HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-08-26 Septic System Design ReportSYSTEM DESIGN
FOR GAPY RODERICK
OF LOT 5, BLOCK I, RINGERSWOOD
1 . Percolation Rate, Type of System
35.0 minutes per inch on the primiry site(holes 3-4) and
50.0 MPI on the alternate site(hol,�s 1-2). Mound systems.
2. Propos'(. Flow Rate.
4 bedroims @ 150 G.P.D. = 600 G.P.D.
3. Soil T-eatment Area Needed.
600 G.P.D. x 0.83 factor = 500 Sq. Ft. of rock bed area, or
a bed 10 feet wide by 50 feet long.
4. Septic Tanks & Distribution System.
Two septic tanks of at least 1000 and 750 gallons, respectively,
are needed. In add?tion, a third pumping tank and pump are need-
ed for pressure distribution to the mound system. Distribution
to the rock bed is to be through 3 perforated laterals 40" apart.
All materilas and construction should adhere to the applicable
provisions of the city of Orono.
5. Mound Dimensions.
Since the ground slope is just a little over 3% only the down -
slope area can be used for absorption. The required basal width
is 2.4 x 10 or 24 feet which means 10 feet for the rock bed and
14 feet on the downslope side. With a 4:1 sideslope and a 3
foot high mound, the downslope distance would be 13.2 feet so
the use of 14 feet is sufficient. Use 4:1 sideslopes on all
other sides.
If any other information is needed, please contact me.
Sincerely,
PERCOR, /INC.
Mark S. Gronberg, E.
PCA certified
0
d-
p,4 rF .• P-zc-Ps
rrd1. if .. / 4': yo'
G,ll� Y /Poo E/P / C /(�
oT S gC6ok-
250.00 S 88000' 43"
o;
i
ufi/if cno' �roi i/
r--- I
/�2/� NoIE'��OP�CU/4�/o/! �c"S�S L�Tf D��✓�
16
020.E
i�y EF sd.
X 'O,y1
r.+tiks
liol„ o i
cos
va h Ply\ `N ft i
oowoo
i Ole, L
I
� II
In
I
:..7g of Soil Boris is-18
��� L�
Lonation or 1'rojec[
Borings made by f �" ( �.ci-__�;.: N rf-�: i.(_ Date
Classification System: AASHO USDA-SCS < Unified : other —
Auver used (check. two): Hand X or Power �; Flight or Bucket other
Depth, Borin➢. n+amber —I Depth, Borinp number - 2
in Surface elevation in Surface elevation
feet feet
n_ -.— - ----- n — - — —.•... -
1 —
2
4 —
5 —
F —
7 —
A —
. (' C/J Y %%)A I"
End of boring at 7 feet.
Ftandinit Water table'
Present at feet of depth,
_ $,ours after boring.
Not present in boring hole X
`tottled soil:
Observed at fee: of depth.
Not rr->sent in boring hole
Obs, rvations and comments:
2 —
3 --
4
6 —
7 —
8 —
l�✓ C s /�.t �/ y �' !� f S
-i
i
i
i
AA -
End of boring at feet.
Standing water table: `
Present at feet of depth,
!.ours after horin;t.
Not present in borin- tole
PIottled soil:
observed at feet of depth.
Not present in borin` hole
Observations and :omments:
b- 33
TEACOLAT10N TEST DATA SKM
Test hole location G. v�'r� &;le number
Date Lest hole was prepared P 1 2 -� Depth of hole bottom, /er inches.
Diameter of hole, 6 inches.
Soil data"from test bole:
Depth, inches
O - /9
/D • /d'
Soil texture
194,4 e K ! 1,4 tv%
Method of scratchint sidevall _od-10ef I_CKArr/I
Depth of pea -sized gravel in bottom of hole, 2 inches.
Date and hcur of initial water firing 3y 40-23 -PS
Depth of initial water filling, / 6 inches above hole bottom.
Mcthod used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least
4 hours OV $-? y ",014 L-00 A n o,v
Percolation test readings made by on
_ n g at _�' %S a'fl' startMaximum water depth above hole bottom
�,�--
(date) --�
during test, inches.
