Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout009 - Appendix I - Stormwater Memo and Drainage Plan 1105 REEVES RD. W. STE 6 BOZEMAN, MT 59718 406-581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 1 of 15 Master Site Plan - Stormwater Drainage Report Diamond 8 Ballpark Complex April, 2026 Modified July, 2026 Headwaters Engineering, Inc. Project #: 2128.002 Prepared For: 4 Bozeman, LLC David Hargrove david@4rland.com 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 2 of 15 1. Introduction This design report outlines the stormwater analysis conducted for the Phase 1A Site Plan of the Diamond 8 Ballpark Complex and describes the stormwater drainage and management facilities. The purpose of this report is to quantify anticipated stormwater runoff from the proposed development and provide the design basis and sizing for the proposed on-site stormwater conveyance, retention, and detention facilities. The stormwater management plan has been developed in accordance with the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards (CBDCS), October 2024 and subsequent addenda, and is intended to demonstrate that the proposed improvements will not adversely impact downstream properties or infrastructure. This report has been prepared for the Phase 1A Site Plan and will be updated with each subsequent Site Plan phase as additional impervious area, stormwater infrastructure, and final design details are added to the project. Phase 1A primarily includes site grading, athletic field construction, shallow athletic field underdrains, private storm piping, excavation of the primary stormwater ponds, and construction of a temporary stormwater pond associated with the phased Harvest Parkway improvements. The hydrologic analysis conservatively evaluates anticipated full-buildout tributary conditions for sizing of the primary stormwater facilities; however, permanent outlet control structures and other phase-specific improvements will be finalized with Phase 1B and subsequent Site Plans as applicable. The design approach is based on the following principles: • Post-development runoff rates will be controlled to applicable pre-development discharge rates. • On-site detention and retention will be provided to mitigate increased runoff volumes associated with development. • Minor storm events will be conveyed through the stormwater collection system based on the applicable design event and final hydraulic modeling. • Major storm events will be routed through storage facilities and designated overland flow paths without adverse impacts to structures. • Stormwater facilities will provide water quality treatment through sedimentation, pretreatment, and controlled release where applicable. This design report outlines the stormwater analysis conducted for Site Plan 1 of the Diamond 8 Ballpark Complex and describes the stormwater drainage and management facilities. The purpose of this report is to quantify anticipated stormwater runoff from the proposed development and to provide the design basis and sizing for the proposed on-site stormwater conveyance, retention, and detention facilities. This report is for site plan 1 only and additional reports will be created with future site plan submittals for this site. 2. Project Description The Diamond 8 Ballpark Complex is a multi-field recreational development consisting of eight (8) baseball fields, including two high school-sized fields and six youth-sized fields, along with associated parking areas, access roads, pedestrian circulation, and supporting facilities. Phase 1A of the project includes initial site grading, construction of athletic field subgrades and shallow underdrains, installation of select private stormwater conveyance infrastructure, excavation of the primary detention and retention facilities, and construction of a temporary stormwater pond serving the phased Harvest Parkway configuration. Subsequent phases will add roadway, parking, pedestrian, building, and other impervious improvements. The hydrologic analysis presented herein evaluates anticipated full- 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 3 of 15 buildout tributary conditions for sizing of the primary stormwater facilities, while Phase 1A construction includes only those improvements identified on the Phase 1A Site Plan. Permanent outlet control structures for the primary wet detention facilities are deferred to Phase 1B, when associated impervious improvements and final discharge configurations are established. The following is the legal description for the subject property. S04, T02S, R05 E, COS 2552, TRACT 4 The existing site is largely undeveloped, characterized by native grasses, mostly consisting of smooth brome, meadow foxtail, orchard grass, and common Timothy wetlands. There is a shallow drainage system trending north. The site slopes gently to the north at approximately 0.5% to 2%. Stormwater runoff from the existing site occurs as diffused sheet flow, gradually concentrating toward the northwest portion of the property before leaving the site and entering downstream drainage systems eventually flowing into the East Gallatin River. Figure 1: S04, T02S, R05E, COS 2552, TRACT 4 3. Design Criteria Stormwater design for the Diamond 8 Ballpark Complex has been completed in accordance with the CBDCS and incorporates the following criteria: Runoff Control The stormwater system is designed such that post-development discharge rates do not exceed pre- development runoff rates for all applicable storm events. This is achieved through the use of on-site detention and retention facilities sized to store the difference between pre- and post-development runoff volumes. SUBJECT PROPERTY A p p e n di x C N or th W es BAXTER LANE OAK STREET DURSTON ROAD 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 4 of 15 Design Storm Events The following storm events were evaluated as part of the design: • 10-year, 24-hour storm: used for detention and retention sizing • 25-year storm: used for storm pipe system design • 100-year storm: used for evaluation of overland flow routing and ensuring protection of buildings Rainfall depths utilized in the analysis are based on CBDCS requirements: • 10-year storm: 1.70 inches • 100-year storm: 2.34 inches Hydrologic Modeling Hydrologic modeling was performed using HydroCAD software with the following assumptions: • SCS Curve Number (CN) method • Type II rainfall distribution • Time of concentration calculated for each basin • Pre- and post-development land use conditions evaluated Stormwater Conveyance Stormwater conveyance infrastructure has been designed to: • Maintain minimum velocities of 2.5 ft/sec where feasible • Convey the 25-year storm event within the pipe system • Provide adequate capacity without surcharging Water Quality Stormwater treatment is provided through detention and retention ponds which reduce flow velocities and promote sedimentation of suspended solids and associated pollutants. 4. Existing Conditions Drainage Patterns The existing site drains generally from south to north, with runoff occurring primarily as sheet flow. The relatively flat topography results in slow-moving runoff that eventually concentrates into shallow drainage pathways near the northern boundary of the site. Soils and Groundwater Subsurface conditions consist of a mix of topsoil, clay, and underlying gravel layers. Groundwater has been observed at shallow depths in portions of the site, which limits infiltration potential and supports the use of detention-based stormwater management rather than infiltration systems. The NRCS Soil Survey identifies the two major soil types on the site to be Amsterdam-Quagle Silt Loams, 0 – 4 percent slopes and Lamoose Silt Loam, 0 - 2 percent slopes (453B and 537A). These soils belong to hydrologic soil group C and B/D. Test pits were excavated on the property in January of 2026. Soil profiles generally exhibited 6” to 4.5 feet of topsoil, 2 – 6 feet of lean clay and 6 - 7 feet poorly graded gravels with sand and cobbles below existing ground. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 5 of 15 Groundwater wells were installed in April of 2025 and monitored for the entirety of the 2025 season. Readings indicated a high ground water table between 0.5 ft to 5 ft below existing ground. Additional wells were added in January, 2026 and will be monitored through the 2026 season. Earlier conceptual design iterations included a deep groundwater drain system intended to maintain groundwater conveyance toward adjacent wetlands. That conceptual system has been removed from the project. No deep drain system is proposed to intercept or intentionally redirect regional groundwater. The only subsurface drainage proposed within the athletic field areas consists of shallow athletic field underdrains intended to collect stormwater infiltrating through the field section and convey that water to the proposed stormwater facilities. Floodplain The project site is located outside mapped FEMA floodplains (Zone X). No floodplain encroachment is proposed as part of this development. 5. Hydrology and Hydrogeology Hydrologic modeling was conducted to evaluate runoff characteristics under both pre-development and post-development conditions using HydroCAD. The site runoff has been modeled using HydroCAD software for the storms ranging between the 2- year and 100-year event. SCS method was utilized for all pond sizing due to site being over 5 acres. General conditions include prominent wetlands within this 80-acre parcel (see attached wetland map). Baxter Creek currently runs through this subject property. Tables 6.5.1 & 6.5.2 from the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards “CBDCS” are included below. These charts were utilized for storm depth and intensity. Table 6.6.2 from the CBDCS was used to find the SCS Curve Numbers for the pre-development and post-development site. The attached Geotechnical /Hydrogeological Evaluation in Appendix C discusses the soils, in-situ conditions and groundwater for the site and surrounding area. Conclusion of that evaluation: The current groundwater is generally high in this area with some areas approximately half a foot below existing ground. Pre-Development Conditions Under existing conditions, the site is predominantly pervious with vegetation consisting of grasses and natural cover. Curve Numbers for pre-development conditions are approximately 62, reflecting relatively low runoff potential. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 6 of 15 Table 1. Estimated Pre-Development Peak Flows Sub Area Description Area Tc Q10 Q25 Q100 CN (acres) (min) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) . A Onsite Basin – SCS 5.900 55 0.02 0.06 0.23 62 B Onsite Basin – SCS 13.767 61 0.05 0.15 0.52 62 D Onsite Basin – SCS 6.601 40 0.02 0.08 0.30 62 E Onsite Basin – SCS 2.303 30 0.01 0.03 0.12 62 F Onsite Basin – SCS 1.187 30 0.00 0.01 0.06 62 G Onsite Basin – SCS 4.609 33 0.02 0.05 0.23 62 I Onsite Basin – SCS 1.459 38 0.01 0.02 0.07 62 Version 10 of HydroCAD was used to model the storm basins using the SCS Method. The printouts for each basin are provided in the appendices. The time of concentration calculations were completed per Chapter 6 of the CBDCS. Time of concentration values range from approximately 30 to 60 minutes, indicating relatively slow runoff response. Overall, pre-development runoff is minimal and widely distributed. Post-Development Conditions Post-development conditions include significant increases in impervious area due to synthetic turf fields (rapid infiltration), parking areas, and roadways. Curve Numbers increase substantially, resulting in higher runoff rates and shorter times of concentration. Storage and conveyance facilities were both sized for the 10 yr 24 hr. storm. Additional analysis was done to ensure that the 100 yr- 24 hr. storm scenario was within City of Bozeman Design requirements. City of Bozeman Design Standards require 2 ft of separation between bottom of pond facility to ground water table for retention ponds. In areas where 2 feet of separation from groundwater is possible, a retention pond is proposed. However, in areas of high ground water, wet detention ponds will be utilized. Wet detention ponds will store temporary runoff above the permanent wet pool and discharge into nearby wetlands at a controlled rate, matching the pre-development flow. See appendix A for the overall basin and pond location details. The groundwater elevations have been measured on this site for over 1 year, with some additional wells added in January 2026. Using this data, we have designed the retention ponds to be at least 24” above the high groundwater. The wet ponds have been designed to have a portion of the bottom at or below the lowest groundwater elevation recorded. The storage volume will be calculated using the volume above the high groundwater elevation. Pipes were modeled using Bentley StormCAD and the pond overflow and cross sections were modeled using Bentley FlowMaster. HydroCAD was utilized to determine the post development storm flow rates basin volume. Shown below is an overview on anticipated overall post development peak flow for pond facilities. Table 6.6.2 in the City of Bozeman Design Standards provides a list of all relevant CN numbers. 98 would be utilized for all impervious areas and 61 for all green space applications including the (5) grass ballfields. A CN number of 98 would be used for the (3) turf fields and will be treated as impervious due to anticipated rapid runoff and lack of soil infiltration. Turf fields are graded at a minimum grade of 0.5% or but utilize a pipe under-drain system to collect immediate runoff via perimeter drains. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 7 of 15 Table 2. Estimated Post-Development Peak Flows Sub Area Description Area Tc Q10 Q25 Q100 CN (acres) (min) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) . A Onsite Basin – SCS 5.900 7.0 6.26 8.19 11.13 86 B Onsite Basin – SCS 13.767 9.0 4.67 7.51 12.24 76 D Onsite Basin – SCS 6.601 10.0 1.29 2.38 4.28 73 E Onsite Basin – SCS 2.303 7.0 2.26 2.98 4.11 85 F Onsite Basin – SCS 1.187 5.0 0.63 0.11 0.93 78 G Onsite Basin – SCS 4.609 7.5 5.61 7.17 9.53 88 I Onsite Basin – SCS 1.459 7.0 2.23 2.76 3.54 91 6. Drainage Basins The site has been divided into multiple drainage basins (A, B, D, E, F, G, and I) based on grading and drainage patterns. Each basin is routed to a corresponding detention pond as shown in the HydroCAD routing diagram (Appendix B). Each basin includes a combination of pervious and impervious surfaces, with impervious percentages ranging from approximately 25% to over 70% depending on land use. Runoff from each basin is conveyed via a combination of sheet flow, swales, and storm piping to the associated detention facility. A total of three retention ponds and 4 wet detention ponds in varying sizes were designed within this development. Due to the size of the subject property, the SCS method was utilized to size all retention and detention facilities. Retention facilities were designed assuming no infiltration as all ponds are well above the poorly graded gravel layer. Detention ponds are sized assuming an outlet at a pre-development flow rate into onsite wetlands. Total runoff area has been calculated at approximately 40 acres consisting of 52% pervious and 48% impervious surfaces. See table 3 for a summary of all pond volumes. See appendix B for Hydrocad Pond summary. A temporary stormwater pond is proposed near the phased western terminus of Harvest Parkway to manage runoff from approximately 0.28 acres of roadway and associated disturbed area during phased development. The temporary pond was sized using the Rational Method to retain the 100-year storm event. The required storage volume is approximately 468 cubic feet, while approximately 712 cubic feet of storage is provided. The facility will be constructed and maintained as an interim stormwater facility serving the shortened Harvest Parkway configuration and will be inspected and maintained in accordance with the project Stormwater Facilities Operation, Inspection and Maintenance Plan. The temporary pond will be removed, replaced, or incorporated into the permanent stormwater system when Harvest Parkway is extended farther west and the applicable future-phase drainage improvements are constructed. Table 3. Storm Pond Volumes Pond Type Contributing Area 10 yr Required 100 yr Required 100 yr Pre-Dev Total Available Subarea (acres) Storage (cft)________Storage (cft)______Outflow (cfs) Storage (cft) __ A Wet Detention 5.900 8,015 15,551 0.23 16,117 B Wet Detention 13.767 5,358 15,028 0.52 15,376 D Retention 6.601 4,705 11,543 N/A 11,892 E Retention 2.303 4,879 8,799 N/A 9,322 F Retention 1.187 1,525 3,136 N/A 3,136 G Wet Detention 4.609 6,970 13,024 0.23 14,026 I Wet Detention 1.459 2,309 4,008 0.07 4,016 I-A Temp Retention 0.280 N/A 468 N/A 712 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 8 of 15 All wet detention ponds were designed assuming post development runoff stacks on top of the permanent groundwater pool. The outflow rate was determined by using the pre-development 10 yr flow rate as shown in Table 1 and sized accordingly. The pretreatment forebay is included within the total calculated storage volume for the pond facility. Where 2 ft separation from bottom of pond to the groundwater table is feasible, retention ponds will be used. The initial storm volume and runoff treatment volume will be captured in this pond without accounting for any outflow or infiltration during the 10-year & 100-year events—the entire storm will be stored. During Phase 1A, the primary pond facilities will provide storage associated with phased site construction and anticipated future tributary development. Permanent outlet control structures for the primary wet detention facilities are deferred to Phase 1B, when associated impervious improvements, final tributary configurations, and permanent discharge conditions are established. The final outlet structures will be designed to control discharge consistent with applicable City of Bozeman requirements and the pre- development discharge rates identified in this report. Until permanent outlet controls are installed, available pond storage and interim drainage conditions will be maintained in accordance with the project Operation, Inspection and Maintenance Plan and applicable construction-phase SWPPP requirements. 7. Stormwater System Design The stormwater collection system is designed to efficiently route runoff from developed areas to detention or retention facilities, while minimizing localized ponding. Stormwater is collected and conveyed through a combination of: • Overland sheet flow • Graded swales • Curb and gutter systems (in parking lots0 • Storm drain inlets and piping Underground stormwater conveyance facilities were evaluated for the 25-year design storm in accordance with the project design criteria. The storm drain system is intended to convey the minor storm event without uncontrolled surface flooding or adverse surcharge conditions. Pipe slopes and sizes were selected to maintain a minimum velocity of approximately 2.5 ft/s where feasible and to operate in a non-pressurized condition under the applicable design event. The 100-year storm event is managed through a combination of available system capacity, stormwater storage facilities, and designated overland flow paths. Proposed storm drain PVC pipe size ranges from 8” to 24”. This mainline pipe drains that generally runs in the center of the site, between ballfields, ultimately flows into Storm Pond B and generally includes runoff (rapid infiltration) from the 3 turf fields, impervious walking areas, buildings, and concrete pads for bleachers and walkways. All pipe has been designed to have a velocity of above 2.5 ft/s. Figure 2 shows the key characteristics of the piped system. Figure 2: Storm Drain Ball Park to Pond B 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 9 of 15 Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis Hydraulic grade line (HGL) analysis was performed for both the 10-year and 100-year storm events. 10-Year Storm • Pipe system operates within capacity • No surcharge conditions observed • HGL remains below rim elevations 100-Year Storm • Increased flows observed throughout the system • Downstream pipe segments approach capacity • Overland flow paths provide supplemental conveyance without inundating buildings Major Storm Routing During the 100-year storm event, excess flows not conveyed by the pipe system are routed via overland flow paths. Site grading directs these flows north toward existing drainage corridors, minimizing risk to structures and infrastructure. Parking areas and open spaces are designed to accommodate shallow flow depths and provide additional conveyance capacity. Drainage Ditch Along Laurel Parkway In addition to underground pipe systems, a series of drainage swales are proposed across the complex. A drainage ditch along Laurel Parkway is proposed to collect and convey runoff from all eastern grass fields and pervious grass areas. In addition to runoff, this ditch will convey post-development flow from Pond G and will ultimately connect to Pond B. Designing based on the 100 yr scenarios, this drainage swale is anticipated to handle 3.38 cfs of flow. The geometry of the ditch includes a width of 2 ft, side slopes at a 3:1 ratio and a depth of 1.5 ft. Minimum slope for the entirety of the ditch is 0.4%. See Flow Master in Appendix B for cross section and modeling. Drainage Ditch Along Baxter Lane A drainage ditch along Baxter Lane is proposed to transport and collect runoff from Pond A and Pond B. These detention ponds each have an outfall structure that controls outflow matching the pre-development level. Using the 100 yr scenario, this drainage swale is anticipated to handle 2.48 cfs of flow. The geometry of the ditch includes a width of 2 ft, side slopes at a 3:1 ratio, and a depth of 1.5 ft. Minimum slope for the entirety of the slope is 0.5%. See Flow Master appendix for cross section and modeling. Ballfield Lateral Drains To manage stormwater infiltrating through the synthetic turf field sections, shallow athletic field underdrains are proposed beneath the fields. Stormwater is expected to infiltrate rapidly through the turf and aggregate base section, move more slowly through the underlying pit run section, and migrate laterally along the prepared pit run/subgrade interface. This interface will be graded toward perforated collector drains, generally consisting of 8-inch pipe, which will convey collected stormwater to the applicable stormwater facility. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 10 of 15 The athletic fields are generally designed with finished grades approximately 24 inches or more above monitored high groundwater elevations. The shallow field underdrains are anticipated to be approximately 26 inches below the field surface and will remain above monitored high groundwater across the majority of the site. Localized portions of the underdrain system may experience temporary seasonal groundwater influence during spring high-water conditions. These underdrains are not intended to function as groundwater drains or to intercept and redirect regional groundwater. The conceptual deep groundwater drain system shown in earlier design iterations has been removed from the project. If monitoring or operation of the shallow athletic field underdrains indicates abnormal continuous flow or material seasonal groundwater influence, appropriate control measures will be evaluated in conjunction with the permanent Phase 1B outlet-control design. Permanent outlet control structures for the primary wet detention facilities are deferred to Phase 1B, when final impervious areas, tributary configurations, and discharge conditions are established. 8. Results and Compliance Based on the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling completed to date, the proposed stormwater system is designed to meet applicable City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards. Specifically: • Post-development runoff is captured and managed by on-site detention and retention facilities; • Primary stormwater facilities have been evaluated using anticipated full-buildout tributary conditions; • Controlled discharge from wet detention facilities will not exceed applicable pre-development discharge rates; • The underground stormwater conveyance system is designed for the applicable minor storm event; • The 100-year storm event is accommodated through stormwater storage and designated overland flow paths; • The conceptual deep groundwater drain system has been removed, and the remaining shallow athletic field underdrains are intended solely to manage infiltrated stormwater beneath the athletic fields; • A temporary stormwater pond is provided for the phased Harvest Parkway configuration; and • Permanent outlet control structures and other phase-specific stormwater improvements will be finalized with Phase 1B and subsequent Site Plan applications, as applicable. This Stormwater Drainage Report will be updated with each subsequent Site Plan phase as additional impervious area, final outlet structures, and permanent stormwater infrastructure are added to the project. 9. Water Quality Stormwater treatment is provided through retention and wet detention ponds, which reduce flow velocities and allow for sedimentation of suspended solids. City of Bozeman Design Standards require the first 0.5” of rainfall be treated. All runoff is captured onsite and conveyed into pre-treatment forebays prior to discharge into the main pool cell. Forebays are designed as separate pool cells and utilize a flat hardened bottom and consist of roughly 10% of the runoff treatment volume, with an armored spillway separating the forebay from the main wet pool cell. These facilities provide water quality benefits consistent with CBDCS requirements. 10. Operation and Maintenance A Stormwater Facilities Operation, Inspection and Maintenance Plan is included in Appendix D. The O&M Plan identifies the responsible party and establishes Phase 1A inspection frequencies, maintenance triggers, 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 11 of 15 corrective actions, recordkeeping requirements, and a planning allowance for routine maintenance. The plan addresses the primary stormwater ponds, temporary Harvest Parkway pond, shallow athletic field underdrains, private storm piping, storm inlets, and associated stabilized areas. During active construction, the project SWPPP remains the primary document governing erosion and sediment control BMP inspection and maintenance. The O&M Plan supplements those requirements for constructed stormwater facilities and interim operation. The O&M Plan will be updated with Phase 1B and subsequent Site Plans as permanent outlet controls, additional impervious area, and remaining permanent stormwater infrastructure are constructed. 