Gravel Source

Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition

Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
1A Fluvaquents-Udifluvents complex, 0 to 3 percent Poor Fluvaquents, frequently flooded 45%
slopes, frequently flooded Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Wayland 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Naples Creek 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
2A Geneseo silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Geneseo 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Naples Creek 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
3A Hemlock silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Hemlock 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Naples Creek 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
4A Naples Creek silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Naples Creek 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Hemlock 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Wayland 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
5A Wayland soils complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, Poor Wayland 60%
frequently flooded Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Wayland, very poorly drained 30%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Wakeville 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
12D Rockrift channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Rockrift 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mongaup, very stony 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
13F Rock outcrop-Arnot complex, 25 to 70 percent slopes Not rated Rock outcrop 55%
14D Cadosia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Cadosia 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lordstown, very stony 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 1 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
15A Guyanoga channery silt loam, fan, 0 to 3 percent Poor Guyanoga, fan 90%
slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Hemlock 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
15B Guyanoga channery silt loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent Poor Guyanoga, fan 90%
slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Hemlock 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
16A Almond channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Almond 80%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ontusia 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Gretor 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
16B Almond channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Almond 80%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ontusia 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Gretor 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
16C Almond channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Almond 80%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ontusia 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Gretor 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
18A Homer fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Homer 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic
Argiaquolls 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 2 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
19A Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic, Typic Argiaquolls, Poor Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic
0 to 3 percent slopes Argiaquolls 80%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Homer 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Atherton 7%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
20A Atherton and Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic, Typic Poor Atherton 40%
Argiaquolls, 0 to 3 percent slopes Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic
Argiaquolls 40%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Homer 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Canandaigua 7%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
24A Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Howard 80%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Phelps 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
24B Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Howard 80%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Phelps 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
24C Howard gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Howard 80%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Phelps 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
24D Howard soils, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Howard 65%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 20%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Phelps 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 3 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
25A Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Chenango 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Castile 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Valois 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
25B Chenango gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Chenango 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Castile 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Valois 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
25C Chenango gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Chenango 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Castile 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Valois 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
25D Chenango gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Chenango 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Castile 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Valois 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
25E Chenango gravelly loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Fair Chenango 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Valois 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
26B Chenango channery loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Chenango, fan 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Castile 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
27B Castile gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Castile 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chenango 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Phelps 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 4 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
31A Collamer silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Collamer 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
31B Collamer silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Collamer 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
31C Collamer silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Collamer 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
31D Collamer silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Collamer 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
32A Dunkirk fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
32B Dunkirk fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 5 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
33A Dunkirk silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
33B Dunkirk silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
33C Dunkirk silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
33D Dunkirk silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
33E Dunkirk silt loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 6 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
34A Lakemont silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Lakemont 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Fonda 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Barre 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
35A Odessa silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Odessa 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Churchville 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Rhinebeck 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
35B Odessa silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Odessa 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 6%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Churchville 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Rhinebeck 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
36A Schoharie silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 7 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
36B Schoharie silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
36C Schoharie silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
36D Schoharie silty clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
36E Schoharie silty clay loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
37A Schoharie silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
37B Schoharie silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Schoharie 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 8 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
38A Niagara silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Niagara 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Collamer 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Rhinebeck 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
38B Niagara silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Niagara 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Rhinebeck 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Collamer 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
39A Rhinebeck silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Rhinebeck 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
41A Aeric Epiaquepts, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Aeric Epiaquepts 50%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Aeric Epiaquepts 45%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Elnora 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
43A Canandaigua silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Canandaigua 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Niagara 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 9 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
44A Canandaigua mucky silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Canandaigua 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
45A Fonda mucky silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Fonda 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
46A Galen fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Galen 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Aeric Epiaquepts 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Kendaia 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
46B Galen fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Galen 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Aeric Epiaquepts 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Kendaia 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
48A Arkport fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Arkport 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galen 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
48B Arkport fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Arkport 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galen 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
48C Arkport fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Arkport 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galen 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 10 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
48D Arkport fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Arkport 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 8%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
49B Arkport loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Arkport 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galen 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
49D Arkport loamy fine sand, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Arkport 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
49E Arkport loamy fine sand, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Arkport 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 8%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
49F Arkport loamy fine sand, 35 to 55 percent slopes Poor Arkport 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Dunkirk 8%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
50B Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 50%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 45%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Collamer 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 11 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
50C Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 60%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 35%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Collamer 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
50D Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Dunkirk 60%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Arkport 35%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Collamer 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
53A Lamson fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Lamson 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lamson 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galen 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
