HomeMy WebLinkAbout1036-91 ASP - Cassils Road.~..~ --
County of Newell No. 4
By-law No. 1036-91
.-
A By-law of the County of Newell No. 4 in the Province of Alberta
to adopt the "Cassils Road Area Structure Plan".
Whereas Council proposes to establish a framework for the orderly
__ subdivision and development of the 64.3 hectares in the SE 6-19-1~
in the County of Newell, immediately west of the Town of Brooks
north of Cassils Road
And Whereas this plan will identify existing development and will
outline the procedures and conditions under which future subdivis
and development will be allowed to proceed. The Area Structure
Plan will establish the County of Newell's planning policies for
this area which will be used by the land owners as well as other
government and municipal agencies and utility companies in the
formulation of their plans and priorities for development.
Therefore be it resolved that this By-law receive first reading
and that the necessary Public Hearing be held to hear comments
on this Plan
Further be it resolved that this By-law receive second and final
reading after the Public Hearing and that this By-law take effect
on final passing of the By-law.
Dated at Brooks, Alberta this 6th day of June, 1991.
June 6, 1991 Moved by Councillor Wells that By-law 1036-91 receive first readi
Carried.
June 20, 1991 Moved by Councillor Bulger that By-law 1036-91 receive second
reading. Carried Unanimously.
June 20, 1991 Moved by Councillor Nelson that By-law 1036-91 receive third and
final reading. Carried Unanimously.
Dated at Brooks, Alberta this 20th day of June, 1991.
REEVE
~~
~~:..~ ~!
COUNTY ADM STRAT6R
~~
v
I ~ ~ ~r
~~ ~,v~
~ 3~
County of Newell
Cassils Road
Area Structure Plan
By -law No. 1036 -91
Adopted: June 20, 1991
Prepared by the Staff of the
Southeast Alberta Regional Planning Commission
June 6, 1991
June 20, 1991
June 20, 1991
County of Newell No. 4
By -law No. 1036 -91
A By -law of the County of Newell No. 4 in the Province of Alberta
to adopt the "Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
Whereas Council proposes to establish a framework for the orderly
subdivision and development of the 64.3 hectares in the SE 6- 19 -14 -4
in the County of Newell, immediately west of the Town of Brooks
north of Cassils Road
And Whereas this plan will identify existing development and will
outline the procedures and conditions under which future subdivision
and development will be allowed to proceed. The Area Structure
Plan will establish the County of Newell's planning policies for
this area which will be used by the land owners as well as other
government and municipal agencies and utility companies in the
formulation of their plans and priorities for development.
Therefore be it resolved that this By -law receive first reading"
and that the necessary Public Hearing be held to hear comments
on this Plan
Further be it resolved that this By -law receive second and final
reading after the Public Hearing and that this By -law take effect
on final passing of the By -law.
Dated at Brooks, Alberta this 6th day of June, 1991.
Moved by Councillor Wells that By -law 1036 -91 receive first reading.
Carried.
Moved by Councillor Bulger that By -law 1036 -91 receive second
reading. Carried Unanimously.
Moved by Councillor Nelson that By -law 1036 -91 receive third and
final reading. Carried Unanimously.
Dated at Brooks, Alberta this 20th day of June, 1991.
REEVE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County of Newell No. 4
By -law No. 1128 -95
A By -law of the County of Newell No. 4, in the Province of Alberta, to amend the Cassils
Road Area Structure Plan, By -law 1036-91.
Whereas County Council feels that amendments to the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
are required to accommodate current development proposals;
And Whereas County Council has advertised these proposed amendments by Public Notice,
And Whereas a Public Hearing will be held on June 8, 1995 to hear any concerns
regarding these proposed amendments,
Therefore be it resolved that the following amendments be made to By -law 1036.91, being
the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan:
1. That the text within the section entitled "Phase II" on Page 15 of the Area
Structure Plan be deleted and replaced with the following text:
"The second phase of development should be allowed to commence when it is
demonstrated that there is sufficient demand for additional lots. At this stage,
additional acreage lots will be developed as an expansion of Westland Acres, to the
north and west. This will involve the extension of roads into the area immediately
west of Westland Acres, and the creation of 20 to 25 additional lots (see Figure
8). As this expansion occurs, additional access into this area must be provided.
The road connecting the Westland Acres development with the service road to the
south, parallel to Cassils Road, will be required as a condition of approval for any
expansion of Westland Acres west of this connecting road.
In Phase 11, the ultimate level of development should be in the order of 50 to 60
Lots. As in Phase I, the location of existing buildings and developments must be
addressed. Similarly, as lots are subdivided and developed, the potential re-
subdivision of these lots into 15 to 17 metre wide urban type Tots must be taken
into consideration. This means that new lots should have frontages of multiples
of 15-17 metres.
These Tots will not be serviced by a water system or sewer system. Even though
the Tots should meet the Land Use By -law minimum size requirement of 0.5
hectares, and must be at least 0.20 hectares to meet the Subdivision Regulations
for unserviced lots, the increasing numbers and density of private sewage disposal
systems raises environmental concerns. As a result, prior to subdivision approval
in this phase, any developer shall provide satisfactory percolation and ground water
tests and any other required engineering information to the County, Provincial
Plumbing Inspector and the Subdivision Approving Authority."
2. That Schedule "A" of this amending By -law shall replace Figure 8, on Page 16 of
the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan.
3. That the text within the section entitled "Future Phases" on Page 17 of the Area
Structure Plan be deleted and replaced with the following text:
"Subdivision and development beyond Phase II are outside the scope of this Area
Structure Plan as these developments are more urban than rural in nature.
However, provisions for future development have been taken into account in this
plan. Phase III would be the re- subdivision of lots into smaller urban sized lots.
This phase of development can only proceed with the installation of a municipal
water and sewer system, and will not occur until this area is annexed by the Town
of Brooks.
Planning beyond Phase II will have to be done as the demand warrants and will
require engineering studies and a new Area Structure Plan."
4. That the text within the section entitled "9. Subdivision and Development
Guidelines" on Page 18 of the Area Structure Plan be deleted and replaced with
the following text:
"To ensure that the subdivision and development of lots during the first two phases
of this plan do not prejudice future re- subdivision of the land in this area, the
following guidelines shall be used in controlling subdivision and regulating
development:
All subdivisions shall be in accordance with this plan;
The exact locations of all buildings and developments will be required to ensure
proper planning of all lots;
Prior to subdivision approval, applicants will be required to provide information
on the utility services to be used;
Percolation and ground water testing, satisfying the requirements of the
Provincial Plumbing Inspector, will be required prior to subdivision approval;
All lots created in Phase I and II must have a minimum frontage of 30 metres
and a minimum area of 0.50 hectares, wherever possible;
The design of all new lots must take into account the future urban use of this
area and, therefore, these lots should be multiples of 15 to 17 metres in width;
All new development shall comply with the following minimum set -back
requirements:
Front Set -back 7.5 metres
Side Set -back 1.5 metres
unless otherwise approved by the Municipal Planning Commission."
Moved by Councillor Daniels that By -law 1128 -95 receive first reading. Carried.
Moved by Councillor Barg that By -law 1128.95 receive second reading. Carried.
Moved by Councillor Douglass that By -law 1128 -95 receive third and final reading.
Carried.
REEVE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
d
td
4
o t� O
v>
N
o O
I I
tri
CD
D
o O
n
U") Sv
c
n
c
1
CD
0
0
0
ACCESS STREET IN PHASE II
0
0
0
O
ROADWAY (12th Sheet)
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90 m
Marshal Drarn
t:111
R
411•11111M ,11 /11114111411411144442•441143111114001144141110411
May 11, 1995
June 8, 1995
June 22, 1995
County of Newell No. 4
By -law No. 1130 -95
A By -law of the County of Newell No. 4, in the Province of Alberta, to amend Land Use
By -law 1004.90
Whereas County Council is amending the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan to provide for
additional country residential development,
And Whereas the Land Use By -law must be amended to allow for this additional
development,
And Whereas County Council has advertised this proposed amendment by Public Notice,
And Whereas a Public Hearing will be held on June 8, 1995 to hear any concerns
regarding this proposed amendment,
Therefore be it resolved that the following amendment be made to By -law 1004 -90:
That the portion of the SE 6-19-14-4, indicated as Phase II in the Cassils Road Area
Structure Plan, be included in a Country Residential District of the Land Use By -law.
Moved by Councillor Stobbs that By -law 1130 -95 receive first reading. Carried.
Moved by Councillor Douglass that By -law 1130-95 receive second reading. Carried.
Moved by Councillor Loewen that By -law 1130-95 receive third and final reading. Carried.
REEVE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1. Introduction 1
2. Purpose of the Plan 2
3. The Site 4
4. Existing Land Use and Development 8
5. Ownership 11
6. Planning Constraints 13
7. Development Concept 14
8. Development Phases
Phase I 17
Phase II 20
Phase III 22
Phase IV 26
Future Phases 30
9. Subdivision and Development Guidelines 31
10. Implementation 32
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 REGIONAL SETTING 3
Figure 2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
Figure 3 PLAN AREA BOUNDARIES 7
Figure 4 TOPOGRAPHY 9
Figure 5 EXISTING LAND USE DEVELOPMENT 10
Figure 6 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 16
Figure 7 PHASE I, SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 19
Figure 8 PHASE II, SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 21
Figure 9 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS 28
Figure 10 PHASE III IV, SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT 29
CONCEPT
1. INTRODUCTION
CASSILS ROAD AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AMENDMENT
The area of land west to the Town of Brooks along Cassils Road has been subject of
considerable discussion and development pressures over the past number of years. The
location of this site introduces some unique planning problems. To begin with, the area lies
within a rural municipality therefore, all subdivision and development must be rural in nature
and in accordance with the County's Land Use Bylaw. This, by itself, is not a problem. The
problem is that this area has been identified as a future growth area for the Town of Brooks
and could ultimately become urban development. As a result, it is imperative that any activity
that occurs in this area must be planned in a manner that will not prevent its conversion to
urban development in the future.
In 1989 the County of Newell requested the staff of the Southeast Alberta Regional Planning
Commission to prepare an Area Structure Plan for this location. A Draft plan was prepared,
circulated and a public meeting was held. This plan is the culmination of the comments and
suggestions received from this circulation process.
In 1995, an amendment was made to the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan. This amendment
made text changes to the original document regarding the first and second phase of
development in this area and was adopted as By -law No. 1128 -95
In 2000, UMA Engineering Ltd., on behalf of Cecil Blair, provided this amendment to the
original Cassils Road Area Structure Plan from 1991. Development pressures in this area
have resulted in the need to add the successive development Phases III and IV. These
phases, in various stages of detail, can ultimately provide for the logical sequence of
subdivision and full build out of the quarter section in which they are contained.
2. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
This Area Structure Plan is intended to establish a framework for the orderly subdivision and
development of the 64.3 hectares in the SE 1/4 Sec 6, Twp 19, Rge 14 W 4th in the County of
Newell, immediately west of the Town of Brooks north of Cassils Road. (see Figure 1)
This plan will identify existing development and will outline the procedures and conditions
under which the future subdivision and development will be allowed to proceed. The Area
Structure Plan will establish the County of Newell's planning policies for this area which will be
used by the land owners as well as other govemment and municipal agencies and utility
companies in the formulation of their plans and priorities for development.