11. References • City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards (2024) • HydroCAD Modeling Outputs • Supporting geotechnical reports 12. Appendices Appendix A – Civil Pond Sheets Appendix A – Stormwater Post -Basin Exhibit Appendix B - Time of Concentration Calcs Appendix B - StormCad Printouts Appendix B - HydroCAD printouts Appendix C – Geotechnical & Hydrogeological Evaluation & Soils Investigation Report Appendix C – Soils Investigation Report Appendix C – USGS Soil Mapper Report Appendix C – Geologic Map Appendix D - Stormwater Facilities Operation, Inspection and Maintenance Manual Appendix D - Acknowledgement of Stormwater Facility Maintenance Requirements Appendix D - Stormwater Facility Inspection Form H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Stormwater Report Docs\Stormwater Drainage Report_0416_GS.doc 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 12 of 15 Appendix A Plans & Exhibits 15 SD 15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SD15 SDSDSD SDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSD SDSDSDSDSDINV=4703 FG=11.0INV=4704.35(LOWEST 0.5%) FG=11.5INV=4705.17 (LOWEST 0.5%) FG=14.0INV=4706.5(LOWEST 0.5%) FG=13.2INV=4707.02(LOWEST 0.5%) FG=20.7INV=4707.56 (LOWEST 0.5%)INV=11.1 FG=19.2INV=4709.46 (LOWEST 0.5%)INV=13.0 FG=21.0INV=4709.76 (LOWEST 0.5%)INV=14.0 FG=21.7INV=4710.89(LOWEST 0.5%)INV=14.7 FG=23.0INV=4711.56(LOWEST 0.5%)INV=16.0 FG=19.5INV=4707.05(LOWEST)INV=10.05 FG=19.0INV=4709.0(LOWEST)INV=4712.0 INV=4709.75(LOWEST)INV=4714.0FG=21.0 INV=4710.44-lowestinv=4714.5fg=21.5 FG=24.0INV=4711.0 lowestINV=4716.0 (8 ft deep) INV=4706.5 FG=10.6INV=4706.9 all slopes 0.5%until top slope=0.3% FG=10.6INV=7.20 SD BASIN G BASIN B BASIN E BASIN F BASIN D FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BASIN A BASIN I-ABASIN I N GRAPHIC SCALE 1 inch = ft. 0 ( IN FEET ) 50100 100 100 11"X17": 1"= 200 ft HEADWATERS PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER DRAWN BY: DATE: 2026 VERIFY SCALE THESE PRINTS MAY BE REDUCED. LINE BELOW MEASURES ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYPlot Date: 7/7/2026 3:15 PM H:\2128\002\ACAD\WORKSHEETS\BASIN DELINEATED\POST_BSN_BALLFIELDS.dwg © HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC. REVISION DATE: 1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718 HEADWATERSMT.NET 406-581-5730 PROJECT LOCATION MONTANA BOZEMAN 02/12/26 AB POST DEVELOPMENT OVERALL BASIN 4 BOZEMAN, LLC DIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX 2128.002 S-1 POND B WET DETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4707.46 BOTTOM OF POND = 4707.46 ft EG = 4708.00 ft REQUIRED STORAGE = 15028 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 6650 ft^2 Z = 3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 15376 ft^3 POND D RETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4705.64 BOTTOM OF POND = 4707.64 ft REQUIRED STORAGE = 11543 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 5000 ft^2 Z = 3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 11891 ft^3 POND E RETENTION POND GW DEPTH= 4713.20 BOTTOM OF POND = 4715.20 REQUIRED STORAGE = 8799 ft^2 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft AREA = 3800 ft^2 Z = 3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 9322 ft^3 POND G WET DETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4718.26 BOTTOM OF POND = 4718.26 ft REQUIRED STORAGE = 13024 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 6000 ft^2 Z=3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 14026 ft^3 POND F RETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4716.67 BOTTOM OF POND = 4718.88 ft REQUIRED STORAGE = 2962 ft^2 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 1250 ft^2 Z = 3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 3485 ft^3 POND I WET DETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4720.61 BOTTOM OF POND = 4720.61 ft REQUIRED STORAGE= 4008 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 1650 ft^2 Z=3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 4400 ft^3 POND A WET DETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4708.48 BOTTOM OF POND = 4708.48 ft EG = 4709.38 ft REQUIRED STORAGE = 15551 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 2 ft BOTTOM AREA = 7000 ft^2 Z = 3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 16117 ft^3 POND I-A TEMPORARY RETENTION POND GW DEPTH = 4719.80 BOTTOM OF POND = 4721.80 ft REQUIRED STORAGE= 468 ft^3 POND: DEPTH = 1.11 ft BOTTOM AREA = 490 ft^2 Z=3:1 TOTAL AVAILABLE STORAGE = 712 ft^3 SD11"X17": 1"= 20 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )5101010HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:16 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABWET DETENTION POND B4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-2STORM POND CROSSSECTION ATOP=4709.46FINISHED GROUNDEXISTING GROUNDWETLAND 30' SETBACKAADRAINAGE SWALEWETLAND16,117 CFT VOLUMEFUTURE OUTLET ANDPIPE STRUCTURE3:13:13:1NOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025.4:1FUTURE PIPE FROM LAURELPARKWAY 2' MIN11"X17": 1"= 20 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )5101010HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:20 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABRETENTION POND D4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-3DRAINAGE SWALEAASTORM POND CROSSSECTION ATOP=4709.64FINISHED GROUNDEXISTING GROUND11,892 CFT VOLUME3:13:13:14:1NOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025.FUTURE INLET PIPE FROMPARKING LOT 2' MIN11"X17": 1"= 10 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )2.5555HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:22 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABRETENTION POND E4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-4AATOP=4717.20FINISHED GROUNDEXISTING GROUNDSTORM POND CROSSSECTION A9,322 CFT VOLUME3:13:13:1NOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025. BOTTOM OF SWALE = 4717.33POND G11"X17": 1"= 20 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )5101010HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:24 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABWET DETENTION POND G4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-5TOP=4720.26FINISHED GROUNDEXISTING GROUNDAASTORM POND CROSSSECTION A3:13:13:114,026 CFT VOLUMEFUTURE PIPE FROMPARKING LOT INLETNOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025. POND F2' MIN11"X17": 1"= 10 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )2.5555HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:25 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABRETENTION POND F4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-7TOP=4720.880 TO 1 FEET: SILTYCLAY ORGANIC SOILEXISTING GROUNDSTORM POND CROSSSECTION AAAFINISHED GROUND3:13:13,136 CFT VOLUME3:1NOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025. 11"X17": 1"= 10 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )2.5555HEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\EXHIBITS\POND GRADING_SITE_SUBMITTAL.dwg Plot Date: 7/7/2026 4:16 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN04/23/2026ABRETENTION POND I-A4 BOZEMAN, LLCDIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX2128.002P-8TOP=4722.91EXISTING GROUNDSTORM POND CROSSSECTION AAAFINISHED GROUND3:13:1712 CFT VOLUMENOTE:-OUTLET STRUCTURE AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED WITH PHASE 1B SITE PLAN.-GW ELEVATIONS CALCULATED USING RELATIONSHIPS TO HIGH GROUNDWATER IN NEARBY MONITORING WELLS IN 2025.3:13:1MAJOR STORMWSE=4722.47 OHP11"X17": 1"= 100 ftNGRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = ft.0( IN FEET )25505050VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 10 ftHORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 50 ft11"X17" VERTICAL: 1" = 20'11"X17" HORIZONTAL: 1" = 100 ftHEADWATERSPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERDRAWN BY:DATE:2026VERIFY SCALETHESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLYH:\2128\002\ACAD\SHEETS\STORM P&P.dwg Plot Date: 4/23/2026 5:26 PM© HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC.REVISION DATE:1105 REEVES RD WEST, SUITE 6, BOZEMAN, MT 59718HEADWATERSMT.NET406-581-5730PROJECT LOCATIONMONTANABOZEMAN4/8/2026ABBALLFIELD STORM DRAIN (1 OF 1)PHASE 1ADIAMOND 8 BASEBALL COMPLEX2128.002SD-1DIAMOND 8 STORMDRAIN CENTERLINE PROFILE - STA. 0+00 TO 13+96FG SURFACEEG SURFACEINV OUT: 4707.46INLETLATERAL PIPEINLETINLETINLETNOTE:ALL PIPE TO BE SDR 35 PVCLATERAL PIPELATERAL PIPELATERAL PIPESTORM POND B 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 13 of 15 Appendix B Modeling Software Printouts & Calculations Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin A City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 27.1 sheet flow (min)Tt1 3.5 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.01 slope (ft/ft)s 0.01 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=3.1 minutes Tt2=2.5 minutes Lunpaved=300 ft Lunpaved=ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=300 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s Vunpaved=1.249773 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.006 ft/ft V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=23.80606 minutes Tt3=1.820463 minutes L pipe/channel 2053 ft L pipe/channel 2053 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=1.4 ft/s V=18.8 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.01 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 54.0 minutes Total Time of Concentration 7.7 minutes 0.9 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin B City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 33.3 sheet flow (min)Tt1 4.3 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.006 slope (ft/ft)s 0.006 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=3.1 minutes Tt2=2.9 minutes Lunpaved=300 ft Lunpaved=ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=300 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s Vunpaved=1.249773 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.006 ft/ft SLPOE V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=1.574616 ft/s Vpaved=1.700779 ft/s slope 0.006 ft/ft slope 0.007 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=10.32021 minutes Tt3=0.789193 minutes L pipe/channel 890 ft L pipe/channel 890 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=1.4 ft/s V=18.8 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.01 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 46.7 minutes Total Time of Concentration 8.0 minutes 0.8 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin D City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 33.3 sheet flow (min)Tt1 3.5 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.006 slope (ft/ft)s 0.01 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=3.1 minutes Tt2=2.8 minutes Lunpaved=300 ft Lunpaved=150 ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=150 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft SLPOE V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=2.933723 minutes Tt3=2.933723 minutes L pipe/channel 253 ft L pipe/channel 253 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=1.4 ft/s V=1.4 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.17 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.01 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 39.3 minutes Total Time of Concentration 9.2 minutes 0.7 hours 0.2 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin E City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 28.3 sheet flow (min)Tt1 3.5 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.009 slope (ft/ft)s 0.01 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=2.1 minutes Tt2=2.9 minutes Lunpaved=264 ft Lunpaved=264 ft Lpaved=ft Lpaved=0 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=2.103681 ft/s Vunpaved=1.530653 ft/s slope 0.017 ft/ft slope 0.009 ft/ft V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=0 minutes Tt3=0 minutes L pipe/channel 0 ft L pipe/channel 0 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=4.1 ft/s V=1.4 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.17 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.08 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 30.4 minutes Total Time of Concentration 6.3 minutes 0.5 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin F City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 28.3 sheet flow (min)Tt1 3.5 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.009 slope (ft/ft)s 0.01 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=1.5 minutes Tt2=1.4 minutes Lunpaved=143 ft Lunpaved=80 ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=62 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s Vunpaved=1.530653 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.009 ft/ft V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=0 minutes Tt3=0 minutes L pipe/channel 0 ft L pipe/channel 0 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=4.1 ft/s V=1.4 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.17 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.08 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 29.8 minutes Total Time of Concentration 4.8 minutes 0.5 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin G City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 28.3 sheet flow (min)Tt1 4.3 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.009 slope (ft/ft)s 0.006 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=3.1 minutes Tt2=3.2 minutes Lunpaved=300 ft Lunpaved=0 ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=300 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s Vunpaved=1.61345 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.01 ft/ft V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=1.574616 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.006 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=0.695745 minutes Tt3=0.053204 minutes L pipe/channel 60 ft L pipe/channel 60 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=1.4 ft/s V=18.8 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.01 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 32.1 minutes Total Time of Concentration 7.5 minutes 0.5 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow Diamond 8 Sports Complex Basin I City of Bozeman Time of Concentration Calculations Austin Belluscio 2/18/2026 Time of Concentration Tc=Tt1 + Tt2+Tt3 Predevelopment Post Development Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt=K/p^.5*(nL/S^.5)^.8 Tt1 35.8 sheet flow (min)Tt1 3.5 sheet flow (min) n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings L 150 flow length (ft)L 150 flow length (ft) P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in)P2 1.7 10yr 24 hour depth (in) s 0.005 slope (ft/ft)s 0.01 slope (ft/ft) Tt2= length / velocity Tt2= length / velocity Tt2=2.4 minutes Tt2=2.9 minutes Lunpaved=300 ft Lunpaved=ft Lpaved=0 ft Lpaved=300 ft V=16.1345xs^.5unpaved V=16.1345xs^.5 unpaved Vunpaved=2.103681 ft/s Vunpaved=1.249773 ft/s slope 0.017 ft/ft slope 0.006 ft/ft V=20.3282*s^.5paved V=20.3282*s^.5 paved Vpaved=2.03282 ft/s Vpaved=1.700779 ft/s slope 0.01 ft/ft slope 0.007 ft/ft Tt3= length / velocity Tt3= length / velocity Tt3=0.122991 minutes Tt3=0.063845 minutes L pipe/channel 30 ft L pipe/channel 72 ft Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 Vel=1.49/n*R^(2/3)x S^.5 V=4.1 ft/s V=18.8 ft/s n 0.17 mannings n 0.013 mannings R 2.1 Hydraulic radius R 2.1 Hydraulic radius S 0.08 slope ft/ft S 0.01 slope ft/ft R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter R=Flow Area/Wetted Perimeter Predevelopment Post Development Total Time of Concentration 38.3 minutes Total Time of Concentration 6.5 minutes 0.6 hours 0.1 hours Sheet Flow - 150' max Sheet Flow - 150' max Shallow Concentrated Shallow Concentrated Open Channel & Pipe Flow Open Channel & Pipe Flow EGLHGLBallfield - 10 - YR 24 HRLabel: O-1 Type: Outfall ID: 47 Label: CO-7 Type: Conduit ID: 48 Label: MH-6 Type: Manhole ID: 55 Label: CO-6 Type: Conduit ID: 40 Label: MH-5 Type: Manhole ID: 54 Label: CO-5 Type: Conduit ID: 39 Label: MH-4 Type: Manhole ID: 53 Label: CO-4 Type: Conduit ID: 38 Label: MH-3 Type: Manhole ID: 52 Label: CO-3 Type: Conduit ID: 37 Label: MH-2 Type: Manhole ID: 51 Label: CO-2 Type: Conduit ID: 36 Label: MH-1 Type: Manhole ID: 50 Label: CO-1 Type: Conduit ID: 35 Label: MH-7 Type: Manhole ID: 56 47 \ O-1 4709.46 4707.46 0.0 48 \ CO-7 0.002 37.0 24.0 \ 9.93 55 \ MH-6 4710.00 4707.46 37.0 40 \ CO-6 0.001 265.0 24.0 \ PVC 9.39 54 \ MH-5 4711.36 4707.81 302.0 39 \ CO-5 0.005 228.0 18.0 \ PVC 8.69 53 \ MH-4 4714.49 4709.47 530.0 38 \ CO-4 0.008 143.0 18.0 \ PVC 8.69 52 \ MH-3 4716.85 4710.00 673.0 37 \ CO-3 0.017 211.0 15.0 \ PVC 6.79 51 \ MH-2 4717.83 4714.36 884.0 36 \ CO-2 0.013 190.0 15.0 \ PVC 6.16 50 \ MH-1 4720.59 4716.85 1074.0 35 \ CO-1 0.004 300.0 8.0 \ PVC 0.77 56 \ MH-7 4720.69 4718.68 1374.0Elevation (ft)4,721.00 4,720.50 4,720.00 4,719.50 4,719.00 4,718.50 4,718.00 4,717.50 4,717.00 4,716.50 4,716.00 4,715.50 4,715.00 4,714.50 4,714.00 4,713.50 4,713.00 4,712.50 4,712.00 4,711.50 4,711.00 4,710.50 4,710.00 4,709.50 4,709.00 4,708.50 4,708.00 4,707.50 4,707.00 1,350.0 1,300.0 1,250.0 1,200.0 1,150.0 1,100.0 1,050.0 1,000.0 950.0 900.0 850.0 800.0 750.0 700.0 650.0 600.0 550.0 500.0 450.0 400.0 350.0 300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 ID\Label Link Length (ft) Rise (in)\Material Flow (cfs) Slope (ft/ft) ID\Label Ground (ft) Invert (ft) Station (ft) 37S BASIN D 38S BASIN B 39S BASIN G 43S BASIN F 45S BASIN E 47S BASIN I 51S BASIN A 40P POND D 41P POND G 42P POND B 44P POND F 46P POND E 48P POND I 52P POND A Routing Diagram for POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc, Printed 4/16/2026 HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 48HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 48P: POND I Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=1.208 ac Peak Elev=1.85' Storage=0.092 af 2.93 cfs 0.08 cfs POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 10yr-24hr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 1.70 2 2 100yr-24hr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.34 2 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff = 1.29 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.108 af, Depth> 0.20" Routed to Pond 40P : POND D Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 73,738 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 181,544 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 32,234 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 287,516 73 Weighted Average 213,778 74.35% Pervious Area 73,738 25.65% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=287,516 sf Runoff Volume=0.108 af Runoff Depth>0.20" Tc=10.0 min CN=73 1.29 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff = 4.67 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.309 af, Depth> 0.27" Routed to Pond 42P : POND B Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 104,370 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 332,690 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 54,450 85 Gravel roads, HSG B * 108,159 98 Impervious Turf Field 599,669 76 Weighted Average 387,140 64.56% Pervious Area 212,529 35.44% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 9.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=599,669 sf Runoff Volume=0.309 af Runoff Depth>0.27" Tc=9.0 min CN=76 4.67 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff = 5.61 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.280 af, Depth> 0.73" Routed to Pond 41P : POND G Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 125,815 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A * 20,733 98 Impervious Turf Field 54,216 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 200,764 88 Weighted Average 54,216 27.00% Pervious Area 146,548 73.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.5 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=200,764 sf Runoff Volume=0.280 af Runoff Depth>0.73" Tc=7.5 min CN=88 5.61 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff = 0.70 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Depth> 0.36" Routed to Pond 44P : POND F Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 5,023 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A * 20,763 98 Impervious Turf Field 25,932 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 51,718 79 Weighted Average 25,932 50.14% Pervious Area 25,786 49.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=51,718 sf Runoff Volume=0.035 af Runoff Depth>0.36" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 0.70 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff = 2.26 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.112 af, Depth> 0.58" Routed to Pond 46P : POND E Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 3,576 98 Water Surface, HSG B 66,641 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 30,117 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 100,334 85 Weighted Average 40,113 39.98% Pervious Area 60,221 60.02% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=100,334 sf Runoff Volume=0.112 af Runoff Depth>0.58" Tc=7.0 min CN=85 2.26 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff = 1.84 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.091 af, Depth> 0.90" Routed to Pond 48P : POND I Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 41,969 98 Paved parking, HSG A 10,641 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 52,610 91 Weighted Average 10,641 20.23% Pervious Area 41,969 79.77% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=52,610 sf Runoff Volume=0.091 af Runoff Depth>0.90" Tc=7.0 min CN=91 1.84 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff = 6.26 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.309 af, Depth> 0.63" Routed to Pond 52P : POND A Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 176,374 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 80,626 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 257,000 86 Weighted Average 80,626 31.37% Pervious Area 176,374 68.63% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=257,000 sf Runoff Volume=0.309 af Runoff Depth>0.63" Tc=7.0 min CN=86 6.26 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 40P: POND D Inflow Area = 6.600 ac, 25.65% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.20" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 1.29 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.108 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 0.87' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.133 ac Storage= 0.108 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.273 af 50.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 40P: POND D Pond 40P: POND D Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=6.600 ac Peak Elev=0.87' Storage=0.108 af 1.29 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 40P: POND D Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.005 0.06 0.007 0.08 0.009 0.10 0.012 0.12 0.014 0.14 0.016 0.16 0.019 0.18 0.021 0.20 0.023 0.22 0.026 0.24 0.028 0.26 0.031 0.28 0.033 0.30 0.035 0.32 0.038 0.34 0.040 0.36 0.043 0.38 0.045 0.40 0.048 0.42 0.050 0.44 0.053 0.46 0.055 0.48 0.058 0.50 0.060 0.52 0.063 0.54 0.065 0.56 0.068 0.58 0.070 0.60 0.073 0.62 0.075 0.64 0.078 0.66 0.080 0.68 0.083 0.70 0.086 0.72 0.088 0.74 0.091 0.76 0.093 0.78 0.096 0.80 0.099 0.82 0.101 0.84 0.104 0.86 0.107 0.88 0.109 0.90 0.112 0.92 0.115 0.94 0.117 0.96 0.120 0.98 0.123 1.00 0.125 1.02 0.128 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.131 1.06 0.134 1.08 0.136 1.10 0.139 1.12 0.142 1.14 0.145 1.16 0.147 1.18 0.150 1.20 0.153 1.22 0.156 1.24 0.159 1.26 0.162 1.28 0.164 1.30 0.167 1.32 0.170 1.34 0.173 1.36 0.176 1.38 0.179 1.40 0.182 1.42 0.185 1.44 0.188 1.46 0.190 1.48 0.193 1.50 0.196 1.52 0.199 1.54 0.202 1.56 0.205 1.58 0.208 1.60 0.211 1.62 0.214 1.64 0.217 1.66 0.220 1.68 0.223 1.70 0.226 1.72 0.229 1.74 0.232 1.76 0.236 1.78 0.239 1.80 0.242 1.82 0.245 1.84 0.248 1.86 0.251 1.88 0.254 1.90 0.257 1.92 0.260 1.94 0.264 1.96 0.267 1.98 0.270 2.00 0.273 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 41P: POND G Inflow Area = 4.609 ac, 73.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.73" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 5.61 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.280 af Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 14.63 hrs, Volume= 0.176 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 158.0 min Primary = 0.19 cfs @ 14.63 hrs, Volume= 0.176 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.07' @ 14.63 hrs Surf.Area= 0.162 ac Storage= 0.160 af Plug-Flow detention time= 338.7 min calculated for 0.175 af (63% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 222.6 min ( 1,063.8 - 841.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.322 af 60.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'5.5" W x 1.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.19 cfs @ 14.63 hrs HW=1.07' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.19 cfs @ 4.88 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 41P: POND G Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 41P: POND G Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=4.609 ac Peak Elev=1.07' Storage=0.160 af 5.61 cfs 0.19 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 41P: POND G Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.008 0.08 0.011 0.10 0.014 0.12 0.017 0.14 0.020 0.16 0.022 0.18 0.025 0.20 0.028 0.22 0.031 0.24 0.034 0.26 0.037 0.28 0.039 0.30 0.042 0.32 0.045 0.34 0.048 0.36 0.051 0.38 0.054 0.40 0.057 0.42 0.060 0.44 0.063 0.46 0.066 0.48 0.069 0.50 0.072 0.52 0.075 0.54 0.078 0.56 0.081 0.58 0.084 0.60 0.087 0.62 0.090 0.64 0.093 0.66 0.096 0.68 0.099 0.70 0.102 0.72 0.105 0.74 0.108 0.76 0.111 0.78 0.114 0.80 0.117 0.82 0.121 0.84 0.124 0.86 0.127 0.88 0.130 0.90 0.133 0.92 0.136 0.94 0.139 0.96 0.143 0.98 0.146 1.00 0.149 1.02 0.152 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.155 1.06 0.159 1.08 0.162 1.10 0.165 1.12 0.168 1.14 0.172 1.16 0.175 1.18 0.178 1.20 0.182 1.22 0.185 1.24 0.188 1.26 0.192 1.28 0.195 1.30 0.198 1.32 0.202 1.34 0.205 1.36 0.208 1.38 0.212 1.40 0.215 1.42 0.219 1.44 0.222 1.46 0.225 1.48 0.229 1.50 0.232 1.52 0.236 1.54 0.239 1.56 0.243 1.58 0.246 1.60 0.250 1.62 0.253 1.64 0.257 1.66 0.260 1.68 0.264 1.70 0.267 1.72 0.271 1.74 0.274 1.76 0.278 1.78 0.282 1.80 0.285 1.82 0.289 1.84 0.292 1.86 0.296 1.88 0.300 1.90 0.303 1.92 0.307 1.94 0.311 1.96 0.314 1.98 0.318 2.00 0.322 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 42P: POND B Inflow Area = 13.767 ac, 35.44% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.27" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 4.67 cfs @ 12.03 hrs, Volume= 0.309 af Outflow = 0.29 cfs @ 14.43 hrs, Volume= 0.249 af, Atten= 94%, Lag= 143.9 min Primary = 0.29 cfs @ 14.43 hrs, Volume= 0.249 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 0.76' @ 14.43 hrs Surf.Area= 0.170 ac Storage= 0.123 af Plug-Flow detention time= 238.0 min calculated for 0.248 af (80% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 151.7 min ( 1,056.6 - 904.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.353 af 70.00'W x 95.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'3.8" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.29 cfs @ 14.43 hrs HW=0.76' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.29 cfs @ 3.74 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 42P: POND B Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 42P: POND B Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=13.767 ac Peak Elev=0.76' Storage=0.123 af 4.67 cfs 0.29 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 42P: POND B Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.009 0.08 0.012 0.10 0.015 0.12 0.018 0.14 0.022 0.16 0.025 0.18 0.028 0.20 0.031 0.22 0.034 0.24 0.037 0.26 0.040 0.28 0.044 0.30 0.047 0.32 0.050 0.34 0.053 0.36 0.056 0.38 0.060 0.40 0.063 0.42 0.066 0.44 0.069 0.46 0.073 0.48 0.076 0.50 0.079 0.52 0.082 0.54 0.086 0.56 0.089 0.58 0.092 0.60 0.096 0.62 0.099 0.64 0.102 0.66 0.106 0.68 0.109 0.70 0.113 0.72 0.116 0.74 0.119 0.76 0.123 0.78 0.126 0.80 0.130 0.82 0.133 0.84 0.136 0.86 0.140 0.88 0.143 0.90 0.147 0.92 0.150 0.94 0.154 0.96 0.157 0.98 0.161 1.00 0.164 1.02 0.168 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.171 1.06 0.175 1.08 0.178 1.10 0.182 1.12 0.186 1.14 0.189 1.16 0.193 1.18 0.196 1.20 0.200 1.22 0.204 1.24 0.207 1.26 0.211 1.28 0.215 1.30 0.218 1.32 0.222 1.34 0.226 1.36 0.229 1.38 0.233 1.40 0.237 1.42 0.240 1.44 0.244 1.46 0.248 1.48 0.252 1.50 0.255 1.52 0.259 1.54 0.263 1.56 0.267 1.58 0.271 1.60 0.274 1.62 0.278 1.64 0.282 1.66 0.286 1.68 0.290 1.70 0.294 1.72 0.298 1.74 0.301 1.76 0.305 1.78 0.309 1.80 0.313 1.82 0.317 1.84 0.321 1.86 0.325 1.88 0.329 1.90 0.333 1.92 0.337 1.94 0.341 1.96 0.345 1.98 0.349 2.00 0.353 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 44P: POND F Inflow Area = 1.187 ac, 49.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.36" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 0.70 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.03' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.040 ac Storage= 0.035 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.080 af 25.00'W x 50.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 44P: POND F Pond 44P: POND F Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Inflow Area=1.187 ac Peak Elev=1.03' Storage=0.035 af 0.70 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 44P: POND F Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.001 0.04 0.001 0.06 0.002 0.08 0.002 0.10 0.003 0.12 0.004 0.14 0.004 0.16 0.005 0.18 0.005 0.20 0.006 0.22 0.007 0.24 0.007 0.26 0.008 0.28 0.008 0.30 0.009 0.32 0.010 0.34 0.010 0.36 0.011 0.38 0.012 0.40 0.012 0.42 0.013 0.44 0.014 0.46 0.014 0.48 0.015 0.50 0.016 0.52 0.016 0.54 0.017 0.56 0.018 0.58 0.018 0.60 0.019 0.62 0.020 0.64 0.021 0.66 0.021 0.68 0.022 0.70 0.023 0.72 0.023 0.74 0.024 0.76 0.025 0.78 0.026 0.80 0.026 0.82 0.027 0.84 0.028 0.86 0.029 0.88 0.029 0.90 0.030 0.92 0.031 0.94 0.032 0.96 0.033 0.98 0.033 1.00 0.034 1.02 0.035 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.036 1.06 0.037 1.08 0.037 1.10 0.038 1.12 0.039 1.14 0.040 1.16 0.041 1.18 0.042 1.20 0.042 1.22 0.043 1.24 0.044 1.26 0.045 1.28 0.046 1.30 0.047 1.32 0.048 1.34 0.048 1.36 0.049 1.38 0.050 1.40 0.051 1.42 0.052 1.44 0.053 1.46 0.054 1.48 0.055 1.50 0.056 1.52 0.057 1.54 0.057 1.56 0.058 1.58 0.059 1.60 0.060 1.62 0.061 1.64 0.062 1.66 0.063 1.68 0.064 1.70 0.065 1.72 0.066 1.74 0.067 1.76 0.068 1.78 0.069 1.80 0.070 1.82 0.071 1.84 0.072 1.86 0.073 1.88 0.074 1.90 0.075 1.92 0.076 1.94 0.077 1.96 0.078 1.98 0.079 2.00 0.080 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 46P: POND E Inflow Area = 2.303 ac, 60.02% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.58" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 2.26 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.112 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.14' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.109 ac Storage= 0.112 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.214 af 40.00'W x 95.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 46P: POND E Pond 46P: POND E Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.303 ac Peak Elev=1.14' Storage=0.112 af 2.26 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 46P: POND E Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.06 0.005 0.08 0.007 0.10 0.009 0.12 0.011 0.14 0.012 0.16 0.014 0.18 0.016 0.20 0.018 0.22 0.020 0.24 0.021 0.26 0.023 0.28 0.025 0.30 0.027 0.32 0.029 0.34 0.031 0.36 0.033 0.38 0.035 0.40 0.036 0.42 0.038 0.44 0.040 0.46 0.042 0.48 0.044 0.50 0.046 0.52 0.048 0.54 0.050 0.56 0.052 0.58 0.054 0.60 0.056 0.62 0.058 0.64 0.060 0.66 0.062 0.68 0.064 0.70 0.066 0.72 0.068 0.74 0.070 0.76 0.072 0.78 0.074 0.80 0.076 0.82 0.078 0.84 0.080 0.86 0.082 0.88 0.084 0.90 0.086 0.92 0.088 0.94 0.090 0.96 0.093 0.98 0.095 1.00 0.097 1.02 0.099 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.101 1.06 0.103 1.08 0.105 1.10 0.108 1.12 0.110 1.14 0.112 1.16 0.114 1.18 0.116 1.20 0.119 1.22 0.121 1.24 0.123 1.26 0.125 1.28 0.127 1.30 0.130 1.32 0.132 1.34 0.134 1.36 0.137 1.38 0.139 1.40 0.141 1.42 0.143 1.44 0.146 1.46 0.148 1.48 0.150 1.50 0.153 1.52 0.155 1.54 0.157 1.56 0.160 1.58 0.162 1.60 0.165 1.62 0.167 1.64 0.169 1.66 0.172 1.68 0.174 1.70 0.177 1.72 0.179 1.74 0.181 1.76 0.184 1.78 0.186 1.80 0.189 1.82 0.191 1.84 0.194 1.86 0.196 1.88 0.199 1.90 0.201 1.92 0.204 1.94 0.206 1.96 0.209 1.98 0.211 2.00 0.214 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 48P: POND I Inflow Area = 1.208 ac, 79.77% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.90" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 1.84 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.091 af Outflow = 0.06 cfs @ 14.01 hrs, Volume= 0.061 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 121.6 min Primary = 0.06 cfs @ 14.01 hrs, Volume= 0.061 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.17' @ 14.01 hrs Surf.Area= 0.053 ac Storage= 0.053 af Plug-Flow detention time= 334.9 min calculated for 0.061 af (67% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 228.0 min ( 1,053.4 - 825.