2013 Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

Photo credit: Bing

VILLAGE OF CROSS PLAINS, WI Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report Prepared by MSA Professional Services, Inc. in cooperaĆ&#x;on with the Village of Cross Plains.

Presented to the Village Board July 22, 2013

SERVICES

Preface

(This page intenĆ&#x;onally leĹŒ blank)

Village of Cross Plains, WI

Contents and Acknowledgements

Preface

Executive Summary ......................... iv

Chapter 1:

Study & Property Background ......... 1

Village President Pat Andreoni

Environmental Assessment .......... 11 2.1 Facility Review 2.2 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 2.3 Asbestos / Haz. Mat. Survey Report 2.4 Phase II ESA (2007) 2.5 Chemical Disposal Report 2.6 Site Preparation Cost Analysis 2.7 Phase II ESA (2008) 2.8 Structural Condition Report 2.9 Market Value Appraisal 2.10 Phase II ESA (2009) 2.11 MSA Review / Recommendations

Chapter 3:

Chapter 4:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following people are responsible for the creation, refinement, and adoption of this Plan

1.1 Project Location 1.2 Property History 1.3 Parcel Information 1.4 Existing & Planned Land Use

Chapter 2:

Preface

Village Board Pat Andreoni, President Ray Blanchard, Trustee Doug Brunner, Trustee Judy Ketelboeter, Trustee Jay Lengfeld, Trustee Steve Schunk, Trustee Tim Statz, Trustee

Planning Commission

3.1 Alternative One 3.2 Alternative Two 3.3 Alternative Three

Pat Andreoni, Chairman Doug Brunner Tim Statz Randy Case Mitch Hogan Todd DuQuette Lee Sorensen

Financial Analysis and Funding Strategies .......................... 29

Village Staff

Conceptual Site Plans..................... 25

4.1 Financial Analysis 4.2 Funding Strategies

Matthew Schuenke, Village Administrator Tom Malone, Assistant Village Administrator

MSA Professional Services, Inc. Andrew Bremer, AICP, Project Manager Steve Tremlett, AICP, Urban Designer Sarah McDonald, Landscape Designer Jayne Englebert, Senior Project Hydrogeologist Kristi DuBois, Senior Project Engineer

All prior reports and title searches referenced in this report are on file with the Village Administrator

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

i

Preface

(This page intenĆ&#x;onally leĹŒ blank)

ii

Village of Cross Plains, WI

Preface

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Village of Cross Plains has stated emphatically through past and current public planning processes and development projects its desire to rehabilitate Main Street (US 14) into a vibrant mixed-use district. The West Gateway District of Main Street includes several vacant industrial properties that together comprise the former Zander Creamery property.

Zander Creamery origins date back over 100 years. Until a Listeria outbreak in 2004 the facility produced butter for commercial use. Listeria monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened immune systems. The only known butter and butterine sold in retail stores was at GFS Marketplace Stores located in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Michigan under the GFS label. The other butter and butterine products were distributed nationwide, including individual serving butter chips used by restaurants, butter and butterine cups distributed to restaurants, tubs of whipped butter for restaurants and bulk butter for food manufacturers, primarily under the Zander’s and GFS labels.

Shortly after the Listeria outbreak the Creamery closed and the business filed for bankruptcy.

According to a title search one of the properties (1214 Main St.) is still owned by Zander Creamery Inc. There are currently delinquent taxes in the amount of $77,146 dating back to 2004, and interest accrues monthly on the delinquent taxes.

In addition, there is an

existing lien against the property for a Foreign Judgment against Zander’s Creamery in favor of Southern Products Company (Bridgeton MO), a wholesale trade company, in the amount of $175,978.51. On October 4, 2014, the judgment will expire and be of no more effect, unless the creditor renews it for another 10 years. Interest has been accruing on the principal amount at a rate of 9% per annum, adding an estimated interest in the amount of $136,400.00. The judgment is against Zander’s and acts as a lien against any real estate owned

by Zander’s Company Inc. in Dane County regardless of address. The parcel contains four buildings that comprise the production facilities of the old Creamery.

The other principal portion of the Creamery (1300 Main St.) was sold to Joh-May Enterprises LLC in 1999. There are no liens, mortgages, or delinquent taxes according to a title search of the property. These parcel contains three buildings that comprise the office and cold storage facilities of the old creamery. The office building is the oldest building dating back to 1906. A structural analysis of the building was completed in 2009 (refer to Chapter 2). The study found the brick facade to be in relatively good condition and fitting the context of “main street properties” and therefore may be appropriate for some type of adaptive reuse.

Since 2004, the site has remained vacant but not forgotten. Between 2005 and 2009 several environmental studies have been completed for

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report iii

Preface the property including Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessments. In addition, the property has been identified for potential redevelopment in various Village land use plans, including incorporation into the Village’s Tax Increment Finance District #3.