'ime
Time 1 inter -,-al, Measurement, Drop in water
v:nutes i inches level, inches
Percolation
rate, j
minutes per j
inch
Remarks
P LITi
U
A '
�
�Y
Percolation rats w 'YC• 0 minutes per inch.
o- aj
PERCOLATI0N TEST DATA SHEET
Test hole location /C �y!�'� '` Hole number = l
Date test hole was prepared'PS Deptb of hole bottom.`,? inches.
Diameter of hole, 6 inches.
Soil data from test bole:
Depth, inches
o -p'
F -/,p
Soil texture
f?L.4 rK e o f t",
,,Y1 A re rl,, Y l o "
Method of tzrat-hinR sidevall
Dtpth of pea -sized gravel in botto= of hole, inches.
Date and hc•sr cf initial water filling
Depth cf initial water filling,
inches above hole bottom.
Mcthod used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least
4 hours
Percolation test readings made by on
starting at elm. . Maxim= water depth above hole bottom
(date)
during zest, inches.
i '-me
Time i :nte-ti•c:, `leasuremcnc, Drop in water
Minutes inches level, inches
Percolation
rate,
minutes per
inch
Remarks
.�• ilo/
Percolation Tate • :.fU . -=� minutes per inch.
0- JJ
PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET
Test hole location Solt number
Date test hole was prepared Depth of hole bottom,_.�R inches.
Diameter of hole, 05 inches.
Soil data from test bole:
Depth. inches
0-4
/O - iY
Soil texture
&. e K 60A ih
dl4rkl rZAY' 6P,4111
Method of scratching t
Depth of pea -aired gray._ bottoz of hole, inches.
;gate and hcur cf initial water filling
Depth c_` initial water filling, _ inches above hole bottom.
Mcthod used to maintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least
6 hours
Percolation test readings made by on
a.m.
starting at M. . Maximum water depth above hole bottom
(date)
during test, _ inches.
i = .me i I
Time i ;nter1 al. ! HeafiU7Cmen;, Drop in water
minutes inches I level, i-^hes
I
Percolation
rate,
minutes per
inch
Remarks
't I
le,
Percolation rate • el0. =) minutes per inch.
a- J�
PZRC01.AT10N TEST DATA SKM-
Test hole location / 9�;e � cc � Sole number_
Date test hole was prepared e*-11_ - 9 5 , Depth of hole bottom,-/'r inches.
Diameter of hole, 6 inches.
Soil data from test bole:
Depth, inches
Soil texture
�fc.�rR r!i!Y eOAI�t
Method of scratching sidewall
Depth of pea -sized gravel in botto= of ho_e, inches.
Date ane hc::r of initial water filling
Depth c_` initial water filling,
inches above hole bottoc.
Method used to =aintain at least 12 inches of water depth in hole for at least
4 hours
Percolation test readings rade by on
starting at 8.m. Maximum water depth above hole bottom
(date)
during test, inches.
i
j 7 ime ;
'lime i ;nte1 Measurement, Drop in water
Minutes i inches level, inches
Percolation
ra_e, {
minutes per
inch
Remarks
3 I
'8
3"2
•r
Percolation rate 0 �=%. 0 ainutes per inch.
Lot 2, Block 1
Peres PB21 thru PB:5. Borings BB21 thru BB23. Average• pert s
for bath Frimary and alternate sites are. acceptable. SloI)cs
nearly level at the tested sites, ranging from 0 to 3%. Mottling
indicated below 21, with actual water tab.e at 3.2 to 4.21. A
standard mound system should be used due to the presence of sh-illow
saturation zones.
Lot 3, Block 1
Peres PB31 thru PB26. Borings BB31 thru BB33. Slope, in the
primary site are approximate?y 6-88, on a slight flattening
Of the 10-121 slopes surrounding it. Borings in the primary site
indicate 1 to 2 ' of loamy topsoil over a 6" layer of organic clay
topsoil over r. plastic sandy clay. Actual water table at the
primary site was bel, 5'. However, the high plasticity indi
a heavy clay that i bably saturated. The secondary site
mottled below 1.5 '- an actual saturated zone at 1' depth.
