HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-10-17 ENR Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
October 17, 2011
7 p.m.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes:
a. September 19, 2011
5. Unfinished Business
a. Gladstone Savanna
b. Maplewood Dump Site
6. New Business
a. Joy Park Wetland Buffer Waiver
7. Visitor Presentations
8. Commission Presentations
9. Staff Presentations
a. Shoreland/Wetland Ordinance Update
b. Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Reappointments
c. Maplewood Nature Center Programs
10. Adjourn
Agenda Item 4.a.
MINUTES
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
7:00 p.m., Monday, September 19, 2011
Council Chambers, City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
A. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission was called to order at 7:04
p.m. by Vice Chair Edmundson.
B. ROLL CALL
Bill Schreiner, Chair
Randee Edmundson, Vice Chair
Judith Johannessen, Commissioner
Carol Mason Sherrill, Commissioner
Ann Palzer, Commissioner
Dale Trippler, Commissioner
Ginny Yingling, Commissioner
Absent
Present
Staff Present
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Staff added I. 7.
Recovery Facility Tour
Commissioner Yingling
H.
Discussion.
Commissioner Trippler
Seconded by Commissioner Yingling.
Ayes - All
The motion passed.
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the Auqust 15. 2011. Environmental and Natural
Resources Commission Meetinq Minutes as submitted.
Seconded by Commissioner Johannessen.
Ayes - All
The motion passed.
E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Shoreland/Wetland Ordinance - Update on State Shoreland Rules
a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the report and introduced Molly Shodeen,
Area Hydrologist with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
September 19,2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
1
b. Molly Shodeen, Area Hydrologist, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources addressed
and answered questions of the commission on the State Shoreland Rules.
. The State began looking at the shore land rules several years ago due to the increase in
large structures being constructed within the shoreline of recreational lakes, particularly
large docks and boat houses.
. The new rules were drafted during a two-year rulemaking process that involved all state
shoreland stakeholders, including cities, counties, and property owners on lakes.
. The draft rules were sent to Governor Pawlenty in 2010, who sent the rules back to the
DNR for additional reviews, particularly a review by the 2011 Legislature.
. There has been no work on the draft shoreland rules since that time.
. The DNR will begin reviewing a process for completion of the rules in the next coming
months. Ms. Shodeen estimated that this process could take another year before
anything is finalized.
. Prior to the adoption of the state shoreland rules by the Governor, Ms. Shodeen
recommended that the City of Maplewood make only minor amendments to the existing
shoreland ordinance.
. Ms. Shodeen indicated she would look into the Minnesota GreenStep Cities
recommendation for cities to adopt the alternative shoreland rules. She will also be back
before the Commission in the next few months an update on the resurrection of the
rule making process.
2. Trash Collection System Analysis - Update
a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the System Analysis Update
and answered questions of the commission. Comments and questions regarding the
analysis are welcome and will be presented at the September 26, 2011, City Council
Meeting.
. The City received six [@spOtj$es tgthe Trash Collection Request for Proposal.
. The Trash Hauling WQ[kinggrq!JP~nalyzed those responses and found that there
were six respon~iy@prOpgsal sceharios from four companies.
. Of the six scenl!iriOs;tp@ Ttlil,sh Hauling Working Group ranked Allied Waste Services
with the highe$t scores~s OUtlined in the RFP evaluation process.
. The Trash Haulitjg Wor~ing Group will recommend that the City Council authorize staff
to begin negotiatiOtj~with Allied for a Draft Trash Collection contract during the
September 26, 201 lmeeting.
. Possible improvements to the City's existing system will also be revisited during a
workshop on October 24.
. Both the contractual and the existing system tracks will come together on November
28 when the City Council will determine which system meets the goals outlined in the
Trash Collection System Analysis.
F. NEW BUSINESS
None.
G. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
1. Lisa Hlavenka, 1780 Desoto Street, Maplewood. Ms. Hlavenka asked questions regarding the
trash collection system analysis. She asked if there was an option to opt out of the garbage
collection program. Staff stated state statute indicates that residents can opt out of the
program but they have to have a responsible means of removing their trash such as owning
their own business. She also asked about the track record of these garbage companies in
the RFP and is there someone that they can get a hold of the in customer service with
concerns.
September 19,2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
2
H. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
1. Fish Creek - Commissioner Yingling
Commissioner Yingling stated the city is moving forward with the conservation fund in the
purchase of the Fish Creek property for natural resource protection. A very generous donation
was made by 3M. The DNR has made a grant available for the purchase as well. The city will
be submitting a grant proposal through the LCCMR and the Friends of the Mississippi River
are assisting with the process.
I. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
1. Lake Phalen Watershed Vision Retreat - September 22, 2011, at Our Redeemer Lutheran
Church at 1390 Larpenteur Avenue East in St. Paul at 6:30 and 8:30 p.m. for Part 2 of the
retreat. Part 1 was held September 13, 2011.
2. Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Reappointments - September 26,
2011. Commissioners Johannessen and Schreiner are up for renewal.
3. Renewable Energy Ordinance - This will be discussed at the September 26, 2011 city
council meeting.
4. Maplewood Mall Extreme Makeover for Stormwater Management - September 27, 2011,
Tours will be held at 8 a.m., 11 a.m., noon and 5:30 p.m. at the main east mall entrance next
to Barnes and Noble.
5. Solar Works in Maplewood - October 11,2011, 6:30 to 8 p.m. at the Maplewood Nature
Center, 2659 7th Street East in Maplewood.
6. Maplewood Nature Center Programs - Staff spot lighted some of the programs at the
Maplewood Nature Center.
7. Ramsey-Washington Resource Recovery Facility Tour - Staff will be setting up a tour to
the RRT site in Newport. More information to follow.
J. ADJOURNMENT
Acting Chair Edmundson adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
September 19,2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
3
Agenda Item 5.a
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission
Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Gladstone Savanna Soil Remediation and Stormwater Management
October 12, 2011 for October 17, 2011 Commission Meeting
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
The city is developing a Master Plan for Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve and Gloster
Park. Several commissions are involved in the development of the Master Plan and the ENR
will address two issues in the plan: soil remediation and stormwater management. At the
October 17, 20 II ENR Commission meeting, consultants from SEH, Inc. will present the soil
analysis and remediation plan and stormwater management strategies.
DISCUSSION
Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve is a 24-acre natural area, which currently has no
trails or amenities. Gloster Park is a 2.7 acre Neighborhood Park with play equipment and open
play area. The Master Plan is treating these sites as one. The Master Plan for Gladstone
Savanna and Gloster Park will integrate history, natural resources, trails and recreation,
stormwater management, and soil remediation.
In the late 1800's the property was the location ofthe Gladstone Shops of the St. Paul and
Duluth Railroad. Repair operations ceased in the 1940' s and the property was acquired by the
Whirlpool-Seeger appliance company for use in storage, shipping, and receiving of appliances.
Buildings on the site were demolished in 1979-1980. The city acquired the site in 1994. A 573-
foot deep water supply well was located on the property and sealed on September 21,2001.
Phase I and limited Phase II Environmental Assessments were done in the late 1980's and early
1990's. In 2007, the city's consultant SEH, Inc. and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's
(MPCA) consultant Delta Consultants conducted a more extensive investigation to characterize
the nature and extent of contamination on the property. This work is presented in their Final
Phase II Investigation Report (January 2008). The full report is available online at
www.ci.maplewood.mn.uslgladstonesavanna. Key portions of the report are attached:
Attachment I includes the text from the report (pages 1-16);
Attachment 2 contains three tables from the report;
Attachment 3 contains the figures from the report, showing the soil borings, trench
locations, and results
SEH, Inc. prepared a Response Action Plan (RAP) and Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) in
February 2008, which addresses the management and disposal of contaminated soil at the site.
Attachment 4 includes portion of the RAP/CCP: report pages 1-9, figures 4 and 5 showing a
map with soil results and a map ofthe proposed remediation. The full report with appendices is
available online at www.ci.maplewood.mn.uslgladstonesavanna.
Contamination exceeding Soil Reference Values (SRV) or action levels was found at some of the
sampling areas. SRV levels are indicated in the attached tables and items in bold in the attached
tables and maps exceed SRV. Consultants from SEH, Inc. will review the findings at the ENR
Commission meeting.
The RAP and CCP propose three methods of handling the contaminated soils on the site. In one
small area, contaminated soils would be removed from the site and disposed of at a permitted
landfill. In some areas soil would be left on site and covered with additional fill to create a four
foot separation between contamination and the soil surface. In some areas there may be potential
to reuse soils on site beneath paved surfaces. The Master Plan is being designed to
accommodate these remediation strategies. In 2008, the RAP and CCP were submitted to the
MPCA for review. The MPCA requested that the city resubmit it once detailed plans for the site
are completed.
Stonnwater Management
The Gladstone Savanna/Gloster Park Master Plan will include improvements in the handling of
stormwater on the site. At the ENR Commission meeting, consultants will present the general
strategy for stormwater management at the site. This includes: I) improve the capacity ofthe
existing basin on the site to capture and infiltrate stormwater, 2) improve the aesthetics of the
storm basin, and 3) increase the ecological benefits of the storm basin.
Staff supports the RAP and CCP for handling contaminated soil at the site and we support the
general stormwater management strategy for the site. The commission will have an opportunity
to review the final Master Plan for the site in November. However, our consultants will not
attend that meeting so technical questions on soil remediation and stormwater management
should be addressed at the October meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the ENR Commission approves the recommendations in the
RAP and CCP for managing contaminated soil at the site.
Staff recommends that the ENR Commission approves the general strategies for
stormwater management at the site.
Attachments:
1. Phase II Report text (pages 1-16)
2. Phase II Report tables 2, 3, 4
3. Phase II Report figures
4. RAP and CCP (text pages 1-9, Figures 4,5)
Full reports are available at: www.ci.maplewood.mn.us\gladstonesavanna
2
Attachment 1
Final Phase II Investigation Report
Gladstone Savanna
Maplewood, Minnesota
SEH No. A-MAPLE0701.02
VIC 10# VP20120
January 2008
Jill Mickelson
Environmental Engineer
Kathryn Sarnecki
Environmental Engineer
AI Sunderman, P.G.
Project Manager
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
651.490.2000
Attachment 2
Final Phase II Investigation Report
Gladstone Savanna
Maplewood, Minnesota
SEH No. A-MAPLE0701.02
January 2008
Attachment 2
Table of Contents
Certification Page
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................1
1.1 January 2007 SEH Scope of Work .....................................................................1
1.2 Purpose of Investigation .....................................................................................2
1.3 Summary of Results for 2007 Investigations ......................................................2
2.0 Site Background ........................................................................................................2
2.1 Site Description ...................................................................................................2
2.1.1 Site History ..............................................................................................3
2.1.1.1 Report: December 1999..........................................................3
2.1.1.2 Report: November 3, 1992......................................................3
2.1.1.3 Report: December 14,1992....................................................3
2.1.1.4 Report: March 5,1993.............................................................4
2.1.1.5 Application: March 22, 1993..................................................4
2.1.1.6 Letter: April 27, 1993...............................................................4
2.1.1.7 Letter: August 18,1993..........................................................4
2.1.1.8 Letter Report: September 9, 1994 ..........................................5
2.1.1.9 Report: October 14, 1994.......................................................5
2.1.1.10 Report: May 18, 2005 ............................................................5
2.1.2 Use of Sanborn and Historic Maps..........................................................5
2.2 Regional Physical Setting ...................................................................................6
2.2.1 Regional Geology....................................................................................6
2.2.2 Soils........................................................................................................6
3.0 Overview of January 2007 (SEH) Phase II Investigation ........................................7
3.1 Scope and Rationale........................................................................................... 7
3.2 Field Investigation and Sampling Methods .........................................................7
3.2.1 Geoprobe Soil Borings ............................................................................7
3.2.2 Hollow Stem Auger Soil Borings .............................................................7
3.2.3 Soil Sample Locations.............................................................................8
3.2.4 Site Soil Sampling ...................................................................................8
3.2.4.1 Field Screening .......................................................................8
3.2.4.2 Laboratory Analytical Samples ...............................................8
3.3 Chemical Analytical Methodologies ....................................................................8
3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control......................................................................9
3.5 Action Levels.......................................................................................................9
4.0 January 2007 (SEH) Phase II Investigation Results ...............................................9
4.1 Boring Locations.................................................................................................9
4.2 Site Specific Geology ........................................................................................1 0
4.3 Field Screening Results ....................................................................................11
SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page i
Attachment 2
Table of Contents (Continued)
4.4 Soil Laboratory Results .....................................................................................11
4.4.1 Diesel Range Organics (DRO) ..............................................................11
4.4.2 GRO and VOCs ....................................................................................11
4.4.3 RCRA Metals ........................................................................................11
4.4.4 SVOCs................................................................................................. .12
4.4.5 PCBs.................................................................................................... .12
4.4.6 Asbestos............................................................................................. ..12
5.0 October 2007 (Delta) Phase II Investigation Results ............................................12
5.1 Test Pits ............................................................................................................12
5.2 Test Trenches ...................................................................................................12
5.3 Residential Well sampling .................................................................................13
5.4 Test pit and trench soil profile ...........................................................................13
5.5 Field Screening Results ....................................................................................13
5.6 Soil Laboratory Results................................................................................... ..13
5.6.1 Diesel Range Organics (DRO) ..............................................................13
5.6.2 VOCs................................................................................................... ..13
5.6.3 RCRA Metals...................................................................................... ..13
5.6.4 SVOCs................................................................................................. .14
5.6.5 PCBs.................................................................................................... .14
5.6.6 Asbestos............................................................................................. ..14
6.0 Findings/Extent of Contamination - Phase II Investigation ................................14
6.1 Previously Known Contamination .....................................................................14
6.2 2007 Investigation Conclusions ........................................................................15
7.0 Standard of Care ......................................................................................................16
List of Tables
Table 1 - Previous Investigation Analytical Results
Table 2 - January 2007 SEH PID Field Screening Results
Table 3 - January 2007 SEH Soil RCRA Metals and Asbestos Analytical Results
Table 4 - January 2007 SEH Soil TPH, VOC, and SVOC Analytical Results
Table 5 - January 2007 SEH Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) Equivalents
Table 6 - January 2007 SEH Soil PCBs Analytical Results
Table 7 - October 2007 Delta Field Screening Results
Table 8 - October 2007 Delta DRO, VOC, PAH, PCB, and Asbestos Analytical Results
Table 9 - October 2007 Delta Total Metals Analytical Results
Table 10- October 2007 Delta SVOC Analytical Results
Table 11 - October 2007 Delta Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) Equivalents
Table 12 - October 2007 Residental Groundwater Analytical Results
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page ii
Attachment 2
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location
Figure 2 - Site Plan
Figure 3 - Historic 1903 Structures
Figure 4 - Previous Investigations
Figure 5 - SEH Sample Locations
Figure 6 - SEH and Previous Investigations
Figure 7 - Test Pit and Test Trench Locations
Figure 8 - Summary of Tier 1 SRV Exceedances
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
List of Appendices
Site Legal Description
October 2007 Delta Environmental Investigation Information
Previous Reports & Investigations
Standard Operating Procedures
Boring Logs
Laboratory Analytical Reports
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page iii
Attachment 2
January 2008
Final Phase II Investigation Report
Gladstone Savanna
Prepared for the City of Maple wood
1.0 Introduction
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH"') was retained by the City of
Maplewood to conduct a Limited Phase II Environmental Site Investigation
(Phase II). The investigated site is the 27-acre former railroad repair yard
located at the southwest corner of Frost Avenue and English Street in
Maplewood, Minnesota. (herein referred to as "site" or "subject property").
