Loading...
Res 2017-14 Columbia Arena EAW RESOLUTION NO. 2017-14 A RESOLUTION ORDERING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE COLUMBIA ARENA AREA REDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has prepared an EAW for the proposed Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment; and WHEREAS, the City has received and responded to comments on the EAW; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Record of Decision, which is attached as EXHIBIT A. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota: 1.The Record of Decision for the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment is accepted and approved. 2.A Negative Declaration for the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Environmental Assessment Worksheet is ordered and an Environmental Impact Statement shall not be required. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEYTHIS TH 24 DAY OF APRIL 2017. ____________________________________ SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________________ DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A DATE:April 25, 2017 TO:Parties on the EQB EAW Distribution List Other Interested Persons FROM: Walter Wysopal City Manager City of Fridley SUBJECT: Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Project Recordof Decision on Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) The City of Fridley (City), as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), for the environmental review of the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment project has issued the attached Record of Decision regarding the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project. The City has concluded that an EIS is not required because the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. The rationale for this determination is provided in the Record of Decision. The Record of Decision also provides the City’s responses to all substantive comments received on the EAW during the 30-day public comment period. Issuing this Record of Decision concludes the City’s environmental review process for this project according to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board rules, Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1000 to 4410.1700. This project can now proceed to permitting and approvals. Attachment: Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment April 25, 2017 Record of Decision City of Fridley Findings of Fact and Record of Decision Environmental Assessment Worksheet for: Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment April 25, 2017 Proposer: City of Fridley Responsible Government Unit: City of Fridley Contact Person: Contact Person:Scott Hickok, Community Development Walter Wysopal, City Manager Director City of Fridley City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley, MN 55432 Phone: (763) 572-3500 Phone: (763) 572-3590 Email:wally.wysopal@fridleymn.govEmail:scott.hickok@fridleymn.gov 1.Background The City of Fridley (City) is proposing to redevelop approximately 33 acres within the th city limits along University Avenue Northeast and 69 Avenue. The project site includes the former Columbia Ice Arena, current City Public Works Garage, and a portion of park property. The project includes a new municipal center, public works facility, and residential housing. A complete description of the project was included in the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW). An EAW was prepared for the project and placed on public review in May 16, 2016 and June 14, 2016. Since that time, the City has refined the project design and continued to finish additional studies and coordination with agencies about the project, including evaluation of traffic and modifications to the existing regional trail connection. Due to this additional information and coordination, the May 2016 EAW was updated to address design changes and previous public comments. The revised EAW was on public review from March 13, 2017 to April 12, 2017. 2. Environmental Review A mandatory environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) was required under Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, subpart 19(D) – Residential development. The City of Fridley is the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) and prepared an EAW according to Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules with assistance from Wenck, Inc. 3. EAW Notification and Distribution Notice of availability of the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on March 13, 2017. A press release was published in the Sun Focus and also posted on the City’s website, www.ci.fridley.mn.us, where a copy of the EAW was available for download. Copies of the EAW were sent to the appropriate parties on the EQB Distribution List, dated February 2017. The 30-day comment period ended at 4:30 pm on April 12, 2017. 4. Comments Received and Responses to Comments During the two public comment periods, eight (8) comment letters were received. The comment letters are provided as Attachment 1. Table 1 provides a list of the entities that commented on the EAW, a summary of their comments, and responses to each comment. A public hearing was held during the first public review of the EAW on May 23, 2016. The City Council meeting minutes are included as Attachment 2. Attachment 3 provides two response letters submitted to State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Њ Please see Response to Comment completed. A follow up phone call The City sent a letter to SHPO on site. The City will coordinate with information the City provided, an permits that may be required for land use at the site and previous archaeological survey of the site within the vicinity of the project March 27, 2017 describing past SHPO would be The City will continue to work with the MnDOT on proposed with SHPO on April 18, 2017 indicating that based on the MnDOT on any approvals or improvements to roadways sending a follow up letter Ћ studies that have been project construction. was no longer being recommended. indicated that Response A1. Recommendation of a Phase 1 be documented as previously for survey if project area can forward, more detailed plans ry for review We will reconsider the need Standards for Identification surveyed or disturbed. Any previous survey work must Design - as project moves Secretary of the Interior's meeting requirements of Comment Summary Archaeological survey meet contemporary and Evaluation. will be necessa standards. Scheffing Beimers Beimers Name Last Name Karen Table 1: Summary of Comments and Responses SarahSarah First Minnesota Minnesota HistoricalHistorical MnDOT SocietySociety Entity Comment 5/24/2016 5/24/2016 6/2/2016 Date of Comment ID 121 Letter AAB Please see Response to Comment The EAW was revised to include a ons and updated modifications. The updated EAW, dated March 2017, reflects those the December 2015 and January Subsequent to the comments in with MnDOT on access control. ail alignment. 2016 MnDOT correspondence, figure showing the conceptual The City will continue to work sed the traffic site plan with the Rice Creek study to reflect those design the City modified its project Ќ Comment noted. design modificati West Regional Tr design and revi traffic study. Response B2. on MN47 at 71st Ave. MnDOT the review of plans within 30 access for this development. regarding emergency access MnDOT's goal is to complete Before an EIS determination electronically can usually be reviewed request for access regional trail corridor of the In December 2015, MnDOT access to Trunk Hwy 47 at depicting the layout of the description in item 6 must add a conceptual site plan location and will not grant has access control at that Rice Creek West Regional proposed location of 71st proposed development in MnDOT owns all rights of December 15, 2015 and January 12, 2016 letter relation to the existing turned around faster. Comment Summary days. Submittals sent is made, the project Comments from the are still in effect. Trail. Ave. Youngquist Scheffing Scheffing Scheffing Name Last Name Karen Karen Karen First Jan MnDOT MnDOT MnDOT Council Entity Metro Comment 6/13/2016 6/2/2016 6/2/2016 6/2/2016 Date of Comment ID 2341 Letter BBBC Please see Response to Comment Minnesota Department of Natural the City of Fridley, the EAW was Following a meeting held March impacts to the Rice Creek West entities to discuss the potential Resources, Anoka County, and provided an opportunity for all measures were being taken to 2, 2017 with the Met Council, impacts to the trail and what ude additional Regional Trail. The meeting details regarding potential Ѝ minimize those impacts. revised to incl Response C2. displacement of trail by storm The EAW indicates that under Creek. They are administered the Rice Creek West Regional requirement that the trail be to the metropolitan Regional trail, nor does it identify any displacement of the