It must be pointed out that this Area Structure Plan provides the opportunity and direction for
the land owners in this area to subdivide and develop their lands, but it can not and will not
force them to participate should they choose not to develop. This plan, prepared for the
County, provides a framework for a subdivision and development scheme, but it will be up to
the landowners to obtain the necessary agreements between themselves and the appropriate
agencies to implement this scheme.
REGIONAL SETTING
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
1
3. THE SITE
The lands included in this Area Structure Plan are shown in Figure 2. The study area contains
64.3 hectares of land Tying in the SE 1/4 Section 6, Twp. 19, Rge 14, W 4th, north of Cassils
Road. Figure 3 shows the general topography of the site which is relatively flat, having only a
3 metre elevation difference across the site. The land slopes gently from west to east with
several lower areas along the eastern edge of the site. These slight depressions should not
pose any problems for the development of this site, but will have to be taken into account as
the area develops. Due to the relative flatness of the topography of this site and the
surrounding area, detailed engineering studies will likely be required if this area is to be
connected to the Town of Brooks utility system.
The soils in the area are of the brown soils group and portions of the site have good
agricultural capabilities when irrigated. The Canada Land Inventory classification rates the
largest portion of the study area as class 2t soil, while the north east corner (approximately
1/3) is class 3t. Class 2 and 3 soils are considered better agricultural soils, and non
agricultural developments are discouraged. However, because portions of the site included in
Phases I and II have been disturbed as a result of subdivision and development, the
agricultural viability of those portions of the site has been greatly reduced. Until such time as
lands to the north are redeveloped, agricultural practices may continue.
The remainder of the site to the north has not presently been disturbed in terms of
development, but portions are being used for animal grazing as the only form of agriculture on
the site. Two lots remain unsold in the recently developed Phase II of this Area Structure Plan,
therefore putting development pressure on the remaining lands to be subdivided. Future
development of this quarter section would logically follow as the next phase of development
and Phase III, immediately north of Phase I and II, could be an acceptable area as the next
phase. (see Figure 9)
Although the soils in this area are good agricultural soils, there are various reasons why this
property should be redesignated to residential uses. Fragmentation of the land in this area
has already occurred with the residential development to the south and the east of the
property. This fragmentation has resulted in a small site, which would limit the agricultural
production at this location. The site is also situated within the Urban Fringe area of the Town
of Brooks and will possibly be annexed in the future as the Town's boundary expands. The
R238# 4
expansion of the Town will result in an uncertain future for agricultural uses on this site. The
final reason to consider residential development on the subject site is that the original Cassils
Road Area Structure Plan has identified the remainder of the quarter section as future
residential uses. This legislation was the first step to indicate the future of this site and this
amendment is in keeping with the intentions of the original Cassils Road Area Structure Plan.
-t
111..11)(1111 I1..II (k /..1�l:
ma st
p .is !IF /I
BI.:1 /B .111:
f I° 45(
near
ffifirsaist 41:
src71 7B) 7
1
SE Sect. 6 Twp. 19 Rge. 14
The information on this map is Copyright 1999,
The Board of Directors of the Eastern Irrigation District.
All rights reserved.
Scale 1:4,000
W E
Map Produced By:
Mark Porter
March 25, 1999
Eastern Irrigation District
Figure 2
1
(SE 6- 19 -14-W 4th)
1
-i
r
r
0
0
0
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
0
dim IN 101
1 1 1
r
PLAN AREA BOUNDARIES
CASSILS ROAD
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
TOWN OF BROOKS_
llll
7 1111111
IIIII11 1 1
11111111
I m pl aui ll1111111111
Figure 3
4. EXISTING LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Since the 1960's there have been 13 subdivision applications that have resulted in the creation
of the existing parcels. Figure 4 shows the approximate locations of the existing
developments. There are currently 15 residences and associated buildings on some 18
parcels of land. In addition, there are the necessary gas and electric utilities to service these
developments. The area is not serviced by a municipal water or sewer system. However,
some of the residences receive domestic irrigation water from the irrigation canals that run
through the area. Water for this location comes from the major E.I.D. canal that runs just north
of this site. A small canal running north -south through the centre of the site delivers water to
several smaller ditches, which in turn supply water to various lots. The delivery system through
this area also carries irrigation water to the NW 31- 18- 14 -w4th, which has "first water rights
As development occurs in the study area, irrigation water deliveries to this adjacent quarter will
have to be maintained.
The main access to the site is via Cassils Road (Secondary Highway #542) which extends
westerly from the Town of Brooks and runs along its southern boundary. This well developed
paved access to the Town has generated a demand for subdivision in this area, and this
demand is expected to continue in the future. Secondary access to this site is from the north
south road allowance (12th Street) which is located within the town boundaries.
The northern portion of the site is currently being used for agricultural purposes, with the
country residential developments located along Cassils Road and off of 12th Street (Westland
Acres). The agricultural lands have irrigation water rights and are currently being irrigated and
cultivated.
Future development to the north of the existing development will maintain the water delivery
system to the adjacent properties. As is the current practice, irrigation water from the irrigation
canals that run through the area can be extended for the fringe development pending
negotiations with the Eastern Irrigation District (E.I.D.).
A
76u
L---CASSILS ROAD -.760.4
N. N. N.
ll
16.
L
11
i7
P
TOPOGRAPHY
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
Figure 4
01
01
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 AGRICULTURE
0
0
0
0
0
0
01
I
0 2
v —4
N
1
w
MAJOR ACTIVE CANAL (EI.D.)
r
9
AGRICULTURE
L —i
CASSILS ROAD
WATER DEUVERY
TO NW' /4 31- 18-14 -W4th
EXISTING LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
'IL t 1.1 t t /J4At t....t`t`"If
EXISTING BUILDINGS TRANS ALTA ELECTRICAL LINES
CWNG GAS LINES IRRIGATION CANALS
I
1
1
�Q
Figure 5
5. OWNERSHIP
The present distributions of ownership in the study area. are summarized below and reflect the
most recent subdivisions within the entire quarter section:
Owner
1. Amos and Rhonda Volk
2. Brad and Janis Stolson
3 Frank Percival and Dimitrios Lazarakis
4. Ronald and Charlotte Langille
5. Lloyd and Mabel Woods
6. Tony and Patricia Schimmel
7. Roger and Agnes Raimbault
8. Wayne and Diane Mackinnon
9. James and Christine Brack
10. Bettina Stafford
11. John Thomson
12. Glen and Muriel Nelson
13. Thomas and Judy Arik
14. Robert Hiebert
15. Rennie Arndt and Freda Fullerton
16. Nicholas and Vionne Salonka
17. James and Christine Blair
18. Richard and Louanne Crawford
19. Harold and Merle Prentice
20. Grant and Donna McNaughton
21. Keith and James Kress
22. Dale and Deborah Heidmiller
23. Richard and Shelly Deunk
24. James and Tammy Cyr
25. Jan and Renate Dykstra
26. Douglas and Rainey Angela Felker
27. Theodore and Dorothy Schmidt
28. Peter and Michelle Thomas
29. Jody Sewall
R238#
11
Hectares
0.139
0.139
0.139
0.139
0.211
0.879
0.879
1.460
0.552
1.660
1.460
0.552
1.450
1.460
1.450
20.190
16.738
0.208
0.208
0.186
0.186
0.152
0.152
0.200
0.400
0.200
0.400
0.200
0.200
30. Ivan and Sylvia Mitchell 0.200
31. William and Caroline Rettie 0.200
32. Scott Hanson 0.200
33. John and Brigitte Gerrard 0.200
34. Kristjan and Linda Austman 0.200
35. James and Barbara Laychuk 0.200
36. William and Mabel Rooke 0.336
37. John and Valerie Deunk 0.330
38. Daryle and Edith Fox 0.200
39. Shawn and Sherrie Schuh 0.220
40. Kasy and Francis Kaczanowski 0.190
41. Michael and Susan Ondrus 0.200
42. Joseph and Beverly Bickley 0.200
43. CLB Holdings 0.200
44. Lawrence and Elizabeth Dunne 0.200
45. Brian and Shauna Mokelky 0.200
46. John and Dorothy Mokelky 0.200
47. Willy Abbuhl Koller et al. 2.020
48. Edward and Connie Lukye 1.409
49. Darcy and Lisa Dyck 0.139
50. Nicholas and Cindy Brkich 0.145
51. Darren and Cheryl Cockerill 0.164
52. Colleen and Keith Davidson 0.176
53. Robert and Barbara Medway 0.186
54. David and Barbara Penner 0.279
55. Larry and Shelley Janke 0.179
56. Leighton and Lilianne Smith 0.164
57. Lee Ann Woods 0.167
Total 60.893
R238#
12
6. PLANNING CONSTRAINTS
There are a number of planning considerations that must be taken into account in the process
of developing this area.
These include:
1. the land is owned by a number of individuals;
2. the location of existing residences, buildings and trees;
3. the existing irrigation canals and drainage ditches, as well as the existing utility
infrastructure and rights of way;
4. the topography of the site may affect the location of gravity sewage and surface
drainage and may require special engineering;
5. the access onto the existing road system needs to be controlled;
6. percolation and ground water tests must be conducted to ensure that the
development of private sewage disposal systems does not create environmental
problems.
7. the subdivision and development of this area must accommodate larger unserviced
rural Tots in the initial phases, which can be converted to serviced urban lots at a later
date should they be annexed into the Town of Brooks.
8. that setback distances from Lakeside Feeders feedlot operation to the northwest
restricting residential development are adhered to.
R238#
13
7. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
After taking into consideration the existing land use, the site characteristics and constraints,
the development concept shown in Figure 6 was created. The quarter south of Cassils Road
was originally included in this concept. However, after discussions with the land owners who
indicated they were not interested in developing their land for residential purposes at this time,
it was decided to eliminate that quarter from the plan. At some point in the future when the
owners of this quarter are ready to proceed with a development scheme, an area structure
plan outlining their proposal will be required.
The concept provides for phased residential development on the larger lots along Cassils
Road and the expansion of the residential area off of 12th Street (Westland Acres). The
overall planned density of Phases I II average 0.45 hectares (1.11 acres) per lot, with no
individual lot being Tess than 0.20 hectares (0.50acres) in size. Lots of this size are required to
accommodate individual water and sewage systems.
The concept shows future road rights of way that will be necessary to service the entire area.
The location of these roads will allow the first phase of development to proceed and establish
linkages to future phases. The exact alignment of these roads will have to be worked out
when detailed designs for these areas are being considered. The service road along Cassils
Road will be used to control traffic onto this important Secondary Highway. To provide for a
safe road network, access points onto Cassils Road show spacing at a minimum distance of
200 metres. In addition, to ensure a safer intersection at 12th and Cassils Road, the service
road should end with a cul -de -sac thus eliminating an additional entrance.
Parks were required to meet the public reserve requirement and to meet the needs of the
residents. As the first phases of development beyond Phase II, a total of 5.17 hectares of
public reserve had to be provided. In accordance with the County -Town Urban Fringe
Agreement, all reserve required in Phases I II were deferred. This policy was followed where
the land being subdivided was part of the larger block onto which the reserve was deferred.