The site location and investigated corridor are depicted on Figures 1 and 2.
A legal description ofthe property is attached in Appendix A.
SEH's initial investigation in January 2007 identified the need for additional
site information. A second investigation was conducted by MPCA's
consultant (Delta Environmental) through a Petroleum Brownfields
Remediation program grant in October 2007. A full description of SEH's
January 2007 work is included in this report with a summary ofthe October
2007 investigation findings and a copy of documents supplied by MPCA's
environmental consultant is attached in Appendix B.
1.1 January 2007 SEH Scope of Work
This Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was completed
in general accordance with the MPCA Guidance Document 4-01: Soil and
Groundwater Assessments Performed during Site Investigations. The Phase
II ESA consisted ofthe following general tasks:
. Monitoring and sampling soils collected from two (2) hollow stern auger
borings advanced for geotechnical assessment,
. Advancing eighteen (18) Geoprobe1M borings,
. Soil sample collection and characterization,
. Field screening of soil samples,
. Analysis of collected soil samples, focusing on the near-surface interval
(0 to 4 feet),
. Compilation of and evaluation of collected data, and
. Report of investigation findings.
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 1
Attachment 2
1.2 Purpose of Investigation
The City of Maple wood is planning a redevelopment ofthe Gladstone
neighborhood, including the Gladstone Savanna subject property. Defined
plans for the subject property include the placement of up to two (2) storm
water ponds in the west third of the parcel. At the same time the City intends
to restore the oak savanna eco-type to the remainder ofthe subject property.
The purpose ofthis investigation was to:
1. Evaluate previous environmental investigations ofthe subject property.
2. Design a scope of work to supplement the previous investigations,
specific to the installation of storm water ponds and prairie restoration.
3. Implement the Phase II ESA workplans,
4. Present the results and recommendations to the City of Maplewood for
integration in the Gladstone Savanna planning process, and
5. Work with site planners to identifY appropriate reuse/public use of the
Gladstone Savanna parkland.
1.3 Summary of Results for 2007 Investigations
As a result ofthe January and October investigations, SEH identified
contamination exceeding State action levels, associated with the following
historic areas ofthe site:
Historic Area ORO B(a)P RCRA RCRA RCRA
Equivalents Lead Arsen ic Mercu ry
Round House 710 5.6 797 20 0.21
Woodworking/Tool Room & Tin Shop 169 2.3 93.3 2.7 4.8
Paint Shop 120 0.086 400 6.9 3.8
Machine Shop 230 29.7 360 8.2 0.51
Erecting Shop 72 2.16 611 4.1 1.6
Transfer Pit Non-detect 4.7 32.2 1.2 0.46
Brass Foundry 130 1.23 797 29 0.23
Water Tank/Shed 29 2.12 16.5 3.8 0.035
Track Extension 210 Non-detect 74 3.9 Non-detect
ACTION LEVEL 200 2.0 300 5 0.5
Note: Listed result is the rnaxirnlllTI concentration detected of all sampling points within the
historic area. Items in bold exceed a Tier 1 SRV or general site action level (DRO).
2.0 Site Background
2.1 Site Description
The subject property is currently vacant. The property covers approximately
27 acres located at the southwest comer of English Street and Frost Avenue
in the City of Maple wood, Minnesota. A legal description ofthe subject
property is included as Appendix A. The approximate property boundary
and relevant features are depicted on Figure 2, "Site Plan".
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 2
Attachment 2
2.1.1 Site History
According to reports reviewed for this assessment, the subject property was
first developed as a railroad repair facility in the late 1800's. The property
ceased repair operations in the 1940's. Subsequently the property was
acquired by the Whirlpool-Seeger appliance company and was used for
storage, shipping and receiving of appliances. The subject property buildings
were demolished in 1979-1980. A 573-foot water supply well (Unique
Number 233514) was located on the property in 1998 by the City of
MaplewoodlMinnesota Department of Health and sealed on September 21,
2001. In 1994 the City of Maplewood acquired the property from the Trust
for Public Land. A chain-of-title review was not completed as part ofthe
Initial Phase II Investigation.
2.1.1.1
The following is a summary of the investigations and reports that were
reviewed by SEH, in chronological order. Excerpts from these reports are
included as Appendix C. Figure 3 and Table 1 present summaries of the
previous investigation results.
Report: December 1999
Warzyn Environmental (Warzyn), Preliminary Phase I Environmental
Assessment, Glacier Park Company, Property Sequence Number 204
(#60791), for Glacier Park Company.
Result: Identified potential for leaks/ spills of:
2.1.1.2
. Oils & solvents from former RR repair facility
. Oils & solvents from railroad tracks serving the Whirlpool-Seeger
warehouse.
. Petroleum release from gas station adjacent to NE.
. Unknown off-site spills could impact sediments in stormwater pond.
Note: Non-ASTM methodology.
Report: November 3. 1992
American Engineering & Testing (AET), Limited History Search and
Workplan, for Good Value Homes.
Result: Identified potential contamination from:
. Roundhouse in NE Comer.
. Repair facility in central portion of site
. Creosote treated railroad ties north and south of previous buildings
. Fill placed after building demolition
Recommended PID screening, DRO samples from roundhouse/repair
structures and P AHs from railroad track areas. Historic Sanborn maps are
listed as unavailable.
2.1.1.3
Report: December 14. 1992
AET, Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (AET #92-2097) for
Good Value Homes.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 3
Attachment 2
2.1.1.4
2.1.1.5
2.1.1.6
2.1.1.7
Ten soil borings completed throughout site. Average sample collection
interval is 5 to 7.5 feet deep. Certain borings are analyzed for DRO and
PAH. DRO impact of 160 ppm detected in boring #5 between the
woodworking and pattern shops, and lesser DRO impacts throughout site.
Higher and lower-boiling point peaks noted on DRO lab analytical for many
samples, especially for samples near the main structure, and the roundhouse.
Two composite P AH samples were collected, one from 2.5 - 5 feet, and the
other from 7.5 - 10 feet. Each comprised of four grab samples collected from
across the former rail area. PAH detections in composite samples from 2.5 to
5 foot interval. Total P AHs below 5 mg/kg.
Report: March 5.1993
AET, Report of Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 27-acre
Parcel, English Street and Frost Avenue (AET #93-546) for K & J
Corporation.
AET completed five soil borings to depths of20 feet to 27.5 feet. Thirteen
samples were analyzed for DRO only. The average sample collection depths
varied, but were no shallower than 5 feet and no deeper than 27 feet in any
boring. Sample SB#4, approximately 100 feet east of previous boring #5,
and located in the north end ofthe former erecting shop, has DRO impacts of
53 mg/kg, below the then-current standard of 100 mg/kg. Other samples are
non-detect or have low DRO detections. Also, geotechnical investigation
finds fill soils unsuitable for planned residential development of site.
Note: This report was revised June 30, 1994 and references to geotechnical
suitability andMPCA requirements were not present in revision.
Application: March 22. 1993
MPCA Request for Property Transfer Technical Assistance (VIC # PT3740)
by K & J Corporation.
K & J Corporation submitted copies ofthe Warzyn 1999 ESA, and the AET
1992 and 1993 investigation reports to the MPCA PTNC program. The
application identified possible sources ofDRO impacts as former BNR USTs
(unspecified), and railroad service facility. The applicant requested
concurrence with no further investigation conclusion ofthe 1993 AET report.
Letter: April 27. 1993
MPCA Property Transfer Technical Assistance Program, to K & J
Corporation.
MPCA deemed the previous site investigations incomplete and requested
additional sampling. The request included a thorough Phase I ESA,
additional Phase II ESA investigation covering soils and groundwater,
including PTNC Guidance Doc #4 soil and groundwater sampling, including
three groundwater monitoring wells.
Letter: August 18. 1993
MPCA Property Transfer Technical Assistance Program, to K & J
Corporation.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 4
Attachment 2
2.1.1.8
2.1.1.9
2.1.1.10
MPCA acknowledged K & J Corporation's withdrawal from the PTNC
program. Letter states "No further action by VIC program staff will be taken
on this Site at this time. However, this should not be construed to mean that
no other contamination exists at the Site... .the presence or absence of other
contamination at the Site cannot be confirmed at this time."
Letter Report: September 9. 1994
AET, Report Review, for the Trust for Public Land.
Reviewed previous AET Phase II report (AET #93-546, revised) and AET
Phase I ESA (AET #93-1002). AET identifies leakage offuel and lubricants
at site, as documented in previous investigations. Reiterates that MPCA has
issued notification of site file inactivity. Presents possibility of on-site septic
systems, wells, and railroad ties remaining at site.
Report: October 14. 1994
Braun Intertec (Braun), Environmental Soils Evaluation ofthe Former
Burlington Northern Site, Southwest Comer of English Street and Frost
Avenue, for the City of Maple wood.
Reviewed previous AET and Warzyn reports and investigations and
completed five additional soil borings across site. Boring depths ranged
from 41 to 70 feet deep. Groundwater encountered at 69.5 feet below west
portion of site. Samples from the 0-4' interval were submitted for
DRO/GRO, PAH, and VOC analyses. No detections above method detection
limits for any analyzed compound. Concluded that DRO soil contamination
is limited to the areas ofthe maintenance and roundhouse buildings.
Recommend contingency plan for excavation.
Report: Mav 18. 2005
Braun, Limited Phase I ESA, Gladstone Neighborhood Strategic Planning
Study Area, for the City of Maple wood.
Conducted a Limited ASTM E 1527-00 Phase I ESA for the future Gladstone
Neighborhood redevelopment, including the subject property. The subject
property is identified as having a recognized environmental condition (REC).
"Former railroad snowplow repair facility and roundhouse. Known
petroleum contamination around maintenance buildings and roundhouse.
Additional areas may exist." Report recommends the preparation of a
response action plan and construction contingency plan to manage
contaminated soil that might be disturbed by redevelopment.
2.1.2 Use of Sanborn and Historic Maps
Please note that Sanborn fire insurance maps were first identified for the site
in the 2005 Braun report. Previous reports did not identifY the existence of
Sanborn maps. SEH scanned the 1903 Sanborn maps, corrected for scale and
skew, and overlaid on site maps. The locations and extents of buildings were
corrected through the use of 1940 and 1953 aerial photographs obtained from
the City of Maple wood GIS department.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 5
Attachment 2
Also, previous investigation reports did not always present soil boring data
on maps printed to scale. When possible, field notes or written
measurements were used to locate these borings relative to the SEH site map.
In the absence of scaled map information, the locations of these borings were
approximated from published map features. Therefore, the location of
previous consultants' borings should be considered as approximate.