Coupled with a s. the secondary site i3 marginal for a
round system and a .ire at least 2' of sand base as part
of the design. I suq�, hata standardpresaure mound system
be required for .both sites with addea sand depth fur the secondary
system. Please note that this lot is the most tenuous in the
subdivision in terms of slope and soils consideration for using
a mound system. Should a propo:��d house location encroach on
either of the tested sites, careful review and possible additional
+.esting will be neeled to ensure that a mound can still be used.
rnu site does not appear capable of supporting any kind of a trench
system.
Lot 4, Block 1
Peres PB41 thru PB46. Boring- 9B41 thru BB43. Slopes average 58 -
7% overall. Borings indicate actual water table at 4' with mottling
at a depth of 3-4' for the primary and 2' at tn, --condary site.
Perc rates were fairly uniform throughout these tested .sites. A
depression/drainageway to the immediate south of the tested sites
must be avoided during construction of the systems. I .could
recQMQ&g9 A standard pressure mound for both site.
Lot 5, Block 1
Peres PB51 thru PB56. Boring:, BB51 thru BB53. dopes are 3% to
6% overall. Mottling at the primary site started at 2.7 to 3.5'
with actual water table at 3.7 to 5.0'. This site is acceptable
for a standard mound system. The alternate site hag a perc rate
considered too slow for any system by code. However, close
scrutiny shows that the peres were taken at depth in the sandy
clay subsoil, not in the topsoil. In general, throughout the entire
subdivision the testing done at a depth of 12", in the topsoil,
indicates acceptable percolation rates, with testing at 24" or more
indicating slower, marginal perc rates. In my opinion, this site
is no different than most of the others, and would have an acceptable
perc rate if tested at the 12" depth in the :.andy loam topsoil.
No further testing should be required; a mound system if; recommended.
' r=
•
414
o /
s
J
N
�
�
w
o
00
O
o m
---``--t-
--
/
a n
c� I
0
SYSTEM DESIGN
FOR GARY RODFRICK
OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1, RINGERS;JOOD
8-16-85
1. Percolation Rate, Type of System.
14 MPr on the primary site and 148 MPI on the alternate site.
Since the ho•ise is located on the primary site, the alternate
site will need to be used. Percolation results were obtained
by others and a rate of 148 would not normally qualify for a
mound system. However, it was noted that this area was tested
at a greater depth and thus if the upper layers were tested, a
much better rate would be obtained.
2. Proposed Flow Rate.
4 bedrooms @ 150 C.P.D. - 600 C.P.D.
3.Soil Treatment Area Needed.
600 C.P.D. x 0.83 factor is 500 Sq. Ft. of rock Led area, or a
bed 10 feet wide x 50 feet long.
4.Septic Tanks d Distribution System.
Two septic tanks of at least 1000 gallons and 750 gallons are
needed. In addition, a third pumping tank and pump are needed for
pressure distribution to the mound system. Distribution to the
ro^_k bed is to be through 3 perforated laterals 40" apart. ,.11
materials and construction should adhere to the provis;o.:s of
the Ci�y of Orono.
5. Mound Dimensions.
Since trip ground slope is from 2-3i both the upslope atjd downslope
areas can be used.Unless additional percolation tests are perform-
ed, ar. extra 1 foot layer of sand or 2 feet total should be used
to insure adequate percolation in the upper two feet. The required
basal width is 5.0 x 10 feet rock bed width or 50 feet. _Thus, the
total width of the upslope and downslope must be at least 50 feet
minus 10 feet or 40 feet. With a 4 foot high mound, this would
amount to _greater than z 4:1 slope.
If anything eles is needed, please contact me.
Si nr•erel y,
PERCOR, INC.
Mark S. .,ronberg, F.
PCA Certifird
— 250.00 S 88000' 43" E
_ o�
c.t�/i � and di-ei�a9e �orc mew lC / I
/vo f2 � PPrcU,�4 •'loll �e�s �S � D�.��
�o
• ae 53 �� G
l , 1`orF
�o PH
s \ ` 9495:2 I
O PB S-/ I"S
iq,
o pa T2 0.4
t
a
1
I
p
I
N
4A re,. p-lf,pS
,5CALf : / Z/D"
SUGGESTIONS FOR REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF SEPTIC TANKS
WHAT IS IN MY BACKYARD AND HOW DOES IT WORK?
