Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWILLOW STREET LOFTS BLOCK 3 220 WILLOW STREET - Filed GC-GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE - 2010-06-28To: Craig Foreman; Ralph Campano; Dave Stringer; Bob Barkeen From: Jon Prouty Date: December 12, 2003 Re: Willow Project/Related Information FYI Jon JP/ksr Enclosures: 8'/2 x 11 Color Perspective; 8'h x 11 Color Plan; EPA Policy Letter 3944 JFK Parkway, 12E, Fort Collins, CO 80525 • (970) 226-5000 • Fax (970) 226-5125 er than an solely by "an act or ommas_' or than one Whose act or employee or a art of the defendant► omission occurs in conn&ction with a contractual relationship ln existing directly or indirectly with the defendant - order to invoke this defense, the defendant must additionally establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that "(a) he exercised due carin�o espect to the sideration the hcharacteristics azardous nOf suer' concerned 'taking ht of all relevant facts and hazardous substanCe, in liq recautiona against foreseeable cireuastances,• and (b) he took P and the consequences acts or omissions of any such third party that could foreseeably result from such acts or omissions-" 42 V.S.C. 9607(b)(3)- An owner of property maY tYPica11Y be unable substances detect by reasonable means when or wRsther hazardous o5subsur ace migraticn t come to be located -beneath the Propertyoutside the property. gazed an aquifer froID a source or 501 cy�s position roY•C interflra of CS+1► it 1s the soleh by o��...,.r OASm-�ta� t a ovation off thn landowner'$ an - to take an aftirma ive IPo1py, o...invntsr i s not r wed Ve r].S! Co -.� • �i w�oV��1t tb V tleS' that _a.. _cact, Not only is groundwater contamination nation d1Xzlcu'.L �- � but once identified, i.t is oftendifficult to acitigate or aBaseds without extensive studies and pump and treat remedia=on. on EPAIS technical experience and the �►9 en 's interpretation of ^WWr a, "A has concluded that ttiswf o aro ,,%rater owner to is cton2.0.7b 3 a ; - in the care where tRa rojitmy cvny-aui3 v «.. - of t o ion of this cell ma a sect he t3on m- casg, contamination in the affected aquifer- utionsh tests of section, application of the "due care an o istoness of a ci$ 107 (b) (3) and evaluation of the ire a f cat-sF requ settl,ment udder Section' iaz t9)•t 1) ( ) ����� but not limited to, the analysis of the circumstan�,oenal s use of it on the. spread or impact o! the wall and/or the AocordinglY • t of the aontanitsatica i . the aquifer. containten ! ropertY g� does not a i in the came are anon of Which contains a 9d�+'ater weil.� a sxsstenee or B iZy affect the migration of contaaina ion in the aft@ • 5 tnn DaveSer -Willow Project meetin 12/9/03 � � � " � � '�" `� �� ` ��� � `"' �� " "" ` �� ���� tr ,., ,.. ., Pa a 1,,. From: Craig Foreman To: Bob Barkeen; Dave Stringer; Ralph Campano Date: 12/9/03 11:25AM Subject: Willow Project meeting 12/9/03 Hi: Just met with Jon on the project. Here is the info. Jon went over the project and the need for the alley and sidewalk and landscape easements on the park. We then discussed how the project works with the United Way parking lot, the park and the future Northside Center project. We informed Jon that the project and easements would need to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Board for review. Then the easements can be made ready for Council action. We would like to do all the easements at one time. Jon seemed to understand this and was ok with the process. Here are the main points from our discussion; Alley vacation: The east half of the alley would revert to the City (Parks ownership). Parks would then sell this land to the developer. Sidewalk on park property: The development needs a sidewalk along the United Way parking lot for their conductivity. The City would grant an easement (5' wide) on the park property for this sidewalk. Landscape on park property: The development needs a landscape easement (5' wide) on the east and north edges, of the development, on park property. The City would grant this easement. The landscaping would be compatible with the park landscape. The north easement is on the house property we are attempting to purchase. Utilities: We determined that the project would not need any utility easements on the park. Parking need for the Bas Bleu Theater: Jon indicated he has talked to the United Way folks about the theater using some of their parking lot for theater users. They would need a letter from the United Way folks allowing for the parking with liability and cost sharing for maintenance/replacement. Since the City owns the land under the parking lot, we think the City may also have to grant some type of easement for the parking? We need to know if in Jack's work, is there a need for some parking in the United Way lot? If so, could we have a conflict when events would be going on at the center and at the theater? Stormwater needs: We indicated