2.2 Regional Physical Setting
2.2.1 Regional Geology
The bedrock geology ofthe Maplewood area consists of sedimentary rocks
deposited in a shallow basin during the transgression and regression of
shallow seas throughout the Paleozoic. The Paleozoic strata were deposited
in thin, relatively horizontal layers and were subsequently warped during
faulting that caused the formation ofthe Twin City basin. The Twin City
basin forms a bedrock depression in Hennepin, Ramsey and northern Dakota
Counties and a structural high in southern Scott and southern Dakota
Counties. The bedrock units in the vicinity ofthe site in descending order are
Platteville/Glenwood Formations, St. Peter Sandstone, Prairie du Chien
Group, and Jordan Sandstone. A bedrock valley exists west ofthe site. The
bedrock valley is incised through the bedrock units exposing the lower
formations (Jordan Sandstone and Prairie du Chien Group) as the upper most
bedrock geology at and west ofthe site. The St. Peter Sandstone and
Platteville Glenwood Formations are the upper most bedrock east ofthe site.
The surficial geology in the area surrounding the site consists of Pleistocene
age glacial deposits ofthe Des Moines Lobe. Glacial deposits consist oftills,
lacustrine, and stream deposits. In general, deposits at the site and north are
stream deposits originating from the Grantsburg Sublobe. In general, deposits
south and west ofthe site are tills originating from the older Superior Lobe.
Surficial geology ofthe site consists of stream deposits ofthe Gransburg
Sublobe overlying till (Minnesota Geological Survey, Geologic Atlas for
Ramsey County [C-7] {MGS, 1992}).
2.2.2 Soils
According to the USDA Soil Survey of Ramsey County (1977), the central
portion ofthe site, where structures were previously located is mapped as
urban land. The northern, western, and southwestern portions ofthe site are
mapped as urban land-Chetek complex. The Chetek series consist of
somewhat excessively drained soil on outwash plains. The southeastern
portion ofthe site is mapped as Richwood silt loam and Brill silt loam.
2.2.3 Groundwater
According to the Geologic Atlas for Ramsey County (C-7, MGS 1992) the
surficial groundwater elevation is approximately 865 feet above mean sea
level (amsl), or approximately 50 feet below ground surface, with flow to
west southwest flow direction. The bedrock groundwater elevation in the
Prarie du Chien Aquifer is approximately 810ft amsl, or approximately 100
feet below ground surface with a south-southwest groundwater flow
direction.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 6
Attachment 2
3.0 Overview of January 2007 (SEH) Phase II Investigation
3.1 Scope and Rationale
The goal of this Phase II was to determine the extent of environmental
impacts to soil that may be encountered during redevelopment ofthe
Gladstone Savanna. Preliminary development plans for the subject property
include the installation of up to two stormwater retention basins in the
western third ofthe property, and the completion of prairie restoration ofthe
oak savanna throughout the remainder ofthe property. Included in the prairie
restoration may be trails, informational kiosks, and other informal green
space and educational features. The locations and extent ofthese features are
contingent upon the findings ofthe Phase II ESA.
The scope ofthe subsurface investigation included twenty (20) Geoprobe'"
and Hollow Stern Auger (HAS) soil borings (Figure 4). The investigation
included field screening soil for organic compounds and collecting soil
samples for laboratory analysis. The results of soil screening and laboratory
analysis are used to evaluate impacts to the sites.
3.2 Field Investigation and Sampling Methods
The following sections describe the methods, procedures, and protocol used
to conduct the subsurface investigation. Modified MPCA Soil and Water
Sampling and Emergency Response Section Fact Sheet Guidelines were
followed. Copies standard operating procedures (SOPs) are attached as
Appendix D.
3.2.1 Geoprobe Soil Borings
Geoprobe'" borings (boreholes) were advanced on the site by Thein Well
with a truck mounted unit in general accordance with the EP A Standard
Operating Procedure No. 2050, Model 5400 Geoprobe™Operation. No
lubricants or solvents were used for downhole drilling or sampling
equipment.
Soil samples were collected on the sites using a steel rod and samplers
advanced into the ground using the hydraulic and/or hammer devices.
Samplers were four feet long and two inch diameter hollow, stainless steel
cylinders (Macro-Core"') or a two feet long discrete sampler. The soil
samples were collected in a hollow acetate liner placed into the sampler and
extruded once the sample was withdrawn from the subsurface. Soil samples
were collected continuously at four feet intervals to the termination depth of
the boring except where discrete sampling was needed. The location of each
borehole is depicted on Figure 4.
3.2.2 Hollow Stern Auger Soil Borings
A Mobile Drilling Rig using 4 Y, inside diameter Hollow Stern Augers
(HSA) were used to complete two soil borings. Soil samples were collected
using a two inch diameter split spoon sampler. When possible, split spoon
samples were collected at each two foot interval. Between each sampling
interval, the split spoon sampler was decontaminated using an Alconox wash
followed by a water rinse. Two soil borings (SEH-l and SEH-2) were
completed by HSA on the site.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 7
Attachment 2
3.2.3 Soil Sam pie Locations
All SEH soil sample locations were recorded using a Trimble Geospatial
Positioning System and reported using Ramsey County Coordinates. The
coordinates were post-processed for accuracy and imported into the site base
map, which is maintained in AutoCAD.
3.2.4 Site Soil Sam piing
A portion of each sample was reserved for description in the field in general
conformance with ASTM D 2488. Boring logs were prepared for each soil
boring and are included in this report as Appendix E.
3.2.4.1
3.2.4.2
3.3
Either the acetate liner of each sample was cut open or split spoon was
opened and the respective soil samples were collected for field screening and
laboratory analysis. The SEH scientist wore a new clean pair of disposable
Nitrile'" gloves while collecting each sample. All remaining soil from each
sample and borehole cuttings were left on-site.
Specific information on samples collected at each site (e.g. total number of
samples collected, samples depths, etc.) is included within Section 4.0
"Phase II Investigation Results".
Field Screening
Samples were collected for field screening from each boring. Soil samples
collected were placed in a new, clean, quart-size, labeled, re-sealable plastic
bag. The soils used for field screening were not used for sample analysis.
Soil clumps were manually agitated and the bags were shaken vigorously at
the beginning and end ofthe headspace development period. The bags were
allowed to volatilize on a heated dashboard for a period of five minutes. A
MiniRae Photo-ionization detector with a 10.6 e V hNu bulb calibrated to
Isobutylene was inserted through a small opening in the bag and the highest
reading was recorded.
The results ofthe field screening were documented on the SEH scientists'
boring log prepared for the report and are included as Table 2.
Laboratorv Analvtical Samples
Samples were collected for lab analysis from each boring. Soil samples were
placed directly into laboratory-cleaned, tarred glass jars and preserved with
laboratory-supplied preservatives. Samples containers were labeled
according to site, client, boring number and sample interval and were placed
into laboratory-supplied coolers. The samples were kept on ice until delivery
to the laboratory. Appropriate chain-of-custody and QAlQC procedures
were maintained for sample collection. Samples were transported to Legend
Technical Services, Inc. within 48 hours oftheir collection.
Chemical Analytical Methodologies
The soil samples were analyzed by Legend Technical Services, Inc. The
laboratory analytical methods and quality control data are included within the
Legend Technical Services laboratory report attached as Appendix F. Soil
samples were analyzed for:
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 8
Attachment 2
. Diesel Range Organics (Wisconsin Method DRO),
. Gasoline Range Organics (Wisconsin Method GRO),
. Volatile Organic Compounds (EPA Method 8260B),
. Semi-Volatiles (Method 8270C),
. RCRA Metals (EPA Method 7471A/60l0B),
. TCLP Lead/Mercury (EPA Method 1311/60l0B),
. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (Method 8082), and
. Asbestos (EP A Bulk Asbestos Method).
3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control
SEH reviewed the laboratory reports to verify required sample temperatures
upon arrival and sample analysis within allowable holding times. The
laboratory quality control data for each report was reviewed to verify that the
following are within acceptable limits:
. Surrogates
. Method blanks
. Laboratory control samples
. Matrix spike analyses
Qualifiers were applied to data where appropriate (see analytical result
tables). Legend Technical Services, Inc. is a Minnesota certified laboratory
and has a current QA/QC manual on file with the Minnesota Department of
Health and the MPCA.
Results ofthe QA/QC analysis indicate that SEH-19-6' soil SVOC results are
qualified. The results should be marked as "estimated" due to surrogate
recoveries above the upper acceptance limit. The sample weight for SEH-8
VOC analysis is below the desired 8.0 grams for Method 8260B.
3.5 Action Levels
To evaluate the magnitude of impacts, analytical results are compared to
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department of
Health (MDH) action levels. Soil results are compared to Tier I Soil
Reference Values (SRV). TCLP metals results are evaluated against toxicity
characteristics in 40 CFR 261.24, subp. (b). No action levels exist for DRO
and GRO. However, the MPCA uses 200 mg/kg for soil and 200 ug/L for
groundwater as a general guideline for DRO and GRO. Appropriate action
levels are included in the laboratory analytical summary tables.
4.0 January 2007 (SEH) Phase II Investigation Results
Twenty (20) soil borings (SEH-l to SEH-20) were advanced on the site
(Figure 2).
4.1 Boring Locations
Two borings (SEH-l and SEH-2) were advanced onsite on 1/12/2007 by
Braun Intertec using a Hollow Stern Auger. SEH was onsite to collect soil
samples and field-screen the soils. SEH-l is located on the southwestern
portion ofthe subject property, along the eastern edge of a current
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page g
Attachment 2
stormwater basin. SEH-l was advance to 20.5 feet below ground surface
(bgs). SEH-2 was advanced to 40.5 feet (bgs) in the northwest portion ofthe
site in the bottom stormwater detention basin near the basin inlet.
Eighteen borings (SEH-3 to SEH-20) were advanced onsite from 1/23/2007
to 1/24/2007, by Thein Well using a truck-mounted Geoprobe"'. SEH was
onsite to log the soils onsite, collect soil samples, field-screen the soils. The
locations ofthe borings (and total boring depth) are as follows:
. SEH-3 (12 '): north side ofthe former blacksmith shop.
. SEH-4 (12'): south side ofthe former blacksmith shop.
. SEH-5 (8'): between the wood repair shop the erecting shop and the
paint shop.
. SEH-6 (8'): near old water tanks that previously had an oil shop under
the tanks.
. SEH-7 (12'): in the former boiler location.
. SEH-8 (8'): south ofthe former paint shop and adjacent to former
railroad tracks.
. SEH-9 (8'): former paint shop.
. SEH-lO (8'): former woodworking building.
. SEH-l (12'): Former round house (southwest).
. SEH-12 (12'): Former round house (north-middle).
. SEH-13 (12'): Former round house (northeast).
. SEH-14 (8'): former boiler shop.
. SEH-15 (12'): former brass foundry.
. SEH-16 (8'): east side of former machine shop, adjacent to rail entry into
building.
. SEH-17 (8 '): former erecting shop.
. SEH-18 (8'): northwest extension of former railroad tracks.
. SEH-19 (8'): southwest extension of former railroad tracks.
. SEH-20 (8 '): former woodworking shop and supply warehouse.
4.2 Site Specific Geology
The shallow geology ofthe site consists of varying amounts of fill underlain
by glacial outwash sands and gravels and till. The northeastern portion of the
site near the former roundhouse consists of fill to approximately seven (7) to
eleven (II) feet bgs. Fill consists largely of silt with some layers of clay and
sand. Degraded concrete and brick are located at approximately four (4) feet
bgs in borings completed within the former roundhouse (SEH-ll, SEH-12,
and SEH-13). Underlying native outwash consists oftan to brown sand.
Borings completed throughout the remainder of the site consist of fill of
variable thickness underlain by native out wash (well graded sand). Fill
generally consists of sand with some silt layers. Fill is encountered to 7.6 feet
bgs on the western portion ofthe site (SEH-19) including asphalt at 5 to 5.5
feet bgs. Clay fill is above the asphalt and stained sand below asphalt has
petroleum (diesel and asphalt) odors. Fill is 3.8 feet deep on the eastern
portion ofthe site (SEH-14) with concrete from 2.5 to 3.8 feet bgs. Concrete
was encountered in SEH-7 from 2.5 to 3.5 feet bgs and 8 to 9.3 feet bgs.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 10
Attachment 2
Borings completed in the pond area (Braun 2007) on the western portion of
the site consist of up to 17 feet of fill underlain by outwash to the end of
borings as 40.5 feet bgs.
4.3 Field Screening Results
Table 2 summarizes field screening results. Field screenings and
observations indicated contamination at the following locations only:
. SEH-4: OS' of black stained well graded gravel at 3 feet bgs.
. SEH-6: a stringer of oil odor at 3.8 feet bgs.
. SEH-19: grey and black staining with diesel odor from approximately
4.5 to 7.6 feet bgs.
Field screenings and observations ofthe remainder ofthe borings identified
no indications of contamination.
4.4 Soil Laboratory Results
Select samples were analyzed for DRO, GRO, VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, RCRA
metals and bulk Asbestos (Tables 3 through 6).