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.101 af 30.00'W x 55.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'1.8" W x 1.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.06 cfs @ 14.01 hrs HW=1.17' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.06 cfs @ 5.12 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 48P: POND I Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 23HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 48P: POND I Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)2 1 0 Inflow Area=1.208 ac Peak Elev=1.17' Storage=0.053 af 1.84 cfs 0.06 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 24HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 48P: POND I Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.001 0.04 0.002 0.06 0.002 0.08 0.003 0.10 0.004 0.12 0.005 0.14 0.005 0.16 0.006 0.18 0.007 0.20 0.008 0.22 0.009 0.24 0.009 0.26 0.010 0.28 0.011 0.30 0.012 0.32 0.013 0.34 0.014 0.36 0.014 0.38 0.015 0.40 0.016 0.42 0.017 0.44 0.018 0.46 0.019 0.48 0.020 0.50 0.020 0.52 0.021 0.54 0.022 0.56 0.023 0.58 0.024 0.60 0.025 0.62 0.026 0.64 0.027 0.66 0.028 0.68 0.029 0.70 0.029 0.72 0.030 0.74 0.031 0.76 0.032 0.78 0.033 0.80 0.034 0.82 0.035 0.84 0.036 0.86 0.037 0.88 0.038 0.90 0.039 0.92 0.040 0.94 0.041 0.96 0.042 0.98 0.043 1.00 0.044 1.02 0.045 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.046 1.06 0.047 1.08 0.048 1.10 0.049 1.12 0.050 1.14 0.051 1.16 0.052 1.18 0.053 1.20 0.054 1.22 0.055 1.24 0.056 1.26 0.058 1.28 0.059 1.30 0.060 1.32 0.061 1.34 0.062 1.36 0.063 1.38 0.064 1.40 0.065 1.42 0.066 1.44 0.068 1.46 0.069 1.48 0.070 1.50 0.071 1.52 0.072 1.54 0.073 1.56 0.074 1.58 0.076 1.60 0.077 1.62 0.078 1.64 0.079 1.66 0.080 1.68 0.081 1.70 0.083 1.72 0.084 1.74 0.085 1.76 0.086 1.78 0.088 1.80 0.089 1.82 0.090 1.84 0.091 1.86 0.092 1.88 0.094 1.90 0.095 1.92 0.096 1.94 0.098 1.96 0.099 1.98 0.100 2.00 0.101 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 25HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 52P: POND A Inflow Area = 5.900 ac, 68.63% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.63" for 10yr-24hr event Inflow = 6.26 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.309 af Outflow = 0.17 cfs @ 15.71 hrs, Volume= 0.163 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 223.1 min Primary = 0.17 cfs @ 15.71 hrs, Volume= 0.163 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.06' @ 15.71 hrs Surf.Area= 0.186 ac Storage= 0.184 af Plug-Flow detention time= 354.4 min calculated for 0.163 af (53% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 224.7 min ( 1,075.1 - 850.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.370 af 70.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'1.3" W x 4.2" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.17 cfs @ 15.71 hrs HW=1.06' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.17 cfs @ 4.53 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 52P: POND A Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 26HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 52P: POND A Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=5.900 ac Peak Elev=1.06' Storage=0.184 af 6.26 cfs 0.17 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 27HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 52P: POND A Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.010 0.08 0.013 0.10 0.016 0.12 0.019 0.14 0.023 0.16 0.026 0.18 0.029 0.20 0.033 0.22 0.036 0.24 0.039 0.26 0.043 0.28 0.046 0.30 0.049 0.32 0.053 0.34 0.056 0.36 0.059 0.38 0.063 0.40 0.066 0.42 0.070 0.44 0.073 0.46 0.076 0.48 0.080 0.50 0.083 0.52 0.087 0.54 0.090 0.56 0.094 0.58 0.097 0.60 0.101 0.62 0.104 0.64 0.108 0.66 0.111 0.68 0.115 0.70 0.118 0.72 0.122 0.74 0.125 0.76 0.129 0.78 0.133 0.80 0.136 0.82 0.140 0.84 0.143 0.86 0.147 0.88 0.151 0.90 0.154 0.92 0.158 0.94 0.162 0.96 0.165 0.98 0.169 1.00 0.173 1.02 0.176 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.180 1.06 0.184 1.08 0.188 1.10 0.191 1.12 0.195 1.14 0.199 1.16 0.203 1.18 0.206 1.20 0.210 1.22 0.214 1.24 0.218 1.26 0.222 1.28 0.225 1.30 0.229 1.32 0.233 1.34 0.237 1.36 0.241 1.38 0.245 1.40 0.249 1.42 0.253 1.44 0.257 1.46 0.260 1.48 0.264 1.50 0.268 1.52 0.272 1.54 0.276 1.56 0.280 1.58 0.284 1.60 0.288 1.62 0.292 1.64 0.296 1.66 0.300 1.68 0.304 1.70 0.308 1.72 0.312 1.74 0.317 1.76 0.321 1.78 0.325 1.80 0.329 1.82 0.333 1.84 0.337 1.86 0.341 1.88 0.345 1.90 0.349 1.92 0.354 1.94 0.358 1.96 0.362 1.98 0.366 2.00 0.370 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 28HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff = 4.28 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.265 af, Depth> 0.48" Routed to Pond 40P : POND D Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 73,738 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 181,544 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 32,234 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 287,516 73 Weighted Average 213,778 74.35% Pervious Area 73,738 25.65% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=287,516 sf Runoff Volume=0.265 af Runoff Depth>0.48" Tc=10.0 min CN=73 4.28 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 29HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff = 12.24 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 0.686 af, Depth> 0.60" Routed to Pond 42P : POND B Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 104,370 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 332,690 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 54,450 85 Gravel roads, HSG B * 108,159 98 Impervious Turf Field 599,669 76 Weighted Average 387,140 64.56% Pervious Area 212,529 35.44% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 9.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=599,669 sf Runoff Volume=0.686 af Runoff Depth>0.60" Tc=9.0 min CN=76 12.24 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 30HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff = 9.53 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.478 af, Depth> 1.24" Routed to Pond 41P : POND G Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 125,815 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A * 20,733 98 Impervious Turf Field 54,216 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 200,764 88 Weighted Average 54,216 27.00% Pervious Area 146,548 73.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.5 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=200,764 sf Runoff Volume=0.478 af Runoff Depth>1.24" Tc=7.5 min CN=88 9.53 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 31HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff = 1.54 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.072 af, Depth> 0.73" Routed to Pond 44P : POND F Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 5,023 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A * 20,763 98 Impervious Turf Field 25,932 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 51,718 79 Weighted Average 25,932 50.14% Pervious Area 25,786 49.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=51,718 sf Runoff Volume=0.072 af Runoff Depth>0.73" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 1.54 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 32HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff = 4.11 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.202 af, Depth> 1.05" Routed to Pond 46P : POND E Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 3,576 98 Water Surface, HSG B 66,641 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 30,117 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 100,334 85 Weighted Average 40,113 39.98% Pervious Area 60,221 60.02% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=100,334 sf Runoff Volume=0.202 af Runoff Depth>1.05" Tc=7.0 min CN=85 4.11 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 33HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff = 2.93 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af, Depth> 1.46" Routed to Pond 48P : POND I Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 41,969 98 Paved parking, HSG A 10,641 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 52,610 91 Weighted Average 10,641 20.23% Pervious Area 41,969 79.77% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=52,610 sf Runoff Volume=0.147 af Runoff Depth>1.46" Tc=7.0 min CN=91 2.93 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 34HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff = 11.13 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.547 af, Depth> 1.11" Routed to Pond 52P : POND A Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 176,374 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 80,626 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 257,000 86 Weighted Average 80,626 31.37% Pervious Area 176,374 68.63% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=257,000 sf Runoff Volume=0.547 af Runoff Depth>1.11" Tc=7.0 min CN=86 11.13 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 35HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 40P: POND D Inflow Area = 6.600 ac, 25.65% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.48" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 4.28 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.265 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.95' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.158 ac Storage= 0.265 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.273 af 50.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 40P: POND D Pond 40P: POND D Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=6.600 ac Peak Elev=1.95' Storage=0.265 af 4.28 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 36HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 40P: POND D Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.005 0.06 0.007 0.08 0.009 0.10 0.012 0.12 0.014 0.14 0.016 0.16 0.019 0.18 0.021 0.20 0.023 0.22 0.026 0.24 0.028 0.26 0.031 0.28 0.033 0.30 0.035 0.32 0.038 0.34 0.040 0.36 0.043 0.38 0.045 0.40 0.048 0.42 0.050 0.44 0.053 0.46 0.055 0.48 0.058 0.50 0.060 0.52 0.063 0.54 0.065 0.56 0.068 0.58 0.070 0.60 0.073 0.62 0.075 0.64 0.078 0.66 0.080 0.68 0.083 0.70 0.086 0.72 0.088 0.74 0.091 0.76 0.093 0.78 0.096 0.80 0.099 0.82 0.101 0.84 0.104 0.86 0.107 0.88 0.109 0.90 0.112 0.92 0.115 0.94 0.117 0.96 0.120 0.98 0.123 1.00 0.125 1.02 0.128 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.131 1.06 0.134 1.08 0.136 1.10 0.139 1.12 0.142 1.14 0.145 1.16 0.147 1.18 0.150 1.20 0.153 1.22 0.156 1.24 0.159 1.26 0.162 1.28 0.164 1.30 0.167 1.32 0.170 1.34 0.173 1.36 0.176 1.38 0.179 1.40 0.182 1.42 0.185 1.44 0.188 1.46 0.190 1.48 0.193 1.50 0.196 1.52 0.199 1.54 0.202 1.56 0.205 1.58 0.208 1.60 0.211 1.62 0.214 1.64 0.217 1.66 0.220 1.68 0.223 1.70 0.226 1.72 0.229 1.74 0.232 1.76 0.236 1.78 0.239 1.80 0.242 1.82 0.245 1.84 0.248 1.86 0.251 1.88 0.254 1.90 0.257 1.92 0.260 1.94 0.264 1.96 0.267 1.98 0.270 2.00 0.273 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 37HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 41P: POND G Inflow Area = 4.609 ac, 73.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.24" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 9.53 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.478 af Outflow = 0.25 cfs @ 15.35 hrs, Volume= 0.247 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 201.5 min Primary = 0.25 cfs @ 15.35 hrs, Volume= 0.247 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.88' @ 15.35 hrs Surf.Area= 0.182 ac Storage= 0.299 af Plug-Flow detention time= 354.2 min calculated for 0.247 af (52% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 236.3 min ( 1,062.1 - 825.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.322 af 60.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'5.5" W x 1.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.25 cfs @ 15.35 hrs HW=1.88' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.25 cfs @ 6.52 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 41P: POND G Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 38HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 41P: POND G Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=4.609 ac Peak Elev=1.88' Storage=0.299 af 9.53 cfs 0.25 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 39HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 41P: POND G Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.008 0.08 0.011 0.10 0.014 0.12 0.017 0.14 0.020 0.16 0.022 0.18 0.025 0.20 0.028 0.22 0.031 0.24 0.034 0.26 0.037 0.28 0.039 0.30 0.042 0.32 0.045 0.34 0.048 0.36 0.051 0.38 0.054 0.40 0.057 0.42 0.060 0.44 0.063 0.46 0.066 0.48 0.069 0.50 0.072 0.52 0.075 0.54 0.078 0.56 0.081 0.58 0.084 0.60 0.087 0.62 0.090 0.64 0.093 0.66 0.096 0.68 0.099 0.70 0.102 0.72 0.105 0.74 0.108 0.76 0.111 0.78 0.114 0.80 0.117 0.82 0.121 0.84 0.124 0.86 0.127 0.88 0.130 0.90 0.133 0.92 0.136 0.94 0.139 0.96 0.143 0.98 0.146 1.00 0.149 1.02 0.152 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.155 1.06 0.159 1.08 0.162 1.10 0.165 1.12 0.168 1.14 0.172 1.16 0.175 1.18 0.178 1.20 0.182 1.22 0.185 1.24 0.188 1.26 0.192 1.28 0.195 1.30 0.198 1.32 0.202 1.34 0.205 1.36 0.208 1.38 0.212 1.40 0.215 1.42 0.219 1.44 0.222 1.46 0.225 1.48 0.229 1.50 0.232 1.52 0.236 1.54 0.239 1.56 0.243 1.58 0.246 1.60 0.250 1.62 0.253 1.64 0.257 1.66 0.260 1.68 0.264 1.70 0.267 1.72 0.271 1.74 0.274 1.76 0.278 1.78 0.282 1.80 0.285 1.82 0.289 1.84 0.292 1.86 0.296 1.88 0.300 1.90 0.303 1.92 0.307 1.94 0.311 1.96 0.314 1.98 0.318 2.00 0.322 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 40HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 42P: POND B Inflow Area = 13.767 ac, 35.44% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.60" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 12.24 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 0.686 af Outflow = 0.51 cfs @ 15.04 hrs, Volume= 0.470 af, Atten= 96%, Lag= 181.6 min Primary = 0.51 cfs @ 15.04 hrs, Volume= 0.470 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.96' @ 15.04 hrs Surf.Area= 0.200 ac Storage= 0.345 af Plug-Flow detention time= 313.2 min calculated for 0.469 af (68% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 195.0 min ( 1,069.4 - 874.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.353 af 70.00'W x 95.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'3.8" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.51 cfs @ 15.04 hrs HW=1.96' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.51 cfs @ 6.46 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 42P: POND B Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 41HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 42P: POND B Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=13.767 ac Peak Elev=1.96' Storage=0.345 af 12.24 cfs 0.51 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 42HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 42P: POND B Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.009 0.08 0.012 0.10 0.015 0.12 0.018 0.14 0.022 0.16 0.025 0.18 0.028 0.20 0.031 0.22 0.034 0.24 0.037 0.26 0.040 0.28 0.044 0.30 0.047 0.32 0.050 0.34 0.053 0.36 0.056 0.38 0.060 0.40 0.063 0.42 0.066 0.44 0.069 0.46 0.073 0.48 0.076 0.50 0.079 0.52 0.082 0.54 0.086 0.56 0.089 0.58 0.092 0.60 0.096 0.62 0.099 0.64 0.102 0.66 0.106 0.68 0.109 0.70 0.113 0.72 0.116 0.74 0.119 0.76 0.123 0.78 0.126 0.80 0.130 0.82 0.133 0.84 0.136 0.86 0.140 0.88 0.143 0.90 0.147 0.92 0.150 0.94 0.154 0.96 0.157 0.98 0.161 1.00 0.164 1.02 0.168 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.171 1.06 0.175 1.08 0.178 1.10 0.182 1.12 0.186 1.14 0.189 1.16 0.193 1.18 0.196 1.20 0.200 1.22 0.204 1.24 0.207 1.26 0.211 1.28 0.215 1.30 0.218 1.32 0.222 1.34 0.226 1.36 0.229 1.38 0.233 1.40 0.237 1.42 0.240 1.44 0.244 1.46 0.248 1.48 0.252 1.50 0.255 1.52 0.259 1.54 0.263 1.56 0.267 1.58 0.271 1.60 0.274 1.62 0.278 1.64 0.282 1.66 0.286 1.68 0.290 1.70 0.294 1.72 0.298 1.74 0.301 1.76 0.305 1.78 0.309 1.80 0.313 1.82 0.317 1.84 0.321 1.86 0.325 1.88 0.329 1.90 0.333 1.92 0.337 1.94 0.341 1.96 0.345 1.98 0.349 2.00 0.353 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 43HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 44P: POND F Inflow Area = 1.187 ac, 49.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.73" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 1.54 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 0.072 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.85' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.051 ac Storage= 0.072 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.080 af 25.00'W x 50.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 44P: POND F Pond 44P: POND F Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Inflow Area=1.187 ac Peak Elev=1.85' Storage=0.072 af 1.54 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 44HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 44P: POND F Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.001 0.04 0.001 0.06 0.002 0.08 0.002 0.10 0.003 0.12 0.004 0.14 0.004 0.16 0.005 0.18 0.005 0.20 0.006 0.22 0.007 0.24 0.007 0.26 0.008 0.28 0.008 0.30 0.009 0.32 0.010 0.34 0.010 0.36 0.011 0.38 0.012 0.40 0.012 0.42 0.013 0.44 0.014 0.46 0.014 0.48 0.015 0.50 0.016 0.52 0.016 0.54 0.017 0.56 0.018 0.58 0.018 0.60 0.019 0.62 0.020 0.64 0.021 0.66 0.021 0.68 0.022 0.70 0.023 0.72 0.023 0.74 0.024 0.76 0.025 0.78 0.026 0.80 0.026 0.82 0.027 0.84 0.028 0.86 0.029 0.88 0.029 0.90 0.030 0.92 0.031 0.94 0.032 0.96 0.033 0.98 0.033 1.00 0.034 1.02 0.035 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.036 1.06 0.037 1.08 0.037 1.10 0.038 1.12 0.039 1.14 0.040 1.16 0.041 1.18 0.042 1.20 0.042 1.22 0.043 1.24 0.044 1.26 0.045 1.28 0.046 1.30 0.047 1.32 0.048 1.34 0.048 1.36 0.049 1.38 0.050 1.40 0.051 1.42 0.052 1.44 0.053 1.46 0.054 1.48 0.055 1.50 0.056 1.52 0.057 1.54 0.057 1.56 0.058 1.58 0.059 1.60 0.060 1.62 0.061 1.64 0.062 1.66 0.063 1.68 0.064 1.70 0.065 1.72 0.066 1.74 0.067 1.76 0.068 1.78 0.069 1.80 0.070 1.82 0.071 1.84 0.072 1.86 0.073 1.88 0.074 1.90 0.075 1.92 0.076 1.94 0.077 1.96 0.078 1.98 0.079 2.00 0.080 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 45HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 46P: POND E Inflow Area = 2.303 ac, 60.02% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.05" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 4.11 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.202 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.90' @ 24.00 hrs Surf.Area= 0.126 ac Storage= 0.202 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.214 af 40.00'W x 95.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Pond 46P: POND E Pond 46P: POND E Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=2.303 ac Peak Elev=1.90' Storage=0.202 af 4.11 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 46HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 46P: POND E Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.002 0.04 0.004 0.06 0.005 0.08 0.007 0.10 0.009 0.12 0.011 0.14 0.012 0.16 0.014 0.18 0.016 0.20 0.018 0.22 0.020 0.24 0.021 0.26 0.023 0.28 0.025 0.30 0.027 0.32 0.029 0.34 0.031 0.36 0.033 0.38 0.035 0.40 0.036 0.42 0.038 0.44 0.040 0.46 0.042 0.48 0.044 0.50 0.046 0.52 0.048 0.54 0.050 0.56 0.052 0.58 0.054 0.60 0.056 0.62 0.058 0.64 0.060 0.66 0.062 0.68 0.064 0.70 0.066 0.72 0.068 0.74 0.070 0.76 0.072 0.78 0.074 0.80 0.076 0.82 0.078 0.84 0.080 0.86 0.082 0.88 0.084 0.90 0.086 0.92 0.088 0.94 0.090 0.96 0.093 0.98 0.095 1.00 0.097 1.02 0.099 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.101 1.06 0.103 1.08 0.105 1.10 0.108 1.12 0.110 1.14 0.112 1.16 0.114 1.18 0.116 1.20 0.119 1.22 0.121 1.24 0.123 1.26 0.125 1.28 0.127 1.30 0.130 1.32 0.132 1.34 0.134 1.36 0.137 1.38 0.139 1.40 0.141 1.42 0.143 1.44 0.146 1.46 0.148 1.48 0.150 1.50 0.153 1.52 0.155 1.54 0.157 1.56 0.160 1.58 0.162 1.60 0.165 1.62 0.167 1.64 0.169 1.66 0.172 1.68 0.174 1.70 0.177 1.72 0.179 1.74 0.181 1.76 0.184 1.78 0.186 1.80 0.189 1.82 0.191 1.84 0.194 1.86 0.196 1.88 0.199 1.90 0.201 1.92 0.204 1.94 0.206 1.96 0.209 1.98 0.211 2.00 0.214 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 47HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 48P: POND I Inflow Area = 1.208 ac, 79.77% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.46" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 2.93 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af Outflow = 0.08 cfs @ 14.74 hrs, Volume= 0.082 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 165.5 min Primary = 0.08 cfs @ 14.74 hrs, Volume= 0.082 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.85' @ 14.74 hrs Surf.Area= 0.062 ac Storage= 0.092 af Plug-Flow detention time= 348.2 min calculated for 0.081 af (55% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 237.7 min ( 1,049.4 - 811.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.101 af 30.00'W x 55.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'1.8" W x 1.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.08 cfs @ 14.74 hrs HW=1.85' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.08 cfs @ 6.47 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 48P: POND I Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 49HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 48P: POND I Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.001 0.04 0.002 0.06 0.002 0.08 0.003 0.10 0.004 0.12 0.005 0.14 0.005 0.16 0.006 0.18 0.007 0.20 0.008 0.22 0.009 0.24 0.009 0.26 0.010 0.28 0.011 0.30 0.012 0.32 0.013 0.34 0.014 0.36 0.014 0.38 0.015 0.40 0.016 0.42 0.017 0.44 0.018 0.46 0.019 0.48 0.020 0.50 0.020 0.52 0.021 0.54 0.022 0.56 0.023 0.58 0.024 0.60 0.025 0.62 0.026 0.64 0.027 0.66 0.028 0.68 0.029 0.70 0.029 0.72 0.030 0.74 0.031 0.76 0.032 0.78 0.033 0.80 0.034 0.82 0.035 0.84 0.036 0.86 0.037 0.88 0.038 0.90 0.039 0.92 0.040 0.94 0.041 0.96 0.042 0.98 0.043 1.00 0.044 1.02 0.045 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.046 1.06 0.047 1.08 0.048 1.10 0.049 1.12 0.050 1.14 0.051 1.16 0.052 1.18 0.053 1.20 0.054 1.22 0.055 1.24 0.056 1.26 0.058 1.28 0.059 1.30 0.060 1.32 0.061 1.34 0.062 1.36 0.063 1.38 0.064 1.40 0.065 1.42 0.066 1.44 0.068 1.46 0.069 1.48 0.070 1.50 0.071 1.52 0.072 1.54 0.073 1.56 0.074 1.58 0.076 1.60 0.077 1.62 0.078 1.64 0.079 1.66 0.080 1.68 0.081 1.70 0.083 1.72 0.084 1.74 0.085 1.76 0.086 1.78 0.088 1.80 0.089 1.82 0.090 1.84 0.091 1.86 0.092 1.88 0.094 1.90 0.095 1.92 0.096 1.94 0.098 1.96 0.099 1.98 0.100 2.00 0.101 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 50HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 52P: POND A Inflow Area = 5.900 ac, 68.63% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.11" for 100yr-24hr event Inflow = 11.13 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 0.547 af Outflow = 0.24 cfs @ 16.23 hrs, Volume= 0.237 af, Atten= 98%, Lag= 254.8 min Primary = 0.24 cfs @ 16.23 hrs, Volume= 0.237 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 1.94' @ 16.23 hrs Surf.Area= 0.209 ac Storage= 0.357 af Plug-Flow detention time= 366.6 min calculated for 0.237 af (43% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 241.5 min ( 1,075.2 - 833.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 0.00' 0.370 af 70.00'W x 100.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=3.0 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 0.00'1.3" W x 4.2" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.24 cfs @ 16.23 hrs HW=1.94' (Free Discharge) 1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.24 cfs @ 6.39 fps) Orifice/Grate Pond 52P: POND A Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 51HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 52P: POND A Inflow Primary Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Inflow Area=5.900 ac Peak Elev=1.94' Storage=0.357 af 11.13 cfs 0.24 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"POST-DEV_ BALLFIELDS Printed 4/16/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 52HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 52P: POND A Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 0.00 0.000 0.02 0.003 0.04 0.006 0.06 0.010 0.08 0.013 0.10 0.016 0.12 0.019 0.14 0.023 0.16 0.026 0.18 0.029 0.20 0.033 0.22 0.036 0.24 0.039 0.26 0.043 0.28 0.046 0.30 0.049 0.32 0.053 0.34 0.056 0.36 0.059 0.38 0.063 0.40 0.066 0.42 0.070 0.44 0.073 0.46 0.076 0.48 0.080 0.50 0.083 0.52 0.087 0.54 0.090 0.56 0.094 0.58 0.097 0.60 0.101 0.62 0.104 0.64 0.108 0.66 0.111 0.68 0.115 0.70 0.118 0.72 0.122 0.74 0.125 0.76 0.129 0.78 0.133 0.80 0.136 0.82 0.140 0.84 0.143 0.86 0.147 0.88 0.151 0.90 0.154 0.92 0.158 0.94 0.162 0.96 0.165 0.98 0.169 1.00 0.173 1.02 0.176 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 1.04 0.180 1.06 0.184 1.08 0.188 1.10 0.191 1.12 0.195 1.14 0.199 1.16 0.203 1.18 0.206 1.20 0.210 1.22 0.214 1.24 0.218 1.26 0.222 1.28 0.225 1.30 0.229 1.32 0.233 1.34 0.237 1.36 0.241 1.38 0.245 1.40 0.249 1.42 0.253 1.44 0.257 1.46 0.260 1.48 0.264 1.50 0.268 1.52 0.272 1.54 0.276 1.56 0.280 1.58 0.284 1.60 0.288 1.62 0.292 1.64 0.296 1.66 0.300 1.68 0.304 1.70 0.308 1.72 0.312 1.74 0.317 1.76 0.321 1.78 0.325 1.80 0.329 1.82 0.333 1.84 0.337 1.86 0.341 1.88 0.345 1.90 0.349 1.92 0.354 1.94 0.358 1.96 0.362 1.98 0.366 2.00 0.370 37S BASIN D 38S BASIN B 39S BASIN G 43S BASIN F 45S BASIN E 47S BASIN I 49S BASIN H 51S BASIN A 54S BASIN C 55S (new Subcat) Routing Diagram for PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc, Printed 4/17/2026 HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing (selected events) Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 10yr-24hr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 1.70 2 2 100yr-24hr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.34 2 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 15.49 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 40P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 6.601 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 0.000 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 6.601 62 Weighted Average 6.601 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 40.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.026 0.025 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.02 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.01 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=6.601 ac Runoff Volume=0.018 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=40.0 min CN=62 0.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 15.80 hrs, Volume= 0.036 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 42P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 0 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 599,669 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 0 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 0 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 599,669 62 Weighted Average 599,669 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 61.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.054 0.052 0.05 0.048 0.046 0.044 0.042 0.04 0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=599,669 sf Runoff Volume=0.036 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=61.0 min CN=62 0.05 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 15.35 hrs, Volume= 0.013 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 41P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 4.609 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 4.609 62 Weighted Average 4.609 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 33.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.01 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=4.609 ac Runoff Volume=0.013 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=33.0 min CN=62 0.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 15.32 hrs, Volume= 0.003 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 44P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 1.187 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 1.187 62 Weighted Average 1.187 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 30.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.005 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=1.187 ac Runoff Volume=0.003 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=30.0 min CN=62 0.00 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 15.32 hrs, Volume= 0.006 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 46P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Water Surface, HSG B 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 2.303 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 2.303 62 Weighted Average 2.303 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 30.