Most houses built in Orono after 1460, where city sewer is not
available, have two septic tanks, one or more distribution boxes
and a number of drainfield trenches. In the septic tanks, heavy
sewage solids will settle to the bottom and be decomposed by
anaerobic (oxygen -free) bacterial action. Floating solids such
as grease, fat, and :oap scum will be retained inside the tank
by baffles at the inlet and outlet. In many cases, the first
tank will retain most of the solids and the second tank merely
provides extra settling time. This ensures that'the effluent
entering the drainfield is relatively free of solids which tend
to clog up clay soils.
TYPICAL SEPTIC SYSTEM
►iA5 EM ENy
Floating r= ��19 T r., -_� -. _.T -.� �.- -.,
Solids a
Sludge Distribution Box Lrainfield
WHY BOTHER WITH PREVENTIVF MAINTENANCE?
Eventually, a septic tank that is functioning rnrrectly will accumulate
a large quantity of sludge (decomposed wastes) and floating solids.
If this accumulation is not removed regularly, the solids will by-pass
the baffles in the tank and will ;)e flushed out into the drainfield
causing premature and unnecessary clogging of the drainfield. The
result: sewage will ba(-k up into your house and;or form a puddle
(or river) jin your yard. THERE ARE NO INEXPENSIVE WAYS TO R.PAIR A
CLOGGED DRAINFIELD,
M M
�, c- 77�' c)
-7q sb M
6 zL >:s r �o�rzr:-►Hw►
� 7 D 7 (� D •rf O 0� zy •-8 r
t
1 30 N
, j �?41 / 2 N E,j' `�,��ij- ru •• � , i � .t �_ � hnr �'Q 5 R e, ... .
C M rs As AID ; rr.d r/ M 4W I
HrrAtil 31 Cow x.w.. 4 Am)
w 10 y g� L
lit FDN6~� s I w �, 7'';� /Z�wIP \MP \ �l� 2
�1 _ S
' i G 1 psi 21' N�
Mod 3
a1R \� / N7H• —1
FboJ ONLm
[• L II "CMP I /?~GMI� �1+: i� �� •i' s �4�j ��
•� �•.. ,
nr
Af
Jel
�'? / _ C c � v rr t ► �G'� mac.. 2 j
l
TLOT A
VIEW A. 0
b — —
u s. Ma w, hp� *,w AA
°4 VIL OF LONG LAKE'
IssI oo V •.•rr �•- q� Or r
C, K2-1 cv�'-
8225 8224 3so
Y2�4 Tq o � •�o
2 �31 4 h. 8110 yisoets �� . , — - ISO 50 v'
Vetid •d dt�Vv�'V
�cvmfAMve mx�zm�aprr�a+'s+pmn'rnno _(Pm(Pt_P�_
Al ut to o t/1 J s t s W �y W N cN 1y r . NJ . ,�� ^� N S r•
All i• �►r N 1.A (i+ r —. p �� �u �� U v1l- lV -
.1 1i
1 �IV
J! � i J•. r: L j w � �; w '+ 4 ' J1 i !J. s N t ! � N N
Z
_ atos�
L a �
✓
y 0 tl��v-vvv•vvvvvvvv-o-vG
f>_s_s_>>_a_•s_�fvo�waovo�
isi$ �'$
vve?
wamCID
{�
(t r• N ii� 1` W ►`� N CO J O• U� •� W rJ �. W -.all�
to N
;�
a
r:
L
fi cr
w ? iu `
:7
` c j
3N wj l�Ntfa i
d
0
3 1_
A 0
MAR RXrxr7Jii�isr7f'-V'
N N ri rj vp a, v► C� 0. o• f r to A w f Jl 0 � � r 4•
♦ W P+ � i W = I` N �' tad N � O` f 1� {` W r, T lh � w �� — � �
N `
t
r
w
:
a
•
HOW CAN I MAKE MY DRAINFIEI_D LAST LONGER?
Here are a few suggestions:
-Don't use ;►our toilet or kitchen sink as a garbage can. Undigested
foods and cigarette butts will not decompose in the septic tanks.
-if you have a garbage disposal use it as seldom as possible or not
at all.