However, when the existing lots along Cassils were subdivided, money in place of reserve was
set aside to purchase the additional amounts of reserve required to account for their portions
of the reserve allocation. At this point in time, it is not envisioned that any reserve areas in the
site will be required for school purposes. However, as this area and the surrounding areas
develop this requirement can be looked at again.
R238#
14
The concept also shows a buffer /utility right -of -way along 12th Street to accommodate an
existing gas line. This strip of land could be converted to residential use if the land owners
enter into negotiations with the utility company and have the line moved.
It should be noted that all buildings shown on the attached maps were located from aerial
photography and are approximate locations used for illustrative purposes only. Prior to
subdivision of any lots containing existing development, detailed location plans will be required
from the applicant.
R238#
15
DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
PHASE 1 2 4 ACCESS POINT
PROPOSED ROAD O PARK LOCATION
:a\ BUFFER /UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
6
8. DEVELOPMENT PHASES
Phase I
In Phase I of the plan (see Figure 7), the existing larger parcels fronting onto Cassils Road
may be allowed to be subdivided once, creating lots with a minimum of at least 30 metre (±98
foot) frontages. All these lots front onto the service road which will control access onto Cassils
Road. In this phase, the area adjacent to the 6 lots in Westland Acres will also be permitted to
be subdivided to take advantage of the existing road and services that were installed at the
time the initial lots were established.
In Phase I, all subdivision and development must occur in a way that will not prejudice
development of future phases. Lots will be required to have a minimum frontage of 30 metres
(±98 feet) and a minimum area of 0.2 hectares (±0.50 acres) to ensure compliance with the
subdivision and plumbing regulation standard to accommodate private water and sewer
systems. Buildings should be located towards one side of the lot in anticipation of future
subdivisions. The width of lots should be such that future phases can be re- subdivided into
urban sized lots with widths in the range of 15 to 16 metres (±49.21 to 52.49 feet).
It should be noted that the existing lots in Westland Acres are less than the required 0.2ha
(±0.50 acre) size. Due to the limited depths of these lots, and in keeping with the existing
subdivision, the County may consider recommending approval of smaller sized lots, if the
developer can prove to the satisfaction of the Municipal Planning Commission and the
Provincial Plumbing Inspector that smaller lots will be of sufficient size to accommodate private
sewerage systems and will not negatively impact this or the adjacent areas.
As subdivision and development occur in this phase, the total numbers of lots could reach 40.
Currently, most of the existing lots are receiving domestic water from the Eastern Irrigation
District via individual delivery points. As the numbers increase, the problems of water delivery
also increase, and there is a point at which the Irrigation District will enforce their policy of
requiring water for multi parcel subdivisions to be delivered to a single delivery point. Should
this occur, the residents may be required to form a Water Co- operative, or some type of Water
Users group, to acquire land for a larger reservoir and oversee the operate of some type of
system. It is important to note that the responsibility for organizing and operating any water
R238#
17
system will be up to the residents of this area, and the approval of all future subdivision and
development applications may be dependent upon the establishment of such a system.
R238#
18
1
SERVICE ROAD
mod-- ACCESS POINT
1
CASSILS
PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION
DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
KIA BUFFER /UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
ROAD
min. 200 m
1
CC
J
2
N
CC
2
1
,4 FUTURE
ACCESS
POINT
TOTAL AREA: 22.9 ha
NUMBER OF LOTS: 41
LOT SIZES: 0.20 ha to 1.0 ha
Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
Phase II (as amended by By -law 1128 -95)
The second phase of development should be allowed to commence when it is demonstrated
that there is sufficient demand for additional lots. At this stage, additional acreage Tots will be
developed as an expansion to Westland Acres, to the north and the west. This will involve the
extension of roads into the area immediately west of Westland Acres, and the creation of 20 to
25 additional Tots (see Figure 8). As this expansion occurs, additional access into the area
must be provided. The road connecting the Westland Acres development with the service
road to the south, parallel to Cassils Road, will be required as a condition of approval for any
expansion of Westland Acres west of this connecting road.
In Phase II, the ultimate level of development should be in order of 50 to 60 Tots. As in Phase
I, the location of existing buildings and developments must be addressed. Similarly, as lots are
subdivided and developed, the potential re- subdivision of these lots into 15 to 17 metre wide
urban type lots must be taken into consideration. This means that new Tots should have
frontages of multiples of 15 -17 metres.
These Tots will not be serviced by a water system or sewer system. Even though the lots
should meet the Land Use By -law minimum size requirement of 0.5 hectares, and must be at
least 0.20 hectares to meet Subdivision Regulations for unserviced lots, the increasing
numbers and density of private sewage disposal systems raises environmental concerns. As a
result, prior to subdivision approval in this phase, any developer shall provide satisfactory
percolation and ground water tests and any other required engineering information to the
County, Provincial Plumbing Inspector and the Subdivision Approving Authority.
R238#
20
0
0
10
0 I0
0O
I I
Schedule "A"
CASSIS ROW
Serra Rood
o O
PHASE II
SUBDIVISION AND
DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
E
0
v.
Expansion of Westland Acres 23 lots
Lot Size 0.2 ha to 0.7 ha
0
N
Figure 8
FRAM
b
2
i
1
1
1
AA.F
Cassiis Road Area Sfruclure Pl an _.__...,_`k !"9 l+,';
Phase III
The lands within Phase III are included in the Area Structure Plan Amendment and consist of
+4.33hectares (±10.70acres) as shown in Figure 10. This area, also referred to as the
Westland Acres Expansion Area, is situated north of the existing development (Westland
Acres) within the SE 1/4 Section 6, Twp 19, Rge 14, w 4th. This parcel of land is owned by
James Cecil Blair and Christine Mary Blair who live in the north central portion of this Area
Structure Plan. Phase III will be designed to accommodate eighteen 0.20 hectare (0.50 acre)
country residential Tots. The main access to these eighteen lots will be off the 12th Street
collector. It is proposed that the existing Schmidt Street be extended north to cross the site
and to provide an access to future development to the north.
Running along the eastern edge of the Blair property is an existing Canadian Western Natural
Gas pipeline. This pipeline right -of -way will be maintained and a +25 -30 metre (±82-98 foot)
buffer area will be provided as park space. The proposed design allows for a green buffer that
runs in a north -south direction along the east side of the property and can be used as a park
space and /or pathway along the 12th Street collector to connect to the green buffer of the
existing development. Other utility rights of way exist on the Blair property which will also be
used as green buffer areas between future development phases. Two other buffer areas run
along the western edge and the northern edge of the proposed development and will connect
to a future park to the north of the development. The park area included in the Land Use
application for Phase III consists of ±0.49 hectares (±1.22 acres). This area will more than
accommodate the required 10% municipal reserve dedication for this phase.
The required municipal reserve for Phase III has been provided along the east boundary
consisting of the gas right -of -way. The deferred reserve from the previous subdivision consists
of 2.404 hectares (5.940 acres) and will be addressed in Phase IV. Phase IV of this Area
Structure Plan will accommodate the deferred reserve as well as the required 10% for the
remainder of the property.(see Table in Phase IV) The total reserve required for Phase IV will
be accommodated within the proposed park situated approximately in the centre of the Blair
property as well as along the gas right of way along the east border.
The existing residents, being aware of the intentions of the original Cassils Road Area
Structure Plan, will have the expansion lots backing onto their property. In terms of preserving
the views for these existing residents, the proposed lots in the expansion area have been
R238#
22
staggered and the proposed houses will not be in line with the existing residences thus
maintaining the vistas between the buildings. Upon review, it was decided that a linear buffer
between the existing properties and the proposed Tots (no. 2 to 9) would not serve to provide
connections or linkages to any nearby paths or parks. However, cluster landscaping can be
encouraged on the lots of the proposed expansion area to maintain vistas and provide desired
privacy. A buffer along the north border of the expansion area will be provided and serve as a
link to the proposed park.
Keeping in mind the proximity of this site to the Town of Brooks boundary, it becomes
important to consider the possible future annexation into the Town of Brooks and the
conversion of this country residential development to a more urban development. This is
achieved in an urban overlay of the proposed plan. (see Figure 10) This urban overlay
scenario shows how the proposed country residential Tots can be further subdivided when
municipal servicing is extended to this site. When purchasing these Tots, residents should be
encouraged to consider the placement of their houses and the possibility of further subdivision.
Positioning the homes to one side of the lot would allow for the ease of future subdivision and
will be reviewed at the time of building permit. In keeping with the characteristics of the
existing neighbourhood, the architectural controls of the existing development will be followed
for this development.
A geotechnical study has been conducted on this eighteen lot area in October of 1999.
Eighteen test holes have been dug corresponding to the approximate location of each lot. The
results from this geotechnical study indicate that a mound septic system will be the preferred
option to service these future lots. The treatment mound septic system is similar to the
subsurface disposal field method with the exception that it is above ground. Treatment
mounds are used when the soil is impervious and /or when the water table is too high for the
standard septic system. (see appended Geotechnical Study and the schematic representation
of a mound system) It is not possible to determine the cumulative effects of the total amount
of effluent being discharged by the existing and proposed developments prior to development,
however if the mound treatment systems are constructed and maintained properly the impacts
should be minimal. The treatment mounds proposed in this application will be constructed in
strict accordance with the regulations set forth by Alberta Labour in the "Alberta Private
Sewage Treatment and Disposal Regulations" and the "Canadian Plumbing Code 1990 Part 8
Private Sewage Treatment and Disposal The home owner will be responsible for the
establishment and maintenance of their individual septic system.
R238#
23
Concems of a high water table in this area and its affect on the development of the eighteen
proposed Tots in the expansion area will be addressed through construction techniques such
as the use of weeping tile and the avoidance of basement construction. Also, the use of a
mound system which relies as much on evaporation as it does on percolation will be better
than the use of a conventional septic system which relies only on percolation. The future
affect that additional Tots may cause on the ground water table is impossible to determine at
this time.
Grading of the Phase III will allow the rear lot line elevations along the southern lots to match
existing lot grades. Further details will be addressed at the detail design stage at which time
grading will permit runoff towards the road to be in the gutters. At the time of subdivision, a lot
grading plan will be prepared as a part of the application process. Development beyond the
proposed 18 Tots will require further investigation into drainage issues.
In terms of storm water management for the 18 Tots of the expansion area, both water quality
and quantity design issues will comply in accordance with the Town of Brooks Storm Sewer
Drainage Study. For the interim, runoff from the proposed development will be collected in the
gutters in front of the Tots. The gutters will channel the runoff east near 12 Street and
continue north to the proposed dugout. The catch basins and underground pipes will be used
for the minor flow and swales and ditches will be used for the major overland flow. This
dugout will act as a fire protection facility as well as a storm retention pond. Stormwater will
route through the dugout and an outlet to One Tree Creek will be sized to restrict the outflow to
pre development conditions. Details of the proposed facilities will be incorporated into the
detailed design. Future development beyond these 18 lots will require further investigation into
storm water management approaches.
The water cisterns and the septic systems will be the responsibility of the homeowner. The
developer will provide the proposed road. Access to Phase III will be via 12 Street, located to
the east of the property. This present condition of this road will have to be determined by the
Town of Brooks but is considered to be in a deteriorating state. The traffic generated by the
proposed eighteen lots will have a very minimal affect on the condition of 12 Street due to the
incidental increase in vehicular trips per day for 18 residential lots. The developer should not
be responsible for the entire cost of any required upgrade due to minimal impact this
subdivision will cause. However, at the time of future subdivision the upgrading of 12 Street
as well as cost sharing issues will have to be addressed.