54A Lamson mucky fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent Poor Lamson 90%
slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lamson 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
56A Elnora loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Elnora 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Aeric Epiaquepts 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
58B Colonie loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Colonie 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Elnora 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
58C Colonie loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Colonie 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Elnora 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 12 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
62B Mardin channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Mardin 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Bath 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
62C Mardin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Mardin 88%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Bath 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
62D Mardin channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Mardin 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Bath 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
62E Mardin channery silt loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Mardin 80%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Bath 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
63B Langford channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Langford 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Erie 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
63C Langford channery silt loam, 8 to 15 pecent slopes Poor Langford 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Erie 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
63D Langford channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Langford 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Erie 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
64B Langford-Erie channery silt loams, 3 to 8 percent Poor Langford 55%
slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Erie 45%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 13 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
66A Lyons soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Lyons 75%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lyons, frequently ponded 15%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Canandaigua 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Kendaia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ilion 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palms 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
68A Volusia channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Volusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mardin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
68B Volusia channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Volusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mardin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
68C Volusia channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Volusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mardin 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
68D Volusia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Volusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mardin 7%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 14 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
69A Erie channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Erie 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Chippewa 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
69B Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Erie 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Chippewa 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
69C Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Erie 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Chippewa 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
71A Darien silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Darien 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ilion 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
71B Darien silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Darien 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ilion 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
71C Darien silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Darien 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ilion 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
72A Darien-Ilion silt loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Darien 68%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ilion 27%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 15 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
72B Darien-Ilion silt loams, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Darien 68%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ilion 27%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
73B Gretor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Gretor 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Gretor, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
73C Gretor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Gretor 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Gretor, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
73D Gretor channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Gretor 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Mongaup, very stony 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor, poorly drained 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
76B Orpark silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Orpark 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Orpark, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
76C Orpark silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Orpark 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Orpark, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
76D Orpark channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Orpark 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Orpark, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
77A Chippewa silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Chippewa 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa, very poorly drained 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 16 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
77B Chippewa silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Chippewa 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Volusia 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Chippewa, very poorly drained 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
82B Manlius channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Manlius 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
82C Manlius channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Manlius 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
82D Manlius channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Manlius 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
91A Palms muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Not rated Palms, undrained 55%
Palms, drained 40%
92A Carlisle muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Not rated Carlisle, undrained 45%
Carlisle, drained 40%
Palms, undrained 10%
93A Edwards muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Not rated Edwards, undrained 50%
Edwards, drained 35%
Martisco, undrained 10%
94A Martisco muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Not rated Martisco, undrained 55%
Martisco, drained 35%
Palms, drained 5%
95A Saprists, 0 to 3 percent slopes, inundated Poor Saprists, inundated 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Organic matter content
Fluvaquents, frequently flooded 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
101A Honeoye loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Honeoye 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 17 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
101B Honeoye loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Honeoye 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
101C Honeoye loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Honeoye 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
101D Honeoye loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Honeoye 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
101E Honeoye loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Honeoye 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 18 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
104A Honeoye loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, lower clay Poor Honeoye, lower clay surface 85%
surface Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
104B Honeoye loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, lower clay Poor Honeoye, lower clay surface 85%
surface Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
104C Honeoye loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, lower clay Poor Honeoye, lower clay surface 85%
surface Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
106B Danley-Lansing complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Danley 50%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lansing 45%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Conesus 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Appleton 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 19 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
107B Conesus-Lansing complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Conesus 50%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 45%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Appleton 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
108C Lansing loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Lansing 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Conesus 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Appleton 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Wassaic 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
108D Lansing loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Lansing 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Conesus 9%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Wassaic 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Kendaia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Appleton 1%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
108E Lansing loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Lansing 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Aurora 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 20 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
112B Ontario fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ontario 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
112C Ontario fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
112D Ontario fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
112E Ontario fine sandy loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Poor Ontario 93%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
114B Ontario gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ontario 98%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
114C Ontario gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
114D Ontario gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
116B Ontario loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ontario 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Kendaia 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
116C Ontario loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
116D Ontario loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Ontario 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 21 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
118F Ontario, Honeoye, and Lansing soils, 35 to 55 Poor Ontario 40%
percent slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Honeoye 35%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lansing 20%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Aurora 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
120E Palmyra and Howard soils, 25 to 45 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 55%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Howard 40%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
122A Palmyra cobbly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
122B Palmyra cobbly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
124A Palmyra fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Palmyra 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
124B Palmyra fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Palmyra 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
126A Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
126B Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 95%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
126C Palmyra gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
126D Palmyra gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
128A Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
128B Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
128C Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Palmyra 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 22 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