-Have your tanks pumped at least once every three years to remove
the solids. '"his will probably cost $ 75.00 - 100.00. If you don't
specifically ask the pumping contractor to open up your tanks, he
will probably just put his hose down the inspection pipe and drain
the liquid from the tanks. This method does not effectively remove
solids. He should open the tanks, stir the contents while pumping
to break up the sludge and scum layers, and at the sLme tims clean
and repair or replace baffles as necessary. Baffles have a bad
habit_ of falling off aFter a number of years.
-You should also open up the distribution box and remove any accumulated
solids.
HOW CAN THE VIIIAGE HELP ME MAINTAIN MY SYSTEM?
The septic system inspector will come around at least once every two
years to measure the accumulations in your tanks and evaluate the
overall system condition. You should have at least one 4" diameter
inspection pipe extending to the surface from each tank for easy
inspection access. Every licensed contractor sends a pumpout notification
slip to the Village when a tank is pumped. The Village keep_ an
inventory and inspection/maintenance record card for each septic system
and will send out a notice to the homeowner when a requAred maintenance
pumping (once every three years) is overdue. If you have questions
or problems with your septic system, feel free to call the inspector
a:. 473-7357.
fA
r GA
U U) to w '.o Ln iI tj r+Ull
r A y r R' 14
r' ' R 1'. F '
J i
n 1r1 f 1' i t Iri
r _ `
tL) s • � r
�' N .• �' VI e
o• A i vl � r f .c
.1
rNi a i► w " Jr. i l 1� t' Ito
yl s ^ q •' �, to ^' O r� U' d ._, J 4•, YI J V r/
� , � � � -•. � � �r .<� 1 L gin; r 01
na •ri S�n E� J s�V / � ;A ,
it
it tc,1
It
100 0 r+ ell 0
p
/ N
W
EXH!91T
November 27, 1981
P.O. Pox 209
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Mr. Judd Ringer
405 South Willow Drive
Long Lake, Minnesota 55356
Dear Mr. Ringer:
We have completed a site evaluation for on -site sewage treatment facilities
of 15 proposed lots located East of Willow Road and North of Trunk Highway
No. 12 in Orono, Minnesota. A location map has been enclosed showing the
location of the soil borings and percolation tests. Soil boring logs and
percolation test data is also enclosed.
The soil boring show a uniformly high water table throughout the area tested.
This condition prohibits the installation of conventional soil absorption
systems.
The gentle slopes and percolation rates encountered indicate that Mound
Systems should be satisfactory on these sites. We recommend that the future
homes be provided with Mound Systems of soil absorption.
Please call if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Yours very truly,
CARL W. BORG, P.E. el \
CWB:vl
cc: Mr. Michael Gaffron
City of Orono
Ene. 3 copies - Location Hap
Sheets 1 - 3 - Soil Borings
1 Sheet Percolation Test Data
#615 Ringer Subdivision
Page 6
Lot 6, Block 2
Peres PA61 thru PA66. Borings BA61 thru BA63. Slopes are nearly
level. Mottling occurred below 1.5', with actual water
encountered below 5.71. (Note that soil appears saturated
below 2.51) Perc rates were acceptable, although 1 of 6 taken
at depth very very slow. Both primary and secondary sites should
use mound systems.
Lot 1, Block 3
Peres PCll thru PC14. Boring BC11 and BC12. This lot contains
an existing house, garage and barn. The existing septic system
is unknown and was not located during my routine inspection in
July 1981, although no evidence of failure was noted. A future
drainfield site has been tested to the south of the house. Average
percolation rate is 21 minutes per inch; soil borings indicate
soils suited for a shallow trench or mound system, with mottling
beginning at a depth of 5'. This is the highest elevated point
in the entire subdivision and appears to be the only lot possibly
suited for a shallow trench system. An attempt should be made
to locate the existing system to ensure it is within the lot
boundaries, although there is only a•remote possibility that it
isn't.
Lot 2, Block 3
Peres PC21 thru PC24. Borings BC21 and BC22. This lot contains
an existing house and small shed. The existing septic system is
unknown and was not located during my inspection last July. No
evidence of system failure is noted. While the existing system
undoubtedly consists of trenches, soils data provided for a future
drainfield site indicates mottling at a 3.5' depth. This indicates
that the replacement system, should it ever be necessary, would
probably have to be a mound. Percolation rates averaged 56 mpi.