4.4.1 Diesel Range Organics (DRO)
Detectable DRO concentrations were observed in sample points SEH-4,
SEH-7 through SEH-9, SEH-12 through SEH-18, SEH-19-2, and SEH-20.
Ofthese detections above the recommended MPCA standard of 200 mg/kg
were observed in SEH-12 (740 mg/kg), SEH-16 (230 mg/kg) and SEH-19
(21 0 mg/kg) (Ta ble 4).
According to laboratory QAlQC records, the following sample results for
diesel range organics (DRO) are primarily due to overlap from a heavy oil
range product: SEH-4, SEH-7, SEH-9, SEH-12, SEH-13, SEH-14, SEH-15,
SEH-16, SEH-17, SEH-18, SEH-19-2, and SEH-20.
The sample DRO results from SEH-8 and SEH-19-6' are attributed to a
complex mixture of diesel range and heavy oil range organics.
4.4.2 GRO and VOCs
No detections of GRO or VOCs were identified in any ofthe current soil
sample results.
4.4.3 RCRA Metals
RCRA metals were present in all samples submitted for laboratory analysis.
It is possible that some ofthe results can be attributed to background levels,
but specific background samples were not collected as part ofthe assessment.
RCRA metal exceedences ofMPCA SRVs were noted for arsenic, mercury
and lead (Table 3). The exceedences appear to correlate with the locations of
the former railroad roundhouse (SEH-12), brass foundry (SEH-15), machine
shop (SEH-16), and paint shop (SEH-8 and SEH-9). Lead exceedences
range from 300 mg/kg to 740 mg/kg. Arsenic exceedences range from 6.9
mg/kg to 29 mg/kg. Mercury exceedences range from 0.51 mg/kg to 3.8
mg/kg.
Samples exceeding 100 mg/kg as RCRA Lead and approaching 4.0 mg/kg as
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 11
Attachment 2
RCRA Arsenic were submitted for TCLP analysis. Results ofthe TCLP
analysis indicates that the metal detections are below published (40 CFR
261.30) criteria for hazardous materials (Table 3).
Detections of arsenic appear to correlate spatially and by concentration with
lead detections. Increases in lead detections are usually matched by a
matching increase in arsenic. Mercury detections appear to spatially
correlate with lead detections but do no respond equivalently to changes in
lead concentration.
4.4.4 SVOCs
SEH-6, SEH-12, SEH-13, SEH-15, SEH-16, and SEH-17 have SVOC
concentrations above laboratory detection limits, all other SVOC
concentrations are non-detect (Table 4). Samples with detected SVOC
concentrations were equated to benzo(a)pyrene using the 1/06 MPCA B(a)P
Equivalents tables, modified (Table 5). Any non-detect of an individual P AH
compound was weighted at half its detection limit for the purpose ofthe
B(a)P equivalents measurement.
Based on the B(a)P equivalents calculations, samples SEH-6 (2.12 mg/kg),
SEH-12 (5.60 mg/kg), SEH-16 (29.70 mg/kg), and SEH-17 (2.16 mg/kg)
exceeded the Tier I Soil Reference Values for soil.
4.4.5 PCBs
Sample SEH-7 was non-detect for PCBs (Table 6).
4.4.6 Asbestos
No detections of asbestos were identified in any ofthe soil samples
submitted for laboratory analysis (Table 3).
5.0 October 2007 (Delta) Phase II Investigation Results
Twenty-three (23) test pits and twelve (12) test trenches were excavated
across the subject property by MPCA environmental consultant (Delta
Environmental). Appendix B contains information supplied by MPCA's
consultant and includes field notes, sample plan and location spreadsheets,
field map, sample analytical, photos and photo descriptions, and analytical
reports.
5.1 Test Pits
The test pits were designed to allow for amount, extent and composition of
debris buried across the subject property. The test pits were based on a 300
foot grid. Additional test pits have been added or pits shifted from the grid
pattern to address known or potential areas of contamination. Test pits were
excavated to the bottom of fill.
5.2 Test Trenches
The test trenches were excavated in and around areas of historic railroad
operations to allow delineation of contamination and extent of debris onsite.
Test trenches were excavated to the bottom offill.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 12
Attachment 2
5.3 Residential Well sampling
A private 110 foot deep well is located at 1835 Phalen Place in Maplewood,
Minnesota. This well is located southwest (down gradient) from the subject
property. This well was be sampled forVOCs, DRO, PAHs, and RCRA
Metals. None ofthese parameters were above the drinking water or
groundwater standards (shown on Table 12).
5.4 Test pit and trench soil profile
The shallow geology ofthe site consists of varying amounts of fill underlain
by glacial outwash. The northeastern portion of the site near the former
roundhouse consists offill to approximately four (4) to six (6) feet bgs. Fill
consists largely of sand. Debris comprised of bricks, ash, iron pipe and
concrete is common to approximately four (4) feet bgs.
Borings completed throughout the remainder of the site consist of fill of
variable thickness underlain by native outwash. Fill generally consists of
sand and is encountered to 10 feet bgs on the remainder ofthe site. Concrete
and debris was encountered often in the center of the site near old building
associated with railroad operations. The deepest debris was encounter near
test trenches 5 and 6.
5.5 Field Screening Results
Table 7 summarizes field screening results from the January 2007
Investigation. Field notes from October investigation are included in
Appendix B.
Eight test pit locations (TP-5, TP-6, TP-11, TP-12, TP-13, TP-18, TP-23 and
TP-24) and five test trench locations (TT-4, TT-7, TT-8, TT-11, and TT-12)
had PID screening results above 10 ppm. All ofthese test pits and trenches
are located on the eastern half ofthe site in and around areas ofthe former
railroad operations and buildings.
5.6 Soil Laboratory Results
Select samples were analyzed for DRO, GRO, VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, RCRA
metals and bulk Asbestos (Tables 8 through 10).
5.6.1 Diesel Range Organics (DRO)
Detectable DRO concentrations were observed in sample points TT-2B, TT-
5, TT-6, TT-7, TT-lO, and TT-12. None off these detections are above the
recommended MPCA standard of 200 mg/kg (Table 8).
According to laboratory QAlQC records, the following sample results for
diesel range organics (DRO) are primarily due to high boiling point
hydrocarbons present in samples: TT-2B, TT-5, TT-6, and TT-7.
5.6.2 VOCs
No detections ofVOCs were identified in any ofthe current soil sample
results.
5.6.3 RCRA Metals
RCRA metal exceedences ofMPCA Tier I SRVs were noted for arsenic,
mercury and lead (Table 9). The exceedences appear to correlate with the
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 13
Attachment 2
locations ofthe former railroad roundhouse (TT-2B and TT-3A) and supply
warehouses at the woodwork building and erecting shop (TT-5 and TT-lO
respectively). Lead exceedences range from 360 mg/kg to 797 mg/kg (Tier I
SRV is 300 mg/kg). Arsenic exceedences range from 6.2 mg/kg to 29
mg/kg(Tier I SRV is 5 mg/kg). Mercury exceedences range from 0.51
mg/kg to 4.8 mg/kg(Tier I SRV is 0.5 mg/kg).
SEH soil samples from January 2007 exceeding 100 mg/kg as total lead and
approaching 4.0 mg/kg as total arsenic were submitted for TCLP analysis.
Results for analysis indicated that the metal detections are below published
(40 CFR 261.30) criteria for hazardous materials. October 2007 sampling by
MPCA's consultant did not analyze any samples for TCLP. Two total metals
results exceeded the January 2007 results. One sample was for total lead of
797 near the sample collected by SEH with a total lead result of 740 mg/kg
and a corresponding TCLP result of 0.81 mg/L. The second sample was for
total mercury with a result of 4.8 mg/kg. The previous high level of mercury
on site was 3.8 mg/kg with a corresponding TCLP result of no detection
(<0.001 mgiL).
5.6.4 SVOCs
TP-ll and all test trenches except TT-l have SVOC concentrations above
laboratory detection limits, all other SVOC concentrations are non-detect
(Table 8 and 10). Samples with the potential to exceed the Tier I SRV for
benzo(a)pyrene equivalents (BaP) have been evaluated in Table ll. Any
non-detect of an individual P AH compound was weighted at half its
detection limit for the purpose ofthe B(a)P equivalents calculation. Based on
the B(a)P equivalents calculations, samples TT-7 at 4 ft bgs (2.3 mg/kg) and
TT-ll at 4 ft bgs (4.7 mg/kg) exceeded the Tier I Soil Reference Values for
BaP in soil. All other detections were below the Tier I SRVs.
5.6.5 PCBs
All samples were non-detect for PCBs (Table 8).
5.6.6 Asbestos
Pipe wrap with 8% Chrysotile asbestos was detected in TT -4 and TT-7
around a 2-inch iron pipe two to three feet bgs. The location ofthe pipe was
oriented such that it could be the same 2-inch pipe running west from under
English Street through TT-4 and then through TT-7. No other mention of
this size pipe with wrap was recorded in the field notes (Table 8).
6.0 Findings/Extent of Contamination - Phase II Investigation
Samples were analyzed to determine total petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile
organic compounds, semi-volatile organic compounds, poly-chlorinated
biphenyls, asbestos and metals contamination in soil on site.
6.1 Previously Known Contamination
Previous sampling of soil (1992 through 1994) identified DRO at
concentrations up to 160 mg/kg at depths of 5 to 7.5 feetin the vicinity ofthe
former pattern shop and erecting shop areas (AET boring #5 and SB4).
Other DRO detections have been identified in scattered locations on the
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 14
Attachment 2
property, but are below 100 mg/kg. DRO samples collected from the vicinity
ofthe former railroad roundhouse and the erecting shop have indications of
higher and/or lower boiling-point compounds present on laboratory
chromatograms. Originals oflaboratory chromatograms were not available
for review.
No RCRA metals or asbestos analyses were conducted during the previous
investigations.
6.2 2007 Investigation Conclusions
Field screening results indicated potential indications of contamination at
SEH-4, SEH-6, SEH-19, TP-5, TP-6, TP-11, TP-12, TP-13, TP-18, TP-23,
TP-24, TT-4, TT-7, TT-8, TT-11, and TT-12. With the exception ofSEH-
19, TT-7, and TT-ll, none of the other samples had contamination exceeding
action levels.
Laboratory analytical results indicate that the areas of primary concern for
this property are the former structures associated with the railroad repair
facility. As a result ofthe January and October investigations, SEH identified
contamination exceeding State action levels, associated with the following
historic areas ofthe site:
Historic Area ORO B(a)P RCRA RCRA RCRA
Equivalents Lead Arsen ic Mercu ry
Round House 710 5.6 797 20 0.21
Woodworking/Tool Room & Tin Shop 169 2.3 93.3 2.7 4.8
Paint Shop 120 0.086 400 6.9 3.8
Machine Shop 230 29.7 360 8.2 0.51
Erecting Shop 72 2.16 611 4.1 1.6
Transfer Pit Non- 4.7 32.2 1.2 0.46
detect
Brass Foundry 130 1.23 797 29 0.23
Water Tank/Shed 29 2.12 16.5 3.8 0.035
Track Extension 210 Non-detect 74 3.9 Non-detect
ACTION LEVEL 200 2.0 300 5 0.5
Note: Listed result is the rnaxirnlllTI concentration detected of all sampling points within the historic area. Items in bold
exceed a Tier 1 SRVor general site action level (DRO).
In general, the RCRA metal detections of lead, arsenic and mercury appear to
be the most wide-spread contaminant in shallow soils at the site. (SEH-8,
SEH-9, SEH-12, SEH-13, SEH-15, SEH-16, SEH-17, TT-2, TT-3, TT-5, and
TT-lO). Areas with lead arsenic and mercury above the Tier I SRVs are on
the eastern half ofthe site in areas associated with historic railroad operations
and buildings.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as measured by benzo(a)pyrene
equivalents are also present, in one hot spot adjacent to the machine shop
(SEH-16) and to a lesser degree in former rail areas (SEH-6, SEH-12, SEH-
17, TT-7, and TT-11).
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 15
Attachment 2
DRO impacted soil was observed in the west portion ofthe site (SEH-19)
and may be present in other areas. However, additional site investigation
with test pits and test trenches did not reveal any other areas ofDRO
concentrations above the suggested MPCA action level of 200 mg/kg. DRO
detections in most ofthe soil samples are attributed to heavy oils, not diesel,
with the exception ofSEH-19 which is likely a mix of heavy oil and diesel,
predominantly the latter compound.
7.0 Standard of Care
This report was developed in accordance with generally accepted
professional practice at this time and location. No warranty is implied or
intended. The findings and conclusions ofthis report are not scientific
certainties but probabilities based on professional judgment regarding the
significance and accuracy ofthe collected data. The January 2007 initial
investigation was limited in scope, conceming an environmental system that
is changing over time, and the investigation period was limited to a restricted
time frame. The October 2007 additional investigation was not performed by
SEH, and all materials received from MPCA' s environmental consultant are
attached in Appendix B as reference for any work completed onsite in
October 2007. Changing site conditions may affect the report findings and
therefore, future conclusions.