R238#
24
All shallow utilities will be installed by their respective providers such as cable by Shaw Cable,
Telus will provide phone service, Transalta will provide electricity, and Canadian Western will
provide gas service.
Municipal services such as fire protection, EMS, police, hospitals, sanitation etc. will be
provided by the County of Newell No. 4 and /or the Town of Brooks. The Town of Brooks will
likely annex the subject site at some time in the future, being located in an urban fringe area.
At that time, all servicing will be provided by the Town of Brooks to include water and sewer.
As a very rough estimate based on the availability of existing services near the site, providing
municipal servicing to this site would cost in the area of $250,000.
The issue of fire protection for this site, and any future development, will be addressed through
the inclusion of a water dugout that will provide an area for a static water supply. This static
water supply will supplement the nearest hydrant and the capacity of the pumper trucks. This
Public Utility Lot will be situated within the central park planned just north of the expansion
area and contain a minimum of 27,000 imperial gallons of water to meet the requirements of
the NFPA 1231, Water Supplies for the Suburban and Rural Firefighting. This dugout will be
sized to accommodate the fire protection requirements as well as stormwater runoff. Access
to this dugout will be provided along the east border of lot 10 between it and the gas right of
way. This access route at no time will be less than 6 metres (19.7 feet) in width and will
provide access to the park site. This water facility will be constructed when the number of lots
in this area reaches a threshold beyond which they can no longer be adequately serviced by
the Brooks Fire Department. Being situated in the central park area, future expansion of this
dugout can be easily accommodated if needed.
The static water supply in the will be constructed by the developer. The maintenance of this
water supply and the proposed open space in this development will be the responsibility of the
developer until such time when a Home Owners or Residents Association is established. The
homeowners association can be established prior to all the lots being sold and will assume the
full responsibilities of future maintenance.
R238#
25
Phase IV
Phase IV of development refers to the lands north and west of the area outlined in Phase III.
This phase of development is being recognized in this Area Structure Plan Amendment as an
area for future development and to satisfy the amendment requirements. The full
development of this phase would result in a build out of the above mentioned quarter section
(see Figure 10). Phase IV encompasses the remainder of the Blair property and Salonka
property and will not be considered for land use reclassification until market conditions demand
further lots in this area.
The proposed future layout for this final phase in the Cassils Road Area Structure Plan
includes a collector road that projects from the northeast corner of the quarter section and runs
in a southwest direction where it intersects Cassils Road along the western boundary of the
site. The intersection of this proposed collector road with 12 Street will be aligned with the
north section boundary road as shown in the Northwest Sector Area Structure Plan. These
points of access /egress to the site have been reviewed by UMA's functional planning
transportation engineer, and were viewed as being acceptable, and will not negatively impact
traffic flows on 12th Street and Cassils Road.
This separation of traffic along a north /south axis of Schmidt Street at the westerly limit of the
Blair property allows future Tots to back onto the Salonka property and a convenient division of
these two properties. This division also acknowledges an existing shallow bury Eastern
Irrigation District utility right -of -way and an existing berm allowing for a landscaped buffer
between the backs of the future Blair and Salonka Tots. The extension of Schmidt Street
creates a logical division and allows for easily staged development to the north of the
Westland Acres Expansion Area.
The proposed design for this phase acknowledges the 10,000 ft development setback
requirement from the nearest point of the Lakeside Feedlot located two miles north and one
mile west of the existing Westland Acres in SE 1/4 Section 13, Twp 19, Rge 15, W 4th. This
development setback effectively sterilizes a portion of the northwest corner of the SE 1/4
Section 6, Twp 19, Rge 14, W 4th and is reflected in the proposed plan.
The deferred reserve from the previous subdivision consists of 2.404 hectares (5.940 acres).
Phase IV of this Area Structure Plan will accommodate the total deferred reserve and the
required 10% for the remainder of the property. (see Table below) This portion of the total
R238#
26
Phase
%MR Required
MR Provided
Phase III
10% (1.07ac)
±0.49ha (1.22ac)
11.4%
Phase IV
10% +Deferred Reserve (8.782ac)
+3.554ha(8.782ac)
22.3%
reserve required for Phase IV will be accommodated within the proposed park situated
approximately in the centre of the Blair property and the gas right of way to the east.
Previous Deferred Reserve +2.404ha (5.940ac)
Phase IV MR Required +1.150ha (2.842ac)
Total +3.554ha (8.782ac)
As demonstrated in the above table, Phase III of the proposed development will accommodate
the required 10% reserve. Phase IV however will accommodate the required 10% and the
former deferred reserve.
Densities for the build out of the Blair property will include:
Westland Acres 45 lots +135 persons
Expansion 18 Tots +54 persons
Balance Blair Lands 32 lots +96 persons
95 Tots +285 persons
It is expected that the above population will access Cassils Road from 12th Street.
R238#
Salonka Lands to the West
39 lots 117 persons
It is anticipated that the Salonka population will access Cassils Road from the proposed west
boundary collector. Both areas of development will produce insufficient volumes of traffic to
negatively impact the environmental capacities of the westerly or 12th Street collectors.
Servicing for Phase IV will be via septic tank and field. When the development of this phase
will commence it will be necessary to conduct percolation tests on the property to ensure that
the land can support this septic system and there will not be a negative impact on the adjacent
landowners. The water supply will be trucked into holding cisterns which is common practice in
the area.
27
W
CAS5IL.5
.H'
L
LA/<'E.5/DE FEEL' E25 (ASP ,2EQ L// ..C .QES /OEiL 77A L
/o, 000 Fr, (.304 M) sETB,4 cK
E.l;'ST'A.t G.R. S. .'JS%1ELOP
01X>SED wE57L/- v..11:15 A e 5
aY MS /ON
6X /S /NC o7EAcr2wY /tom/
L1 ✓LL7Pr' •e A17
(WE s /a5 2E5)
LIMA
F/61012.E.
W._..........�.......
Pi/TZ/i2E
TLEATMENT
PAC /L/ry
MGAO W
O WV#E
WESTL.y1 M AGe
BL/. J AYE/E A/[
EK /6T/NG �6VEJ CJ✓ =HNN NT
Y I 1
-5. EAVCE a ✓L.t///
EX, LS s,.o l/ 42E4
1
t
1
1
1
1
tlAsi zeov
NM.A GNG /NE.Ei2 /N6 LTO.
LiEv/GiA/: S.L•S.
.5CA.LE t000
CASs /LS ROAD
CA SS /L.S ROA0
AREA. 2LJC' 7 LAZE
PLAN
9'•p OIJ
VeRLA IC)
W._..........�.......
Pi/TZ/i2E
TLEATMENT
PAC /L/ry
MGAO W
O WV#E
WESTL.y1 M AGe
BL/. J AYE/E A/[
EK /6T/NG �6VEJ CJ✓ =HNN NT
Y I 1
-5. EAVCE a ✓L.t///
EX, LS s,.o l/ 42E4
1
t
1
1
1
1
tlAsi zeov
NM.A GNG /NE.Ei2 /N6 LTO.
LiEv/GiA/: S.L•S.
.5CA.LE t000
CASs /LS ROAD
CA SS /L.S ROA0
AREA. 2LJC' 7 LAZE
PLAN
9'•p OIJ
VeRLA IC)
Future Phases (as amended by By -law 1128 -95)
Subdivision and development beyond Phase IV are outside the scope of this Area Structure
Plan as these developments are more urban than rural in nature. However, provisions for
future development has been taken into account in the development of this plan. Phase V
would be the re- subdivision of lots into smaller urban sized Tots. This phase of development
can only proceed with the installation of a municipal water and sewer system, and will not
occur until this area is annexed by the Town of Brooks. Phase III of the development should
occur because annexation and subsequently a connection to the Town of Brooks servicing is
not yet available. Once the subject site is annexed, the process of re- subdividing the existing
lots can occur to permit a higher density, the removal of the individual septic and cistern
utilities, and to encourage urban sized lots in the area. The prospective purchaser of any Tots
in the expansion area will be advised of a "need to consider" future subdivision at the time of
full servicing.
Planning Beyond Phase V will have to be done as demand warrants and will require
engineering studies and a new area structure plan.
R238#
30
9. SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
To ensure that the subdivision development of lots in the initial phases of this plan do not
prejudice future plans, the following guidelines are presented (as amended by By -law 1128-
95):
1. all subdivision of lots shall be in accordance with this plan;
2. the exact locations of all buildings and developments will be required to ensure proper
planning of all Tots;
3. prior to subdivision approval applicants will be required to provide information on the
utility services to be used;
4. percolation and ground water test satisfactory to the Provincial Plumbing Inspector will be
required prior to subdivision approval;
5. all lots created in Phase I and II must have a minimum frontage of 30 metres (98.4 feet)
and a minimum area of 0.50 hectares (1.24 acres);
6. The design of all new lots must take into account the future urban use of this area and,
therefore, these lots should be multiples of 15 to 17 metres (49.2 to 55.8 feet) in width;
7. all lots created in Phase III must have a minimum area of 0.20 hectares (0.50 acres)
8. the re- subdivision of lots should take into account the ultimate plan for this area and
therefore these lots should be multiples of 15 to 16 metres (49.21 to 52.49 feet);
9. all buildings erected shall take into account the proposed locations of future roads and
lanes;
10. all new development shall comply with the following setback requirements:
Front Setback
Side Setbacks
7.5 metres (24.61 feet)
1.5 metres (4.92 feet)
Or as Approved by the Municipal Planning Commission.
4
This diagram illustrates
proper and improper building
locations and how these can
create future problems.
INITIAL SUBDIVISION
(PHASE 1)
15 m ROAD (PHASE 11)
1MPROPERI.Y LOCK. ED BUILDING
6 m LANE (PHASE 11)
PROPERLY LOCATED BUILDING
31
SERVICE ROAD
1
E
0
ULTIMATE RESUBDIVISION
TO FULLY SERVICED
URBAN SIZED LOTS (PHASE 111)
APPENDIX 1
Certificate of Title
IV: of uuArn 1W
&out)) 21berta ianb Iegistration ;District
S
LINC
0026 579 319
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLAN 7811334
BLOCK "C"
EXCEPTING
PLAN NUMBER
SUBDIVISION 8110015
SUBDIVISION 9211683
SUBDIVISION 9411185
SUBDIVISION 9512659
EXCEPTING THEREOUT ALL MINES
ATS REFERENCE: 4;14;19;6;SE
ESTATE: FEE SIMPLE
MUNICIPALITY: COUNTY OF NEWELL ND. 4
D.C.T. ISSUED: NO
REFERENCE NUMBER: 941 148 841 +10
REGISTRATION
951 261 856
OWNERS
JAMES CECIL BLAIR (FARMER)
AND
CHRISTINE MARY BLAIR
BOTH OF:
YOUNGSTOWN
ALBERTA
AS JOINT TENANTS
REGISTRATION
NUMBER DATE (D /M /Y)
9JP
603LM
SHORT LEGAL
7811334;C
man: scum LIU 1'roactlon
SEARCH DATE: 14/02/2000
HECTARES (ACRES) MORE OR LESS
1.362 3.37
1.112 2.75
2.777 6.86
2.26 5.58
AND MINERALS
REGISTERED OWNER(S)
OATE(DMY) DOCUMENT TYPE VALUE
15/11/1995 SUBDIVISION PLAN
ENCUMBRANCES, LIENS INTERESTS
PARTICULARS
16/03/1966 CAVEAT
CAVEATOR THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE EASTERN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
20/04/1972 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE CANADIAN WESTERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY
LIMITED.