It would alto be advisable to locate the existing system to ensure
it is within the new lot boundaries.
B. Discussion of Mound Systems
Since the proposed Ringer subdivision appears to need mound systems
throughout, it might be worthwhile to review the conditions which
favor use of mound systems over conventional trench systems.
As you are aware, a biomat forms at the rock -soil interface in a
standard trench system. This biomat acts as a "valve" to slow
the downward percolation of septic tank effluent to a rate where
the flow is unsaturated, i.e. air in the soil pores is in contact
with the percolating effluent. Under these essential conditions,
adequate sewage treatment will occur. However, in many soils,
either a seasonal saturated condition or extremely fine, impermeable
soil texture (or both) tends to eliminate the air/effluent contact
and also severely limits the soils capacity to absorb large amounts
of effluent. To ensure that a standard trench system is not
• #615 Ringer Subdivision
Page 5
Lot 6, Block 1
Peres PB61 thru PB66. Borings BB61 thru BB63. Average perc
rates at both sites are acceptable. Slopes range from 2 to 4%.
Mottling started at a depth of approximately 2.4 feet, with
actual water level at 2.5 to 4.41. A standard mound system
should be used at both sites.
Lot 7, Block 1
Peres PB71 thru PB76. Borings BB71 thru BB73. Slopes average 2-3%.
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). Actual water level ranged from 1.7
to 3.5' with mottling generally below 2.51. A standard mound is
recommended for both sites.
Lot 11 Block 2
Peres PA11 thru PA18. Borings BA11 thru BA13. Slopes are very
flat. Mottling was indicated below 2.2 ' with actual water
encountered below 2.01. Two secondary sites were tested. All
sites are acceptable for a standard mound system.
Lot 21 Block 2
Peres PA21 thru PA26. Borings BA21 thru BA23. 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 mound
system is recommended for both sites.
Lot 3, Block 2
Peres PA31 thru PA36. Borings BA31 thru BA33. Slopes averaged
2 to St. Mottling starts at a depth of 2.0-3.51. Actual water
level was below 2.51. Perc rates are acceptable. Mound systems
are recommended for both sites.
Lot 4, Block 2
Perce PA41 thru PA46. Borings BA4
flat. Mottling generally was four
water level at about 4.01. Perc r
acceptable; perc rate for secondary
acceptable for a mound based on th
for Lot 5, Block 1. I recommend a
Lot 5, Block 2
1
e
thru BA43. Slopes are very
d below 2.01, with actual
ate for primary site is
site is slightly slow but
justification referred to
mound system for both sites.
Peres PA51 thru PA56. Borings BA51 thru 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 slow at the secondary site. (Refer to Lot 5, Block 1)
This lot has the overall worst set of percolation rates of the
division. 'However, only two of the peres were taken in the
topsoil, the others, two of which were very slow, were at depth.
I recommend that a mound system be used on this site. If peres
were re -taken in the topsoil, it is likely they would pass as
did nearly all others done in this manner.
#615 Ringer Subdivision
Page 4
Lot 2. Block 1
Peres PB21 thru PB26. Borings BB21 thru BB23. Average perc rates
for bith primary and alternate sites are acceptable. Slopes are
nearly level at the tested sites, ranging from 0 to 3%. Mottling
indicated below 2', with actual water table at 3.2 to 4.21. A
standard mound system should be used due to the presence of shallow
saturation zones.
Lot 3, Block 1
Peres PB31 thru PB29. Borings BB31 thru BB33. Slopes in the
primary site are a;,,.oximately 6-88, on a slight flattening
of the 10-12% slope& surrounding it. Borings in the primary site
indicate 1 to 2 ' of loamy topsoil over a 6" layer of organic clay
topsoil over a plastic sandy clay. Actual water table at the
primary site was below 5'. However, the high plasticity indicates
a heavy clay that is probably saturated. The secondary site was
mottled below 1.5 feet with an actual saturated zone at 1' depth.
