HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 2002.08.08 - 26723July 18, 2002
MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #02170
BY: Planning and Building Committee, Charles E. Palmer, Chairperson
IN RE: DEPARTMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROVISIONS
OF A BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR THE FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
To the Oakland County Board of Commissioners
Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, pursuant to and in accordance with the
provisions of the Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act, being Act 381 of the Public Acts of the State
of Michigan of 1996, as amended (the "Act"), have established a redevelopment of Brownfields
Redevelopment Authority and Board (OCBRA) to facilitate the clean up and redevelopment of
Brownfields within Oakland County's communities; and,
WHEREAS the former Sanicem landfill site in Orion Township has been a long-standing environmental
hazard, a "facility" under state statute, and a tax-reverted, non-producing parcel for many years; and,
WHEREAS a Brownfield clean up and redevelopment plan (the "Plan") has been prepared to restore the
environmental and economic viability of this parcel which the OCBRA has reviewed and modified; and,
WHEREAS pursuant to OCBRA by-laws, a local committee has been appointed, participated in
discussions regarding the proposed plan and project, reviewed the plan, and recommends its approval;
and,
WHEREAS the members of the Township Board have reviewed the Plan, and have been provided a
reasonable opportunity to express their views and recommendations regarding the Plan in accordance
with Sections 13 (13) of the Act, and have unanimously approved the resolution declaring their
concurrence with the provisions of the Plan (attached); and
WHEREAS the OCBRA, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 13 of the Act, has unanimously
approved a resolution (attached) adopting the Plan, procedures for cost reimbursement, and
recommending the adoption of the Plan by the Planning and Building Committee and the Board of
Commissioners to be carried out within the Township of Orion, relating to the redevelopment of the former
Sanicem Landfill located at M-24 and Brown Road (the "Property"); and,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners does hereby
adopt the Plan and be carried out within the Township of Orion, relating to the redevelopment of the
former Sanicem Landfill located at M-24 and Brown Road (the "Property"); and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that adoption of this resolution is contingent on Corporation Counsel
approval of Public Hearing publishing dates of July 16, 2002 and July 18, 2002; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a public hearing on the adoption of the Brownfield Plan approved by
the Oakland County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority for the former Sanicem Landfill in Orion
Township shall be held on August 8 th at 9:45 a.m. in the Board of Commissioners Auditorium, 1200 North
Telegraph Road, Pontiac, Michigan.
Chairperson, on behalf of the Planning & Building Committee, I move the adoption of the foregoing
resolution.
PLANNING & BUILDING COMMITTEE
Planning & Building Committee Vote:
Motion carried on unanimous roll call vote with Garfield absent
PRO.TIT,' CT SUMMARY
Project Name: Former Sanicem Landfill Redevelopment
Project Location:
Type of Eligible
Property:
Lapeer and Brown Road, Orion Township, Michigan
Facility (contaminated)
Eligible Activities: Brownfield plan, baseline environmental assessment activities, due
care, and additional response activities.
Reimbursable Costs: $4,569,000.00
Years to Complete
Payback: 12 years including revolving fund capture
Estimated Eligible
Investment: $50 million
Annual Tax Revenue
Before Project: $0
Annual Tax Revenue
After Project: $645,000.00
Project Overview: Brown Road Group, L.L.C. plans to develop the 36-acre former
Sanicem Landfill located near the intersection of Lapeer Road and Brown Road, in Orion
Township. The development will consist of a high technology, research and light industrial park
with total estimated construction of 300,000 to 350,000 square feet. Approximately 100 acres of
land immediately south of the Property located in the City of Auburn Hills will also be
developed as part of the project under a separate brownfield redevelopment plan approved by the
City of Auburn Hills Brownfield Redevelopment Authority and City Council. Appropriate
environmental measures will be completed to prevent exposure of hazardous materials to human
health, safety, and the environment. The total investment is estimated at approximately $50
million on the property in Orion Township as contained in this Plan. When combined, as many
as 3,000 jobs may result from development of the project described in this Plan and the Auburn
Hills Plan, This Plan has been prepared to provide for Tax Increment Financing for
reimbursement of eligible costs and to allow an appropriate qualified taxpayer to make
application to the State of Michigan for a Brownfield Redevelopment Single Business Tax Credit
for the portion of the Property located in Orion Township.
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
ORION TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN
for
OAKLAND COUNTY MICHIGAN
BROWN ROAD GROUP, LLC
AKT PEERLESS PROJECT No. 03172s2
JUNE 26, 2002
Type of Eligible
Property: Facility (contaminated)
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Name: Former Sanicern Landfill Redevelopment
Project Location: Lapeer and Brown Road, Orion Township, Michigan
Eligible Activities: Brownfield plan, baseline environmental assessment activities, due
care, and additional response activities.
Reimbursable Costs: $4,569,000.00
Years to Complete
Payback: 12 years including revolving fund capture
Estimated Eligible
Investment: $50 million
Annual Tax Revenue
Before Project: $0
Annual Tax Revenue
After Project: $645,000.00
Project Overview: Brown Road Group, L.L.C. plans to develop the 36-acre former
Sanicem Landfill located near the intersection of Lapeer Road and Brown Road, in Orion
Township. The development will consist of a high technology, research and light industrial park
with total estimated construction of 300,000 to 350,000 square feet. Approximately 100 acres of
land immediately south of the Property located in the City of Auburn Hills will also be
developed as part of the project under a separate brownfield redevelopment plan approved by the
City of Auburn Hills Brownfield Redevelopment Authority and City Council. Appropriate
environmental measures will be completed to prevent exposure of hazardous materials to human
health, safety, and the environment. The total investment is estimated at approximately $50
million on the property in Orion Township as contained in this Plan. When combined, as many
as 3,000 jobs may result from development of the project described in this Plan and the Auburn
Hills Plan. This Plan has been prepared to provide for Tax Increment Financing for
reimbursement of eligible costs and to allow an appropriate qualified taxpayer to make
application to the State of Michigan for a Brownfield Redevelopment Single Business Tax Credit
for the portion of the Property located in Orion Township.
Idand County
Brownfield Redevelopment Plan
For
Former Sanicem Landfill
Orion Township, Michigan
Prepared With the Assistance of:
The Oakland County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority
and
AKT Peerless Environmental Services
22725 Orchard Lake Road
Farmington, Michigan 48336
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2M GENERAL DEFINITIONS AS USED IN THIS PLAN 2
10 STATUTORY ELEMENTS OF THE BROWNFIELD PLAN 3
4.0 'VIDEO APPROVAL FOR CAPTURE OF SCHOOL TAX LEVIES 4
5.0 GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL OF THE BROWNFIELD PLAN 4
6.0 BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 6
6.1 Description of the Project and Costs to be Paid through the Brownfield Plan (MCL
125 2663(1)(a)) 6
6.2 Estimate of Captured Taxable Value and Tax Increment Revenues (MCL
125 .2663 (1)(b)) 9
6.3 Method of Financing and Description of Advances by the Municipality MCL
125.2663(1)(c) 11
6.4 Maximum Amount of Note or Bonded Indebtedness (MCL 125.2663(1)(d)) 12
6.5 Duration of Brownfield Plan (MCL 125.2663(1)(e)) 12
6.6 Estimated Impact of Tax Increment Financing on Revenues of Taxing Jurisdictions
(MCL 125 2663(1)(f)) 13
6.7 Legal Description, Property Map and Personal Property (MCL 125.2663(1)(g)) 13
6.8 Estimates of Residents and Displacement of Families (IVICL 125.2663(1)(h)) 14
6.9 Plan for Relocation of Displaced Persons (MCL 125.2663(1)(I)) 14
6.10 Provisions for Relocation Costs (MCL 125.2663(1)(j)) 14
6.11 Strategy for Compliance with Michigan's Relocation Assistance LawMCL
125 2663(1)(k) 14
6.12 Description of Proposed Use of Local Site Remediation Revolvina Fund MCL
125 . 2663 (1)(1) 14
6.13 Other Material that the Authority or Governing Body Considers Pertinent 15
7.0 LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND APPENDICIES 16
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLES:
TABLE 1: ANNUAL TAX INCREMENT REVENUE BREAKDOWN
TABLE 2: ANNUAL TAX INCREMENT REVENUE BY TAXING JURISDICTION
TABLE 3: ANNUAL MILLAGE RATES AND TAXABLE VALUE
FIGURES:
FIGURE 1: LOCATION MAP OF THE ELIGIBLE PROPERTY
FIGURE 2: ELIGIBLE PROPERTY BOUNDARY MAP
FIGURE 3: CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
APPENDICIES:
APPENDIX A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ELIGIBLE PROPERTY
APPENDIX B: ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
APPENDIX C: REIMBURSEMENT PROCEDURES
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
ORION TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN
OAKLAND COUNTY
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Oakland County Board Of Commissioners established the Brownfield Redevelopment
Authority (Authority) of Oakland County by adoption of a Resolution pursuant to the Brownfield
Redevelopment Financing Act, Michigan Public Act 381 of 1996, as amended (Act 381). The
Michigan Department of State, Office of the Great Seal, acknowledged receipt and filing of the
Resolution. The primary purpose of Act 381 is to encourage the redevelopment of blighted,
contaminated and functionally obsolete property by providing economic incentives through
Single Business Tax credits and Tax Increment Financing for certain eligible activities. Tax
increment revenues may be captured to pay for all activities allowed by law. The Authority is
authorized by Act 381 to undertake all activities allowed by law.
1
2.0 GENERAL DEFINITIONS AS USED IN THIS PLAN
All terms used in this Brownfield Plan are defined as provided in the following statutes, as
appropriate:
The Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act, 1996 Mich. Pub. Acts. 381, MC.L. § 125.2651 et
seq., as amended
Sections 38d and 38g of the Single Business Tax Act, 1975 Mich. Pub. Acts. 228, MC.L. §§
208.1 — 208.145, as amended
The Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 Mich. Pub. Acts 451, MC.L. §
324.20101 et seq., as amended.
2
3.0 STATUTORY ELEMENTS OF THE BROWNFI i41D PLAN
Brownfield plans developed by the Authority are to be submitted to County Board of
Commissioners for approval. A brownfield plan may apply to one or more parcels of eligible
property. The capture of tax increment revenues under a brownfield plan shall be determined
individually for each parcel of eligible property. Section 13 of Act 381 requires that the plan
contain the following information about the eligible property to the extent applicable.
(a) A description of costs intended to be paid for with tax increment revenues,
including a brief summary of the eligible activities that are proposed for each
eligible property.
(b) An estimate of the captured taxable value and tax increment revenues for each
year of the plan from each parcel of eligible property and in aggregate.
(c) The method by which the costs of the plan will be financed, including a
description of any advances made or anticipated to be made for the costs of the
plan from the municipality.
(d) The maximum amount of note or bonded indebtedness to be incurred, if any.
(e) The duration of the plan, which shall not exceed the lesser of the period required
to pay for the eligible activities from tax increment revenues plus the period of
capture authorized for the local site remediation revolving fund or 30 years.
