Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 10-25 EDAP EDA MEETING City of Brooklyn Center October 25, 2004 AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes -Commissioners not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. September 27, 2004 Regular Session 4. Commission Consideration Item a. Resolution Authorizing Submission of an Application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund •Requested Commission Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. 5. Adjournment EDA Agenda Item No. 3a MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 CITY HALL CITY COLJNCIL L CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Regular Session and was called to order at 7:57 p.m. by President Myrna Kragness. 2. ROLL CALL President Myrna Kragness, Commissioners Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, Diane Niesen, and Bob Peppe. Also present: Acting Executive Director Curt Boganey, Public Works Director/City Engineer Todd Blomstrom, Community Development Director Brad Hoffman, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Commissioner Lasman, seconded by Commissioner Peppe to approve the agenda and consent agenda. Motion passed unanimously. 3a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Commissioner Lasman, seconded by Commissioner Peppe to approve the September 13, 2004, regular session minutes. Motion passed unanimously. 4. COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ITEMS 4a. DISCUSSION OF REDEVELOPMENT FOCUS FOR OPPORTUNITY SITE STUDY AREA PLANNING 1. RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT TARGET DATES FOR REDEVELOPMENT FOCUS 2. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOLICITATION OF REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR URBAN DESIGN SERVICE 3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING TASK FORCE FOR OPPORTUNITY SITE STUDY AREA PLANNING 09/27/04 -1- DRAFT Acting Executive Director Curt Boganey discussed that at the last EDA meeting the Commission had recommended that the target dates for the redevelopment facus be redrafted to reflect the creation of a task force and the integration of the task force into the redevelopment focus activities. Before the EDA this evening are three resolutions including resolution approving draft target dates for redevelopment focus; resolution authorizing solicitation of request for qualifications for urban design service; and resolution establishing task force for Opportunity Site Study area planning. Mr. Bo ane discussed that the task force ro osed would consist of ei ht members consistin of Y P P g g Chairs of the Planning, Housing, Financial, and Park and Recreation Commissions (or the Chair's designee) and four persons appointed by the President of the EDA with the concurrence of the EDA, with the President of the EDA appointing a Chair of the task force from amongst the task force members. The responsibilities of the task force would be to meet with the planning firm and City staff to review and comment on the Opportunity Site Study area planning and participate in three public meetings. The task force would terminate upon selection of a developer by the EDA. Commissioner Peppe questioned what would happen if changes were needed after the task force had terminated. Mr. Boganey responded that he believes the assumption would be if any changes were needed they would be minor. The developer would have to submit a proposal that would be consistent with the standards and design criteria and the Planning Commission would most likely be able to make recommendations to the EDA depending on what the changes might be. Commissioner Lasman expressed that she does not believe it would be wise to terminate the task force and questioned if the task force would be able to continue on an active basis as needed. Mr. Boganey responded that he believes that would be possible and that at this time he believes the City Manager is looking for any modifications that the EDA would deem appropriate. President Kragness asked for clarification on the corrected target dates. Mr. Boganey discussed that the language for October 11, 2004, Amend TIF Budget/Plan will be amended to also read Resolution Calling for the Sale of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Bonds. This action would allow the sale of the TIF bonds as scheduled on November 8, 2004. Commissioner Carmody expressed that she believes an end date for the task force would be helpful and that the task force could be notified of when there will be discussions or meetings. President Kragness suggested that the Chair and Vice-Chair continue to be notified of the meetings and that they could attend and notify the other task force members as needed. Mr. Boganey discussed that the presumption would be once the develaper is selected the actual development will take place over years and to keep a task force in place may not be practical. Commissioner Lasman ex ressed that the word terminate bothers her and that she would like to see a P different word used. She believes that the task force does not need to be held for years and years; however, she would like to have it open-ended if the task force is amendable in case they are needed to participate on some limited capacity. 