130A Farmington loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Farmington 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galoo 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Nuhi 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
130B Farmington loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Farmington 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Galoo 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Nuhi 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
132A Galoo loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rocky Poor Galoo 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Nuhi 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
132B Galoo loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, rocky Poor Galoo 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Nuhi 4%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
134A Camillus silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Camillus 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
134B Camillus silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Camillus 95%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
151C Willdin-Norchip complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes Poor Willdin 60%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Norchip 38%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
152B Valois gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Valois 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cadosia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
152C Valois gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Valois 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cadosia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 23 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
152D Valois gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Valois 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cadosia 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
152E Valois gravelly loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Fair Valois 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cadosia 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
153B Valois gravelly loam, cool, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Valois, cool 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
153C Valois gravelly loam, cool, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fair Valois, cool 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
153D Valois gravelly loam, cool, 15 to 25 percent slopes Fair Valois, cool 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
153E Valois gravelly loam, cool, 25 to 35 percent slopes Fair Valois, cool 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
162B Willdin channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Willdin 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ontusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Middlebrook 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lewbath 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
162C Willdin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Willdin 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ontusia 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lewbath 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Middlebrook 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
162D Willdin channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Willdin 80%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lewbath 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Mongaup 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ontusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 24 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
168A Ontusia channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Ontusia 88%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Willdin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
168B Ontusia channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ontusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Willdin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
168C Ontusia channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Ontusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Norchip 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Willdin 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
168D Ontusia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Ontusia 90%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 7%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Norchip 3%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
171C Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 8 to 15 Fair Lordstown 40%
percent slopes Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Manlius 20%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cadosia 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
171D Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 15 to 25 Fair Lordstown, very stony 40%
percent slopes, very stony Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Manlius, very stony 20%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cadosia 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 25 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
171E Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 25 to 35 Fair Lordstown, extremely stony 40%
percent slopes, extremely stony Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Manlius, extremely stony 20%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cadosia 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
171F Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 35 to 80 Fair Lordstown, extremely stony 40%
percent slopes, extremely stony Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Manlius, extremely stony 20%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
177A Norchip silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Norchip 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Norchip, very poorly drained 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ontusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
177B Norchip silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Norchip 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Norchip, very poorly drained 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ontusia 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
181B Mongaup-Ischua complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Mongaup 45%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua 40%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 26 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
181C Mongaup-Ischua complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Mongaup 45%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua 40%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
181D Mongaup-Ischua complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes, Poor Mongaup, very stony 45%
very stony Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua, very stony 40%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
181E Mongaup-Ischua complex, 25 to 35 percent slopes, Poor Mongaup, extremely stony 45%
extremely stony Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua, extremely stony 40%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
182B Mongaup channery loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Mongaup 75%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 27 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
182C Mongaup channery loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Mongaup 75%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Rockrift 10%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Willdin 8%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Ischua 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Gretor 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
201A Lima loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Lima 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Honeoye 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lyons 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
201B Lima loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Lima 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Honeoye 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lyons 1%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 28 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
201C Lima loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Lima 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Honeoye 7%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
204A Lima loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, lower clay surface Poor Lima 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Honeoye 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lyons 2%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
204B Lima loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, lower clay surface Poor Lima 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Honeoye 6%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Appleton 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Kendaia 3%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Cazenovia 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lyons 1%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
210A Phelps gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Fair Phelps 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
210B Phelps gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Fair Phelps 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 29 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
212A Nuhi silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Nuhi 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Farmington 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Nuhi, poorly drained 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
240B Aurora-Angola silt loams, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Aurora 60%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 30%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Darien 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Danley 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
240C Aurora-Angola silt loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Aurora 60%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 30%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Darien 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
240D Aurora-Angola silt loams, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Aurora 60%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 30%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Darien 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
241B Aurora silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Aurora 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 30 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
241C Aurora silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Aurora 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 8%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 7%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
241D Aurora silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Aurora 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Danley 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Angola 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
255B Cazenovia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Cazenovia 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ovid 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cayuga 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
255C Cazenovia silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Cazenovia 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cayuga 8%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ovid 7%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
255D Cazenovia silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Cazenovia 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Cayuga 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ovid 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
260B Cayuga silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Cayuga 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 31 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
260C Cayuga silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Cayuga 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
260D Cayuga silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Poor Cayuga 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lansing 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Schoharie 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
304A Kendaia loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Kendaia 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 6%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lyons 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Churchville 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ovid 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
304B Kendaia loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Kendaia 85%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Lima 7%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lyons 4%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer
Churchville 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ovid 2%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
342A Angola silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Angola 90%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ilion 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Darien 5%
Thickest layer
Bottom layer