"20 FT STRIP"
CONTINUED
82 14 2808 16:15 p. 2 Of 3
TITLE NUMBER
951 261 856 +27
CONSIDERATION
T0: Uf1 GE0141TICS
FROM: South LTO Production 02 -14 -2000 16:15 p. 3 of 3
ENCUMBRANCES, LIENS INTERESTS
PAGE 2
REGISTRATION 951 261 856 +27
NUMBER DATE (D /M /Y) PARTICULARS
741 100 000 29/10/1974 IRRIGATION COUNCIL ORDER
THIS PROPERTY IS INCLUDED IN THE EASTERN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT
751 0(70 389 03/01/1975 CAVEAT
CAVEATOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE EASTERN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
79] 163 104 02/10/1979 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE CANADIAN WESTERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY
LIMITED.
921 135 993 08/06/1992 CAVEAT
RE EASEMENT
CAVEATOR TRANSALTA UTILITIES CORPORATION.
SOX 1900, CALGARY
ALBERTA
•AGENT BERT VIK
931 026 636 03/02/1993 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE AGT LIMITED.
AS TO PORTION OR PLAN:9212667
TAKES PRIORITY OF CAVEAT 921025243
REGISTERED ON 04/02/92
951 017 975 20/01/1995 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE EASTERN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
951 261 859 15/11/1995 CAVEAT
RE DEFERRED RESERVE
CAVEATOR SOUTHEAST ALBERTA REGIONAL PLANNING
COMMISSION.
C/0 PLANWELL CONSULTING LTD
BOX 20036 KENSINGTON P.O.
MEDICINE HAT
ALBERTA T1A8M4
951 261.863 15/11/1995 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE TRANSALTA UTILITIES CORPORATION.
AS TO PORTION OR PLAN:9512660
951 261 866 15/11/1995 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE THE EASTERN IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
AS TO PORTION OR PLAN:9512661
951 266 649 22/11/1995 UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY
GRANTEE CANADIAN WESTERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY
LIMITED.
TOTAL INSTRUMENTS: 012 *END OF SEARCH SR* J55968B /XLTUMAG1
APPENDIX 2
Geotechnical Study
utvia UMA Engineering Ltd.
Engineers, Planners Surveyors
2540 Kensington Road N.W., Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 3S3 (403) 270 -9200 FAX 270 -0399
October 28, 1999 File No: 3839-002 -00-07
Mr. Cecil Blair
Box 1422
Brooks, Alberta
T1R 1C3
Attention: Mr. Cecil Blair
Dear Sir.
Re: Geotechnical Investigation, Westlands Acres Phase II, Brooks, Alberta
This letter briefly presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the above site.
The purpose of the investigation was to determine the subsurface conditions at the site
and to assess those conditions with regards to the installation of septic fields.
1. Field and Laboratory Investigations
The field investigation was done on October 16, 1999 and consisted of the drilling of
eighteen boreholes and eighteen percolation test holes. The borehole locations are
shown on Drawing 1, attached. The percolation tests were done in accordance with
Alberta Environmental Protection guidelines.
The boreholes were drilled to depths ranging from 3.0 m to 6.6 m below existing
grade. Fifteen of the eighteen boreholes were shallow (3.0 m depth) and were
drilled in order to obtain shallow water table levels. The three deeper boreholes
(9908, 9913, and 9918) were drilled to assess foundation conditions for structures.
Disturbed and split spoon samples were taken in the deep boreholes. Samples were
not taken in the shallow boreholes. Standpipe piezometers were installed in all
boreholes. All boreholes were logged in the field by a geotechnical technician from
UMA Engineering Ltd. The borehole logs are also attached. Please note that the
boreholes are referenced using the last four digits on the borehole log sheets.
Laboratory testing was limited to moisture content determinations on all samples.
The results are on the borehole logs.
2. Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface soils were sand, silt, and clay. Topsoil thickness across the site was
0.3 m. Typically, the stratigraphy consisted of variable thickness of sand or silt over
day and clay till. In only two boreholes (9907 and 9913), there was no sand or silt.
There were day layers encountered below the topsoil in Boreholes 9902, 9905,
9906, 9907, 9908, 9909, 9913, 9917, and 9918. These clay layers were generally
less than 1 m thick. The sand and silt layers were typically 1 m to 2 m thick. The top
of the lower clay layer was between 1.2 m and 5.0 m below grade. The average top
of the day layer was 1.9 m.
MEEH
A Member Firm of the of Alberta
Lot
Perc Rate
Groundwater
Level
Suitable (Y /N)
1
15.2
Dry
Y
2
15.0
2.75
Y
3
5.6
2.25
N
4
27.5
2.1
N
5
16.8
1.8
N
6
>60
1.3
N
7
>60
1.1
N
8
>60
1.5
N
9
>60
1.8
N
10
>60
1.8
N
11
>60
2.2
N
12
>60
2.4
N
13
>60
1.65
N
14
23.6
1.75
N
15
34.4
2.15
N
16
10.3
2.3
N
17
5.6
2.8
Y
18
>60
2.15
N
Page 2
October 28, 1999
Mr. Cecil Blair
Attention: Mr. Cecil Blair
The percolation rates for the eighteen tests ranged from 5.6 minutes for 2.5 cm of
drop to over 60 minutes for 2.5 cm of drop. The rates are presented in Table 1.
The groundwater levels were read on October 22, 1999. The readings ranged from
1.1 m to 2.8 m below grade with one borehole (9901) that was dry. The groundwater
levels are given on the borehole Togs and are also given in Table 1.
3. Evaluation and Recommendations
Based on the results of the percolation tests and water table readings, there are
only three Tots where the ground conditions are suitable for the installation of a
standard septic field. As shown in Table 1, Lots 6 to 13 and 18 have percolation
rates greater than 60 minutes for 2.5 cm of drop. This is the slowest permissible rate
for the installation of standard septic fields. In the remaining nine Tots, only three lots
(1, 2, and 17) had groundwater levels below the required depth of 2.4 m below
grade.
Table 1
Page 3
October 28, 1999
Mr. Cecil Blair
Attention: Mr. Cecil Blair
With the slow percolation rates and high groundwater levels, standard septic fields
cannot be installed. Possible alternatives to septic fields include treatment mounds,
pump out tanks, and individual treatment systems. The type of system will require
approval from the County.
In addition to the septic system, the high groundwater table will also have an impact
on home construction. If basements are used, weeping tile and sump pumps will be
required to control water infiltration. Waterproofing systems are also recommended.
For home foundations, the soft subsoils will make it necessary for wider footings
with a bearing capacity of 50 kPa. Bearing certificates are recommended.
If you have any questions conceming the above, please contact our office.
Yours very truly
UMA ENGINEERING LTD
Ms. riffin, M. ng., P.Eng.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
pRolOTY iff,T EDIT /Piot '..E•••• :14 YY-MM-DD HH:MM j L PLoT DRIVER/DEVICE: HP4MV 1 AcAD PP FILE: A-hp4-F j FF:.CALE:: 8 j F ArAD ESL TS--916.dwg
0
REV
YY
Y
MM
OD
0
ISSUE/REVISION DESCRIPTION
DRN
DES
CHK
ENG
Ulna UMA Engineering Ltd.
Engineers, Manners Surveyors
Rood NW_ Colq.sy, I?N
THE DRAWiNG PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT
I AW. AND SHOULD NOT BE REPRoDOCED IN ANY
MANNER. olt IN? AN PliPI•VI. 1 IN PI IIY
WRITTEN I 111 1IMA ILA us 1 ICING 1111
set"
UMA JOB No.
3839-00? 00 -03
1
CECIL BLAIR
WESTLAND ACRES PHASE H
SITE PLAN AND
BOREHOLE LOCATIONS
DISK ACAO FILE No.
TS 6.dwg
1
DRAWING No. ISS/P 0
,z
i
4
1
r■
1 5 ie
4
f
N t•
P
ift•
SO
a
r
4
ei
20
i..
c
3
CP5PT.„
3
1 -*le I
4.r
1 JI M i do'
I':
y
c MI z wily 7..2,,
...P
ii.
ie
Sat?.
13119916 8149915
t,
'3/92.
8119914
i_rr ...Tir....-111[1":-
8119913
r3r,..zcsr-r,..riv.z_
ovi r: e -7...---Z,
;I
3 9918 8119917
4
8119912
4
0149911 8149910
i.
.:.,...s.
A
31 901 8119902
1 4"
1=k -rs, s
8119903
8119904
8H9905
8119908
1*19907
8H9908
N.
8119909 Pi
In'
.5
II^
n
io
it
,,,T-1•/ OP, A p es. A Vie' A at'
pRolOTY iff,T EDIT /Piot '..E•••• :14 YY-MM-DD HH:MM j L PLoT DRIVER/DEVICE: HP4MV 1 AcAD PP FILE: A-hp4-F j FF:.CALE:: 8 j F ArAD ESL TS--916.dwg
0
REV
YY
Y
MM
OD
0
ISSUE/REVISION DESCRIPTION
DRN
DES
CHK
ENG
Ulna UMA Engineering Ltd.
Engineers, Manners Surveyors
Rood NW_ Colq.sy, I?N
THE DRAWiNG PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT
I AW. AND SHOULD NOT BE REPRoDOCED IN ANY
MANNER. olt IN? AN PliPI•VI. 1 IN PI IIY
WRITTEN I 111 1IMA ILA us 1 ICING 1111
set"
UMA JOB No.
3839-00? 00 -03
1
CECIL BLAIR
WESTLAND ACRES PHASE H
SITE PLAN AND
BOREHOLE LOCATIONS
DISK ACAO FILE No.
TS 6.dwg
1
DRAWING No. ISS/P 0
EXPLANATIt.14 OF FIELD LABORATORst PEST DATA
The field and laboratory test results, as shown for each hole, are described below.
1. Natural Moisture Content
The relationship between the natural moisture content and depth is significant in
determining the subsurface moisture conditions. The Atterberg Limits for a
sample should be compared to the natural moisture content and should be on
the Plasticity Chart in order to determine their classification.
2. Soil Profile and Description
Each soil strata is classified and described noting any special conditions. The
Modified Unified Classification System (MUCS) is used. The soil profile refers
to the existing ground level at the time the hole was done. Where available, the
ground elevation is shown. The soil symbols used are shown in detail on the
soil classification chart.
3. Tests on Soil Samples
Laboratory and field tests are identified by the following and are on the Togs:
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Blow Count. The SPT is conducted
in the field to assess the in situ consistency of cohesive soils and
the relative density of non cohesive soils. The N value recorded is
the number of blows from a 63.5 kg hammer dropped 760 mm
which is required to drive a 51 mm split spoon sampler 300 mm into
the soil.
