Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout030-2145-12-000 (2) ST CROIX COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING MEMO DATE: JANUARY 26, 2012 TO: BROWN WOOD ESTATES SUED. LOT OWNERS ti1 CodeAdministratio FROM: PAM QUINN, P & Z POWTS INSPECTOR _41, 715-386-4680 RE: SOIL REPORTS FOR PRIVATE ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT Land Information & SYSTEMS (POWTS) planning 715-386-4674 Enclosed with this memo are copies of a letter that was sent to the developer of RealproBrown Wood Estates in 2005 notifying him of unuseable or deficient soil reports that 715-386=677 were submitted for the lots. Adam Schumaker, the Certified Soil Tester, is no longer licensed with the state and the deficiencies in his reports were verified during Reclrng a May 10, 2006 on-site investigation by Leroy Jansky, our state regional wastewater 13-386-4675 specialist at that time. Each lot must be re-evaluated by a licensed soil tester, providing acceptable data to allow for installation of a POWTS prior to our department issuing sanitary permits. It has come to our attention with the recent submittal of an application for a permit } on lot 5 that current owners may not be aware of the problems our department identified back in 2005. Your cooperation will be much appreciated by anyone wishing to purchase and t~ h build on a lot in Brown Wood Subdivision. A copy of this memo will be attached to each of the soil reports on file so there will be no question about their accuracy or =r viability. cif ST. CRoix COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 715386.4686 FAx PZ@CO.SAINT-CROIX.WI.US 1 101 CARM/CHAEL ROAD, HUDSON, W/ 54016 WWW.CO.SAINTCROIX.WI.US ST CROIX CO UNTY ~4- PLANNING ZONING Mr. Glen Johnson Glen Johnson Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 809 Hudson, WI 54016 RE: Brown Wood Estates Subdivision Unacceptable Soil Reports kip CodeAdministrau` Dear Glen: 715-386-4680 Land Enclosed is a copy of a memo detailing county staff findings from an on-site investigation Pat informauon & completed on the above-referenced Brown Wood Estates subdivision. Alex Blackburn and 715-386 4674 1 talked with you briefly while we were at the site on November 14th, where we were trying to verify locations of all 14 lots' proposed POWTS tested areas. Real PYOPVTY \ 715-3$.04677 As summarized in the memo, none of the soil-tested areas indicated on soil evaluation reports submitted for these lots had benchmarks for establishing elevations for POWTS Re cling designs. Lots 3 and 4 had unacceptable reports due to the use of a power auger instead of -386-4675 excavated test pits. Other inaccuracies and/or misinformation have been detailed in the memo, copies of which will be sent to the Town of St. Joseph and Dept. of Commerce. Due to the lack of accurate data presented, none of the soil reports will be accepted for use to obtain a sanitary permit until all data has been verified by individual on-site inspection. The subdivision process for lot creation was allowed to continue, however, the final plat has not yet been signed and conditions on the 10/25/05 committee approval include a $10/acre inspection fee to partially recoup the cost for county staff time for the required on-site inspections. P Please contact me if you have questions regarding the enclosed memo and the specific deficiencies for this 14-lot subdivision. Sinc ely, ela Quinn Zoning Specialist, POWTS Enc. Cc: Robert Bezek, Code Administrator Theresa Johnson, Town of St. Joseph Chair Adam Schumaker, CST 253309 Leroy Jansky, Dept. of Commerce Subdivision file Sr CRO/X COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 110 1 CARM/CHAEL ROAD, HuDsoN, Wi 54016 71X386-4686 FAx PZCQ CO. SAINT-CROIX. W1. US W W W. CO. SAI NT-C ROIX. W I . U5 ST. CROIX COUNTY WISCONSIN PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT N N N N N N■ N■ Nosed ST. CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER g - 1101 Carmichael Road Hudson, WI 54016-7710 Phone: (715) 386-4680 Fax (715) 386-4686 Memo From: Pam Quinn Date: 11 /22/2005 Re: On-site Investigation of POWTS locations for Lots 1-14, Brown Wood Estates Subdivision, Town of St. Joseph, Section 30, T30N, R1 9W On November 14, 2005, an on-site investigation of Brown Wood Estates proposed POWTS locations was performed at the request of the Town of St. Joseph. The town's concern was that grading for road construction and drainage improvements had either damaged or entirely removed proposed POWTS locations. Alex Blackburn and I used