regional County has received Federal plans to mitigate the impact acknowledge in this section. Creek Trail as mitigation for In figure 8, the stormwater Trail may be required to be stormwater basin on top of Amendment for Rice Creek the development scenario, water basin, a Master Plan Funds for a portion of Rice by DNR and include that a park/land/open space will approved by Metropolitan proposes reroute of Rice Trail. The EAW does not Please note that Anoka plan shows a proposed address the impacts of reduce by 7.7 acres. If Comment Summary Council and should be development concept the net change in Parks System YoungquistYoungquist Name Last Name First JanJan Council Council Entity MetroMetro Comment 6/13/2016 6/13/2016 Date of Comment ID 23 Letter CC Please see Response to Comment The EAW was revised to include a comprehensive plan amendment The EAW was revised to include ail alignment. figure showing the conceptual site plan with the Rice Creek text regarding a required Ў West Regional Tr and updates. Response C2. place for a period of 20 years. Eric Wojchik The EAW should include a site the regional trail, Section 8 of that will be taken to minimize areas currently designated as trail is not approved, the trail concept proposes to re-route will need to be maintained in Eric Wojchik EAW should indicate a Comp Plan Amendment is required Council review and approval Any change to original work EAW should reflect this. If a proposal to reroute regional funds requires pre-approval operated and maintained in 2030 Comp Plan. As part of for land use changes to the place until 20 yr timeframe needs to identify measures plan depicting post-project done through use of those from DNR. If development or mitigate project related effects to displacement of the 2040 Comp Plan, City regional trail as a form of Park use within the City's provided as a part of this Additionally, Item 18.5.c alternate transportation. for municipal and Metro Comment Summary conditions. It was not has elapsed. submission. Jan Youngquist Name Last Name First Council Council Council C 4 6/13/2016 Metro C 5 6/13/2016 Metro C 6 6/13/2016 Metro Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter implement required mitigation for City will work with the Rice Creek Watershed District and USACE to Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permits for the project including those for wetland impacts (i.e., The City will acquire necessary and USACE Section 404). The make any necessary project cations and Џ wetland impacts. design modifi Response available for development and fill a natural wetland of record Conservation Act. Stormwater development. Any proposal to parcels have been developed. site will be mitigated through proposed impacts to Wetland should identify parcels within functional land uses and new detail for land use categories suggest the water feature be accordance with MN Wetland separate the basins for their provided additional land use establishing a final basin off- replacement of lost wetland Council staff advises City to stormwater pond created in which new guided land use proper mitigation involving land uses planned for City. replacement wetlands. We re-designed to specifically physically separated from on the site should involve for those redevelopment functions and values, in the center of proposed components should be Comment Summary community remaining Jim Larsen Document text states that includes current respective functions, the creation of the treatment system Name Last Name First Council C 7 6/13/2016 Metro Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter Please see Response to Comment potential improvements to public City will work with the Council to The City will work with the Met City of Fridley. As feasible, the approvals and permits prior to The City will remain in contact project construction, including connecting the project to Met transportation facilities in the maintain and enhance public Council to obtain necessary with Met Council regarding А Council infrastructure. Response 3H. To assess potential impacts to need to review, comment and our Interceptor system, prior through this project location. On page 34, applicant states Transit to improve bus stops at University/69th and 73rd. Met Council Interceptor runs segment of sanitary sewer a need to be submitted to Met Municipal Services staff will location map of project will connection can be made to City's wastewater disposal site discharge to adjacent improvements but cannot to project initiation, plans Engineering Manager 651- they will work with Metro 602-4503 for review and permit to construct each Metro Transit is open to recommend issuance of application to MPCA for should be sent to Scott At the time City makes permit by MPCA before copy of plan, data and Environmental Service Comment Summary Council. The Council's working with City on Dentz, Interceptor Rice Creek. comment. system. Burrows Name LarsenLarsen Last Name Kyle First Jim Jim Council Council Council Entity MetroMetroMetro Comment 6/13/2016 6/13/2016 6/13/2016 Date of Comment 10 ID 89 Letter CCC forecasts during The City is aware of the potential the comprehensive plan update. the comprehensive plan update. housing in the City, and will take The City will work with RCWD to obtain any necessary approvals that into account as needed for implications of the project on and permits prior to project transportation in the City. Б The City will use construction. Response Forecasts are not discussed in helpful information to include. 2021-2030 decade would also submittal of their 2040 Comp Housing Need. Fridley should consider whether or not they to be consistent with Council consistent with RCWD Rules. City is correct in assessment think the redevelopment will Plan Update as it will impact housing policy requirements forecasts, and therefore it's required as the City begins the EAW and this would be begin before 2018 and the commit to anything at this the process of obtaining a The redevelopment would increase applicable to the stormwater management Fridley may also want to be aware that a forecast increase that Allocation. that a RCWD permit be Allocation of Affordable likely increase Fridley's Further analysis will be Comment Summary plans for this site are required to ensure RCWD permit. policy. time. Name Graham Beard Axtell Last Name Kyle First Todd Tara Council Council RCWD Entity MetroMetro Comment 6/13/2016 6/13/2016 6/16/2016 Date of Comment 1112 ID 1 Letter CC D determine mitigation needs and The City has been working with completed for the project site. other permit requirements. A wetland delineation was the RCWD and USACE to В Response and extent of wetlands on the proposed stormwater pond as correctly indicated. If wetland require mitigation for impacts WCA. We raise this point now mitigation would be required ation will be to this wetland basin. Use of so City is aware that further under WCA. However, there Corps of Engineers may still acceptable to Corps or WCA mitigation is required under plans may be warranted as mitigation plan may not be required to determine type "incidental wetland" in the property, as the City has Section 404 of the Clean mitigation Water Act and the Army Tech Evaluation Panel if "incidental wetlands" in Comment Summary WCA, it's possible no project is developed. 1 meets definition of are no provisions for A wetland deline discussion re: Name Axtell Last Name Kyle First RCWD Entity Comment 6/16/2016 Date of Comment ID 2 Letter D reference the revised EAW, dated have mentioned, and others such assist in defining how many units we have reduced our expectation apartments. A better number will many factors, some of which you will likely be more in the area of the site. Though of number of units, the number would have been accomplished the sale of air rights above the partnership and quite possibly 500 - 600 units, with some of excessive number of units for After further analysis, we too as area available for parking, would agree that 1,140 is an plans we considered showed will be appropriate based on parking garages, etc. Please selected, who will ultimately portion of the complex. This this development. The early negotiation with the private constructed about the civic private units that would be complete our development be known soon as we are ЊЉ developer that has been through a public/private those units being senior March 6, 2017. Civic portion of Response Far reaching negative impact units, which facts do not see on the entire City due to proposed 1,140 housing to support that growth. Comment Summary E 1 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter intersection's performance rating, We would agree that an "F" rated better queuing can happen at the 71st. Though the State was open to the possibility of studying and parkway within the development timing, they were not in favor of continue to develop in a manner an access into or out of