Failed percolation test

feelinfoul

hi all,
advice required on what to do next/what are my options?
test holes dug last thurs afternoon,tester organised to test on sat,called him today to inquire how he got on,he informed me water table 1.4 metres down from surface(i.e very high)surface water failed to soak away in smaller holes,he checked soil and said it is of the type to hold water(its orangey/browny colour,sticky gear)etc...
basically he suggested my site wouldn't be suitable(wife distraught!)
i have been researching all day since, anybody know anything about the following means of remedying my problem and the costs involved for such systems--soil covered mound sand filter?--constructed wetlands?--willow plantations?--any of the mechanical recovery systems out there be suitable?
sorry for dragging on,thanks in advance!

Poor Uncle Tom

With a watertable level at GL -1.4m I would sometimes recommend a constructed raised percolation area. But, I don't know your site, I don't know ground falls, proposed invert levels, soil hydraulics, neighbouring site conditions, the topography of the site in general or of surrounding lands, aquafier vulnerability, etc., etc.

Basically you should get the paperwork from your tester, fail or pass the paperwork should still be there. Tank this for a second opinion to someone who has done tests on a nearby site perhaps and good luck.

No6

Feeling foul without knowing your situation if your perc test has failed you may be better advised to look for an alternative site if possible. Don't make a planning application with a failed trial hole its an instant refusal so save your money. If you tester dosn't reccomend any alternatives that might work chances are nothing will work. You could get a second opinion but if they are both doing it right the result should be much the same. Another solution I have found that occasionaly works is to dig a new hole soemwhere else on the site but get your tester there first to pick an alternative spot with you.

sydthebeat

are you purchasing the site??

if so, move on to a better location...
its been my experience that farmers try to flog off the worst corners of their fields as 'sites'..:rolleyes:

if this is your only landholding then it may be considered as a different situation.

1.4 wouldnt normally be considered exceptionally high.. usually 1.0 m means an automatic fail... but it depends on the site conditions and topography as PUT has outlined above..

a raised bed percolation area would seem the minimum solution to the issues...
i have seen situations where a client has had to raise the whole site by 1.0 m in order to get planning...

Quazzie

sydthebeat wrote: »

a raised bed percolation area would seem the minimum solution to the issues...
i have seen situations where a client has had to raise the whole site by 1.0 m in order to get planning...

I had to do this myself, but that was based on the fact that the tester suggested this. He indicated that if I done this then he thought it would pass. That combined with the fact I had access to free filling I went for it. I'd have a chat with the tester and suggest this and he might give you an indication if he thinks thats the solution. it might be that he deems the soil unsuitable in which case you might have no alternative but to change site.

gerry28

Hi Feelinfoul,

What county are you in?

I got planning permission here in donegal and my site failed the perc test, both tests were over 50. I got a engineer to do out a plan, along the lines of raised sand polishing filter and land improvement drainage. An EHO calls out to have a look at the site for the council and see if it would be an environmental hazard.

feelinfoul

thanks guys,
i'm in co. carlow,the site is on a purchase subject to planning deal with a decent farmer(ie the only one with a realistic asking price for an acre,in this locality)
as regards the topography of the site ,its dead level at about 800ft above sea level,incidentally it is the corner of a large field syd:o,the problem is immediatly up from the site the land rises very steeply at about 40 deg.for a kind of small mountain/ridge and i,m thinking i'm getting all the runoff water through the land,would trying to drain/raise this site be meaningless?what are the cost implications of such ventures?
i'm meeting with my architect/engineer later to discuss and any further info would be great