SO Water Soluble Sulphate Content. Expressed in percent. Conducted
primarily to determine requirements for the use of sulphate resistant
cement. Further details on the water soluble sulphate content are
given in Section 6.
Yo Dry Unit Weight. Usually expressed in kN /m
July 1996
N
Consistency
C (kPa) approx.
0 -1
Very Soft
<10
1 -4
Soft
10 -25
4 -8
Firm
25 -50
8 -15
Stiff
50 -100
15 30
Very Stiff
100 200
30 60
Hard
200 300
>60
Very Hard
>300
y Total pit Weight. Usually expressed in kN /m
Q Unconfined Compressive Strength. Usually expressed in kPa and
may be used in determining allowable bearing capacity of the soil.
C Undrained Shear Strength. Usually expressed in kPa. This value is
determined by either a direct shear test or by an unconfined com-
pression test and may also be used in determining the allowable
bearing capacity of the soil.
CpEN Pocket Penetrometer Reading. Usually expressed in kPa. Estimate of
the undrained shear strength as determined by a pocket pene-
trometer.
The following tests may also be performed on selected soil samples and the
results are given on separate sheets enclosed with the logs:
Grain Size Analysis
Standard or Modified Proctor Compaction Test
Califomia Bearing Ratio Test
Direct Shear Test
Permeability Test
Consolidation Test
Triaxial Test
4. Soil Density and Consistency
The SPT test described above may be used to estimate the consistency of cohesive
soils and the density of cohesionless soils. These approximate relationships
are summarized in the following tables:
Table 1 Cohesive Soils
July 1996
Table 2 Cohesionless Soils
5. Sample Condition and Type
The depth, type, and condition of samples are indicated on the Togs by the fol-
lowing symbols:
Grab Sample
Shelby Tube
SPT Sample
I I
6. Water Soluble Sulphate Concentration
The following table, from CSA Standard A23.1 -94, indicates the requirements
for concrete subjected to sulphate attack based upon the percentage of water
soluble sulphate as presented on the logs. CSA Standard A23.1 -94 should be
read in conjunction with the table.
Table 3 Requirements For Concrete Subjected to Sulphate Attack*
Water soluble Sulphate Minimum Maximum Paden
Class Degree sulphate (SO (SO Specified water Icemen d
of of in sal sample, in ground 28 d ling cement
expo exposur water compressive materials to
sure e samples, strength, MPaf robot be
mg/L used#
S-1 Very
severe
over 2.0 over 10,000 35 0.40 50
S-2 Severe 0.20 2.0 1,500 32 0.45 50
10,000
S-3 Moderat 0.10 0.20 150 -1,500 30
e
For sea water exposure see Clause 15.4
t See Clause 15.1.4
See Clause 15.1.5
Type 20 cement with moderate sulphate resistance (see Clause 3.1.2)
Variable
No Recovery
Core Sample
0.50
20§,
40, or
50
July 1996
N
Density
0
5
Very Loose
5
10
Loose
10
30
Compact
30
50
Dense
>50
Very Dense
Table 2 Cohesionless Soils
5. Sample Condition and Type
The depth, type, and condition of samples are indicated on the Togs by the fol-
lowing symbols:
Grab Sample
Shelby Tube
SPT Sample
I I
6. Water Soluble Sulphate Concentration
The following table, from CSA Standard A23.1 -94, indicates the requirements
for concrete subjected to sulphate attack based upon the percentage of water
soluble sulphate as presented on the logs. CSA Standard A23.1 -94 should be
read in conjunction with the table.
Table 3 Requirements For Concrete Subjected to Sulphate Attack*
Water soluble Sulphate Minimum Maximum Paden
Class Degree sulphate (SO (SO Specified water Icemen d
of of in sal sample, in ground 28 d ling cement
expo exposur water compressive materials to
sure e samples, strength, MPaf robot be
mg/L used#
S-1 Very
severe
over 2.0 over 10,000 35 0.40 50
S-2 Severe 0.20 2.0 1,500 32 0.45 50
10,000
S-3 Moderat 0.10 0.20 150 -1,500 30
e
For sea water exposure see Clause 15.4
t See Clause 15.1.4
See Clause 15.1.5
Type 20 cement with moderate sulphate resistance (see Clause 3.1.2)
Variable
No Recovery
Core Sample
0.50
20§,
40, or
50
July 1996
7. Groundwater Table
The groundwater table is indicated by the equilibrium level of water in a stand-
pipe installed in a borehole or test pit. This level is generally taken at least 24
hours after installation of the standpipe. The groundwater level is subject to
seasonal variations and is usually highest in the spring. The symbol on the logs
indicating the groundwater level is an inverted solid triangle (V).
July 1996
FRACTION
SIEVE SIZE (mm)
DEFINING RANGES OF
PERCENTAGE BY WEIGHT OF
MINOR COMPONENTS
•a.
-a- a•
.r 7-
GRAVt1.
(.OARSE
75
18
50.35
AND
FINE
19
4.75
SAND
COARSE
4.75
2.00
35 20
Y
MEDIUM
2.00
0.425
FINE
0.425
0.060
20 -10
SOME
SILT (non•psbc)
or
0.090
10 -1
TRACE
CLAY (plotle)
GRAVELS
(MORE THAN HALF
COARSE GRAINS
LARGER THAN
4.75 mm)
SANDS
(MORE THAN HALF
COARSE GRAINS
SMALLER THAN
4.75 Rao)
SILTS
(BELOW' A' UNE
NEGUGIBLE ORGANIC
CONTENT)
CLAYS
(ABOVE' A' UNE NEGLIGIBLE
ORGANIC CONTENT)
ORGANIC
SILTS CLAYS
(BELOW' A' UNE)
CLEAN
GRAVELS
(UTTLE OR NO
FINES)
DIRTY
GRAVELS
(WITH SOME
FINES)
CLEAN SANDS
(UTTLE OR NO
FINES)
DIRTY SANDS
(WITH SOME
FINES)
W <50
W1 50
WC` 30
30<W 50
W >50
w
W >50
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
BEDROCK
c o
o 4
c o
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL SAND -SILT
MIXTURES
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL SAND -CLAY
MIXTURES
J
u
1II
III..= III
GW WELL GRADED GRAVELS. LI OR NO
FINES
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SILTY SANDS. SAND -SILT MIXTURES
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES
SM
SC
ML
MH
CL
CI
CH
OL
OH
Pt
BR
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS AND GRAVEL
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES
WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,
LITTLE OR NO FINES
POORLY GRADED SANDS, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS,
ROCK FLOUR, SILTY SANDS OF SLIGHT
PLASTICITY
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY,
GRAVELLY. SANDY, OR SILTY CLAYS, LEAN
CLAYS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM PLASTICITY,
SILTY CLAYS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT
CLAYS
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS
OF LOW PLASTICITY
ORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY
PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
NOT MEETING ABOVE
REQUIREMENTS
CONTENT OF
FINES EXCEEDS
12%
ATTERBERG OMITS
BELOW 'A' LINE
W, LESS THAN
ATTERBERG LIMITS
ABOVE •A' UNE
W, MORE THAN 7
C 6 C (D40) 1t03
D D. x D.
NOT MEETING ABOVE
REQUIREMENTS
CONTENT OF
FINES EXCEEDS
12%
ATTERBERO UMITS
BELOW *A* UNE
W, LESS THAN 4
ATTERBERO UMITS
ABOVE' A' UNE
W, MORE THAN 7
CLASSIFICATION IS BASED UPON
PLASTICITY CHART
(SEE BELOW)
WHENEVER THE NATURE OF THE FINE
CONTENT HAS NOT BEEN
DETERMINED, IT IS DESIGNATED
BY THE LETTER F'.
E.G. SF IS A MIXTURE OF SAND WITH
SILT OR CLAY
STRONG COLOUR OR ODOUR. AND
OFTEN FIBROUS TEXTURE
SEE REPORT DESCRIPTION
8
5
9
OIL
0 10 m 30 40 00 30
U0440 UMIT
70 SO W
100
NOTE:
1. BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATION POSSESSING CHARACTERISTICS OF TWO GROUPS
ARE GIVEN GROUP SYMBOLS, E.G. GWGC IS A WELL GRADED GRAVEL MIXTURE
WITH CLAY BINDER BETWEEN 5% AND 12%
SOIL COMPONENTS
COBBLES 75 mm TO 200 mm ROCK FRAGMENTS
BOULDERS >200 mm ROCKS 0.75 m' IN VOLUME
JULY 1996
MODIFIED UNIFIED CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM FOR SOILS �1t1
MAJOR DIVISION
MUGS
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
CRITERIA
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stern Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
SHELBY TUBE
SPT SAMPLE
E
A- CASING MI NO RECOVERY 11 CORE SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE
111
PEA GRAVEL
1111 SLOUGH
Ell
GROUT 0 DRILL CUTTINGS gtil SAND
J
W
E
v
SOIL
Z
w
Z
•SPT (Standard Pen Test). o
20 40 60 80 W.
W
w
REMARKS
E
o f
O N
DESCRIPTION
n
Q
N
N
P L AS TIC
M.C. UDUID
o
1 1
20 40 60 80
0.0
OL
TOPSOIL loose, dry
0.0
SILT
ML
sandy, loose low plastic Tight brown
dry
-1.o
-1.0
CLAY
silty, low plastic, medium brown, occ.
oxidizes and sulphates, frequent sand
2.0
CL
lenses, moist to wet
2.0
—3.0
—3.0
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
Groundwater Level Dry October 22, 1999
4.0
4.0
—5.0
—5.0
—6.0
—6.0
7.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
9.0
9.0
10.0
10.0
UMA Engineering Ltd.
b g
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/16
Calgary, Alberta
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
T Westland Acres Phase II
:0.1PY (BM1OW
LOCATION: See Site Plan
bUKthULt. Nu: JO.) UUL/ ��v 1
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT
SAMPLE
BACKFILL
E
1--
o
ENGINEER:
TYPE
v
TYPE
c
N
o
N
GDG
GRAB SAMPLE
BENTONITE
if
SOIL
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL
METHOD: Solid
SPT
1111 SLOUGH
SAMPLE
1.....t
N
Stem
Z
w
__1
Auger
13_
A- CASING
M GROUT
•SPT (Standard Pen Test).
20 40 60 80
OE
ELEVATION:
NO RECOVERY
DRILL
o W
t-
CL
11 CORE SAMPLE
CUTTINGS la SAND
REMARKS
W
cm
DESCRIPTION
PLASTIC M.C. UOUIO
I
I
10 40 60 80
0.0
t.o
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
CI
SM
ML
TOPSOIL loose, moist
0.0
1.0
2.0
1 999
3.0
4.0
5.0
—6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
7
CLAY
silty, medium plastic, dark brown, moist
silty, SAND
fine grained, light brown, wet
SI LT
sandy, light to medium brown, wet
Leve 2.75 m Octob 22,
,Groundwater
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineenn Ltd.
g g
§9/10/250443N (ern9w Calgary, Alberta
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/16
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
NI UJLUI: Westland Acres Nnase it
LULAIIUN: gee 31te non
DU L
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 3839002/990.)