the site time. Staff has discussed signal Fridley is at the lower tip of the through intersections. We have possibility of an access point at parts north in Anoka County to timing with the State Highway traffic funnel that travels from mitigate negative factors that vide our City into vertical strips. There are disbursement of traffic and a at 71st. By allowing two new existing intersection at 69th. that fact and not the least of which is wait many factors that go into an possibly adjusting the signal Department, as well as, the 694 or Minneapolis. We will intersection is undesirable, keep development moving however we have 2 State north south streets and a works as best possible to ЊЊ we do believe a better also been evaluating Highways that di that recognizes Response Traffic at the intersections of hours. The project will cause congested during non-peak 73rd/Hwy 65 are currently long-term traffic issues. Comment Summary 73rd/University, and 69th/University and E 2 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter at Osborne that would also better intersection. Please reference the new trail and new roadway in the from Osborne to 73rd (except for feels secluded and is unlit. A trail at University that would mitigate modifications of westbound 69th more efficient designed roadway a period during construction). It likely be used more often based on a higher perception of safety folks desire to use it, because it was a project to merely make a . There have The work on Osborne Road was solution would be to combine a pedestrians in a more safe and adjacent to the roadway would level of service impacts at this been concerns about trail and permanently move the traffic revised EAW, dated March 6, evolving, it appears the best on those trails that are less Though that design is still ЊЋ accommodate bikes and not being proposed to same right-of-way efficient manner. Response secluded. 2017. since 73rd has capacity. How Will 71st next to the Target Distribution facility through Locke Park become a "Thru There is a plan to cut down Osborne Road to two lanes does that plan factor into Street" and the currently paved trail be removed? adding traffic to 73rd? Comment Summary E 3 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks E 4 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter development, developers suggest public/private partnership portion will have better answers, once all of the campus have been worked parking, the new parkway within designed without a parking deck buildings and that guest parking integrated into the base of their Frontage Road and 71st are not ootprint areas of parking stalls in a deck are now can exist in the spaces allowed anticipated to be necessary for land, it is more economical, as defined and staff parallel parking. These details redevelopment was purposely parking on grade takes more at a value of $25-30,000 per While the University Avenue their complex, while still on development details for the designed to accommodate for cost purposes. Though the development may be ЊЌ that their parking will be The Civic portion of the stall. As for the private outside of the f will be better Response campus. out. for the site? How will parking Is on-street parking going to What are the parking plans estimated 1700 vehicles? be accommodated for an Comment Summary be allowed? E 6 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name E 5 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter park where it is most convenient It is anticipated that excess snow we have reduced our expectation Good design of the development park in the park. Folks generally design is laid out on campus the underused asset in the City as it something that will be positively will likely be more in the area of the site. Though showed private units that would of number of units, the number excessive number of units. The for them to park. If an efficient would have been accomplished the sale of air rights above the impacted by the development. partnership and quite possibly be constructed about the civic and dumped in one of several will eliminate the necessity to may be required to be hauled After further analysis, we too 500 - 600 Units with some of Locke Park is a beautiful, but would agree that 1,140 is an impacted. Use of the park is portion of the complex. This currently for snow storage. park will not be negatively nearby City locations used early plans we considered ЊЍ through a public/private currently exists. Civic portion of Response Where is snow storage for all and roads to include the City have capacity pays for possible expansion? Locke Park and clogging up for enrollment? If not, who of these new parking stalls approximately 200-300 or prevented from parking in expected to reside in the residential development, more? Does the Fridley arks How many children are Comment Summary arks How will residents be the nice quiet space? School District area? E 8 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name Last E 7 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith SpE 9 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sp Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter development is embedded on one to enjoy a park will be necessary, have mentioned, and others such student populations are generally assist in defining how many units apartments. A better number will many factors, some of which you around the water feature to also that crossing University Avenue remain for those who will enjoy private school as selected. New city/region. We don't anticipate the students would go either to may be a fair estimate still and attribute of new development. The playground equipment will unless they are looking to play estimate of 200- 300 students designed with a 1/2 mile trail her district or as area available for parking, developer who will ultimately development negotiation has been conluded with a private will be appropriate based on the Spring Lake Park School University Avenue. The new development has also been looked upon as a positive be known soon as we are of our larges parks in the ЊЎ that type of activity. The parking garages, etc. An those units being senior on the ball fields across District, or anot Response require having play space for kids? Do any City ordinances ks Where are play areas for developments like this? Comment Summary Name Last E 10 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Spar Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter ed roadways so future. Funding sources have yet ordinances does not require play this development area. No, City space. Park decisions are based equipment/programming based on overall park planning for the enhance the park experience in area. Density that is planned is This development is not unlike development does not have to most successful when planned Commission, and City Council that exiting and entering the stration, Park throughout the metropolitan Yes, this is a placeholder for final approvals of parks and traverse neighborhoods. ЊЏ development occurring near higher travel to be identified. on Park Admini Response City. a placeholder for the future to Is there a comparable area in developer to construct or just There is a possible overhead the Twin Cities or elsewhere and University. Is this going is successful pedestrian walkway at 71st where this housing density benchmark this proposed Comment Summary to be required for the be funded by others? and can be used to development? and traffic flow E 12 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Name E 11 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter 4 stories above the garage plinth. The City of Fridley was developed success of the Cielo development likely result in a reduced number This site provides an opportunity plan appears to be no more than have repeatedly told staff during . Currently, the in Fridley also has demonstrated mix of housing and amenity that the reduced number of units will determine mitigation needs and determine mitigation needs and The City has been working with The City has been working with amily. Citizens the public/private development pent up and has not been met. the City does not have enough Though the ultimate design on side has yet to be determined, input/engagement events that completed for the project site. to create a place that allows a as a single family community that there is a market that is other permit requirements. housing options. The recent A wetland delineation was can co-exist in a balanced the RCWD and USACE to the RCWD and USACE to ЊА Comprehensive Planning Meetings and other of stories of units with some multif Response manner. take a generally single-family trucks to support this? Or will wetland boundaries indicated United States, Section 10 of appear to be high-rise units and construction. Does the City Fire Dept. have ladder support this development? Why does the City want to the City