(f) An estimate of the impact of tax increment financing on the revenues of all
taxing jurisdictions in which the property is located.
(g) A legal description of each parcel of eligible property to which the plan applies,
a map showing the locations and dimensions of each eligible property, and a
statement of whether personal property is included as part of the eligible
property.
3
(h) An estimate of the number of persons residing on each eligible property to
which the plan applies and the number of families and individuals to be
displaced, if any.
(i) A plan for establishing priority for the relocation of persons displaced by
implementation of the plan, if applicable.
(j) Provisions for the costs of relocating persons displaced by implementation of the
plan, and financial assistance and other reimbursement of expenses, if any.
(k) A strategy for compliance with the Michigan Relocation Assistance Act, if
applicable.
(1) A description of proposed use of the site remediation revolving fund.
(m) Other material that the authority or governing body considers pertinent.
4.0 MDEQ APPROVAL FOR CAPTURE OF SCHOOL TAX LEVIES
If the brownfield plan provides for the capture of taxes levied for school operating purposes from
eligible property in order to fund environmental activities, a work plan or remedial action plan
must be approved by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in
accordance with Act 381.
5.0 GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL OF THE BROWNFIELD PLAN
5.1 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
At least 20 days prior to approving a brownfield plan, the County Board of Commissioners must
give notice and a reasonable opportunity to the taxing jurisdictions levying taxes subject to
capture to express their views and recommendations regarding the plan.
4
5.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR APPROVAL
The County Board of Commissioner may then approve or reject the plan, or approve it with
modification based upon the following considerations:
1. Whether the plan contains the necessary information and meets the requirements of
Act 381.
2. Whether the proposed method of financing the costs of eligible activities is feasible
and the Authority has the ability to arrange the financing.
Whether the costs of eligible activities proposed are reasonable and necessary to carry
out the purposes of Act 38 1.
4. Whether the amount of captured taxable value estimated to result from adoption of
the plan is reasonable.
5
6.0 BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
ORION TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN
6.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND COSTS TO BE PAID THROUGH THE
BROWNFIELD PLAN (MCL 125.2663(1)(A))
A. Brown Road Group, L.L.C. Redevelopment Project and Site Description
Public Act 381 of 1996, as amended, defines "Eligible Property" as "property for which eligible
activities are defined under a brownfield plan that was used or is currently used for commercial,
industrial or residential purposes that is either in a qualified local unit of government and is a
facility, functionally obsolete, or blighted or is not in a qualified local unit of government and is
a facility, and includes parcels that are adjacent or contiguous to that property if the development
of the adjacent and contiguous parcels is estimated to increase the captured taxable value of that
property. Eligible property includes, to the extent included in the brownfield plan, personal
property located on the property. Eligible property does not include qualified agricultural
property exempt under section 7ee of the general property tax act, 1983 PA 206, MCL 211.7ee,
from the tax levied by a local school district for school operating purposes to the extent provided
under section 1211 of the revised school code, 1976 PA 451, MCL 324.20101."
The eligible property consists of approximately 36 acres located near the intersection of Lapeer
Road and Brown Road, in Orion Township, Oakland County, Michigan (the Property). The
developer, Brown Road Group, L.L.C., proposes to develop a high technology, research and light
industrial park on the Property with total estimated construction of 300,000 to 350,000 square
feet of structures. A conceptual site plan of the Property showing a potential layout of the
development is attached as Figure 3. Actual site layout will be determined after final design and
end use selection, and subject to Orion Township site plan approval. The developer has already
performed a complete wetlands assessment and received approval from the MDEQ for the
Property. Likewise, the developer has submitted and received a wetlands permit from the
MDEQ, which allows for the complete development of the Property. As agreed by MDEQ, any
required mitigation of wetlands will take place on the southern portion of the Property, entirely
located in Auburn Hills.
6
The project and property described in this Plan includes only the 36-acre parcel located in Orion
Township. However, the overall development will also include the approximately 100 acres of
contiguous land immediately south of the Property located in the City of Auburn Hills and
contained in a separate bro -wnfield plan approved by the City of Auburn Hills.
Under this Plan the Property will be prepared to make it suitable for development, and
appropriate response activities will be performed to prevent exposure of hazardous materials to
human health, safety, and the environment. The total project on the Property represents an
overall investment of approximately $50 million. The completion of this overall project is
estimated to create as many as 3,000 jobs within the County, 500-800 of the jobs resulting from
the construction planned on the Property in Orion Township.
This Plan is being prepared to provide Tax Increment Financing, including the capture of taxes
levied for school operating purposes, for reimbursement of eligible costs to be incurred as part of
the project. In addition, this Plan will enable the developer to apply for a State of Michigan
Brownfield Redevelopment Single Business Tax Credit. A Brownfield Work Plan will be
submitted by the Authority to the MDEQ for approval of the capture of school taxes for
reimbursement of a portion of the eligible activity costs listed below.
B. Identification of the Property as a "Facility."
The Property consists of approximately 36 acres and has been used as a landfill. There is
extensive documentation on the Property detailing the environmental conditions on-site based on
previous investigations performed on the site in the 1990s by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and MDEQ. Additional
information was collected in July 2000 by BL Companies for Brown Road Group, L.L.C. As
discussed below, the Property is impacted by certain contaminants due to its historical use, and
as such meets the definition of a "facility" under applicable Michigan law.
Under Part 201, a "facility" is defined as " any area, place, or property where a hazardous
substance in excess of the concentrations which satisfy the requirements of section 20120a(1)(a)
• . • has been released, deposited, disposed of or otherwise comes to be located." M.C.L. §
324.20101(1)(o). A "release" is defined to include "spilling" or "leaking" of a hazardous
substance into the environment. In addition, a "release" includes the abandonment of containers
or other clostd receptacles containing hazardous substances. M.C.L. § 324.20101(1)(bb).
7
Results from the investigation activities conducted by various agencies indicate that the majority
of soil and groundwater at the site is not contaminated above the generic exposure pathway-
based cleanup levels applicable to the site, with the exception of isolated incidents of heavy
metals in the southwest portion of the site and minor exceedences of other volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in soils located in the center
of the fill area. Leachate and sediment samples also exhibited minor exceedences of VOCs,
SVOCs, metals and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Methane was detected throughout the
landfill, but was only above potentially hazardous levels in isolated areas of thickest fill.
Leachate seeps are occurring throughout the southern end of the landfill and are flowing into the
outwash and marsh areas on the site. (For further detail regarding contamination of the Property
see Appendix B).
Based on the series of investigative work performed on-site, contamination resulting from the
landfill operation has resulted in localized on-site impact. No off-site impact is evident at this
time, though fugitive methane and leachate are still emanating from the landfill.
Based on the Findings and Conclusions of investigations performed for the Property, it is
determined that the Property meets the definition of a facility as defined in Part 201 of the
NREPA.
C. Description of Costs to be Paid for With Tax Increment Revenues and Summary of
Eligible Activities
Eligible activities that may take place as part of this project include the preparation of this Plan
by the Authority, the Baseline Environmental Assessment, due care activities, remedial
investigation and additional response activities including: land balancing to achieve proper
capping of the landfill area; removal and disposal of contaminated soil; land preparation such as
dynamic compaction and installation of engineered foundation systems as an alternative to
complete contamination removal, hauling and landfilling; methane venting from the deep fill
areas; and, leachate collection and treatment.
8
The estimated cost of the eligible activities is shown in the table below:
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY ESTIMATED COST
1. The cost to prepare this brownfield plan and $ 20,000.00 work plan
2. Remedial Investigation and Due care $ 100,000.00
3. Baseline Environmental Assessments $ 20,000.00
4. Land Balancing, Closure and Capping $ 600,000.00
5. Contaminated Soil Removal and Disposal $ 150,000.00
6. Land Preparation $1,500,000.00
7. Methane Venting $ 300,000.00
8. Leachate Collection and Treatment $ 300,000.00
9. Ongoing monitoring and reports $ 75,000.00
Subtotal Eligible Activities $3,065,000.00
OTHER REIIVIBURSEABLE EXPENSES
10. Interest $ 900,000.00
11. Administrative Costs $ 604,000.00
The total estimated eligible costs to complete $4,569,000.00
all activities
6,2 ESTIMATE OF CAPTURED TAXABLE VALUE AND TAX INCREMENT
REVENUES (MCL 125.2663(1)(B))
The total estimated cost of the eligible activities and other expenses to be reimbursed through the
capture of tax increment revenues is $4,569,000.00. The Developer will invest approximately
$50 million in real and personal property improvements on the Property. Redevelopment of the
Property is expected to initially generate an estimated incremental taxable value of
approximately $1,600,000 beginning in 2003 based on the sale of the land to the Developer.
After construction is complete, the estimated incremental taxable value for each year of the Plan
9
is based upon an average estimated rate of $40.00 of taxable value per square foot (based upon
current taxable values assigned to similar buildings in the market area) of buildings constructed
on the Property (estimated at 325,000 square feet in total). Appreciation of real property at a rate
of 3% annually and depreciation of personal property based on State of Michigan depreciation
tables is also factored into the calculation of incremental taxable value.
The estimated number of years of tax capture by the Authority and the total estimated tax
increment revenue to be captured by the Authority is summarized in the table below and is
presented in detail in Tables 1 through 3 attached to this Plan.
Total Estimated Tax Increment Revenue
Year Incremental Taxable Tax Increment
Value Revenue
2003 $ 1,600,000 $ 62,893.00
2004 $13,005,000 $ 511,204.00
2005 $12,690,000 $ 498,822.00
2006 $12,563,100 $ 493,834.00
2007 $12,534,543 $ 492,712.00
2008 $12,559,579 $ 493,696.00
2009 $12,638,466 $ 496,797.00
2010 $12,771,470 $ 502,025.00
2011 $12,958,864 $ 509,391.00
2012 $13,110,930 $ 515,368.00
2013 $13,362,958 $ 525,275.00
2014 $13,580,247 $ 533,816.00
Total: $5,635,833.00
_t
10
The captured incremental taxable value and associated tax increment revenue will be based on
the actual increased taxable value from all taxable improvements on the Property and the actual
millage rates levied by each taxing jurisdiction during each year of the Plan.
6.3 METHOD OF FINANCING AND DESCRIPTION OF ADVANCES BY THE
MUNICIPALITY MCL 125.2663(1)(C)
The Developer, Brown Road Group, L.L.C., has advanced, and will agree to advance in the
future, the cost of eligible activities implemented on the Property. The Authority will advance
$6,000.00 form its USEPA' Brownfield Demonstration Pilot Grant in order to fund the cost of
preparing this Plan. In accordance with this Plan the Authority will repay the amount advanced
by the Developer, together with a portion of the interest expense incurred by the Developer to
finance the cost of eligible activities, solely from the tax increment revenues realized from the
eligible property in accordance with the terms of the Reimbursement Procedures contained in
Appendix C.