According to prior studies researched during this project, both 1214 and 1300 Main Street have environmental issues from past Creamery operations. These issues generally relate to soil contamination near the former loading dock area. Refer to Chapter 2 of this report for a full discussion of the environmental issues at the Creamery.

No additional studies or actions have been taken since the last environmental study in 2009. In 2009, the Village approved a developer’s agreement to assist with the rehabilitation of an adjacent property, 1200 Main St. (Coach’s Supper Club). In 2015, the WisDOT is planning to reconstruct US 14. These improvement projects coupled with the tax delinquent status of the 1214 Main St. property, and approaching decade of inactivity at the site, have left residents and officials eager to return the property to a productive use. However, questions remain regarding ownership, tax status, environmental issues, and ultimately the best use of the property.

These questions, along with developing conceptual redevelopment alternatives, need to be vetted prior to the Village Board making any determination has to the potential role it may play in helping to return this property to a productive use.

If ultimately the Village Board does not assume a prominent role in the acquisition and redevelopment of the property, this report can be shared with perspective owners to convey the history of the property, status of environmental assessments, and visions for potential redevelopment.

iv

Village of Cross Plains, WI

The purpose of this project is to: •

Perform a title search of the properties to document relevant parcel information;

•

Review the prior environment studies, determine their relevance, and update variables as necessary;

•

Develop three conceptual development options for the site.

The three development options include purchasing and remediating the site for either a Public Use (i.e. park or parking lot), New Development (i.e. removing all buildings, cleaning up the site, and preparing it for new private investment), or Redevelopment (i.e. clean up and demolition for some portion of the property leaving some structures in place for renovation/remodel for new private use);

•

Analyze the net property value implications from each alternative, update cost estimates for remaining environmental studies and clean-up, and suggest potential funding sources to assist with site remediation.

CHAPTER 1 PROPERTY BACKGROUND 1 2 3 5

Project Location Property History Parcel Information Existing & Planned Land Use

The following chapter summarizes the history of the Zander Creamery and provides information regarding the use, square footage, and value of both buildings and parcels. In addition to the parcels that together comprise the Zander Creamery (#2, 3a, 3b below) this chapter also provides parcel information for three adjacent properties, which for the reasons described herein either have existing access constraints, or are planned for redevelopment under the Village’s Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Revitalization Plan.

The rear of the properties abut an active railroad operated by Wisconsin & Southern Railroad Company. The parcel is owned by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. In addition, the Black Earth Creek meanders behind these properties, a portion of which travels through the southeast corner of parcel #3b. The parcel to the rear of #3a, 3b, and 5 is owned by the Village.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Zander Creamery is located on the south side of US 14 (locally Main St.) on the west end of the Village of Cross Plains (pop. 3,538). US 14 is planned for reconstruction in 2015 by the WisDOT. As part of this project, the Village will be replacing lighting, sewer, and water utilities within the roadway, and performing other streetscaping improvements.

US 14 (Main St.)

4

1 2

Wisco ns

in & S

outhe

3a

3b

5

rn Ra

ilroad

Black Earth Creek

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

1

Chapter 1

IntroducƟon

1.2 PROPERTY HISTORY 1850 1870 First known creamery operation

1898 Henry M. Zander’s new Creamery Opens 1900

1906 Zander’s Creamery Office building is built

Zander’s 1870’s building Image Source: Unknown

1938 Henry M. Zander dies 1972 Production facility built 1973 First cooler warehouse built 1979 Second cooler warehouse built

2000

1994 First recall of butter produced by the creamery from grocery stores. Listeria bacteria was involved.

1996 Second production facility is built and third cooler warehouse built 2000 Wastewater pretreatment plant built

Zander’s Store 1908 Image Source: Wisconsin Historical Society

Family business is owned and operated by Timon, Stan and Jeffrey Zander 2004 April 15, Zander’s Creamery Inc. products are recalled due to Listeria bacteria 2004 June Creamery is under limited operation, dozen’s of Zander employees are laid off 2004 Zander’s Cremeary Inc. closes

2

Village of Cross Plains, WI

H.M. Zander’s Creamery 1928 Image Source: Wisconsin Historical Society

Chapter 1 The project site is also located within the Village’s Tax Increment Finance District #3, which is a rehabilitation and conservation TIF district established by the Village in 2008 for the purpose of revitalization properties along Main St. and conservation activities along the Black Earth Creek and Zander Park. Several revitalization projects have occurred since the district was

created including the renovation of Coach’s Supper Club, immediately west of the Schroeder property (parcel #1).

1.3 PARCEL INFORMATION The following section provides specific property information. Access Dane is the source of most property information described herein.