09/27/04 -2- DRAFT Commissioner Niesen discussed the active phases for the task force would be more maintenance and reviewphases and suggested adding some type of that language. Commissioner Carmody expressed that she believes it would important to have some type of end date for their formal function as a task force. Commissioner Lasman discussed that she would like to have language added to indicate that the task force is not done after the planning stages to leave it more open-ended. Mr. Boganey suggested that the language be amended to read that the task force shall become inactive after the EDA has selected a developer. Commissioner Lasman questioned if the word inactive would mean that they could be called upon again if needed. Mr. Boganey responded that they could be reactivated at anytime. Commissioner Peppe suggested that a statement be added that would preface such a statement. He believes that having the task force available for input after the their formal function would be important. Mr. Boganey asked if the Commission would be amenable to having the language read that the task force shall become inactive after the EDA has selected the developer and may be reactivated at the discretion of the EDA. It was the consensus of the Commission to amend the resolution language to read that thetask force shall become inactive after the EDA has selected the developer and may be reactivated at the discretion of the EDA. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-07 Commissioner Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING DRAFT TARGET DATES FOR REDEVELOPMENT FOCUS The motion for the adoption o� the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-08 Commissioner Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOLICITATION OF REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR URBAN DESIGN SERVICE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. I 09/27/04 -3- DRAFT I I I RESOLUTION NO. 2004-09 Commissioner Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption with the above mentioned amendment: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING TASK FORCE FOR OPPORTUNITY SITE STUDY AREA PLANNING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. 4b. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES Mr. Boganey discussed that this resolution would authorize the acquisition of property at 1900 57�'Avenue North and that this would be the first step in the consolidation of all properties commonly refened to for the Asian Market. Once the EDA has acquired the property it would bethe intent of staff to commence the process immediately. President Kragness questioned if the City was aware that the property was for sale before it was purchased. Mr. Boganey responded that he believes the City was not aware. Community Development Director Brad Hoffinan discussed that they had approached Mr. Vang prior to selling the property. S Commissioner Niesen questioned when the City purchases properties if the City's Assessor should determine values and if there is any difference with commercial or residential properties. Mr. Boganey discussed that he believes that would not be snfficient and that the values would need to come from a commercial appraiser. Mr. Hoffinan discussed that there is no difference whether it is commercial or residentiaL Commissioner Niesen questioned if the amounts could be included when the EDA is approving acquisitions. Mr. Boganey discussed that the amounts are not included before an appraisal since condemnation can often lead to caurt actions. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-10 Commissioner Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Niesen. Motion passed unanimously. I 09/27/04 -4- DRAFT I 5. JOURNMENT A motion by Commissioner Niesen, seconded by Commissioner Carmody to adj ourn the meeting at 8:22 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. President I 09/27l04 -5- DRAFT i f EDA Agenda Item No. 4a MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Tom Bublitz, Community Develo ment S ecialist P P j DATE: October 19, 2004 SUBJECT: Resolution Approving an Application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund In an ongoing process to create a redevelopment opportunity for the Hmong American Shopping Center, Phase I and II envirorunental investigations have been completed on the site. Both the Phase I and Phase II studies were funded by Hennepin County's Environmental Response Fund (ERF) and the Brownfield Assessment Grant Program. The Phase I study noted several environmental conditions on the site and the Phase II provided for soil and ground water testing relative to the environmental conditions discovered in the Phase I report. The key Phase II results for the site are summarized by the following: Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compound's (VOC'S) associated with dry cleaning operations were encountered in soil and ground water in the vicinity of a