the preliminary plat contour map and Adam Schumaker's soil reports to verify data submitted for all 14 lots. We both have orienteering experience and can read topographic maps and scale distances, so we found all the areas that were reported as POWTS sites. A summary of our findings follows: No benchmarks were observed on any of the 14 lots in the locations indicated. Each soil report identified a BM1 and BM2, however, no 1.5" PVC pipe markers were visible at any of the soil-tested sites. The soil evaluation pages are dated 8/20/05 and the plot plans done on 10/24/05, indicating that the POWTS locations existed only three weeks prior to the on-site visit. Benchmarks should have been easily seen with the naked eye. This is a violation of Comm 85.40(3)(a) which requires a benchmark on every report. The actual distance between test pits does not match the distance indicated by a 1" = 40 ft. scale used on the plot plans. By pacing between test pits on several lots, there appeared to be significantly less distance between the pits, which would reduce the area available for POWTS construction. In addition, mound sites need a specific length along a verifiable contour for system design. All 14 lots must have the dimensions for the tested area measured with a tape or wheel to document actual size and contour length prior to POWTS design. Lot 1 required a complete soil report. The original report plot plan had specific horizontal references from the north and east lot lines to the proposed POWTS location, which has now been graded for construction of a driveway and e 2 - Brown Wood Estates a stormwater retention area. CST Schumaker then produced a new plot plan dated 11115105 for soil borings and benchmarks that are in a different area on the lot, but used the same elevations and soil profile descriptions as the original report. Machine-augered borings were observed on lots 3 and 4 This is a violation of Comm 85.20(3)2, which states "a soil boring may not be created by means of a power auger". The soil profile descriptions are not acceptable; the holes had not been back- filled and the deepest one observed extended to approximately 60 inches. The reported depths on all pits were between 80 - 86 inches, describing the lowest profile as sandy loam with strong, medium, granular (3mgr) structure. This appears to be falsified data, since augering would have altered any structure in soils taken from the boring and the walls of the 18-inch diameter holes smeared soil visible from above. No backfilled test pits/borings were visible on lots 5 8 and 14. • The area indicated for a mound on Lot 5 had no visible excavation for pits or borings. Alex and I found the SE lot corner stake and walked 150 feet west to an area between two drainage easements, as shown on the plot plan. Adam submitted a new soil report on 11/15/05 for a conventional POWTS in a different location on lot 5; all test pits locations and elevations based on visible benchmarks must be verified by county staff. • The original tested area on lot 8 appeared to have been damaged as part of road/driveway construction, so a new soil report was completed on 11/14/05 showing a mound location. This soil report will not be accepted by the county until another on-site has been done to verify all three test pit locations, contour length, and elevations based on benchmarks, as represented on the plot plan. • For lot 14, Adam stated that he'd completed the soil evaluation a year and a half ago and that's why there were no visible test pits in the areas shown on the 10/24/05 plot plan. A soil report completed 4/30/03 for Jeff Brown is on file, but it is not in the same location as the more recent report. A new soil report was completed 11/14/05 in a different location - again, on-site verification will be required to identify locations for all three test pits and benchmarks as required in Comm 85.20 and 85.40. The soil descriptions for this parcel are suspect; the predominant soils are Amery and Santiago series, both of which typically have reddish brown (5 YR 4/4) and/or yellowish red (5 YR 4/6) massive sandy loams @ 31- 36 inches below grade. The soil profiles described have sandy loams in the lowest horizon that range from massive (0m) to strong (3msbk) structure. Based on soil survey data and observations of the material from the backfilled pits, the soil application rate of 0.2 gpd/ft2 will be used for POWTS designs with a system elevation at or below 36" deep. Individual on-site determinations will have to be scheduled to use any