WS 02-09-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Work Session Memo February 5, 2010 Page 2 • 1) There is already a responsible party (Ashland Oil) on the hook for some level of clean-up. Late last week Ashland Oil finally produced a draft 3 -party Compliance Agreement between the company, MPCA and the City, which spells out how they plan to clean-up the site. This is very good news, since the City has been seeking a commitment from Ashland to take on the clean-up over the past 3 years. During that process, the City was successful in engaging the MPCA to revisit the site and seek enforcement on Ashland's responsibilities. Staff is in the process of reviewing the draft agreement with legal counsel and will provide the City Council with more information in the coming weeks. 2) There are several different cost estimates for addressing the site clean-up, depending on the scope of work. Attached is a spreadsheet from Barr Engineering that identifies a range of estimates. On the low end, the clean-up would allow the area to be used as a park or open space. We anticipate that Ashland would be required by MPCA to do this level of clean-up under the Compliance Agreement, which would allow for de -listing of the site from the Superfund program. On the high end, both the environmental and geotechnical corrections could be accomplished, making the site suitable for some type of development. We do not expect that Ashland would be required to do this level of work under their Superfund clean-up obligations, and in fact we have some concerns that they might balk or withdraw from the discussions if another use is • advanced by the City. 3) Assuming that $2.OM is the historical limit on federal funding, it is unclear how much additional clean-up work could be done. It is possible that development could be pushed north of the current line (see attached map). However, we don't know the full extent of the benefits, such as the number of housing units that could be constructed. Furthermore, our advisors at Ehlers Associates have indicated that many of the national housing developers are leery of buying land that has had severe contamination. This adds to the concern that even if the full 8-10 acres were cleaned -up to residential standards, there might not be a developer willing to acquire that part of the site. 4) The federal appropriations account that we would be competing for funds for this project has traditionally yielded far less funding for local projects than some of the other transportation related appropriations accounts. 5) One last concern relates to timing. If the City does want to push for additional clean-up, it is possible that this could delay final resolution of NW Refinery Superfund site and have spill over impacts on the larger project. In summary, staff does not have enough information about the status of the NW Refinery to make a recommendation on requesting federal dollars. Once we start the • discussions with Ashland, we can explore the feasibility of additional clean-up. Through that process we could assess whether it makes sense to seek federal help. Lastly,