former dry cleaning establishrnent located in the strip center. Soil borings were taken directly under the floor of the former dry cleaners and concentrations were measured at levels exceeding Health Risk Limit's (HRL's) established for VOC's. The off site extent of the VOC plume (if any) was beyond the scope of the Phase II investigation. The shallow ground water flow direction from the Hmong American Shopping Center is east, southeast. The status of the contaminant plume (if any), east, southeast of the site, is not known. Petroleum contamination is present in the soil and ground water at the water table in the southern portion of the site. This finding is consistent with historical petroleum releases from Petroleum Release Tank sites on this portion of the property that were subjects of other investigations and are now closed sites. The extent of the contamination was not determined during the Phase II investigation and the locations of the sources were not encountered during the Phase II investigation. Concentrations of ground water contaminants detected in samples from the southern po.rtion of the site exceed the HRL's and surface water standards for a few petroleum related compounds. It is possible that I I residual petroleum contaminat�on of soil or ground water on the southern portion of the site will need to be addressed during redevelopment. Since contaminants were found on the site during the Phase II investigation, they must be remediated in some way. The extent and quantity of specific contaminants cannot be determined from a Phase II investigation. Standard procedure for addressing contamination found in a Phase TI is to develop a formal Response Action Plan (RAP). The intent of a RAP is to create a plan to remediate contamination on and from the site. The RAP document provides a blueprint with which to clean up contaminated soils and ground water. The RAP document is linked to the planned development of a particular site. For example, it is important to determine building placement on a development site in order to determine the necessary clean up protocol, such as removal of soils or creation of permanent ground water monitoring. Since redevelopment plans have not been created for this site, a formal RAP cannot be finalized. The purpose of the ERF application to Hennepin County is to develop additional environmental investigative information that can be used in preparation of a RA.P once a redevelopment plan is in place for the site. The ERF application is requesting $15,000 for additional investigation of the site and $45,000 for additional work to delineate the off site migration (if any) of VOC's from the former dry cleaning operation. This additional work would include such items as drilling momtoring wells in the area south, southeast from the site and conducting a well survey of existing private wells in the area south, southeast of the site. The total grant request is $60,000. No matcl�ing funds are required by the EDA or the City. The resolution before the EDA would provide authorization for the ERF grant application to Hennepin County. A copy of the ERF grant application is included with this memorandum. As required by Hennepin County, a companion City Council Resolution (included in the City Council agenda packet) must also be approved and submitted to Hennepin County. i I Commissioner introduced the followin resolution and g moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION TO THE HENNEPIN COUNT� ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND WHE REAS, an application requestmg grant funds from the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund has been prepared for submission by the Econoxnic Development Authority (EDA) of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the grant funds will be used for Environmental Investigation for preparation of a Response Action Plan for the Hmong American Shopping Center located in Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the EDA in and for the City of Brooklyn Center that the Environmental Response Fund application is hereby authorized for submission to the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. October 25, 2004 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I i Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Grant Application Cover Page Applicant: Brooklvn Center Economic Development Authoritv (EDA) Address: 6301 Shin�le Creek Parkwav. Brooklvn Center, MN 55430 Phone: 763-569-3300 Faac:763-569-3360 E-mail: Municipality: Citv of Brooklvn Center Project Contact Person: Tom Bublitz Phone: 763-569-3433 Fax:763-569-3360 E-maiL• tbublitznn,ci.brookvn-center.nm.us Application Preparer: Tom Bublitz Phone: 763-569-3433 Fax: 763 569-3360 E-mail: tbublitz cni,ci.brookvn-center.mn.us L SITE INFORMATION Name of Site Hmon� American Shonning Center (Building name, location, reference, etc.) Site Address 1910-2000 57 Ave N City (or Township) Brooklvn Center Hennepin County District No. 1 Property Identification No.: Pronertv Address pID 1910 57�' Ave N 02-118-21-13-0024 02-118-21-13-0025 1950 57` Ave N 02-118-21-13-0026 2000 57 Ave N 02-118-21-13-0027 i 1912 57 Ave N 02-118-21-13-0028 Page 1 I If enrolled in an MPCA program: VICNPIC Program I.D. Property is enrolled in VIC program under current owner. LUST Program I.D. Other 1. Is this site the previous recipient o� an ERF grant for assessment? Yes, Site received ERF funds to conduct a Phase II Investigation, which was completed in July 20Q4. 