Interest shall begin to accrue after completion of the Developer's expenditures for eligible
activities, and upon notice of completion of expenditures for eligible activities to be provided
promptly in writing by the Developer to the Authority. The Developer shall also provide the
Authority with a final total of expenditures incurred for completion of eligible activities, less the
amount of any reimbursement for said expenditures made to date by the Authority — this amount
to be considered the principal amount for purposes of calculating interest. The amount of
interest payable shall be calculated on the outstanding principal balance at an interest rate no less
than the prevailing six-month Treasury Bill rate and that such rates shall be computed and
compounded quarterly. Interest accrual on the outstanding principal balance shall cease on
December 31, 2014,
The Developer may assign to its lender, direct payment from tax increment revenue by the
Authority for reimbursement of the costs incurred by the Developer for the eligible activities
completed under this Plan, said assignment to take place upon written notice from the Developer
to the Authority in order to satisfy certain lender requirements for which the Developer is
obligated. Payments to the Developer or its lender will be made to the full extent incremental
property tax revenues are or become available for such purpose under Act 381. Tax increment
revenues will first be used to pay or reimburse the Authority for administrative and operating
expenses deScribed in Section 6.1 including $6,000.00 for the cost to prepare this Plan.
1 1
There exists the potential for certain eligible activities approved in this Plan to not qualify for
reimbursement through the capture of both school tax and non-school tax dollars. Specifically,
there exists the potential that certain land preparation costs may only be reimbursed using non-
school tax dollars captured under this Plan. Whether or not certain land preparation costs may be
reimbursed using school tax dollars will be resolved by the MDEQ in accordance with Act 381.
The amount of school tax revenues, which will be used to reimburse the costs of implementing
eligible activities at the Property, will be limited to the cost of eligible activities approved by the
MDEQ. Following the approval or disapproval of school tax capture by the MDEQ, to the extent
necessary, the Authority will segregate the repayment of eligible activities between those that
may be repaid from captured school taxes and those that may not, and apply those payment
streams accordingly.
The Authority, under this Plan, has agreed to facilitate redevelopment of the Property though the
use of tax increment financing as allowed by Act 381. To this end, the Developer, Authority and
Oakland County shall not seek reimbursement of the tax increment revenues captured and
expended under this Plan for the reimbursement of eligible activities at the Property.
6.4 MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF NOTE OR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS (MCL
125.2663(1)(D))
There will be no note or bonded indebtedness incurred by Oakland County, Orion Township or
the Authority for the purpose of financing the cost of eligible activities as part of this Plan.
6.5 DURATION OF BROWNFIELD PLAN (MCL 125.2663(1)(E))
The Plan will remain in effect for as many years as is required to fully complete the project, or
30 years, whichever is less.
12
6.6 ESTIMATED IMPACT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ON REVENUES OF
TAXING JURISDICTIONS (MCL 125.2663(1)(F))
The following table presents a summary of the estimated tax increment revenues, to be generated
by the taxing jurisdictions, whose millage is subject to capture by the Authority under this Plan.
Estimated Captured Taxes by Taxing Jurisdiction
Taxing Jurisdiction Total
School Operating $2,580,752.00
State Education Tax $ 860,251.00
Combined County $ 665,807.00
Community College $ 228,713.00
Combined ISD $ 495,017.00
Combined Local $ 805,293.00
Total: $5,635,833.00
Tables 1-3 attached to this Plan provide a detailed breakdown of the estimated impact of tax
increment financing on the revenues of the taxing jurisdictions.
6.7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY MAP AND PERSONAL PROPERTY (MCL
125.2663(1)(G))
A legal description of the Property is provided in Appendix A A Location Map and a Boundary
Map of the Property are attached in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. Personal property is
included as part of the Eligible Property and the value of the personal property is considered
eligible investment for the purpose of calculating the amount of the Brownfield Redevelopment
Single Business Tax Credit for this project. The estimated taxable value of the personal property
is also included in the calculation of captured tax increment revenue under this plan.
13
6.3 ESTIMATES OF RESIDENTS AND DISPLACEMENT OF FAMILIES (MCL
125.2663(1)(H))
There are no persons residing on the Property to which this Plan applies, and therefore there are
no families to be displaced.
6.9 PLAN FOR RELOCATION OF DISPLACED PERSONS (MCL 125.2663(1)(1))
There are no persons residing on the Property to which this Plan applies, and therefore there is no
need for a relocation plan.
6.10 PROVISIONS FOR RELOCATION COSTS (MCL 125.2663(1)(J))
There are no persons residing on the Property to which this Plan applies, and therefore there is no
need for the provision of relocation costs.
6.11 STRATEGY FOR COMPLIANCE WITH MICHIGAN'S RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE LAWMCL 125.2663(1)(K)
There are no persons residing on the Property to which this Plan applies, and therefore there is no
need for compliance with Act No. 227 of the Public Acts of 1972, being Sections 213.321 to
213.332 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
6.12 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE OF LOCAL SITE REMED1ATION
REVOLVING FUND MCL 125.2663(1)(L)
Tax increment revenue will be deposited in the Local Site Remediation Revolving Fund as part
of this plan. In lieu of capturing the full amount authorized by Act 381, the Authority has opted
to collect a fixed amount of $750,000.00 in increments of $150,000.00 during years 2004-2008.
All proceeds deposited in the Authority's Local Site Remediation Revolving Fund as part of this
Plan and other brownfield plans will be used in accordance with the Act. The Authority
currently anticipates using the fund to pay eligible activity costs at this and other eligible
properties included in other brownfield plans approved or amended by the Authority and County
Board of Commissioners.
14
6.13 OTHER fvIATEMAL THAT THE AUTHORITY OR GOVERNING BODY
CONSIDERS PERTINENT
The total estimated cost of eligible activities incurred by the Developer (exclusive of interest and
the $6,000 cost of this brownfield plan funded by Oakland County) to be reimbursed from tax
increment revenue under this Plan is $3,059,000.00. The actual amount of tax increment revenue
utilized for the purpose of reimbursing the Developer or its lenders for the cost of eligible
activities shall not exceed the amount of $3,059,000.00 without this Plan being amended by the
Brownfield Redevelopment Authority and Oakland County Board of Commissioners.
During the final year of the Plan, only the amount of tax increment revenue necessary to
complete reimbursement of the remaining balance of the cost eligible activities will be captured
and any remaining taxes will be distributed to the taxing jurisdictions.
15
7.0 LIST OF TABLES. FIGURES AND APPENDICIES
TABLES:
TABLE 1:
TABLE 2:
Annual Tax Increment Revenue Breakdown
Annual Tax Increment Revenue by Taxing
Jurisdiction
TABLE 3: Annual Millage Rates and Taxable Value
FIGURES:
FIGURE 1: Location Map of the Eligible Property
FIGURE 2: Eligible Property Boundary Map
APPENDICIES:
APPENDIX A: Legal Description of the Eligible Property
APPENDIX B: Environmental Data
APPENDIX C: Reimbursement Procedures
16
TABLE 1
•
Annual Tax increment Revenue Breakdown
Table 1 - Annual Tax Increment Revenue, Former Sanicem Landfill, Orion Township, Michigan
._ i
Year 2002 tax 2003 tax I 2004 tax 2005 tax _ 2006 tax 2007 tax 2008 tax 2009 tax 2010 tax 2011 tax 2012 tax 2013 tax 201 4 tax
Land, Real & Personal Property Taxable Value $0 $1,600,000 1 $13,005,000 $12,690.000 $12,563,100 $12,534,543 $12,559,579 $12,638,466 $12,771,470 $12,958,864 $13,110,930 $13,362,958 _I $13,580,247 _ i
Incremental Taxable Value $0 $1,600,000 $13,005,000 $12,690,000 $12,563,100 $12,534,543 $12,559,579 $12,638,466 $12,771,470 $12,958,864 $13,110,930 $13,362,958 $13,580,247
1 Tax rate 0.0336916 0.0393083 0,0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 _ 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.0393083
Tax on Land Real & Personal Property $0 $62,893 $511,204 $498,822 $493,834 $492,712 $493,696 $496,797 $502,025 $509,391 $515,368 $525,275 $533,810 _
Incr. Tax on Captured Taxable Value $0 $62,893 i._ $511,204 $498,822 $493,834 I $492,712 $493,696 $496,797 $502,025 $509,391 $515,368 $525,275 1 7533,816 !----
Cumulative Incr. Taxes $0 $62,893 $574,097 $1,072,919 $1,566,753 $2,059,465 $2,553,161 $3,049,958 $3,551,983 $4,061,374 $4,576,742 $5,102,017 $5,635,833
Amount for admin. expenses $0 $24,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 $58,000 , $0
I
Amount to Revolving Fund $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000
I I