Fire Dept. require recommended to confirm housing area, and create At 8 stories, these units Hafer A wetland delineation is navigable waters of the sources to Comment Summary Hafer If the project involves apartment complex? some form of hi-rise on the NWI. additional re Name E 13 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith SparksE 14 10/24/2016 Citizen Keith Sparks Last Name F 1 1/6/2017 USACE KristenF 2 1/6/2017 USACE Kristen First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter determine mitigation needs and The City has been working with Please refer to Response letter Please refer to Response letter Please refer to Response letter from City via Braun Intertec from City via Braun Intertec from City via Braun Intertec other permit requirements. other permit requirements. the RCWD and USACE to ЊБ dated April 20, 2017. dated April 20, 2017. dated April 20, 2017. Response re must be taken to ensure provide much detail. MPCA is investigations, but does not materials into waters of the G 3 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Extensive investigation and related to navigable waters remediation efforts may be the Rivers and Harbors Act may apply, which prohibits discharge of dredged or fill elsewhere on the property MPCA's comments or may U.S., it may be subject to Plan for the entire project Response Action Plan and Hafer When a proposal involves Construction Contingency without a USACE permit. does not migrate into the that contamination found necessary to remove the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and require a wells or otherwise affect potential for stormwater excavation of materials EAW indicates past site area, which may clarify currently reviewing the Comment Summary infiltration mobilizing the construction or result in additional USACE permit. water quality. comments. G 2 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Ca G 1 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Name Last Name F 3 1/6/2017 USACE Kristen First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter Please refer to Response letter Please refer to Response letter from City via Braun Intertec from City via Braun Intertec ЊВ dated April 20, 2017. dated April 20, 2017. Response for the analytical results. It is detailed investigation in some hazardous substances. Please locations of samples collected identify measures that will be contingencies and what plans necessary and there will be a areas of the property. Please possibly impacting municipal and provide summary tables subsurface will require more water will require treatment subsurface and spreading it potential contaminated soil, prior to disposal/discharge. G 5 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Demolition of structures at hazardous substances and or domestic supply wells. proper disposal methods. Please provide discussion further into the aquifers, possibility that extracted used to properly identify groundwater, and waste advised that a sub-slab permitting will likely be are in place to address regarding consturction provide maps showing materials. Widespread Comment Summary ar Additional testing and contamination in the contamination int eh the site may contain presence of VOC Name Last G 4 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Krom Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter Please refer to Response letter Please refer to Response letter Please refer to Response letter from City via Braun Intertec from City via Braun Intertec from City via Braun Intertec ЋЉ dated April 20, 2017. dated April 20, 2017. dated April 20, 2017. Response regulatory criteria at this site. the redevelopment process. It concern. Even though the site assess the site for releases of Public Works parcel. The RAP Construction at the ice arena assessments. Please provide concentrations of regulatory training area for the release It is advised that a sub-slab and CCP should address the a plan for assessing the fire chemical substances during depressurization system be depressurization system be depressurization system be chemical substances at the beneath a new foundation, closure, changing the land potential for encountering is advised that a sub-slab ng area will site may trap soil vapors allowing accumulation of application of residential commercial/industrial to Please provide a plan to has received regulatory residential will require Comment Summary require additional those vapors to The fire traini use from installed. installed.installed. G 6 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar G 8 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar G 7 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Name Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter comments for MnDOT Letter B. Please refer to Response letter from City via Braun Intertec ЋЊ Please see responses to dated April 20, 2017. Response the potential for encountering CCP should include discussion revised EAW for the Columbia of hazardous substances. The all previous comments on the proposed redevelopment still the subsurface. The RAP and RAP and CCP should address redevelopment process. It is comments. Please note that The location of a demolition disposal of waste recovered depressurization system be depressurization system be Arena Area Redevelopment dump in Locke Park, which and plans for handling and and/or hydrogen sulfide in from the dump during the accumulation of methane ng MnDOT has reviewed the advised that a sub-slab advised that a sub-slab these substances. It is Comment Summary and has no additional has the potential for installed. installed. apply. G 9 4/11/2017 MPCA Karen Kromar Name H 1 4/12/2017 MnDOT Karen Sheffi Last Name First Entity Comment Date of Comment ID Letter 5. Findings of Fact A.The proposed Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment will be a mixed-use redevelopment project resulting in the construction of approximately 518 residential units (single and multi-family units), a City Hall facility, a Public Works facility, and parking areas on 33 acres in the City of Fridley. The project will be served by existing and updated public infrastructure. B.The project will grade and reshape the majority of the site, leveling the site and creating a stormwater collection pond in the center to also provide an open space and park area. The well site and areas in the southeast corner of the project site will remain undisturbed. C.The project is compatible with the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which identified the project site as a potential redevelopment area. Based on public input and existing plans, the project site was approved by the Fridley City Council on September 28, 2015 for a Future Mixed Use Campus. D.The project is compatible with the existing zoning requirements of the P: Public Facilities and R-3: General Multiple Dwellings Districts. Rezoning of the project site to S-2: Redevelopment would be more consistent with the overall project design to allow flexibility for mixed use development and redevelopment projects. The City plans to rezone the area to an S-2 Redevelopment District, prior to public improvement authorization. E.The site includes two Type 1 wetland areas, totaling approximately 0.28 acres. Excavation of the 0.25-acre wetland will occur for construction of the stormwater pond and other project features. The 0.03-acre wetland is located in the southeast corner of the site and will not be disturbed. A permit will be required per the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) for wetland impacts. This permit would be issued by the Rice Creek Watershed District, which will require mitigation for wetland impacts. F.To City wells are located on southwestern corner of the project site. The project will not impact these wells and changes in existing water appropriation are not required. G.The project will connect to an existing Metropolitan Council-Environmental Services (MCES) wastewater interceptor. There are no known capacity concerns. A permit will be required from MCES for the project connection. H.The project site does not currently have stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs). Stormwater currently discharges to Rice Creek. The project will increase impervious surface, which has the potential to increase stormwater runoff. The proposed project stormwater management system is designed to meet RCWD requirements. A centralized BMP (water feature) with treatment train and a second pond in the southeast corner of the site will reduce the impacts of stormwater. The project has been modeled and shows site runoff will increase, but peak discharges to Rice Creek will decrease due to rate control from the BMPs. I.A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Stormwater Construction Permit will be required, which will include a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). ЋЋ J.Potential environmental hazards and contamination were identified by several studies, as described in the EAW. Response actions were taken to remediate the potential hazards and contamination, and are currently or have been reviewed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for case closure as contaminate levels are below MPCA thresholds. K.The project is estimated to generate up to 7,754 weekday daily trips. There are several transportation mitigation measures identified to accommodate traffic from th the project, including improvements to the intersection of 69 Avenue and University Avenue and improved transit and alternative transportation modes in the project design. L.The project is consistent with the overall plans for development/redevelopment in this area of the City, and will require further evaluation during the permitting process. There are number of permits that will be required for construction. M.The EAW and responses to comments have adequately addressed issues contained in the EAW regarding the project. N.There have been no comments received to suggest that further environmental review is warranted. O.The City finds that the project as proposed does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. 