2. Is this application for an assessment, RAP development, or cleanup? Assessment Additional subsurface investigation and preliminary work related to development of a RAP. 3, Does this application request funds for property acquisition? NO 4. Current property owner Chafong Lee 5. Property owner after cleanup Unknown at present time 6. Current environmental consultant and legal counsel if applicable Consultant Phone Attorney Phone 7. Legal description of the site: 1910 57 Ave N Lot 1, Block 2, Northbrook Center Addition and Lot 2, Block 2, Northbrook Center Addition 1950 57 Ave N Lot 3, Block 2, Northbrook Center Addition 2000 57 Ave N Lot 4, Block 2, Northbraok Center Addition 1912 57 Ave N Lot 5, Block 2, Northbrook Center Addition 8. Acreage of site 8.11 Square footage of site 353,271.60 9. Attach an accurate and legible location map and site diagram showing locations of relevant site features such as buildings, retaining walls, suspected/known areas of contamination, etc. (photographs are helpful). The map should include the property boundaries, a scale bar and a north arrow. 10. What is the current Zoning/Land use of the site C-2 Commerce Page 2 I 11. Will the proposed final use of the site require a zoning change? YES If yes, describe the expected zoning and the necessary procedure for obtaining the change. The site is currently comprised exclusively of commercial uses. Redevelopment of the site may include a mix of residential and commercial uses. The zoning for the redeveloped site will most likely be a Planned Unit Development (PUD), which will allow the greatest flexibility for a mixed use redevelopment. The rezoning procedure would follow the requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance and State Statutes. The process wauld require the City's Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the rezoning and a recommendation to the City Council. Final approval of the rezoning will require a majority vote of the City Council. 12. Current economic condition: Developed site (described below) The site is comprised of four (4) commercial buildingsincluding one freestanding grocery store, two traditional strip center type buildings and a freestanding auto repair building. The total square footage of the four buildings is approximately 65,000 square feet. Both strip center buildings include some vacant store fronts and active retail businesses including: Asia Fashion and Fabrics Asian Grocery Store B C Auto Repair Chuck Wagon Restaurant Minnesota Martial Arts Unique Beauty Salon Laundry King Coin-Wash Cash and Pawn Monh Wok Restaurant Pro Nails Nail Salon Northbrook Beauty Salon 13. If the site is currently developed with building(s) but is not occupied, how long have the building(s) been vacant? 14. If this application is for a RAP implementation, is demolition required to implement the R.AP? NO If yes, describe the structure(s) to be demolished (include age and condition). If yes, does demolition require asbestos and/or lead paint abatement? If yes, describe. Page 3 I IL SITE HISTORY l. Please attach a brief synopsis of the site's history. Explain why the site is believed to be contaminated (if the application is for an assessment grant) ar how the site eame to be contaminated. Alsa list the titles and dates of any supporting environmental reports, historical information, etc. The Hmong American Shopping Center is a retail strip center located in Brooklyn Center and built in the late 1950's and early 1960's. It has operated as a neighborhood retail center from the 1950's continuing to the present day. The site is contaminated primarily due to the following: Two closed petroleum release tank sites associated with former gasoline stations exist on the southern portion of the property. Both sites were closed with residual soil and ground water contamination. One dry cleaner formerly located in the strip center building located on the northern portion of the property. One petroleum release tank site located south of the property adjacent to 57 Avenue North and reported to have off site contamination. Although groundwater flow is reported to be in a southeasterly direction, petroleum contamination has been detected in a monitoring well installed on the southeast corner of the property. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed in Apri12003 and a Phase II Investigation Report was completed in July 2004. Copies of both reports are on file with the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. III. CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION INFORMATION (Complete tliis section if your application is for an assessment and/or RAP development.) 