Amount left to reimburse $3,965,000 $3,926,107 $3,622,903 $3,332,081 $3,046,247 1 $2,761,635 $2,475,839 $2,037,042 $1 ,593,017 i $1,141,626 I $684,258 $216,983 $0
1 I
Cumulative Revolving Fund $150,000 $300,000 $450,000 I $600,000 $750,000
TABLE 2
Annual Tax Increment Revenue by Taxing Jurisdiction
Table 2- Annual Tax Increment Revenue by Taxing Jurisdiction, Former Sanloam Landfill, Odon Township, Michigan
1 1 1 ;Total From Each
Year 12002 tax 12003 tax 2004 tax 2005 tax 2006 lax 2007 tax 2008 tax 2009 tax 2010 tax !2011 tax 12012 tax 2013 tax 12014 tax 1,a_:risdicZion
I . I
ALLOCATED INCR. TAXES School 1
Operating (18 mills) $0 I $28,800 $234,090 $228,420 $226,136 $225,622 _ $226,072 $227,492 1 $229,886 . $233,260 $235,997 1 $240,533 $244,444 I $2,580,752 _
State Ed. Tax (6 mills) $0 $9,600 $78,030 $76,140 $75,379 $75,207 $75,357 $75,831 $76,629 $77,753 $78,666 $80,178 I $81,481 5860,251
I 1
School Operating Subtotal $0 $38,400 $312,120 $304,560 $301,515 $300,829 _ $301,429 $303,323 $306,515 $311,013 $314.663 $320.711 1 $325,925
I
Combined County (4,6438 mills) j $0 $7,430 $00,393 $58,910 $55341 $58,208 $58,324 358,691 $59,308 $60,178 $60,885 $62,055 I $63,064 $665,807
CommunityColege (1.5952 n‘ills) $0 $2,552 $20,746 $20,243 $20.041 $19,995 $20,035 $20,161 $20,373 $20,672 $20,915 $21,317 521,663 3228,713
I
Combined 03,4526 mills) $0 $5.524 $44,901 $43,813 $43,375 943,277 _ 543,363 043,636 $44,095 $44,742 $45,267 $46,137 046,887 5455,017
Combined Local (5.6167 mills) $0 $8.987 $73,044 $71,276 $70,562 $70,403 $70,545 $70,986 $71,734 $72,786 $73,638 $75,055 576,277 5505,293 ;
I 1
Debt Ntill!ge,s all Jurisdictions (not criltured) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I
I 1 I Total Captured School Taxes 1 90 538,430 1 $312,120 $304,560 $301,515 $300,829 $301,429 $303,323 $306,515 $311,013 $314,663 $320,711 . 5325,920
I I
Total Captured Non-School Taxes __A $0 $24,493 $199,084 $194,262 $192,319 $191,883 $192,267 $193,474 $195,510 $198,378 $200.705 $204,554 $207,881
I
Total Incr. Taxes 1 i $0 $62,893 $511,204 $498,822 $493,834 6492,712 $493,696 $496,797 $502,025 $509,391 9515,368 $525.275 $533.816
1 Cumulative Incr. School Taxes $0 $38,400 $350,520 $655,080 $956,595 $1,257,424 $1,558,853 $1,862,176 $2,168,699 $2,479,704 $2,794.367 $3,115,078 1 $3,441,003 ,
I
Cumulative Incr. Non- School Taxes $0 I $24,493 $223,577 $417,839 $610,158 $802,041 $994,308 I $1,187,782 $1,383,292 $1,581,670 $1,782,375 $1,986.939 1 $2,194,830 , I
Corn. TOTAL 10cr. Taxes $0 1 $62,893 $574,097 i $1,072,919 $1,566,753 1 $2,059,465 / $2,553,161 1 $3,049,958 , $3,551.983 1 $4,061,374 1 54,576,742 I $5,102,017 55,635,933 I
TABLE 3
Annual Millage Rates and Taxable Value
Table 3 -Annual rAllage and Taxable Value, Former Sanicem Landfill, Orion Township, Michigan
_
I
1 I Year 2002 tax i2003 tax 2004 tax 2005 tax 2006 tax ,2007 tax 2008 tax 2009 tax 2010 tax _ 2011 tax 2012 tax 2013 tax 12014 tax
I
1 1
School non-home,stead 0.0181 0.018 1 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.0181 I
0.316
1
0.018 0.0181 0.0181
State Educ. Tax 0.006 0.0061 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.0061 0.0061 0.006 0.0061 0.8061 0.006
1 I
Combined County 0.0046438 0.0046438 1 0.0046438 0.0046438 0.0046438 0.0046438 0.00464381 0.0046438 1 0.00464381 0.0046438 0.00464381 0.0046433! 0.0046438
1 I 1
1 1 1 1
Community College 0.0015952, 0.00159521 0.0015952 0.00159521 0.0015952 0.0015952 0.0015952 0.0015952 0.0015952 1 0.0015952 0.00159521 0.00159521 0.0015962
1 1 I 1
Combined ISD 0.0034526 0.00345261 0.0034526 0.0034526 0.0034526 0.0034526 0.0034526 0.00345261 0.0034526 0.0034526 0.00345261 0.00345261 0.0034526
1 1 i
Combined Local 0 0.0056167' 0.0056167 0 00561671 0 00'6167 0.0056167 0.00561671 0.00561071 0.00561671 0.0056167!1 0.0050167 1 0.0356167
I
1 0.03930831 0.03330E3 0.03.93083 Total t.tillage 1 I 0.0336916 0.0393083=1 0.0393083 0.0393083 1 0.0393083 0.0393083 0.03930831 0.03930831 0.0393083 0.03930831
1 1
Year 1 2002 20031 2004 2005 20061 20071 2008i 200911 20101 2011! 2012L_ 2013 2314
Personal Property Depreciated Taxable Value 1 1 I 1 1 !
Sta rting in 2003
1
$4,005,000 $3,420,000 $3,015,000 1 $2,700,000 j $2,430,000 1 $2,205,000 ! $2,025,000 1 1,890,000 $1,710,000 1 $1,823,300 .S51,4)5,033
I I
! 1
_
i 1 I
Land and Real Property Taxable Value $0 $1 600 000 t $9,000,000 59 270 000 $9,548 100 $9 834 543 $10,129,579 $10 433,466 $10,746 470 $11 068,864 $11,400,930 $11 742,958 , $12,095,247
I 2002 Base Taxable Value Land and Real ! 1
Property $0 1
2002 Base Taxabie Value Personal Propn $0
Value of Personal Property added in 2003 i $4,500,000 1
L—•
_
PARAKEEr-H4
_ .„. ' • —CARDINAL—Ht.
HUMMING:811304N ,
EAtEVIS
stiVAELOw
i I I
;
I!
cr
Z.
f ,
r
t
a:
fiJ
0
;].
tt
f
tfl
,
/if SON10010 --BRowN-RD - -
fr r. rc‘ 2
rc‘
0
r-,
s-ip,s7c,t()t.4
t.1
I I
Q.
Ci
to,koovvy5,5?K m
SPARROW.HL 35
CAST
falace Of AHI ..ALOA s
PROPERTY LOCATION MAP
LAPEER ROAD
ORION TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN
PROJECT NUMBER : 317222
DRAWING NUMBER : LOCATION MAP
'II __------ --,
tA,'"----------
ui ci
il
m rr,
't 1
..-- .
I =
1 j -
/
I I i
•
, 11 ,
i t
11 0 11
,..' a
LEGEND
WE
1421110S26110104Mr=fir.
IMA1/21.1 BY: OGO '
DATE: 05-24-02
eseeresmamessocaer=
i
FIGURE 1
0 a
1999 Del-wine. Stmet. :Attu USA
4
ig
1 r RD E
1 -,,AKTPEERLESS
environmental set-vices
105 E. Michigan Ave., P.O. Box 655, Jodcson, MI 49204
Phone: (517)787-3393 Fox: (517)787-4508
FIGURE 2
Eligible Property Boundary Map
FIGURE 3
Conceptual Site Plan
\ -etam .A
4,116. It al=
/1•111=1111 1111111111111r OIMELNim 1111maim IhrEOPVI 111111=Wer MENUS"
ci)
C.)
C.)
•
+4.
0
• ...I
Cl,
0)
1:1 • ••nI
110
r..14
0
' 0 I
IC°
'
, 943 11 _ —
Coil Course
1r!('
n . -,.1 01 4,'.. • < I ,
r I
ntk: :50 N43pte,n, ttri
0 2000 4000
cI REFERENCE: Scale: 1" = 2000
ROCHESTER, MI QUADRANGLE 0 ..-- 7.5 MINUTE SERIES
DATED: 1968
PHOTOREVISED: 1981 USGS QUADRANGLE MAP Maptech(r) U.S. Terrain Series(tm),
(c)Moptech, Inc. 603-433-8500
GRAPEIC SCALE
–ISO o so 100 200 400
,
( IN Mir )
1 inch 100 ft.
BROWN RD.
N
60.0 60.1. 60.5
EMIEEErt*ElaWEE•474
VACANT
UNDEVELOPED
C.
PROPOSED ACCESS DRIVE
PROPOSED BUILDING
(120,000 S.F.)
1235.0
•N. .\\
\
\ \ \ ' '
\
\
\).)) I I I
235.1' t
1
6
235.1'
EMPLOYEE PARKING
(11 11,1 t1.1M-0
1111 11111 [1111111111111 1WH IHEIth
25.0'
40.0'
25.0'
U.)
k---'—•--1•—•—•—•-20' PARKING SETBACK—• — •— — •
(mai T11mt00p2.__
(cm, or AVOUHN 6I55)
115.0'
40.0'
[RUCK DOCKS
400.0'
400 0'
Yel) LIG
,!ISS DIG
-7171
OW 1 ION I
111.T. LOSA.5.311S AND ELEVATIONS OF E0I0111013
111005TIGIIOLIN7j U110111:.5 A3 SHOWN C01 111151 I_ GA ARE ONLY
:
APPFOXIM
'
AIL NO GUAR-VITEE
01-01I2 0.55S 012 111111
AS 10 II1E C•n•nnPt. 111111055 'LV ACCilitACY T1 iLi1001. PIE
1:1.111W:11;112F: 711511. BE EKCI
C0•2 : .0 1.1
JS1VELY 005000S1310
Er0'1'N; THE 05OT
Loc51110+1
IC 011100115,5 Ei1c31.< TO TOE STAET"
-4 --
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING
AS OC IA Il°;-2 S
Id 01,01.1 1072
(Os) 1159 -,J1;•1
ELLEN DR.
LOCATION MAP NO SCALE
Rol
0.w.)
_ - !I I 1
....n C,.n,,, QES ,I. • .• , • 1 •I 1.E, E c'a IN •n•ir '7E'l i LAE
13 IN t;OAD CROUP, L.L.0
-..::.!:::-........,--;,.
110 SO11111 1.1A11.1 ;7,-1,-;- Er. S1111.1:: 000
1111 ,=1_ OAK, V CIII ;:ttt t.,067
,. s '' ' •' -, I I - 0" i r.Mhf ),Y ....,I11:. F LAN (ORION) . _
DU1ION -I 'L ICH; loLocy pA1.-6(
Pr Ot 10, II .0 T 1/1 OF EEC 11001 35, 1 4'. 11 luE ,
11, 11-0 ;it, 0K 1 r ;. ,: Cr CI At) C '1 ,5 OCFC::AN ,. . _ ' c . • . ' :::.',-;,' -.1, 1 ,-' . n ,, :i r it 3(..,1 ; I" - 1.i. i'l.i,ni.NO 20011 i:ni ,,
. - ...,
I:, '.1 ,.n, ,y i ,, ', ' .•.: ni,---,i; -CY2 I I, .,5 11T. P-1 I
APPENDIX A
Legal Description of the Eligible Property
LEGAL DESCR1PTICN
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NO. 09-35-400-013:
PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 35, TOWN 4 NORTH, RANGE 10
EAST, ORION TOWNSHIP, OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN, DESCRIBED AS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT DISTANT SOUTH 87°-52'-50" WEST [S 89°-00'-16" W,
MEASURED], 300.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST SECTION CORNER; THENCE
NORTH 020-07'-10" WEST [NI 00°-59'-41" W, MEASURED], 359.82 FEET; THENCE
ALONG A CURVE TO RIGHT, RADIUS 360.00, CHORD BEARS NORTH 39°-30'-10"
WEST [N 38°-22'-41" W, MEASURED], 96.67 FEET, DISTANT OF 96.96 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 31°-47 1-11" WEST [N 30°-39'-42" W, MEASURED], 183.24 FEET;
THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, RADIUS 340.00, CHORD BEARS NORTH
62°-03'-04" WEST [N 62°-55'-35" W, MEASURED], 342.72 FEET, DISTANT OF 359.19
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°-41'-04" WEST [S 88°-48-33" W, MEASURED], 1554.35
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 03°-08'-46" EAST [S 03°-08'-46" E, MEASURED], 101.13
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 11°-29'-07" WEST [S 12°-36'-36" W, MEASURED], 283.66
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°-41'-04" WEST [S 88°-48'-33" W, MEASURED], 209.21
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°-24'-26" EAST [S 00°-16'-57" E, MEASURED], 384.78
FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°-52'-50" EAST [N89°-00'-21" E], 2279.23 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
APPENDIX B
Environmental Data
ficfrh
DESCRIPTION OF ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
AND ASSOCIATED COSTS FOR
BROVVNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE ORION TOWNSHIP PORTION
OF THE FORMER SANICEIVI LANDFILL
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
PREPARED FOR:
BROWN ROAD GROUP, L.L.C.