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
SHELBY TUBE
SPT SAMPLE
A- CASING I NO RECOVERY 11 CORE SAMPLE
CKFILL TYPE BENTONITE E PEA GRAVEL
II SLOUGH
Eil GROUT r a DRILL CUTTINGS 1
(w)H1d30
asn
SOIL SYMBOL
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NO
(N)1
•SPT (Standard Test)*
20 40 60 BO
8313
031.
REMARKS
DEPTH(m)
PLASTIC M.C. UOUIO
I
■IOZ3Id
IO1S
I
20 40 60 80
0.0
•0
2.0
3.0
4.0
-5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
—9.0
10.0
OL
SM
SP
CL
1 1
TOPSOIL
-r°
r
j
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
-5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
—9.0
10.0
2.
3 Z
SAND silty, fine grained, dark brown,
damp to moist
SAND medium grained, clean, medium brown
occasional oxides, medium brown, moist
CLAY
silty, firm, low plastic, dark brown,
occasional sand lenses, wet
Groundwater Level 2.25 m October 22, 1999
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
Calgary, Alberta
§9/10/25 04 01PY ISOM 1
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE ■GRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE .BENTONITE
CI_
W
0
0.0
1.0
2.
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
U
N
OL
ML
SP
J
CID
((1)
-J
O
(1)
0000
0000
0000
/10/25 04:05P1
TOPSOIL
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
SILT
sandy, low plastic, medium brown, moist
j CLAY
silty, stiff, medium plastic, medium
brown, occ. sand lenses, moist to wet
I Groundwater Level 2.1 m October 22, 1999
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Calgary, Alberta
LOCATION: See Site Plan
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
SHELBY TUBE SPT SAMPLE
PEA GRAVEL SLOUGH
SAND med grained, med brown,moist to wet
CL
W
-J
J
0
CL
(n
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)•
20 40 60 80
PLASTIC
20 40 60 80
LOGGED BY: DL
REVIEWED BY: GDG
Fig. No:
M.C. UOUID
BOREHOLE NO: Ji3.)
PROJECT NO: 3839- 002 -00
ELEVATION:
A— CASING NO RECOVERY m CORE SAMPLE
GROUT DRILL CUTTINGS SAND
LJ
0 1-
W
W
O J O
N W
0
REMARKS
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
0
w
0
0.0
1.0
2
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
Page 1 of 1
E
F--
a.
w
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
U
V)
OL
CI
SP
SM
ICI
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
I9/10/25 0405w WHIM,
LOCATION: See Site Plan
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
TOPSOIL
CLAY
silty, stiff, medium plastic, dark brown
occasional sand lenses, moist
SAND
medium grained, wet
Groundwater Level 1.8 m October 22, 1999
SAND silty, medium grained, medium brown
moist to wet
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Calgary, Alberta
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
SHELBY TUBE SPT SAMPLE A- CASING
PEA GRAVEL SLOUGH t GROUT
w
a
W
J
J
0
1-
a
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)* c W
20 40 60 80
PLASTIC M.C. LIQUID o o
20 40 60 80
LOGGED BY: DL
REVIEWED BY: GDG
Fig. No:
BOREHOLE NO: 3839002/9900
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
ELEVATION:
NO RECOVERY m CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS Ej SAND
REMARKS
W
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
COMPLETE: 99 /10/15
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE ■GRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE ■BENTONITE
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NU: JOJ UuL/ J uo
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL
0 SPT SAMPLE E
1111 SLOUGH t
A- CASING
GROUT
NO RECOVERY 1 1 CORE SAMPLE
0 DRILL CUTTINGS RA SAND
E
O.
N
-J
m
N
o
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
IJJ
CL
w
Q
CD
Z
J
Q
.F_,
N
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)•
20 40 60 80
o
W REMARKS
E
o
PLASTIC
M.C. LIQUID
20 40 60 80
00
1.0
t
2.0
—3.0
—4.0
—5.0
—6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
OL
CL
SP
CI
TOPSOIL
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
—4.0
—5.0
—6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
occasional
CLAY
silty, firm, low p lastic medium brown
snod lenses, moist
000
000
medium grained, wet
\Groundwater Level 1.3 m October 22, 1999
7
CLAY (TILL)
stiff, medium plastic, medium to dark
brown, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
Calgary, Alberta
X9/10/25 04:061 181410M'__ _1
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fiq. No:
Poe 1 of 1
g
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
4 SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE SHELBY TUBE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE PEA GRAVEL 1111
SPT SAMPLE
SLOUGH
E A-CASING
GROUT
NO RECOVERY 1 1
DRILL CUTTINGS
CORE SAMPLE
SAND
SOIL
1.-1
Z
20 (Standard 40 60 Pen Te
o '-,2
REMARKS
I-
o
DESCRIPTION
Q
N a.
PLASTIC
M.C. UOUID
o
W
w
vi
20 40 60 80
0.0
OL
TOPSOI
0.0
CL
silty, stiff, medium plastic, dark brown
occ. sulphates, moist to wet
1 p
Groundwater Level 1.1 m October 22, 1999
1'
C1
2.0
3.0
3.0
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
4.0
—4.0
—5.0
—5.0
6.0
6.0
7.0
7.0
—8.0
8.0
9.0
9.0
10.0
10.0
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/16
Calgary, Alberta
19/10/25 04:07PM (814117P___)
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
g
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
t3ORtrnULt Nu: uo..) uuc n)
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
0.0 OL
CL –CI
1.0
ML
1
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
E
F-
d
W
9.0
10.0
CI
ML
SP
CI
0000
0000
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
TOPSOIL
CLAY silty, firm, low to medium plastic,
medium to dark brown, moist
SILT
sandy, some clay, firm, low plastic,
medium brown, moist
Groundwater Level 1.5 m October 22, 1999
CLAY (TILL)
silty, stiff, medium plastic, medium
brown, occ. oxides, moist
SILT sandy, low plastic, medium brown,
moist to wet
SAND medium grained, moist to wet
CLAY (TILL)
silty, very stiff, medium plastic,
medium brown to blueish grey, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 6.6 m
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Calgary, Alberta
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
SPT SAMPLE A– CASING
SLOUGH GROUT
w
w
CL
J
X
1
X
w
J
cL
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1-
CL
10
22
22
22
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
ELEVATION:
NO RECOVERY m CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS Q SAND
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)• o w
20 40 60 80 o-
PLASTIC M.C. LIQUID o oN 0.
I I a
20 40 60 80
REMARKS
S
w
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
0.0
1.0
9.0
10.0
t
LOGGED BY: DL
REVIEWED BY: GDG
Fig. No:
COMPLETION DEPTH: 6.6 m
COMPLETE: 99 /10/15
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE IIGRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE ■BENTONITE
9/10/2b 0 (BMW
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: Jb,59UUL/ yy ub
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: t UU[/ yyv�
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
IACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE fif
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL
METHOD:
1
1M
Solid Stem Auger
SPT SAMPLE
SLOUGH
E
r
A- CASING
GROUT
ELEVATION:
NO RECOVERY 11 CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS go SAND
DEPTH(m)
3sn
SOIL SYMBOL
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
1
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NO
(N)ldS
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)•
20 41 l 80
i
83131
031.
RE S
DEPTH(m)
PLASTIC N.C. UOUID
VOZ3Id
IO1S
I I
20 40 60 80
0.0
—1.o
-3.0
a.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
DL
CL —CI
ML
CI
TOPSOIL
i
j
1
0.0
-1.0
i
2.0
—3.0
a.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
CLAY silty, firm, low to medium plastic,
dark brown, occ. sand lenses, moist
SILT
sandy, some clay, firm, low plastic,
medium brown, moist
Groundwater Level 1.8 m October 22, 1999
CLAY (TILL)
silty, stiff, medium plastic, medium
brown, occ. oxides, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA Engineering Ltd.
r� g
Calgary, Alberta
LOGGED BY DL COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No: Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: StbiUuL/ yy 10
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE SHELBY TUBE
SPT SAMPLE
E
A- CASING
NO RECOVERY I I CORE SAMPLE
ACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE Fa PEA GRAVEL
IM SLOUGH
Mk
GROUT
r a DRILL CUTTINGS MI SAND
DEPTH(m)
asn
SOIL SYMBOL
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
1 SAMPLE TYPE J
SAMPLE NO
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)*
20 40 80
tl]1]1
431.
REM j
DEPTH(m)
IdS
PLASTIC
1A.C. UOUID
I
IVL]IO
101S
1
20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
Y
2.0
—3.0
4.0
—5.0
6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
OL
TOPSOIL
rit
0.0
1.0
1
2.0
—3.
o
4.0
—5.0
6.0
7.0
—8.0
9.0
10.0
ML
SILT
sandy, stiff, low plastic, medium brown,
moist
SM
CI
;3V
o
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
to wet
Groundwater level 1.8 m October 22, 1999
CLAY (TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin L.,.
g
Calgary, Alberta
49/10/25 04.09P11 1111410V1 1
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 36J90U2/ yy i i
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT
SAMPLE
BACKFILL
E
o
ENGINEER:
TYPE
N
TYPE
—J
m
N
J
o
GDG
GRAB SAMPLE 7 SHELBY TUBE
BENTONITE 111 PEA GRAVEL
SOIL
METHOD:
1111
Solid
SPT
SLOUGH
Stem
SAMPLE
Lul
J
1-
n
Z
J
Cl_
N
Auger
l-.
N
t
•SPT
A- CASING
GROUT M
(Standard Pen Test)•
20 4 60 80
ELEVATION:
NO RECOVERY
DRILL
o W
I-
1 1 CORE SAMPLE
CUTTINGS E SAND
REMARKS
E
W
o
DESCRIPTION
PLASTIC M.C UO
l
a
I
20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
t o
2. i
3.0
4.0
—5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
OL
ML
SM
a
TOPSOIL
i
0.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
—5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
7-9.0
10.0
SILT
sandy, stiff, low plastic, medium brow
moist
.1
112
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
wet
Goundwater Level 2.2 m October 22, 1999
CLAY
f
(TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
Engineering
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Caleary, Alberta
99110/25 04:a9PY 1BH10W__ I
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Poe 1 of 1
g
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
SHELBY TUBE
F
SPT SAMPLE
g A– CASING OE
NO RECOVERY 11
CORE SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE
111 PEA GRAVEL
1111
SLOUGH
lE GROUT 0
DRILL CUTTINGS gS
SAND
E
w
v
c
r
N
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
w
Z
w
a:
Z
v
a
(r)
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)• c
20 40 60 BO i-
W
L'-'
REMARKS
E
W
PLASTIC
M.C. UOUID
N
20 40 60 80
o.o
1.0
2.0
1
10
4.0
5.0
—6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
OL
TOPSOIL
ri
0.0
1.0
-2.0
3.0
—4.0
5.0
—6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
M L
SILT
sandy, stiff, low plastic, medium brown,
brown, most
SM
o
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
to wet
CI
CLAY
(TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown
occasional sand lenses, moist
Groundwater Level 2.4 m October 22, 1999
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
Calgary, Alberta
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase 11
LOCATION: See Site Pion
dUrttnuLL Nu: JOJJuuc/
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 38390Uz yy i J
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE
BACKFILL TYPE
GRAB SAMPLE Z SHELBY TUBE
BENTONITE lii PEA GRAVEL
j
1111
SPT SAMPLE A- CASING Or
SLOUGH Efi GROUT r a
NO RECOVERY 1 1 CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS SAND
E
m
SOIL
Z
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)•
o W
REMARKS
E
v)
v
J
20 40 60 80
t-- M
o
o
v)
DESCRIPTION
v)
Q
N
N a.