Coupled with a slope of 10% the secondary site is marginal for a
mound system and would require at least 2' of sand base as part
of the design. I suggest that a standardpressure mound system
be required for both sites with added sand depth for the secondary
system. Please note than this lot is the most tenuous in the
subdivision in terms of 31ope and soils consideration for using
a mound system. Should a proposed house location encroach on
either of the tested sites, careful review and possible additional
testing will be needed to ensure that a mound can still be used.
The site does not appear capable of supporting any kind of a trench
system.
Lot 4, Block 1
Peres PB41 thru PB46. Borings SB41 thru BB43. Slopes average 5• -
7t overall. Borings indicate actual•water table at 4' with mottling
at a depth of 3-4' for the primary and 2' at the secondary site.
Perc rates were fairly uniform throughput these tested sites. A
depression/drainageway to the immediate south of the tested sites
must be avoided during construction of the systems. I would
reC M apA tandard pressure mound for both sites.
Lot 5, Block 1
Peres PB51 thru PB56. Borings BB51 thru BB53. Slopes are 3% to
6% overall. Mottling at the primary site started at 2.7 to 3.5'
with actual water table at 3.7 to 5.01. This site is acceptable
for a standard mound system. The alternate site has a perc rate
considered too slow for any system by code. However, close
scrutiny shows that the peres were taken at depth in the sandy
clay subsoil, not in the topsoil. In general, throughout the entire
subdivision the testing done at a depth of 12", in the topsoil,
indicates acceptable percolation rates, with testing at 24" or more
indicating slower, marginal perc rates. In my opinion, this site
is no different than most of the others, and would have an acceptable
perc rate if tested at the 12" depth in the sandy loam topsoil.
No further'testing should be required; a mound system is recommended.
N f+ �►
+i
it
rt
r
w
rr a a
Of a0
Aw ra
A
A
�
w
tyj
to
to
tip
rat
8
o
0
0
o
0
so
rt
x
X
M
11t
rn
Ar8
W1
W
W
N
N
N
N
arr0
�M
o oA�Oh
a
A
M O
w a w
AO �p
to
K
to�p
ro
M
20014
all
a
a�
irta
a
rare
�+ �'•
barn �
A
Do 0
aaa:1
M
J' (+ O Aiv w
'•
y
pa.
A= W
U1
N
4+ 10
1P
N O
W N
O� Q►
A
pr
Art
a►
r
A
%%g0
r O
M M
a a
rr a w
't7
�
'd
gO
8a
't7
g.�
04
'O
gm
44
.004
R! 'd
rtw
A O
w\
1-�
p rt
A
Air
rAap
a
w
O►
0%
00
C� 0
0
N
y
�
Owl
a
" a
ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ak
ae 19
�
o
S
M
W
rr
cn
O
Zn In
O N
W O
O N
rt
owe
r
C+
9+
C+ rMr
(+ 1+
(+ f+
rMr rrrr
JC rr
A A
a O
w
•*raO
• �•
n
r M
t1
T
fS ?
p
0 a
a
a
O
C
9of
1+
I
C a
a s
C
at
e
rr
rt
a
M
l0
M
A
�
O
a
IA
C abQd
uoisinipgng aabuTH St9#
•.1
*
<O D10
rt K
oQ WsKa AK
•
rt
O
n
s
O
n
rt
OI
m
n
rt
o
n
0
n
rt
o
n
rt
O
n
s
O
n
frt
to
OaAWa
n
a;
r7 a
rt
96
N
N
r
F�
N
t-+
F+
t-
r
NO
rt rt rt
o a
K 0
Re IK ONa
A K
aK
A A K
aaK
a s �c
►�
A K
a
a
A K
aK
a ►C
A K
D.
a �C
►Kc
A K
aK
a •c
K
A K
aK
a ►C
K
A ►i
a.K
a �C
K
A K
aK
a �C
m
1C ?A
waag'Q.
as
a rt
to a p W O
+As n A
NA a
aG A a
s �e ra•
�a0ooro
�oalto
tT
�P W
� g
44
ww
"
y1 *4
P W
g 8 �
494
www
r •
w m
Ln -1
'0R7
Aug
r•w
*
N w
O %D
'.8 8
49
wr•
* .