to Jon that the need for a water quality pond for the development may still fit on the park site. However, without knowing at least a conceptual size from the Willow Project and the new Northside Center we can't be sure they both can work on the park. EPA cleanup work: Jon indicated they think their project will be ok with the shallow work for foundations, etc. The sewer line may encounter some contamination and have to have this material removed. Here are the assignments: Jon will be doing legals for the alley and the sidewalk and landscape easements. He will have an engineer look at the water quality needs for the project. I'm correct, we both will not need stormwater detention? Ralph is working on acquiring the house nearest the park. Unknown as to when this will happen. I will go visit with the United Way folks for an exchange of info. Dave Stringer Willow Project meeting 12/9/03 a e 2 Bob, Jack, Jean and I should meet to look at the latest Northside plans to see if the Willow Development has any impacts (besides parking and the water quality pond) related to the Land Use Code, etc. We should look at the water quality needs for the proposed Northside Center. Do we spend some of our dollars on this? If so how much is this item? We agreed to work on these items over the next few months. All for now. Craig All for now. CC: Basil Hamdan; Bill Whirty; Bob Burkhardt; Bob Loeven; Cam McNair; Cameron Gloss; Carrie M. Daggett; Clark Mapes; Ingrid Decker; Jack Gianola; Jean Helburg; John Stokes; Marty Heffernan From: "Kaye Vincent" <lagunitas@frii.com> To: "'Dave Stringer"' <DSTRINGER@fcgov.com> Date: 10/23/03 4:21 PM Subject: RE: Willow Project/Alley Vacation Dave, Thank you for the information. I will forward your email to Jon. Kaye -----Original Message ----- From: Dave Stringer [mailto:DSTRINGER@fcgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 3:32 PM To: lagunitas@frii.com Subject: RE: Willow Project/Alley Vacation Kaye, I just received word from the City's Utility Department that there are existing underground utility lines in the Willow Street alley that Jon is asking to vacate. I think it would be best for Jon to contact Roger Buffington at 221-6854 and talk to him about his proposed project. Otherwise we will not be able to go forward with the vacation request since Utilities have concerns. Dave »> "Kaye Vincent" <lagunitas@frii.com> 10/16/03 10:49AM >>> Dave: Thanks for the update! I'll forward this information to Jon. Thanks. Kaye -----Original Message ----- From: Dave Stringer [mailto:DSTRINGER@fcgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:25 AM To: lagunitas@frii.com Subject: RE: Willow Project/Alley Vacation Kaye, I heard back from our Transportation Director regarding the alley vacation request at Willow Street. The Director will not oppose the vacation of this alley. I will now route an alley vacation request letter to the utilities and adjacent property owners to see if there is any opposition to the vacation. This process takes at a minimum three weeks. If there is no objection I will then get it a resolution scheduled for a regular City Council meeting for their vote. John needs to be aware that if the alley is vacated he is only entitled to 1/2 of the dedicated right of way adjacent to his properties. The other half goes to the property owners on the opposite side of the alley. Dave >>> "Kaye Vincent" <lagunitas@frii.com> 10/08/03 01:32PM >>> Dave, Thanks for the information. We appreciate your help regarding this matter. Kaye -----Original Message ----- From: Dave Stringer [mailto:DSTRINGER@fcgov.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 11:30 AM To: lagunitas@frii.com Subject: re: Willow Project/Alley Vacation Kaye I'm waiting for the Director of Transportation to make the decision on if we will support the vacation. He left me a message on Monday stating he hoped to look at it on Tuesday. I'll bug him again. Dave >>> "Kaye Vincent" <lagunitas@frii.com> 10/07/03 11:21AM >>> Dave: Jon asked that I contact you regards to the Willow Project alley vacation. Do you need additional information from our office? He wants to make sure that our office is not delaying its progress. Thanks for your help. Kaye Vincent Lagunitas Companies 970-226-5000 From: Jack Gianola To: Bob Barkeen; Craig Foreman; Dave Stringer; Ralph Campano Date: 12/10/03 4:03PM Subject: Re: Willow Project meeting 12/9/03 Craig, Thanks for the update on the development next to the Northside Aztlan Center. I have four comments: 1. Yes, the meeting you suggested is needed, so will assume you will put that together in the near future. 