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 32 of 34
 Gravel Source
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Tie-break Rule: Lower

Ontario County, New York

Survey Area Version and Date: 13 - 09/24/2016

Map Component name and % composition

symbol Map unit name Rating Rating reasons
356A Ovid silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Ovid 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
356B Ovid silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ovid 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
357B Ovid silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Poor Ovid 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
357C Ovid silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Poor Ovid 85%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Odessa 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lakemont 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
400A Udorthents, loamy, 0 to 3 percent slopes Poor Udorthents, Loamy 80%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Ontario 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Palmyra 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Lima 5%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
401D Udorthents, refuse substratum. 0 to 25 percent Poor Udorthents, refuse substratum 90%
slopes Bottom layer
Thickest layer
Udorthents, Loamy 10%
Bottom layer
Thickest layer
PG Pits, gravel and sand Not rated Pits, gravel and sand 75%
PQ Pits, quarry Not rated Pits, quarry 80%
W Water Not rated Water 100%

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 33 of 34
 Gravel Source
Rating Options

Attribute Name: Gravel Source

Gravel consists of natural aggregates (2 to 75 millimeters in diameter) suitable for commercial use with a minimum of processing. It
is used in many kinds of construction. Specifications for each use vary widely. Only the probability of finding material in suitable
quantity is evaluated. The suitability of the material for specific purposes is not evaluated, nor are factors that affect excavation of
the material.

The properties used to evaluate the soil as a source of gravel are gradation of grain sizes (as indicated by the Unified classification
of the soil), the thickness of suitable material, and the content of rock fragments. If the bottom layer of the soil contains gravel, the
soil is considered a likely source regardless of thickness. The assumption is that the gravel layer below the depth of observation
exceeds the minimum thickness. The ratings are for the whole soil, from the surface to a depth of about 6 feet. Coarse fragments of
soft bedrock, such as shale and siltstone, are not considered to be gravel.

The soils are rated "good," "fair," or "poor" as potential sources of gravel. A rating of "good" or "fair" means that the source material
is likely to be in or below the soil. The bottom layer and the thickest layer of the soils are assigned numerical ratings. These ratings
indicate the likelihood that the layer is a source of gravel. The number 0.00 indicates that the layer is a poor source. The number
1.00 indicates that the layer is a good source. A number between 0.00 and 1.00 indicates the degree to which the layer is a likely
source.

The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the
Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown
for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map
unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the
percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented.

Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map
unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the
Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a
given site.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Aggregation is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value to represent the map unit as a
whole.

A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity,
e.g., rock outcrop. The components in the map unit name represent the major soils within a map unit delineation. Minor
components make up the balance of the map unit. Great differences in soil properties can occur between map unit components
and within short distances. Minor components may be very different from the major components. Such differences could
significantly affect use and management of the map unit. Minor components may or may not be documented in the database. The
results of aggregation do not reflect the presence or absence of limitations of the components which are not listed in the database.
An on-site investigation is required to identify the location of individual map unit components.

For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that
the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in
some, but not all, aggregation methods.

For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's
components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents
the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be generated.
Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not.

The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group,
percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now
represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent
composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie-break"
rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie-break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be
returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant
condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred.
Tie-break Rule: Lower

The tie-break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be
selected in the event of a percent composition tie.

Application Version: 6.1.0.0 05/16/2017

Page 34 of 34