16. Current status of the investigation: A. Is the site.enrolled in the MPCA VIC or VPIC program? Yes. The site is enrolled in the MPCA VIC program by the current owner. B. Has a Phase I Environmental Assessment been completed? YES (If yes, please attach a copy to this application) C. Do you have an approved work plan for a Phase II investigation? A Phase II Investigation was completed July 2004. Page 4 I (If yes, please attach a copy of the work plan and cost estimate to this I application) D. Has any portion of the work plan been implemented? Phase II completed July 2004 E. Please provide copies of any approval and/or comment letters that you have received from the MPCA and copies of any reports documenting investigation activities that have been conducted to date. 17. Briefly summarize the identified contamination at the site to date (contaminants, concentrations, etc.) and the objective of the future planned investigation. If no soil or groundwater samples have yet been collected at the site, please say so. Pursuant to the Phase II Investigation Report completed in July 2004, identified contaminants at the site include the following: Chlorinated VOC's were encountered in the soil and groundwater under and to the east of that portion of the strip center formerly occupied by a dry cleaning operation. One of the tasks to be accomplished with this ERF application will be to delineate the extent of soil contamination above the water table. During vertical groundwater profiling, the chlorinated solvent plume was defined in the vicinity of the former dry cleaners and VOC concentrations were measured at levels exceeding the HRL's and potentially relevant surface water standards. The off site extent of the chlorinated VOC's plume was not fully delineated during the Phase II investigation. Petroleum contamination is present in the soil and groundwater at the water table in the southern portion of the site. This finding is consistent with historical petroleum releases from petroleum tank release sites on this portion of the site. The extent of the contamination was not determined during the Phase II investigation and the locations(s) of the sources(s) was (were) not encountered during the Phase II. Concentrations of groundwater contaminants detected in samples from borings exceed the HRL's and surface water standards for a few petroleum related compounds. Identified contaminants on the site include: Soils Petroleum related compounds 1,2,4 trinethyl benzene 1,3,5 trimethyl benzene Page 5 I Di-N-butyl phthalate Tetrachloroethylene Related chlorinated VOC's Groundwater Naphthalene Ethyl benzene Petroleum related VOC"s and SVOC's Chlorinated VOC's Tetrachloroethylene Trichloroethylene Soil Concentrations 1,2,4 Triethylbenzene 4 and 5 mg/kg PCE 0.40 mg/kg Groundwater Concentration Vinyl chloride 1.0 ug/liter PCE 8.4-3100 ug/liter Isoplithalene 470 ug/liter Toluene 3,000 uglliter TCE 100-130 ug/liter Ethyl benzene (insufficient data) IV. CONTAMINATION INFORMATION Not Applicabe (Complete this section if your application is for a cleanup.) 18. What type of contaminants are present at the site? 19. Attach a copy of the approved RAP and final approval letter for your Response Action Plan from the MPCA. Also include your cost estimate for the RAP. 20. Summary of Contamrnation Information: A. Provide a concise description of the identified contamination and proposed RAP. The description should include the occurrence of the contamination (i.e., are there distinct areas of contamination or is contamination widely disseminated across the site? Is the contamination at the surface or at depth?). B. Complete the following table for soil contamination (be sure to include areas of contamination that have been identified at the site but will not be treated or removed as part of the approved RAP): General Total Volume of Total Volume of Remedy RAP Cleanup Goal Contaminant identified identified (i.e., residential type (i.e., DRO, contaminated contaminated soil RVs, industrial Page 6 VOCs,metals, soil (cyds) to be remediated SRVs, etc.) etc.) I I I I I f I I I I C. Complete the following table for groundwater contamination. If no or limited groundwater investigation has been conducted, indicate this. Also indicate if a groundwater investigation was conducted but no contamination was detected. General Contaminant Affected aquifer (i.e., Approximate dimensions of Remedy type (i.e., DRO, VOCs, water table, deeper contaminant plume onsite. metals, etc. aquifers) Specify if the plume extends off-site. I I I I f I D. List all compounds comprising the identified release in soil and the corresponding average and maximum concentration far each compound. Also include petroleum in the table. If distinct areas of contamination are present at the site, please describe separately. (NOTE: It is acceptable to provide an overview with estimated average and maximum concentrations. For the carcinogenic PAH compounds, provide BaP equivalent concentrations.) Compound Tier I Average Maximum SRV (residential) Concentration Concentration l i E. Please do the same as in D. for groundwater. Compound ARL Average Concentration Maximum Concentration 1 I I I I I F. If