Laserfiche WebLink
April 29,2003 <br /> Job Number. LG03-103 <br /> Page 8 <br /> hole or 30 minim or less for a deep hole. A satisfactory percolation rate was achieved on parcel <br /> one but not on parcels two or three. <br /> VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> In conclusion, a satisfactory percolation rate was achieved on Parcel 1 but not on Parcels <br /> 2 or 3. No ground water was encountered in the borings and the depth to ground water <br /> according to a recent San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District <br /> ground-water map is about 130 feet below the ground surface at the site. <br /> ` Based on the results of this study, we have found the soils to be suitable for a septic <br /> system consisting of leach lines and seepage pits for Parcel 1. We believe that due to the <br /> proposed use and size of Parcel 1, the use of the septic system will not negatively impact the <br /> ` ground water quality of the area Parcels 2 and 3 will require additional percolation testing to <br /> locate suitable soils. <br /> Parcels 2 and 3 are suitable for engineered septic systems designed by a Civil Engineer to <br /> mitigate the"slow" percolating soil condition. We recommend that the design and installation <br /> of the septic system follow the requirements established by the San Joaquin County <br /> r Environmental Health Division. <br /> VIII. LIMITATIONS <br /> im <br /> The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the <br /> existing and proposed development, the use of the subject property, and the site conditions as <br /> they existed at the time we excavated our test holes and performed the percolation tests. It was <br /> assumed that the test hole and percolation test results were representative of the subsurface <br /> conditions in the general area <br /> 'pES Eot <br />