less conservative application rate for sizing of a POWTS. In general, much of the data submitted in order to create these 14 lots was either inaccurate or misrepresents existing site conditions at the time of the site visit. Regardless of future plans to relocate POWTS as part of house construction, each soil report must provide a minimum amount of data on which to design a septic system. No sanitary permits will be issued based on these 3 - Brown Wood Estates • soil reports until every lot has accurate, verifiable data and each POWTS location has flagged benchmarks and borings. Cc: Glen Johnson, Developer Adam Schumaker, CST #253309 Leroy Jansky, Regional Wastewater Specialist Alex Blackburn, Zoning Specialist Theresa Johnson, Town of St. Joseph Chair Dwight Farnham, Deputy Zoning Admin., Town of St. Joseph RR E~EIVE® Wisconsin Department of OI EVALUATION REPORT Page of Division of Safe and Buildings ( 91 1n accordance with Com fs. me County Attach complete site plan on p r s(~pff8INSOM .~F Minch in size. Plan must ~ include, but not Nrnited to: ve Ian rgli3Fdui~ r~io4 and Parcel I.D. 7 percent slope, scale or dimensl oca and distance to neare'sR road 6 2~ y S ROSSO Print all information. Reviewed by Date Personal informelion you provide may be used for secondary purposes (Privacy Law, e. 15.04 (1) (m)). Property Owner Property Location l.t_ h n Govt. Lot S 114 i&Ls/114 S 30 T N R/ E (or)df Property Owners Mailing Address Lot # Block # Subd. Name or CSM# o 6c5 d ~ wn c.vood S' State Zip Code ❑ City ❑ Village mown Nearest Road t- `t ( .51 16 h /38)6~h- New Construction Use: IpAesidentiai / Number of bedrooms Code derived design flow rate ySa/~ '&6 GPD ❑ Replacement ❑ Public or commercial - Describe: Parent material " A Flood Plain elevation If applicable ~ General oornments !;Y-S e ~ y® u 4,1e., fy~ and recommendations: ` 0'11: vt.0 N-Q.e(,g~lJ~i^+dK~° - rc" 'Yto y/0)1 P1 Boring # ❑ Boring Sylf Pit Ground surface elev. ft. Depth to limiting factor In. soU ApplIcadon Rnte Horizon Depth Dominant Color Redox Description Texture Structure Consistence Boundary Roots GPD/N In. Munsell Qu. Sz. Cont. Color Gr. Sz. Sh. •Eff#1 •Eff#2 11-361 uv r 5-14 .5 ra', U- Boling #❑7 Boring ❑9 Pit Ground surface elev.Q=-::-- ft. Depth to limiting factor v in. Sol Application Rate Horizon Depth Dominant Color Redox Description Texture Structure Consistence Boundary Roots GPDM'f' In. Munad Qu. Sz. Cont. Color Gr. Sz. Sh. 'Eff#1 'Eff#2 # Z ,111 c s )v , .r Z. o -51W - SO zwr S - s k. - • Effluent #1 = BOD > 30 < 220 mg& and TSS >30 < 150 mg& • Effluent #2 = BC, < 30 mglL and TSS 130 mg4 CST Name (Please Print) _ _ CST Number zS33Q Address Date Evaluation Cor4aw Telephone Number 1 Property Owner. Sc Parcel ID # I Page ~ of # ❑ Boring Ground surface elev. = ft. Depth to Amiting tailor in. R Pit SoN iCSKM Rate Horizon Depth Dominant Color Redox Description Texture Structure Consistence Boundary Roots GPDW in. Munsell Ou. Sz. Cont. Color Gr. Sz. Sh. 'Ef1#1 'EM L6463;1-3 e 'S e r Q eo # ❑ F-1 ❑ PBoring it Ground surface elev. ft. Depth to luting factor In. SoN icatior► Rate Horizon Depth Dominant Color Redox Description Texture Structure Consistence Boundary Roots GPD/ff In. Munsell tau. Sz. Cont. Color Gr. Sz. Sh. •Eff#1 •011#2 F-1 Boring # ❑ ❑ Boring Pit Ground surface elev. ft. Depth to limiting factor in. SoN Application Rate Horizon J Depth Dominant Color Redox Description. Texture Structure Consistence Boundary Roots GPQff in. Munsd Ou. Sz. Con. Color Gr. Sz. Sh. •E11101 '811#2 • Effluent #1 = BOD5 > 30 < 220 mWL and TSS >30:5 150 mglL • Ef iluent #2 = BOD, 130 mg& and TSS 130 moll. The Department of Commerce is an equal opportunity service provider and employer. If you need assistance to access services or need material in an alternate format. please contact the department at 608-266-3151 or TTY 608-264-8777. asauwrwoot l:S ~ -o w PAGE ~OF NAME ~O h r S6 Y~ LOT# f Z LEGAL DESCRIPTION -<C-1/4 4,~.c'Y4,S ?QT-3n,N,R / T E(OR ISf'> SCALE: I" l r BM I ELEVATION )0. U BM I DESCRIPTION lJ e BM 2 ELEVATION 1 /'~1! o BM 2 DESCRIPTION SYSTEM ELEVATION SYSTEM TYPE ,4-tA ~zs n f ~Az~ Y~ i i G3 ` cry, SIGNATURE DATE X.0 7 LB\Q = 930.53 0 01, o/ LBO = 923.20 O LBO = 925.00 \ 14 LBO = 925 00 / 7364 S. F. \ 9 3.61 Ac. -13 / 12 ~ \ 144188 S.F. 130685 ~ 3.31 Ac. 9,30 \ \ 3. / H WL / ' / .72 W / i PG. 272 / cn I - ~ x w N 11 LBO = 934.21 ~ 142177 S.F. O 3.26 Ac. BX 4-. 0 0 0 wl ' z PG. 272 0 0 , - - F. LBO = 934.21 i C. i m 3 x / f m Z ~ W6 XB XB N 89°57'01 E 549.91' LOT SOT 2 N 00042'55' r-' K d -7 - 17.75'.