US US1414(Main (MainSt.) St.)

4

1 2

3

Wiscon sin & South ern R ailro ad

3

5

Black BlackEarth EarthCreek Creek

1

Property Address: 1206 Main Street Owner: Patricia Schroeder Parcel #: 070703244735 Land value:$52,905 Improvement value: $100,230 Fair Market value: $153,134 Taxes: $3,170.92 Zoned: General Business Current Use: Residential Future Land Use: Downtown Building Sq. ft.: 3,200 (all floors) Lot Size Sq. ft.: 4,639 Tax status: Compliant

Parcel #1, also known as the Schroeder property, was included within this report because the parcel does not have driveway access to Main St. and because the property owner has shown prior interest in selling the property. The property contains a two story residential house that is currently rented.

Access is provided to the rear yard through either the adjacent Coach’s Supper Club or the Zander Creamery property (#2). The existing use does not fit the long-term preferred land use as identified in the Village’s Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Revitalization Plan.

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

3

Chapter 1

IntroducƟon 2

Property Address: 1214 Main Street Owner: Zander’s Creamery Inc. Parcel #:070703244842 Land value: $144,665 Improvement value: $125,935 Fair Market value: $270,599 Taxes*: $6,062.66 Zoned: Industrial Current Use: vacant Future Land Use: Downtown Building Sq. ft.: 17,400 (combined) Lot Size Sq. ft.: 19,017 Tax status: Delinquent since 2004

The three parcels that together comprise the old creamery are currently in different ownership. Parcel #2 is still owned by Zander Creamery Inc. According to a title search of the property, there are no mortgages against the property. There are currently delinquent taxes in the amount of $77,146 dating back to 2004, and interest accrues monthly on the delinquent taxes.

In addition, there is an existing lien against the property for a Foreign Judgment against Zander’s Creamery, Inc. dated and docketed October 5, 2004, Dane County case number 04 FJ 33. The Foreign Judgment is in favor of Southern Products Company (Bridgeton MO), a wholesale trade company, in the amount of $175,978.51. On October 4, 2014, the judgment will expire and be of no more effect, unless the creditor renews it for another 10 years. Interest has been accruing on the principal amount at a rate of 9% per annum, adding an estimated interest in the amount of $136,400.00. The judgment is against Zander’s and acts as a lien against any real estate owned by Zander’s Company Inc in Dane County regardless of address.

Madison Gas and Electric maintains a 10 foot wide easement along the rear of the property for underground electric.

The parcel contains four buildings that comprise the production facilities of the old Creamery. Portions of buildings number 1 & 5 (refer to next page) are located on 1300 Main Street according to Access Dane imagery.

This includes portions of the loading docks.

There is a for sale sign on the front of the building but a current listing could not be found.

4

Village of Cross Plains, WI

Chapter 1

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

5

Chapter 1

IntroducƟon 3a 3a

3b

3b

Property Address: 1300 Main Street Owner: Joh-May Enterprises Inc. Parcel #: 70703243931 Land value: $124,540 Improvement value: $158, 514 Fair Market value: $283,053 Taxes: $5,922.21 Zoned: Industrial Current Use: vacant Future Land Use: Downtown Building Sq. ft.: 12,777 (combined) Lot Size Sq. ft.: 17,002 Tax status: Compliant Property Address: Main Street Owner: Joh-May Enterprises Inc. Parcel #: 70703244251 Land value: $17,436 Improvement value: $0 Fair Market value: $17,436 Taxes: $369.23 Zoned: Industrial Current Use: vacant Future Land Use: Downtown Building Sq. ft.: 0 Lot Size Sq. ft.: 3,400 Tax status: Compliant

Parcels #3a and 3b where sold to Joh-May Enterprises LLC in 1999. There are no liens, mortgages, or delinquent taxes according to a title search of the property.

The parcel contains three buildings that comprise the office and cold storage facilities of the old creamery. The office building is the oldest building dating back to 1906.

A structural analysis of the building was completed in 2009 (refer to Chapter 2). The study found the brick facade to be in relatively good condition and fitting the context of “main street properties” and therefore may be appropriate for some type of adaptive reuse.

The warehouse structure behind the office is the most recently constructed building (1996) and may also be worth consideration for some sort of adaptive reuse.

There is an existing concrete pedestrian bridge over the Black Earth Creek at the southeast corner of the property.

It is unclear whether the bridge is located on Parcel #3b or on the Village owned parcel (07073294801).

6

Village of Cross Plains, WI

Chapter 1 4

Property Address: 1306 Main Street Owner: Joh-May Enterprises Inc. Parcel #: 70703244128 Land value: $52,905 Improvement value: $40,849 Fair Market value: $93,754 Taxes: $1,913.40 Zoned: Industrial Current Use: Commercial Future Land Use: Downtown Building Sq. ft.: 900 Lot Size Sq. ft.: 1,664 Tax status: Compliant

Parcel #4 is also owned by Joh-May Enterprises Inc. The property is rented for a commercial business, Call of the Wild Gallery and Frame Shop. Similar to the Schroeder property, the Call of the Wild does not have its own access point or parking lot. The driveway to the east of the building and the rear parking lot are on the Creamery Parcel #3b.

5

Property Address: 1310 Main Street Owner: Z Boys LLC Parcel #: 070703244211 Land value: $54,001 Improvement value: $139,684 Fair Market value: $193,684 Taxes: $4,029.64 Zoned: Planned Development-Res (PDD-R) Current Use: Residential Future Land Use: Single Family-Urban Building Sq. ft.: 2,800 (all floors) Lot Size Sq. ft.: 7,015 Tax status: Compliant

Parcel #5 was sold by Joh-May Enterprises to Z Boys LLC in 2009. The relationship between the two entities is unclear but both have the same tax billing address according to Access Dane. The property is rented for residential use.

Given the proximity to the Creamery site and ownership status the property may be suited for redevelopment for commercial use.

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

7

Chapter 1

IntroducƟon

1.4 EXISTING & PLANNED LAND USE US 14 is the main thoroughfare connecting the Village to the cities of Middleton and Madison to the east. The corridor is book ended by commercial uses with a long connecting segment of single-family residential uses. The study properties are located within the West Gateway District. This area is primarily planned for commercial and mixed uses. The Village’s Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as future “Downtown” uses. According to the plan these areas are intended to remain the civic, social, and commercial hub of the community through revitalization planning efforts. This category is intended for a mix of retail, commercial service, office, institutional, governmental, and residential (mainly upper stories) uses arranged in a pedestrian-oriented environment with onstreet parking; minimal front and side yard building

setbacks; and building designs, materials, placement, and scale that are compatible with the character of existing or historic development.

The land behind the study properties, extending east comprises Zander Park. The park is bisected by the Wisconsin Southern Railroad and the Black Earth Creek. The eastern portion of the creek is scheduled to be meandered back to its original course in 2013. In 2014, the Commercial Core District, otherwise known as the Lagoon Street Area, will also be reconstructed as part of a larger project to revitalize this portion of Main Street.

$SPTT 1MBJOT %PXOUPXO 3FWJUBMJ[BUJPO 1MBO Residential Core District

American Legion Dr.

et

on

Str

eet

er

St

re

et Jo

n vi

aS

tre

et

l Va

le

y

St

re

M

et

Ludden Drive

Hillebrand

tinen tal L ane

Village of Cross Plains, WI

Drive

Con

Park and Open Space

Str

ee

t

t

tree

C

Residential

in

aS

lali

ad

art

ch hur

Str

eet

/C

TH

P

Brewery Road

Mill Street

tre

Wilson Street

Hickory Street

sS

Maple Street

wi

go

s ae

Eu

Bourbon Ro

8

Le

et

C La

Commercial Mixed Use

ay W

Spring Street

ne

Center St.

Pi tre

Market Street

ia

Zander Park

Downtown Land Uses

East Gateway District

lv sS

liu

Water St.

Commercial Core District

Ju

Main Street

Bourbon Road District

Sy

Park Street

East Street

West Gateway District

%PXOUPXO $SPTT 1MBJOT 'VUVSF -BOE 6TF 1 BOE %JTUSJDU

Chapter 1 Wetlands Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources designated wetlands are present in the area but do not appear to be located on any of the subject properties.

The image below shows a map of wetlands in the area. According to Access Dane, the wetlands extend to Black Earth Creek, but do not extend any further north.

1201

070703241112 Lot 2 1205

070703241229

1303

FOXVILLE

070703241916

1311

1307 070703242022

070703242139

070703244735

Floodplain Area

1206

1200

070703244531

Lot 3

1214

070703244842

1306

CSM 04912 Lot 2

CSM 04912 Lot 1

070703244211 070703243931

070703291014

13 49 M0 CS Lot 2

1225 0703245841

070703292657 CSM 06625

862

K KK KK KK K K KK

KK KK KK K K KK KK KK KK KKK

1918

070703292353

1310

0707032443

1310

0707032442

070703294801

KK K KK KK KK

070703245636 924

070703244128

1300 Lot 1

864

Floodplains The map below indicates areas within the study area that are designated as Floodplain by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to Access Dane, at least some portion of all subject properties are located with the 100-year floodplain. This area also has a shallow depth to groundwater, average of 7 to 8 feet below ground surface. Therefore, it is unlikely that a building with a full basement will be constructed in the future on the properties and flood insurance will also be required.

KK KK KK KK K K KK KK KK KK K KK KK KK KK K K KK KK KK KK K K KK KK KK KK K KK KK KK KK

Wetland Area

CSM 04913 Lot 3

070703291710

CSM 06625 070703292559 1301 Lot 3 1309 070703292442

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

CSM 06625 Lot 4

9

Chapter 1

IntroducƟon

(This page intenƟonally leŌ blank)

10 Village of Cross Plains, WI

CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 11 11 12 13 14

Facility Review Phase I ESA Hazardous Materials Report Phase II ESA (2007) Haz. Chem. Disposal Report

14 14 14 15 15

Site Prep. Cost Analysis Phase II ESA (2008) Structural Condition Report Market Value Appraisal Phase II ESA (2009)

The following chapter summarizes the previous ten environmental and planning reports that have been conducted on the site since the Creamery closed in 2004. A brief summary of the purpose of each prior study and the work completed will be provided in chronological order, followed by a summary of findings and recommendations.

2000 2004 Creamery Closes 2005 Facility Review 2007 Phase 1 ESA 2007 Asbestos/Hazardous/ Special Materials Survey 2007 Phase II ESA 2007 Hazardous/Non-Hazardous Chemical Disposal Report 2008 Site Preparation Cost Analysis 2008 Additional Phase II ESA 2009 Structural Condition Report 2009 Market Value Appraisal 2009 Additional Phase II ESA 2010 2013 Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report

17 MSA Review / Recommendations

2.1 FACILITY REVIEW (2005) In early February 2005, MSA Professional Services conducted a review of the facilities on site. The purpose of this study was to review building components and existing structural, heating, electrical, and similar systems for deficiencies.

The goal was to identify potential obstacles to reuse or redevelopment of the buildings. At this time, Zander Creamery production had recently ceased due to a Listeria outbreak.

While the site is not listed as an Historic Site, the oldest buildings present date to 1906 with other construction and remodeling occurring as recently as 2000. The review did not include inspections for asbestos or hazardous materials.

The report concluded that the facility had been maintained in reasonable condition and could be reused as a processing facility. However, it was suggested that redevelopment as a main street-oriented, mixed use facility would be more appropriate given its location in a mixed residential/commercial area.

2.2 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (2007) In May of 2007, Liesch Companies performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the Creamery. The ESA was comprised of a review of State and Federal databases, historical records, and a site walkthrough, with the intent of identifying environmental concerns related to the property.

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 11

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

The assessment followed American Standard Test Method E-1527 guidelines, which meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements for environment testing. According to these metrics, no recognized environmental conditions were identified. Liesch did note several conditions that did not fall under ASTM definitions; •

•

The site is listed as a closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site in the State LUST database. Soil and groundwater at the site were impacted from a release from an underground fuel oil tank located east of the 1906 office building (refer to the Figure 2.1 at the end of this chapter). The site was investigated, and closure was granted by the DNR in 1997.

Several spills of milk product were noted, from a ruptured valve and from a tanker truck that toppled over in the parking lot.

•

A water supply well was present. The well was installed in 1952, with a depth of 48 feet.

•

Small amounts of chemicals were stored at the facility, including general cleaning supplies, petroleum ether, silicone foam control agent, propylene glycol, potassium hydroxide. In general the containers were noted to be in good condition and no leakage or spills were noted.

•

•

Three 30-gallon plastic containers containing approximately 10 gallons total of steam line corrosion inhibitor, a corrosive material were noted in the mechanical area, along with four 5-gallon containers of used oil.

In addition, several small containers of other hazardous materials were noted, along with items such as mercury containing thermostats.

12 Village of Cross Plains, WI

Final recommendations made by Liesch were the following; •

Remove and dispose of hazardous or special waste classification materials. (COMPLETED - See Section 2.5)

•

Install soil borings around the perimeter of the property buildings to ascertain if prior industrial activities have impacted the property.

(COMPLETED - See Section 2.4)

•

Conduct an asbestos inspection to determine if asbestos is present. (COMPLETED - See Section 2.3)

•

Abandon the on-site water supply well if it is not to be utilized.

2.3 ASBESTOS/HAZARDOUS/SPECIAL MATERIALS SURVEY REPORT (2007) Liesch Environmental Services conducted a survey for asbestos and hazardous/special materials in July 2007.

Liesch collected 163 samples of suspect asbestos containing materials (ACM) from throughout the buildings. Due to multiple layers in some of the samples, a total of 220 laboratory analyses were performed. The following materials were found to contain asbestos at concentrations exceeding the regulatory limit of 1%: • • • • • • • • • •

transite in light fixtures, floor tile, drywall joint compound, wall texture, window glazing, sink coating, sheet flooring, transite panels, roof coating (silver paint), and roof flashing material.

Chapter 2 The majority of the ACM were found in the 1906 office building and the portion of the production facility constructed in 1972. Roofing materials on the 1996 cooler warehouse building and the 1996 portion of the production facility also contained asbestos. No friable ACM was noted during the inspection.

A small amount of possible PCB-containing light fixtures and ballasts were noted in the report.

Possible mercury containing thermostats, light tubes and smoke detectors were also noted. In addition, small quantities of cleaning materials, paints and stains, and maintenance chemicals were noted. The report recommended that these materials be removed from the building and properly disposed if they were no longer in use.

2.4 PHASE II ESA (2007) In August of 2007, Liesch provided a report of their second Environmental Site Assessment. The purpose of this assessment was to sample the soil and groundwater at the site to determine if former industrial property use had impacted the property.

Code NR 140 water quality standards. Liesch speculated, based on the characteristics of the contamination, that it was from a former heating oil tank. No record of a tank (underground or above ground) in this area was found, although members of the Zanders family have recollections of a pump dispenser in the vicinity of the current loading dock. In addition, low level petroleum contamination was detected on the west side of the property in one soil boring.

Chloromethane was detected in several of the groundwater samples from across the site. In one sample the concentration exceeded the NR 140 enforcement standard. Liesch concluded that the chloromethane detections may be related to former refrigerants utilized at the property. They concluded that additional investigation, including upgradient wells, would be required to determine if the source of this contamination was on-site or from a neighboring property.

Based on the findings of the assessment, Liesch provided the following recommendations: •

The Phase II ESA should be submitted to the former Site Owner, and the contamination detected during this investigation should be reported by the former Site Owner to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The former Site Owner and Village should work with the DNR to determine the scope of work to resolve the contamination issues identified by this report. (IN 2013, MSA CONFIRMED THAT THE DNR HAS RECEIVED THE DATA FROM THIS REPORT – See additional discussion and DNR comments in Section 2.11).

•

Additional soil investigation may be necessary to define the extent of the petroleum contamination detected near the loading dock area in order to achieve closure from the Department of Natural Resources. (ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION COMPLETED – See Section 2.10).

Sixteen soil borings were advanced on June 11 and 12, 2007 to depths between 12 and 14 feet below the ground surface. Select zones from the borings were submitted for laboratory analysis of petroleum compounds, solvents, and metals based on field soil vapor analyses, color, odor and other physical features. At least one soil sample was collected from each boring. In addition, grab groundwater samples were collected from seven of the soil borings and analyzed for similar parameters.

Soil organic vapors were detected in five of the soil borings using field vapor monitoring equipment.

Petroleum contamination from an unknown source was detected at levels exceeding regulatory guidelines in the vicinity of the loading dock area near the center of the property. Groundwater from this area exceeded Wisconsin Administrative

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 13

Chapter 2 •

Environmental Assessment

The installation of monitoring wells may be necessary to monitor groundwater conditions and determine the extent of the petroleum and chloromethane groundwater contamination at the site. (COMPLETED - See Section 2.9)

2.5 HAZARDOUS/NON-HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL DISPOSAL REPORT (2007) In addition to the second ESA, Liesch also provided a Hazardous/Non-Hazardous Chemical Disposal Report in August of 2007. Liesch representatives inventoried hazardous and non-hazardous chemicals at the site for the purpose of disposal.

Materials were staged at the 1214 Main Street building for proper segregation, containerization, and disposal. Additional laboratory analysis was conducted to aid in proper disposal of some of the material. A total of eight 55 gallon steel drums and four 5-gallon steel containers containing various hazardous and non-hazardous chemicals were removed from the site and disposed at Badger Disposal in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Liesch noted that some special wastes are still present on the site, and include, but are not limited to, dry cell batteries, circuit boards, oil filled devices, lead containing items, and mercury containing materials.

They noted additional chemicals may be discovered during demolition of the buildings or redevelopment of the site requiring proper disposal.

2.6 SITE PREPARATION COST ANALYSIS (2008) In April of 2008, MSA in conjunction with Liesch, and ArchDesign Inc. provided the Village with a supplement to the 2005 Downtown Revitalization Plan. A portion of the plan discussed the Zander Creamery site, including a Site Preparation Cost Analysis.

This report included costs for additional soil and groundwater investigation activities to define the

14 Village of Cross Plains, WI

Chapter 2

extent of contamination reported in the August 9, 2007 report discussed above. Costs to complete the investigation, preparation of a remedial action options report and site closure request, along with preparation of the DNR GIS Registry packet were also included.

Additional soil and groundwater investigation was completed in 2009 by Foth Infrastructure and Environment, LLC (Foth) (See Section 2.10). A comparison of the costs and tasks in this April 2008 revitalization plan will be compared in Section 2.11 with the work completed in 2009

by Foth to determine which tasks remain to be completed and whether the list of tasks and cost estimate need to be revised.

2.7 PHASE II ESA (2008) In June 2008, Liesch conducted additional soil and groundwater sampling at the site to further define the contamination found and reported in their 2007 Phase II Environmental Assessment report.

Fifteen additional soil borings were advanced at the site, and four of the borings were converted to groundwater monitoring wells. Several of the borings were drilled inside the facility through the concrete floor to define the extent of the contamination.

The investigation found contaminated soils above regulatory limits for diesel range organics, gasoline range organics, xylenes, and lead. The results of this investigation are discussed in more detail in the December 2009 report by Foth (see Section 2.10).

2.8 STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS REPORT (2009) In February of 2009, MSA in conjunction with JendUSA Engineering Associates, provided the Village with a supplement to the 2005 Downtown Revitalization Plan. A portion of the plan discussed the Zander Creamery site, including a Structural Condition Report for 1300 Main Street.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2

The two story Zander office building was analyzed for design load capacities based on a commercial use for the building. The report concluded that the office building is in overall good structural condition with no foundation repairs or major exterior wall repairs needed. The roof structure and 2nd floor structure requires reinforcing as outlined above and as attached in the drawings to bring the structural support system up to code. The extent of the second floor reinforcing is dependant on the type of use for this floor. A heavier use such as assembly or paper storage will require a live load capacity of 100 psf and the reinforcing for this loading has been calculated and is shown in the attached plans. A lighter loading such as light office or residential will require less reinforcing and will require additional engineering work to redefine the reinforcing requirements. Some additional investigation work should be done including removal of ceiling tiles and plaster on the first floor and removal of plaster in the basement to be able to visually grade the lumber and to verify the assumptions made in the reinforcing plans.

2.9 MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL (2009) In 2009, an updated appraisal of the 1214 Main property value was conducted by Tenny Albert. This market appraisal included an updated estimate of the value of the land at this site only, and does not include improvements. The estimated land value of $112,400 was based on a vacant site free of contamination (approx. $32,000 less than the 2013 assessed land value). Information provided to the assessor by Foth, based on their additional investigation (discussed below) indicated that the total of the costs to remove contaminated soil, remove asbestos from the buildings, partially demolish the loading dock area to access contaminated soil for removal, perform additional assessment activities to obtain no further action documentation from the DNR for the groundwater contamination, cap the site to limit infiltration of surface and rain water, and reporting and DNR fees, was estimated at $193,400.

2.10 PHASE II ESA (2009) A third Phase II Environmental Site Assessment was performed at this property in 2009 by Foth. The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate the degree and extent of groundwater contamination that was previously detected in the investigations by Liesch in 2007 and 2008. In addition, sediment samples were collected from Black Earth Creek adjacent to the site to determine if the creek had been impacted by contamination from the site. The pretreatment storage system at the site was also cleaned and wastes generated from the cleaning were removed and disposed.

Four additional rounds of groundwater sampling were conducted between October 2008 and October 2009 at the four groundwater monitoring wells installed by Liesch in 2008. Water quality standards were exceeded for trimethylbenzenes, naphthalene, arsenic, lead, and chromium in some of the sampling.

Three sediment samples were collected from the stream bed of Black Earth Creek adjacent to the property in October 2008. The only standard exceeded in the three samples was for arsenic with concentrations ranging from 1.4 to 3.4 mg/ kg. (Note: The State standard for arsenic was 0.039 mg/kg at non-industrial properties and 1.6 mg/kg at industrial properties. However, a recent study has determined that normal background concentrations of arsenic in the State of Wisconsin can range as high as 8.0 mg/kg, due to naturally occurring arsenic in the rocks and soil in the State. Therefore, the Department of Natural Resources has recently determined that a standard of 8 mg/kg is appropriate, and therefore the concentrations detected in Black Earth Creek can be attributed to normal background and do not represent contamination).

In December 2008 Foth coordinated the clean out and disposal of untreated waste from the pretreatment system located on the western side of the Production Facility building. Approximately 6,000 gallons of wastewater containing 4 to 10

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 15

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

inch balls of waste dairy fat were removed from the facilities storage tanks and disposed into the Village of Cross Plains sanitary sewer system.

Foth concluded the following based on this assessment and previous investigations at the site: Soil • Gasoline range organics and petroleum compound contaminated soil is present above regulatory limits on the west side of the office building, southeast of the loading dock. The source of the contamination is unknown. According to Foth, the extent of the contamination is undefined.

•

•

Diesel range organics (DRO) contaminated soil is present near the loading dock area, and may be related to a former motor fuel tank in this location. Foth concluded the extent of the soil contamination in this area of the property is undefined.

