Laserfiche WebLink
kift -moo, <br /> December 16,2003 <br /> Job Number: LG03-304 <br /> Page 5 <br /> 1r <br /> of up to two bedrooms could be placed on each lot at some point in the future. <br /> 4.0 GROUND WATER INFORMATION <br />.. 4.1 Ground Water Depth and Gradient <br /> The San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (1998, 1999) ground <br /> water depth and elevation maps were reviewed to determine the ground water levels near the <br /> Site. The Fall 1998 and Spring 1999 maps are the most recent maps available from the San <br /> Joaquin County Flood Control office. According to these maps (Plates 2-5), ground water lies <br /> between 115 and 125 feet below ground surface in the vicinity of the Site and flows to the north <br /> to northeast at a gradient of between 4 to 7 feet per mile. <br /> 4.2 On-Site Ground Water <br /> The site contains a domestic and agricultural well. We understand from a pump repair permit <br /> dated 6-20-88 that the domestic well is 6-inch diameter well. A new 1.5 horse power pump was <br /> installed to a depth of 170 feet at that time. No other details regarding the domestic well or the <br /> agricultural well are known. The well locations are noted on the site plan, Plate 1. <br /> Ground water was not encountered by the staff of Neil O. Anderson&Associates, Inc. during <br /> drilling on November 6 and November 19, 2003. However, subsurface water was noted on <br /> November 21, 2003 within deep percolation holes conducted for Parcel 1 and 2 on November 21, <br /> 2003. The percolation test holes for Parcel 3 were found to be dry. Mr. Mike Huggins of the <br /> EHD observed the perched water during the time of the percolation test and mentioned it <br /> probably came from a very recent rain storm and is"ponded" on the hard pan surface. The depth <br /> to this water surface varied between 15.9 feet deep for Parcel 1 and 4.45 feet for Parcel 2. <br /> 4.3 Potential Ground Water Contamination Issues <br /> No potential ground water contamination sources were identified during our site visit. The site <br /> has dairy equipment in a barn suggesting it may have been a dairy in the distant past. The site <br /> had also contained an almond orchard which may have required pesticides and fertilizers. <br /> Beyond the use of septic system and seepage pits in the local area, there are no other potential <br /> ground water contamination issues recognized on the site. <br /> SD,., <br /> i <br />