TFinal Phase II Investigation ReportT
City of Maplewood
A-MAPLE0701.02
Page 16
N
C
v
E
~
u
ro
'1j'
.
~
~
jj
~
Ri!!
. C 0
C ~ .
Rl '" ~
N iii.3.!:
Ql~~:2
:c c{l"'O-
lllBc:(g
1-{l"'O3:
~:iil!
C)..!!!1}
2~
~
..
..
~
'0
00
~
m ~ rn a - ~
00 ~ ~ ~
Ia a ~ 00 ~ ~ a
W v a V
~
~
m ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ q
~ ~ ~ ~
IN a N ~ a 00 ~ a ~
W v v v
"'----
00 ~ ~
.. ~ ~ -
IN ~ ~ a ~ ~ q
W a ~ a ~ ~ a ~
00 v v v
-
~ ~ N ~ a - ~
I~ v ~ ~ ~
W a N ~ a ~ ~ a
00 v v v
-
~ ~ N a ~ N 0 - ~
IN 0 ,; 00 ~ 00 ~ ~
W a M a
00
-
00
i'" ~ m a N ~ 0 ~ ~ q
N a ~ ~ N ~ ~
wN a N
00
-
~ ~ ~
'00 ~ ~ a ~ a ~ - ~ q
mN a N ~ a rn ~ a ~
00 v v v
-
M ~ ~ ~
I<D rn a ~ 00 a ~ ~ q
w~ a ~ 00 a ~ N V a ~
00 v v v
-
N ~
'00 N 0 v ~ ~ 0 a ~ q
mc<i N 00 a 00 ~ ~ ~
a 00 a
00 v
g~
~~ ~ ~ ~ a - ~
a.:I:::q ~ ~ 00 ~ q
. W a ~ a a ~ 00 ~ a ~
0 00 v v v
0 -
0
Z~ ~ ~ ~ - ~
OliN N ~ ~ rn ~
.!: w a N ~ a ~ ~ a
500 v v
m -
~ 00 a ~ ~ 0 a ~
mN 00 ~ ~
..; N ~ a rn ~ ~ a
00 v M V
-
~ m ~ 0 - ~
I~ 00 00 ~ 00 ~
wN ~ ,; 00 a ~ 0 ~ a
00 v ~ v
-
~ ~ ~ a ~ - ~
I~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ q
w~ a ~ ~ a ~ ~ a ~
00 v v v
-
~ ~ 00 ~ a - ~
m;q N ~ ~ ~
a ~ v a 00 ~ a
00 v v v
-
~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~
I~ ~ ~
wN a ~ ~ a ~ N ~ a
00 v v v
-
~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ - ~
m'" N ~ ~
a N a 00 rn ~ a
00 v v v
-
~ N 00 ~ ~ rn - ~
I~ ~ ~ ~ ~
w~ a ~ a 00 00 ~ a
00 v v
-
~~ ~ 00 ~ rn ~ a ~
IOO 00 ~ ~ ~
WN a a a 00 ~ ~ a
00 v v v
-
.. ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~
mN a ~ ~ ~
a N ~ a rn ~ a
00 v v v
"
10
. ~
'0 ~ "
~ ~ E E E E E E E E 0 a
~ =
V ~
~ ~
0 .
00 = 00 a 00 V a a a ~ g
~ 00 a a a a
a N N 00 ~
. ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
<'! ~
. "5
~ m
~ , , , ~ ~
~ 0 ~
~ 0 ~ i ~ E 00 ~ <'! 0
2 ~ 0 .
U 0 > a
. ~ " 0 " ~ ~
;:. ~ W U U ~ m Jj
.. .. ~
C .. ~
~ ~
l:
I:
0
~
;
.
>
~
IT
~
~ ~
"
C 1:
0 0
" i
.
~ 0
,
"
C >
i >
~ ffi
~
0 C
~... ~
Wi
0 0 ~ ~ O~ "" "" " " "" " " " "" "" ""
lo~ " , , "' ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~
" a a a aa aa aa a a aa a a a aa aa aa
~- 0 , a
~
N ~'C a a
a a
~ ~
~N ~'? a
a a
t- " " .
~~ ~ " , , "' 'c " ~ 0 H m'
a a a aa aa a~ 00 a ~ a ~a 69 ~ ~ "
Wi
~N 0 0 0 00 ~~ 70 " 7" ~m 0
" DC " , ~ ;; 7~ ,
a a a aa 7~ 7t ~7 11
Wi
r~ 0 0 '0 ;'f:'J: '0 ~ " " 0' 0' $<.0 ~
0 0 '0 "' "'
~ 0 0 0 c::ic::i o~ 0~ 0 6'8 0 0 ~0 6'8 o~ ~
Wi
r~ ~ ~ R R ~R
a a ~ aa
5- " " ," ,~ 7 ,
~~ 0 0 '0 '0 0 "~
~ a a a aa aa 96 0 ~ aa a a ~a aa o~ ~
5- 0 " 0 0 "0 00 0 0 ,0 ~o 0
~~ 0 0 0 00 . ~ m m ~ .
~ ~ , a a a aa ~ c " 0;;: "'t " .;
0.
~IC-
t'" ~ 0 ~ ~ O~ aa aa a a aa a a a aa aa aa
o~ " , , "'
.., Z 7 a a a aa aa aa a a aa a a a aa aa aa
., .i~
m
'" a 0 0'
.. m~N , , " 00 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 00
0 0 0 0 c::ic::i c::ic::i c::ic::i 0 0 c::ic::i 0 0 0 c::ic::i c::ic::i c::ic::i
~~
lij ~ ~ Wi
mN , 0 0 '0
~ ex: ~ ~ " , , "'
M a a a aa
. cnO:iE
:c :gg ,; I-
~ .!l on 0 ~N
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ",gJ
~ C ~ 0 ~o
. .
Ci u 0.
g . Wi
" ~~ 0 a DO DO 0 0 DO 0 0 0 DO DO DO
:i 3 " 0 R ~R 00 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 00
a a a aa aa aa a a aa a a a aa aa aa
~ Wi
.. m7 , , "
on ~ 0 0 0 00 00 " , 7 0 0 70 07 "
a a a aa aa o ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ a ca c c "
I-
~N , " , , "' 00 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 00
" "'
0 a a a aa aa aa a a aa a a a aa aa aa
~ 0 0 0 00 "" "" " " "" " " " "" "" ""
~ 0 0 '0 00 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 00
a a a aa c::ic::i c::ic::i 0 0 c::ic::i 0 0 0 c::ic::i c::ic::i c::ic::i
Wi
~7 " 0 0 '0
, , , "'
0 0 0 c::ic::i
t;- , ~ ,
~~ c'
m,? ~ a ~ I
Wi
~N 0' , I
, ~ ~
'?'? 0 0 0
"
S 0 S
DO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t 0 ;
~ n I "
'5 DO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0
00 0 0 0 0 0 EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 0
- ~ ~
C ~ " e ~ ~
0 ~ ~ 0 '" ~ , , " , ,. DO h ~ , >
~ ~ ~ ~ ~7 - C offi
~ ~ .~- ~ ~ ~ ~
~ , ~ I ~
~ . ~
. ~ 0
C ~ (l) ~ I
0 , ~ ~
~ 000 , I
e s~ a 0 a "5 ~
~~~~1ij ~ 00
0 0 , ~~o ~ ~ ~ ~ g DO ~. W~ ~ ! 1
~ ~ li colli'j , ~ D i
~ ~;:;::;~.c ~~~~~il~ ~D 0
i~- IDa _0 g6-
I I ~€~~~~~~~~ 0 s ~ 0
E 0 ~~ mw 0
00 ~ .'" ~ ~
'" . 4x a~~~~~~~~~ ~(l)OO(l)ll(l)(l) Om 0
"" ~ B6~~~~i\':';-: 3
"0 00 . o~ 06 .26 e D
;;; ~ U ~ I ~ 0
C 0 ~ .
~ ~ > on ~ 0 D 0
~
c
~
>
"'ell
.!1 ~
.c c
~ 0
1--
w
"C
.!!!
Cl
"2
o
.~
.
>
'"
~CO
W'o
1: W
. .
" 2
'3 ~
.B"-c
o
'i~
In .
-0.
. .
pE
!;,
c.
..
0"
N
C
.
In
c
o
~ ]i
m ~
~ w
I
w ~
00 I ~
Ii '"
~
c
o
9ii ]i
m ~
~ w
~
w -
(f) ill ~
~ "
$ g
"
c
o
9ii ~
m ~
~ w
I
~ ] B)
Ii' "
ffi g
~
c
o
9ii ]i
m ~
~ w
I
w ~
(f) ;;: ~
&1 ~
ffi g
~
c
o
9ii ]i
m ~
N W
~
W -
(f) ill Hi
~ "
fi g
"
c
o
9ii ~
m ~
~ W
I
~ 2
"' "
Ii' "
ffi g
~
g2 G 0
~ :i5 g
~ ~ LL
0_
-0'-
Iii 2l L1' b
o ~ ~ ~
u 0 E
m~
o
Z
w
4
U
o
o
~
U
OOONO
'" 0 r-- 0
NO 0 LD
OOOO~
~@
000
000
WOO
N N 0
a a
gg
g]~
~g~
o~=
~ 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~
M
N
ci
~ g ~ g g ~ g g g g g g g g
o N 0 0 0 "" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
oeD (:)
@gg g
O'!&gj N
~ ~ g ~ ~ : g g ~ g g g g g g g g
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a a
00
ON
gj~g
01hlt:!
00"'"
l'I
N
ci
r--ooooooo
0)0000000
00000000
00000000
~
o
00000000
00000000
=0000000
=0000000
a
g
;:
(00000000
LDOOOOOOO
00000000
00000000
a
o
~
o
N 0 0 0) 0 00 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 '" 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 r-- 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~g
a ~
00000
co '" 0 0) 0
'" LD 0 "" 00
0000'"
a a
a a
WOO
W~
000 N
r-- r-- 0 r--
"" "" 0 0
0000
a a
00
~~
~!~
ocio
000
8l~~
.,.,(i)<i:f
gjg8
~~O
0"":.,.,
~
W
M
ci
'" 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
g g g ~ g g g g g g g g
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o
li
ci
o (D 0 0
o 00
~ ~ ~ ~
000
000
000
c::i 0 0
~
ci
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
o 000 0 0 0 c::i
000 '<l" 0
~~~(')~~
M
~
o
~
N
~
o
00000000
0000000
<,,0000000
00000000
o
o
M
0) 0 0 0
00 0 0 0
0000
o c::i 0 c::i
0000
0000
0000
0000
~
~
o
~
o
o
~ N ~ ~
M ~ 0
o c::i 0 0
N
N
~
ci
~ ~ ~ i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ : ~ I ; ~ ~ ; i ~ i i ~
o 0
c 0 c
~ ~ ~ ~ -;
g ~ ~ ~ ~
~ g g g i;:
('Un 7~
(i) '00'00
W~~~~
m m m m Dl
"
.
.
~ OJ ~
.. 0 ..l:
l: N i:
OJ OJ ~ ~ OJ ~ OJ OJ ~
C ~ E 8 ~ OJ c c .. ~ ~
~5~~5:5:~~~OJ~
~;~~i~~%%!~g
OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~
~ OJ OJ .. 9 OJ OJ OJ OJ N 9 0
..l: ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (D 00
UOOOr--OOOOr-- -~
OJ ~
c .
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
o Rl OJ a.
;,::g ~ ~ ~
: ~ ~:.: ~
g ~ ~ ,g ~
.go; :2 :':': Z
C M J:, .n
"
o
c 0
~ OJ ~
2:' C 0
5:-5 ::J
~ ~ ~
j: J ;2; ~
~ ~
,...
;gN
oJ
<0
m
<ON
oi
N
....
NN
"!
~
..
~N
'"'
N
:2N
vi
~
:;!N
oJ
"
" IE
]; (J)
" ~
, .
5-i=
.
a.
.
'"
"
"0
>-
I
o
"
~
fl
U
o
N
o
o
o
o
o
~!~
~-
g~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..l: r;; ~ :gj ~
~ ..l: 0 '5 0
I E 0 0 D-
E 0 <t C ::; -g
~~~;8i
~~~4~*
~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~
0:: C :5 0:: OJ ('U
I8-ogco
~~~;~j~
is:f I 0 ~-I
i~ic~:H
N ~ ~g~r:
'@~~; ~~
I~i~~
~~~~e
~~~!i
=- <" (J) I I- ..l: U
o c
~~
o fl
(f) i:L
o w
oil.
Attachment 3
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location
Figure 2 - Site Plan
Figure 3 - Historic 1903 Structures
Figure 4 - Previous Investigations
Figure 5 - SEH Sample Locations
Figure 6 - SEH and Previous Investigations
Figure 7 - Test Pit and Test Trench Locations
Figure 8 - Summary of Tier 1 SRV Exceedances
g
o
~
o
Ji
o
o
~
o
~
o
~
~
4
5
'S
~
o
o
~
www.sehlnc.com
FILE NO.
