Loading...
CCM 02/11/2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY FEBRUARY 11, 2013 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL : MEMBERS PRESENT : Mayor Lund Councilmember Barnette Councilmember Saefke Councilmember Varichak Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT : Darin Nelson, Interim City Manager Scott Hickok, Community Development Director James Kosluchar, Public Works Director Darcy Erickson, City Attorney Julie Jones, Planning Manager Paul Hyde, Hyde Development APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES : City Council Meeting of January 28, 2012. APPROVED. OLD BUSINESS : Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code 1. Pertaining to Home Occupations (Text Amendment, TA #12-03, by the City of Fridley); and, Adopt Official Title and Summary Ordinance. Darin Nelson , Interim City Manager, stated the public hearing was held on January 7 with a subsequent first reading on January 28. There are no language modifications from the first to second readings. Staff recommends the City Council approve the second reading. Staff also recommends approval of the summary ordinance for this text amendment. WAIVED THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1301 ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLICATION OF THE OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 2 2.Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 205.30, 0-5, of the Fridley Zoning Code Pertaining to Clarifying Approved Locations for Telecommunications Towers and Facilities and Adoption of a Map of Approved Tower Sites as Part of Appendix A to Chapter 205.30 (Text Amendment, TA #12-04, by the City of Fridley); and, Adopt Official Title and Summary Ordinance. Darin Nelson , Interim City Manager, stated a public hearing was held on January 7 with a first reading on January 28. The changes from the first to second readings include some modifications to the table of approved sites and corresponding map to better clarify the location of approved telecommunication sites. Staff recommends Council’s approval. Staff also recommends approval of the summary ordinance for this text amendment. WAIVED THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1302 ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLICATION OF THE OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY ORDINANCE. 3. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Telecommunications Fees (Text Amendment, TA #12-05, by the City of Fridley). Darin Nelson, Interim City Manager, stated a public hearing was held on January 7 with a subsequent first reading on January 28. There were no language modifications from the first to second readings. Staff recommends Council’s approval. ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1303. 4. Resolution Ordering Advertisement for Bids: 2013 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair Project No. 429. Darin Nelson, Interim City Manager, stated this is an annual project which includes concrete replacement of sidewalks, pavement, curbing, and other miscellaneous concrete work throughout the City because of utility repairs and substandard conditions. The cost is estimated at $43,000 and is allocated through various funds and departments including water, sewer, streets, and parks. Staff anticipates opening bids on March 6 and awarding the contract on March 11. Staff recommends Council’s approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2013-09. 5. Approve Change Order No. 1 for the City of Fridley AV System Project. Darin Nelson, Interim City Manager, stated this change order upgrades the audio mixing equipment to meet the City's audio and teleconferencing needs. It is further expandable if other FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 3 needs arise. The net amount of the change order is $806.91, and will be paid for with dedicated equipment funds from the Cable TV Special Revenue Fund. APPROVED. 6. Approve Change Order No. 3 for the City of Fridley AV System Project. Darin Nelson, Interim Finance Director, stated this change order adds a scaler/receiver for the document imaging camera located above the staff presentation area. The addition of a scaler/receiver allows the document camera and computer outputs to be converted to a single video output signal allowing the producer to switch between inputs. The amount of this change order is $2,780.89 and will be paid for with the dedicated equipment funds from the Cable TV Special Revenue Fund. APPROVED. 7. Appointment - City Employee Darin Nelson, Interim Finance Director, stated staff recommends the appointment of Taylor Anderson to the position of Public Services Worker in the Parks Division. Mr. Anderson brings with him broad experience in a variety of maintenance and trade functions including operating his own business in landscaping and grounds maintenance. This appointment fills a vacancy created when Tyson Jenkins resigned in May, 2012. APPROVED. 8. Claims (158310 - 158484) APPROVED. 9. Licenses APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 10. Estimates Odland Protective Services 7655 Vernon Street Rockford, MN 55373 Watertower No. 1 Rehabilitation Project No. 382 Estimate No. 2..............................................$ 23,650.00 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 4 CompView, Inc. 1410 Energy Park Drive Suite 16 St. Paul, MN 55108 City of Fridley AV System Project FINAL ESTIMATE ...................................$ 34,399.12 APPROVED. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA : MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA : MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM : (No one from the audience spoke.) PUBLIC HEARING : 11. Consideration of the Final Scoping EAW Document of the Alternative Urban Area- Review (AUAR) for the property generally located at 4800 East River Road (FMC Site) (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:42 P.M. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 5 Scott Hickok , Community Development Director, stated the AUAR scoping document is the equivalent of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. They are probably more familiar with the EAW EIS process when they are talking about environmental reviews of very large projects. There is an alternative to the EIS which is the AUAR, and it is staff's recommendation through this process the City do an AUAR on the former FMC site, or more recently known as the BAE site. Mr. Hickok stated this document takes all of the environmental things you might consider here and discounts the ones that really do not have to be considered because they are taken care of and would not be relevant in this case. It puts every relevant piece of environmental analysis in the scoping document and not only identifies it but also identifies how to proceed in taking care of it. Mr. Hickok said for clarification, there is a 14-acre site at the southern end of the FMC site that is a superfund site. That is not part of this consideration. However, 122 acres north of the site contains 83 acres of the Naval Industrial Reserve Ordinance Plant (NIROP) Superfund site is part of this consideration and will be part of this redevelopment. Mr. Hickok stated the AUAR looks at soil contamination and regulated waste on the site. The AUAR document will identify processes in place that are to be followed for long-term protection of the groundwater. It looks at adjacent road capacity and impacts to those. It will evaluate future use on this land. It will measure proposed uses against the existing use. It will consider wildlife on the site. It will take a look at water. No supplier-protected wells are planned as part of this development, but it will take a look at existing water. It will consider erosion and sedimentation that might happen as part of this development. It will consider surface water runoff, water quality, and wastewater, geologic hazards and soil conditions, solid waste and storage tanks, traffic, and vehicle related emissions. Mr. Hickok stated it will also consider stationary source emissions. These could be things like boilers or exhaust vents, etc. They will consider odors, noise, and dust. It will consider nearby resources, historic and archeological. In the study, it talks about two historic houses along East River Road and consideration of those. It will consider adverse visual impacts and compatibility with plans which would be comprehensive plan, zoning, etc. It will also consider compatibility with its own plans that were identified as options. It will also consider impact on infrastructure and public services. All cumulative impacts of the 122 acres are already being considered. Also other environmental impacts are being considered as part of this document as well. Mr. Hickok stated taking all of the environmental considerations and putting it into focus now and adopting a document that gives marching orders to move forward, the formal AUAR process would begin tomorrow. They would take the scoping document and build an AUAR consistent with that and answer the questions that have been outlined in the scoping document. Mr. Hickok stated on February 25, there would be a submission to the EQB (Environmental Quality Board for the State of Minnesota) for notification of AUAR preparation. On March 4 the EQB publication of AUAR preparation notice would be posted. On March 18 there would be FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 6 a complete graph of the AUAR submitted back for Fridley staff to review. On April 8, the AUAR would be submitted to the EQB for publication. On April 15, the EQB publication of AUAR availability and public input meeting would be announced through another public announcement of a couple types. The EQB would publish this and would begin a 30-day comment period again that would run from April 15 through May 15. Mr. Hickok stated on May 1, like they did last time on January 9 mid-way through the 30-day comment period, they had a public hearing for people who had questions or comments. They would have a similar meeting for the formal AUAR. From May 16 to May 31, responses to comments would be applied and the AUAR revised. On June 3, the revised AUAR would be submitted to the City for review. On June 17 that revised AUAR would go to the EQB for publication. It would be published on June 24. From June 24 through July 8, there would be a third comment period. On July 22, they would bring the AUAR back to Council for their final approval. On July 29, they would send notification to the EQB of the adequacy of the AUAR. On August 5, the EQB would publish the adequacy of the document in the EQB Monitor, and this process would be completed. Mr. Hickok stated the scoping document is complete and staff recommends Council’s approval. Councilmember Saefke stated in Appendix B there is a document from Mr. Kosluchar stating that some other governmental agencies should be informed about this. His only concern is the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization. He knows it was mentioned and one of the primary difficulties that the MWMO has is they do not normally get the plans for development until it is too late to do anything. They would like to have this document and preliminary plans before construction begins so they can make recommendations that could be incorporated into the development. He realizes the MWMO is not a permitting agency and Mr. Kosluchar's memo defines that, but they usually have the watershed authority, whichever development is in, take a look at the stuff beforehand. Oftentimes they have had Rice Creek Watershed take a look at stuff and get their approval before development begins. Councilmember Saefke stated Well No. 13 is there. He did not see anything in there discussing the total responsible parties for the contamination of the soils in that area. He asked if responsible parties are kicking in to this development and what influence it is having on Well No. 13. He said he knows there is remediation work going on there right now to capture the contaminated groundwater. He is wondering what influence that pocket of contamination is having on the City's well and whether it is restricting the use of that well and, if it is, who or what is going to remediate the loss of a perfectly good well that they cannot use because of contaminated groundwater on the NIROP property and the FMC property. He wonders if those things have been addressed or will be addressed. The City does have quite an investment at Well No. 13. There is a large industrial area in that general area, and it is the only source of water origination. If there was a fire or something, it used to be set up so in case there was a drop in pressure, that well would automatically come on to provide fire service water from that direction because that is the City's southernmost source of water. He asked if that had been contemplated and if responsible parties are going to remedy the situation if they cannot use that well. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 7 Mr. Hickok stated notifying the Mississippi Watershed District early is a point very well taken. They will do everything they can to make sure they get their information as early as they can to be able to respond. As far as Well No. 13, there are probably other people who are better equipped to respond, but this is a project about cleaning up. This is not a project about putting contamination into the soil; it is about cleaning up existing contamination. Liabilities rest with the originators of the contamination, and the good news for us is much is being relieved in the site in terms of contamination. It is really important they understand and make a distinction that the AUAR hopes to identify anything that would be a further impact, be it emissions, erosion, etc. The groundwater plume that is affecting Well No. 13 is there now, and what is being done as a part of this development is to clean up and relieve them of some of that which is already there in the earth. Paul Hyde , Hyde Development, stated they have been working on redeveloping the former NIROP/FMC site for almost a year. They have come a long way. They have spent an enormous amount of time in understanding the environmental issues on the site. It is a federal superfund site. This is their fourth site they have done. Their second one was here in Fridley, the former Boise-Onan Medtronics site. They are used to working on these sorts of projects. The key is to really be able to understand what the end use is in terms of real estate, and then fitting that with the existing environmental condition and then working with the regulatory bodies, both the City, the state pollution control agency and, in this case, United States EPA. They have had a spectacular round of meetings with those agencies over the last 8 to 12 weeks. Both here locally and in Chicago with the EPA. They really think they have a good program going forward to incorporate their redevelopment project into the existing monitored ongoing and in-place cleanup efforts. Mr. Hyde stated their redevelopment is not going to do anything to the existing groundwater system. As to Well No. 13, that is a very good question. That is not anything their development changes. All that is being reviewed and overseen by the state and federal government as it has been for 20 years. They believe their project will actually make it better by ultimately being able to redevelopment the area underneath the existing building. It will improve the efficacy of that groundwater system. Perhaps bring new technology to bear in terms of remediating the groundwater system and ultimately bringing jobs and tax base back to the site. That is their goal. Mr. Hyde stated the scope of this particular document is a very broad scope of identifying potential issues. Everything from traffic, to groundwater, to air emissions. That is the purpose of this particular meeting tonight. Every single building, every shovel they put in the dirt will be reviewed, overseen and approved by both the federal and state governments; and that will ultimately lead to their project from beginning to end. Perhaps up to 12 different buildings being reviewed and approved and certified as environmentally safe by both the state and federal governments. This is just the beginning on a very large, statutorily-mandated environmental impact statement process and it could be a five- to nine-year process. Every single piece of ground they are encountering, redeveloping, and working on will be reviewed, tested, and overseen by the appropriate regulatory bodies. That is as much as he can answer at this point. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 8 Councilmember Bolkcom asked as far as Well No. 13 or anything else and the agencies that have been working on the contamination, the ownership does not go away with this project. Mr. Hyde replied by virtue of them acquiring the site, both state and federal law mandates that the ultimate environmental liability still rests with the responsible party--in this case the United States Navy. There is an agreement called the "Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA)" binding three different agencies to the cleanup of this site. That is the Navy, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the U.S. EPA. None of that changes by virtue of their redevelopment. They are reviewing and overseeing the environmental issues to the best of their ability on the site. What they are saying is, okay, that is done. That is what you are working on. How can they make it better and incorporate what they want to build. That is for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's voluntary cleanup unit which is designed and statutorily enabled to do just this sort of thing--incorporate new development on polluted sites. They were the first program in the United States to come up with this. This was 1992 and they have been leading the country ever since in incorporating new development on polluted infill sites which brings jobs, tax base, and pollution cleanup into cities like Fridley, Brooklyn Center, Minneapolis, and St. Louis Park. That is what this program is designed to do. And they are going to do continue to do what they have been doing for many years. Councilmember Bolkcom said part of the whole thing is to do something on a site they could not do before. She asked if it would cause anyone to be harmed in any way. They will be cleaning up some of that stuff that has been left there because no one has been moving any dirt, etc. to put in new buildings. Mr. Hyde stated the only thing that is changing is the building is falling apart. The environmental issue has not changed. The building does not have a useful life anymore. Now it is time to redevelop the site. How do they incorporate the next iteration of useful life in terms of commercial redevelopment on this site into the existing environmental situation? That is what they are about to do. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if anything said at the public meeting and the public hearing tonight will be incorporated into some report or if he will summarize it. Mr. Hickok replied they collected the comments from the January 9 public meeting and all of the comments that came in during the 30-day comment period. Those are all in Appendix B. Tonight is a public hearing by virtue of staff’s choice, not by law. They wanted this process to be as transparent as possible and as public involved as possible. However, this meeting will have a standard set of minutes that will be placed in this file and will serve as help for Council. This is really their question and answer period and that of the public if they are curious or if they were puzzled about a certain piece of the project. They will come back during the time period that was outlined, April 15 to May 15. They will have another 30 days to comment on the AUAR, now the final document, and then once it goes into the EQB and is published, there will be another 10-day period they will have an opportunity to comment. They want to see people’s comments, understand what people's concerns are, and have this document address those. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 9 Councilmember Bolkcom asked, if there was going to be a public document anywhere so someone could actually read it after the program tonight. Mr. Hickok replied, yes. There was a link on the City's website through the 30-day comment period. Now that they have this document it will be on the website. When they get to the next round of AUAR, much like this one, there is a whole list of people who get it, including staff at the library across the street and the City's front desk. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Anoka County made any comments. Mr. Hickok replied yes, they did. Councilmember Bolkcom said on Page 4, the fourth paragraph down, it says there will be no public roads. Do they absolutely know there will be no public roads or any improvements not knowing what the exact development will be there? They are looking at 2016 or beyond and also they had the whole East River Road corridor study done and the increase in numbers. Has all that been taken into account? What would happen in this development if some huge building went in there? Hopefully there will be a lot of buildings here with a lot of employees. There would be no reason to have any improvements or any turn lanes, etc.? Mr. Hickok replied in the document, there are an Option 1 and an Option 2. This is saying that inside the public road system that exists right now there will be a private road system. As far as the comment about traffic numbers, this anticipates development and emissions at intersections and those kinds of things. It is not saying it is blind to those facts. It is just simply stating that based on the proposals as submitted, they are not anticipating that any future infrastructure outside of this project would be necessary. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether they are not anticipating any traffic issues, such as going from an A to a D, because of the road coming out of there. Mr. Hickok replied that is why it was really important to involve the County in this process. One of the things that is important to remember is this site was developed and at one time had over 5,000 employees on it. The idea is to bring it back. They would love to have 5,000 employees on this site again. However, in terms of the infrastructure that is in place, it was designed and built for heavy shipments of artillery in and out of the site and also for the traffic numbers that anticipated jobs on the site of 4,500 people. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she recalled at 3:30 p.m., it was not a place you wanted to be because people were leaving. Have they anticipated the people going in and out of that site? Mr. Hickok replied the study anticipates that it will be looking at emissions at intersections and those kind of things. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 10 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they will be looking at that. Mr. Hickok replied, yes. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on Page 5, it says, "Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a government unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries." She asked them to explain the question. Mr. Hickok replied, to understand the outline a little bit, this is like a form document that the EQB provides, and it is filling in the answers. The highlighted bold question is what the EQB is asking the developer. The answer is below: “Purpose is reuse of an underutilized and contaminated site.” Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether the project will be carried out by a government unit, is that because the City is involved in it as a government. Mr. Hickok replied, we are the responsible governmental unit that makes certain that when this development happens it happens in accordance with the law. In that way, the City is involved as a governmental unit. This response is basically indicating what it is the City is overseeing, and that is the reuse and underutilization of a contaminated site. Councilmember Bolkcom asked regarding Question No. 8, everything, including tax increment financing, cannot be completed until all the final decisions. Mr. Hickok replied, the way our tax increment financing is structured is that there are a couple of pieces of there. There is the more common kind they are familiar with that is pay as you go. As the pieces develop. There is also a hazardous substance subdistrict here. There are special provisions in the law that allows money to be spent in different ways. On the more standard type you will see that happen as Mr. Hyde moves ahead and does the first phase, the first building. There will be draws once they reach a certain benchmark. However, as far as some of the cleanup costs, some of that hazardous substance money will be released early in the process to help with some of that cleanup. It is structured. The laws relative to both the hazardous subdistrict and the TIF recognize that there needs to be certain things done with the environmental piece before there are releases. However, the one case is a bit different district than what they are used to dealing with and that is that hazardous substandard sub district. That is one basically created so they are able to help fund some of the cleanup where those costs are extraordinary and need financial help to do. Councilmember Bolkcom stated but it says no final decisions can be made until all the appropriate environmental reviews are done. Mr. Hickok replied, the HRA has been in the process with Mr. Hyde on this for about a year. The foundation is basically laid, and the HRA has agreed to do two forms of tax increment FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 11 financing. However, it does take the AUAR to be completed in order to continue moving ahead with the development. That is true and that is correct. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on Page 6, what a “Response Action Plan approval” is and what a “Voluntary Response Action Agreement approval” is. Mr. Hickok deferred to Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde replied a voluntary response action agreement is a document that binds themselves to the State Pollution Control Agency to a plan and program for them submitting investigation plans and response action plans (RAPs) which is the cleanup plan. That is the plan that governs how they are going to clean up what they find on the site and what they are going to ultimately build. Once they implement the cleanup plan and build the building, they provide a report to the State to document how they have cleaned up the site, what they have built, and the State provides the appropriate liability protection. In this case a Certificate of Completion that certifies they have done everything possible on their end to redevelop and clean up that particular site. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that is an unusual name for it. Mr. Hyde replied that is the whole nature. What has been going on in this site for 20 years has been an endorsement action from the state and federal government against the United States Navy. The Navy did not volunteer for this. They polluted it and they are the responsible party. Their development firm is volunteering. They did not put it there. They are volunteering to clean up what they find and to redevelop the site. The volunteering nature of what they are doing and the review and oversight of that by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is part of the voluntary investigation and clean-up or VIC program created by an amendment to the State superfund law in 1992 that has allowed the redevelopment of polluted property across the state for the last 20 years. Mr. Hickok stated they may recognize RAP as they recently talked about that on the CITGO site. There is a RAP in place for that once it decides to redevelop that they will need to follow. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what is a SWPPP. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, replied, stormwater pollution prevention plan. When it is referenced in this document it is talking about typically erosion control during construction and post-construction water quality improvements to this site. Councilmember Bolkcom said with respect to the top paragraph on Page 16, “The proposed land uses being studied by the AUAR are largely industrial in nature, so examining impacts and surrounding areas based on a change in land use will be unnecessary. No further evaluation of land use will be provided by the AUAR.” What does that mean? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 12 Mr. Hickok replied, it is industrial now and it will be industrial. If, for example, they were going to take it to a residential standard and clean up and demolish the industrial site, the standards for cleanup are very different for a residential standard. They are going industrial to industrial. That further level of analysis they might do for residential is not going to be required because they are taking down 1.8 million square feet of building, and they are going to be building between 1.5 to 1.8 million square feet of building back there of a similar industrial nature. Councilmember Bolkcom asked is it not going to be quite different from what is there now? Could there not be an impact? It has been sitting vacant. Mr. Hickok replied think about this in terms of the industrial sites that are out there. Do you put your industrial buildings that have been sitting vacant and now are occupied through some sort of additional test, even though it has been sitting empty for a while and the new user who is coming in is quite different from Mayflower Transport who used to be there? They do not have them go through any additional analysis. It is industrial to industrial. The City's zoning code is set up to basically define what uses are permitted but not necessarily down to different types of industrial use. They have heavy industrial, light industrial, and outdoor intensive industrial. They even have some manufacturing only. There is not going to be any further analysis based on one type of industry vs. another type. Mr. Hyde stated they are still going to spend a lot of money making it a dramatically improved, far more diverse, business park, with 30 different businesses instead of 1 business. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that is what is confusing to her is they are going to bring in a bunch of businesses. Mr. Hyde stated they are taking a functionally obsolete 60 to 70 year old manufacturing building with holes in the roof and replacing it with perhaps 12 new industrial buildings that could be home to 30 or more tenants. They are going to require them to spend $80 to $100 million dollars to get that to be the case. From a planning perspective, from what is going to occur in terms of capital investment and tenant uses and tax base, it is different. Councilmember Bolkcom asked as they are getting rid of an obsolete building and putting in new buildings there, how it cannot impact the surrounding area. Mr. Hickok stated he thinks her fear is quite well-founded but new industrial development has enough tests and standards that it must live by. What this is saying is when the developer takes out 1.8 million square feet of a building but replaces it with 12 buildings, there is going to be a modern standard. Ponding will be required, as well as all the things a modern building is required to have. It will need to pass different tests. This is not just to say, we are blindly going to say 12 buildings are okay where 1 big building used to be. Each building will have its own form of analysis. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 13 Councilmember Bolkcom said the third paragraph on Page 17, talks a lot about redevelopment and long-term solutions for groundwater and the whole action related to damage. How is that assessed then? It is related to contamination and the impacts to the whole Mississippi River and fish. What happens if they start digging something up and find something incredible that no one knew was there. There was a lot of dumping there. There still could be some impact to the fish and Mississippi because of the remediation going on there now. That water is being pumped into the Mississippi. Mr. Hickok replied he thinks what she is asking is whether there will be additional impacts the City should worry about to the fish in the river, and how is that being monitored through this process. Councilmember Bolkcom replied, right. Mr. Hickok stated he does think it goes back to in part to what Mr. Hyde talked about with this being an improvement to the site. They are not changing the Navy's damage that has been done and the testing they have to do, etc. However, this development is going to make it better, and Mr. Hyde will tell them to expect to find all sorts of stuff that will make it better and potentially could make it better for what goes into the river. There is nothing new that is planned as part of the new development that is going to be contaminating that. The testing will still have to happen. The damage to fish, if it is happening right now, based on the Navy's contamination of this site, is an unfortunate thing. Testing will still have to happen. They will still have to be on the hook for that. However, it will now be getting better. It will get cleaned up and the contamination and stuff they find will be cleaned up. All of that can have a positive impact on what eventually runs to the river. That is the good news for us. Councilmember Bolkcom said first paragraph on Page 18 indicates that the physical impacts to the water will not be addressed; but Mr. Hickok is saying it will be addressed when there is actual development going on there and something additional is found. Mr. Hyde replied, there is an existing groundwater system in place which has been there for a long time. Their development is not changing that. To the extent they run into a new hot spot or something under a building that no one has found, they will have to clean it up. To the extent they have a modification to the groundwater system, they have done this previously on four superfund sites. There are some wells that maybe will have to be moved to be in a better spot that could not be moved before because there was a building there. They will work with the Navy, the PCA, and EPA to do that. Before anything happens, it will have to not only be blessed by their environmental engineers but those of the Navy and the state and federal government. Councilmember Bolkcom asked who bears that cost. Mr. Hyde replied, they do as the redeveloper of the project. The reason is because under the existing document that governs the cleanup between the Navy and the state and federal government, the Navy has met their obligations. They are not obligated to redevelop the site, FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 14 they are obligated to clean up what is there today. The developer’s obligation is to take it to the next step. That is why the grant program is in place. That is why tax increment is created to do this, to be able to get it over that next hurdle towards ultimately being redeveloped from where it has been left. Councilmember Bolkcom asked but there is no City cost involved in that other than the tax increment financing that is happening which is a whole separate issue. Mr. Hyde replied, right. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on the bottom of that page, it mentions the water tower. Why would a water tower that is currently dry stay? Mr. Hyde replied their plan is to tear that down. The purpose of this document is to not paint anybody into a corner in terms of keeping it, but it is not in use at this time. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on the bottom of Page 19, is says water-related land use management districts will not be addressed. What is that saying? Mr. Hickok replied, he believes that is directly related to the two proposals that they have submitted are leaning towards no additional water-related land use management being necessary there. Neither of the options, 1 or 2, would require anything additional beyond what they would normally be doing as part of that standard review process. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on Page 20, the water surface use, No. 15, how could a big project happen that would not affect the water bodies or water craft on the river. Mr. Hyde replied, they are actually developing less than is there now. There is about 2 million square feet of building, it will be 1.5 million or a little more. They are not planning on using any barge or river traffic for their development. They are not using any surface water to address the tenants who might be on the project. Councilmember Bolkcom asked the second paragraph from the bottom on Page 20, says approximately 122 acres will be regraded with 300,000 cubic yards estimated to be moved away from the site. Would that be moved to a different part of the site? Mr. Hyde replied, moved around. They are going to do a significant amount of regrading. There will be new stormwater ponds on the site. Currently stormwater is not being treated. There will be different building elevations with dock areas and truck ports. There will be a significant mass grading effort that will be going on at the site. Over 5 to 9 years all those buildings will be tested, approved, implemented, reported, documented, with the State pollution control agency. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 15 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if someone would explain the last paragraph on Page 25. That is the whole response action plan they talked about. Does this address that? Mr. Hyde replied they are trying to talk about a reduction in the mass of contaminated soils that now exist. They will either treat stuff on site or off site if they find polluted soil under the building. The areas south and north of building have been investigated. That cleanup has been implemented. There has not been an opportunity to get at stuff under the building as it is still there. To the extent they encounter impacted soil that fails the industrial cleanup standard, it will be treated or removed. That actually reduces the amount of polluted soil on the site that has been there for 20 years. It has been here for 60 or 70 years and is there today. In the event you have to remove the impacted soil it actually improves the efficacy of the groundwater system in that it is not fighting what might be underneath the building. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether there would be some soils left there as the second paragraph talks about a vapor barrier system. Mr. Hyde replied, absolutely. One of the primary impacts on the site is chlorinated solvents. Chlorinated solvents volatilize. Think of yourself as pumping gas and you can kind of see the fumes. To the extent again they are not only testing soils for the soil cleanup standard. They are also testing for the vapor standards. Vapors are a very important issue these days. To the extent they are concerned about vapors, they are going to have vapor venting systems underneath the buildings. They have done this for 13 years in their buildings. They put a liner underneath the building floor, pipes underneath that liner, add a sand (either passive or an active system) that draws air through those pipes and clean vapors out so they do not enter the workspace. That system is fairly sophisticated. They did their first one in 1999. To the extent you are concerned about those chlorinated solvents volatilizing on the site, you are going to have vapor systems underneath the building slab designed, reviewed, and approved by the state pollution control agency. Councilmember Bolkcom asked and the fans are blowing it where? Mr. Hyde replied, out into the atmosphere where it volatilizes and defuses into the air. Right now to the extent those vapors are there, they may be trapped beneath the building slab or escaping into the workspace. The cleanup will remove the free product which is the source of the vapors to the extent there are any residual vapors. You have a vapor system underneath the building slab that prevents any further vapors from migrating into the workspace. Councilmember Bolkcom stated but he is saying it goes into the air. Mr. Hyde stated it goes out into the air anyway. That is where the vapors are going today. All reviewed and approved remediation, the latest state of art vapor treatment systems reviewed and approved by the state and federal government. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 16 Councilmember Bolkcom asked what is an ADT referred to on the bottom of Page 28. Mr. Hickok replied, average daily trips. Councilmember Bolkcom asked on Page 29, No. 22, depending on how many parking spaces there are, would there be detailed air qualities related to that. Mr. Hickok replied that is basically restating the thresholds that is spelled out in the EQB guidelines for meeting a study. If there are over 500 parking stalls. They already know from the two site plans how many parking stalls there are. They know they are going to be over that, and it is telling us they will have to study it then. Councilmember Bolkcom said on Page 32, it talks about this will not change any existing sources related to the parks and Riverfront Islands. Do they anticipate a fair amount of dust such as when you see a big project going on? Could they see some air quality and other issues related to actually using Riverfront Park? Mr. Hickok replied, that is why it is outlined here and that is an issue. It is an emission that you do not want. A controlled site does not have that kind of dust. It is watered so it does not transfer to other properties. Through the development process, those standards are going to have to be met where the dust is controlled through watering and other methods. Councilmember Bolkcom asked they know if there is some wildlife existing on this site. Mr. Hickok replied there has been an early analysis. He is not aware of any migrating birds or any other species that are taking habitation there. Councilmember Bolkcom referred to the woman’s comment relating to tearing up concrete, she asked Mr. Hickok to explain the response. Mr. Hickok replied, there was a response by Mr. Hyde after the meeting and there was a written comment that came in after as a follow-up to that. He asked Mr. Hyde to comment again about any contamination related to it. Mr. Hyde replied one of the important lead building elements is to reuse the concrete. You do not want to mine a limestone quarry and have this crushed concrete just crushed when it is a perfectly suitable sub-base material for your parking lot or building slab. What you do to cover yourself to make sure you are not creating anymore environmental issues with that is to sample the concrete before you crush it. You look for particular contaminates in the concrete and, again, something that is done many times. If you see some staining perhaps in the samples, you do not crush that. It gets sent off to a disposal facility. Mayor Lund asked whether there is a possibility of using contaminated soils or crushed concrete and having it burned. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 17 Mr. Hyde replied, not on site. What they have developed with the help of the Pollution Control Agency is a cleanup standard for the pollutants that they are concerned about on site. They already know what they are. They have been looked at for 20+ years. The PCA then guides them as to what can stay on site and what has to leave and also guides on how the stuff that is left has to be treated and disposed of. They will follow that guidance with their cleanup. Councilmember Barnette stated about two weeks ago there was a meeting where some community advisory groups were being organized, and one of their focuses was going to be on the superfund area. One of the things he found interesting and kind of discerning in a way is that elected officials were not invited to be on those advisory groups. He imagines they will be organizing in the next three or four weeks, and that is one of the things they are looking at is these superfund sites. Mayor Lund stated he has understood them to be “citizen” advisory groups and would not include elected officials but does not mean they could not sit in on them. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:50 P.M. NEW BUSINESS: 12. Resolution to Approve the Scoping Document for the Alternative urban Area-Wide Review (ARAR) for the Redevelopment of the FMC Site (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive a revised resolution which has two additional new paragraphs. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2013-10. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. Resolution to Approve Application for Safe Routes to Schools Infrastructure Funds st for Improved Bike/Pedestrian Access to Fridley Middle School on 61 Avenue, West th Moore Lake Drive and 7 Street (Ward 1). FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 18 Julie Jones, Planning Manager,stated as they have an existing Safe Routes to Schools grant for the Fridley School District which staff is in the midst of administering currently. This will be the City’s second one if they are successful in obtaining it. This program is federal funding that is administered by MnDOT. This round of funding is for infrastructure funds where the City can actually do physical improvements, not just plan for them. Ms. Jones stated grant applications can be made up to $300,000. In this program, they are allowed to include design and construction oversight costs as well, which is a good thing. In case the City’s engineering staff is busy working on street improvement projects, the grant funds can be used to hire an engineering firm to help with oversight on the project. If they are successful in getting grant funds, the project must be completed by June 30, 2014; and the submittal deadline is this coming Friday. Ms. Jones said the reason why the City is more concerned about getting kids biking to school is, if anyone has driven through the areas between the middle school and Fridley high school about 8 a.m. or 3 p.m., they know the City experiences tremendous traffic congestion in that area. The City is interested in getting more people allowing their kids to bike rather than walk to school to help alleviate traffic congestion. Some of the congestion the City will never be able to relieve with the Safe Routes to School grant because as many as a third of the middle school students come from outside the district. The Ivy Schools program in Fridley is very popular and is a real draw for other communities, and a lot of the students are being driven to school. Ms. Jones stated they know that kids are not getting enough exercise. They are seeing that in rising obesity and diabetes rates. There is a lot of emphasis in trying to find new ways for kids to get exercise. They are also seeing research documenting that kids actually learn better in the classroom if they have had experience biking or walking to school. Ms. Jones stated of course safer paths for kids walking to school translates into safer recreational paths for residents as well, which is why staff is interested in pursuing this. Also, in 2010 the City’s former environmental planner, Rachel Harris, had formed a committee related to the SHIP (State Health Improvement Program) grant and asked the committee to analyze and rank different sections of the City where it had missing trail sections of disconnect trail sections. It is interesting to note that two of the top three ranked spots of concern for them are the two they are thrd looking at in this grant application. One being on Seventh Street, from 59 to 53, and the other st being on 61 from the train station over to Stinson Boulevard. Mr. Jones stated another thing that has happened as part of that SHIP program was the City hired an engineering consulting firm to look at various segments of roadway. She showed a st drawing of one of the segments that was in their report to the City. The section is on 61 Avenue and looking at how it could be laid out. The layout is what the City is proposing to pursue funding for in this grant application. Removing the street parking on one side of the street, on st the north side of 61 Street, and making room for a bike lane. There would be bike lanes on both sides of the roadway. They would keep the existing sidewalk infrastructure in place. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 19 Ms. Jones stated what is new about this grant proposal is addressing the problem of what do you do with those bike lanes when you get close to the intersections of highways, such as Highways 47 and 65, where there is not enough room in the right-of-way to bring that cyclist to the intersection on the existing paved roadway. The concept that SRF came up with in their study was to create sections of transition where you would bring that on-road bike lane off-road onto the existing sidewalk and widen that sidewalk to make it a multi-use area which both walkers and bikers could share. Ms. Jones stated what is being proposed in the drawing is for both Highways 47 and 65 as well as in front of the middle school where there really is a need for special events to have parking remain on both sides of the street. Ms. Jones stated she showed a drawing on how the road striping could be restructured on Seventh Street to accommodate a 10-foot wide raised bike trail, again by removing parking on one side of the street. They are proposing that parking be removed from the east side of Seventh Street so that the trail could be on the school side of the roadway to avoid kids having to cross the street multiple times to get to school. That multi-use path would be 10-feet wide and could be accommodated for bikers and walkers combined on one side. Ms. Jones stated they have prepared a map to be submitted with the grant application that shows the line in green where the new proposed bike lanes would be running from Starlite Boulevard (where the Northstar train station is) east over to Highway 65. The areas in the yellow boxes are areas of more detail where the City is showing where those bike transaction points would be. Where the on-road bike lane would transition into an off-road trail. Ms. Jones stated in front of the middle school, they are proposing to create a new multi-use trail on the sand dunes side of West Moore Lake Drive which will be a nice improvement for the park there as well as on the north side of the street to keep cyclists out of the roadway during the school start and end times. Ms. Jones stated on Highway 65, there will be transitioning of the bike lane off the street onto the sidewalk, in front of Miller Funeral Home in front of St. Phillip’s Church over by Highway 65. Ms. Jones stated staff recommends Council’s approval. They are still waiting for some more detailed cost results from an engineering consultant for the City’s grant application. They are anticipating the costs of this project to be right around the $300,000 maximum of the grant. This is a highly competitive grant, and they know this is going to be a tough one to get as a lot of people are going for this last round of funding. If the costs come back higher, staff will be bringing this back of course for Council review. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 20 Councilmember Bolkcom said if this is something they are going to be doing, they need to look at developing a policy to keep these cleaned up in the wintertime. They need some costs on the numbers related to maintenance, as this continues to grow with people walking and biking. Mayor Lund stated regarding the east-west bikeway going all the way to Stinson, the map only shows areas up to Highway 65. His concern is what happens on the other side? Ms. Jones stated in the grant application they are only proposing to go to Highway 65. They do not feel they would have funding to go any further. That would be a future project. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adopt Resolution No. 2013-11. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14. Approve Change Order No. 3 for 2012 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2012-01. James Kosluchar , Public Works Director, stated there are some additional workups in the contract he will summarize: pavement marking, material substitution, subsoil and base correction, some concrete sidewalk that was modified/added, some water main repairs that were necessary, and enhancements to some infiltration water quality facilities that were constructed with the project. Mr. Kosluchar stated Item No. 1 is to replace the type of pavement marking. They typically specify a poly pre-form material. It has been very costly, and they did want to examine the possibility of using epoxy paint. Epoxy paint has been known to last nearly as long and they wanted to try it in this area. That is a cost savings of $15,800 in that change. Mr. Kosluchar stated regarding hydrant extension, there was one particular hydrant where there was an extension required to meet grade. The water line at that point was unusually deep. Mr. Kosluchar stated the bigger item on the roadway piece was an insufficient base that was found on three MSAS streets. These require a thicker section of aggregate base and pavement than local streets. City records and soil exploration/borings did not identify that as a deficiency. Staff saw a good base. They happened to hit it probably in good locations. There was about 1,500 feet of the MSAS streets that were required to be reclaimed and reconstructed rather than reclaimed and paved. Basically they had to add gravel base underneath the City’s typical reclaim operation. That cost was just over $30,000 for that change on 1,500 feet of street. Mr. Kosluchar stated regarding concrete sidewalk, staff actually did not include a bid item in the plans. The reason being they were going to have the City’s miscellaneous concrete contractor do some of this work. The pedestrian ramps that needed to be upgraded to ADA requirements were actually less costly through the street contractor; and their contractor was FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 21 actually available. The City’s miscellaneous concrete contractor was swamped with work last year and it was very difficult to get them there in a timely fashion. Therefore, staff made the change and asked them to install the concrete ADA compliant ramps alongside the paving. Mr. Kosluchar stated they also had manhole modification for a pipe network. They had an added cost of $459.40 to adjust some manholes on the pipe network. Mr. Kosluchar stated regarding Item No. 6, the City had a sinkhole that developed adjacent to some storm sewer work. The pipe was located on sewer easement on two private properties in their front yards, and steps determined the pipe required replacement and the sinkhole was restored. The pipe was upsized to 21 inches. This was right adjacent to the Change Order No. 2 item that was in the right-of-way. Mr. Kosluchar stated Item No. 7 was for additional riprap. There was an infiltration pond installed on Oakley Drive at Meadowlands Park. They actually added riprap from what was shown in the plans. They were planning on using some riprap that was done at the end of the roadway. The quantity and quality was not sufficient to reuse; therefore, staff added some additional riprap. Mr. Kosluchar stated Item No. 8 was the watermain break. They had some repairs that were made to a watermain. On the water main replacement, they had two leaks that appeared which were adjacent to or outside the area of the watermain that was to be replaced. They had the on- site contractor respond and repair those lines. That was on Rice Creek Terrace. Mr. Kosluchar stated they also had some enhancements to rain gardens at Community Park. They had three trees removed and two rain gardens extended and connected with the pipe. This is associated with paving that is to be done in 2013 on the Community Park parking lot. They are getting ready for that and doing the water quality upgrades that are required by Rice Creek and they found they could actually enhance the performance of the two rain gardens by doing removal of the two trees that were there. The City Forester was not real happy with the way the trees were growing at any rate and recommended they be replaced or removed and other plants be installed in the spring. Mr. Kosluchar stated the approved Change Order No. 3 would be within the 2012 budget for the work. Staff recommends the City Council approve the change order to Midwest Asphalt Corporation in the amount of $39,227.11. Councilmember Bolkcom asked regarding the paints the City will be using for striping, what happens if it does not have satisfactory results? Mr. Kosluchar replied, what they are finding with the life of the poly pre-form tape that they had been using, is that it is running from five to seven years depending on traffic. The epoxy is a much lower cost and other municipalities have used it locally and have seen consistent five-year results with it. The formulations have gotten better in recent years. They are willing to give this FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 22 a try. At some point the City staff does take over the restriping of those roadways, and they do annual contract work with several cities to do the lineal striping because they do not have the striping truck. Then Fridley’s own crews go out and stripe crosswalks, stop bars, and legends in the street. They are looking at this as an option for some cost savings in the street budget over the long run. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke approving Change Order No. 3 for 2012 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2012-01. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PRESENTATION: 15. Annual National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Review of Fridley’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for 2012. Mr. Kosluchar stated the NPDES is stormwater legislation initiated by the Clean Water Act. Basically under that legislation, the EPA has delegated a stormwater program to each state including Minnesota. Minnesota has taken on the authority of the program by statute. Mr. Kosluchar stated Fridley has a requirement in its MS4 permit. Fridley is an MS4 as are other cities in the State. It means Fridley has a separate municipal separate storm sewer system. Fridley’s system includes everything from ditches, curbs, gutters, storm sewers, and similar means of collecting water. It does not run to a wastewater collection system or treatment plant. The Fridley has its permit under the State of Minnesota. Mr. Kosluchar stated in 2008, Fridley had its most recent authorization of the stormwater permit, and the heart of that is a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Fridley is in its 10th year under the NPDES program. Fridley has historically been very proactive in the implementation of a stormwater program, and it has been meeting the requirements of the six minimum control measures under that permit for many years prior to the federal requirements being enacted. The six minimum control measures under the City’s permit are: (1) Public outreach education, (2) public involvement and participation, (3) illicit discharge through detection elimination, (4) construction site runoff control, (5) post-construction stormwater management, and (6) pollution prevention and good housekeeping for our municipal operations. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to the first item, for 2012, Fridley municipal television Channel 17 ran several videos that are associated with stormwater including one called “Can Wetlands Be Too Wet.” These explain stormwater wetland interactions with development and non-point source pollution. They also hand out or take the opportunity to hand out printed materials for the public. There were tech-tip bookmarks with a Springbrook Nature Center logo on them. There were watershed brochures that were handed out at events, recycling drop-offs, and the Home Show. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 23 Mr. Kosluchar stated as far as good housekeeping for municipal operations, the City continued its education program and training public works staff in best management practices. Also, several staff have been selected to go to outside training that has been offered for free over the past year, including some roadway de-icing training and turf maintenance training. Mr. Kosluchar stated one of the City’s efforts in public participation and involvement is to actually provide residents opportunities to construct rain gardens along their streets or to assist and maintain those rain gardens once they are constructed. Four new rain gardens were constructed in 2012. Some of them were in conjunction with the City street project. Mr. Kosluchar stated there are also two other rain gardens under construction by the City at Community Park. There is also a large infiltration basin that was constructed at the north end of Oakley Drive by the City of Fridley. Mr. Kosluchar stated this meeting is also a public participation opportunity for residents of Fridley. Residents should feel free to call staff if they have any questions about stormwater Mr. Kosluchar stated the City’s illicit discharge detection and elimination activities include updates for the storm sewer map that the City does annually. For 2012, it has specific emphasis on water quality elements such as ponds. They are trying to have physical qualities of those ponds collected so that they can move onto the next step they are going to be required to do in the future. Mr. Kosluchar stated also staff updated the illicit discharge ordinance which was approved in February 2012. That ordinance strengthens basically the City’s abilities in detection elimination of illicit discharges. Also, the City has an ongoing program for review at municipal facilities. Staff does outfall inspections on sections and cleanings. They do 20 percent annually. They had outfalls on Rice Creek this year that were inspected. There is a documented visual inspection of components, materials, and condition of the outfall structures. Mr. Kosluchar stated staff has also worked with property owners to comply with the City’s new IDE code. Staff has worked with Anoka County Wellhead Protection Group to provide presentations to a number of Fridley businesses on wellhead protection which also has side benefits to stormwater. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to construction site runoff control, the City approved an erosion control ordinance in 2006. In addition, the City has other ordinances that are enforced to help protect shoreland areas and require runoff control of parking areas. As to construction compliance, staff requires the use of best management practices by developers during construction. These items include silt fencing, temporary ponding, concrete washout areas, soil stabilization, etc. The City maintains its own compliance on its projects and assists with education on compliance for contractors. Actually the 2012 projects include the Center Point Agency East River Road retrofit project, Tri-Land Redevelopment (Cub Foods), and Sam’s Club redevelopment. The City had 10 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 24 projects that were reviewed and 5 of them required an NPDES permit which basically means they have an acre or more of impact and exposed soils. Several corrective notifications were issued but no notices of violation were issued by the City. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to No. 5, the post-construction stormwater management, one of the activities the City is doing there is maintaining compliance with development ordinances including addition of stormwater BMP’s to any and all redevelopment projects within the City. There is the construction piece and the maintenance piece ongoing. As to management agreements, there are some stormwater management agreements when developers redevelop their property or develop new property. They try to obtain access easements for the City to legally enter the property and correct when needed. Two of those agreements were coordinated in 2012. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to No. 6, good housekeeping and pollution prevention under municipal operations, the City inspects and removes debris from 13 structural stormwater treatment devices each year as needed. Two structures required sediment cleaning in 2012. They are staying relatively clean which is good and means there are maybe some better things happening upstream although we had a very dry year. The City completed about 655 hours of street sweeping during the spring and fall rounds of 2012 and removed 2,441 cubic yards of material from our streets. About half of this material is sand and dirt. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to the de-icing program, staff continues to look for ways to reduce salt usage. In six years they have reduced the City’s sand usage by about 70 percent. They are also looking at innovative ways to de-ice. Mr. Kosluchar stated as to other events the City had, in 2012 the City had to move to the Coon Creek Watershed District MWMO. The City entered in December 2011 and has been doing that transition over 2012 including the update of Coon Creek Watershed District’s plan and then subsequently the City’s plan to fall in with its goals. Mr. Kosluchar stated the southern portion of Fridley entered in with the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization in July 2012, and coordination of the City’s plans with that agency is ongoing. Then the City had the Oak Glen Creek project which was a big project the City continues to work on. The City does have a Conservation Corp grant that provided some labor in late 2012 to perform some tree removal and associated work in preparation of an improvement project and that will continue in 2013. The City also has the improvement project which is currently under final design. The staff worked very hard to obtain easements from the affected property owners. Mr. Kosluchar stated in the future, the City’s newest MS4 permit is still in the works with MPCA. This has been probably about closing in on two years now. It seems like late spring 2013 is what staff is hearing now when it will actually be issued for comment. Again there will be closer linkages between total maximum daily loads. These are pollutant measures along actual waterways and the MS4 permit. Reporting requirements for BMP’s will be implemented FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2013 PAGE 25 and more information about plan BMPs and programs will be required. One of the things staff sees with the TMDL’s requirements is the South Metro Mississippi River TMDL which is estimated to cost cities about $850 million by 2020 to achieve a 25 percent reduction in total suspended solids from 2002 levels. There will be 159 Minnesota cities, including Fridley, affected by that. Mr. Kosluchar stated they will also see ponding inventory and monitoring. This is why staff is preparing with the GIS staff the inventory piece of this because they know they will be doing some monitoring and potentially some future enforcement. Fridley’s role in this MS4 process is to stay in touch regarding the proposed regulations and try and provide comment when there are segments of the permit that are released to the City. There are resources to the public. There is the MPCA stormwater website, the EPA stormwater website, and the City of Fridley website. There are the three watershed districts, Coon Creek Watershed District, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization.. 16. Informal Status Reports Mr. Kosluchar stated MnDOT is already planning a big project in Fridley for this summer. It will be on I-694 and the project limits are from Brooklyn Park to Arden Hills. It will affect all of Fridley. I-694 will be closed down to two lanes during the day and one lane overnight, and there will be intermittent ramp closures along I-694. The project is for resurfacing. There will be a project open house on Wednesday, March 6, 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Fridley Community Center. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how long will this project last? Mr. Kosluchar replied, his understanding is it will last the majority of the summer. He is attending the project open house himself to find out. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:38 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Denise Johnson Scott Lund Recording Secretary Mayor