ROYAL OAK, MICHIGAN
JUNE 20, 2002
PROJECT NO. G01426
Enat_31,,:MilialE.MIL_GalifilittEl ER. INCH E tribIgyana_tjat i (Ida
39205 Country Club Drive, Suite C-4, Farmington Hills, Nil 48331 Telephone: 248-324-2090
fical
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Property Use and Description 1
2.0 Environmental Conditions 3
2.1 Previous Investigations 3
2.2 Recent Investigations 4
3.0 Proposed Response Activities 6
3.1 Remedial Investigation and Due Care 6
3.2 Baseline Environmental Assessment (BEA) 6
3.3 Land Balancing, Closure, and Capping 7
3.4 Contaminated Soil Removal and Disposal 7
3.5 Land Preparation 7
3.6 Methane Venting 8
3.7 Leachate Collection and Treatment 8
3.8 Administrative Costs 8
3.9 Ongoing Monitoring and Reports 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Estimated Costs for Proposed Response Activities
LIST OF APPENDICES
Attachment 1 Excerpts From Baseline Environmental Assessment
.1: FD000-1\RO1426\BF REDEVELOP \ AJZ_ORION.DOC
• • fical
1.0 PROPERTY USE AND DESCRIPTION
The site consists of approximately 145 acres, of which the northern 40 acres are in Orion Township and
the southern 105 acres are in the City of Auburn Hills, both in Oakland County, Michigan. The Orion
Township portion of the site is the subject property of this plan. The developer of the site, Brown Road
Group, L.L.C. (BRG), has purchased the property from the J. Fons Company (Pons).
The site was undeveloped land until the early 1960s, when it was purchased by two parties who initially
developed the site as the Silver Bell Ski Lodge (SBSL). The developers of SBSL accepted fill material to
increase the size of the proposed ski hill on the southwest portion of the site, which became known as the
Silver Bell Ski Lodge Dump (SOSLD). The fill material is believed to have originated from various sources,
including local auto manufacturing facilities, and included such waste as foundry sand, scrap metal, and
55-gallon drums. SBSL went bankrupt in the late 1960s and the entire property was subsequently
purchased by Fons.
Fons operated a solid waste landfill on the western half of the site and accepted waste during the 1970s.
Reportedly, the landfill accepted only household rubbish originating from the City of Detroit. Filling
activities started in the northern portion of the site and expanded southward as the landfill operations
continued. The landfill ceased operation in 1979, prior to the enactment of solid waste rules under Public
Act 641; therefore, it was never lined or capped, nor were complete leachate collection or methane
venting systems installed. Since then, the site has remained dormant, with the exception of the Fons
family residence located in the east-central (nonlandfilled) portion of the site.
The site is located in an area of primarily commercial and industrial use property and includes a small
number of residential dwellings. Properties surrounding the site include an industrial/office park to the
north; Bald Mountain Road, followed by undeveloped and residential properties to the east; cleared land,
which is to be an office/industrial park to the south; and Lapeer Road (M-24), followed by an active landfill
to the west. The entire Orion Township portion and the western 40 acres of the Auburn Hills portion of the
site are currently zoned for industrial use. The eastern 65 acres of the Auburn Hills portion are currently
zoned for residential use.
Topographically, the site is rolling to hilly, with surface elevations ranging from 1,100 feet above mean
sea level (AMSL) in the southwest (SBSLD) portion to, 970 feet AMSL in the southeast corner of the site.
The landfill area is approximately 1,070 feet AMSL in the northern section and slopes downward to
1,000 feet AMSL in the southern end. The northern, nonlandfill area also slopes from 1,070 feet AMSL in
the north to 970 feet AMSL in the south. Steep-sided erosional gullies define the eastern and western
06/20/2002
J:\FDOCO1V301426\BF REDEVELOP \ RJZ_OHION.DOC 1
&cal
edges of the landfill area. Streams and rivulets run the course of the gullies and drain into an outwash
and marsh area located in the southeastern portion of the property.
BRG intends to develop the property as a high technology industrial/office park. The property will be
prepared to make it suitable for development and appropriate response activities will be performed to
prevent exposure of hazardous materials to human health, safety, and the environment.
06/20/2002
J:\FDOCOl nnoi 426\BF REDEVELOP\RJZ01; ON.DOC 2
fTcal
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
2i PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
The site was investigated in the 1990s by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ). In 1990, the EPA, Field Investigation Team collected 18 soil samples and
11 groundwater samples to determine whether EPA Target Compounds were present at the site. All soil
samples were collected at ground surface near areas of leachate seeps along the edges of the landfill
and at sediment deposition locations in the southeast portion of the site. Groundwater samples were
collected from monitoring wells at various locations throughout the site and at two offsite locations, one
upgradient and the other downgradient. In addition, water samples were collected from five residential
wells (RW-1 through RW-5) in the vicinity of the site. Three residential wells were located downgradient of
the site, one was located upgradient, and one was located on the site property. Details of this
investigation are provided in Draft Screening Site Inspection Report for Sanicem Landfill, September 12,
1990, prepared by Ecology and Environment, Inc. A copy of this report is on file with the MDEQ-
Environmental Response Division (ERD), Southeast Michigan District Office, Livonia, Michigan.
During the period of 1992 through 1994, the MDNR, Geological Services Section (GSS) performed a
Hydrogeologic Investigation at the site which included the drilling of 15 soil borings and the installation of
monitoring wells in 10 of the borings to assess site geology, hydrogeology, and to collect groundwater
samples. The monitoring wells were identified as Rose Lake wells (RL-1 through RL-10) and were located
around the perimeter of the landfill, downgradient of the landfill, in the outwash area, and in the vicinity of
the SBSLD. See the Hydrogeological Investigation, Sanicem Landfill, January 1994, by GSS for details. A
copy of this report is on file with the MDEQ—ERD, Southeast Michigan District Office, Livonia, Michigan.
In 1995 and 1996, MDEQ contracted Roy F. Weston Company (Weston) to oversee a remedial
investigation of the site which included the installation of numerous soil borings and monitoring wells, a
soil-gas survey, surface water and sediment analysis, leachate investigation, and methane testing.
Additionally, Weston oversaw the excavation of a series of test pits in the SBSLD area to characterize
soils and to remove drums. See the Remedial Investigation Report (Final), prepared by Eder Associates
(for Weston, MDEQ), dated November 1995, and the Additional Remedial Activities report, prepared by
C.C.Johnson and Malhotra, P.C. (CCJM) Inc. (for Weston, MDEQ) in October 1996 for details. Both
reports are on file with the MDEQ—ERD, Southeast Michigan District Office, Livonia, Michigan.
Results of the investigation activities indicate that the majority of soil and groundwater at the site is not
contaminated above the generic exposure pathway-based cleanup levels applicable to the site, with the
06/20/2002
JAN00001 \R01426\BF REDEVELOP\RJZ_ORION.DOC 3
fical
exception of isolated incidents of heavy metals in the SESLD area and minor exceedances of other
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in soils near the center
of the fill area. Leachate and sediment samples also exhibited minor exceedances of VOCs, SVOCs,
metals, and polychlorinated biphenyls. Methane was detected throughout the landfill, but was above
potentially hazardous levels only in isolated areas of thickest fill. Leachate seeps are occurring throughout
the southern end of the landfill and are flowing into the outwash/marsh area located in the southern
portion of the site. The leachate contains low levels of contaminants (metals and SVOCs), which have
impacted sediments in the outwash and marsh areas of the site but do not appear to have impacted
surface water or to have posed a threat of impact to off site properties.
During the test pit activities in the SBSLD area in April 1996, drums and contaminated soil were removed.
According the to the CCJM report, it is believed that all drums and contaminated material have been
removed from the SBSLD area.
2.2 RECENT INVESTIGATIONS
BRG contracted a geotechnical engineering firm to perform materials testing soil borings throughout the
site and to assess the vertical and horizontal extent of landfill materials throughout the site. A total of 19
soil borings were made at various locations throughout the property. A scientist from BL Companies, Inc.
was present during selected borings to collect soil samples for analysis. The soils were field screened for
VOCs with a photoionization detector during drilling; selected samples, based on boring location, were
sent to a laboratory for analysis for parameters of concern.
Results from the geotechnical borings indicate that the northern area of the landfill contains up to 75 feet
of fill, with fill thickness tapering off to the south, east, and west. The fill in this area consists primarily of
household rubbish and debris. The area of thickest fill encompasses approximately 30 acres of the
northwestern portion of the property; as expected, this area is also the area of highest methane
production. Fill associated with the SBSLD appears to be approximately 15 to 20 feet thick and
encompasses approximately seven acres; no methane was detected in the SBSLD area. Results from the
limited environmental analysis during geotechnical borings further demonstrate that contamination in soil
resulting from historical site operations is limited to isolated areas within the landfill.
In summary, based on the series of investigative activities performed on the site, it appears that
contamination resulting from the SBSLD and the Fons landfill operation has resulted in localized onsite
impact, primarily in the landfill area and the erosional and outwash areas. No offsite impact is evident at
this time. Fugitive methane and leachate are still emanating from the landfill.
06/20/2002
JAFD0001 \R01426\13F REDEVELOP\RJZ_ORION.DOC 4
fiCal
Additional activities performed to date, as a part of this project, include a wetlands evaluation, woodlands
study, and a complete topographic and boundary survey. The wetlands evaluation indicates the existence
of possible jurisdictional wetlands in the southeastern portion of the property and a small area in the
northwestern portion of the site.
06/20/2002
J:\F00001 \ R01426\BF REDEVE: OP \ RJZORION.DOC 5
fical
3.0 PROPOSED RESPONSE ACTIVMES
The following activities are deemed necessary for the development of the site to ensure appropriate
protection of human health, safet„ and the environment. The costs associated with each activity have
been estimated using generally accepted engineering practices. Costs have been derived from the
following-sources:
• Environmental and engineering consultant bids.
• Contractor bids.
• R.S. Means Environmental Remediation Cost Data — Unit Pricing.
• Other sources, as applicable.
Table 1 contains the estimated costs for the response activities detailed in Section 3 of this report.
3.1 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND DUE CARE
It is believed that the interior of the site has been adequately characterized for the purposes of assessing
current onsite exposure risk. However, further investigation will be necessary to determine how the
proposed development would impact potential exposure pathways, in particular, the potential hazards
associated with landfill gas (LFG)/methane. Additional investigation will also be necessary to further
ensure potential offsite risk hazards associated with the former landfill operations are below acceptable
levels. Therefore, it is recommended that a soil gas investigation be conducted to characterize the
occurrence of LFG and that soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediment samples be collected to
further characterize the southern (hydraulically and hydrogeologically downgradient) portion of the site.
The number and locations of samples to be collected will be determined based on site plan-specific
requirements during site design and development.
The estimated cost for this activity is $100,000.
3.2 BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (BEA)
BRG will prepare and submit a BEA for the site. The BEA will include a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment, which will use existing data collected from the site as well as any additional data collected
during subsequent investigation activities. The BEA will be submitted to the MDEQ-ERD with a Petition
for Determination.
The estimated cost for this activity is $20,000.
06/20/2002
J:\FDOCO1\R01426\BF REDEVELOP\RJZ_ORION.DOC 6
3.3 LAND BALANCING, CLOSURE, AND CAPPING
The existence of former landfill area will require incremental additional costs for moving landfill material
and for providing protective cover prior to development. Anomalously high and low areas of elevation will
require grading to balance the land for development. Several areas of exposed rubbish, especially those
which have been eroded into deep gullies, currently exist on site. The landfill material will remain in place
with the exception of excavations necessary for infrastructure improvements and limited offsite disposal.
Native material in the northeast (nonlandfill) area will also be used to fill low lying areas. In addition, a
large portion of the filled area does not have sufficient surface cover (less than one foot). These areas will
be addressed by providing a , protective cover of fill which will provide a barrier to exposure of potentially
hazardous materials in the landfill.
The estimated cost for this activity is $600,000.
3.4 CONTAMINATED SOIL REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL
Based on existing data, it is believed that soil removal will not be required to achieve compliance with
remedial objectives; however, the possibility exists that unknown contamination may be encountered
during mass grading and site development operations. In such a case, grossly contaminated soils and/or
other material may require removal and proper disposal. In addition, some landfill material will need to be
removed for infrastructure improvements. If the excavated landfill material cannot be used for fill in other
areas of the site, it will be disposed properly.
The estimated cost for this activity is $150,000.
3.5 LAND PREPARATION
Decomposition and settling of the landfill materials limit the suitability for the landfill area of the site to
support building structures. Therefore, it may be necessary to use a limited amount of land preparation or
technologically advanced foundations to support building development. Dynamic compaction of landfill
material, deep foundations, floating slabs, or combinations of these technologies will be employed where
needed for structural integrity.
The estimated cost for this activity is $1,500,000.
06/20/2002
JAFD0001\R01426\BF HEDEVELOP\RJZ_ORION.DOC 7
ITC41 d'
3.6 METHANE:. VENTNG
It appears that the occurrence of methane gas has been adequately characterized by the IvIDEQ in 1995.
Based on data from that study, the collection and venting of LFG at the site will be necessary for a large
portion of the landfill area. Vertical venting, typical of a landfill, may not be suitable for areas to be
developed as these areas will likely be frequented by human traffic. Therefore, lateral piping and remote
collection will be used to vent the gas in areas unlikely to be inhabited, or into areas where risk of
potentially hazardous conditions are low. An effective gas venting system will be designed and installed
on a parcel-by-parcel basis as the site is developed.
The estimated cost for this actiyity is $300,000.
3.7 LEACHATE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT
Several leachate seeps have been identified along the boundaries of the landfill area. In general, the
leachate seeps drain toward the topographically low area in the southeast section of the site. Prior to and
during site grading and development, a leachate collection system will be designed and installed. It is
anticipated that the site will be preferentially developed (buildings, paving, etc.) which will reduce the
infiltration of surface water, thereby reducing the amount of leachate. The leachate that remains will be
appropriately treated prior to discharge.
The estimated cost for this activity is $300,000.
3.8 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
An appropriately qualified consulting firm or firms will be employed to administer and implement the
remedial activities. The administrator(s) will be responsible for project management, management and
accounting of eligible activities, and general health and safety.
The estimated cost for this activity is $70,000.
3.9 ONGOING MONITORING AND REPORTS
Based on the results of the these remedial activities, periodic groundwater or surface water monitoring
may be necessary. New and/or existing monitoring wells will be tested at appropriate time intervals to
ensure that remedial activities have been and remain successful. Periodic reports will be generated and
submitted summarizing the monitoring data and remedial activities.
Tho estimated cost for this activity is $75,000.
06/20/2002
JAFD000-1\F101426\BF REDEVELOPTJZ_OHON.DOC 8
fICTI1 4
Table No.1 — Summary of Estimated Costs for Proposed Response Activities
Description of Eligible Activities for Brownfield Redevelopment/Orion Township Portion
Brown/Former Sanicem Landfill
Response Activity Estimated Cost
Remedial Investigation and Due Care $100,000
BEA $20,000
Land Balancing, Closure, and Capping $600,000
Contaminated Soil Removal and Disposal $150,000
Land Preparation $1,500,000
Methane Venting ; $ 300,000
Leachate Collection and Treatment $300,000
Administrative Costs $70,000
Ongoing Monitoring and Reports $75,000
Total Estimated Costs $3,115,000
06/20/2002
JAHD0001 \R01426\BF REDEVELOPUIJ7_01110N.DOC 9
• • 1 •
he'll, IA „
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Baseline Environmental Assessment
06/20/2002
J: \ FD0001 \R01 426113F REDEVELOP \RJZ_ORION.DOC 10
Baseii
For
City of
fishbeck, thompson, carr & huber
scientists architects
mironmentall Assess ent
ursuant t
(c) if 199
51, Part 211,
S A menie
er Sanice 4
• Conducte
Section 2012
P.A.
49 I 1 Lapeer R r ad
u turn ) ills and Orion Townshi
akland County, ichigan
Prepared for:
Brown Road Group, LLC
Royal Oak, Michigan
May 21, 2002
Project No. G01426
fre,h
BASELiNE ENV3RONIVIENTAL ASSESSMENT
CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 20126(1)(c) OF 1994
RA. 451, PART 201, AS AMENDED
AND THE RULES PROMULGATED THEREUNDER
FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
4901 LAPEER ROAD
CITY OF AUBURN HILLS AND ORION TOWNSHIP
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
PREPARED FOR:
BROWN ROAD GROUP, LLC
ROYAL OAK, MICHIGAN
MAY 20, 2002
PROJECT NO. G01426
EisiiamKalimeapN. QABElk HvaTJEUM...._ E13.9 .11 C'e t tS Architects
39205 Country Clu.) Drive, Suite C-4, Farmington Hills, MI 48331 Telephone: 248-324-2090
he'll
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Identification Of Author And Date Of BEA 1
2.0 Introduction 2
3.0 Property Description & Intended Hazardous Substance Use 4
4.0 Known Contamination 6
5.0 Likelihood Of Other Contamination 9
6.0 Alternative Approaches 10
7.0 Conclusions 11
8.0 References 12
9.0 Attachments 13
9.1 Figures
9.2 Tables
9.3 Supplements
J AGD000-1\ R01426 \ FLIZ_BEACATEGORYN.DOG
Proje anager
Ronald C. Waybrant, D.
Regional Environmental Director
c't)
(Signature and Date) (Signature and Date)
fical
1.0 IDENTIFICATION OF AUTHOR AND DATE OF BEA
The persons with primary responsibility for the data assembly, interpretation, and technical conclusions
are Mr. Robert J. Zwald, C.P.G. and Mr. Ronald C. Waybrant, Ph.D. of Fishbeck, Thompson, Carr & •
Huber, Inc. (FTC&H). The signatures of these parties and the date of Baseline Environmental
Assessment (BEA) completion are provided below.
DATE BA CONDUCTED: MAY 21_2002
DATE OF BEA COMPLETION: MAY 21,2002
ASSESSMENT CONDUCTED BY: ASSESSMENT REVIEWED BY:
05 '21/2002
J:Tbocoi ria 1 426\ RJZBEA_CATEGORYN. DOE;
fical
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This Category N BEA was performed for the former Sanicam LandfiU, located at 4901 Lapeer Road, in
Auburn Hills and Orion Township, Oakland County, Michigan. A location map for this property is provided
as Figure 1; a site diagram is provided as Figure 2.
The BEA has been prepared in preparation of the eventual purchase and brownfield redevelopment of the
property by Brown Road Group, L.L.C. (BRG). A Brownfield Redevelopment Plan was submitted to the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in October 2000. The Brownfield Plan was
approved by the City of Auburn Hills Brownfield Redevelopment Authority in September 2001.
Historically, the site was undeveloped land until the early 1960's, when it was purchased by two parties
(named Bookmeyer and Gardener) who initially developed the site as the Silver Bell Ski Lodge (SBSL).
The developers of SBSL accepted fill material to increase the size of the proposed ski hill in the
southwest portion of the site, which became known as the Silver Bell Ski Lodge Dump (SBSLD). The fill
material is believed to have originated from various sources, including local auto manufacturing facilities,
and included such waste as foundry sand, scrap metal, and 55-gallon drums. SBSL went bankrupt in the
late 1960's and the entire property was subsequently purchased by the J. Fons Company (Fons).
Fons operated the Sanicem solid waste landfill on the western half of the site and accepted waste during
the 1970's. Reportedly, the landfill accepted only household rubbish originating from the City of Detroit.
Filling activities started in the northern portion of the site and expanded southward as the landfill
operations continued. The landfill ceased operation in 1979, prior to the enactment of solid waste rules
under Public Act 641, and therefore was never lined or capped, nor were complete leachate collection or
methane venting systems installed in accordance with current regulations. Since then, the site has
remained dormant, with the exception of the Fons residence, located in the east-central (non-landfilled)
portion of the site.
Further details on the historical documentation for the site are provided in the Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment, dated May 17, 2001, completed by FTC&H (See Section 9.3, Supplement 2).
BERG intends to purchase the property and develop it as a high technology industrial/office park. The
property will be prepared to make it suitable for development, and appropriate response activities will be
performed to prevent exposure of hazardous materials to human health, safety, and the environment.
The subject property was determined to be a facility as defined in Section 20101(1)(o) of Part 201 of the
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), P.A. 451 of 1994, as amended, due to
05/21/2002 2
\GDOCO1\R01426 IJZ_BEACATEGORYN.DOC
ficth.
the presence of metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the groundwater/soil at concentrations
exceeding their respective Generic Residential Cleanup Criteria (GRCC). The GRCC for each
contaminant is either the Statewide Default Background Criteria, Drinking Water Protection Criteria,
Groundwater/Surface Water Interface Protection Criteria, Groundwater Contact Protection Criteria, Direct
Contact Criteria, and/or aesthetic criteria. In addition, fugitive methane presents inhalation and explosion
hazards and landfill lead-late presents an aesthetic hazard. These criteria are found in MDEQ,
Environmental Response Division, Operational Memorandum #18, Part 201 Generic Cleanup Criteria,
Revision 1, June 7, 2000. The determination of which criteria forms the GRCC is based upon site-specific
and contaminant considerations.
This BEA was conducted according to the Category N guidelines in the Instructions for Preparing and
Disclosing Baseline Environmental Assessments and Section 7a Compliance Analyses to the Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality and for Requesting Optional Determinations (MDEQ, March 11,
1999). A Category N BEA is a "basic characterization for all BEAs, including those for properties at which
there will be no hazardous substance use." The Category N BEA is considered appropriate for this
property, as the intended use does not include the significant use of hazardous substances. The future
use of this property will be as an office/industrial park. However, the future occupants of the development
are currently unknown and, therefore, the potential for hazardous substance use is also unknown. If a
future occupant will be using hazardous substances, then an amended BEA or a separate BEA will be
prepared within 45 days of occupancy.
