1985-01-06 Septic System Design Report

Home Browse Search

A 615 F,age Ringer Subdivision 5 � J Lot 6. Block 1 63 Avera e pert Peres 1'B61 thru PB66. Borings BB61 thruSloBB 9 - rates at both sites are acceptable. roximatel es r2n4efeetm with 1 to 4�. }' Mottling started at a depth of app Y .5 to 4.4'. A standard mound system actual water level at ? should be used at both sites. Lot 7, Block 1 Peres PB71 thru PB76. Borings BB71 thru BB73. Slopes average 2-38. Perc rates were fairly slow, with the secondary site being somewhat slower than the limit (however, the justification for Lot 5, Block 1 also applies here). 4ctual water level ranged from 1.7 to 3.5' with mottling generally below 2.5'. A standard mound is recommended for both sites. Lot 1, Block 2 Peres PA11 thru PA18. Borings BAll t)lru BA13. Slopes are very flat. Mottling was indicated below 2.2 ' with actual water encountered below 2.0'. :wo secondary sites were tasted. All sites are acceptable for a standard mound system. Lot 2, Block 2 Peres PA21 thru PA26. Borings DA21 thru DA23. Very flat slopes. Mottling occurs at 2.0 to 2.4' with actual water encountered below 2.41. Perc rates on both sites are acceptable. A mo•ind system is recommended for both sites. Lot 3, Block 2 Peres PA31 thru PA36. Borings BA31 thru BA33. Slopes averaged 2 to 5%. Mottling starts at a depth of 2.0-3.51. Actual water luvel was below 2.5'. Perc rates are acceptable. Mound systems are recommended for both sites. Lot 4, Block 2 Peres PA41 thru PA46. Borings DA41 !-hru DA43. Slopes are very flat. Mottling generally was found below 2.0', with actual water level at about 4.01. Perc rate for primary site is acceptable; pert rate for se—ndary site is slightly slow but acceptable for a mount: t--used :)n the justification referred to for Lot 5, Block 1. 1 recommend a mound system for both sites. Lot 5, Block 2 =rNRL Lc,r ZPeres PA51 thru PA56. Borings Y5lP'thOru BA53. Slopes are very flat. Mottling occurred below 1.2 feet with actual water below 4.0 feet. Perc rates are acceptable for the primary site and slightly olov at the secondary site. (Refer to Lot 5, Bloc% 1) This lot has the overall. worst set of p^-colation rates of the di vision. 'However, only two of the Peres .--re taken in the topsoil, the others, two of which were very slow, were at depth. I recommend that a mound system be used -)n this sicc. If peres were re -taken in the topsoil, it is likely they would ljass as (lid nearly all others done in this manner.