groundwater at the site is contaminated, note the geologic makeup of the affected aquifer (sandlgravel, till, lacustrine clay, etc.), and the estimated average linear velocity (be sure to indicate how this number was determined). G. Briefly describe the possible exposure scenarios posed by identified e contamination at the site (i.e., ingestion or human contact with contaminated soil, consumption af contaminated groundwater, ecological impacts, etc.), and Page 7 I nearby receptors that could be affected by contaminants migrating from the site (high resource value wetland/creeks/rivers, etc.). H. Provide a concise description of the proposed RAP activities. Include an estimate of volumes of soil and/or groundwater to be excavated/treated. Also describe demolition activities necessary to perform the cleanup. V. COST RECOVERY 21. Is the site receiving funding from any other state or federal funding program(s)? NO If yes, which program(s) and at what funding amount? 22. Has the site been identified as a state or federal Superfund site? NO 23. Has the party responsible for the contamination been identified? YES NO If yes, who is the responsible party (RP)? RP to be confirmed Is there any financial commitment by the RP for the cleanup? YES NO Not applicable for this application. 24. Are there available resources for the RP to pay for the cleanup? YES NO Please explain: Not applicable for this application. 25. Is a cost recovery plan to recover costs from responsible parties in place? YES NO Not applicable for this application. If yes, please attach the plan and amount of costs to be recovered. Has consent of the Attorney General been obtained? YES NO NOTE: It is not required that you have a plan to recover costs from the party responsible for the cantamination. However, if you are planning on recovering yourcosts from the responsible party, attach information on the process. VI. COST ANALYSIS INVESTIGATION, CLEANUP AND PROJECT COST BUDGETS 26. What is the grand total of investigation, cleanup and other proj ect costs for the site? 27. How much funding are you requesting from ERF? 60,000 28. Please fill out the following budget table to identify the assessment, cleanup, and project costs for the site. Include a time-line far completion of the assessment and/orclean up. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Page 8 I BUDGET TABLE Assessment and/or Investigation and Amount RAP Development Activities Environmental Investigative work relative to preparation of a $57,000* RAP including on site and off site investigation of chlorinated solvent plume. Work items include: *$42,000 is estimated for off Work plan preparation. site investigation Well receptor survey and questionnaire preparation and $15,000 for on- Geoprobe investigation for chlorinated solvent plume site investigation. delineation, chlorinated solvent source delineation, and petroleum source delineation. Reporting. General project management and administration. MPCA VIC Program staff oversi�ht. $3,000 SUBTOTAL (I) 60,000 Soil and Groundwater Cleanup Amount Activities i Nia SUBTOTAL (II) N/A TOTAL Investigation and Cleanup SUBTOTAL (I) SUBTOTAL (II) 60,000 Other Project Activities necessary to Amount implement RAP (ie, acquisition costs, demolition and all related pre-demo N/A abatement and special waste disposal) SUBTOTAL (III) N/A TOTAL Investigation, Cleanup and Project SUBTOTALS (I) +(II) (III) 60,000 29. Is there a possibility that the site will be investigated and/or cleaned up without ERF money? NO Please explain: At the present time, the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) does not have a written development Page 9 agreement to either acquire or assist with the development of the site. The EDA has allocated $51,000 for a market study and site planning for the project. The preliminary findings of the market study have indicated that a retail redevelopment project or combination of retail and residential development is feasible for this site. If the city, through its EDA, is unable to facilitate redevelopment of the site with the current owner, the city, through its EDA, will consider acquisition of the site for redevelopment, through the use of eminent domain. Additional investigative work beyond the Phase II investigation is essential to facilitate the city's role in redevelopment of the site particularly as it relates to potential off site contamination resulting from contaminants related to the former dry cleaning operation on the site. 30. Have other sources of funding for this project been identified? YES A. If yes, what are the sources of funding and dollar commitment from each? Source Amount Funding EPA Brownfield's Assessment Grant $16,428 Metronolitan Council Livable Communities Grant for Market Siudv Site Planning and Neiehborhood Review 24,000 Brookln Center EDA Funds for Market Studv, Site Plannin� And Nei�hborhood Review $51,000 B. If no, what efforts have been made to secure other funding? (Attach letters of r.ejection for funding requests, city council minutes, etc). Also attach a narrative explaining why the proj ect cannot be financed