6. Decision on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement Based on the EAW, comments received during the comment period, and responses to the comments and issued identified, the City of Fridley as the responsible government unit (RGU) for this environmental review concludes the following: The EAW, this Findings of Fact and Record of Decision document, and related documentation and materials for the project were prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410. The EAW, this Findings of Fact and Record of Decision and related documentation for the project have satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have been reasonably obtained. Based upon the above findings and evaluation per Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, the City of Fridley finds that the proposed Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. Consequently, the City of Fridley issues a Negative Declaration on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and does not require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment project. Attachments Attachment 1: Comment Letters Attachment 2: Response Letters to SHPO and MPCA Attachment 3: City Council Meeting Minutes Attachment 4: City Resolution ЋЌ ATTACHMENT1-COMMETLETTERS ATTACHMENT2-RESPONSELETTERSTOSHPO&MPCA ¤ FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N. E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ¤ ¤ (763) 571-3450 FAX (763) 571-1287 WWW.CI.FRIDLEY.MN.US March 27, 2017 PW17-049 Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office 345 Kellogg Boulevard West St. Paul, MN 55102 Attn: Kelly Gragg-Johnson RE: SHPO Number 2016-2507 – Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment EAW Dear Kelly You may have seen the notice, but the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment EAW was re-noticed with EQB as a result of updates that have occurred during the design of the project. At this time, we expect to respond to comments in April, and send the EAW to th City Council for action on April 24. We received your letter in response to the previous notice, and wanted the opportunity to respond as a part of the current review. We understand that you have asked for a Phase I archeological survey, however this may not be beneficial. Below is a description of past use of the site. Aerial photo history shows that the site that would eventually house the Columbia Arena was undeveloped prior to the construction of the arena structures. When first developed, an arena was constructed on the site and opened its doors on May 15, 1968. The arena was open year around with, "dry-floor" events scheduled throughout the summer. The arena was built to accommodate 4,000 spectators. Originally built with one sheet of ice 85' X 200', a second building and second 85' x 200' sheet of ice was constructed in 1975, attached and east of the original building. The arena was home to many things including Disney on Ice Training, Jim Henson's Muppets World Tour training, and the use of the building for the filming of the movie, Mighty Ducks III. Eventually evolving out of ice-time management in southern Anoka County, the County Board voted to sell the arena to the Minnesota Youth Sports Association (MYSA). In ¤ ¤ FRIENDLYDRIVEN RESPONSIVE March 27, 2017 Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office Page 2 2005 the MYSA determined that a minimum of $2.5M would need to be spent to update the ice refrigeration. At that point they needed to decide whether to fix up this arena, or add sheets of ice in Blaine, to the already existing Sports Center there. Sheets of ice in Blaine were the decision. They sold the arena in 2006 as they made a development deal with Kraus Anderson. Krause Anderson in turn sold the arena to a private investor named William Folgerty. Prior to the sale, the MYSA representative asked the City what they envisioned for the future development for the 12 + acre site. These development concepts were conveyed to Mr. Fogerty, but none of those type developments evolved. The owner then determined they too would offer the property for sale, rather than developing it. After lengthy negotiations between the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and the Fogerty family, the HRA, closed on their purchase of the Columbia Arena site October 2014. During the summer of 2015, the HRA's demolition contractor removed the arena building from the site and readied the site for redevelopment. The Fridley HRA and City staff worked closely with citizens to determine what citizens felt the best re-use of the former arena site might be. A series of 4 meetings were held and the great news is that the City received back through those meetings, the equivalent of 800 hours citizen input. Citizens felt there should be a civic presence on the site and that it should be "grand". The full report is available at: http://www.fridleymn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/954. A conclusion of the Citizen group was that the existing Public Works facility in its location and configuration would hinder quality development on the former arena site. It was also discussed that without the free parking of the former Columbia Arena site, that soccer should be programmed elsewhere, where parking is available and the land once used for soccer could be added to this development acreage. The City had purchased the soccer area and there were not endless strings attached prohibiting other development. The City had begun a process of analyzing the existing City Hall, not with the idea of moving, or building new, but instead with the idea that some changes or updates may be necessary to assure a good service experience from the existing City Hall building for the next 50 years. The result of the study revealed that costs of all necessary improvements to meet Building Code, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title 9 Requirements would end up being significant improvements. In fact significant enough that it would likely be more prudent to build new, rather than try to refurbish a building, moving staff in the interim, or worse yet, trying to build around them as they worked through construction. ¤ ¤ FRIENDLYDRIVEN RESPONSIVE March 27, 2017 Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office Page 3 At that same time citizens were likely unaware of the City's City Hall Study but yet were suggesting that the arena site be used for a civic purpose, in fact stating that a new City Hall, Police and Fire Stations may be appropriate. A good sign that the public see and supports the need for a new facility. Council took all citizen input in and evaluated this site and eight other potential civic campus sites as well, just to be certain that if they were to develop a new campus, this site would be the best of all possible locations. Council's analysis was thorough and rigorous and it ultimately did result in their choosing the former Columbia Arena site as their favorite site for a potential new civic campus. Since that signal from the City Council to further study this site much work has been done. An ALTA Survey was completed for the former arena site, the Public Works site and an 11 acre park site south of the former arena parking lot have been included for campus layout consideration. A site plan with a mix of public and private development has also been prepared to provide a sense of the overall vision for the campus. The storm water management for the site will be accomplished in such a way as to make the pond a water feature amenity that the City complex can look out upon, while the public would enjoy the pathways and patio spaces that are planned to be developed around the periphery of that water feature. A Geotechnical analysis has been completed and the soils are conducive to development of the pond and can be properly engineered to accommodate the future planned buildings as well. As described above, the Arena buildings and parking areas have been demolished and the site is vacant. The park area is still open for resident use, and the Public Works facility is still in operation and will be until the new structure is complete. The site is contaminated with petroleum and other pollutants which will be cleaned up, but there is nothing remaining of the former arena on this site. We are requesting that the Phase I archeological survey not be required. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Respectfully, Jon Lennander, PE City of Fridley 763-572-3551 ¤ ¤ FRIENDLYDRIVEN RESPONSIVE Braun Intertec Corporation Phone: 952.995.2000 11001 Hampshire Avenue S Fax: 952.995.2020 Minneapolis, MN 55438 Web: braunintertec.com April 20, 2017 Ms. Karen Kromar Planner Principal Environmental Review Unit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd. St. Paul, MN 55155 Mr. Mark Ostby Site Remediation & Redevelopment Section Remediation Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd. St. Paul, MN 55155 Re: Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment-Environmental Assessment Worksheet Response to MPCA Comments Fridley, Minnesota Dear Ms. Kromar and Mr. Ostby: On behalf of the City of Fridley, Braun Intertec Incorporated (Braun Intertec) has prepared this letter to provide information and clarification to the proposed development and specifically the chemical impacts at City property which includes the City Civic Center Redevelopment project. Introduction The City of Fridley is proposing to redevelop approximately 33 acres of property in the City of Fridley into a new mixed use development. The project site includes the former Columbia Ice Arena (7011 University Avenue Northeast), current City Public Works facility (400 71st Avenue Northeast), and portions of the Locke Park property (6911 University Avenue Northeast), Fridley, Minnesota. These three parcels comprise the Site (Site). In support of the proposed development the City of Fridley prepared and submitted an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to the MPCA for review. The development is currently planned to be completed in two phases. The first phase is being performed by the City and consists of approximately 25 acres that includes the Former Columbia Ice arena parcel and the western portion of the Public Works parcel. This first phase is commonly known as the Fridley Civic Center Development and consists of the demolition of existing structures and construction of a new City Hall and Public Works facility and will not include any residential buildings. The second phase of the development will be performed by a private developer in coordination with the City of Fridley. The second phase will include the Locke Park parcel and the eastern portion of the Public Works parcel. The second phase of the development is not finalized but will include mixed use commercial and residential buildings. AA/EOE City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 2 The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) provided comments regarding the EAW to the City of Fridley in a Letter Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Environmental Assessment Worksheet dated April 11, 2017. Clarifications and additional information in regard to the MPCA comments are provided below. The information presented in this clarification letter is provided in the same order as the comments from the MPCA letter dated April 11, 2017 MPCA Comment #1: Response: The MPCA letter stated that some investigations have been performed at the Site under the direction of the MPCA. However, the extent of the previous investigations and findings and results of implemented response actions were summarized in the EAW and did not include detail information, but rather referenced site investigation reports. Braun Intertec, on behalf of the City of Fridley, has performed several investigations within the Redevelopment Area to define potential chemical impacts at the Site due to historic operations/activities at the three parcels of the planned development. Below is a list of the pertinent reports in chronological order prepared by Braun Intertec in regard to these investigations at the Site: General Excavation Report Worksheet - Guidance Document 3-02, Leak Number 00016645, 7011 University Avenue dated January 5, 2007 Limited Site Investigation Report Form - Guidance Document 4-06, dated January 12, 2007. Environmental Assessment Former Columbia Arena 7011 University Avenue Northeast, dated October 27, 2014. City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 3 Response Action Plan, Former Columbia Ice Arena, 7011 University Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota dated March 19, 2015. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment City of Fridley Redevelopment, 400 71st Avenue Northeast, 6911 University Avenue Northeast, 7011 University Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota dated December 16, 2015. Response Action Plan Implementation Report, Former Columbia Ice Arena, 7011 University Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota dated January 4, 2016. MPCA Investigation Report Form Guidance Document 4-06, Columbia Arena, dated January 8, 2016. Environmental Investigation Report, City of Fridley Public Works Facility/Fire Training Center, 400 71st Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota, dated April 22, 2016 (2016 EI Public Works). Environmental Investigation Report, City of Fridley Redevelopment, 6911 University Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota, dated April 22, 2016 (2016 EI Locke Park). Environmental Assessment, City of Fridley Civic Center Development, 400 71st Avenue Northeast /7011 University Avenue Northeast, Fridley, Minnesota dated March 2, 2017 (2017 Site Assessment). Response Action Plan, City of Fridley Civic Center Development, Fridley, Minnesota dated March 16, 2017 (2017 Civic Center RAP). Additionally a Phase I ESA was performed at the Site in 2014 by others: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Columbia Ice Arena 7011 University Avenue Northeast, prepared by Carlson McCain and dated July 18, 2014. A summary of these investigations and the results for the portions of the development included in the first phase of the development (Civic Center Development) was included in the 2017 Civic Center Response Action Plan (RAP), which is currently being reviewed by the MPCA. The RAP for the former Columbia Ice Arena has already been approved by the MPCA (Attachment 4). City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 4 The results of the investigation of the Locke Park parcel and the eastern portion of the Public Works Parcel (Second Phase of the development) were included in 2016 EI Public Works and the 2016 EI Locke Park reports. A summary of the pertinent findings from these various investigations are described below to address specific comments from the MPCA letter. MPCA Comment #2: Response: As noted, two municipal wells are located on the Locke Park Parcel. The City of Fridley Municipal Well #10 and Well #11 are located in the water treatment building on the northwestern corner of Locke Park. City Well #10, unique well number 206658, is 199 feet deep and was drilled through sand and gravel drift deposits. City Well #11, unique well number 206657, was drilled to a depth of 669 feet below ground surface (ft. bgs) and encountered Shakopee Limerock at a depth of 225 feet bgs. Well 206657 is cased to a depth of 325 ft. below ground surface, and is open hole from 325 ft. to 669. Copies of the well logs for these two wells are included as Attachment 1. Braun Intertec has collected and analyzed samples of shallow groundwater at the Site from both temporary and permanent groundwater wells during various investigations at the Site. The sample locations at the Site with the permanent and temporary groundwater wells highlighted, are shown on a Figure included as Attachment 2. The result of this analysis has determined that the petroleum and firefighting chemical groundwater impacts are limited to small areas around the sources of these impacts. Analytical results for groundwater samples collected downgradient of the identified source areas were either not detected above the laboratory reporting limit (non-detect) for the chemicals of concern, or were detected at concentrations well below the drinking water standards. Monitoring wells installed at the Site in the shallow groundwater unit, above the alluvial clays, measured groundwater flow to the west/southwest. For the petroleum releases, the source areas are the two former tank basins that were located north of the former Columbia Ice Arena area, and the former tank