Laserfiche WebLink
1615 Ringer <br />. page 6 <br />Lot 6, Block 2 <br />j?eres PA61 thru PA66. Borings BA61 thru BA63. Slopes are nearly <br />level. Mottling occurred below 1.51, with actual water <br />encountered below 5.71. (Note that soil appears saturated <br />below 2.5 ) Perc rates were acceptable, although t of 6 taken <br />at depth very very slow. Both primary and secondary sites should <br />use mound systems. <br />Lot 1, Block 3 <br />Peres PC11 thru PC14. Boring BC11 and BC12. This lot contains <br />an existing house, garage and barn. The existing septic system <br />is unknown and was not located during my routine inspection in <br />July 1981, although no evidence of failure was noted. A future <br />drainfield site has been tested to the south of the house. Average <br />percolation rate is 21 minutes per inch; soil borings indicate <br />soils suited for a shallow trench or mound system, with mottling <br />beginning at a depth of 51. This is the highest elevated point <br />in Vie entire subdivision and appears to be the only lot possibly <br />suited for a shallow trench system. Hn attempt should be made <br />to locate the existing system to ens, -ire it is within the lot <br />boundaries, although there is only a r^_mote possibility that it <br />isn't. <br />Lot 2, Block 3 <br />Perce PC21 thru PC24. Borings BC21 and BC22. This lot contains <br />an existing house and small shed. The existing septic system is <br />unknown and was not located during my inspection last July. do <br />evidence of system failure is noted. While the existing system <br />undoubtedly consists of trenches, soils data provided for a future <br />d.rainfield site indicates mottling at a 3.5' dopt;s. This indicates <br />that the replacement system, should it ever be necessary, would <br />probably have to be a mound. Percolation rates averaged 56 mpi. <br />It would alto he advisable to locate the existing system t.i ensure <br />it is within tl c new lot boundaries. <br />B. Discussion of Mound Systems <br />Since the proposed Ginger subdivision appears to need mound systems <br />throughout, it might be worthwhile to review the conditions which <br />favor use of mound sy9tem3 over conventional trench systems. <br />As you are awarn, a bi.omat forma at the rock-sr-1 interface in a <br />standard tre�ich syjtem. This biomat zncts as a "valve" to slow <br />the downward percolation of septic tank effluent to a rate wire <br />the flow is unonturated, i.e. air :n the soil pores is in contact <br />with the percolating effluent. Under those essential conditions, <br />adequate sewage treatment will occur. Howe e r, in many coils, <br />either a seasonal z turated condition or extrLmely f+ne, impermeable <br />soil texture (or both, tends to oliminate tho ;-Ar/effluent contact <br />and also severely liraits th- soils capacity to aLsorb large amou:its <br />of effluent. To ensure that a standard tren.;h system is not <br />