A 0-
CD
� �
941
r•r•
N I"r
m N
-ova
'da
ww
1-0
t-• m
� �
44
ww
s
ut
%o %D
� �
'da
ww
ut
N w
� 8
44
r•w
K
aw
rtA
A�
n
a
~
o
a
�rt0A r
• (+
p-
Nt•+W
NW
rW
NA
NAP
Nw
Nw
w
A M
a
a a
h~+ A r O
A a•
r A
m O �
O a w A A
00
i t
N NW
000
11 1
N N
N
1
N W
N
1
N �P
N
1
W at
usol
I I
-I m
mob
t l
C tT
o0
1 1
N W
00
I I
W wO
a C
K
log
41 f M
• K• O
a rt
rt
O W
MM
rtrt
N N
1 NJ
PAPA
rtrt
N N
ulut
MM
rtrt
tJ N
NA
PAPA
rtrt
N N
O:I
MM
r+rt
N N
Om
Ph
t•+rt
of
tAM
rtrt
N N
ON
MM
rt rt
/-r N
vO
MM
rtrt
fo
rrtt
w
rt
a C
a
a
la-• �
66
G G
as
669
G G G
aaa
Re
G�
as
96
G G
a.a
Re
G G
as
66
G G
as
Re
G G
as
Re
� G
as
Re
G G
as
tAn
a
A
�.1
Z abed:
S19t uoTsTATpgng aabuTH
• EXhlt31T
TO: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Septic System Inspector
DATE: January 5, 1982
SUBJECT: Ringer Subdivision, North Willow Drive #615
Summary: All proposed lots were found to have high water tables,
necessitating the use of mound systems. Percolation rates in the
upper soil profile generally were suitable for mound systems,
with slower rates found in deeper test holes. Slopes on thn entire
site are fairly level and suited for mound systems.
This report will consist of: a) a short review of each lot of the
proposed division and b) a discussion of mound systems,including
how and why they work and their current and future use as part of
Orono's land use management plan. The Ringer subdivision is
perhaps the most extensive development in Orono to date that will
require all mound systems.
A. Ringer Subdivision
A preliminary review of the Hennepin County Soil Survey indicated
extensive areas of Cordova silty clay loam and Shorewood silty
clay loam as well as Leseur loam would be found at this site.
These soils all would be expected to have a seasonal water table
or saturation zone between 1 and 3 feet below the surface.
During the course of the soils investigation, I met with the site
evaluator, Carl Borg, and realtor-Graydon McCulley on the
site. We made a boring which definitely indicated these high
water table soils were present. I later confirmed with Dr. James
L. Anderson of the University of Minnesota Soils Extension
Department that mound systems would be. appropriate for these soil
types. These are much the same soils as found in the Medina-
14orningside area, which experience conventional trench septic
system failures due to the soil conditions. In general, the
loamy topsoil characteristics for the Ringer property are suitable
for proper functioning of standard pressure -mound septic systems
as per Orono's Code and Design Manual.
For clarity's sake I have labeled the northern most tier cf seven
lots as Block 1, the western group of six lots as Block 2, and
the two lots to the southeast as Block 3.
Lot 1, Block 1
Peres PBll thru PB16. Borings BB11 thru BB13. Average perc
rates for both primary and alternate sites are acceptable. Slopes
are quite level. Saturation indications (mottling) started at
1.7 to 2.5 feet. Actual water table at 5-7' depth. A mound
system should be used due to the presence of shallow saturation
zones.
9
SEPTIC SYSTEM INFORMATION
STREET ADDRESS 750 JNCA:'FY ZAAzAF 17,e/t*
LOT S BLOCK SUBDIVISION R/AUGfr-IeS WOOD
MONTH AND YEAR TESTING DONE
// 6�- NOU• 1961
ITEMS ALREADY COMPLETED _ f0 rfXC 7Z5TS (,Pl3`SI , P6 SZ, PB-S3,
-% o% Yr-C% v/C - t L ) S c. I) slwfrIA I r C f sc Az -G I he" -
NEED TO COMPLETE BEFORE ISSUING BUILDING PERMIT;
OBORINGS
OPERC TESTS
0 SYSTEM DESIGN AfQ A-,lD-
SITE PLAN
O OTHER
SUBDIVISION FILE NO. �p�s
DATE THIS SHEET FILED BYA&
i