exclusively with local resources. The City, through its EDA, has been negotiating with the owner of the Hmong American Shopping Center to assist in the redevelopment of the site or purchase the site for redevelopment. This negotiation process is still underway. A third option is for the EDA to acquire the property through eminent domain. To date, the City has committed $51,000 to the planning phase of the project and the Metropolitan Council has committed an additional $24,000. Once a redevelopment project is established through a formal development agreement or the EDA acquires the property, the EDA will be able to allocate additional local funding to the project. In this preliminary phase, the EDA has committed significant local resources to the project but is not at a point in the project to commit additional funds until a project is formally established. Page 10 i The Metropolitan Council did provide funds for the marketing study and site planning portion of the project but rejected the Phase I and II requests indicating these elements were part of the development phase of the project. VII. SITE VALUE 3 L What is the current estimated value of the site? $3.1 million 32. What is the estimated value of the site, should contamination be found and remediation completed? Based on information from the Brooklyn Center City Assessor, the final value of the property would take into account the extent and cost of clean up along with the �nal remediation requirements. A. How was this figure determined? Information from City Assessor. B. Who `determined it? Brooklyn Center City Assessor VIII. REDEVELOPMENT 33. Explain the likely use of the site after investigation and cleanup and how this was determined (give examples of prospective developers, interested parties, zoning requirernents, etc.). Redevelopment of the site will likely focus on retail with the possibility of some housing. Based on market analysis provided by Maxfield Research, Inc., the project site could accommodate an additional 30,000 sq. ft. of retail and 60 units of housing. Housing does not exist on the site presently. Presently, no specific redevelopment plans have been proposed for the site. Redevelopment would likely require rezoning of the site. The zoning classification would likely be changed from C-2 (Commerce) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). 34. Describe how the community will derive benefit from the project. Provide a description of to what extent the project will remove blight; also indicate other measures such as green space creation, job creation, etc. to help quantify the community benefit of your proj ect. The Hmong American Shopping Center was constructed in the 1950's and 1960's as a traditional neighborhood retail strfp center to serve the retail and service shopping needs of the surrounding area. The center has gone through numerous changes over the decades and is currently underutilized Page 11 and approaching the end stages of its useful economic life. There is a significant amount of deferred maintenance on the site and it would not be practical to update the buildings to current code standards. If the site is not redeveloped, the center will continue to decline in terms of physical structure and retail choices for the surrounding neighborhood. Redevelopment will benefit the surrounding neighborhood and the larger community. Some of the benefits derived from the proposed redevelopment are listed below. Redevelopment will include demolition of all structures on the project site, which will eliminate any concern for a blighting influence on the neighborhood. Redevelopment will provide a new configuration of retail spaces on the site, with potential for the addition of housing on the site. The redevelopment of the site would be designed to attract shoppers and visitors outside the immediate neighborhood while still maintaining a neighborhood retail center. Redevelopment would eliminate the existing deteriorating strip center and would be supportive of the existing uses surrounding the site both residential and commerciaL Redevelopment of the site will address potential health risks posed by on site and possible off site contaminants exceeding established Health Risk Limit's (HRL's). 35. If the site will be redeveloped for residential use, provide the following data: At this point in the project planning process, it is not possible to determine the number of housing units, or whether housing will be a component in the redevelopment of the site. TOTAL OF RENTAL UNITS TO BE DEVELOPED Monthly rental cost per unit Number of affordable units Construction cost per unit TOTAL OF OWNER-0CCUPIED LTNITS TO BE DEVELOPED Purchase price per unit/home Number of affordable units/homes Construction cost per unit IX. RESOLUTIONS 36. A resolution must be adopted prior to submission of the application package. The required element is a resolution from the governing body of the city where the Page 12 i project site is located, which supports the application. The following blank resolution is included as an example for your convenience. You may choose to reformat it, but make sure to include all of the statements that appear in our example. RESOLUTION #1— City Approving the Application BE IT RESOLVED that the city.of supports the City where site is located environmental financial grant application submitted to the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services on by Date Applicant for the site. Site name I certify that the above resolution was adopted by the city council on Date Signed: Authorized Official Title: Date: Witnessed by: Title: Date: Page 13 �e a '��a j .;,'i2''wn�'�aF"' r�' '�`'"s�7i-��. �.f� i n i P^ 1 i a.