AMAPLE0701.02
SITE LOCATION
GLADSTONE SAVANNA
INITIAL PHASE II ESA
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
1
Figure
DATE:
02/26/07
G.
ci R
~ ~
eo'
u
,
z
g ~
c{c{f-
(9z0
-ZW
f-c{w
W>z
z w<(~
<( >(j):2:
~z
0.. ;~o
UJ woo
!:: (.1)1--0
U) <((1)5:
IOW
"-c{~
O~"-
w(9c{
f- :;;;
~
:J
,
~
-
~ *
ID
~M
u:
~ ~
eo'
u
,
.L3~lS I-tSll8N3....
z
UJO
w f= -:t:
~ a~b
I- _z(I)
() I-Zw
:J (/)<:(2
0:: W>z
I- ><C_
U) ~Cf.):2:
('I') =Wo
g W60
.,- (/)1--0
~ ~U)5:
0:: [LOW
o o:s~
I- wc.9<(
~ l:: :2:
I:;e
:J
w
=>
Z
W
>
<!:
I-
(f)
o
0::
LL
~
~
o
-
" e
,
-0
c
ID
0>
ID
--'
z<~
ID
~,.
u:
~ ~
eo'
u
,
.L3~lS I-tSll8N3....
z
o
~ f= .:{
0<(<(1-
i= <.920
<( f=z(/)
c.9 (/)<(w
i= w>~
(/) ><C_
w ~Cf.):2:
> =~o
~ WOO
(j) (/)1--0
<{UlS;
is 5:0w
:;: o:s~
UJ W(9<(
0::: l:: :2:
a.:;;
:J
w
=>
Z
W
>
<!:
I-
(f)
o
0::
LL
~;
~~~ ~
~~3 0
5[j~ ~
ni:llll
~ :~("' ~o
j ~ ,,-o,,'~.L
~
"
..
~ ~ ~
~ ! [
~.l
~q
e
~
~
"
-0
c
ID
0>
ID
--'
z<~
w
=>
z
w
>
<!:
I-
(f)
o
0::
LL
ID
~L{)
u:
~ ~
eo'
u
,
z
o
U) f= -:t:
Z <(<(I-
Q Qzg
I- I-Zw
<( u)<(z
o W>z
9 ~c%~
UJ =~o
0: wOO
~ (.1)1--0
<( ~U)5:
U) [LOW
I 0::]0:
w wc.9<(
U) l:: ~
:;;
:J
.L3~lS I-tSll8N3....
:h
~;
~~~ ~
~~3 0
nllllll
~ n?",~o 0
j ~"-_'.'LL
~
~
~
~
o
-0
c ~
ID
0>
ID
--'
z<~
w
=>
z
w
>
<!:
I-
(f)
o
0::
LL
.L3~lS I-tSll8N3....
ID
~CD
u:
~ ~
eo'
u
,
if)
22
90
~ f= .:{
c.9 <(<(I-
_ <.920
I- f=z(/)
(/) (/)<:(w
w w>2
~ ><r:~
- ZCf.):2:
(./) =w -
:J -20
o wOO
- (./)1--0
[ij ~(I)5:
0::: [LOW
D... o:s~
o W(9<(
~ ~ :;?;
I~
W--'
if)
~;
~~~ ~
~~3 0
nllllll
~ n?",~o 0
j ~"-_'.'LL
~
" "
..
,
~ , I "
.. ..
" ,
I " l
..
~ ..
e @
..
l
~ ..
i
~
" -
.. ~
-0
c ~
ID
0>
ID
--'
2<~
"
d
N
-t
w
~
o
'"
"
-t
~,::;
q:- ;;;
o "
ciJ (/]
~
1],<--
u::
,
o
~~
"i-LJ]
Q:~
"
w
z
a
~ ~
()~O
oz(f.)
~"'w
I>Z
u<:<:~
zw:::;
w w -
"zo
f-aa
of-a
zws
",ow
f-::i...J
O:l')~
f- :::;
w
W
f-
c
c
c 1
~
c
,
" ~
~
~
"
- ~
~
, ~
~
! "
~ c
o j
,
-0 ~ ~
c c
'"
'" 0
'"
~
"'~
"
2!
N
-t
w
~
o
'"
"
"
~ ~~
.Q>CO "i-LJ]
LL ~"
"<
"
if) i'"
w <(
U Z 0
Z Z if)
<( <( W
0 > Z
W <( Z
W
U if) ~
X w ci
w z
> 0 0
'" f- ~
if) if)
0 w
<( -'
'" -' "-
w (9 <(
F :2
e
0 !
e
;
- - "
"'
, , g~
~g
8 8 ~~
g d "
;!i)
,0
"'-
"
-t
w
"'''
"R
oflB
'"
,
~
~
0
0
0 [:'
o j
,
;; ~
C , c
'"
'" 0
'"
-'
"'~
Attachment 4
Response Action Plan and
Construction Contingency Plan
Gladstone Savanna
Maplewood, Minnesota
SEH No. A-MAPLE0701.02
VIC 10# VP20120
February 8, 2008
Distribution List
No. of Copies
Sent to
I
Amy Hadians
VIC Project Manager
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
I
Shanna Schmitt
VIC Hydrogeologist
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
I
Chuck Ahl
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
Table of Contents
Letter of Transmittal
Title Page
Distribution List
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Contacts..................................................................................................1
2.0 Site Background ........................................................................................................2
2.1 Site Description ...................................................................................................2
2.1.1 Site History ..............................................................................................2
2.1.2 Site Investigation History.........................................................................2
2.2 Proposed Development and Future Land Use....................................................2
2.3 Summary of Results for 2007 Investigations ......................................................3
2.3.1 Subsurface Contamination ......................................................................3
2.3.2 Non-contaminated Materials ...................................................................3
3.0 Options for handling of contaminated materials ....................................................3
3.1 Option 1: Leave in-place ....................................................................................4
3.2 Option 2: Beneficial Reuse On-site ....................................................................4
3.3 Option 3: Landfill Disposal.................................................................................4
3.3.1 Confirmation Sampling............................................................................5
3.4 Contaminated Soil Excavation ............................................................................5
3.4.1 Excavation...............................................................................................5
4.0 Construction Contingency Plan ..............................................................................5
4.1.1 Potentially Contaminated Soils................................................................5
4.1.1.1 Composite Sample Collection .................................................6
4.1.1.2 Footprint Confirmation Sampling ............................................6
4.2 Suspect Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) ....................................................7
4.2.1 Suspect ACM Handling Standard Operating Procedures....................... 7
4.2.2 Suspect ACM Site Security .....................................................................8
4.2.3 ACM Containerization/Transport.............................................................8
4.2.4 ACM Transport/Disposal Information ......................................................8
4.3 Groundwater.......................................................................................................8
5.0 Project Timel ine .........................................................................................................9
6.0 SUM MARY..................................................................................................................9
SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page i
Table of Contents (Continued)
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location
Figure 2 - Site Layout
Figure 3 - Gladstone Savanna Master Plan
Figure 4 - Tier 1 SRV Exceedances
Figure 5 - Proposed Response Action Plan
Appendix A
List of Appendices
Site Health and Safety Plan
Response Action Plan and Construction Contingency Plan
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page ii
April 4, 2008
Response Action Plan and Construction
Contingency Plan
Maplewood Gladstone Savanna
Prepared for the City of Maplewood
1.0 Introduction
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc ., (SEH) has prepared this Response Action
Plan and Construction Contingency Plan behalf ofthe City of Maple wood
(City). The Plan covers the management and disposal of contaminated soils
and debris located on the Gladstone Savanna redevelopment site.
The City is participating in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program for the Gladstone
Savanna site ("Project Area").
The majority ofthe subject property is currently vacant idle land. The subject
property is located in a mixed commercial/residential/vacant area at the
intersection of English Street and Frost Avenue. Figure 1 identifies the site
location. Figure 2 identifies the general site layout and relevant past land
uses.
1.1 Project Contacts
The following parties and their representatives are those currently involved
in the development ofthe Property:
1. Owner:
City of Maple wood
Contact: Chuck Ahl 651.249.2402
2. Environmental Consultant:
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
Al Sunderman - Project Manager 651.490.2135
Kathryn Samecki - Project Engineer 651.490.2180
2. General Contractor:
To be determined
A-MAPLE070201
Page 1
2.0 Site Background
2.1 Site Description
The subject property is currently vacant. The property covers approximately
27 acres located at the southwest comer of English Street and Frost Avenue
in the City of Maplewood, Minnesota.. The approximate property boundary
and relevant features are depicted on Figure 2, "Site Plan".
2.1.1 Site History
According to reports reviewed for this assessment, the subject property was
first developed as a railroad repair facility in the late 1800's. The property
ceased repair operations in the 1940's. Subsequently the property was
acquired by the Whirlpool-Seeger appliance company and was used for
storage, shipping and receiving of appliances. The subject property buildings
were demolished in 1979-1980. A 573-foot water supply well (Unique
Number 233514) was located on the property in 1998 by the City of
MaplewoodlMinnesota Department of Health and sealed on September 21,
2001. In 1994 the City of Maplewood acquired the property from the Trust
for Public Land.
2.1.2 Site Investigation History
Previous investigations and site activities by SEH and Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency's (MPCA) consultant, Delta Consultants (Delta) have
characterized the nature and extent of contamination on the subject property.
A Phase II Investigation Report was prepared by SEH (January 2008). The
Phase II report outlines the results ofthe investigations on conducted on site
by SEH in March 2007 and Delta in October 2007.
2.2 Proposed Development and Future Land Use
Development plans for the subject property include the installation of
stormwater retention basin(s) in the western third ofthe property, and the
completion of prairie restoration ofthe oak savanna throughout the
remainder ofthe property. Included in the prairie restoration may be trails,
informational kiosks, and other informal greenspace and educational
features. See Figure 3 for the Gladstone Savanna master plan.
Stormwater from the site will be directed to infiltration ponds for treatment
before being discharged to the storm sewer and/or surface waters.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 2
2.3 Summary of Results for 2007 Investigations
2.3.1 Subsurface Contamination
As a result ofthe January and October investigations, SEH identified
contamination exceeding State action levels, associated with the following
historic areas ofthe site (See Figure 4):
Historic Area ORO B(a)P RCRA RCRA RCRA
Equivalents Lead Arsen ic Mercu ry
Round House 710 5.6 797 20 0.21
WoodworkingfTool Room & Tin Shop 169 2.3 93.3 2.7 4.8
Paint Shop 120 0.086 400 6.9 3.8
Machine Shop 230 29.7 360 8.2 0.51
Erecting Shop 72 2.16 611 4.1 1.6
Transfer Pit Non-detect 4.7 32.2 1.2 0.46
Brass Foundry 130 1.23 797 29 0.23
Water Tank/Shed 29 2.12 16.5 3.8 0.035
Track Extension 210 Non-detect 74 39 Non-
detect
ACTION LEVEL 200 2.0 300 5 0.5
Note: Listed result is the maximum concentration detected of all sampling points within the historic area. Items in bold
exceed a Tier 1 SR V or general site action level (DRO).
Contamination is present in eight areas ofthe site. The majority ofthe
impacted soil areas (six of nine areas) is found in the central and eastern
portions ofthe site and are located near former buildings associated with
railroad operations. These six areas include the machine shop, the paint shop,
the erecting shop, the transfer pit, and the brass foundry. The three remaining
areas include the roundhouse in the northeast comer ofthe site, the water
tanks/shed along the east tracks leading to the roundhouse, and the track
extension located on the west edge ofthe former rail yard.
2.3.2 Non-contaminated Materials
The remainder ofthe site (areas not identified in Section 2.2) do not have
detectable contaminants of concern, or contain DRO at concentrations below
200 mg/Kg and metal and BaP equivalents below the Tier I SRV s. Most of
the site is composed of sand or silty sand and will be incorporated into the
overall site grading plan. The uncontaminated materials are not subject to
any contaminated or hazardous material handling or disposal requirements
under this Response Action Plan.
3.0 Options for handling of contaminated materials
Soils on the east side of the machine shop with a BaP equivalence of 29.6
will be removed from the site and disposed at a permitted landfill as
described in Option 3 below. The remaining soils with Tier I exceedances or
DRO results above 100 ppm will be managed using one ofthe three
following options described below. As site designs are finalized, the plan for
each area of contaminated soils will be identified in an addendum submitted
to the MPCA prior to construction onsite.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 3
3.1 Option 1: Leave in-place
Much ofthe site will be designed and graded such that areas with
contaminated soils will be covered with additional fill to create a four foot
separation distance between any known depth of contamination and the final
graded surface. Areas not able to be covered with enough soil to provide a
four foot separation distance will be addressed by options two and three.
Cover material will be obtained from the western portion ofthe site that will
be excavated for stormwater infiltration. These soils have been tested for
contamination and have results all below the residential Soil Reference
Values (SRVs) or action levels. See Figure 3 for the site master plan
including approximate location of stormwater pond, and source of cover soil.