PLASTIC
M.C. UOUID
t
Ili
a
o
1
20 40 60 80
0.0
OL
TOPSOIL
0.0
C LAY
silty, stiff, medium plastic, medium
brown, occ. sand lenses Sc oxides, moist
1
1.0
to wet
1.0
Groundwater Level 1.65 m October 22, 1999
X
2
7
1
3
3.0
3.0
X
4
17
5
10,
4.0
p
-a.o
6
25
0
,4
5.0
5.0
CLAY (TILL)
7
7
0
silty, very stiff, medium plastic,
p
medium
CI
brown, occ. oxides, moist
0
6.0
0
—6.0
X 8
20
II
END OF BOREHOLE AT 6.6 m
7.0
-7.0
8.0
8.0
9.0
—9.0
10.0
10.0
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Ltd.
m
REVIEWED BY: CDG
COMPLETE: 99/
Calgary, Alberta
g
Fig. No:
9•
Page 1 1
)9/70/25 04 PV IBNtaw
of
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 3839002/9 14
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE
BACKFILL
E
o
TYPE
TYPE
V)
m
o
cn
GRAB SAMPLE
BENTONITE
E
SOIL
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL 1111
SPT
SLOUGH
SAMPLE
w
c
N
n
Z
J
Q
o
N
Z
v
N
A- CASING
S GROUT r a
•SPT (Stondord Pen Test)•
20 40 60 80
NO RECOVERY
DRILL
o W
M
1 1 CORE SAMPLE
CUTTINGS Ri1 SAND
REMARKS
E
DESCRIPTION
PLASTIC M.C. UQUID
1
W
d
1
20 40 60 80
0.0
1.D
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
1.0
6.0
9.0
10.0
OL
ML
S M
CI
TOPSOIL
0 0
—1.0
1
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
SILT
sandy, stiff, low plastic medium brown
moist
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
to wet
t G Level 1.75 m October 22, 1999
CLAY (TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin T
g g
Calgary, Alberta
§9/10/25 a4:1IPU (axiom v
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
g
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase 11
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 38 9UUL/ 9 y 1
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE Z SHELBY TUBE
SPT SAMPLE E
A- CASING
ot
NO RECOVERY 1 1 CORE SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE 111 PEA GRAVEL
1111
SLOUGH El
GROUT
DRILL CUTTINGS igi SAND
DEPTH(m)
asn
SOIL SYMBOL I
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLE TYPE
SAMPLE NO
(N)1dS
*PT (Standard Pen Test)*
20 40 60 80
83131"
031.
REMARKS
F
c
PLASTIC I.C. UOUIO
rl
1
VOZ3Id
101S
I I
20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
2.
3.0
4.0
—5.0
—6.0
—1.0
—8.0
—9.0
10.0
OL
ML
SM
CI
TOPSOIL
,j
"7
j
I
SILT
sandy, stiff, low plastic, medium brown,
moist
°,Groundwater
7
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
to wet
Level 2.15 m October 22, 1999
CLAY (TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
Calgary, Alberta
LOGGED BY: DL COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No: Page 1 o
BOREHOLE NO: 383900Z/ yy 10
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE ■GRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE ■BENTONITE
E
F--
W
0.0
1.0
2.0
Y
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
J
N
O
OL
ML
leeo
o w
SM
go
o Leo
C
7
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
SHELBY TUBE SPT SAMPLE A- CASING
PEA GRAVEL SLOUGH
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
w
—J
A
TOPSOIL
SILT
silty, stiff, low plastic, medium brown,
moist
SAND
silty, fine grained, medium brown, moist
to wet
CLAY (TILL)
silty, medium plastic, medium brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
Groundwater Level 2.3 m October 22, 1999
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA Engineering Ltd.
Calgary, Alberta
O
LA-1
—J
cn
C-
GROUT
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)* o d'
20 40 60 80 L
PLASTIC M.C. UOUID N o
l I
20 40 60 80
ELEVATION:
LOGGED BY: DL
REVIEWED BY: GDG
Fig. No:
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
NO RECOVERY m CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS El SAND
REMARKS
E
W
O
00
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Page 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase 11 LOCATION: See Site Plan
119/10/25 04:12P11 (BH1OW
1.0
2.0
3.0
1
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.1
of 1
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
bUNLHULt NU: JOJUUL/ I I
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839-002-00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE
SHELBY TUBE
PEA GRAVEL
METHOD:
Solid Stem Auger
'T SAMPLE
MI SLOUGH
A-CASIN 111 NO
al GROUT r a DRILL
ELEVATION:
RECOVERY I I CORE SAMPLE
CUTTINGS fa SAND
DEPTH(m)
I asn
Li..■
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
SOIL SYMBOL
Up
p
-1
cc)
SAMPLE NO
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)* E
20 40 60 80
REMARKS
DEPTH(m)
11dS
C
PLASTIC M.C. LIQUID
I
I 3LV 1
PIEZO!
I
20 40 60 80
0.0
0 2.
y
3.0
4.0
—5.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
OL
TOPSOIL
r/
u.0
2.0
3.0
—4.0
—5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
0
sr
CI
CLAY
silty, medium plastic, dark brown,
occasional sand lenses, moist
ammo
0000
(woo
0000
SAND
silty, fine to medium grained, medium
brown, moist to wet
.../;_-7,
7
CLAY
silty, sandy, firm, medium plastic,
brown, moist to wet
i medium
1Groundwater Level 2.8 m October 22, 1999
END OF BOREHOLE AT 3.0 m
UMA Engmeenng Ltd
Calgary, Alberta
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 3.0 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
99/10/25 04:%3p
PROJECT: Westland Acres Phase II
LOCATION: See Site Plan
BOREHOLE NO: 3839002/ 9y 1 i7
CLIENT: Cecil Blair
DRILLER: Aqua Boring
PROJECT NO: 3839 002 -00
PROJECT ENGINEER: GDG
METHOD: Solid Stem Auger
ELEVATION:
SAMPLE TYPE GRAB SAMPLE 7
SHELBY TUBE
rd SPT SAMPLE E
00 SLOUGH
A- CASING 111
GROUT 0
NO
RECOVERY 11 CORE SAMPLE
DRILL CUTTINGS al SAND
BACKFILL TYPE BENTONITE 111 PEA GRAVEL
E
o
V
0
V)
o
SOIL
DESCRIPTION
Q
Z
J
Q
N
•SPT (Standard Pen Test)•
20 40 60 80
o w
I-
N
CL
REMARKS
E
o
PLASTIC M.C. UOUID
1
20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
2.�
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
OL
CI
SP
Sk
SP
CI
1 1
7
TOPSOIL
1
2
3
4
5
6
2
8
26
0
,C,
11
/0/
III
0/
0,
0.0
1.0
2.Qi
3.0
1. 4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
CLAY
silty, medium brown, occ. sand lenses,
oxides sulphates, moist to wet
IMMO
SAND
medium grained, light brown, moist
+3:
i;
2
SAND
silty, fine grained, light brown, wet
Groundwater Level 2.15 m October 22, 1999
1
X
111
111110111111111111111111
SAND
medium grained, medium brown, wet to
saturated
CLAY (TILL)
silty, very stiff, medium plastic, blue
grey, moist
END OF BOREHOLE AT 6.1 m
UMA En ineerin Ltd.
g g
Calgary, Alberta
/10/2b 04:1011 113111Di 1
LOGGED BY: DL
COMPLETION DEPTH: 6.1 m
REVIEWED BY: GDG
COMPLETE: 99/10/15
Fig. No:
Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX 3
Mound Septic System
(Excerpts taken from the Alberta Private
Sewage Treatment and Disposal Regulations)
Top Sol Cover minimum of 75 mm (3 Inches) deep
75 mm (3 Indn) layer of straw over gravel bed
Gravel Fled
225 mm (9 Inches) under Wen*
50 mm (2 kmdna) above
Side Slope
4 Hodxontal to 1 Veda'
4
1
Mound
9 m (10 bet) gravel
measured from the narrowest paints
Sandy Loam Fil Material
300 mm (12 Inches) deep In the center
160 mm (6 Inches) deep on the :Ides
Manifold and Laterals
Minimum 01 300 mm (12 inch) layer of
nand below the gravel bad
Natural Ground Level
Mont Una from Septic Tank The bottom of the gravel bad must be a rrhknimnsn of
900 mm (3 feet) above any restricting Myer or
seasondy saturated layer.
The bottom of the gravel bed must be a minimum of
1500 mm (5 feet) above any Impervious Myer.
Fig. M1
46
TREATMENT MOUNDS
If the soli percolation rate is either too fast or too slow or a seasonally saturated soil or water table exists
closer than 1 m (3 feet) from the surface, constructing a treatment mound may be an alternative to a
disposal field.
Mound construction begins with the excavation of 1.5 m (5 feet) deep test holes to establish the presence
of an impermeable layer or soil mottling. Soil mottling would indicate a seasonally saturated layer caused
by a fluctuating water table. Soil mottling is a zone of chemical oxidation and reduction activity,
appearing as splotchy patches or red, brown, orange and grey in the soil.
A vertical separation of at least 1 m (3 feet) is required between the bottom of the gravel bed and any
restricting layer or seasonally saturated layer In order to maintain aerobic conditions in the sand or Ni
material under the gravel bed.
Sons with a'hardpan' layer or bedrock, restrict the downward movement of the liquids. When impermeable
bedrock is present, the vertical separation distance must be increased to, at least 1.5 m (5 feet).
A properly constructed mound should be placed on at least .6 m (24 inches) of natural soil which is not
seasonally saturated. If this is not possible, suitable fill material must be imported to provide the minimum
.6 m (24 inch) vertical distance between the bottom of the sand layer and the seasonally saturated layer or
hard pan layer.
Proper construction practices for mounds are extremely important.
20
Once the location has been found to be suitable, the installation of the effluent line from the septic tank to
the mound area may be installed. Prior to the actual installation of the effluent line, the installer must know
the pump capacity and head pressure, the distance from the septic tank to the mound and the friction loss
throughout the piping to enable him to size the effluent line to provide adequate pressure in the laterals for
proper distribution of effluent. See Table 8.6 8 of the Code.
The trench for the effluent line should extend only under the edge of where the base of the completed
mound will be and must be careffUlly backfilled and compacted to prevent settling of the mound into the
trench.
CONSTRUCTION OF TREATMENT MOUNDS
Please refer to the Code for specific details on the construction of treatment mounds.
CONSTRUCTION OF LATERALS
Laterals within the mound must be custom made for each individual Installation. Laterals are usually
manufactured from Schedule 40 PVC pressure piping. See Figs. M2, M3 and M4 Pages 47, 48 The
diameter and length of the lateral as well as the maximum number, size and spacing of perforations must
be carefully calculated. See Table 8.6 C of the Code.
The number and size of perforations must match the rate of discharge from the pump at a given head
pressure in order to maintain a minimum head pressure throughout the distribution system. See Table D.
The perforations must be drilled straight into the bottom of the laterals to ensure complete drainage.
Perforations may also be drilled in the lower half of the face of the caps on the ends of the laterals.