-+.. 1 L�y�� "�.'wra r'"� -9-� i 1 a� ��'?k i �,I� 41 �"��t'� ��F y Y Y i i j,.�tiM� �'':k��F,�l�' r� �'x �y •�r ,1I t�� T�,�� ?�1 ,'3 e q�� ',{'I'��� �w•� i.. :r r�'�`�� ._f.��: t -�i��c J i�..�;' 3 #t: n':P J►A ..,,r�. r .4, r�" "K� ~r r fm d R� r,ytn�f y�. �t' y l:� y /���1�'� y t.. 3 .31 .:i si t,: ae' °a:..,.n,,,�„y��..R. '+Si� jt. L�� L��i3J� t ,F.- i ,�:�'?'r }'�e;. i.; r �e+ f �i r :i ,����i I rl y .r.` j. i r�AF '°d as'w, ar.x*t ,e� z �t 1 R r, r. �n S M' i ti ,y �mif .i 3 sat r t.,�'„s�,+ ��Ry,'i'�. i 'yD v. a,t s x 'C.: Y�i�v Iu R��@, 1 �7��,x,�. a, ti i �'i y�r'ss,;r4 H x F r.. �A K� ���P. �I 3SJ x c� r �1�:7 C�.. 'ge r� s. r. 1r.i�� �a,i� ��p v Q t`:,. �e �`n Y. C! t� �1 t�+ '?1�'' °Cs p r, �n: x l y ^L� '3 6:ia� Mr.ma�.:. A �k.i t r jl h Y t �iC ,r a I.:f.: p F iA� C 1 �t 1 n f ^TC�,S'� 2 r t �f...."1����� �k� �sms� `°ar`'°'" �°':�o'�'���,s`� �t�f .i.�.�.:.� i'-yi'�. �z�! 1 �l }S. :t,.. .i� s,; l`t i e... rr g .{b.��' ^1.. 4:, m ar� i1.ys �rsiy�'��'�' d��4.i:... ��i'" .e��l� �j'� '''3�`! ��N�';j�"�j���,���+w.. n+�i��� .�4 .r t�p 3� �:�:r i a y, i. '�,1�*.wR .'L P*, a4.1 i� i "'L" "f %�i-+���� o-N F v t e��. n r 'r a4 �,■���..r,h.r �.E A Y Y �i� .t .y 'ay Y k rr.�y+. 9 i i j rt,� +a r Y�" .r7. +.a r5g.�.� b, .r F .t S. a t' �^ri.��+ a` i q �.»,�.a��^ �..1 4 v rrx�� �F:iy, t '��t?:r �t� a .s� :�N "'c�ae y ar +re -�e: .�a 1y; r �rwws�.ea a: i, Y,a ��::��3y'c�'3¢4��`a' E .�•�t 4 r ..�y 7 ��N,�'��'� 1 Y i 3 ai s�w+ 9 F �+a�- f� t i t r;�`'��k t�''� r ,c f y .,�N ^s f 7� St t� .ti if sr �r �t `.[t��'�.. 0. �f�� y 7 p.,�'�i�; y f} S; ..�a �d� M1 1 7„ '.4`�1 �II�'~ R �':f,yy.. W'q�R gt l �t i Y t !"�r�"� z i f I� 9 'rr iY'L. 3 v, -7• X l. rl a:�, y.� 1 ,'i �i a f� i� n p �.,�k6f ..i t a '+s��y���, a �,�„�r+,�`�� 1'•ir j 'c� rr j' N yl N F5r Q{., g .1 x n i ,a• �.1�.: v x �a 'd t�C f,i '�W x' �i`�'„r p '.S� k4 ry; �s�i,V��. s t.� �4 F t u y S '7` r• S f r t �r., �t'�.3 r a '1° e t k t�y';`'. .i's p }ks �7, A,�� �r i T3� �t �`s t �Y Y,$y +G ,ol. s. „j ti a I;x' c t '�i y �'�.t ��x .4 1,8� Xy, l Y: 4 �t, i d1 �2'�;i ��;,1�, r �`Ti •i N,� i�.�, g 1 'R �ri '•.r,�� .�-d�� Q ��f.� ��,4P �R" as ti�'�i t` 1 2�• 1r' ��F;'. x a�. ^n y a� u4'c,,�. j y f s r y s '�f� Y ���^y�., S s�� r j d I� i y. t ��klr�._� �'S ','K, 1. z1 y` �4' ti ���ati s� F i�;w `c. s ���.ji ���i��? a i,. i 'i b r j 4 f^3P w ��t' I f�' t� p'�+ :.�y :a 8 ��'.r,� e� .3w� K �y.'s „8. i r i�. �,.�i .i. 1' V' `y_c y '�,wq. S:�"�� �s* :�S r,. 8 :o- •n. 1� u y �4 3,� �a�wida�� J �'�yr 4�,'y S. ��i1 �y �'i. R �F. a y y .u.! i tl G z ..i'� .i+ a�. L r '�'�J{�', r f `in. r� d 1A. 4(/� WY+_ a i r t l� y 1 Y'_ �C�q ����7��.' 1. F '3,i 71t` us ?t 1� c a, �,i �i s�t .�i� �A i*� a.°r i �f� t` .Ra�. �'J i `13' .yy,�' t �ii� A M( �W .E y�.�. y fv t t c. 4. FM��,.r�. ��r`"7 x .,�7 a•�' f a i 4 f r s t •-'-1 3 Y t.3 r 'R. b �k t I r Y' M ��•s� �4 r i: K �p?� ,p �S i j r 'Jc r �l� i 1. p� �4 l '�a��� °""���C .a �r�� I t 5�r.,� f ���;F�� �E' t?` 3dj �,y�3� y 'C '�,k�,� T i4 �'�e /,�dst y}_ F E F,� f-� 3� r '��H,+.� �''r v c 'j,w y '9+1 l;�v�, Z.£..�,1.. i �Sp f "'i �.a .'.�t�."^ k�i:. :�i� �'a +'�,�yy'{t�u� ,j D J ;�S' '?Shf�.+ x, r t .y r� �a f. r j: t� �,��n .�.t 4t�'ji }'i s t w kie. Y.r.. J .r+�w�F ,y C r �a� h s`.,�ty i"' �4. '�r� h� 1} a� et;�R�'. 'G� �j,;�� at �`7. �,a �t� Y�y��.� o+; a �y .ys L.aL� s 4 ar�� $.ds�� c 5. �1 -��,y�e,;��.'t�+, ,r 4Zf 7�i:` i�ee a .�+G t i t o xv�, J i �.d�� fi���� _�e M k���� °C y �.s,_ a c� f.':'�b r .:S� w4 .�[S}�� 1 3 i�' r J 7�� a �xt'? 4 '�'t r "-+2hil�Y��=' t:�F 4 �t d�'t."�i f rt ¢�s L t L,. 3�j� ��,7' �A4 nr s �.t. i i s '�r�`y����r. '�F �a h� �i#� r r ,r Zr z`' y ,{y f. f#f'. n3 t ('�cx"� r!(�� r� h� l� #r t j +1 �4' ��.J,`�d r i �N' !+�Yw< 1�j 3' �i�. t g� r 1� r' 4l i 4 �1'{'�' �N��� 3 t- e; �n 4 ff'Si' C .w `4 '9� S i /.s t K� a c �y:Y A �},�'+��Sf1 `f.r ,Re '1- 't� 5,.� 'jr t t:� f 7. r q°iu.:',* 4t �i J y.�-�' 1 j t T b k I 4! °G,�' r 1 v+.�, s-r L+�`� a .�Fx s s f t� .ti r "`t i_ t �n� �a 9 U 7Y:� y .i !.l g�� ���6 7 7 y d 'y' a� �RF T r d �}t 7 l( r 2 v; :Y' S �:i r 9ty� f 5: :�"`4n:.� 1'�'� d A r 2 1 'i �h Z ..t° {�'�k r -j.�.'��" `c �al� y `a r 3� a ra��, S; 1 �N �p,.. s.. ti' `E r ti k," �7� '+i F r r v "i'�5� �k ;t�' a i�,J� y.�'. �yrs+ i K i s 1 w *w y qiA eok �R 'a�+�. g +r,. J Fi 9 ��1 YM :a�^'" Y', .:,iiC'. +y,, �r,��t t. i 1.� a� y'e}�,'4. '�t r,��.`.� R v.�'. 4 Y E� i i w k KAr ,.,.^r,'` ,1�' 's.., p g, �'qk 7 in�tr �1C, �d` �2'���rr��,� ��,,i �,��.....�kb it,�. xFl.� .F 1:}.�^ wA ����f-�.�.� ���ti3C. rl`��-.�.�if' �t 4 �a}.� ,a A �v<' 1'?{.'� 'S,� ;.s�.