2. The Northside Aztlan Center Project cannot proceed until the impact of the contamination is determined. The project could proceed if the City could receive direction that it would be okay to build over the contamination. The building will have to be placed on drilled peirs, which will penetrate small areas of the contamination, due to building over the dump. If the City cannot build on this site, we should begin the process of looking at other sites. This issue impacts the work that Jon Prouty is doing on his site. 3. It was intended to use the United Way parking lot for overflow parking for the new Northside Aztlan Center- this would occur on a limited basis, but United Way should be informed of this situation and the proper agreements developed. 4. The Stormwater requirements for both sites should be discussed now to determine the impact on the park. It will quite difficult grading on the Northsite Aztlan Center site due to the swallow depth of the dump. And if detention is not required, then grading will need to be done through the site. Look forward to the meeting. Jack G. >>> Craig Foreman 12/09/03 11:25AM >>> Hi: Just met with Jon on the project. Here is the info. Jon went over the project and the need for the alley and sidewalk and landscape easements on the park. We then discussed how the project works with the United Way parking lot, the park and the future Northside Center project. We informed Jon that the project and easements would need to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Board for review. Then the easements can be made ready for Council action. We would like to do all the easements at one time. Jon seemed to understand this and was ok with the process. Here are the main points from our discussion; Alley vacation: The east half of the alley would revert to the City (Parks ownership). Parks would then sell this land to the developer. Sidewalk on park property: The development needs a sidewalk along the United Way parking lot for their conductivity. The City would grant an easement (5' wide) on the park property for this sidewalk. Landscape on Dark property: The development needs a landscape easement (5' wide) on the east and north edges, of the development, on park property. The City would grant this easement. The landscaping would be compatible with the park landscape. The north easement is on the house property we are attempting to purchase. Utilities: We determined that the project would not need any utility easements on the park. Parking need for the Bas Bleu Theater: Jon indicated he has talked to the United Way folks about the theater using some of their parking lot for theater users. They would need a letter from the United Way folks allowing for the parking with liability and cost sharing for maintenance/replacement. Since the City owns the land under the parking lot, we think the City may also have to grant some type of easement for the parking? We need to know if in Jack's work, is there a need for some parking in the United Way lot? If so, could we have a conflict when events would be going on at the center and at the theater? Stormwater needs: We indicated to Jon that the need for a water quality pond for the development may still fit on the park site. However, without knowing at least a conceptual size from the Willow Project and the new Northside Center we can't be sure they both can work on the park. EPA cleanup work: Jon indicated they think their project will be ok with the shallow work for foundations, etc. The sewer line may encounter some contamination and have to have this material removed. Here are the assignments: Jon will be doing legals for the alley and the sidewalk and landscape easements. He will have an engineer look at the water quality needs for the project. I'm correct, we both will not need stormwater detention? Ralph is working on acquiring the house nearest the park. Unknown as to when this will happen. I will go visit with the United Way folks for an exchange of info. Bob, Jack, Jean and I should meet to look at the latest Northside plans to see if the Willow Development has any impacts (besides parking and the water quality pond) related to the Land Use Code, etc. We should look at the water quality needs for the proposed Northside Center. Do we spend some of our dollars on this? If so how much is this item? We agreed to work on these items over the next few months. All for now. Craig All for now. CC: Basil Hamdan; Bill Whirty; Bob Burkhardt; Bob Loeven; Cam McNair; Cameron Gloss; Carrie Daggett; Clark Mapes; Ingrid Decker; Jean Helburg; John Stokes; Marty Heffernan From: Carrie Daggett To: Bob Barkeen; Craig Foreman; Dave Stringer; Ralph Campano Date: 12/9/03 2:52PM Subject: Re: Willow Project meeting 12/9103 ** Confidential ** Craig, you may want to make sure that Margit is in the loop, too, since Prouty has no way to know right now how his work will relate to EPA's - - there is a brand new work plan that has not even been circulated yet. >>> Craig Foreman 12/09/03 11:25AM >>> Hi: Just met with Jon on the project. Here is the info. Jon went over the project and the need for the alley and sidewalk and landscape easements on the park. We then discussed how the project works with the United Way parking lot, the