Applying cover soils in two areas is presented for the RAP. See Figure 4 for
depiction ofthese areas onsite. The first area is the historic Round House;
two feet of cover soils on top of approximately two to three feet of existing
cover over area of contamination is proposed. The second area is in the
middle ofthe site including areas ofthe former erecting shop, transfer pit,
paint shop and machine shop, and the tool room and tin shop. Two feet of
cover is proposed for this area. A portion ofthe erecting shop with a BaP
equivalence of 2.2 mg/kg at one foot bgs in SEH-7 (See Figure 5) will be
covered with three feet of cover or addressed via Option 2 or 3 described
below.
3.2 Option 2: Beneficial Reuse On-site
There may be potential areas onsite to reuse soils beneath paved surfaces,
such as the road, intersection, or sidewalk. If soils can be used as a subgrade
material under impervious surfaces, this is an additional option of how to
handled contaminated soils.
3.3 Option 3: Landfill Disposal
Soils on the east side of the machine shop with a BaP equivalence of 29.6
will be excavated and hauled to a MPCA permitted landfill. This area will be
excavated approximately 25 feet in any direction from boring SEH-12. Soil
will be excavated to an approximate depth of four feet, excavating
approximately 300 cubic yards in this area. Figure 4 outlines this
approximate area in read.
Additional contaminated soils may be hauled to a landfill. All contaminated
soil leaving the site for landfill disposal will be placed into covered dump
trucks utilizing a backhoe or similar equipment. Soils with levels above the
Tier I SRVs that are not able to be managed onsite using options one and
two will be hauled off site to a licensed landfill located in the State of
Minnesota. An estimated quantity of up to 5,000 cubic yards will be hauled
to landfill.
The contractor may choose to stockpile soil for later disposal, or haul
contaminated soil directly to a landfill. If stockpiled the contaminated soil
must be placed on minimum 10 mil plastic, and cover the stockpile with
minimum 10 mil reinforced plastic. The stockpile shall be surrounded by
fencing ifthe Engineer determines that additional security measures are
necessary. Stockpiles shall be inspected at least once per week.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 4
3.3.1 Confirmation Sam piing
Confirmation samples will be collected from the bottom of all excavated
areas. Confirmation samples will be collected for laboratory analysis for the
following parameters:
. Diesel Range Organics (DRO) by Wisconsin Method
. Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (P AH) by EP A method 8270
. RCRA Total Metals (Metals) by EPA Methods 6010/7471
The number of soil samples at the base ofthe excavation that will be
collected is based on the following from MPCA guidance documents.
500--<1.\)GC
1,{lCC><<.1500
1,500-<2,'5(1(1
1;,5;;0,,<4,000
4.0QQ-<6J)uO
{).OGG-<'8.5.(1(1
85fiO~<HU3!fO (0,25 ;\4:CIi:S)
,
~
,
3.4 Contaminated Soil Excavation
3.4.1 Excavation
During excavation visual (e.g. stained soils), olfactory observations, and
headspace readings will be evaluated by an environmental professional for
the drilling and excavation phase. One sample per 10 cubic yards will be
collected from excavated soil for field screening. Soil samples will be
grabbed from the excavator scoop, placed into a self-sealing quart-sized
plastic bag filled about half-full. After sealing the bag, samples will be
broken up and shaken for at least 15 seconds at the beginning and end of a 5-
10 minute development period. Samples will be placed in the sun or on the
dash of a heated car if it is cold or raining outside for headspace
development. A small hole in the bag will be created and the PID probe
inserted into the bag. The highest meter response from the PID will be
recorded.
Contaminated soils will be immediately placed in trucks for hauling to the
landfill or stockpiled as described in Section 3.3 above. All contaminated
soils leaving the site must be accompanied by shipping manifests to maintain
proper documentation of final disposal of materials.
4.0 Construction Contingency Plan
4.1.1 Potentially Contaminated Soils
In the event that visual or olfactory indicators point to the presence of
contaminated soil, in areas previously not identified, during general site
earthmoving activities, contractors will contact The City of Maple wood
and! or SEH immediately and wait to continue earthmoving activities in this
area until SEH's environmental staff is onsite. At that time, the
environmental consultant will screen the soils using a photoionization
detector (PID) with at minimum a 10.2eV bulb. Approximately one sample
per 10 cubic yards will be collected from potentially contaminated soil for
field screening. Soil samples will be grabbed from the excavator scoop, in-
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 5
place from soils not yet moved, or from soils stockpiled on plastic, placed
into a self-sealing quart-sized plastic bag filled about half-full. After sealing
the bag, samples will be broken up and shaken for at least 15 seconds at the
beginning and end of a 5-10 minute development period. Samples will be
placed in the sun or on the dash of a heated car if it is cold or raining outside
for headspace development. A small hole in the bag will be created and the
PID probe inserted into the bag. The highest meter response from the PID
will be recorded.
IfPID readings above 10 ppm are recorded, or visual or olfactory evidence
of soil contamination exists, SEH will collect samples for laboratory
analytical testing of DR 0, SVOC, As, Pb, and Hg. The contractor may either
leave potentially contaminated materials in-place or stockpile soils as
described below until analytical testing is complete. After review of
analytical results SEH will implement one ofthe three options defined in
Section 3. The MPCA will be notified within 24 hours of unknown
contamination.
4.1.1.1
If stockpiled the contaminated soil must be placed on minimum 10 mil
plastic, and cover the stockpile with minimum 10 mil reinforced plastic. The
stockpile shall be surrounded by fencing ifthe Engineer determines that
additional security measures are necessary. Stockpiles shall be inspected at
least once per week.
Composite Sample Collection
Composite samples, composed of no more than 4 grab samples each, will be
collected from each stockpile. The number of composite samples collected
from each pile will be in compliance with MPCA RBSE sampling guidance
shown in table below.
0-50Q
SOl- JOOO
lOOloi'mon:
. t I, t
..
,It.
'~l' I Do cubic '<'cds
11<:1' 1:"0 cuhic YHrd~
d~j' SDO cubi" v"rds
4.1.1.2
The samples will be labeled according to the stockpile ID, and location
within the pile according to station numbering. For example, a sample
collected from Stockpile A, 35' from the north end will be labeled "A, 0+35
ft". Stakes will be placed to the side of each pile, out ofthe drive area, to
identifY the sample locations.
Soil with suspected types of contamination (i.e. lead, BaP, DRo, etc) will be
placed in a separate stockpiles. The soil will remain in the stockpiles until
laboratory analysis has been completed. Stockpiled soil from lead-impacted
areas will be analyzed for total lead and TCLP lead. Stockpiled soil from
diesel-impacted areas will be analyzed for DRo. Stockpiled soils from
SVOC areas will be sampled for P AHs.
Stockpiled soils exceeding 400 mg/Kg total lead, 200 mgiKg DRo, and 2.0
mg/kg BaP equivalence will be handled by one ofthe three options described
in Section 3. Stockpiled soils exceeding 5 mg/L TCLP lead will be stabilized
prior to disposal.
Footprint Confirmation Sampling
Confirmation sampling will be conducted from the 0 to 6 inch interval
beneath each stockpile footprint in accordance with the MPCA Risk Based
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 6
Site Evaluation (RBSE) manual for excavation floor sampling, and the
samples analyzed for the contaminants of concern identified in each
stockpile. See table in Section 3.3.1 for MPCA RBSE sampling
requirements for soils below each stockpile.
If contamination remains in the stockpile footprint, additional soil will be
removed in minimum of 6" lifts until soil concentrations are below Tier I
SRVs or 200 mg/kg DRO.
4.2 Suspect Asbestos Containing Material (ACM)
4.2.1 Suspect ACM Handling Standard Operating Procedures
An MDH-licensed Asbestos Inspector will be onsite to collect samples if
suspect ACM materials are identified.
Suspect ACM may be present in the following materials:
. Pipe wrap
. Flooring components including vinyl floor coverings and floor tile
. Construction mastics
. Roofing materials
. Transite wallboard or ceiling materials
. Boiler insulation
. Gasket materials
. Electrical insulation
. Others
None ofthe suspect ACMs listed above have been observed in site fill to
date. If additional suspect ACM is observed on site these materials will be
handled as RACM until PLM analysis confirms the absence of asbestos in
the suspect material. Any suspect ACM that has not yet been confirmed as
non-ACM will be sampled as well.
The list of confirmed non-ACM fill includes:
. Sand
. Concrete fragments
. Brick fragments
. Coal
. Clay
. Gravel
The excavation will be conducted so as to limit the spreading of suspect
ACM from the immediate vicinity of each sampling area and prevent
equipment from transporting ACM outside the regulated area. The backhoe
will NOT attempt to remove additional suspect ACM but leave the material
in place. Ifthe materials are confirmed to be ACM, then they will need to be
removed from site by a certified asbestos abatement contractor. Handling of
suspect materials by the backhoe is the most likely way of creating visible
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 7
emissions, which is the most important thing to watch for and prevent as it
relates to emissions control.
4.2.2 Suspect ACM Site Security
The ACM sampling area will be marked in a manner that minimizes the
number of persons that can be within what will be considered the regulated
area, and which protects persons outside the area from exposure to potential
airborne asbestos. Signs will include the following information:
DANGER
ASBESTOS
CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD
AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY
In addition, where the use of respirators and protective clothing are required
in the regulated area the warning signs will include the following:
RESPIRATORS AND PROTECTIVE CLOTHING ARE
REQUIRED IN THIS AREA
Signs will be posted in areas around the ACM sampling area at such a
distance and from such a location that persons may read the signs and take
necessary protective steps before entering the area marked by the signs.
4.2.3 ACM Containerization/Transport
In the event that RACM is identified and proper handling and disposal is
required, information regarding the type of containers used for handling,
transport and disposal ofRACM will be included in the MPCA Notification
of Asbestos-Related Work.
4.2.4 ACM Transport/Disposal Information
In the event that soil samples contain ACM, the containerized cuttings
including ACM debris will be disposed of at an MPCA approved facility.
The name, address and contact information for the transportation contractor
and the disposal facility accepting the RACM will be provided with the
MPCA Notification of Asbestos-Related Work
4.3 Groundwater
No groundwater was encountered in the top thirty feet of soils at the
Gladstone Savanna. Therefore it is unlikely that groundwater will be
encountered during shallow excavation (less than 10 feet) or site grading
activities. One groundwater sample was collected from a residential well and
no sign of contamination was found. Should groundwater be encountered at
the site, the City of Maple wood and/or SEH will be contacted and work
ceased in this area. SEH will sample the groundwater for DRO, VOCs,
SVOCs, and metals to verifY that it is free of contamination.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page 8
5.0 Project Timeline
It is anticipated that the activities covered by this Plan may begin as early as
June 2008. Sampling, disposal and earthmoving activities are expected to be
completed by the end of 2009.
6.0 SUMMARY
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH"') has prepared this Response Action
Plan and Construction Contingency Plan on behalf of the City of
Maplewood.
On behalf ofthe City of Maple wood, SEH requests that MPCA approve this
Response Action Plan and Construction Contingency Plan by return email to
SEH. Please also provide a written response to this work plan that is
addressed to the City of Maplewood, with a copy sent to SEH. As site
development plans are finalized SEH will submit an Addendum to the RAP
detailing which options for handling contaminated materials will be
implemented.
TResponse Action Plan and Construction Contingency PlanT
Maplewood, Minnesota
A-MAPLE070201
Page g
"
2!
N
-t
w
~
o
'"
"
"
~ ~~
.Q> "'<t "i-LJ]
LL ~"
"<
"
if) i'"
w <(
U Z 0
Z Z if)
<( <( W
0 > Z
W <( Z
W
U if) ~
X w ci
w z
> 0 0
'" f- ~
if) if)
0 w
<( -'
'" -' "-
w (9 <(
F :2
e
0 !
e
;
- - "
"'
, , g~
~g
8 8 ~~
g d "
;!i)
,0
"'-
"
-t
w
"'''
"R
oflB
'"
,
~
~
0
0
0 [:'
o j
,
;; ~
C , c
'"
'" 0
'"
-'
"'~
~
~Ln
u::
~~
w
.0-"
Q:~
"
Z
:'\
"-
Z4:~
Qzo
f-Zr.f.)
U<tW
<t>Z
W<tZ
U)U)~
Z W _
OZO
"-00
Wf-O
WW:;:
"'OW
O<t-,
W-',,-
W"'<t
o "
"-
o
'"
"-
,
~"
f"&;
8:,,-
-,
IL
~i;' i:j
~i
II
~g
..
~
'i ~
,
,
~
~
o
o j
,
-0 ~
c 0 0
'" D
'"
'"
-'
"'~
Agenda Item 5.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Maplewood Dump Site
October 13, 2011 for the October 17 ENR Commission Meeting
BACKGROUND
The Maplewood Dump operated for the disposal of general municipal solid waste and industrial
waste from the 1950s to 1970. The site is located North of Pondview Apartments, south of the
railroad tracks, east of Feed Products, and west of Rolling Hills Manufactured Home Park.
Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments were completed in 1995 and 1999 (site map
and geologic cross section map attached). It was determined that site soil and sediments were
above regulatory action limits. Groundwater sampling did not indicate contaminants above
action limits.