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.009 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=2.303 ac Runoff Volume=0.006 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=30.0 min CN=62 0.01 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 15.49 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 48P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description * 0.000 98 Paved parking, HSG A 1.459 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 1.459 62 Weighted Average 1.459 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 38.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=1.459 ac Runoff Volume=0.004 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=38.0 min CN=62 0.01 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 49S: BASIN H Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth> 0.12" Routed to nonexistent node 50P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 1.067 69 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG B 1.067 69 Weighted Average 1.067 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 32.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 49S: BASIN H Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.042 0.04 0.038 0.036 0.034 0.032 0.03 0.028 0.026 0.024 0.022 0.02 0.018 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=1.067 ac Runoff Volume=0.011 af Runoff Depth>0.12" Tc=32.0 min CN=69 0.04 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 15.70 hrs, Volume= 0.016 af, Depth> 0.03" Routed to nonexistent node 52P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 5.900 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 5.900 62 Weighted Average 5.900 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 55.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.023 0.022 0.021 0.02 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.01 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=5.900 ac Runoff Volume=0.016 af Runoff Depth>0.03" Tc=55.0 min CN=62 0.02 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 54S: BASIN C Runoff = 0.35 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.037 af, Depth> 0.16" Routed to nonexistent node 53P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Area (sf) CN Description 32,760 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 90,000 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 122,760 71 Weighted Average 90,000 73.31% Pervious Area 32,760 26.69% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 54S: BASIN C Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Runoff Area=122,760 sf Runoff Volume=0.037 af Runoff Depth>0.16" Tc=10.0 min CN=71 0.35 cfs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 55S: (new Subcat) Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" Subcatchment 55S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 10yr-24hr Rainfall=1.70" 0.00 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff = 0.30 cfs @ 12.60 hrs, Volume= 0.092 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 40P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 6.601 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 0.000 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 6.601 62 Weighted Average 6.601 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 40.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 37S: BASIN D Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=6.601 ac Runoff Volume=0.092 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=40.0 min CN=62 0.30 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff = 0.52 cfs @ 12.97 hrs, Volume= 0.189 af, Depth> 0.16" Routed to nonexistent node 42P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 0 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 599,669 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 0 85 Gravel roads, HSG B 0 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 599,669 62 Weighted Average 599,669 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 61.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 38S: BASIN B Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=599,669 sf Runoff Volume=0.189 af Runoff Depth>0.16" Tc=61.0 min CN=62 0.52 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.47 hrs, Volume= 0.064 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 41P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 4.609 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 4.609 62 Weighted Average 4.609 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 33.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 39S: BASIN G Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=4.609 ac Runoff Volume=0.064 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=33.0 min CN=62 0.23 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 0.017 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 44P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 1.187 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 1.187 62 Weighted Average 1.187 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 30.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 43S: BASIN F Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=1.187 ac Runoff Volume=0.017 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=30.0 min CN=62 0.06 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 0.032 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 46P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Water Surface, HSG B 0.000 95 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG D 2.303 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 2.303 62 Weighted Average 2.303 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 30.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 45S: BASIN E Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.135 0.13 0.125 0.12 0.115 0.11 0.105 0.1 0.095 0.09 0.085 0.08 0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=2.303 ac Runoff Volume=0.032 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=30.0 min CN=62 0.12 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.57 hrs, Volume= 0.020 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 48P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description * 0.000 98 Paved parking, HSG A 1.459 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 1.459 62 Weighted Average 1.459 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 38.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 47S: BASIN I Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.075 0.07 0.065 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.045 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=1.459 ac Runoff Volume=0.020 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=38.0 min CN=62 0.07 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 49S: BASIN H Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 0.031 af, Depth> 0.34" Routed to nonexistent node 50P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 1.067 69 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG B 1.067 69 Weighted Average 1.067 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 32.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 49S: BASIN H Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=1.067 ac Runoff Volume=0.031 af Runoff Depth>0.34" Tc=32.0 min CN=69 0.21 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 12.86 hrs, Volume= 0.081 af, Depth> 0.17" Routed to nonexistent node 52P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (ac) CN Description 0.000 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 5.900 62 Herbaceous range, Good, HSG B 5.900 62 Weighted Average 5.900 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 55.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 51S: BASIN A Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=5.900 ac Runoff Volume=0.081 af Runoff Depth>0.17" Tc=55.0 min CN=62 0.23 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 54S: BASIN C Runoff = 1.48 cfs @ 12.04 hrs, Volume= 0.097 af, Depth> 0.41" Routed to nonexistent node 53P Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Area (sf) CN Description 32,760 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG B 90,000 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 122,760 71 Weighted Average 90,000 73.31% Pervious Area 32,760 26.69% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 54S: BASIN C Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Runoff Area=122,760 sf Runoff Volume=0.097 af Runoff Depth>0.41" Tc=10.0 min CN=71 1.48 cfs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34"PRE-DEV_BALLFIELDS Printed 4/17/2026Prepared by Headwaters Engineering, Inc Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-8a s/n 14053 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 55S: (new Subcat) Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" Subcatchment 55S: (new Subcat) Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 2423222120191817161514131211109876543210Flow (cfs)1 0 Type II 24-hr 100yr-24hr Rainfall=2.34" 0.00 cfs Hydraflow Table of ContentsH:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond.gpw Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hydrograph Return Period Recap............................................................................. 1 2 - Year Summary Report......................................................................................................................... 2 Hydrograph Reports................................................................................................................... 3 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin........................................... 3 10 - Year Summary Report......................................................................................................................... 4 Hydrograph Reports................................................................................................................... 5 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin........................................... 5 100 - Year Summary Report......................................................................................................................... 6 Hydrograph Reports................................................................................................................... 7 Hydrograph No. 1, Rational, Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin........................................... 7 IDF Report.................................................................................................................... 8 Pond Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Pond No. 1 - Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Pond Data Contours -User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 4724.00 ft Stage / Storage Table Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft) 0.00 4724.00 542 0 0 1.00 4725.00 897 712 712 Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [PrfRsr] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise (in)= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span (in)= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 0 0 0 0 Invert El. (ft)= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length (ft)= 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Slope (%)= 0.00 0.00 0.00 n/a N-Value = .013 .013 .013 n/a Orifice Coeff.= 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Crest Len (ft)= 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft)= 4724.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Coeff.= 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 Weir Type = Rect --- --- --- Multi-Stage = No No No No Exfil.(in/hr)= 0.000 (by Contour) TW Elev. (ft)= 0.00 Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s). Stage / Storage / Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C PrfRsr Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil User Total ft cuft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 0.00 0 4724.00 --- --- --- --- 0.00 --- --- --- --- --- 0.000 1.00 712 4725.00 --- --- --- --- 0.03 --- --- --- --- --- 0.032 Hydrograph Return Period Recap 1 Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph No. type hyd(s) Description (origin) 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr 1 Rational ------ ------- 0.467 ------- ------- 0.907 ------- ------- 1.561 Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Proj. file: H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond.gpwTuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Hydrograph Summary Report 2 Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 Rational 0.467 1 5 140 ------ ------ ------ Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond.gpwReturn Period: 2 Year Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hyd. No. 1 Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 0.467 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 140 cuft Drainage area = 0.280 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.71* Intensity = 2.349 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min IDF Curve = Bozeman.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 * Composite (Area/C) = [(0.204 x 0.90) + (0.077 x 0.20)] / 0.280 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.35 0.40 0.40 0.45 0.45 0.50 0.50 Q (cfs) Time (min) Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Year Hyd No. 1 Hydrograph Summary Report 4 Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 Rational 0.907 1 5 272 ------ ------ ------ Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond.gpwReturn Period: 10 Year Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hyd. No. 1 Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 0.907 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 272 cuft Drainage area = 0.280 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.71* Intensity = 4.562 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min IDF Curve = Bozeman.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 * Composite (Area/C) = [(0.204 x 0.90) + (0.077 x 0.20)] / 0.280 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.70 0.70 0.80 0.80 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Q (cfs) Time (min) Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year Hyd No. 1 Hydrograph Summary Report 6 Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 Rational 1.561 1 5 468 ------ ------ ------ Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond\Harvest Parkway Temp Pond.gpwReturn Period: 100 Year Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Hyd. No. 1 Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 1.561 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 5 min Time interval = 1 min Hyd. volume = 468 cuft Drainage area = 0.280 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.71* Intensity = 7.853 in/hr Tc by User = 5.00 min IDF Curve = Bozeman.IDF Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1 * Composite (Area/C) = [(0.204 x 0.90) + (0.077 x 0.20)] / 0.280 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q (cfs) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Q (cfs) Time (min) Harvest Parkway Temp Pond Basin Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year Hyd No. 1 Hydraflow Rainfall Report 8 Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2026 Tuesday, 06 / 30 / 2026 Return Intensity-Duration-Frequency Equation Coefficients (FHA) Period (Yrs) B D E (N/A) 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 2 12.9576 3.4000 0.8024 -------- 3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -------- 10 25.8768 3.5000 0.8110 -------- 25 32.8487 3.4000 0.8079 -------- 50 38.4006 3.4000 0.8086 -------- 100 43.9527 3.4000 0.8092 -------- File name: Bozeman.IDF Intensity = B / (Tc + D)^E Return Intensity Values (in/hr) Period (Yrs) 5 min 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 2.35 1.61 1.25 1.03 0.88 0.78 0.69 0.63 0.58 0.53 0.50 0.46 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 4.56 3.13 2.43 2.00 1.71 1.50 1.34 1.21 1.11 1.03 0.95 0.89 25 5.89 4.04 3.12 2.57 2.20 1.93 1.72 1.56 1.43 1.32 1.23 1.15 50 6.87 4.71 3.64 3.00 2.57 2.25 2.01 1.82 1.67 1.54 1.43 1.34 100 7.85 5.38 4.16 3.43 2.93 2.57 2.30 2.08 1.90 1.76 1.64 1.53 Tc = time in minutes. Values may exceed 60. Rainfall Precipitation Table (in) Precip. file name: Sample.pcp Storm Distribution 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr SCS 24-hour 0.00 2.20 0.00 3.30 4.25 5.77 6.80 7.95 SCS 6-Hr 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 2.60 0.00 0.00 4.00 Huff-1st 0.00 1.55 0.00 2.75 4.00 5.38 6.50 8.00 Huff-2nd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-3rd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-4th 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Huff-Indy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Custom 0.00 1.75 0.00 2.80 3.90 5.25 6.00 7.10 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 14 of 15 Appendix C Geotechnical & Hydrogeological Evaluation & Soils Investigation Report 1105 REEVES RD. W. STE 6 BOZEMAN, MT 59718 406-581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 1 of 6 Geotechnical/Hydrogeological Evaluation Report Diamond 8 5590 Baxter Lane Bozeman, Montana COB Application #25784 April 2026 Headwaters Engineering, Inc. Project #: 2128.002 Prepared For: 4 Bozeman, LLC Bozeman, MT 59718 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 2 of 6 Project Description This evaluation summarizes the geotechnical findings from the onsite Soil Investigation as well as the hydrogeological conditions of the site as they relate to the proposed stormwater disposal method for the Diamond 8 project. The evaluation follows the outline and methodology described in Chapter 6 of the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards, October 2024. The Diamond 8 site consists of 8 baseball fields and three possible ancillary buildings. The site consists two parking lots for the fields as well as an internal emergency access aisle. The site is on the 79.77 acre Tract 4 of COS 2552B. The existing lot is located in the northwest ¼ of Section 4, T2S, R5E, PMM in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The site is well vegetated. The vegetation mostly consists of smooth brome, meadow foxtail, orchard grass, and common Timothy. Existing use on the lot is vacant land and the proposed use is a regional baseball park. The native ground slopes to the north-northwest at roughly 0.5-2.0%. Storm runoff from the site starts as sheet flow before collecting and flowing into the existing watercourse along the west side or into the wetlands along the north end of the site where it all ultimately flows west to Aajker Creek. Aajker Creek is roughly 700’ west of the site at its nearest point and Baxter Creek is about 75’ east of the site at its nearest point. The Niebel-Baxter ditch flows along the east property line before splitting north of Baxter Lane. The overflow channel flows west to Aajker Creek and a mostly unused irrigation ditch continues north. Investigations A soils investigation report was completed for the project area by IMEG in 2026. Twenty-five test pits were excavated on the site and the soil horizons were described; The first soil horizon encountered in each exploratory excavation was an Organic Soil of Low Plasticity (OL). This material was dark brown in color, moist, and very soft. This material was encountered to depths varying from 0.5 to 4.0 feet below grounds surface (bgs). Organic soils are highly compressible and are not suitable for foundation support. This material must be removed from beneath all foundation elements and in any area that will receive flexible or rigid pavements. Underlying the Organic Soil in each of the excavations was a Lean Clay (CL). This material was gray/grayish brown to brown in color and was moist to saturated. This material was encountered to depths varying from approximately 4.5 feet bgs to 9.0 feet bgs. Penetration tests performed on this material indicated that it was very soft to soft in consistency, sensitive to disturbance, and not suitable for foundation support. This material must be removed from beneath all foundation elements. Underlying the Lean Clay in each of the excavations was a Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles (GP). This material was grayish brown in color, moist to wet, and medium dense to dense in consistency. This material was encountered to the end of each excavation at depths varying from approximately 6.0 feet bgs to 9.2 feet bgs. Based on the subsurface investigation, it is recommended that the loads from the proposed structures be transmitted to the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles or to a structural fill pad overlying this material. (IMEG Geotechnical Investigation, March 13, 2026) The site naturally slopes to the north and northwest, but storm ponds are proposed throughout the site. Each field is proposed to have a drain which will collect runoff and carry it to the nearest storm pond. The proposed storm ponds have outlets which aim to discharge into historic stormwater flow paths. Following several site visits, there are not site characteristics that would interfere with the planned stormwater design. The native ground continues sloping to the north-northwest from the site to Aajker Creek. While Baxter Lane is elevated, the water will flow to Baxter Lane and then west to Aajker Creek to prevent water from being backed up into the site. Since no structures exist to the north of the site or within 300’ of the proposed storm ponds no potential impacts to neighboring buildings are expected. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 3 of 6 Groundwater is typically shallow in this area and extensive groundwater monitoring has been completed to date and will continue. The onsite monitoring wells show groundwater ranging from ground surface, up to about 6’ bgs. Each storm pond has been individually designed to maintain 2’ of separation from groundwater, or to be a wet detention pond which is set in the groundwater. Groundwater monitoring has been completed since April 2025 on several of the monitoring wells, allowing comparison groundwater depths for the wells which were only installed in January of this year. In 2025, the highest groundwater occurred on May 1st. The groundwater monitoring results are attached and each well is depicted on the civil sheets. The Potentiometric Surface Map of the Gallatin Valley by James P. Madison, 2022 shows the groundwater in this area flowing in the same direction as the ground contours. Review of well logs in this area show the shallow aquifer continuing to a depth between 24’ & 36’ bgs, before a clay layer is encountered which separates another water bearing horizon. The site is within the Cenezoic Basin – Fill/Alluvial Aquifer, which is unconsolidated or weakly consolidated. The bore logs from the C&H Soils Investigation show lean clay with sand to a depth ranging from 4.3 to 6.7’ below ground surface. Below that is a poorly graded gravel which has no plasticity. Once the infiltrated stormwater reaches this layer, it will infiltrate quickly and have little to no effect on the structural capacity of the soil or affect groundwater levels. The lean clay with sand will result in slow infiltration into the ground, but with the infiltration rate of of 17 minutes per inch the pond will drain in roughly 7 hours. Using the Hantush_USGS_GW_mounding spreadsheet, the groundwater mounding was found to extend roughly 40’ from the pond, but the calculator does not analyze a distance between 20 & 40’ so it is likely less than 40’. The Hantush calculator also does not allow pond elevation to be part of the analysis and therefore the mounding is shown to be 22’ above the bottom of storm pond which is physically impossible. Therefore, the top of the curve should be lowered to the height of the storm pond water surface above the groundwater, or 2’ above existing grade. Lowering this curve results in the mounding approaching zero in well under 10’. Even without this correction shift, the mounding calculator shows the mounding approaching zero in roughly 40’ as discussed above. There are zero structures within 40’ of the proposed storm pond, no buildings down gradient and due to there being open space to the north, there will never be any structures down gradient of the storm pond. The nearest building will be the proposed buildings which are over 130’ away from the storm pond. Therefore, the groundwater monitoring will have no effect on nearby structures. Percolation tests were performed at the elevation of the bottom of the storm pond a showed infiltration rates of around 17 minutes per inch. These rates will allow the storm pond to completely empty in under 7 hours following a storm. Soils The NRCS Soil Survey identifies the major soil types on the site to be Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams (453B), Lamoose silt loam(537A), and Enbar loam (509B) Turner loam (457A). These soils belong to hydrologic soil group B & C as they are comprised primarily of loams and silt loams with moderately high saturated hydraulic conductivity. Review of well logs in this area show the shallow aquifer consisting of sands and gravels continues to a depth between 30-35 feet bgs, before a clay layer is encountered which separates another water bearing horizon. The site is within the Tsc Geological Unit which is described as; Conglomerate, sandstone, tuffaceous siltstone, marlstone, and equivalent sediment and ash beds. Dominantly fluvial, alluvial fan, debris flow, and palustrine. This alluvial deposit results from high sediment loads, steep slopes and fluctuating water flow, common in glacial outwash or mountain foothills. 