park and the future Northside Center project. We informed Jon that the project and easements would need to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Board for review. Then the easements can be made ready for Council action. We would like to do all the easements at one time. Jon seemed to understand this and was ok with the process. Here are the main points from our discussion; Alley vacation: The east half of the alley would revert to the City (Parks ownership). Parks would then sell this land to the developer. Sidewalk on park property: The development needs a sidewalk along the United Way parking lot for their conductivity. The City would grant an easement (5' wide) on the park property for this sidewalk. Landscape on Dark property: The development needs a landscape easement (5' wide) on the east and north edges, of the development, on park property. The City would grant this easement. The landscaping would be compatible with the park landscape. The north easement is on the house property we are attempting to purchase. Utilities: We determined that the project would not need any utility easements on the park. Parking need for the Bas Bleu Theater: Jon indicated he has talked to the United Way folks about the theater using some of their parking lot for theater users. They would need a letter from the United Way folks allowing for the parking with liability and cost sharing for maintenance/replacement. Since the City owns the land under the parking lot, we think the City may also have to grant some type of easement for the parking? We need to know if in Jack's work, is there a need for some parking in the United Way lot? If so, could we have a conflict when events would be going on at the center and at the theater? Stormwater needs: We indicated to Jon that the need for a water quality pond for the development may still fit on the park site. However, without knowing at least a conceptual size from the Willow Project and the new Northside Center we can't be sure they both can work on the park. EPA cleanup work: Jon indicated they think their project will be ok with the shallow work for foundations, etc. The sewer line may encounter some contamination and have to have this material removed. Here are the assignments: Jon will be doing legals for the alley and the sidewalk and landscape easements. He will have an engineer look at the water quality needs for the project. I'm correct, we both will not need stormwater detention? Ralph is working on acquiring the house nearest the park. Unknown as to when this will happen. I will go visit with the United Way folks for an exchange of info. Bob, Jack, Jean and I should meet to look at the latest Northside plans to see if the Willow Development has any impacts (besides parking and the water quality pond) related to the Land Use Code, etc. We should look at the water quality needs for the proposed Northside Center. Do we spend some of our dollars on this? If so how much is this item? We agreed to work on these items over the next few months. All for now. Craig All for now. CC: Basil Hamdan; Bill Whirty; Bob Burkhardt; Bob Loeven; Cam McNair; Cameron Gloss; Clark Mapes; Ingrid Decker; Jack Gianola; Jean Helburg; John Stokes; Margit Hentschel; Marty Heffernan Dave Stringer Willow Project meetin 12/9/03 Page 1 From: Craig Foreman To: Bob Barkeen; Dave Stringer; Ralph Campano Date: 12/9/03 11:25AM Subject: Willow Project meeting 12/9/03 Hi: Just met with Jon on the project. Here is the info. Jon went over the project and the need for the alley and sidewalk and landscape easements on the park. We then discussed how the project works with the United Way parking lot, the park and the future Northside Center project. We informed Jon that the project and easements would need to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Board for review. Then the easements can be made ready for Council action. We would like to do all the easements at one time. Jon seemed to understand this and was ok with the process. Here are the main points from our discussion; Alley vacation: The east half of the alley would revert to the City (Parks ownership). Parks would then sell this land to the developer. Sidewalk on park property: The development needs a sidewalk along the United Way parking lot for their conductivity. The City would grant an easement (5' wide) on the park property for this sidewalk. Landscape on park property: The development needs a landscape easement (5' wide) on the east and north edges, of the development, on park property. The City would grant this easement. The landscaping would be compatible with the park landscape. The north easement is on the house property we are attempting to purchase. Utilities: We determined that the project would not need any utility easements on the park. Parking need for the Bas Bleu Theater: Jon indicated he has talked to the United Way folks about the theater using some of their parking lot for theater users. They would need a letter from the United Way folks allowing for the parking with liability and cost sharing for maintenance/replacement. Since the City owns the land under the parking lot, we think the City may also have to grant some type of easement for the parking? We need to know if in Jack's work, is there a need for some parking in the United Way lot? If so, could we have a conflict when events would be going on at the center and at the theater? Stormwater needs: We indicated to Jon that the need for a water quality pond for the development may still fit on the park site. However, without knowing at least a conceptual size from the Willow Project and the new Northside Center we can't be sure they both can work on the park. EPA cleanup work: Jon indicated they think their project will be ok with the shallow work for foundations, etc. The sewer line may encounter some contamination and have to have this material removed. Here are the assignments: Jon will be doing legals for the alley and the sidewalk and landscape easements. He will have an engineer look at the water quality needs for the project. I'm correct, we both will not need stormwater detention? Ralph is working on acquiring the house nearest the park. Unknown as to when this will happen. I will go visit with the United Way folks for an exchange of info. No Text I Bob, Jack, Jean and I should meet to look at the latest Northside plans to see if the Willow Development has any impacts (besides parking and the water quality pond) related to the Land Use Code, etc. We should look at the water quality needs for the proposed Northside Center. Do we spend some of our dollars on this? If so how much is this item? We agreed to work on these items over the next few months. All for now. Craig All for now. CC: Basil Hamdan; Bill Whirty; Bob Burkhardt; Bob Loeven; Cam McNair; Cameron Gloss; Carrie M. Daggett; Clark Mapes; Ingrid Decker; Jack Gianola; Jean Helburg; John Stokes; Marty Heffernan From: Jack Gianola To: Bob Barkeen; Craig Foreman; Dave Stringer; Ralph Campano Date: 12/10/03 4:03PM Subject: Re: Willow Project meeting 12/9/03 Craig, Thanks for the update on the development next to the Northside Aztlan Center. I have four comments: 1. Yes, the meeting you suggested is needed, so will assume you will put that together in the near future. 2. The Northside Aztlan Center Project cannot proceed until the impact of the contamination is determined. The project could proceed if the City could receive direction that it would be okay to build over the contamination. The building will have to be placed on drilled peirs, which will penetrate small areas of the contamination, due to building over the dump. If the City cannot build on this site, we should begin the process of looking at other sites. This issue impacts the work that Jon Prouty is doing on his site. 3. It was intended to use the United Way parking lot for overflow parking for the new Northside Aztlan Center- this would occur on a limited basis, but United Way should be informed of this situation and the proper agreements developed. 4. The Stormwater requirements for both sites should be discussed now to determine the impact on the park. It will quite difficult grading on the Northsie Aztlan Center site due to the swallow depth of the dump. And if detention is not required, then grading will need to be done through the site. Look forward to the meeting. Jack G. >>> Craig Foreman 12/09/03 11:25AM >>> Hi: Just met with Jon on the project. Here is the info. Jon went over the project and the need for the alley and sidewalk and landscape easements on the park. We then discussed how the project works with the United Way parking lot, the park and the future Northside Center project. We informed Jon that the project and easements would need to be presented to the Parks and Recreation Board for review. Then the easements can be made ready for Council action. We would like to do all the easements at one time. Jon seemed to understand this and was ok with the process. Here are the main points from our discussion; Alley vacation: The east half of the alley would revert to the City (Parks ownership). Parks would then sell this land to the developer. Sidewalk on park property: The development needs a sidewalk along the United Way parking lot for their conductivity. The City would grant an easement (5' wide) on the park property for this sidewalk. Landscape on park property: The development needs a landscape easement (5' wide) on the east and north edges, of the development, on park property. The City would grant this easement. The landscaping would be compatible with the park landscape. The north easement is on the house property we are attempting to purchase. Utilities: We determined that the project would not need any utility easements on the park. Parking need for the Bas Bleu Theater: Jon indicated he has talked to the United Way folks about the theater using some of their parking lot for theater users. They would need a letter from the United Way folks allowing for the parking with liability and cost sharing for maintenance/replacement. Since the City owns the land under the parking lot, we think the City may also have to grant some type of easement for the parking? We need to know if in Jack's work, is there a need for some parking in the United Way lot? If so, could we have a conflict when events would be going on at the center and at the theater? Stormwater needs: We indicated to Jon that the need for a water quality pond for the development may still fit on the park site. However, without knowing at least a conceptual size from the Willow Project and the new Northside Center we can't be sure they both can work on the park. EPA cleanup work: Jon indicated they think their project will be ok with the shallow work for foundations, etc. The sewer line may encounter some contamination and have to have this material removed. Here are the assignments: Jon will be doing legals for the alley and the sidewalk and landscape easements. He will have an engineer look at the water quality needs for the project. I'm correct, we both will not need stormwater detention? Ralph is working on acquiring the house nearest the park. Unknown as to when this will happen. I will go visit with the United Way folks for an exchange of info. Bob, Jack, Jean and I should meet to look at the latest Northside plans to see if the Willow Development has any impacts (besides parking and the water quality pond) related to the Land Use Code, etc. We should look at the water quality needs for the proposed Northside Center. Do we spend some of our dollars on this? If so how much is this item? We agreed to work on these items over the next few months. All for now. Craig All for now. CC: Basil Harridan; Bill Whirty; Bob Burkhardt; Bob Loeven; Cam McNair; Cameron Gloss; Carrie Daggett; Clark Mapes; Ingrid Decker; Jean Helburg; John Stokes; Marty Heffernan Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:08 PM Lagunitas (970) 226-5125 p.01 To: Craig Foreman From: Jon Prouty Date: December 10, 2003 Re: Willow Project I thought our meeting was very productive the other day. Thank you. Summarizing: 1. I will get the necessary legals together and forward them to Dave Stringer. 2. 1 will have Northstar prepare the necessary storm water information and discuss the storm water matters again with Basil. 3. You will speak with Jack and City engineers so we can have their storm water numbers as well. 4. Then we convene another meeting to discuss all matters, including most specifically storm water. 5. After Dave and Ralph receive the legals they will begin the formalities of the alley vacation and the walk and landscaping easements. 6. Separate from this but complementary is the Bas Bleu Theatre's parking easement for off -hours parking in United Way's parking lot. This is part of the Bas Bleu Development LLC project, not the Willow project, however will be handled procedurally together with the foregoing as you determine best. Thank you for your assistance with this project. Jon J P/ksr cc: Ralph Campano; Dave Stringer; Bob Barkeen; Jack Gianola; Tricia Kroetch WiL L-OW P ROd E CT yam® 9q1; TM) ?§|} y[|||) ##$ . \ � ■�� 4c— UnMed fto$ 00m d [nksow w o 40d P M .VM 1995 & Mm ►Iebs1i0f1 cowflop" Ammmm EPA Policy Toward Owners of Property Containing Contaminated Aquifers Of ca of Site Renretlradon Enlatcert�arK Policy and Prograrn Evalustien Dti ziwun 2273G This fact sheet summarizes a new EPA policy regarding groundwater contamination. The "Policy Toward Owners of Property Containing Contaminated Aquifers" was issued as part of EPA's Brownfields Econotnic Redevelopment Initiative which helps states, communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and susuinably reuse browlnfields. Brownfnelds are abandoned, idled or under -used industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived envirornmental contamination. EPA issued this policy to help owners of property to which groundwater contamination has migrated or is likely to migrate tom a source outside the property. This fact sheer is based on EPA's interpretation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation , and Liability Act (CERCLA, commonly known as Superfund) and existing EPA guidance. Under the policy, EPA will not take action to compel such property owners to perform cleanups or to reimburse the agency for cleanup costs. EPA may also consider de mintmis settlements with such owners if they are threatened with law suits by third parties. Background Approximately eighty-five percent of the sites listed on the National Priorities List involve some degree of groundwater contamination. The effects of such contamination are often widespread because of natural subsurface processes such as infiltration and groundwater flow. It is sometimes difficult to determine the source of groundwater contamination. Under Section 107(ax 1) of CERCLA (also found at 42 United States Code § 9607(a)(1)), any "owner" of contaminated property is normally liable regardless of fault_ This section of CERCLA creates uncertainty about the liability of owners of land containing contaminated aquifers who did not cause the contamination. This uncertainty makes potential buyers and lenders hesitant to invest in property containing contaminated groundwater. The intent of the Contaminated Aquifer Policy is to lower the barriers to the traresfer of property by reducing the uncertainty regarding future liability. it is EPA's hope that by clarifying its approach towards these landowners, third parties will act accordingly. Common Questions Regarding Application of the Policy "If a prospective buyer knows of aquifer contamination on a piece of property at the time of purcham is be or she automatically liable for clean-up costs'" No. In such a case the buyer's liability depends on the sellers involvement in the aquifer contamination. if the seller would have qualified for protection under this policy, the buyer will be protected. For example, if the seller of the property was a landowner who bought the property without knowledge, did not contribute to the contamination of the aquifer and had no contractual relationship with the polluter, then the buyer may take advantage of this policy, despite knowledge of the aquifer contamination. In contrast, if the seller has a contractual relationship with the polluter and the buyer knows of the contamination, then this policy will not protect the buyer. -if an original pared of property contains one section which has been contaminated by the seller and another uncontaminated section whick is threatened with contamination migrating through the aquifer, can a buyer be protected under the policy if he or she buys the threatened section of the property.'" The purchase of the threatened parcel separate from the contaminated parcel establishes a contractual relationship between the buyer and the person responsible for the threat. This policy will not protect such a buyer unless the buyer can establish that he or she did not know of the pollution at the time of the purchase and had no reason to know of the pollution. To establish such lack of knowledge the buyer must prove that at the time he acquired the property he inquired into the previous ownership and uses of the property. Protection from Third Party Law Suits Finally, EPA will consider de minimis settlements with landowners who meet the requirements of this policy if a landowner has been sued or is threatened with third -parry suits. A de minimis settlement is an agreement between the EPA and a landowner who may be liable for clean up of a small portion of the hazardous waste at a particular site. To be eligible for such a settlement, the landowner must not have handled the hazardous waste and must not have contributed to its release or the threat of its release. Once the EPA enters into a ode lninimis settlement with a landowner, third parties may not sue that landowner for the costs of clean-up operations. Whether or not the Agency issues a de minimis settlement, EPA may seek the landowners full cooperation ('utcluding access to the property) in evaluating and implementing cleanup at the site. for few bfomaaiion This Poky was issued on May 24, 1995 and published it do Federal AegWaron July 3. t99b (volume 60. page 34790). You may order a copy of the policy from he National Ta takal Wonmion Service OMS), U.S. Oepartnant of Conrnerce. $Us Pat Royal Ad.. Spragfletd, VA 22161, Orders must reference NTIS accession number POW 109146. For Wephons orders or iutt w information on placing an order. can Hits at: (7M4 4630 tot regtdar servim or i;w*S3-P(iiS for rush service. For orders via e4mrlrinternet. serM tD the Waving address: ordmenU&AN wnrW.9ov For more infatnalion about he Contaminated Aqubr Poki, caA EW Kanded at (M3X3.8996. 08/Da�93 Tn 18, 35 IAA 303 293 12J4 _ Ra S t"VW1+v �c+ _. Erg- mp'��s1995' p� • Toaar e _ t 0 ota ntd "e I. STATM4VT OF POLICY � rttation of CERCLA, existing EPA sasad on tha.AgenCy s interp a ise, it is the guidance, and EPA's Supertund program stances have come to be Agency's position that where hazardous located on or in a property solely as the result of subsurface migration in an aquifer from a source oraet neagainstdtbethe owner property Ep11 will not take the pr�� Ce of response actions of such property to require the per=off er� EPA may consider de or the payment of response costs - mini of CERCIA where � settlements under Stctios'►Z�g�l�ntribution suits. ttecQssa�-`Y to protect such landowners This policy is subject to the following conditions: A) The landowner did not cause, contrite to, or hazardous exacerbate the release or threat of release Of a to .take ny to A substances, through an act or omission. unailurlurr affirmative steps itigate or address groa contamination, such as conducting g�undwater Twill not, inns oundwater rmedi.ation systems. Will not, or installing 9r exceptional circumstances constitute an the absence of excep o this w the landowner within the meaning f condition. by policy may not apply where the property contains a gromdwater Well, the existence or operationof which say affect the migration of contamination in the ' affected aquifer. These cases will require fact -specific analysis. e) The pers on taat Caused the releASa is not an agent or employee of the landowner, and was v of in aldiir cuterr. In indiseat contractual relationWdP ner.-Inectly or cases where the landowner acquired the property, indisactlye from► a person that caused the original release, ,an analysis of application of this Policy will require cqu-ad, the Whether. at the time the property wasof landowner kn8w or had reason to know of thediSspoiaation in hazardous substmcas that gave rise to the c the aquifer. 1 By this Policy, l;PA dross not intend to cos`promssa or es 'to seeX access pur cant to Section affect any right it possasm 104 (e) of CERC LA - Fm 2. istI e e d e i 1 To address concerns that strict liability under section 2.07(a)(1) could cause inequitable results With resp OC"t to landowners Who had not been involves in hazardous substance enter into disposal activities, Congress authorize arty Agency under section settlements with certain Pr P tinder this 122(9)(1)(B) of CEACLk 42 V.S.C. S 9622 1 (1)(8) when the Agency determines that a settlement is Section, lic interest," it +rshall as promptly "Practicable and is the'public as possible reach a fitsal Seresonze"colfstshatsettlement facilitynvo ves only a minor Portion of the P t the potentially concerned" and the Agency determines that on or in responsible party: " M is an owner of the real uct Or Permit the which the. facility is located; (ii) did not conduct Ot sal of any transportation, storage► treatment or dispo generation,- and (iii) did not contribute hazardous substance at the facility; tough any act or to the release or threat of release -••• omission. lie requirements which must be satisfied in order for the with. landowners under the .41 Agency to consider a settlementSet ion 122(9)(1)•(B) are MJ& settlement Provisions of Sect east be proved at substantially the same zs the elements defense trial in order forba landowner to bestald above- ish U se 3f the -po icy does not constitute rulemakin4 by the Agency and This Policy t or a is not intended anVe�ptbed ai�enforceabletatalawgor in benefit, re substantive the Agency may tare action equity, by any person. ivYthQrmore, at variance with this Policy. For further information concerning this Policy, please contact E11enKa well in-996 Office of site Remediation Enforcement at ( ) A. detailed discussion -of Section 122(g)(1)(9) and guidance under this section are _provided.i. note 2. ss H each Of these Components on structuring : settlements e of �n the--•----_ +iementS. awa 08/08/05 THU 16:36 thA rug 444 1444 CA aurrart ow u��• •• clear.° Accordingly, failure by an tion re owner LO provide self, certified sresponssesttodixcl MIS infQto o Offer section 1uests � (CI) (I) ($) be qro mi lm's settlement_ II. DISCUSSION A. aci u Nationwide there are numerous �o contaminated groundwl&s thAt are the ater. of response actions under CnCLA due Approximately 85% of tha sites on the rational Priorities List have some degree of groundvater conta�minatiOn' Natural subsurface processes, such as infiltrati°ndandc1res fundrom their ater w� often carry contaminants relatively 1�98 undwate�r ma be sources. Thus, the plume of contaminated qroFor this relatively long and/or extend over a large area - reason, it is sometimes difficult to deterMine the source or sources of such contamination. . — -- L--- AXW GVni.n ro et' � tad a aC63 to ]. b.. 9 3S an M—rnSK"Z. t� U.S.C. S 96a1(a)(1). even vhe participation in the handling takn no action td exacerbate of aronertV 10 a ----- - of CEACLA . 42 �Ct10li �( a such owner has had no of hazardous substances, and has the release. contaminated aquifers Have experienced' diffICUIL Se.Lj++ �•.�..� -- - u�g for eve opstent because prospective pur sons .and lenders s�aetimes view the potential for liability as a' significant risk. The Agaacy is concerned that such unintended effects are having an adverse impact oft property owners and on" the ability or communities to develop or -redevelop property. EPA is issuinq this policy to address the concerns raised by owners of prepertY to which contamination has migrated in an five purchasers of such fifer, as wall as londars and ptoEpes cars to The intenAf this ].R i3 to lover �o Y' redung uncertain r bdi tza =e • uch ,--� __teee ..w a actions ascot 3 Gnind of the types of information which sb landowner to Support a request for s 3 1AM 111 a aim me Zfor an outline uld be provided by the da Minipim settlement. ■