In 2001, the City of Maplewood entered into a Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC)
program with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for the Maplewood Dump site.
The VIC Program is a voluntary program designed to assist organizations with necessary clean
up actions. The MPCA approved a Response Action Plan (RAP) for cleanup of the site which
included covering the site with four feet of cover across the site. In 2002 the City obtained a
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District permit as part of the RAP which allowed the City
to cover the site with street sweepings.
SUMMARY
The City Council has authorized a budget and scope of work for the continued investigation and
planning for the Maplewood Dump site. SEH will assist staff in gathering information regarding
the site's past as well as its future end us. AI Sunderman of SEH will be present during the
October 17, 2011, ENR Commission meeting to give the Commission an update on this work.
Attachments
-"
""0
~,
C'.? 0.,
,-~-, """
~::
,~,
'""'" :J':;
;;;
p
s_
""^"'<
,....:::,
:::?
,.20;
~-
ix
P
~
- ~~
.,
X33C:J C3.A'f3S
\
\
\
,
\
,
\
::J
~
w
~
~
~
~
z
~
c
"
~
Agenda Item 6.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Joy Park Wetland Waiver
October 12, 2011 for the October 17, 2011 Commission Meeting
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
A section of Joy Road has had periodic flooding in the winter and spring of 2011.
Ramsey County is proposing maintenance on a roadside ditch in this area in order to
alleviate flooding. The proposed work could impact a wetland located along the road
and portions of the work would be conducted in the wetland buffer.
DISCUSSION
In winter and spring 2011, there was flooding on Joy Road, across from the Joy Park
parking lot entrance. The flooding caused damage to the road and was hazardous to
traffic. Alan Rupnow, Environmental Resource Specialist for Ramsey County,
conducted a wetland delineation of the site and prepared a Project Proposal. The text
from the project proposal is included as Attachment 1.
Ramsey County determined the flooding was overflow from a small wetland on the north
side of Joy Road that drains into a ditch along the road. The wetland, ditches, and
proposed work are shown in Attachment 2. As noted in the proposal, there are three
locations that restrict drainage from the wetland. The County proposes to clean out the
ditches and to excavate a three-foot wide swale to more directly connect the wetland to
the ditch, which would allow the water to flow out of the wetland in times of heavy
rainfall. The County considers the removal of sediment in the ditch to be routine
maintenance of a stormwater conveyance.
Based on the soils present, Mr. Rupnow believes that this small wetland likely originated
from road construction blocking runoff to Silver Lake. However, the wetland has native
wetland plants and is relatively high quality. It is not mapped on the City's Wetland
Classification Map, but Valley Branch Watershed Oistrict (VBWO) recently conducted a
Minnesota Routine Assessment Method on the wetland and classified it as a high
quality wetland.
If the proposed work is done, the County's report indicates there may be some volume
loss to the wetland during periods of heavy rainfall, since the discharge point will be
larger. Staff will be meeting with representatives from the County and VBWO prior to
the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission meeting to better
understand how this proposal will impact the wetland. That information will be
presented during the Commission meeting. Mr. Rupnow will be in attendance to
present the proposal and answer questions.
CONFORMANCE WITH WETLAND ORDINANCE
The Wetland Ordinance states that the City may waive the requirements of the
ordinance for the maintenance of public streets and utilities within a buffer. This
requirement can be waived if there is a greater public need for the project than to meet
the standards of the ordinance, or ifthere is no other practical alternative. When staff
meets with Ramsey County and the VBWO, we will address this issue and report to the
ENR Commission.
SUMMARY
The Wetland Ordinance requires the ENR Commission and Planning Commission make
a recommendation on wetland buffer waivers prior to review by the City Council. The
Planning Commission's review is scheduled for November 1 , with final review by the
City Council on November 14.
Staff requests that the ENR Commission review and make a recommendation on the
proposal from Ramsey County to clean the ditch along Joy Road and excavate a three
foot wide swale connecting the wetland to the ditch.
Attachments:
1. Project Proposal
2. Map of vvetland and excavation areas
2
'.
>
Attachment 1
Joy Rd Drainage Repair - Project Proposal and Wetland Delineation
Proposal/Scope of Work
A section ofthe north side of Joy Rd across from the west City of Maplewood park driveway was
impacted by periodic flooding during the winter and spring of 2011 resulting in damage to the roadway
and passing traffic. The cause of the flooding was determined to be overflow from a small wetland on
the north side of the road northeast of the driveway. Water from the wetland drains through a small gap
in its southeast corner running into the ditch to the east until it reaches a culvert running underneath
Joy Rd about 400 feet away. (See Figure 2 - Joy Rd Wetland Delineation / Site Map for details)
Ramsey County has determined there are three locations that are restricting drainage from the wetland:
1. Sediment accumulated in the ditch from general run-off accumulation starting 200 feet east of
the wetland.
2. Sediment deposited in the ditch at the end of an undeveloped foot trail located approximately
180 feet east of the wetland's discharge point.
3. The wetland discharge point into the ditch is only about 1 foot wide.
Ramsey County proposes to perform the following maintenance activity and drainage alterations to the
wetland and ditch to protect the integrity of the roadway and public safety.
1. Clean out the ditch line east of the wetland to a proposed 0.34% grade including removing the
trail deposits and accumulated sediment in the ditch bottom.
2. Clean out the ditch from the low point in the roadway by Wetland Point 7 along the south edge
of the wetland to just east of Wetland Point 8 to remove accumulated sediment and improve
drainage into the wetland.
3. . The eastern half of the wetland is separated from the ditch by a tree-covered berm. The
southeast wetland edge is at an average elevation of 999.09 ft and the top of berm average
elevation is 999.44 ft. We propose to excavate a 3:foot wide swale in the berm with a bottom
elevation of 999.20 ft (approximately 3 inches deep) in the berm to provide additional drainage
during periods of heavy snowmelt and rainfall run-off.
The wetland appears to have been created by the initial construction of Joy Rd but has been present for
at least 60 years. It has high quality vegetation (Lake sedge / Carex lacustrls) and the local Wetland
Conservation Act LGU has graded it with a high MnRAM rating. Ramsey County intends to avoid any
direct impact to the wetland, but there may be some volume loss during periods of heavy precipitation
due to the larger discharge point. The wetland delineation and supporting documents are discussed in
the following pages.
Ramsey County Public Works - Joy Rd Wetland Submitlal September 28, 2011
Wetland Point
The wetland point was about five feet inside of the eventual wetland boundary. The dominant
vegetation was lake Sedge, Reed Canary Grass (Pha/aris arund/nacea), and Riverbank Grape
(Vitus riparia) under a canopy of Basswood, Buckthorn, and Silver Map (Acer saccharinum). The
surface soil was a moist silty loam with saturated soils nearby. The boring location had surface
water as recently as one or two weeks before. The soil transitioned to loamy silt with mottling
at 3.5 inches depth. Compacted silt started at 20 inches depth and at 29 inches changed to a
mixture of mottled and gleyed clayey silt with undecomposed root structure. Soli saturation was
not encountered until 18 inches below depth which was surprising due to the high precipitation
of the recent months.
Wet/and Delineation Discussion
A couple of factors made the establishment of the delineation line rather difficult. The soils encountered
did not match the mapped soil type from the web soil survey nor the typical wetland soils found
elsewhere in the immediate area. Soil borings along the presumed wetland boundary found tightly
packed soils (silt/ciay) with mottling within 1 ft of the surface that extended in a much wider area than
what was delineated. These characteristics were also encountered on the berm separating the wetland
from the ditch line. These soils were not included in the wetland, because the clayey soils were bone dry
at depth at the end of a very wet summer even with saturated or nearly saturated soil at the surface.
Even at the wetland transect point; the soil became less saturated with depth with no water table
encountered beyond what had been observed at the surface. The wetland more than likely originated
from road construction blocking runoff to Silver Lake and compacting the solis resulting in water being
held at the surface during the early spring and during heavy rain events. The wetland boundary was
determined, as a result, by the prevalence of Basswood trees (wetland indicator rating of Facultative
Upland) on the western, northern, and eastern sides and along the berm on the southeast boundary of
the wetland. The toe of slope was used along the south roadside boundary. The establishment of the
western corner was difficult due to the presence of saturated soils perched on top of the hard roadside
base.
Removal of the sediment in the ditch line to the east should be considered routine maintenance of an
existing stormwater conveyance. Any hydric conditions in the ditch are the result of the accumulated
sediment.
Figures
Attachments
FIGURE 1: Site Locator
FIGURE 2: USGS Topo Map
FIGURE 3: Wetland Delineation & Site Plan Map
FIGURE 4: National Wetland Inventory Map
FIGURE 5: Joy Road Area Soils Map
Wetland Delineation Data Sheets
Precipitation Charts
Site Photos
i
Ramsey County Public Works - Joy Rd Wetland Submittal September 28. 2011
,
Wetland Delineatian Results
The delineation was conducted on September 1, 2011 by RCPW Environmental Specialist Alan Rupnow
(MnWDCP Master In-Training Certification #5011). The total delineated wetland area was 2818-ft'
(0.065-acre) divided into two halves by wetland type. The western half was a 1693-ft' Type 2 wet
meadow (Cowardin - PEMB) dominated by Lake Sedge (Carex lacustris). The eastern half was an 1124-ft'
Type 1 seasonal depression (Cowardin - PFOA) dominated by bare earth under a Basswood (TiIia
americana) canopy.
The wetland has a small drainage area made up by Joy Rd on the south side and mixed hardwood
hillside to the north and northwest. The surrounding area is parkland owned by the City of Maplewood
with Silver Lake (#62-0001) across Joy Rd to the south. Two shallow marsh wetlands are located 200 feet
to the northwest and 400 feet to the northeast, but are not directly connected.
Aerial review of the wetland on the Ramsey County GIS webslte confirms its presence during each year
provided (1940, 1953; 1974, 1983, 1991, 2003, 2006, 2008, and 2009) with the exception of 1940 where
the photographic evidence was Inconclusive. A farmstead was observed about 200 feet to the northeast,
but that was largely gone by 1953. Joy Rd was present from 1940 forward. Lydia Ave was constructed
225 feet to the west by 1974; the intersection appears to have been constructed between 1991 and
2003, but there was no apparent impact to the wetland. Rainfall during the aerial photo years varied
with most years receiving average to low rainfall. Rainfall was in the >70th percentile range only in 1991.
The rainfall for the current year is shaping up to be much heavier than normal. This was taken into
account when determining the wetland boundary by hydrologic indicators.
The soil survey indicated Kingsley sandy loam (6-12% slopes) a well drained soil with a typical depth to
restrictive feature of >80 inches. The local native wetland soils appear to be Markey Muck (Very poorly
drained with a depth to restrictive feature >80 inches) located underneath the nearby Shallow marsh
wetlands.
The wetland transect was located on the north side of the wetland. The upland point was about 15 feet
outside of the wetland boundary, and the wetland point was 5 feet inside of the wetland. The
delineation data forms may be found in the Attachments at the end of this report.
Upland Point
Dominant vegetation was all Facultative Upland with American basswood (T. arnericana),
Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), and a few herbs and woody vines in smaller but
dominant abundance. The soil was a sandy slit loam that changed into a mottled silt loam at 12
inches depth. Compacted silty clay was found at 20 inches that was very hard to work. No
water table or saturation was encountered although the clay became higher in moisture content
and more workable at 32 inches.
Ramsey County Public Works - Joy Rd Wetland Submittal September 28, 2011
/.+
c..
ro
~
c
ro
Cl..
Q)
.j.J
V')
I
'-
ro
c..
Q)
ex::
Q)
tlO
ro
c
ro
'-
Cl
-0
C
ro
C
o
.j.J
ro
Q)
c
Q)
Cl
-0
C
ro
.j.J
Q)
$
-0
0::::
>
o
--.
('/')
Q)
'-
:J
tlO
LL
'" e
<::t "1'.
0)0)
"''''
O'i 01
II II
'<1'U)
"' "'
di.....!'"
m",,,,
mcnm
0'J0)0'\
"mO'lO'i
E II II 11
Q:; M 0J (()
cacacom
m.-<",
., N '<:tOO
ill..' , ."
0.00'l0'l (1)
'"0 .C1'l 0\ en
wmmO'l
"'0 II II If
ro.-rl N (Y)
Owww
o:::et::o::o:::
me
~",f"-,...O'<1'
romU:.om
0100010..0'1
mcncnOm
(J) 01 O'l.r"! il
II II II 110
tDl'OOcnH
~~~~~
Vi
~.oo"'oU)m
'-.-i 0"1.0...-1.0
~o)ccimmai
'"O~~~~m
ffill 111111 II
'P.....4NM'<t1..()
~~~~~~
Attachment 2
'" '"
~ro
o E
g. 'x
~ 0
o.~
'" a.
c '"
'" '"
t? ffi
,._ V'I
o C
0.. 0
E .~
(u u
",.2
Q)~
on'"
'"0 ::
ill <Jl
"'-....
'" c
o ,Q
."'10
Qj >
~ '"
o u
Z i;j
~
'"
w
.i(
c
o
"'
ro
>
ro
u
x
w