basin on the public works parcel. The source area for the firefighting chemicals is the southwestern portion of the firefighting training area. A map showing the approximate extent of soil and groundwater impacts based upon our investigations and the approximate location of the municipal wells is included as Attachment 3. The detected impacts were from samples of the first encountered groundwater at the Site which is present in the shallow granular alluvial deposits or in the shallow alluvial clays at the Site. Based upon the borings advanced by City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 5 Braun Intertec at the Site, these surficial alluvial materials are underlain by 70 to 80 feet of glacial till. Municipal Well #10 is screened in a sand unit beneath the till. The City of Fridley has been proactively periodically sampling the two municipal wells for firefighting chemicals for since 2009 due to the known Perfluorinated Hydrocarbons (PFC) impacts in the surrounding sites. The results of the laboratory analysis for PFCs (2009 and 2016), have been below laboratory reporting limits (non-detect) for all sampling events. The City will be collecting another round of groundwater samples from the municipal wells for PFC analysis this week to confirm that the concentrations are still below detection limits. MPCA Comment #3: Response: There is not widespread subsurface contamination at the Site. The storm water ponds being designed for the development will be lined, so that the ponds maintain a water at all times. This liner will effectively limit or prevent infiltration of water in to the underlying soils. The remediation of soils, as discussed below, will effectively remove contaminated soils in the vicinity of the lined ponds. MPCA Comment #4: Response: The response action plan prepared for the development addresses management of storm water and groundwater during construction. During the course of the installation or re-alignment of utilities (if applicable) and/or soil correction, localized groundwater dewatering may be necessary. Discharge and/or treatment of groundwater, storm water, or any other dewatering action will be managed in accordance with state, federal, and local agencies. Groundwater that is dewatered will be re-infiltrated to a pit excavated at the Site. Groundwater removed or dewatered from the Site will not be allowed to run off or exit the Site or be discharged in a manner that would spread contamination at the Site. A Department of Natural Resources (DNR) appropriations permit for groundwater withdrawal, if necessary, will be obtained. City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 6 MPCA Comment #5: Response: Braun Intertec recently performed a non-destructive hazardous materials survey, with some limited destructive testing where allowable, for all buildings at the Site that are proposed for demolition. The results of the recent assessment identified small quantities of regulated materials in buildings at the Site. A full destructive survey of the buildings will be completed once the buildings are no longer occupied and prior to demolition activities. Once the final destructive survey is complete, licensed abatement and regulated waste contractors will remove and properly dispose or recycle the regulated materials in support of the demolition of the buildings. The 2017 Civic Center RAP describes in detail the plans for addressing the known soil and groundwater impacts during the first phase of the development. In addition, the RAP includes a contingency plan for addressing unanticipated conditions such as additional impacted materials, buried tanks, wells, etc. A response action plan has not yet been developed for the portions the Site that are part of the second phase of development (Locke Park parcel, eastern part of the Public Works Parcel). However, the City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 7 petroleum impacts on the Public Works parcel will be handled in a manner similar to how the petroleum impacts are being addressed for the Civic Center Development as defined in the 2017 Civic Center RAP. Once the plans for the second phase of the development are completed, a RAP/construction contingency plan (RAP/CCP) will be prepared to address the impacts to residential standards. As discussed above, there have been several investigations that have defined the areas of known impacts at the Site. A summary of these investigations is provided in the RAP, and in the pertinent reports for each investigation. A figure showing the extent of known impacts is included as Attachment 3. Information concerning the known limited impacts are discussed in more detail for each parcel below as related to the comments from the MPCA letter. MPCA Comment #6: Response: The investigations at the Ice Arena parcel identified two areas of impacts on the Columbia Ice Arena Parcel. The first area in the fill sands beneath the former ice sheets, the second area is the underground storage tank (UST) basins located to the north of the former Columbia Ice Arena. Ice Arena Fill Sands Elevated concentrations of various volatile organic compound (VOCs) were detected in soil vapor in the fill sands beneath the ice sheets of the former ice arenas. The elevated soil vapors included chemicals typically associated with the ice cooling system. Based upon our investigations, the elevated concentrations of vapors were limited to the fill sands located above the native clays and trapped beneath the insulating foam layer present for the two ice sheets. Groundwater and soil samples collected from beneath the ice rinks did not contain VOCs above laboratory detection limits (non-detect). During demolition of the Columbia Ice Arenas, the fill sands impacted with elevated soil vapors were successfully remediated to concentrations less than current (2017) industrial ISVs. The source of these vapor impacts (the former cooling system) had been removed a number of years ago. The results of our City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 8 investigations and confirmation sampling indicate these compounds are not present in soil or groundwater at the Site. A copy of Completion of voluntary Response Actions letter from the MPCA dated September 19, 2016 is included as Attachment 4. Former Tank Basins Petroleum impacts to soil and groundwater are present in the UST basins north of the former ice arenas above industrial standards. These impacts have been investigated and received regulatory closure. These impacts will be managed as defined in the 2017 Civic Center RAP. Based upon the additional site-wide environmental investigations performed by Braun Intertec, soil vapors are not present at the Columbia Ice Arena Parcel at concentrations greater than industrial ISVs, indicating that there is a low risk of vapor intrusion at the Columbia Arena Parcel. The proposed development in the Columbia Ice Arena Parcel will be a new City Hall/Police Station and a public works facility, therefore the application of commercial/industrial standards is the appropriate exposure scenario. As described in the RAP, the petroleum source soils in the tank basins will be mitigated through excavation and either disposed of off-site or re-used as engineered fill beneath the parking lots of the planned City Hall/Public work buildings. MPCA Comment #7: Response: Public Works Parcel City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 9 Soil, groundwater and soil vapor investigations were performed in the Public Works parcel to address the recognized environmental conditions (RECs) identified in the 2015 Phase I ESA. These RECs included the chemical storage areas, degreasers, maintenance areas, outdoor storage areas and lawn maintenance chemical storage areas. The results of these investigations only identified two areas of impact, the former UST basins on the eastern side of the Site and in the former fire training area. A summary of these impacts was provided in the 2017 Civic Center RAP, the 2016 EI Public Works report, and the 2016 EI Locke Park report. Former Waste UST Basin The 2015 Phase I ESA provided a Figure with the approximate waste tank location, this Figure is included as Attachment 5. Due to the presence of overhead electrical lines a soil boring could not be advanced in the tank location, however during the 2016 EI Public Works, soil, groundwater and soil vapor samples were collected immediately downgradient of the former waste tank location. The results of the laboratory analysis from these samples did not detect impacts to soils, groundwater or vapor in the vicinity of the former waste tank. Former Petroleum UST Basin The petroleum impacts on the Public Works parcel have been the subject of investigations by Braun Intertec and previous consultants and have received regulatory closure by the MPCA. Based upon the environmental investigations performed by Braun Intertec, soil vapors are not present in the Public