SU0001272 SSNL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'� y � > it so NEIL O. AND-t;RSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHMCAL•ENVIRONMENTAL-GROUNDWATER-INSPECTIONS•TESTING LABORATORY SERVICES a rR CORPORATE OFFICE SACRAMENTO OFFICE W F 22 Houston Lane o�te Bonicmd,Suite 3 4229 N C111CO (539)891-6304 Lodi,CaRfamia 95760 Sacramento,California 93834 C P MCKTON (209)472-1091 (209)367-3701 (916)929-9267 S O RANCHO CORDOVA (916)631-4455 PAR(209)333-8303 FAX(916)929- 925 - November 27, 2000 CD Mr. Rodney Estrada `= - San Joaquin County Environmental Health Division cry 304 East Weber Avenue,Third FIoor Stockton, CA 95202 -�- Re: Addendum, Soil Suitability/Nitrate Loading Study i 30652 East Edwards Avenue, Oakdale California -- I S.J.C. LA-00-52, Our Job Number LG00-339 Dear'Mr. Estrada:, -We appreciate the opportunity to respond-to the corn taents-of your-letter-dated November 16, 2000 = _ regarding the subject property. The following paragraphs correspond to the comments in your letter. Regarding comment items no.s 1 and 5- Initially, we understood from Mr. Rose that his plans for development of the subject property included the fourteen (14)largest lots over two (2.0) acres in size and t leaving the option open to develop lots 15, 17, 19,and 21 which are under two(2.0)acres in size. Mr. Rose k indicated that he has no plans to develop lots 16, 18,20,and 22 which are also under two(2.0)acres in size. In view that your department would not support development of parcels having on-site septic systems and domestic water wells with less than two(2)acre minimum,it appears that the fourteen (14)lots of two (2) acres or greater in size would satisfy the requirement., In light your departments position,development of the remaining acreage(lots under 2.0 acres)could not occur unless the lot sizes were increased to two(2)acres or greater. Regarding comment item no. 2: Mr.Dave Ferrera,the property seller,was difficultto reach during the day time hours therefore Mr. Rose provided the site history information to us_ Mr. Dave Ferrera was contacted over the telephone on 11/20/00 and confirmed the information originally provided by to us by Mr- Rose. Regarding item no.3:The logic requiring a percolation test on the lots under two(2)acres in size is confusing. The opinion from another Environmental Health Department staffmember,described in our report, seemed reasonable and logical. It is hard to understand why the Environmental Health Department would Mu ire a percolafion test bh lots under two Q)-acres-in size and then not-support development of those same parcels having on-site septic systems. A percolation test and liquid waste permit is required prior to the installation of a septic system. As you know,we conducted a percolation test on all twenty-two(22)lots and met your departments requirement. Mr. Rose indicated that in light of your departments position,he wilt not make plans to develop lots under two(2)acres in size- . Regarding item no.4- Deep percolation of rain: The rainfall value used in the report was collected from the Division of Water Resources CIMIS station Manteca located 15 miles directly east of the site. The total rain fall value ; recorded at the Manteca CMS station for the previous year(9-99 to 8-00)was 13-07 inches. The total rain fall value of 13.07 inches was reduced 6.28 inches for evapotranspiration to more accurately reflect the potential deep percolation of rain water into the ground. It was estimated that 6.79 inches was potential deep percolation of rain or"recharge." Over the last 12 months,the rain fall from the other nearby CIMIS stations and the San Joaquin County Soil Survey Report are as follows: M