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 4 of 6 Figure 1 – NRCS Soil Map 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 5 of 6 Figure 2 – Geological Map Figure 3 – Madison GW Contours 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 6 of 6 Conclusion While the groundwater is relatively high in this area, the ponds have individually been designed to maintain the required separation or to utilize the groundwater for a wet detention pond. The proposed buildings will bear on the native gravels which will retail their structural integrity while submerged in water. The parking lots will be set several feet above the high groundwater with the proposed gravel section being separated from the native soils with separation fabric. With the above provided information, in unison with the IMEG Geotechnical Report for the site, we feel the proposed storm plan is the best option for this site. Attachments: -Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Results -MBMG – Potentiometric Surface in Gallatin, Lower Madison, Lower Jefferson, and Upper Missouri River Valleys within Parts of Madison and Gallatin Counties, Montana, James P. Madison, 2022 -NRCS Soil Resource Report -Soils Investigation Report – IMEG March 13, 2026 Exhibits (by reference): C1.0_Existing Conditions C3.0_Grading Plan H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\STORM\Stormwater Report Docs\App C Geotechnical-Hydrogeological eval-new.doc inputif highlighted yellow = dry measureif highlighted red = no longer monitoringif highlighted blue = MW of concernMonitoring Well #Average EG at well = 4709.23 ft 4719.34 ft 4730.71 ft 4711.56 ft 4708.05 ft 4723.00 ftMax Allow GW Elev 4705.23 ft 4715.34 ft 4726.71 ft 4707.56 ft 4704.05 ft 4719 ftTOP ELEV = 4712.22 ft 4723.14 ft 4733.40 ft 4713.56 ft 4709.80 ft 4726.46 ftSTEM LENGTH 2.99 ft 3.80 ft 2.69 ft 2.00 ft 1.75 ft 3.46 ftDate Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)1/26/2026 6.41 4705.81 3.42 9.20 4713.94 5.40 6.59 4726.81 3.90 5.73 4707.83 3.73 5.48 4704.32 3.73 9.32 4717.14 5.862/26/2026 5.90 4706.32 2.91 9.10 4714.04 5.30 6.45 4726.95 3.76 5.45 4708.11 3.45 5.01 4704.79 3.26 9.15 4717.31 5.693/30/2026 4.90 4707.32 1.91 8.97 4714.17 5.17 6.42 4726.98 3.73 5.40 4708.16 3.40 5.22 4704.58 3.47 9.10 4717.36 5.644/19/2026 5.64 4706.58 2.65 8.90 4714.24 5.10 6.34 4727.06 3.65 5.41 4708.15 3.41 5.22 -3.47 3.47 9.03 4717.43 5.57Monitoring Well #Average EG at well = 4713.12 ft 4722.21 ft 4720.45 ft 4708.32 ftMax Allow GW Elev 4709.12 ft 4718.21 ft 4716.45 ft 4704.32 ftTOP ELEV = 4716.36 ft 4725.31 ft 4723.84 ft 4710.92 ftSTEM LENGTH 3.24 ft 3.10 ft 3.39 ft 2.60 ftDate Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)1/26/2026 7.19 4709.17 3.95 5.30 4720.01 2.20 7.09 4716.75 3.70 5.70 4705.22 3.102/26/2026 6.83 4709.53 3.59 5.03 4720.28 1.93 6.96 4716.88 3.57 5.00 4705.92 2.403/30/2026 5.80 4710.56 2.56 5.12 4720.19 2.02 6.82 4717.02 3.43 4.57 4706.35 1.974/19/2026 6.78 4709.58 3.54 5.09 4720.22 1.99 6.78 4717.06 3.39 4.48 4706.44 1.88MW #5 MW #7 MW #8Baxter 80 - Groundwater MonitoringMW #9 MW #10MW #6MW #1 MW #2 MW #3 MW #4H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\GW MONITORING\Monitoring Wells.xls Monitoring Well #Average EG at well = 4710.74 ft 4714.91 ft 4725.52 ft 4731.57 ft 4719.13 ft 4724.62 ftMax Allow GW Elev 4706.74 ft 4710.91 ft 4721.52 ft 4727.57 ft 4715.13 ft 4720.62 ftTOP ELEV = 4713.46 ft 4718.64 ft 4728.56 ft 4733.72 ft 4721.88 ft 4727.49 ftSTEM LENGTH 2.72 ft 3.73 ft 3.04 ft 2.15 ft 2.75 ft 2.87 ftDateTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GWTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GWTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GWTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GWTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GWTape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)4/12/2025 4.00 1.28 1.00 -2.73 4.50 1.46 4.00 1.85 7.00 4.25 5.50 2.634/16/2025 5.59 4707.87 2.87 3.56 4715.08 -0.17 4.91 4723.65 1.87 3.56 4730.16 1.41 7.26 4714.62 4.51 6.34 4721.15 3.475/1/2025 4.97 4708.49 2.25 3.39 4715.25 -0.34 4.51 4724.05 1.47 2.98 4730.74 0.83 6.80 4715.08 4.05 5.85 4721.64 2.985/14/2025 5.49 4707.97 2.77 3.42 4715.22 -0.31 4.72 4723.84 1.68 3.39 4730.33 1.24 7.16 4714.72 4.41 6.30 4721.19 3.435/29/2025 5.92 4707.54 3.20 3.64 4715.00 -0.09 5.12 4723.44 2.08 3.96 4729.76 1.81 7.59 4714.29 4.84 6.75 4720.74 3.886/27/2025 6.20 4707.26 3.48 4.14 4714.50 0.41 5.76 4722.80 2.72 4.77 4728.95 2.62 7.98 4713.90 5.23 7.23 4720.26 4.367/25/2025 6.76 4706.70 4.04 4.34 4714.30 0.61 6.24 4722.32 3.20 5.40 4728.32 3.25 8.69 4713.19 5.94 7.71 4719.78 4.848/25/2025 7.30 4706.16 4.58 4.62 4714.02 0.89 6.45 4722.11 3.41 5.73 4727.99 3.58 9.05 4712.83 6.30 7.89 4719.60 5.0210/9/2025 6.96 4706.50 4.24 4.09 4714.55 0.36 5.71 4722.85 2.67 4.46 4729.26 2.31 8.70 4713.18 5.95 7.50 4719.99 4.6311/6/2025 6.49 4706.97 3.77 3.78 4714.86 0.05 5.09 4723.47 2.05 3.87 4729.85 1.72 8.20 4713.68 5.45 7.10 4720.39 4.2311/27/2025 6.40 4707.06 3.68 3.70 4714.94 -0.03 5.02 4723.54 1.98 3.82 4729.90 1.67 8.10 4713.78 5.35 7.01 4720.48 4.1412/22/2025 6.13 4707.33 3.41 3.70 4714.94 -0.03 4.72 4723.84 1.68 3.52 4730.20 1.37 7.92 4713.96 5.17 6.78 4720.71 3.911/26/2026 6.27 4707.19 3.55 3.85 4714.79 0.12 5.14 4723.42 2.10 3.93 4729.79 1.78 7.96 4713.92 5.21 6.88 4720.61 4.012/26/2026 6.01 4707.45 3.295.214713.43 1.48 5.92 4722.64 2.88 3.75 4729.97 1.60 7.83 4714.05 5.08 6.78 4720.71 3.913/30/2026 6.04 4707.42 3.32 3.62 4715.02 -0.11 5.05 4723.51 2.01 3.85 4729.87 1.70 7.81 4714.07 5.06 6.90 4720.59 4.034/19/2026 6.03 4707.43 3.31 3.72 4714.92 -0.01 4.95 4723.61 1.91 3.69 4730.03 1.54 7.79 4714.09 5.04 6.73 4720.76 3.86Monitoring Well #Average EG at well = 4733.83 ft 4709.81 ft 4716.77 ft 4723.73 ft 4734.13 ftMax Allow GW Elev 4729.83 ft 4705.81 ft 4712.77 ft 4719.73 ft 4730.13 ftTOP ELEV = 4736.98 ft 4712.18 ft 4720.39 ft 4727.13 ft 4737.68 ftSTEM LENGTH 3.15 ft 2.37 ft 3.62 ft 3.40 ft 3.55 ftDate Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW Tape Reading GW Elevation Depth EG to GW(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)4/12/2025 4.50 1.35 4.50 2.13 5.00 1.38 4.50 1.10 4.00 0.454/16/2025 5.73 4731.25 2.58 3.67 4708.51 1.30 6.64 4713.75 3.02 5.48 4721.65 2.08 5.81 4731.87 2.265/1/2025 5.15 4731.83 2.00 2.91 4709.27 0.54 5.78 4714.61 2.16 4.74 4722.39 1.34 5.28 4732.40 1.735/14/2025 5.65 4731.33 2.50 2.93 4709.25 0.56 6.09 4714.30 2.47 5.29 4721.84 1.89 5.68 4732.00 2.135/29/2025 6.05 4730.93 2.90 3.61 4708.57 1.24 6.77 4713.62 3.15 5.89 4721.24 2.49 6.19 4731.49 2.646/27/2025 6.56 4730.42 3.41 3.38 4708.80 1.01 6.48 4713.91 2.86 6.32 4720.81 2.92 6.55 4731.13 3.007/25/2025 6.93 4730.05 3.78 5.01 4707.17 2.64 8.07 4712.32 4.45 6.84 4720.29 3.44 7.00 4730.68 3.458/25/2025 7.22 4729.76 4.07 5.62 4706.56 3.25 8.66 4711.73 5.04 7.01 4720.12 3.61 6.93 4730.75 3.3810/9/2025 6.33 4730.65 3.18 5.49 4706.69 3.12 8.71 4711.68 5.09 6.65 4720.48 3.25 6.32 4731.36 2.7711/6/2025 5.93 4731.05 2.78 4.88 4707.30 2.51 8.26 4712.13 4.64 6.35 4720.78 2.95 5.96 4731.72 2.4111/27/2025 5.96 4731.02 2.81 4.89 4707.29 2.52 8.20 4712.19 4.58 6.89 4720.24 3.49 5.94 4731.74 2.3912/22/2025 5.71 4731.27 2.56 4.53 4707.65 2.16 8.05 4712.34 4.43 6.05 4721.08 2.65 5.61 4732.07 2.061/26/2026 6.00 4730.98 2.85 4.77 4707.41 2.40 7.86 4712.53 4.24 6.13 4721.00 2.73 6.18 4731.50 2.632/26/2026 5.96 4731.02 2.814.324707.86 1.95 6.77 4713.62 3.15 6.02 4721.11 2.62 6.02 4731.66 2.473/30/2026 5.99 4730.99 2.844.324707.86 1.95 7.64 4712.75 4.02 5.98 4721.15 2.58 6.06 4731.62 2.514/19/2026 5.95 4731.03 2.80 4.21 4707.97 1.84 7.59 4712.80 3.97 5.92 4721.21 2.52 5.92 4731.76 2.37MW #17 MW #18 MW #19 MW #20 MW #21MW #11 MW #12 MW #13 MW #14 MW #15 MW #16H:\2128\002\DOCS\DESIGN\GW MONITORING\Monitoring Wells.xls GALLATIN COUNTYPARK COUNTYMADISON COUNTYGALLATIN COUNTYGALLATIN COUNTYBROADWATER COUNTYGALLATIN COUNTYMADISON COUNTYGALLATIN COUNTYBROADWATER COUNTY455045504550550055005500540054005400530053005300520052005200510051005100500050005000490049004900480048004800470047004700460046004600450045004500440044004400430043004300420042004200410041004100460046004600450045004500440044004400 430043004300 420042004200 410041004100 500050005000 490049004900480048004800 470047004700460046004600450045004500440044004400 430043004300 510051005100 520052005200 480048004800470047004700460046004600 450045004500440044004400430043004300420042004200410041004100 480048004800470047004700460046004600450045004500 490049004900550055005500560056005600570057005700540054005400400040004000475047504750465046504650445044504450435043504350425042504250415041504150405040504050415041504150425042504250435043504350445044504450445044504450570057005700560056005600530053005300570057005700560056005600445044504450 435043504350%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%9090909086191191848586N 7th Ave28728728722287284287Bozeman CreekBridger CreekHyalite Cre e k East G all ati n Rive r Gallatin Ri v e r Camp CreekGallatin RiverCherry CreekHot Springs CreekMadison RiverWillow CrJefferson RiverTrail CreekHyaliteReservoirEast Gallati n River Dry Cr eekDry CreekSixteen Mile CreekSixteen Mile CreekMiddle Fk Sixteen Mile CrSo Fk Si xt e e n Mil e CrBrackett CreekJackson CreekMissouri RiverMissouri River HarrisonLakeBelgradeBozemanManhattanThree ForksGallatinGatewayHarrisonWillow CreekAmsterdamAnceneyChurch HillClarkstonLoganLombardMaudlowMenardNorrisSappingtonSedanTridentFourCornersQTbfTbfTbfTbfp_fbKlvgsKshaleTfuTbfPzlCMirp_fbKlvgsTbfKlvgsCMirp_fbp_fbPzlTbfPzlPzlTbfTbfPzlKshalep_fbp_fbKkotnCMirCMirCMirPzlPzlp_fbPzlPzlKegleKkotnKkotnMmdsnMmdsnMmdsnKkotnPzlMPsedMPsedMPsedPzlKshaleMmdsnMPsedMmdsnPzlMmdsnMmdsnMPsedMmdsnPzlPzlPzlMmdsnMPsedKeglePzlMmdsnMPsedCMirKegleKkotnMPsedMmdsnKkotnCMirKkotnMPsedMmdsnMmdsnMmdsnKkotnMmdsnMmdsnKkotnKkotnMPsedKegleMmdsnMmdsnMPsedMmdsnMmdsnMPsedKegleMPsedMmdsnMPsedMPsedMPsedMmdsnMPsedMPsedMmdsnMPsedKkotnKkotnKkotnKkotnMPsedMmdsnMPsedMmdsnMmdsnMPsedMmdsnMmdsnPzlTbfTbfQTbfQTbfMmdsnPzlp_fbp_fbTbfQTbfQTbfTbfp_fbp_fbTbfTbfp_fbTbfTbfTbfQTbfQTbfQTbfQTbfTbfp_fbPzlMmdsnTfuTfuKshaleKshalep_fbPzlMPsedKlvgsPzlQTbfTbfPzlPzlKshaleMPsedKkotnMmdsnPzlQTbfKlvgsKegleKshaleKshaleKkotnMPsedMmdsnPzlTbfTbfTbfTbfQTbfQTbfQTbfQTbfTfuKshaleKshaleMmdsn############################################################################################!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!38793964398539943995399740014015401740244042404340454050405540584060406140624063406540674068407040714074407440754076407640764078407940954098409941024108411241214135413741384141414341474148415041514156415741584158416141624162416341634166416641674168416841694170417141724178417941824184418641884188418941894191419141974200420042024203421042154222422342244229423442344237423842394239424042484251425242554257425742584262426542674269427342754277428142824283428342844287429042934295429642964296429643034308431143134317431743214326432643294329433543364337433743374338433843414343434943504351435243554364436643684369436943714373437343734378437843784379437943794380438043804382438443884391439444044406440744094410441444144416442144254426442944314433443344334434444044424444444744514455445644594464446844784481448544874490449044914492449744994505451745284533453445354541454845494550455445584559456245634565456745684575457645784579457945794584459045914592460146034605460746124616461746214623462446524654465546564660466246634664467650885098510851105115513151315147514951515165517446774687469046984702471047114715471847194722472447324734473447354738474047414742474347524760476147624765476747694779478147844786478747924793479447984803480348044811481648244825482748354837483848504854485548564861486248624862486348704871488348844889489248944896489848984901491049134915491649184922493049334933493649414942494549464950495149634966496849734977498349874988499749985005500550065007500950195020502350305030503550405041504250435045504850495060506350655067507350745176518551865187519451945201520152075222523752395248526152625267527652795291529152945310532053275339534153485356537153815397541654185418543054325449545354595524553555455553556055665568557155775582561156255633566356685677571057265760577059584074BRIDGER R A N G E GALLATIN RANGEMADISON RANGEHORSESHOE HILLSCAMP CREEKHILLS5,0007,0006,5006,0005,5004,5004,0003,5003,000Figure 2. Cross Section A–A'AA'Elevation above sea level (ft)QTbfQTbfQTbfTbfTbfMmdsnPzl=fbMmdsnPzl=fbJefferson RiverMadison River226763 (Bend in cross section)763Gallatin River133165 (Bend in cross section)235475 (Bend in cross section)96132=fb— Belgrade— Manhattan— Logan— Three Forks— BozemanBased on Vuke and others, 2014.AA'KlvgsPzlMmdsnTertiary Basin-FillCenezoic and Mesozoic Igneous RocksCretaceous Eagle AquiferPrecambrian Fractured Igneous,Metasedimentary, and Metamorphic RocksTertiary Fort Union AquiferCretaceous Kootenai AquiferMississipppian Madison Group AquiferMesozoic–Paleozoic Sedimentary RocksCenezoic Basin-Fill/Alluvial AquiferQTbfCMirTbfTfuKegleKshaleKkotnMPsed=fbKshaleKshaleUnconsolidated to weakly consolidated basin-fill. Lenticular beds of clay, silt, sand, gravel.Cretaceous sandstone beds within Kootenai, Eagle, and Fort Union Formations. Primary porosity and permeability in combination with secondary permeability along fractures.Fractured bedrock with mostly secondary porosity and permeability along fractures and/or solution cavities.Hydrogeologic FrameworkRegional Aquifers1RegionalConfining Units2Bearpaw FmClaggett FmColorado GroupLower Paleozoic Sedimentary RocksCretaceous Livingston GroupModified after Crowley and others, 2017.1Aquifer where saturated with water.2Locally may yield water to wells from sandstone.LegendTownRoadStreamInventoried well and measured altitude of water in feet above mean sea level.Generalized Potentiometric Contour—Shows altitude at which water would have stood in tightly cased well. Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 100 ft. Datum is sea level. Arrow shows direction of groundwater flow. Light line is supplemental 50' contour. Shaded relief created from 10 m digital elevation model of the U.S. Geological Survey National Elevation Dataset.Projection: Montana State Plane FIPS 2500 International feet.Datum: North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).ReferencesCarstarphen, C.A., LaFave, J.I., Crowley, J., Mason, D.C., Richter, M.G., Madison, J.P. and Blythe, D.D., 2015, Data for water wells, springs, and streams visited during the Gallatin-Madison Ground Water Characterization Study: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Montana Ground-Water Assessment Atlas 8-01, 40 p., 1 sheet.Crowley, J.J., LaFave, J.I., Bergantino, R.N., Carstarphen, C.A. and Patton, T.W., 2017, Principal aquifers of Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Hydrogeologic Map 11, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000.Hackett, O.M Visher, F.N., McMurtrey, R.G., Steinhilber, W.L., Stermitz, Frank, Boner, F.C., and Krieger, R.A., 1960, Geology and ground-water resources of the Gallatin Valley, Gallatin County, Montana, with a section on Surface-water, and a section on chemical quality of the water: U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1482.Michalek, T., and Sutherland, M., 2020, Hydrogeologic investigation of the Four Corners area, Gallatin County, Montana: Interpretive report: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 735, 74 p.Slagle, S.E., 1995, Geohydrologic conditions and land use in the Gallatin Valley, southwestern Montana, 1992-93; U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4034.Vuke, S.M., Lonn, J.D., Berg, R.B., and Schmidt, C.J., 2014, Geologic map of the Bozeman 30' x 60' quadrangle, southwestern Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 648, 44 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:100,000.Waren, K.B., and LaFave, J.I., 2011, Potentiometric surface map of basin fill and selected bedrock aquifers: Deer Lodge, Granite, Powell, and Silver Bow Counties, Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Montana Ground-Water Assessment Atlas 5-03, 1 sheet.Potentiometric Surface in Gallatin, Lower Madison, Lower Jefferson, and UpperMissouri River Valleys within Parts ofMadison and Gallatin Counties, MontanaJames P. Madison2022NBasin-fill wellFractured-bedrock well%##47624792%%TD Total depth of well Author’s Note: This map is part of the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Groundwater Assessment Atlas for the Gallatin–Madison Area groundwater characterization. It is intended to stand alone and describe a single hydrogeologic aspect of the study area, although many of the area’s hydrogeologic features are interrelated. For an integrated view of the hydrogeology of the Gallatin–Madison Area, the reader is referred to the other maps of Montana Groundwater Assessment Atlas 8 (http://mbmggwic.mtech.edu). This map represents the potentiometric surface for the unconsolidated basin-fill and fractured-bedrock aquifer system in the Gallatin, lower Madison, lower Jefferson, and upper Missouri river valleys within Madison and Gallatin Counties (fig. 1). In the map area, wells are completed mostly within the surficial unconsolidated alluvial and Tertiary basin-fill deposits or in fractured bedrock on the valley margins (fig. 2). On a basin scale, the basin-fill aquifer and surrounding bedrock typically function as a single hydrogeologic unit. A potentiometric surface represents the altitude to which water levels rise in wells completed in an aquifer; it is useful for determining the general direction of groundwater flow and estimating depth to water at a given location. In unconfined conditions, the potentiometric surface is generally a subdued representation of the regional topography; the highest groundwater altitudes coincide with the regional topographic highs and the lowest altitudes with the regional topographic lows. Lateral groundwater movement will be in a direction perpendicular to potentiometric contours from higher to lower altitudes, as indicated by the flow arrows on this map. Across the map area, groundwater generally flows away from mountainous recharge areas and the valley margins (regional topographic highs) towards and parallel to the major surface drainages (regional topographic lows). The potentiometric surface altitude at a site may be subtracted from the land-surface altitude at that location to yield the approximate depth to water. Groundwater levels fluctuate in response to natural and anthropogenic causes such as wet or dry climate anomalies, groundwater withdrawals, and land use. The fluctuations occur at seasonal, annual, or multi-year frequencies and provide insights on groundwater recharge and stresses acting on aquifers. Long-term (10+ year) hydrographs for 19 wells are included on the map to show representative groundwater-level fluctuations. Across the map area, groundwater levels fluctuate annually between 1 and 45 ft. The hydrographs show two main patterns of seasonal fluctuation that reflect different sources of recharge: (1) a natural pattern that reflects seasonal and interannual climate variability, and (2) an “irrigation” pattern that reflects recharge from leaky irrigation canals and over-applied irrigation water. Although the seasonal water-level fluctuations vary with respect to timing and magnitude, Michalek and Sutherland (2020) determined that long-term hydrographs from this region do not show declining trends. Hydrographs that show a natural (unirrigated) recharge pattern reflect water levels generally rising in spring and early summer due to infiltration of snowmelt and increased precipitation. These water levels decline during the late summer and fall, reaching seasonal lows in the winter months (hydrograph 213610). Changes in climate such as droughts or wet periods manifest as multi-year water-level declines or increases. Well hydrograph 234909 shows a declining trend from 2012–2015, increasing from 2016–2019, and decreasing from 2020–present. A similar response is observed in other wells east of the East Gallatin River, which is also located outside the area of intense irrigation practices. On the hydrographs that show an irrigation pattern (e.g., 201713, 226769, or 235473), water levels rise sharply at the beginning of the irrigation season, in late spring. Water levels remain elevated (a blunt peak or plateau) during the summer months while irrigation is ongoing, and sharply decline when irrigation water is “turned off.” Water level decline persists until the next irrigation period begins in the spring of the following year. The irrigation response is observed in wells 226763, 235475, 226769, 235473, and 96132 between Jackson Creek/East Gallatin River and the Camp Creek Hills. In this area, a 2,000-mi network of irrigation canals and laterals distribute water to about 5,350 acres (Michalek and Sutherland, 2020). The timing and magnitude of water-level fluctuation is consistent from year to year because irrigation practices that affect groundwater recharge have not significantly changed in the past 30 years. As demonstrated by Michalek and Sutherland (2020), some land has been taken out of production and flood irrigation has been replaced by wheel lines and center pivots. Although such changes may cause decreased groundwater recharge, these hydrographs demonstrate that water levels have not changed appreciably over the past decade. This potentiometric surface map builds upon and expands the potentiometric maps of Hackett and others (1960) and Slagle (1995).The map is based on about 500 measured water levels gathered during site visits between January 2008 and December 2012 (Carstarphen and others, 2015).1 Water levels were measured over a 4-year period across multiple seasons. Both of these factors can introduce variations in water levels and introduce error into the potentiometric contour configuration. Long-term well hydrographs for wells completed in the basin-fill and surrounding bedrock do not show water-level trends that would change the configuration of the potentiometric contours; these hydrographs show seasonal water-level fluctuations of 15 ft or less. Relative to the scale of this potentiometric map and the contour intervals, use of water levels measured across a 4-year period and during different seasons does not introduce noticeable error in interpretation. This potentiometric surface map is a general interpretation of regional conditions and groundwater flow directions. Readers interested in site-specific interpretations should reevaluate the data with an appropriate contour interval. This map and an ArcGIS Map Package with contours and point data are available at the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology’s publication website, http://www.mbmg.mtech.edu/mbmgcat/catmain.asp. 1Water-level measurements and other site information are available from the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology’s Ground Water Information Center (GWIC) database, http://mbmggwic.mtech.edu. Scale 1:100,000KILOMETERS 1 0 1 2 345678910MILES101234 7891056Figure 1. Location Map909415159090KalispellMissoulaHelenaGreat FallsBillingsBozemanButte116°104°106°108°110°112°114°49°45°46°47°48°MONTANA100 0 100 Miles160 0 160 KilometersThis mapGallatin–MadisonStudy Area45° 26' 35"111° 49' 52"46° 09' 40"111° 52' 00"45° 27' 48"110° 47' 05"46° 10' 55"110° 48' 23"R 6 ER 5 ER 4 ER 3 ER 7 ER 2 ET 4 S T 3 ST 2 ST 1 ST 1 NT 2 NT 3 NT 4 NT 5 N46° 00' 00"111° 45' 00"111° 30' 00"111° 15' 00"111° 00' 00"45° 45' 00"45° 30' 00"R 1 ER 1 WR 2 W111° 45' 00"111° 30' 00"111° 15' 00"111° 00' 00"MONTANA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGYA Department of Montana Technological UniversityMontana GroundwaterAssessmentAtlas 8, Map 4, Plate 1 2022project site United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Gallatin County Area, MontanaNatural Resources Conservation Service December 12, 2025 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Gallatin County Area, Montana.......................................................................13 451C—Quagle-Brodyk silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes.............................13 453B—Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................14 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...................................................16 537A—Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes........................................18 748A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes..........................19 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................22 Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................22 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................22 Hydrologic Soil Group.................................................................................22 Hydrologic Soil Group.................................................................................26 References............................................................................................................31 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 50599005060000506010050602005060300506040050605005060600506070050608005059900506000050601005060200506030050604005060500506060050607005060800490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 45° 42' 3'' N 111° 7' 16'' W45° 42' 3'' N111° 6' 42'' W45° 41' 31'' N 111° 7' 16'' W45° 41' 31'' N 111° 6' 42'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,780 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 29, Aug 30, 2025 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 18, 2022—Aug 29, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 451C Quagle-Brodyk silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes 0.1 0.1% 453B Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes 36.5 42.1% 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 6.5 7.4% 537A Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 43.7 50.3% 748A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes 0.1 0.1% Totals for Area of Interest 86.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 Gallatin County Area, Montana 451C—Quagle-Brodyk silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56sy Elevation: 4,350 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Quagle and similar soils:70 percent Brodyk and similar soils:20 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Quagle Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Silty calcareous loess Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 9 inches: silt loam Bk - 9 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R044BC030MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Description of Brodyk Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Silty calcareous loess Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bk1 - 6 to 30 inches: silt loam Bk2 - 30 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:30 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R044BC030MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Amsterdam Percent of map unit:8 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC032MT - Loamy (Lo) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Anceney Percent of map unit:2 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC036MT - Droughty (Dr) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No 453B—Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56t5 Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Elevation: 4,400 to 5,450 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland Map Unit Composition Amsterdam and similar soils:60 percent Quagle and similar soils:30 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Amsterdam Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loess Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam Bw - 8 to 15 inches: silt loam Bk - 15 to 42 inches: silt loam 2C - 42 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R044BC032MT - Loamy (Lo) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Description of Quagle Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Silty calcareous loess Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam Bw - 6 to 9 inches: silt loam Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Bk - 9 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R044BC030MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Beanlake Percent of map unit:6 percent Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC030MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Meagher Percent of map unit:4 percent Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC032MT - Loamy (Lo) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56vp Elevation: 4,400 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland Custom Soil Resource Report 16 Map Unit Composition Enbar and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Enbar Setting Landform:Flood plains Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 22 inches: loam Cg - 22 to 49 inches: sandy loam 2C - 49 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 24 to 42 inches Frequency of flooding:Rare Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nythar Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Flood plains Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland Hydric soil rating: Yes Straw Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC032MT - Loamy (Lo) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 17 537A—Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56wp Elevation: 4,000 to 5,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Lamoose and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Lamoose Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 9 inches: silt loam Bg - 9 to 27 inches: silt loam 2C - 27 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland Hydric soil rating: Yes Custom Soil Resource Report 18 Minor Components Bonebasin Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland Hydric soil rating: Yes Meadowcreek Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland Hydric soil rating: No 748A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 570v Elevation: 4,350 to 6,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Hyalite and similar soils:70 percent Beaverton and similar soils:20 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hyalite Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt1 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 17 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt3 - 17 to 26 inches: very cobbly sandy clay loam 3C - 26 to 60 inches: very cobbly loamy sand Custom Soil Resource Report 19 Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R043BP818MT - Upland Grassland Group Hydric soil rating: No Description of Beaverton Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 5 to 21 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bk - 21 to 25 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam 2Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R043BP818MT - Upland Grassland Group Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Hyalite Percent of map unit:5 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 20 Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BP818MT - Upland Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Turner Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044BC032MT - Loamy (Lo) 15-19" PZ Frigid North Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 21 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. 22 Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Custom Soil Resource Report 23 24 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group 50599005060000506010050602005060300506040050605005060600506070050608005059900506000050601005060200506030050604005060500506060050607005060800490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 45° 42' 3'' N 111° 7' 16'' W45° 42' 3'' N111° 6' 42'' W45° 41' 31'' N 111° 7' 16'' W45° 41' 31'' N 111° 6' 42'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,780 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 29, Aug 30, 2025 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 18, 2022—Aug 29, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 25 Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 451C Quagle-Brodyk silt loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes B 0.1 0.1% 453B Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0 to 4 percent slopes C 36.5 42.1% 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes C 6.5 7.4% 537A Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes B/D 43.7 50.3% 748A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes C 0.1 0.1% Totals for Area of Interest 86.8 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or Custom Soil Resource Report 26 soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Custom Soil Resource Report 27 1143 Stoneridge Drive Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-1115 Imegcorp.com March 13, 2026 Headwaters Engineering, Inc. Attn: Garrett Schultz, PE Email: gschultz@headwatersmt.net RE: Geotechnical Investigation Report Parcel 4, COS 2552B Bozeman, Montana IMEG# 25007339.00 Dear Garrett, Per your request, IMEG has conducted a subsurface soils investigation for the above referenced property located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 5 East in Bozeman, Montana. The scope of services was to conduct a subsurface soils investigation and provide a soils investigation report for a Baseball/Sports Complex and will be separated into two parts. The first part of the report documents the subsurface conditions, soil properties, and provides foundation design and general earthwork recommendations for the proposed structures. The second part of the report will focus on the suitability of the subsurface soils beneath the proposed baseball fields and will discuss possible subgrade improvements and/or treatment options to be considered for mass grading and site development. Proposed Construction It is our understanding that a baseball complex is proposed for construction and will consist of three synthetic turf fields and five natural grass turf fields. The complex will also include a clubhouse (approx. 