Works Parcel at concentrations greater than industrial ISVs, indicating that there is a low risk of vapor intrusion risk at the Site. The buildings proposed for the first phase of the development are commercial (City Hall with below ground parking, slab on grade public works facility), therefore the industrial ISVs are appropriate for this exposure scenario. Based upon our investigations, there is no need for a sub-slab depressurization system (SSDS) or other vapor mitigation system for the commercial buildings in the first phase of development on the Public Works Parcel. Since the final development plan for the second phase of the development is not complete the need for vapor mitigation for those buildings will be evaluated and described in a RAP that will be prepared once the final development plan for the second phase has been completed. MPCA Comment #8: City of Fridley Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Fridley, Minnesota April 20, 2017 Page 10 Response: Fire Training Area Two investigations have targeted the fire training area. The results of investigations, identified limited chemical impacts to soil and groundwater in the Public Works Parcel. The highest concentrations of firefighting chemicals (PFCs) appear to be limited to the top foot of surface soils in the southwest portion of the fire training center. All of the detected concentrations of PFCs in soils were below the residential SRVs; currently there are not SLVs for these compounds. Based on groundwater samples collected during these assessments the PFC groundwater impacts are limited to the area immediately around the southwest portion of the Fire Training center. The extent of the groundwater impacts in the fire training area are shown on a Figure included as Attachment 3. VOCs were not detected in soil, groundwater or soil vapor in the fire training area, therefore there does not appear to be a source of vapors in the former fire training area that would require the installation of a sub-slab depressurization system. Further though the PFC impacts to soils are below SRVs, Per the RAP, PFC source soils will be excavated and disposed of off-site or re-used beneath permanent pavements to reduce the presence of the low level impacts. MPCA Comment #9: Response: Locke Park Parcel An unregulated construction debris dump is reported to have been located within or in the vicinity of Locke Park. It is not known for certain that this debris dump exists. A portion of a newspaper clipping provided to Braun Intertec by the City of Fridley states that a construction debris dump was opened up in Locke Park for the disposal of debris from a tornado. According to City officials, this probably occurred during a 1965 tornado event in Fridley. Attachment 1 Municipal Wells #10 and #11 Well Logs Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Anoka County Entry Date 04/15/1991 WELL AND BORING REPORT Minneapolis 206657 Quad Update Date 03/26/2015 Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031 120D Quad ID Received Date Well NameTownshipRangeDirSectionSubsectionWell DepthDepth CompletedDate Well Completed FRIDLEY 113024W11CDCCAA669 ft.669 ft.04/20/1970 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method 861 ft.Elev. Method Elevation Drill Fluid AddressUseStatus Active community supply(municipal) Well Hydrofractured? C/W6911 UNIVERSITY AV FRIDLEY MN Yes From No To Casing TypeJoint Step down No Drive Shoe?Yes 0 ft. Stratigraphy InformationAbove/Below Geological MaterialFromTo (ft.)ColorHardness Casing DiameterWeightHole Diameter DRIFT0221 24in. To325ft.lbs./ft.23in. To344ft. SAND, GRAVEL &221225 30in. To225ft.lbs./ft. SHAKOPEE LIMEROCK225235 SHAKOPEE LIMEROCK235236 JORDAN236245SOFT Open Hole Fromft.To669ft. 325 JORDAN SANDROCK245320 TypeMake Screen? JORDAN SANDROCK320350 JORDAN SANDROCK350355 ST. LAWRENCE SHALE355490 FRANCONIA490548 Static Water Level FRANCONIA548618 52ft.land surfaceMeasure04/20/1970 FRANCONIA618669 Pumping Level (below land surface) 144ft.16hrs.Pumping at1000g.p.m. Wellhead Completion Pitless adapter manufacturer Model Casing Protection12 in. above grade At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Grouting Information Well Grouted?YesNoNot Specified MaterialAmountFromTo neat cement300Sacks0ft.248ft. Nearest Known Source of Contamination Direction feetType Well disinfected upon completion?YesNo Pump Not InstalledDate Installed Manufacturer's name HP Model Number Volt Length of drop pipeCapacity ftg.p.Typ Abandoned Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)?YesNo Variance Yes Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well? No Miscellaneous First Bedrock Aquifer Prairie Du Chien GroupJordan-Mt.Simon Last StratDepth to Bedrock ft Mt.Simon Sandstone225 Located by Minnesota Department of Health Remarks Locate Method GPS Differentially Corrected M.G.S. NO 523. NORTH WELL. UTM - NAD83, Zone 15, Meters SystemXY 4793714993454 GAMMA LOGGED 3-19-2015 BY JIM TRAEN. Unique Number VerificationInput Date Information from07/27/1999 Angled Drill Hole Well Contractor Keys Well Co.62012HALEY, R. Licensee BusinessLic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller 206657 Printed on 04/14/2017 Minnesota Well Index Report HE-01205-15 Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Anoka County Entry Date 04/15/1991 WELL AND BORING REPORT Minneapolis 206658 Quad Update Date 03/26/2015 Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031 120D Quad ID Received Date Well NameTownshipRangeDirSectionSubsectionWell DepthDepth CompletedDate Well Completed FRIDLEY 103024W11CDCCAA199 ft.199 ft.12/29/1969 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method 861 ft.Elev. Method Elevation Drill Fluid AddressUseStatus Active community supply(municipal) Well Hydrofractured? C/W6911 UNIVERSITY AV NE FRIDLEY MN Yes From No To Casing TypeJoint Step down No Drive Shoe?Yes 0 ft. Stratigraphy InformationAbove/Below Geological MaterialFromTo (ft.)ColorHardness Casing DiameterWeight SAND08 16in. To128ft.lbs./ft. CLAY835 24in. To16ft.lbs./ft. GRAVEL3542 SAND, GRAVEL & CLAY4295 SAND95123 Open Hole Fromft.Toft. SAND & GRAVEL123173 TypeMake stainless Screen? SAND173199 DiameterSlot/GauzeLengthSet 16in.73ft.128ft.199ft. Static Water Level 38ft.top of breather pipeMeasure12/29/1969 Pumping Level (below land surface) 43.2ft.2hrs.Pumping at800g.p.m. Wellhead Completion Pitless adapter manufacturer Model Casing Protection12 in. above grade At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Grouting Information Well Grouted?YesNoNot Specified MaterialAmountFromTo neat cement130Cubic yards0ft.35ft. Nearest Known Source of Contamination Direction feetType Well disinfected upon completion?YesNo Pump Not InstalledDate Installed Manufacturer's name HP Model Number Volt Length of drop pipeCapacity ftg.p.Typ Abandoned Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)?YesNo Variance Yes Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well? No Miscellaneous First Bedrock Aquifer Quat. buried Last StratDepth to Bedrock ft sand Located by Minnesota Department of Health Remarks Locate Method GPS SA On (averaged) SOUTH WELL. M.G.S. NO. 547. UTM - NAD83, Zone 15, Meters SystemXY 4793734993450 GAMMA LOGGED 3-19-2015 BY JIM TRAEN. Unique Number VerificationInput Date 04/07/1999 Angled Drill Hole Well Contractor Keys Well Co.62012 Licensee BusinessLic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller 206658 Printed on 04/14/2017 Minnesota Well Index Report HE-01205-15 Attachment 2 Groundwater Sample Locations Attachment 3 Estimated Extent of Soil and Groundwater Contamination wells Municipal of location Approximate Attachment 4 Completion of Voluntary Response Actions Letter Dated September 19, 2016 Attachment 5 Public Works facility Site Sketch Attachment 6 Boring Location Maps ATTATCHMENT3-CITYCOUNCILMEETINGMINUTES ATTACHMENT 4 – CITY RESOLUTION CITY OF FRIDLEY RESOLUTION NO. ______________ A RESOLUTION ORDERING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE COLUMBIA ARENA AREA REDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has prepared an EAW for the proposed Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment; and WHEREAS, the City has received and responded to comments on the EAW; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Record of Decision, which is attached as EXHIBIT A. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota: 1.The Record of Decision for the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment is accepted and approved. 2.A Negative Declaration for the Columbia Arena Area Redevelopment Environmental Assessment Worksheet is ordered and an Environmental Impact Statement shall not be required. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEYTHIS ____ DAY OF _____________ 2017. ______________________________ SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: _________________________________ DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK