DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Former School Property & Fire Pump House 15900 Woodward Avenue Highland Park, Michi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Former School Property & Fire Pump House 15900 Woodward Avenue Highland Park, Michi PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT OF FORMER SCHOOL PROPERTY & FIRE PUMP HOUSE 15900 WOODWARD AVENUE HIGHLAND PARK, MICHIGAN CARDNO ATC PROJECT NO. N019721501 MAY 5, 2015 Prepared by: Prepared for: Cardno ATC City of Highland Park 46555 Humboldt Drive, Suite 100 Attn: Mr. Steve Schiller Novi, Michigan 48377 131 Pilgrim Street Phone: (248) 669-5140 Highland Park, Michigan 48203 Fax: (248) 669-5147 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Former School Property and Fire Pump House 15900 Woodward Avenue Highland Park, Michigan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Phase I ESA Summary and Conclusions ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Identified Data Gaps ............................................................................................................ 5 1.3 Identified Liens or Activity and Use Limitations ................................................................... 6 2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Detail Scope of Services ...................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Significant Assumption ........................................................................................................ 8 2.4 Limitations and Exceptions .................................................................................................. 8 2.5 Special Terms and Conditions ........................................................................................... 10 2.6 User Reliance .................................................................................................................... 10 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Location and Legal Description ......................................................................................... 11 3.2 Site and Vicinity General Characteristics ........................................................................... 11 3.3 Current Use of the Property ............................................................................................... 11 3.4 Description of Property Improvements .............................................................................. 11 3.5 Current Uses of Adjoining Properties ................................................................................ 12 4.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION ................................................................................... 13 4.1 Title Records...................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) ............................................. 13 4.3 Specialized Knowledge...................................................................................................... 13 4.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information ............................................ 13 4.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues .................................................................. 13 4.6 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information ....................................................... 13 4.7 Reason for Performing Phase I ESA ................................................................................. 13 4.8 Other User Provided Documents ....................................................................................... 13 5.0 RECORDS REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 14 5.1 Standard Environmental Records ...................................................................................... 14 5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources ........................................................................ 20 5.3 Physical Setting Sources ................................................................................................... 20 5.4 Historical Use Information on the Property ........................................................................ 21 5.5 Historical Use Information on the Adjoining Properties ..................................................... 25 6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ................................................................................................ 32 6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions ................................................................................ 32 6.2 General Site Setting........................................................................................................... 32 6.3 Exterior Observations ........................................................................................................ 32 6.4 Interior Observations ......................................................................................................... 35 7.0 INTERVIEWS .................................................................................................................... 40 7.1 Interview with Owner ......................................................................................................... 40 7.2 Interview with Site Manager ............................................................................................... 40 7.3 Interview with Site Occupants ............................................................................................ 40 7.4 Interview with Local Government Officials ......................................................................... 41 7.5 Interview with Others ......................................................................................................... 41 8.0 EVALUATION AND REPORT PREPARATION ............................................................... 42 8.1 Findings ............................................................................................................................. 42 Project No. N019721501 i Cardno ATC PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Former School Property and Fire Pump House 15900 Woodward Avenue Highland Park, Michigan 8.2 Opinion .............................................................................................................................. 43 8.3 Additional Investigation ...................................................................................................... 43 8.4 Data Gaps.......................................................................................................................... 44 8.5 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 44 8.6 Additional Services ............................................................................................................ 45 8.7 Deviations .......................................................................................................................... 45 8.8 References ........................................................................................................................ 46 8.9 Signature of Environmental Professionals ......................................................................... 46 8.10 Qualifications of Environmental Professionals ................................................................... 47 9.0 NON-SCOPE SERVICES .................................................................................................. 48 9.1 Friable and Non-friable Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) ....................................... 48 9.2 Lead-Based Paint (LBP) .................................................................................................... 48 9.3 Formaldehyde Insulation ................................................................................................... 48 9.4 Radon Gas......................................................................................................................... 48 9.5 100-Year Floodplain .......................................................................................................... 48 9.6 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................ 49 9.7 Electro-Magnetic Fields (EMF) .......................................................................................... 49 9.8 High Pressured Buried Gas Lines ..................................................................................... 49 9.9 Noise Analysis ................................................................................................................... 49 9.10 Vapor Encroachment Screen ............................................................................................. 49 10.0 APPENDICES 10.1 Site (Vicinity) Map 10.2 Site Plan 10.3 Site Photographs 10.4 Historical Research Documentation 10.5 Regulatory Records Documentation 10.6 Interview Documentation 10.7 Special Contractual Conditions 10.8 Qualification(s) of Environmental Professional(s) 10.9 MSHDA Phase I Letter of Reliance 10.10 Copy of Environmental Professional Insurance Certificates Project No. N019721501 ii Cardno ATC PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Former School Property and Fire Pump House 15900 Woodward Avenue Highland
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Michigan's Historic Preservation Plan
    Michigan’s state historic Preservation Plan 2014–2019 Michigan’s state historic Preservation Plan 2014–2019 Governor Rick Snyder Kevin Elsenheimer, Executive Director, Michigan State Housing Development Authority Brian D. Conway, State Historic Preservation Officer Written by Amy L. Arnold, Preservation Planner, Michigan State Historic Preservation Office with assistance from Alan Levy and Kristine Kidorf Goaltrac, Inc. For more information on Michigan’s historic preservation programs visit michigan.gov/SHPo. The National Park Service (NPS), U. S. Department of the Interior, requires each State Historic Preservation Office to develop and publish a statewide historic preservation plan every five years. (Historic Preservation Fund Grants Manual, Chapter 6, Section G) As required by NPS, Michigan’s Five-Year Historic Preservation Plan was developed with public input. The contents do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. The activity that is the subject of this project has been financed in part with Federal funds from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, through the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. However, the contents and opinions herein do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior or the Michigan State Housing Development Authority, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products herein constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Department of the Interior or the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. This program receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilita- tion Act of 1973 and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • An Appraisal of the Adult Education Program of the Highland Park Public School System
    AN APPRAISAL OF THE ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM OF THE HIGHLAND PARK PUBLIC SCHOOLS, HIGHLAND PARK, MICHIGAN by Sophie Veronica Cheskie A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Graduate Council of Wayne State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in the Department of Education with a specialization in Education (Administration and Supervision) Detroit, Michigan 1957 Date Adviser ACKNOWLEDG ME NTS Grateful acknowledgment is made for the generous assistance and wise counseling of her committee: Dr. William Reitz, chairman Dr. W. Ray Smittle; Dr. Lynn N. Nicholas; and Dr. Edgar A. Schule] Their professional experience and guidance were of immeasurable value. The preparation of this manuscript has been a cooperative process. To her colleagues in adult education from whose writings and shared thinking the author has borrowed extensively, grateful appreciation is extended. Full credit is given to Dr. Edward B. Olds, research coordinator, National Commission on Adult Educa­ tion Finance, Washington, D.C., for the use of questions 18 to 27, taken from a preliminary questionnaire which was eventually used in the study on Financing Adult Education. To all adult students who participated in this study, teachers of adult classes, the office staff, the Highland Park Board of Educa­ tion, administrators of the school system, and the community lead­ ers who graciously consented to be interviewed, the author is deeply indebted. ii For assistance in the tedious calculations of the tables in the study, the writer expresses her sincere thanks to Miss Lucille Rie, a friend and colleague. To Dr. William Valade and to Miss Corinne McNulty, the author is indebted for assistance in proofreading the manuscript.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Statewide Historic Preservation Plan
    2020–2025 MICHIGAN Statewide Historic Preservation Plan Working together, we can use the next five years to redefine the role of historic preservation in the state to ensure it remains relevant to Michigan’s future. State Historic Preservation Office Prepared by 300 North Washington Square Amy L. Arnold, Preservation Planner, Lansing, Michigan 48913 Michigan State Historic Preservation Office, Martha MacFarlane-Faes, Lansing, Michigan Deputy State Historic August 2020 Preservation Officer Mark Burton, CEO, With assistance from Michigan Economic Peter Dams, Dams & Associates, Development Corporation Plainwell, Michigan Gretchen Whitmer, Governor, This report has been financed entirely State of Michigan with federal funds from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior. This program receives federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or disability or age in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or you desire further information, please write to: Office for Equal Opportunity National Park Service 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20240 Cover photo: Thunder Bay Island Lighthouse, Alpena County. Photo: Bryan Lijewski Michigan State Historic Preservation Office 2 Preservation Plan 2020–2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Detroit Metropolitan Census 2000 Fact Sheet Series Volume 2, Issue 2: Race and Ethnicity In
    Volume 2, Issue 2 Detroit Metropolitan Census 2000 Fact Sheets Series June 2002 The 2000 census data for the Detroit metropolitan area confirm what many have Race and Ethnicity in the Tri-County suspected for quite some time – the gap between white and minority populations is Area: Selected wider in the Detroit region’s neighborhoods than anywhere else in the nation. For Communities and example, Livonia is the whitest city (population of 100,000 or more) in the nation School Districts with a reported 96 percent white population. In contrast, Detroit, at 82 percent African American, is the second blackest city in the country.1 In fact, approximately 9 out of every 10 African Americans in the Detroit metropolitan area reside in one of five cities: Detroit, Highland Park, Inkster, Pontiac or Southfield.2 More than half of Detroit’s whites left the city during the 1990s and in the suburbs we see whites and minorities living in separate neighborhoods and communities.3 The Detroit News and WDIV conducted a poll in August 2001 in which they asked individuals throughout the metropolitan area a series of questions including: Do you believe segregation harms blacks? Do you believe segregation harms whites? Sixty- one percent of the respondents stated that African Americans were harmed while 38 percent stated they were not. In contrast, respondents were split 50/50 as to whether whites were harmed by segregation. The poll also indicated that whites were less likely to move into an integrated neighborhood and quicker to leave (fearing decreasing property values and poor schools).
    [Show full text]
  • State Takeovers of School Districts and Related Litigation: Michigan As a Case Study
    WORKING PAPER #29 State Takeovers of School Districts and Related Litigation: Michigan as a Case Study Kristi L. Bowman Michigan State University November 2012 The content of this paper does not necessarily reflect the views of The Education Policy Center or Michigan State University Author Information Kristi L. Bowman is Professor of Law at Michigan State University. Her work focuses on the dynamic relationship between law and society in the contexts of educational governance, racial/ethnic equity in K-12 public schools, and free speech in schools. This paper was presented at the ABA Section on State and Local Government’s fall 2012 conference about education law and will be published in The Urban Lawyer in 2013. Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to: Kristi L. Bowman, 419 Law College, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA; e- mail: [email protected]. State Takeovers of School Districts and Related Litigation: Michigan as a Case Study Kristi L. Bowman* Michigan State University In 2011, I published an article in which I argued that state takeovers of school districts are the best of the various legal mechanisms available to school districts in fiscal crisis— better than a general state receivership, and definitely better than municipal bankruptcy, which is not even available to school districts in 26 states.1 I contended that takeover mechanisms should be gradual and progressive, providing a school district with ample notice and opportunity to try to get its own financial house in order before it is divested of
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Statewide Preservation Plan 2020-2025
    Michigan Statewide Historic Preservation Plan 2020-2025 [COVER PHOTO] 1 State Historic Preservation Office Michigan Economic Development Corporation 300 N. Washington Square Lansing, Michigan 48913 Brian D. Conway, State Historic Preservation Officer Jeff Mason, CEO, Michigan Economic Development Corporation Gretchen Whitmer, Governor, State of Michigan Prepared by Amy L. Arnold, Preservation Planner Michigan State Historic Preservation Office Lansing, Michigan December 2019 With assistance from Peter Dams, Dams & Associates This report has been financed entirely with Federal funds from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior. This program receives Federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or disability or age in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or you desire further information, please write to: Office for Equal Opportunity National Park Service 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20240 2 Table of Contents Introduction ………………………………………………………………… Vision………………………………………………………………………… Goal Summary Page…………………………………………………………. Working Together – Stories of Success 2014-2019 …………………………… A Look to the Future: Challenges and Opportunities……………………….…. Goals and Objectives……………………………………………………………. Goal 1: Targeted Preservation Education……………………………………... Goal2: Expand Preservation Funding Opportunities………………………… Goal 3: Increase Diversity in Historic Preservation…………………………. Goal 4: Build Stronger Partnerships………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan National Historic Landmarks
    NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS PROGRAM NATIONAL PARK SERVICE LISTING OF NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS BY STATE MICHIGAN (42) SS BADGER (Car Ferry) ...................................................................................................................... 01/20/16 LUDINGTON, MASON COUNTY, MICHIGAN BAY VIEW ............................................................................................................................................. 12/23/87 BAY VIEW, EMMET COUNTY, MICHIGAN CALUMET HISTORIC DISTRICT ......................................................................................................... 03/28/89 CALUMET, HOUGHTON COUNTY, MICHIGAN CITY OF MILWAUKEE (Great Lakes Car Ferry) .................................................................................. 12/14/90 ELBERTA, BENZIE COUNTY, MICHIGAN COLUMBIA (Excursion Steamer) ......................................................................................................... 07/06/92 ECORSE, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN CRANBROOK ....................................................................................................................................... 06/29/89 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN THE DETROIT INDUSTRY MURALS, DETROIT INSTITUTE OF ARTS ............................................ 04/22/14 DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN DOW, ALDEN, HOUSE AND STUDIO .................................................................................................06/29/89 MIDLAND, MIDLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN DOW, HERBERT H., HOUSE .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Redefining the School District in Michigan
    Part two of a three-part series Redefining the School District in Michigan Redefining the School District in Michigan by Nelson Smith Foreword by Amber M. Northern and Michael J. Petrilli October 2014 1 Thomas B. Fordham Institute The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is the nation’s leader in advancing educational excellence for every child through quality research, analysis, and commentary, as well as on-the-ground action and advocacy in Ohio. It is affiliated with the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, and this publication is a joint project of the Foundation and the Institute. For further information, please visit our website at www.edexcellence.net or write to the Institute at 1016 16th St. NW, 8th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20036. The Institute is neither connected with nor sponsored by Fordham University. Redefining the School District in Michigan CONTENTS Foreword ................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5 Origins of the EAA ................................................................................................................. 8 Sidebar: What Is an Interlocal Agreement? .................................................................. 8 Sidebar: Emergency Management in Michigan Schools .......................................... 10 Architecture of the EAA .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 See Where Your School Ranks! Mackinac.Org/ CAP2013
    A MACkinAC CenTer reporT The Michigan Context and Performance Report Card: Public Elementary Middle Schools, 2013 See where your school ranks! mackinac.org/ CAP2013 THE MICHIGAN CONTEXT AND PERFORMANCE REPORT CARD: Public elementary & Middle Schools, 2013 By Audrey Spalding The Mackinac Center for Public Policy The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to improving the quality of life for all Michigan citizens by promoting sound solutions to state and local policy questions. The Mackinac Center assists policymakers, scholars, businesspeople, the media and the public by providing objective analysis of Michigan issues. The goal of all Center reports, commentaries and educational programs is to equip Michigan citizens and other decision makers to better evaluate policy options. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is broadening the debate on issues that have for many years been dominated by the belief that government intervention should be the standard solution. Center publications and programs, By Audrey Spalding in contrast, offer an integrated and comprehensive approach that considers: All Institutions. The Center examines the important role of voluntary associations, communities, businesses and families, as well as government. ©2013 by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy All People. Mackinac Center research recognizes the diversity of Michigan citizens and treats them as individuals with unique backgrounds, circumstances and goals. Midland, Michigan All Disciplines. Center research incorporates the best understanding of economics, science, law, psychology, history and morality, moving beyond mechanical cost-benefit analysis. All Times. Center research evaluates long-term consequences, not simply short-term impact. Committed to its independence, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy neither seeks nor accepts any government funding.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Birmingham Historic District Commission Meeting
    AGENDA BIRMINGHAM HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING MUNICIPAL BUILDING-COMMISSION ROOM-151 MARTIN STREET WEDNESDAY – February 5th, 2020 *********** 7:00 PM*********** 1) Roll Call 2) Approval of the HDC Minutes of January 15th, 2019 3) Courtesy Review 4) Historic Design Review 5) Sign Review 6) Study Session 7) Miscellaneous Business and Communication A. Pre-Application Discussions B. Staff Reports 1. Administrative Sign Approvals 2. Administrative Approvals 3. Draft Michigan Statewide Historic Preservation Plan 2020-2025 4. January Demolitions 8) Adjournment Notice: Individuals requiring accommodations, such as interpreter services for effective participation in this meeting should contact the City Clerk's Office at (248) 530-1880 at least on day in advance of the public meeting. Las personas que requieren alojamiento, tales como servicios de interpretación, la participación efectiva en esta reunión deben ponerse en contacto con la Oficina del Secretario Municipal al (248) 530- 1880 por lo menos el día antes de la reunión pública. (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). A PERSON DESIGNATED WITH THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE DECISIONS MUST BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 15, 2020 Municipal Building Commission Room 151 Martin, Birmingham, Michigan Minutes of the regular meeting of the Historic District Commission (“HDC”) held Wednesday, January 15, 2020. Chairman John Henke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 1) ROLLCALL Present: Chairman John Henke; Vice-Chairman Keith Deyer; Board Members, Gigi Debbrecht, Natalia Dukas, Patricia Lang (arrived 7:15 p.m.); Student Representative Klea Ahmet Absent: Board Members Doug Burley, Michael Willoughby; Alternate Member Kevin Filthaut Administration: Nicholas Dupuis, City Planner Laura Eichenhorn, Transcriptionist 01-01-20 2) Approval Of Minutes Motion by Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • MDOT-Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit Project
    This page left intentionally blank. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE Application for Section 106 Review SHPO Use Only IN Received Date / / Log In Date / / OUT Response Date / / Log Out Date / / Sent Date / / Submit one copy for each project for which review is requested. This application is required. Please type. Applications must be complete for review to begin. Incomplete applications will be sent back to the applicant without comment. Send only the information and attachments requested on this application. Materials submitted for review cannot be returned. Due to limited resources we are unable to accept this application electronically. I. GENERAL INFORMATION THIS IS A NEW SUBMITTAL THIS IS MORE INFORMATION RELATING TO ER# 08-462 a. Project Name: Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit Project - Phased Sec. 106 Submittal; see Attachment A. b. Project Address (if available): Generally Woodward Avenue from Downtown Detroit to Michigan State Fairgrounds/8 Mile Road. c. Municipal Unit: Detroit and Highland Park County: Wayne d. Federal Agency, Contact Name and Mailing Address (If you do not know the federal agency involved in your project please contact the party requiring you to apply for Section 106 review, not the SHPO, for this information.): Tricia Harr, AICP, Environmental Protection Specialist, Federal Transit Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, E43-105, Washington, DC, 20590; 202-366-0486 or [email protected] e. State Agency (if applicable), Contact Name and Mailing Address: Matt Webb, Project Manager, Michigan Department of Transportation, Van Wagoner Building, 425 West Ottawa Street, Lansing, MI, 48909 f. Consultant or Applicant Contact Information (if applicable) including mailing address: Tim Roseboom, Project Manager, Detroit Department of Transportation, 1301 East Warren, Detroit, MI, 48207; 313-833-1196 or [email protected] II.
    [Show full text]
  • MDOT-Woodward Avenue Light Rail Transit Project FEIS Archeological
    Table of Contents ABSTRACT 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1.1 No Build Alternative .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1.2 Locally Preferred Alternative ................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.3 Park and Ride Lot .................................................................................................. 2-3 2.1.4 Traction Power Substations ................................................................................... 2-3 2.1.5 Construction Staging Areas ................................................................................... 2-3 3.0 RESEARCH DESIGN .................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Research Goals ............................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Background Research ................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2.1 National Historic Landmarks and Historic Districts .............................................. 3-1 3.2.2 Archaeological Sites .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]