9,600 sqft), two concession/storage/restroom facilities (approx. 4,800 sqft each), two outdoor batting cages, paved walkway, and asphalt parking lots. It has been assumed that each structure will utilize a slab- on-grade with stem wall foundation. In determining the allowable bearing capacity and settlement estimates, it has been assumed that the foundation footings will not be subjected to unusual loading conditions such as eccentric loads. A footing is eccentrically loaded if the load transferred to the footing is not directed through the center of the footing. This creates a bending moment in the footing and results in a non-uniform load transfer to the underlying soil. If any of the foundation footings will be eccentrically loaded, please contact this office so we can appropriately revise our allowable bearing capacity and settlement estimates. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 2 of 24 Site Description The subject property has a total area of 79.77 acres and is accessed from West Oak Street from the south and Baxter Lane from the north. The proposed complex will be located on the northern half of the property which is relatively flat with an approximate slope of 1.5 percent to the north. The property for the most part is undeveloped, however historic imagery shows an old agricultural pole barn in the northeast quarter. During the site visit only the concrete foundation of this structure was observed. A creek extends north from the approximate center of the southern boundary for approximately 1,200 feet then heads northwest exiting the property near the northwest corner. Historic imagery also shows visual wet areas paralleling the creek, and along the north half of the western property boundary, and a small area in the northeast quarter of the property. The subject property is currently undeveloped and relatively flat. No other significant geological or topographical features were observed across the subject property. It should be noted that the subject property was covered by snow on the day of the site visit limiting observation of the grounds surface. Subsurface Soil and Conditions On January 7, 2026 a member of the staff of IMEG visited the site to conduct a subsurface soils investigation. The subsurface soils investigation consisted of examining twenty-five exploratory test pit excavations. The exploratory test pits were excavated with a Bobcat E88 tracked excavator provided and operated by Elevation Excavating. The test hole locations were chosen based on the location of the desired building sites, as depicted on the site plans sent to our office via email. The soil profiles revealed by the exploratory excavations were logged and visually classified according to ASTM D 2488, which utilizes the nomenclature of the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The relative density of each soil layer was estimated based on penetration tests performed with a static cone penetrometer, probing of the excavation sidewalls with a rock hammer and the overall stability of the excavation. Any evidence of seepage or other groundwater conditions were also noted. The locations of the exploratory test pits are shown on the included Test Pit Location Map. The subsurface soil conditions encountered in the test pits are described below and in more detail on the included Test Pit Logs. The following paragraphs briefly summarize the subsurface soils and conditions observed in the exploratory test pits excavated for the field investigation. The soil horizons are described as they were encountered in the test pit excavations, starting with the horizon nearest the surface and proceeding with each additional horizon encountered with depth. Please refer to the attached test pit logs for more detailed information. The first soil horizon encountered in each of the exploratory excavations was a Silty Clay Organic Soil of Low plasticity (OL). This material was dark brown to black in color, moist and very soft. This material was encountered to depths varying from 0.5 feet below grounds surface (bgs) to 4.0 feet bgs. Organic soils are Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 3 of 24 highly compressible and are not suitable for foundation support. This material must be removed from beneath all foundation elements and in any area that will receive asphalt or concrete pavements. Underlying the Organic Soil in each of the excavations was a Lean Clay (CL). This material was gray/grayish brown to brown in color and was moist to saturated. This material was encountered to depths varying from approximately 4.5 feet bgs to 9.0 feet bgs. Penetration tests performed on this material indicated that it was very soft to soft in consistency, sensitive to disturbance, and not suitable for foundation support. This material must be removed from beneath all foundation elements. Underlying the Lean Clay in each of the excavations was a Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles (GP). This material was grayish brown in color, moist to wet, and medium dense to dense in consistency. This material was encountered to the end of each excavation at depths varying from approximately 6.0 feet bgs to 9.2 feet bgs. Based on the subsurface investigation, it is recommended that the loads from the proposed structures be transmitted to the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles or to a structural fill pad overlying this material. It is required that the excavation for any structure be observed by a licensed geotechnical engineer to verify that the proper foundation subgrade material has been reached prior to the forming or casting of any foundation elements or the placement and compaction of any required structural fill. Groundwater Groundwater and/or seepage were encountered within each of the exploratory excavations at depths varying from 4.5 feet bgs to 9.0 feet bgs. It should be noted that eleven groundwater monitoring wells were previously installed across the property. These wells were checked monthly by Headwaters Engineering from April 2025 to February 2026. Based on this monitoring data the seasonally high groundwater elevation varied from 0.54 feet bgs to 4.05 feet bgs in 2025. This data also indicated that seasonally high ground water should be anticipated from late April to early May. During the field investigation an additional ten monitoring wells were installed across the area to be developed. Headwaters Engineering will continue checking these wells. Given the shallow depth of groundwater across the site, basement and crawl space foundations are not feasible. It is recommended that slab-on-grade with stem wall foundations be utilized for any foundation constructed on this site. Based on the subsurface investigation significant amounts of groundwater should be anticipated in utility and foundation excavations. Dewatering of the site prior to the start of construction and throughout the duration of the construction activities should be anticipated. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 4 of 24 Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (WSS) provides soil data and information produced by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The NRCS has determined the physical characteristics and engineering properties, among other data, of near surface soils across the United States. These data are reviewed against our observations and analysis of the subsurface soils encountered during the field investigation to determine if a correlation is present. If a strong correlation is determined, it is likely that other engineering properties or characteristics described by the NRCS regarding the soils present on the subject property are accurate as well. It should be noted that the NRCS typically only describes the soils located within 5 feet of the surface. Figure 1. NRCS Soils Map NRCS Soil Survey information of the area was taken from the NRCS WSS, Version 2.0. For more information, please visit the NRCS Web Soil Survey on the World Wide Web, at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. The subject property location is shown as a black triangle on Figure 1 above. The NRCS Soils Survey identifies three soil types across the desired building areas. The soil types are 453B – Amsterdam Quagle Silt Loam, 509B – Enbar Loam and 537A – Lamoose Silt Loam. The NRCS describes these soil types as alluvium and/or loess. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 5 of 24 Geologic Setting The following paragraphs discuss the geologic setting in the direct vicinity of the subject property. The geologic setting is determined from a review of surface geology maps and reports published by the United States Geological Survey and others that contain the subject property. This information is especially helpful in determining any geologic hazards that may be present in the immediate area (such as landslide deposits) and what types of soil and rock may be present in the area. Additional information regarding the parent material and depositional environment of a given soil type can also sometimes be obtained or inferred from these maps and reports. Figure 2. Geologic Map The local surface geology in the direct vicinity of the subject property was determined from the USGS Geologic Map of the Bozeman 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Southwestern Montana. The subject property location is shown as a black triangle on Figure 2 above. The USGS Geological Map identifies two surface geology formations across the desired building sites. These formations are Qabo – Braid Plain Alluvium and Tscmv – Madison Valley Member of the Sixmile Creek Formation. Qabo Braid plain alluvium, older than Qab (Pleistocene)—Rounded to well-rounded, dominantly cobble gravel with clasts as large as boulders, and sand, silt, and clay; mostly composed of clasts of Archean metamorphic rock, and dark-colored volcanic rock, with subordinate Paleozoic limestone and Proterozoic Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 6 of 24 Belt rocks. Clast lithologies in general order of decreasing abundance include Precambrian metamorphic rocks, mafic volcanic rocks, dacite(?) porphyry, quartzite, sandstone, limestone, and chert. A well in this unit indicates a thickness of 9 m (30 ft) of alluvium overlying Tertiary deposits. Tscmv Madison Valley member— Madison Bluffs, Madison Plateau, and Camp Creek Hills area. Pinkish tan or tan, tuffaceous silt or siltstone and marl interbedded with crossbedded, texturally immature, coarse- grained sandstone that contains lenses of pebble conglomerate or local cobble conglomerate ranging from matrix- to clast-supported, and from cemented to unconsolidated. Conglomerate clasts are dominantly Archean gneiss and extrusive volcanic rocks, with subordinate Belt rocks, and occasional Paleozoic limestone clasts. Sandstone has large root casts locally, and marl beds are typically full of small root casts. Several vitric ash beds are present throughout the unit. Opalized wood fragments are abundant in many conglomerate lenses. Conglomerate also contains relatively abundant disarticulated bones, bone fragments, and occasional teeth. Numerous articulated Barstovian fossils have been collected and studied from the fine-grained parts of this unit (Tabrum and Nichols, 2001; Douglass, 1899, 1901, 1903, 1907a, 1907b, 1908, 1909a, 1909b; Frick, 1937; Dorr, 1956; Sutton, 1977; Sutton and Korth, 1995; Evander, 1996), including the Anceney beds of Dorr (1956). The contact between this unit and the underlying Dunbar Creek Member of the Renova Formation is sharp and locally appears unconformable as noted by Hackett and others (1960). In the northernmost part of the Madison Bluffs, the contact appears to be an angular unconformity. A relatively resistant bed at the base of the Madison Valley formation cuts down to nearly the level of the Climbing Arrow Member. In the southernmost part of the Madison Bluffs, calcic paleosols occur at the contact between the Madison Valley member and the underlying Dunbar Creek Member of the Renova Formation. Thickness 60 m (200 ft) throughout most of the Madison Bluffs area, but thickens to 90 m (300 ft) in the southern bluffs. Dry Creek area. Grayish orange, crossbedded sandstone and pebble conglomerate interbedded with brownish orange tuffaceous siltstone and marl. Sandstone beds contain large lenses of dominantly pebble conglomerate with occasional cobble-size clasts or local cobble conglomerate. Conglomerates vary from matrix supported to clast supported. Unlike the clast composition in the Madison Bluffs and Camp Creek Hills areas, the clasts in the Menard area are dominantly Paleozoic limestone and Mesozoic sandstone, with subordinate andesitic volcanic rock and minor metamorphic rocks. Hughes (1980) interpreted the volcanic rock source as the Maudlow Basin where Livingston Group rocks are exposed. Near the Bridger Range, the clasts are dominantly Proterozoic LaHood Formation arkose, Paleozoic limestone, and quartz. Thickness near Menard about 30 m (100 ft). It is not known if the Madison Valley member thickens dramatically to the east, or if it has been down-faulted from the Bridger Range to Dry Creek. It is at a much higher elevation close to the Bridger Range than at Dry Creek. Some of the coarse-grained beds of the Madison Valley member are shown on the map with a dotted pattern. In general, these are medium to coarse grained, fairly laterally persistent sandstone beds with numerous lenses of conglomerate and conglomeratic sandstone. Hughes (1981) describes these conglomeratic sandstones as “blanket-like” deposits in the Dry Creek area. 11 In local areas south of Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 7 of 24 Manhattan and in the southeastern part of the map area, some of the conglomerate lenses contain dominantly cobble- rather than the more typical pebblesize clasts of other areas. These cobble conglomerates serve as caprocks with overlying fine-grained sediment stripped away. The cobble conglomerates have been interpreted as alluvial terrace deposits (Hackett and others, 1960) and pediment gravels (Mifflin, 1963), but were traced into the Madison Valley member in several places. They are shown as coarse-grained beds of the Madison Valley member. Gravel pits are numerous in the coarse-grained beds of the Madison Valley member. Seismicity The USGS provides seismic design parameters for the design of buildings and bridges across the United States. These parameters are based on the 2015 National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Recommended Seismic Provisions. The primary intent of the NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions is to prevent, for typical buildings and structures, serious injury and life loss caused by damage from earthquake ground shaking. The following seismic design parameters were determined for the subject property using the USGS Seismic Design Application: Approximate site Location: Latitude = 45.696° N Longitude = 111.116° W Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters: Short Period (SS) = 0.729g 1-Second Period (S1) = 0.225g Site Coefficients and Adjusted MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters: SMS = 0.887g SM1 = 0.484g Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters: SDS = 0.591g SD1 = 0.323g The seismic site class for this project is D. Regional Faults The USGS and Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG) have compiled a map of Quaternary Class A faults and earthquake epicenters in western Montana; a Class A fault is one that is associated with at least one large magnitude earthquake within the last 1.6 million years. A review of this map indicated that Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 8 of 24 there are four Class A faults in the general Bozeman area and numerous earthquake epicenters. The faults mapped near the subject property are the Bridger Fault (691), the Gallatin Range Fault (692), the Central Park Fault (670) and the Elk Creek Fault (694). The subject property location is shown as a black triangle on Figure 3 Below. Figure 3. Quaternary Class A Fault Map Liquefaction In general terms, liquefaction is defined as the condition when saturated, loose, fine sand-type soils lose their support capabilities due to the development of excessive pore water pressure, which can develop during a seismic event. Loose silty sandy soils, if located below the groundwater table, have the potential to liquefy during a major seismic event. Our subsurface investigation did not encounter any loose sand or silt horizons within the depth of excavation that will be located within the water table, and, it is our opinion that the potential for differential settlement resulting from liquefaction during a moderate seismic event is low. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 9 of 24 Foundation Recommendations Based on the subsurface soils encountered in the exploratory excavations, it will be acceptable to utilize slab-on-grade with stem wall foundations, provided the recommendations made in this report are properly implemented. Please find the following as general recommendations for all foundation elements: • In order to keep the footing out of the active frost zone it is recommended that the bottom of all footing elevations be a minimum of 48 inches below finished grade. • All foundation footings are to bear on the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles or on a structural fill pad overlying this material. All foundation footings shall be dimensioned for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). • Due to the very soft consistency and saturation of the Lean Clay soils during seasonal ground water peaks, it is recommended the entire foundation footprint continue down to native gravel and imported structural fill be utilized to achieve desired foundation elevations. • All site grading and drainage recommendations must be properly implemented. • The exposed subgrade must remain in a dry condition throughout construction of the foundation elements. • If construction takes place during the colder months of the year, the subgrade must be protected from freezing throughout construction. This may require the use of insulating blankets and/or ground heaters. Allowable Bearing Capacity The bearing capacity of a soil is defined as the ultimate pressure per unit area by the foundation that can be supported by the soil in excess of the pressure caused by the surrounding soil at the footing level. Bearing capacity is determined by the physical and chemical properties of the soil located beneath the proposed structures footings. It is recommended that the loads from the proposed structures be transmitted to the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles or to a structural fill pad overlying this material. For this scenario it is recommended that an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot be used to dimension all foundation footings. These allowable bearing capacities may be increased by one third for short term loading conditions such as those from wind or seismic forces. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 10 of 24 Settlement While the soil at the site may be able to physically support the footings, it is also important to analyze the possible settlement of the structure. In many cases, settlement determines the allowable bearing capacity. When a soil deposit is loaded by a structure, deformations within the soil deposit will occur. The total vertical deformation of the soil at the surface is called total settlement. Total settlement is made up of two components: elastic settlement and consolidation settlement. Elastic settlement is the result of soil particles rearranging themselves into a denser configuration due to a load being imposed on them and usually occurs during the construction process and shortly after. Consolidation settlement occurs more slowly and overtime as water within the pore spaces of a soil are forced out and the soil compresses as the stress from the load is transferred from the water molecules to the soil particles. Consolidation settlement is more of a concern with fine-grained soils with low permeability and high in-situ moisture contents. The degree of settlement is a function of the type of bearing material, the bearing pressure of the foundation elements, local groundwater conditions, and in some cases determines the allowable bearing capacity for a structures’ footings. In addition to analyzing total settlement, the potential for differential settlement must also be considered. Differential settlement occurs in soils that are not homogeneous over the length of the foundation or in situations where the foundation rests on cut and fill surfaces. If the foundation rests on structural fill overlaying properly prepared soils with rock, differential settlement is expected to be well within tolerable limits. Areas that have significantly more fill under the foundation footings (four feet of more) create greater potential for differential settlement. In these cases the structural fill must be installed properly and tested frequently. Compaction efforts and structural fill consistence are vital in minimizing differential settlement. For this project it is not anticipated that significant quantities of structural fill will be required. For this project, total settlement is expected to consist of elastic settlement. A settlement analysis based on conservative soil parameter estimates, the recommended allowable bearing capacity, and the assumption that all recommendations made in this report are properly adhered to, indicates the total and differential settlement are expected to be 1-inch or less. Structures of the type assumed can generally tolerate this amount of movement, however, these values should be checked by a structural engineer to verify that they are acceptable. Please note that the settlement estimates are based on loads originating from the proposed structure. If additional loads are introduced, such as the placement of large quantities of fill, our office should be contacted to re-evaluate the settlement estimates. Lateral Pressures Lateral pressures imposed upon foundation and retaining walls due to wind, seismic forces, and earth pressures may be resisted by the development of passive earth pressures and/or frictional resistance between the base of the footings and the supporting soils. If a foundation or retaining wall is restrained from moving, the lateral earth pressure exerted on the wall is called the at-rest earth pressure. If a foundation or retaining wall is allowed to tilt away from the retained soil, the lateral earth pressure exerted Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 11 of 24 on the wall is called the active earth pressure. Passive earth pressure is the resistance pressure the foundation or retaining wall develops due to the wall being pushed laterally into the earth on the opposite side of the retained soil. Each of these pressures is proportional to the distance below the earth surface, the unit weight of the soil, and the shear strength properties of the soil. It is recommended that all foundation and retaining walls be backfilled with well-draining granular material. Well-draining granular backfill has a more predictable behavior in terms of the lateral earth pressure exerted on the foundation or retaining wall and will not generate expansive related forces. If backfill containing significant quantities of clayey material is used, the seepage of water into the backfill could potentially generate horizontal swelling pressures well above at-rest values. Additionally, seepage into a clayey backfill material will also cause significant hydrostatic pressures to build up against the foundation wall due to the low permeability of clay soils and will make the backfill susceptible to frost action. Subsurface walls that are restrained from moving at the top are recommended to be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 70 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) (at-rest pressure); the equivalent fluid pressure is the product of the retained soils unit weight and its coefficient of active or at-rest earth pressure. Any subsurface walls that are allowed to move away from the restrained soil, such as cantilevered retaining walls, are recommended to be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf (active pressure). For passive pressures, an equivalent fluid pressure of 250 pcf is recommended, and the coefficient of friction between the cast-in-place concrete and the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles and/or structural fill is 0.5. These recommended values were calculated assuming a near horizontal backfill and that the onsite soils will be used as foundation wall backfill provided, they are not too moist and are able to be properly compacted. It is also assumed that the backfill will be compacted as recommended in this report. If the onsite soils cannot be moisture conditioned to near optimum or be properly compacted, then a more suitable material will need to be imported as foundation wall backfill. Also, please note that these design pressures do not include a factor of safety and are for static conditions, they do not account for additional forces that may be induced by seismic loading. Subgrade Preparation and Structural Fill In general, the excavation for each structure must be level and uniform and continue down through any organics and lean clay to the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles; please note that it is recommended the entire building footprint continue down to native gravel. If any soft spots or boulders are encountered, they will need to be removed and backfilled with structural fill. The excavation width must extend a minimum of one footing width from the outside edges of the footings or to a distance equal to ½ the height of the required structural fill. For example, if 4 feet of structural fill is required under the foundation footings, the excavation width must extend out a minimum distance of 2 feet from the outside edges of the foundation footings. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 12 of 24 Once the excavation is complete, the native subgrade shall be compacted to an unyielding condition with a large smooth drum roller. Any areas of the excavation that are observed to be rutting or pumping shall be sub excavated and replaced with structural fill. Following compaction of the native subgrade, any required structural fill can be placed and compacted or the foundation footings may be formed and cast. Structural fill is defined as all fill that will ultimately be subjected to structural loadings, such as those imposed by footings, floor slabs, pavements, etc. None of the soils encountered in the exploratory excavations are suitable for reuse as structural fill, and structural fill will need to be imported for this project. Imported structural fill is recommended to be a well graded gravel with sand that contains less than 15 percent of material that will pass a No. 200 sieve and that has a maximum particle size of 3.0 inches. Also, the fraction of material passing the No. 40 sieve shall have a liquid limit not exceeding 25 and a plasticity index not exceeding 6. The gravel and sand particles also need to be made up of durable rock materials that will not degrade due to moisture or the compaction effort; i.e. no shale or mudstone fragments should be present. It would also be acceptable to utilize a ¾-inch crushed washed rock as structural fill in areas of standing water to provide a capillary break. Structural fill must be placed in lifts no greater than 12-inches (uncompacted thickness) and be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 97 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. If ¾- inch crushed washed rock is utilized it is recommended to be compacted to an unyielding condition. Typically, the structural fill must be moisture conditioned to within + 2 percent of the materials optimum moisture content to achieve the required density. It is recommended that the structural fill be compacted with a large vibrating smooth drum roller. Please note that if a moisture-density relationship test (commonly referred to as a proctor) needs to be performed for a proposed structural fill material to determine its maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D698, a sample of the material must be delivered to this office a minimum of three full working days prior to density testing being needed. At no time should surface water runoff be allowed to flow into and accumulate within the excavation for the foundation elements. If necessary, a swale or berm should be temporarily constructed to reroute all surface water runoff away from the excavation. Excavation should not proceed during large precipitation events. If any of the foundation footings are found to be located on a test pit, the area will need to be excavated down to the full depth of the test pit and structural fill be placed and compacted in controlled lifts as described in this report to bring the area back up to the desired grade. Foundation Wall Backfill Approved backfill material should be placed and compacted between the foundation wall and the edge of the excavation. Structural fill is recommended as foundation wall backfill in all areas that will support concrete slabs-on-grade or asphalt paving improvements. The Lean Clay is suitable for foundation wall backfill in areas that will not have concrete or asphalt pavements, provided it is not to moist and is able to be compacted. If Lean Clay is to moist and/or unable to be compacted properly, it will need to be moisture conditioned to + 2 percent of its optimum moisture content or a suitable backfill material will need to be Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 13 of 24 imported. Samples collected from the excavations indicate natural moisture content of the lean clay varied from 18 percent to 32 percent with an average moisture of approximately 25 percent. The optimum moisture for the lean clay is estimated to be approximately 18.4 percent. If the onsite soils cannot be moisture conditioned properly, they will need to be re-used in less critical areas that are outside of the building and/or field locations. The foundation wall backfill shall be placed in uniform lifts and be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material’s maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. The foundation wall backfill will need to be compacted with either walk behind compaction equipment or hand operated compaction equipment in order to avoid damaging the foundation walls. If walk behind compaction equipment is used lifts should not exceed 8-inches (loose thickness) and if hand operated compaction equipment is used lifts should not exceed 4-inches (loose thickness). Site Grading Surface water should not be allowed to accumulate and infiltrate the soil near the foundation. Proper site grading will ensure surface water runoff is directed away from the foundation elements and will aid in the mitigation of excessive settlement. Please find the following as general site grading recommendations: • Finished grade must slope away from the building a minimum of 5 percent within the first 10 feet, in order to quickly drain ground surface and roof runoff away from the foundation walls. Please note that in order to maintain this slope; it is imperative that any backfill placed against the foundation walls be compacted properly. If the backfill is not compacted properly, it will settle and positive drainage away from the structure will not be maintained. • Permanent sprinkler heads for lawn care should be located a sufficient distance from the structure to prevent water from draining toward the foundation or saturating the soils adjacent to the foundation. • Rain gutter down spouts are to be placed in such a manner that surface water runoff drains away from the structure. • All roads, walkways, and architectural land features must properly drain away from all structures. Special attention should be made during the design of these features to not create any drainage obstructions that may direct water towards or trap water near the foundation. Interior Slabs-on-Grade Due to the very soft consistency and saturation of the Lean Clay during peak groundwater season, it is recommended that the entire footprint for each structure continue down to the native poorly graded gravel and utilize structural placed and compacted in controlled lifts to achieve the desired building elevations. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 14 of 24 The native subgrade then needs to be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. Following compaction of the native subgrade, structural fill be placed and compacted to within 6-inches of the desired bottom of slab elevation. It is our opinion that the only way to eliminate the risk of slab movement is to excavate the area beneath the proposed slabs down to native gravel. Followed by properly placing and compacting structural fill in controlled lifts to the desired building elevation. An alternative to the complete removal of the lean clay would be supporting the interior slabs on an adequate structural fill pad mechanically reinforced with geogrid and underlain by a woven geotextile fabric. Provided the slabs are structurally separated from the foundation walls, and that the owner is willing to accept the risk of some potential slab movement. The feasibility of this alternative option will be dependent on the in-place strength and moisture content of the soils present at the time of construction. For all interior concrete slabs-on-grade, preventative measures must be taken to stop moisture from migrating upwards through the slab. Moisture that migrates upwards through the concrete slab can damage floor coverings such as carpet, hardwood and vinyl, in addition to causing musty odors and mildew growth. Moisture barriers will need to be installed to prevent water vapor migration and capillary rise through the concrete slab. Capillarity is the result of the liquid property known as surface tension, which arises from an imbalance of cohesive and adhesive forces near the interface between different materials. With regards to soils, surface tension arises at the interface between groundwater and the mineral grains and air of a soil. The height of capillary rise within a given soil is controlled by the size of the pores between the soil particles and not the size of the soil particles directly. Soils that have small pore spaces experience a higher magnitude of capillary rise than soils with large pore spaces. Typically, soils composed of smaller particles (such as silt and clay) have smaller pore spaces. In order to prevent capillary rise through the concrete slab-on-grade it is recommended that 6 inches of ¾- inch washed rock (containing less than 10 percent fines) be placed and compacted once the excavation for the slab is complete. The washed rock has large pore spaces between soil particles and will act as a capillary break, preventing groundwater from migrating upwards towards the bottom of the slab. Water vapor is currently understood to act in accordance with the observed physical laws of gases, which state that the water vapor will travel from an area of higher concentration to that of a lower concentration until equilibrium is achieved. Because Earth contains large quantities of liquid water, water vapor is ubiquitous in Earth’s atmosphere, and, as a result, also in soils located above the water table (referred to as the vadose zone). Typically, the concentration of water vapor in the vadose zone is greater than that inside the residence. This concentration difference may result in an upward migration of water vapor from the vadose zone through the concrete slab-on-grade and into the building. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 15 of 24 In order to prevent this upward migration of water vapor through the slab, it is recommended that a 15-mil extruded polyolefin plastic that complies with ASTM E1745 (such as a Stego Wrap 15-mil Vapor Barrier) be installed if moisture sensitive floor coverings will be utilized. The vapor barrier should be pulled up at the sides and secured to the foundation wall or footing. Care must be taken during and after the installation of the vapor barrier to avoid puncturing the material, and all joints are to be sealed per the manufacture’s recommendations. Once the excavation for any interior slabs-on-grade is completed as described in the first paragraph of this section, and the ¾ inch washed rock and moisture barriers have been properly installed, it will be acceptable to form and cast the steel reinforced concrete slab. It is recommended that interior concrete slabs-on-grade have a minimum thickness of 4 inches, provide all slab reinforcement is designed by a licensed structural engineer. Exterior Slabs-on-Grade For exterior areas to be paved with concrete slabs such as sidewalks and/or patios, it is recommended that, at a minimum, the organic soil be removed. The subgrade then needs to be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. If the native subgrade cannot be compacted, it may be necessary to install a thicker structural fill section that is mechanically reinforced with Tensar HX5.5 geogrid and a layer of geotextile fabric such as a Mirafi 500X. This will be dependent on the in-place strength and moisture content of the soils present at the time of construction. For non- vehicular traffic areas, a minimum of 6 inches of ¾-inch minus rock needs to be placed, and 4 inches of 4000 pounds per square inch (psi) concrete placed over the ¾-inch minus rock. For areas with vehicular traffic, a minimum of 9 inches of ¾-inch minus rock should be placed, followed by 6 inches of 4000 psi concrete. Exterior slabs that will be located adjacent to the foundation walls need to slope away from the structure at a minimum grade of 2 percent and should not be physically connected to the foundation walls. If they are connected, any movement of the exterior slab will be transmitted to the foundation wall, which may result in damage to the structure. Asphalt Paving Improvements The following recommendations are intended for the interior parking lots only. The pavement design for the extensions and/or improvements of Laurel Parkway and Harvest Parkway were not included in the scope of this report. For the pavement design it has been assumed that traffic for the interior parking lots will be limited to standard passenger type vehicles with limited busses and occasional truck traffic such as deliveries and/or trash collection. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 16 of 24 It is anticipated that the Lean Clay will be the subgrade material present beneath the parking lots. A Standard Proctor was performed in accordance with ASTM D698 along with a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) was performed in accordance with ASTM D1883 on a bulk sample of the Lean Clay (CL) that was collected during the field investigation. The maximum dry density (Proctor) of this material was found to be 104.8 pcf and 105.8 pcf with an optimum moisture content of 19.5 percent and 17.3 percent. The CBR for this material was found to be 1.3 to 4.2 percent. However, the in-place moisture content of this material varied across the site, but was mostly outside the optimum range to achieve maximum compaction and a reduced CBR value of one percent was utilized in our analysis. This reduction also accounts for Montana’s climate which has seasonal low temperatures that subject the pavement to freeze thaw cycles, as well as to account for any inconsistencies in the subsurface soils and conditions that may be encountered during construction. The proposed pavement cross section is based on the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993) and the assumptions listed above. Based on our analysis the following pavement cross section is recommended for the proposed parking areas: Material Type Material Thickness (inches) Asphalt Surface 3 1 Inch Minus Road Mix Base Course 6 6-inch Minus Subbase Course 20 Table 1. Recommended Pavement Section Material Type Material Thickness (inches) Asphalt Surface 3 1 Inch Minus Road Mix Base Course 6 6-inch Minus Subbase Course 14 Table 2. Recommended Pavement Section with Tensar HX5.5 Geogrid In general, the excavation for the parking areas must continue down through any organics or to the proposed subgrade elevation, whichever is deeper. Once the excavation is complete, the native subgrade shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. If any soft spots (areas that cannot be compacted properly) are encountered during compaction of the native subgrade they will need to be sub-excavated and re-placed with structural fill, which is recommended to consist of a Well Graded Gravel with Sand with a maximum particle size of 6 inches. The structural fill, if needed, shall be placed in a maximum of 12-inch-thck lifts and be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. It may also be necessary to install a layer of Tensar HX5.5 geogrid in these areas prior to placing the sub-base section. Following compaction of the native subgrade it is recommended that a layer of separation geotextile (such as a Miari 600X) be installed to prevent the Lean Clay from migrating up into the subbase course during compaction. Next a minimum of 20 inches of subbase course shall be placed and compacted. Once the Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 17 of 24 subbase course has been installed, a minimum of 6 inches of base course shall be placed and compacted. Both gravel courses shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. If a layer of Tensar HX5.5 geogrid is installed on top of the woven geotextile the sub-base section can be reduced to 14 inches. If asphalt paving is to be placed on foundation wall backfill, the backfill must be compacted to 95 percent of its maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698. It is recommended the backfill be placed in uniform lifts and be compacted to an unyielding condition. Please note that construction traffic was not included in the pavement design analysis. If the pavement section gravels are to be utilized during construction for access roads, staging areas, and deliveries, the gavel sections shall be re-evaluated to account for the additional construction traffic loads. Underground Utilities We recommend specifying non-corrosive materials or providing corrosion protection unless additional tests are performed to verify the onsite soils are not corrosive. It is recommended that ¾-inch minus washed rock be used as a bedding material, where bedding material is defined as all material located within 6 inches of the utility pipe(s). The bedding material should be thoroughly compacted around all utility pipes. Trench backfill shall be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density in paved or landscaped areas and a minimum of 97 percent of its maximum dry density beneath foundation footings. Backfilling around and above utilities should meet the requirements of Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. Conclusions The soils present at the site will be adequate to support the proposed structures, provided the recommendations made in this report are properly followed. Please find the following recommendations as particularly crucial: • In order to keep the footing out of the active frost zone it is recommended that the bottom of all footing elevations be a minimum of 48 inches below finished grade. • All foundation footings are to bear on the Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Cobbles or on a structural fill pad overlying this material. All foundation footings shall be dimensioned for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). • Due to the very soft consistency and saturation of the Lean Clay soils during seasonal ground water peaks, it is recommended the entire foundation footprint continue down to native gravel and imported structural fill be utilized to achieve desired foundation elevations. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 18 of 24 • All site grading and drainage recommendations must be properly implemented. • The exposed subgrade must remain in a dry condition throughout construction of the foundation elements. • If construction takes place during the colder months of the year, the subgrade must be protected from freezing throughout construction. This may require the use of insulating blankets and/or ground heaters. Part 2 Baseball Field Suitability & Mass Grading It is our understanding that mass grading and site development is planned. At the time of this report conceptual grading plans across the site indicate maximum grade increases and grade reductions will be in the order of plus 3.1 feet and minus 2.02 feet. Geotechnical Considerations The following geotechnical considerations will affect the long-term performance of the planned improvements. The geotechnical considerations should be carefully evaluated by the design team and their risks fully understood and accepted before proceeding with design and construction activities. Geotechnical considerations are further addressed in the following sections. The exploratory excavations encountered soft compressible Silty Clay Organic Soil varying from 0.5 feet bgs to 4.0 feet bgs. Following the organic soil moist to saturated lean clays were encountered at depths varying from 4.5 feet to 9.0 feet bgs. The natural moisture of the lean clays increased with depth and were more sensitive to disturbance. The soil strength and stability of the lean clays are significantly reduced with increased moisture and will be negatively affected by construction traffic. Attention should be given to the behavior of the near surface soils during construction. The onsite soils are prone to strength loss with increasing depth and when disturbed by construction equipment and activities. If subgrade elevations during stripping reside within about 2-feet above or within the saturated lean clays, significant rutting of the subgrade soils and difficulty operating truck-mounted equipment should be expected. Careful construction planning, staging, and sequencing will be necessary to preserve the underlying soil strength and minimize any construction trafficking on the prepared subgrade soils. Mechanical Stabilization such as granular bridging layers should be anticipated. The necessary thickness of granular bridging layers will depend on weather, schedule and other factors existing at the time of construction, but could be on the order of 24 inches or more. Cost estimating should include funds for this purpose. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 19 of 24 Mass Grading and Preparations All organic-rich topsoil should be removed from the improvement areas prior to placement of grade-raising fill. Based on the subsurface investigation organic soils were encountered to depths varying from 0.5 feet to 4.0 feet bgs. Site stripping and/or near surface soils should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Engineer at the time of initial site development and grading. After stripping of topsoil has been completed, the subgrade soils should be examined. Following examination of the subgrade soils, we recommend that the subgrade soils be disked, dried, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D- 698). Then, a proof roll test should be performed on the exposed subgrade using suitable equipment such as a fully loaded tandem-axle dump truck with direct observation of the subgrade behavior under the applied wheel loads. Please note that the proof roll test should not be performed if the subgrade soils have not been properly moisture conditioned and/or improved, and remain in a saturated state, as this could result in a significant strength decline of the soils. Depending on the in-place moisture content present at the time of construction, near surface soils at the site may exhibit low-strength characteristics and may be prone to pumping and rutting. Any areas showing excessive deflection or yielding under the proof roll loads should be removed and replaced as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer. All grading fill compaction, moisture content and lift thicknesses should be monitored and verified by a geotechnical representative throughout construction activities. Any damage caused by construction traffic patterns or deterioration due to adverse weather should be repaired to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer. Positive surface water management practices must be established throughout the duration of construction activities and be extended to the service life of the planned improvements. It is imperative that no water be allowed to accumulate adjacent to or upon any of the planned improvement areas. This requirement of design must be satisfied throughout the entirety of construction and be extended to the service life of the planned improvements. Construction Equipment Trafficking Required thicknesses of both reinforced and unreinforced fills necessary to support dynamic construction loads can be estimated for any combination of subgrade strength, fill type, and applied loading, The function of the reinforced fill is to distribute the surface loads and to reduce stresses on the subgrade to a level that does not exceed the bearing capacity of the soil in local shear. In addition to local shear failure, a subgrade can also fail due to deeper seated bearing capacity failure. Localized shear failure, or base punching, typically occurs in the form of severe deformation or rutting in Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 20 of 24 soft subgrades when the applied loading exceeds the subgrade shear strength. The subgrade beneath an unreinforced fill will fail in localized shear at about half the stress level than the ultimate bearing capacity of the subgrade. As strength declines, final subgrades begin to pump under construction loads until permanent rutting occurs. Then, further construction efforts to compact over the unstable underlying soils may be unsuccessful and compaction to 95 percent of standard Proctor cannot be obtained without disking and drying to greater depths. Figure 4 provides a useful reference regarding granular remedial subgrade thicknesses based on subgrade soil strength. For subgrades where equipment trafficking is planned, laboratory remolded strengths rather than undisturbed strengths provide a more representative estimate of expected soil strengths following disturbance by construction activities. Figure 4. Minimum Remedial Thickness for Stabilizing Subgrade During favorable weather, drying by scarification and aeration can be attempted, but the dried surface layer will still deflect where underlying soils are not dry. If deflection does occur granular stabilizing materials may be necessary. With estimated unconfined compressive strengths on the order of 1,000 psf for the lean clay, a twenty-four-inch thickness of compacted crushed stone is recommended. Any granular stabilizing material should be established on a geosynthetic (Mirafi 500x or engineer approved equal) to provide both tensile reinforcement and separation from the underlying subgrade soils. Regardless of the need for additional removal and replacement measures, subgrade compaction, moisture content and prepared depths should be monitored and verified throughout execution of construction activities. Any damage caused by construction traffic, staging, or deterioration due to adverse weather should be repaired prior to proceeding with further construction activities. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 21 of 24 Athletic Fields We anticipate the soils encountered in the turf athletic field areas will consist of lean clay soils in grade cut areas and approved engineered fill overlying lean clay in grade fill areas. It should be noted that the lean clay soils may require soil stabilization and/or be removed and replaced with a more suitable material to provide satisfactory subgrade support and long-term performance. It is imperative that subgrade support be relatively uniform with no abrupt changes in stiffness. It is our understanding that athletic fields require a higher subgrade strength than subgrades supporting pavements or floor slabs. It is our understanding that the synthetic turf fields will consist of a 2-inch turf with infill installed over a composite base. The turf composite base will consist of a thicker base stone section that is capped with a smaller finishing stone section. The base stone section is to be installed over a PVC membrane and woven geotextile overlying a properly constructed fill base. It is also our understanding that the synthetic turf field will implement a series of subsurface collector drains (designed by others) beneath and around the fields to collect surface and subsurface water which will then be routed to designated basins away from the fields and/or structures. It is also our understanding that the natural grass fields will be constructed with a granular base overlying a suitable fill base section and will be sloped to properly drain. The turf sections depicted below show typical turf cross sections. Based on the subgrade investigation, it is anticipated that some subgrade soil stabilization will be required. The necessary modified soil thickness necessary below the synthetic and/or natural turf athletic fields is a function of the underlying soil strength at the time of construction. Various soil modifications for stabilization are discussed below. Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 22 of 24 Soil Stabilization Mechanical stabilization is among the most utilized soil stabilization methods in this area and typically consists of implementing one or more of the following: reinforcing soils with geotextiles, geogrids, mixing in sand or aggregate into existing soils to alter the moisture and dry density of the material. Based on the subsurface investigation and the estimated soil strengths of the onsite material, a eighteen to twenty-four-inch thickness of compacted crushed stone is recommended for a granular stabilization layer. Any granular stabilizing material should be established on a geosynthetic (Mirafi 500x or engineer approved equal) to provide both tensile reinforcement and separation from the underlying subgrade soils. The thickness of the granular stabilization will be dependent on the condition of the subgrade material at the time of the construction. Typically, this thickness can be reduced by installing one or more layers of geogrid or by first stiffing the clay soils. The onsite lean clays could potentially be improved by mixing or incorporating gravel, sand, or crushed stone into the lean clays. This can be done by placing and compacting a stone ballast (railroad ballast) into the lean clays which will cause lateral stress and densification of the surrounding soil, increasing its stiffness. It should be noted that a woven geotextile and/or geogrid may still be required. During excavation and site grading within the athletic fields, we recommend that the Geotechnical Engineer be provided the opportunity to sample and examine soils near the final proposed subgrade elevation. Then, we may revisit the above granular thickness recommendation and provide this information to the design team for consideration. Chemical stabilization of subgrade soils such as cement modified or lime modified would be an alternative to mechanical stabilization and/or removal of soft surficial soils. However, the Owner and project stakeholders alike should consider any possible environmental impacts. Depending on the weather or method of application there may be airborne dust. Dust could affect the neighboring properties and should be addressed before the work commences. Various chemical treatment products, application rates and depths of treatment may be selected in response to the soil types encountered, anticipated soil behavior under construction equipment loads, soil behavior under permanent traffic loads, and the structural subgrade support requirements. Underlying geotechnical factors such as depth to groundwater level and the presence of any sensitive underlying soil layers relative to the final grading plan should be carefully examined. It should be noted that chemical stabilization is not commonly used in the area and it may be difficult finding suppliers for chemical products and contractors who have previous experience with successful applications and/or implementation of subgrade chemical stabilization. The effectiveness of chemical stabilization will be directly related to the selected modifying agent and/or application rate as well as the soil type(s) it is being applied to and typically cannot be applied if temperatures during application or curing will be below Headwaters Engineering Inc. – Geotechnical Investigation, Parcel 4, COS 2552B, Bozeman MT March 13, 2026 Page 23 of 24 40-degrees. Additional soil analysis should be conducted at time of construction to determine the feasibility of chemical stabilization at that time. Construction Administration The foundation is a vital element of a structure; it transfers all of the structure’s dead and live loads to the native soil. It is imperative that the recommendations made in this report are properly adhered to. A representative from IMEG shall observe the construction of any foundation or drainage elements recommended in this report and should verify proper compaction has been achieved in all structural fill lifts. The recommendations made in this report are contingent upon our involvement. If the soils encountered during the excavation differ than those described in this report or any unusual conditions are encountered, our office should be contacted immediately to examine the conditions and re-evaluate our recommendations. If construction and site grading take place during cold weather, it is recommended that approved winter construction practices be observed. All snow and ice shall be removed from cut and fill areas prior to site grading taking place. No fill should be placed on soils that are frozen or contain frozen material. No frozen soils can be used as fill under any circumstances. Please note that not following the preceding recommendations may potentially result in foundation settlement issues in the spring when the frost thaws and the snow melts. Additionally, concrete should not be placed on frozen soils and should meet the temperature requirements of ASTM C 94. Any concrete placed during cold weather conditions shall be protected from freezing until the necessary compressive strength has been attained. Once the footings are placed, frost shall not be permitted to extend below the foundation footings, as this could heave and crack the foundation footings and/or foundation walls. It is the responsibility of the contractor to provide a safe working environment with regards to excavations on the site. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety and in accordance with local and federal regulations, including the excavation and trench safety standards provided by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). According to OSHA regulations (29 CFR 1926 Subpart P Appendix A) the subsurface soils encountered in the test pit excavations can be generally classified as Type C. For Type C soils, OSHA regulations state that cut slopes shall be no steeper than 1.5H:1V for excavations less than 20 feet deep. A trench box may also be used, provided the system extends at least 18 inches above the top of the trench walls. Please understand the preceding OSHA soil classification is provided for planning purposes only and the actual classification of the onsite soils will need to be determined by the contractor onsite during excavation. Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use This report was prepared to be used exclusively by Headwaters Engineering for recreational improvements to be constructed on Parcel 4 of Certificate of Survey 2552B, located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 5 East in Bozeman, Montana. All of the work was performed in accordance REVISIONS DATE DESCRIPTION No 1143 STONERIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 1 BOZEMAN, MONTANA BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX PARCEL 4 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 2552B BOZEMAN MONTANA TEST PIT LOCATION MAP IMEG No. 25007339.00 Drawn By: NJS Checked By: MJW Date: 3.13.2026 A-1 Sheet 1 of 1 N Map Source: Headwaters Engineering GB1-1 4707.2 4703.7 4701.2 MC = 25% OL CL GP 2.0 5.5 8.0 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 8 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. NOTES MW-1 GROUND ELEVATION 4709.23 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.50 ft / Elev 4703.73 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 1 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 2-1 4711.0 4707.5 4706.0 MC = 24% Fines = 94% OL CL GP 2.0 5.5 7.0 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4713.04 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4706.04 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 2 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 3-1 4711.6 4707.8 4706.1 MC = 27% Fines = 95% OL CL GP 1.5 5.3 7.0 0 TO 1.5 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 1.5 TO 5.3 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.3 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarsegrain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES MW-7 GROUND ELEVATION 4713.12 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.50 ft / Elev 4707.62 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 3 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4712.8 4709.7 4708.2 OL CL GP 2.4 5.5 7.0 0 TO 2.4 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.4 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity;soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4715.16 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 3/11/25 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.50 ft / Elev 4709.66 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 4 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJU.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 5-1 4716.6 4713.8 4711.8 MC = 21% Fines = 93% OL CL GP 2.2 5.0 7.0 0 TO 2.2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.2 TO 5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist;medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4718.82 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4711.82 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 5 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 6-1 4717.4 4714.1 4712.9 MC = 21% Fines = 90% OL CL GP 2.0 5.3 6.5 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 5.3 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to dark brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 10 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 90 percent clayey fines. 5.3 TO 6.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarsegrain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 6.5 feet. NOTES MW-2 GROUND ELEVATION 4719.35 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.30 ft / Elev 4714.05 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 6 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 7-1 4717.7 4714.2 4713.2 MC = 27% Fines = 92% OL CL GP 2.5 6.0 7.0 0 TO 2.5 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.5 TO 6 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 10 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 90 percent clayey fines. 6 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4720.18 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 6.00 ft / Elev 4714.18 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 7 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 8-1 4716.9 4711.9 4711.7 MC = 30% Fines = 95% OL CL GP 4.0 9.0 9.2 0 TO 4 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 4 TO 9 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish blue to dark gray; saturated tovery moist; medium plasticity; very soft to soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines; Gleyed Clay. 9 TO 9.2 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND ANDCOBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 9.2 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4720.87 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 4.00 ft / Elev 4716.87 ft HVY SEEPAGE AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION 9.00 ft / Elev 4711.87 ft DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 8 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 9-1 4723.3 4718.6 4717.1 MC = 16% Fines = 92% OL CL GP 0.8 5.5 7.0 0 TO 0.75 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 0.75 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 10 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 90 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4724.05 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4717.05 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 9 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 10-1 4722.0 4717.0 4716.0 MC = 21% Fines = 92% OL CL GP 1.0 6.0 7.0 0 TO 1 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 1 TO 6 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 6 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES MW-6 GROUND ELEVATION 4723 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4716.00 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 10 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 11-1 4720.2 4715.7 4713.7 MC = 12% Fines = 94% OL CL GP 1.0 5.5 7.5 0 TO 1 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 1 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); light brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft to medium stiff; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4721.23 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.50 ft / Elev 4713.73 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 11 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4719.4 4714.1 4711.6 OL CL GP 1.3 6.5 9.0 0 TO 1.25 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 1.25 TO 6.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); light brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity;soft to medium stiff; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 6.5 TO 9 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayeyfines. Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4720.6 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 9.00 ft / Elev 4711.60 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 12 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJU.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 13-1 4712.4 4707.4 4706.9 MC = 28% Fines = 96% OL CL GP 2.0 7.0 7.5 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 7 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); light brown to brown; moist to very moist; medium plasticity; very soft to soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 7 TO 7.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4714.35 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4707.35 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 13 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4709.6 4704.6 4702.6 OL CL GP 2.0 7.0 9.0 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 7 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to dark brown; moist to very moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand;approximately 95 percent clayey fines; seepage at 7ft bgs. 7 TO 9 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayeyfines. Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. NOTES MW-4 GROUND ELEVATION 4711.56 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4704.56 ft SEEPAGE AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION 9.00 ft / Elev 4702.56 ft DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 14 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJU.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 15-1 4717.6 4712.6 4711.1 MC = 22% Fines = 96% OL CL GP 0.5 5.5 7.0 0 TO 0.5 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 0.5 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4718.08 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4711.08 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 15 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 16-1 4719.2 4715.2 4714.7 MC = 18% Fines = 23% OL GC GP 3.0 7.0 7.5 0 TO 3 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 3 TO 7 FEET: CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND; (GC); grayish blue to dark gray; moist to very moist; medium plasticity; medium dense to loose; approximately 50 percent subrounded gravels; approximately 25 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 25 percent clayeyfines; slight gleying. 7 TO 7.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. NOTES MW-8 GROUND ELEVATION 4722.21 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.00 ft / Elev 4715.21 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 16 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB17-1 4710.7 4707.2 4705.9 MC = 26% OL CL GP 4.0 7.5 8.8 0 TO 4 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 4 TO 7.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grainsand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines; slight gleying and oxidation stains. 7.5 TO 8.8 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 8.8 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4714.67 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.50 ft / Elev 4707.17 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 17 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 18-1 4704.7 4701.7 4700.2 MC = 26% Fines = 93% OL CL GP 3.0 6.0 7.5 0 TO 3 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 3 TO 6 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines; slight gleying, seepage at 4ft bgs. 6 TO 7.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4707.7 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 4.00 ft / Elev 4703.70 ft SEEPAGE AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION 6.00 ft / Elev 4701.70 ft DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 18 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 19-1 4730.0 4722.7 4722.3 MC = 28% Fines = 95% OL CL GP 0.8 8.0 8.4 0 TO 0.75 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 0.75 TO 8 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); grayish brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 8 TO 8.4 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 8.4 feet. NOTES MW-3 GROUND ELEVATION 4730.71 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 8.00 ft / Elev 4722.71 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 19 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 20-1 4724.2 4720.7 4718.7 MC = 32% Fines = 93% OL CL GP 2.0 5.5 7.5 0 TO 2 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2 TO 5.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); brown; moist to very moist; medium plasticity; very soft to soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.5 TO 7.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4726.17 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 7.50 ft / Elev 4718.67 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 20 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 21-1 4728.2 4725.4 4723.9 MC = 35% Fines = 90% OL CL GP 1.8 4.5 6.0 0 TO 1.75 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 1.75 TO 4.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); brown; very moist to moist; medium plasticity; very soft to soft; approximately 10 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 90 percent clayey fines. 4.5 TO 6 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4729.94 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 4.50 ft / Elev 4725.44 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 21 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 22-1 4727.9 4722.7 4722.1 MC = 29% Fines = 96% OL CL GP 0.5 5.7 6.3 0 TO 0.5 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 0.5 TO 5.7 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); light brown to brown; very moist to moist; medium plasticity; very soft to soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.7 TO 6.3 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 6.3 feet. NOTES GROUND ELEVATION 4728.41 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.70 ft / Elev 4722.71 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 22 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 23-1 4705.7 4701.1 4699.1 MC = 26% OL CL GP 2.4 7.0 9.0 0 TO 2.4 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.4 TO 7 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); dark brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines; slight gleying. 7 TO 9 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarsegrain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. NOTES MW-5 GROUND ELEVATION 4708.05 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 8.00 ft / Elev 4700.05 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 23 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION GB 24-1 4718.0 4715.2 4713.5 MC = 31% OL CL GP 2.5 5.3 7.0 0 TO 2.5 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.5 TO 5.3 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); dark brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines. 5.3 TO 7 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarsegrain sand; approximately 5 percent clayey fines. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. NOTES MW-9 GROUND ELEVATION 4720.45 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 5.30 ft / Elev 4715.15 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 24 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJTESTS U.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION 4705.9 4703.8 4699.8 OL CL GP 2.4 4.5 8.5 0 TO 2.4 FEET: SILTY CLAY ORGANIC SOIL; (OL); black; moist; low plasticity; very soft. 2.4 TO 4.5 FEET: LEAN CLAY; (CL); dark brown to brown; moist; medium plasticity; soft; approximately 5 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 95 percent clayey fines; seepage at 5ft bgs. 4.5 TO 8.5 FEET: POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND COBBLES; (GP); grayish brown; moist to wet; medium dense to dense; approximately 60 percent ; approximately 35 percent fine to coarse grain sand; approximately 5 percent clayeyfines. Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet. NOTES MW-10 GROUND ELEVATION 4708.33 ft LOGGED BY Noah J. Schaible EXCAVATION METHOD Bobcat E88 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Elevation Excavating LLC GROUND WATER LEVELS: DATE STARTED 1/7/26 COMPLETED 1/7/26 AT TIME OF EXCAVATION 6.00 ft / Elev 4702.33 ft AFTER EXCAVATION --- AT END OF EXCAVATION ---DEPTH(ft)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 SAMPLE TYPENUMBERPAGE 1 OF 1 TEST PIT NUMBER TP 25 PROJECT NUMBER 25007339.00 CLIENT Headwaters Engineering PROJECT LOCATION Bozeman Baseball Complex PROJECT NAME Geotechnical Investigation GENERAL BH / TP / WELL - GINT STD US.GDT - 1/20/26 08:56 - C:\USERS\NOAH.J.SCHAIBLE\ONEDRIVE - IMEG CORP\DESKTOP\GEOTECH PROOJECTS\BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX\TEST PIT LOGS - BOZEMAN BASEBALL COMPLEX (25007339.00).GPJU.S.C.S.GRAPHICLOGMATERIAL DESCRIPTION CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST ASTM D 1883 / AASHTO T 193 PROJECT DATE:1/29/2026 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION USCS Classification:Boring Number: TP-2 Depth: 0 MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Procedure: ASTM D698 Maximum Dry Density: 105.8 lb/ft3 Optimum Moisture: 17.3 % Dry Density at Molding: 101.6 lb/ft3 Relative Compaction: 96.1 % Moisture Content at Molding: 17.1 % SWELL TEST Soaking Period: 96 hrs Surcharge Weight: 10 lbs Surcharge Weight: 10 lbs Surcharge Pressure: 50.9 psf Surcharge Pressure 50.9 psf CBR @ 0.1" penetration: 4.2 Average Moisture Content After Soaking: 23.6 %CBR @ 0.2" penetration: 4.4 Swell, % of Initial Height of Specimen: 0.4 % 27.8 %Moisture Content of Top 1" After Soaking: CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST SAMPLE LOCATION Clayey Sand (Visual) GT IMEG G26009 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5Stress (pounds per square inch)Penetration (inches) Page 2 of 5 Tested By: TJ COMPACTION TEST REPORT Dry density, pcf97.5 100 102.5 105 107.5 110 Water content, % 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 17.3%, 105.8 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 698-12 Method A Standard 4 Clayey Sand (visual) 2602005 IMEG Corp 01/29/2026 Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G. LL PI % > % < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Date: Location: TP-2 Sample Number: G26009 Figure Maximum dry density = 105.8 pcf Optimum moisture = 17.3 % General Testing Page 3 of 5 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST ASTM D 1883 / AASHTO T 193 PROJECT DATE:2/2/2025 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION USCS Classification:Boring Number: TP-19 Depth: Bulk MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Procedure: ASTM D698 Maximum Dry Density: 104.8 lb/ft3 Optimum Moisture: 19.5 % Dry Density at Molding: 99.9 lb/ft3 Relative Compaction: 95.3 % Moisture Content at Molding: 19.3 % SWELL TEST Soaking Period: 96 hrs Surcharge Weight: 10 lbs Surcharge Weight: 10 lbs Surcharge Pressure: 50.9 psf Surcharge Pressure 50.9 psf CBR @ 0.1" penetration: 1.3 Average Moisture Content After Soaking: 30.9 %CBR @ 0.2" penetration: 1.5 Swell, % of Initial Height of Specimen: 1.8 % #DIV/0!%Moisture Content of Top 1" After Soaking: CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST SAMPLE LOCATION Silty Clay with Sand (Visual) GT IMEG 2026 Bozeman BB Complex G26010 0 20 40 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5Stress (pounds per square inch)Penetration (inches) Page 4 of 5 Tested By: TW COMPACTION TEST REPORT Dry density, pcf98 100 102 104 106 108 Water content, % 16.5 18 19.5 21 22.5 24 25.5 19.5%, 104.8 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 698-12 Method C Standard 2.65 Silty Clay with Sand (Visual) 2602005 IMEG Corp 01/28/2026 Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G. LL PI % > % < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.3/4 in. No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Date: Location: Bozeman BB Complex TP-19 BULK Sample Number: G26010 Figure Maximum dry density = 104.8 pcf Optimum moisture = 19.5 % General Testing Page 5 of 5 1105 Reeves Rd. W. Ste 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 581-5730 www.headwatersmt.net Page 15 of 15 Appendix D Stormwater Facilities Operation, Inspection and Maintenance Manual Acknowledgement of Stormwater Facility Maintenance Requirements Stormwater Facility Inspection Form Acknowledgement of Stormwater Facility Maintenance Requirements Diamond 8 5590 Baxter Lane Bozeman, Montana COB Applica on #25784 April 2026 Acknowledgement of Stormwater Facili es Maintenance Requirements PROPERTY OWNER: 4 Bozeman, LLC NAME OF PLAN/DEVELOPMENT: Diamond 8 LOT/BLOCK/SUBDIVISION: Tract 4, COS 2552B Property Owner hereby acknowledges that they are required to maintain all stormwater facili8es on the Property pursuant to Bozeman Municipal Code sec. 40.04.720. This requirement is binding on any successor or assign of the Property Owner listed above. The City requires stormwater facili8es be constructed and adequately maintained on the Property in order to maintain the health, safety and welfare of City residents. Adequate maintenance is defined as keeping the stormwater facili8es and all components thereof in good working condi8on so that these stormwater facili8es con8nue to perform in accordance with the design intent. Should the Property Owner fail to adequately maintain stormwater facili8es, the City may enter upon the Property and take such steps as are necessary to correct deficiencies. The City may assess against the Property Owner for the cost of any repairs or necessary maintenance by any means provided for in the Bozeman Municipal Code. By signing below Property Owner acknowledges they have read this document and the applicable provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code, and they agree to the maintenance requirements for all stormwater facili8es on their Property. BY:_____________________, David Hargrove, member, 4 Bozeman, LLC DIAMOND 8 SPORTS COMPLEX Phase 1A Stormwater Facilities Operation, Inspection & Maintenance Plan 5590 Baxter Lane, Bozeman, Montana Responsible Party 4 Bozeman, LLC Contact David Hargrove | david@4rbozeman.com | 406-581-5730 Applicability Phase 1A construction and interim operation prior to Phase 1B 1. Purpose and Phase 1A System This plan establishes operation, inspection, and maintenance requirements for stormwater facilities constructed or used during Phase 1A. Phase 1A consists primarily of site grading, athletic field construction, shallow athletic field underdrains, private storm piping, excavation of the primary stormwater ponds, and a temporary stormwater pond serving the phased Harvest Parkway configuration. The conceptual deep groundwater drain system has been removed from the project; the remaining field underdrains are shallow systems intended to collect infiltrated stormwater beneath the athletic fields and convey it to the stormwater facilities. The Phase 1A ponds are constructed to support phased development of the site. Permanent outlet control structures and additional controls associated with future impervious area are deferred to Phase 1B. This plan will be updated with each subsequent Site Plan phase as additional stormwater infrastructure, impervious area, and final operating details are added. 2. Inspection and Maintenance Requirements Component Inspection Frequency Maintenance Trigger Required Action Storm ponds, including temporary pond Monthly during active construction; after significant runoff events; spring and fall during interim operation Sediment accumulation, erosion, slope instability, blocked flow path, standing water inconsistent with design, or damaged vegetation Remove accumulated sediment and debris; repair erosion and slopes; restore positive drainage and stabilize disturbed areas. Clean primary ponds after final grading and before landscaping. Athletic field underdrains and private storm pipe Quarterly during interim operation and after observed drainage problems Reduced flow, backup, visible sediment, or evidence of blockage Flush, jet, or otherwise clean affected pipe. Remove sediment before occupancy where observed. Investigate abnormal continuous flow that may indicate groundwater influence. Storm inlets / structures Monthly during active construction and after significant runoff events Sediment, debris, damaged protection, or inlet lowered into active sediment-generating area Keep inlets high where feasible during grading. Once active, install and maintain filter fabric or manufactured inlet protection; remove debris and sediment before bypass occurs. Temporary pond vegetation and disturbed areas Monthly during growing season and after major runoff events Bare soil, rilling, erosion, poor establishment, or noxious weeds Seed/reseed, repair erosion, maintain vegetation, and perform weed control. Remove sediment as necessary to preserve function and storage. 3. Construction-Phase and Interim Operation • The project SWPPP remains the primary construction-phase document for erosion and sediment control BMP inspection and maintenance. This O&M Plan supplements, and does not replace, SWPPP requirements. • Sediment-laden runoff shall be prevented from entering completed storm piping to the extent practicable. Inlet protection shall be maintained until contributing areas are stabilized. • The temporary pond shall remain functional, seeded, and maintained while it is needed for phased development. Sediment shall be removed when accumulation materially reduces storage or interferes with drainage. • Because permanent outlet controls are deferred to Phase 1B, the owner shall preserve available pond storage and inspect for conditions that could reduce capacity. If field underdrains exhibit abnormal continuous flow or suspected seasonal groundwater influence, the condition shall be evaluated and corrective measures implemented as needed before relying on the affected storage volume. 4. Records, Responsibility, and Budget 4 Bozeman, LLC is responsible for implementation of this plan during Phase 1A and interim operation and may assign inspection or maintenance work to the site contractor or other qualified personnel. Inspection records shall identify the date, inspector, facility observed, deficiencies, corrective action, and completion date. Records shall be retained by the owner and made available to the City upon request. Phase 1A maintenance is anticipated to be performed as part of routine site work and SWPPP BMP maintenance. A planning allowance of approximately $2,500 per year should be maintained for routine inspection, minor sediment removal, inlet protection, vegetation repair, and incidental pipe cleaning; major repairs or extraordinary sediment removal are excluded. The long-term O&M plan and budget will be updated with Phase 1B to reflect final outlet controls, additional impervious area, and remaining permanent infrastructure. Stormwater Facility Inspec�on Form Diamond 8 5590 Baxter Lane Bozeman, Montana COB Applica�on #25784 April 2026 Headwaters Engineering, Inc. Project #: 2128.002 Prepared For: 4 Bozeman, LLC david@4rland.com Bozeman, MT 59718 Stormwater Facility Inspection Form Section 1: General Information Facility ID: Facility Type: Choose an item. Date/Time: Click or tap to enter a date. Owner: Contact: Inspector’s Name, contact info: Choose an item. Location/Access info: Type of Inspection: ☐Routine, Dry Weather ☐ Routine, Wet Weather ☐ Complaint Driven ☐ Other: __________________ Section 2: Weather and Discharge Information Most recent precipitation or melt: Temperature: Is a stormwater discharge occurring? ☐ Yes ☐ No If yes, what is the source and quality of discharge? Is an illegal discharge occurring? ☐ Yes ☐ No If yes, what is the source and quality of discharge? Section 3: Facility Maintenance Priority ☐Low: Stormwater facility appears to be functioning as designed. Continue scheduled maintenance. ☐Medium: Stormwater facility requires minor to moderate sediment and vegetation maintenance to mitigate the risk of flooding, waterway pollution, and infrastructure failure. ☐High: Stormwater facility requires significant sediment dredging, vegetation removal, and/or infrastructure repairs to restore function. Notes, Findings & Recommendations: Inspector’s Signature: ________________________________ Date: ___________________ Section 4: Qualitative Analysis Components # Items Conditions Results Notes and Required Actions General Degraded, missing, or inadequate Yes 1.1 Accessibility maintenance access? No ☐☐ Trash, sediment, and waste within 1.2 Debris ☐Yesand around the facility? ☐No Overgrown or dead cattails, Yes 1.3 Vegetation woody shrubs, weeds, grass, and ☐ trees? ☐No Infrastructure Damaged inlet pipe, outlet pipe, Yes1.4 ☐Condition outfall structure, or fencing? ☐No Facility Condition Pretreatment Bay Clogged, obstructed, or filled 2.1 ☐Yesor Facility pretreatment forebay or facility? ☐No 2.2 Storage Bay Clogged or filled storage bay? ☐Yes☐No Stagnant water with infiltration Groundwater or Yes 2.3 greater than 48 hours post-rain ☐Standing Water event? ☐No 2.4 Flow Path Clogged or obstructed flow path? ☐Yes☐No Barren or exposed surfaces on Yes2.5 Side Slopes ☐Facility’s side slopes and bottom? ☐No Maintenance Maintenance Plan Is there a written plan specific to ☐Yes3.1 or Agreement this facility? ☐No Yes3.2 Implementation Is there evidence of maintenance? ☐☐No Section 5: Quantitative Analysis Vegetation Cover type % Within facility Notes Bare ground Aquatics Grasses/Herbaceou Trees >3” DBH Shrubs Total 100 Elevation Analysis Location Reading (ft) Elevation (ft) Notes SRV#CP Control Point SRV#1 Inlet SRV#2 Outlet SRV#3 Center SRV#4 North of Center SRV#5 East of Center SRV#6 South of Center SRV#7 West of center SRV#8 Berm or overflow SRV#9 Summary Section 6: Facility Maintenance Inspection Exhibit Photo 1 description Photo 2 description Section 7: Photo Log