05/21/2002 3
JAGD000-1\R01426\RJZ_BEACATE.GORYN.DOC
f T A
3.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION & INTENDED HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE USE
The site is located on the east side of Lapeer Road (M-24) and extends east to Bald Mountain Road,
immediately east of the intersection of Lapeer Road and Brown Road. The site is comprised of
approximately 145 acres, of which the northern 45 acres is in Orion Township and the southern 100 acres
is in Auburn Hills, both in Oakland County, Michigan. There are five distinct parcels which make up the
site; the parcel numbers are: 14-02-200-001, 14-02-200-002, 14-02-200-003, 14-02-200-017, and
09-35-400-013. A legal property description and site survey are included as Supplement 1 in Section 9.3.
The site is bordered by an industrial park and an asphalt plant, followed by commercial and undeveloped
properties to the north; Bald Mountain Road, followed by vacant land, a former gravel pit and single family
residences to the east; a recently constructed industrial park and undeveloped properties to the south;
and Lapeer Road, followed by Waste Management—Eagle Valley Landfill and newly developed
commercial properties to the west.
Topographically, the site is gently rolling with steep slopes cut along the sides of drainage pathways in
the non-native fill areas. Generally, the site slopes downward to the southeast, toward a wetland area in
the southeast corner of the site. Elevation varies from over 1,100 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in
the northern and southwestern portions of the site, to 970 feet AMSL in the southeast. A drainage creek
runs from the northwest corner of the site southeastward to the wetland area. Another drainage cut
extends from the north-central portion of the site southward to the wetland area. These drainage cuts
define the approximate western and eastern boundaries of the former Sanicem Landfill, respectively,
which occupies approximately 60 acres of the western portion of the property. The southwest portion of
the site, which includes the former SBSLD area, consists of a large hill which drops steeply to the
northeast towards the western drainage creek. The eastern portion of the site, which is undeveloped,
slopes downward to the southwest towards the eastern drainage ditch and the wetland area
Photographs of important features at the subject property are included in Supplement 2 in Section 9.3.
These photographs were taken in November 2001 and May 2002 by Robert J. Zwald, a Project Manager
and senior scientist with the Farmington Hills, Michigan, office of FTC&H.
The majority of the site is currently undeveloped or is part of the former Sanicem Landfill which has been
dormant for approximately 25 years. The Fons have vacated the residential structure. All-terrain- vehicles
and other off-road vehicle tracks were noted throughout the site, indicating unauthorized use of the
property. Structures onsite include an approximately 3,000 square foot residential dwelling, a 1,000
square foot toncrete block gav ,ge, and a 7,700 square foot two-story, vacant concrete block structure,
05121/2002 4
JA000cn1\Ro1426\RJZ_BEACATEGORYN.DOG
herb, 4t
which was the former ski lodge building. All of the structures are located in the east-central portion of the
site. A gravel driveway provides access to the former residence. The remaining structures are accessed
only by unimproved trails.
There were no underground storage tanks (USTs) observed on site and the site was not listed in a
database search of registered USTs. Two abandoned 200-gallon aboveground storage tanks (ASTs)
were observed on the south side of the former utility garage. The ASTs are both empty and their former
contents are unknown, although it is likely that one was used for the storage of motor vehicle fuel. There
were no indications of the past or current use or storage of hazardous materials at the site with the
exception of discarded barrels and other containers in the former utility garage. All of the containers were
empty and former contents are Unknown. There was no evidence of soil staining, chemical spills/leakage,
or distressed vegetation observed in this area. For further information, please refer to MDEQ form EQP-
4476, Notice Regarding Discarded or Abandoned Containers, which has been submitted with this BEA.
The future use of this property will be an office park; however, the occupants and tenants have yet to be
identified. Therefore, this BEA assumes there will be no significant hazardous substance use on the
subject property. If a future occupant/tenant intends to use hazardous substances, then that
occupant/tenant will submit the appropriate BEA under separate cover.
05/21/2002
JAGD00011H01426 FUZ_BEACATEGORYN. DOG
5
freAl
4.0 KNOWN CONTAMINATION
As part of the initial stages of the brownfield redevelopment of this property, due diligence activities were
performed in 1999 and 2000. In addition, a Phase I ESA for the subject property in accordance with
American Society for Testing and Materials Standard 1527 was completed in May 2002 by FTC&H and is
included as Supplement 2. As part of the initial due diligence and the Phase I ESA, a Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) review of the MDEQ file regarding the property was conducted. According to
information obtained during the FOIA review, soil and groundwater sampling activities were conducted at
the site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1990, by the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources in 1994, and by R.F. Weston, Inc. (Weston), an MDEQ contractor, in 1995 and 1996.
The FOIA review provided the fdllowing reports:
• Draft Screening Site Inspection Report, Ecology and Environment (for USEPA), September 1990.
• Hydrogeological Investigation, MDNR Environmental Response Division, Geologic Services
Section, January 1994.
• Remedial Investigation Report (Draft), Eder Associates (for Weston, MDEQ), June 1995.
• Risk Assessment Report, Volume I, Human Health Risk Assessment, Eder Associates (for
Weston, MDEQ), June 1995.
• Risk Assessment Report, Volume II, Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment, Eder
Associates (for Weston, MDEQ), June 1995.
• Remedial Investigation Report (Final), Eder Associates (for Weston, MDEQ), November 1995.
• Additional Remedial Activities, CCJM Inc. (for Weston, MDEQ), October 1996.
• Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum, Eder Associates (for Weston, MDEQ), August 1997.
MDEQ performed an extensive, multi-phase environmental investigation of the site in the 1990's, which
included the installation of numerous soil borings and monitoring wells, a soil-gas survey, surface water
and sediment analysis, leachate sampling, and methane testing. Additionally, MDEQ excavated a series
of test pits in the SBSLD area to characterize soils and to remove drums in this area. Excerpts from these
reports are contained in the Phase I ESA and in Supplement 2 in Section 9.3 of this report.
Results from the MDEQ investigation activities indicate that the majority of soil and groundwater at the
site is not contaminated above acceptable cleanup levels for industrial property, with the exception of
isolated exceedances of heavy metals in the SBSLD and former Sanicem Landfill area and exceedances
of VOCs and metals in the center o the former Sanicem Landfill area. It appears that most of the metals
contamination is resulting from background concentrations, since the levels are relatively uniform and
ubiquitous, including those found in native soils from non-disturbed areas of the site. However,
05/21/2002 6
JAGD0001\Ro1426\RJZ_BEACATEGORYN.D0C
Be!ow is a summary of chemicals at the site which have been found to be above their respective GRCC.
Summary of Chemicals in Groundwater and Leachate
Baseline Environmental Assessment
Brown/Sanicem Landfill
Chemical CAS Number Concentration Location Criteria Exceeded — —
Iron 7439896 16,000 RL-2 DWP
Magnesium 7439954 840,000 RL-1 DWP
Sodium 17341252 1,990,000 RL-2 DWP
bis(2- 117817 7 RL-5 DWP Ethylhexyl)phthalate
Ammonia 7664417 382,000 RL-2 DWP
Chloride 16887006 2,639,000 RL-2 DWP, GSI
Lead 7439921 100 LT-12 DWP
Zinc 7440666 11,000 RL-4 DWP
Ethylbenzene 100414 47 LT-1 GSI
ly( lenes 1330207 230 LT-1 GSI _
Chlorobenzene 108907 60 LT-15 GSI
Cadmium 7440439 9 LT-15 DWP
Silver 7440224 160 LT-1 DWP
2,4-DichloroOenol 120832 22 LT-2 GSI
drinking water pathway
groundwater/surface water interface
Rose Lake wells 1994 and 1995
leachate sample 1995
In summary, based on the MDEQ investigation results, contamination resulting from the SBSLD and the
former Sanicem landfill operation has resulted in onsite impact, but no offsite impact. The detected
concentrations VOCs and metals in the groundwater/soil exceed their respective GRCC. In particular,
concentrations have been detected above the Residential Drinking Water Criteria and the
Groundwater/Surface Water Interface Criteria. In addition, potentially hazardous levels of fugitive
methane are emanating from the landfill and leachate seeps are present which present an aesthetic
criteria exceedance. Therefore, this parcel meets the definition of a facility, as defined in NREPA.
DWP
GSI
RL
LT
05/21/2002 8
JA000001 \ F101 426 \ AJZ__BEACATEGORYN.DOC
5.0 LIKELNOOD OF OTHER CONTAMINAllON
The Phase I ESA included the identification of sites of known or suspected contamination within a one-
mile radius of the property. The Phase I ESA did not document that contamination from neighboring sites
has impacted the subject property. In addition, the Phase I ESA revealed no evidence of recognized
environmental conditions in connection with this parcel, other than those associated with the former
Sanicem landfill onsite and the presence of an operating landfill off site, across Lapeer Road to the west.
In the professional opinion of FTC&H, the Phase I/II ESAs constitute all appropriate inquiry into the
previous ownership and uses of the property, consistent with good commercial and customary practice,
pursuant to the innocent landowners liability exclusion set forth in §107(b)(3) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and §20126(3)(h) of Part 201 of NREPA,
as amended.
05/21/2002 9
JAGD00011A01426 RIZ_BEACATEGORYN, DOC
froylls
6.0 ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
There are no alternative approaches utilized for this Category N BEA.
OS/21 /2002
JAGD0001 V101 420 \ FIJZ_BEACATEGORYN.DOC
1 0
fIcal
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
Contamination resulting from the SBSLD and the former Sanicem landfill operation has resulted in onsite
impact, but no offsite impact. The detected concentrations VOCs and metals in the groundwater/soil
exceed their respective GRCC. In addition, potentially hazardous levels of fugitive methane and leachate
are still emanating from the landfill. Therefore, this parcel meets the definition of a facility, as defined in
NREPA.
FTC&H concludes that this assessment is sufficient to provide the liability protections to the prospective
owner and operator that are provided for in Section 20126(1)(c) of Part 201 of NREPA, as amended.
FTC&H also concludes that thil assessment is sufficient to provide a basis to distinguish potential future
hazardous substance releases from contamination already existing on the property.
The future use of this property will be an office park; however, the occupants and tenants have yet to be
identified. Therefore, this BEA assumes there will be no significant hazardous substance use on the
subject property. Therefore, the analytical data and intended land use will provide the basis to distinguish
existing contamination from a new release. If a future occupant/tenant intends to use hazardous
substances, then an appropriate BEA will be submitted by that occupant/tenant.
05/21/2002
JAGD000-1\R01426\RJZ_BEACATEGORYN.DOC
11
BALD MOUNTAIN ROAD NARLAOLE
0 - - 300 600 -7
Scale: 1" 300'
/
1
1 il / i l
r \ s
,
-,-,
(
i
.. , .
'-j :-'1 /-'''
4.4 -- / /
\ i ./ •
..
/ n
\ P
/
./ ------ ,\ .j (
r - . C
,_..- ,..--...._-.. j .
-,2 1\'` (
i c -
- ' ( -4 / AV I 'D .% C) 7. / —
1 M ,...--..,-- VII c-
1! NJ\ ---,c,i \'`N ---,(- n -,\ \ --,_ ' _ .,-,) ( ,- . _ ,
- fr--‘-)
I L
/
Ii \ '•.; I
• •
1-(1‘
/ A
of ,; \/* . /
\ 4,11 ri
CARAGi. ti/VO •
4 1'
410 N
1 C
r—j
\.)
0 ci r
--\s
—11) )
\
I ik 1'J
L) (1 \
„.. \, 1 ) 1,-,-) \
) ,--;-- ( t------ 0 7_ 1
) / t
_J -J
11_ I Z ±1 ci (/) ci) N
01 `C
° Z I U--
'
%
IL\
/
I 7 )
113
0 0 Ir i\
- / - -
i
, T.7..
L\)„
I , t I
--, : i . , - n.: ' //
1 i 1 ' • • A 71:777, -) - - . I ! i
_
---- --- ' • . .. . . ' '''t ' . i .) ..., -- •...-- . ___
\
— 77 7
2
'
. -
-)
N '• „
I - --) - L LI.
_ — —
• , *
a jik,
millE111111 111111111111111W 1111•11111111r Ak an101116
1111 MUMMIO. r
AI MT
• 44
1.1
•
4E4
• 44
4,
• a.1
Cf)
•
;41
0
CO
a 0 u L.1
PC01
r?4
<
i i
CZ
"..8
0
41
,&
2.
§ 1: r
0,
n /co
9
'°0- -A' • • 943 -t
Gail Course
! 0.: t
• r4-e' -12i•
!. • .?
'"'Trjiler
•--77•Rark,
' I/ •
REFERENCE:
ROCHESTER, MI QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES
DATED: 1968
PHOTOREVISED: 1981
Maptech(r) U.S. Terrain Series(tm),
(c)Maptech, Inc. 803-433-8500
0 2000 4000 F ICIIC
Scale: 1 = 2000
c_
APPENDIX C
Reimbursement Procedure
OAKLAND COUNTY BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ELIGIBLE ACTTVITY
COST REIMBURSEMENT PROCEDURES
ADOPTED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF BROWN ROAD GROUP, LLC AND ITS
LENDERS
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITY COST REIMBURSEMENT
Upon approval of a Brownfield Plan for eligible property or the inclusion of additional parcels
of eligible property in a Brownfield Plan where the owner/operator proposes to seek
reimbursement of costs for eligible activities at eligible property, the OCBRA shall require the
owner/operator to comply with the terms and conditions specified herein including the
schedules governing the capture of the taxes, requests for reimbursement, required
documentation, determination of eligible activities and reimbursement process as more fully
defined below.
DOCUMENTATION OF ELIGIBLE COSTS
Parties seeking reimbursement of costs of eligible activities attributable to eligible property
should submit to the OCBRA requests for reimbursement on a monthly basis. These requests
should include the following:
1. Reference to the Approved Brownfield Plan and parcel.
2. The total amount of the current monthly reimbursement request.
3. The total amount of the reimbursement requests sought to date pursuant to the Approved
Brownfield Plan.
4. Identification of each eligible activity as a line item, the associated costs, with copies of
detailed invoices for the eligible activities and proof of payment. (Parties seeking reimbursement
should request detailed billings from contractors splitting out fees and costs of' eligible activities
from other services.)
5. Other information and documentation that may assist the OCBRA in determining whether the
costs are for eligible activities attributable to an eligible property and that the costs are
reasonable. This documentation may include evidence of a competitive bidding process and/or
evidence that the costs are for eligible activities.
6. Certification by an authorized representative of the party seeking reimbursement that a) he or
she has reviewed the request for reimbursement, b) the costs are for eligible activities attributable
to eligible property, c) the request is for costs incurred and paid and d) he/she is authorized to
seek reimbursement and to make the certification on behalf of the party seeking reimbursement.
The OCBRA will make the final determination of eligibility for all requests for reimbursement.
Reimbursements will take place as tax capture allows. Reimbursement payment is expected to
occur biannually: Within 90 days of receipt of taxes. No payments will be made if property
taxes on any of the eligible properties are delinquent.
The OCBRA will make every effort to follow the reimbursement schedules as specified in
OCBRA Brownfield Plans. For a specific Brownfield Plan, the OCBRA will not reimburse
prior to or in excess of the amount of taxes captured from the eligible property. Shortfalls in
capture will result in proportionate reductions in allocations made for eligible activity
reimbursements. OCBRA administrative and legal costs for establishment and administration of
the Brownfield Plan governing the eligible property take priority for reimbursement over all
other eligible costs. Any residual administrative allocations not expended in a fiscal year will be
carried forward to reimburse eligible administrative costs of the OCBRA
The OCBRA reserves the right to deny or make partial reimbursement of requests for
reimbursement, which it deems not in accordance with the Brownfield Plan, the Act and
procedures, established by OCBRA for reimbursement.
•
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL BROWNFIELD SITE
June 27, 2002
WHEREAS, the former Sanicem landfill site has been a long-standing
environmental hazard, a "facility' under state statute, and a tax-reverted, non-producing
parcel for many years; and,
WHEREAS, a clean up and redevelopment plan has been established to restore
the environmental and economic viability of this parcel; and,
WHEREAS, a local committee has been appointed, reviewed the plan and
recommends its approval; and,
WHEREAS, the BRA Board has reviewed and modified the proposed plan; now,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, to approve the Brownfield Redevelopment
Plan for the former Sanicem Landfill as presented and modified at the June 12, 2002
OCBRA Board meeting, and revised and reviewed by the OCBRA on June 25, 2002, and
considered in its final form at the June 27, 2002 OCBRA meeting, along with the
procedures for cost reimbursement, both attached; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, to recommend the adoption of this plan by the
Oakland County Board of Commissioners, and its Planning & Building and Finance
Committee's
Yeas 4
Nays 0
Approved: June 27, 2002
Ma6ih J Seaman
Chairperson
Oakland County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority
Note: Board Members Lerminiaux and Etkin were unable to attend, but indicated their
approval of the plan in separate communications.
By:
'JILL D. BASTIAN, CLERK
Charter Township of Orion * *
A 4......1171
43,4v
441 51'" 0
4, 2525 Joslyn Road • Lake Orion, Michigan 48360 • (248) 391-0304 • Fax (248) 391-9984 2525 Joslyn Road • Lake Orion, Michigan 48360 • (248) 391-0304 • Fax (248) 391-9984
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COUNTY OF OAKLAND
CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF ORION
RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF A BROWNFIELD PLAN ADOPTED BY THE OAKLAND
COUNTY BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
RECITATIONS:
WHEREAS, the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of
the Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act, being Act 381 of the Public Acts of the State of Michigan of 1996,
as amended (the "Act"), have established a Brownfield Redevelopment Authority and Board (OCBRA) to
facilitate the clean up and redevelopment of Brownfields within Oakland County's communities; and
WHEREAS, the former Sanicem landfill site in Orion Township has been a long-standing environmental hazard,
a "facility' under state statute, and a tax-reverted, non-producing parcel for many years; and
WHEREAS, a Brownfield clean up and redevelopment plan (the "Plan") has been prepared to restore the
environmental and economic viability of this parcel which the OCBRA has reviewed and modified; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to OCBRA by-laws, a local committee has been appointed, participated in discussions
regarding the proposed plan and project, reviewed the plan, and recommends its approval; and
WHEREAS, the OCBRA, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 13 of the Act, shall consider recommending
that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners approve the Brownfield Plan to be carried out within the
Township of Orion, relating to the redevelopment of the former Sanicem Landfill located at M-24 and Brown
Road (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Township Board have reviewed the Plan, and have been provided a reasonable
opportunity to express their views and recommendations regarding the Plan in accordance with Sections 13(13)
of the Act; and
WHEREAS, the Township desires to obtain assistance from either the State of Michigan or the government of
the United States to address the serious traffic concerns caused by the intersection of Interstate 75 and M-24
(Lapeer Road) as part of the development of the Property.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Township Board of Trustees of the Charter Township of Orion
hereby concurs with the provisions of the Plan including approval of the Plan by the Oakland County Board of
Commissioners and implementation of the Plan by the Oakland County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT should any section, clause or phrase of this Resolution be declared by the
courts to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this Resolution as a whole nor any part thereof
other than the part so declared to be invalid.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with any of the provisions of
this Resolution are hereby repealed.
AYES: TOMCZAK., E3A577AA/, kiAgLAU, WIL.50Ni Y s GINGEL L.
NAYS: NONE
ABSTENTIONS: NONE
ABSENT: j TZ E"-ie.
CERTIFICATION
It is hereby certified that the foregoing Resolution is a true and accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the
Townsh/ip BoAard of the Charter Township of Orion at a meeting duly called and held on the /Af-i day of
2002.
SUPERVISOR - Gerald A. Dywasuk CLERK - Jill D. Bastian TREASURER - James Marleau
TRUSTEES Michael Fetzer • Richard L. Tomczak • Michael J. Gingell • Eric S. Wilson
•
FISCAL NOTE (MISC. #02170) August 8, 2002
BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE, SUE ANN DOUGLAS, CHAIRPERSON
IN RE: DEPARTMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PROVISIONS OF A BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR THE FORMER SANICEM LANDFILL
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
Pursuant to Rule XII-C of this Board, the Finance Committee has
reviewed the above referenced resolution and finds:
1. The resolution adopts a Brownfield Plan relating to the
clean-up and redevelopment of the former Sanicem Landfill
in Orion Township to restore the environmental and economic
viability of the property.
2. The property is a tax-reverted, non-producing parcel and no
property taxes are currently being collected.
3. No General Fund/General Purpose appropriation is required.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Causey-Mitchell
absent.
1
Resolution #02170 July 18, 2002
The Chairperson referred the resolution to the Finance Committee. There were no objections.
FOREGOING RESOLUTtON
/1011- HER'ES
6-2
•
Resolution #02170 August 8, 2002
Moved by Palmer supported by Obrecht the resolution be adopted.
AYES: Garfield, Gregory, Law, McPherson, Melton, Middleton, Moffitt, Moss, Obrecht, Palmer,
Patterson, Sever, Suarez, Taub, Webster, Amos, Appel, Brian, Buckley, Causey-Mitchell,
Coleman, Crawford, Dingeldey, Douglas. (24)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefore, the resolution was adopted.
Date
L. Brooks Patio EA County Executive
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
I, G. William Caddell, Clerk of the County of Oakland, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true
and accurate copy of a resolution adopted by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners on August 8,
2002, with the original record thereof now remaining in my office.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County of Oakland at Pontiac,
Michigan this 8th day of August, 2002.