Soil DRO contamination was detected in borings along the west side of the property at a level equal to the State standard for this parameter.

•

Lead concentrations exceeding the nonindustrial regulatory limit of 50 mg/kg were detected in soil on the west side of the site.

Concentrations appeared higher on the west side of the property than elsewhere indicating these concentrations may be due to a local source rather than background for this area.

•

Arsenic concentrations exceeding regulatory limits were found in several locations around the site. Due to the spatial variation of these samples, it appears the concentrations may represent background for this area (See note concerning higher arsenic standards above).

Groundwater • Chloromethane

is

sporadically

16 Village of Cross Plains, WI

detected

Chapter 2

in groundwater sampling at the site. Foth attributed this to coolant leakage from outdoor refrigeration equipment.

•

Arsenic and lead concentrations in groundwater have exceeded the Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 140 preventive action limit in some areas of this site.

•

Petroleum compounds exceeded water quality standards in a monitoring well located between the loading dock area and the 1906 office building, in the center of the property.

Little to no petroleum contamination was detected in groundwater in other areas of the site. Based on this, Foth concluded that the groundwater contamination emanating from the loading dock area is localized and does not appear to leave the property.

•

Groundwater impacts were not evaluated on the west side of the building in the vicinity of the DRO soil contamination discussed above. Foth recommended investigation of the groundwater in this vicinity for petroleum compounds.

Sediments in Black Earth Creek • Although low levels of DRO and several pesticides were detected in the sediment samples collected from Black Earth Creek, Foth concluded that this contamination is typical of agriculture and stormwater runoff impacts. In addition, arsenic was detected in the sediment samples at concentrations attributed to background concentrations.

Recommendations Foth recommended the following to complete the investigation of soil and groundwater impacts at the site: •

Install two additional groundwater monitoring wells to evaluate whether groundwater impacts are present on the west side of the property, one located in the vicinity of the

Chapter 2 DRO and lead contaminated soil, and the other downgradient.

•

Installation of a staff gauge in Black Earth Creek in order to compare creek stages with groundwater elevations and flow directions.

•

Sample the monitoring wells including the new ones on a quarterly basis for another year (four rounds) to evaluate groundwater conditions.

Add polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds to the groundwater parameter list.

•

Determine the extent of petroleum contamination in soils in the vicinity of the loading dock area, and in the area west of the office building (southeast of the loading dock) where Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) and petroleum compounds were detected in previous sampling. Sample soils for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), PAHs, and metals.

•

Abandon the on-site water supply well in accordance with Wisconsin Administrative Code.

Depending upon the results of this additional investigation, Foth recommended development of a remedial action plan for the site, including possible contaminated soil excavation and/ or capping of areas of soil contamination with asphalt pavement. Once these activities are completed, site closure could be requested from the Department of Natural Resources, indicating no further action would be required.

2.11 MSA REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS MSA Professional Services, Inc. (MSA) has reviewed the available environmental data provided for the Former Zander Creamery property in Cross Plains. In addition, MSA has discussed the site with Mike Schmoller, the Department of Natural Resources project manager for the site.

Mr. Schmoller’s comments are incorporated in the summary below.

The following environmental issues have been identified in previous reports and are summarized below, along with MSA’s recommendation for how the issue should be resolved: 1. Soil contamination has been detected and the extent investigated in the vicinity of the loading dock area near the center of the property. The source of the contamination is unknown, but may relate to a former motor fuel tank. Based on the chemical constituents detected, it appears to be diesel range petroleum product. The contamination is highest at boring B-6 on the east side of the loading dock (refer to the Figure 3.1 at the end of this chapter) . Using the December 2011 Department of Natural Resources methodology for determination of residual soil contaminant concentrations, the only boring in this area that has an exceedance of the soil to groundwater residual contaminant limit is B-6, in which the naphthalene concentration at 6 to 8 feet below the ground surface is over the limit. No exceedances were detected at borings B-16, B-18, B-28, B-30, B-31, or B-5, indicating the extent is confined to the area of B-6. No contamination was detected within four feet of the ground surface in this area, so no direct contact threat exists, based on DNR Guidance (the DNR requires an evaluation of the risk of direct contact with contaminated soils within four feet of the ground surface). Due to the shallow groundwater at this site (average of 7 to 8 feet below ground surface), it is unlikely that a building with a full basement will be constructed in the future on the property.

Recommendation: The contamination appears to be limited to the east edge of the loading dock area. Additional borings to the south and east are recommended to define the extent in those directions to determine the amount of soil excavation that would be required to remove soil exceeding State Standards from this area of the site and achieve site closure from the Department of Natural Resources.

According to Mike Schmoller, this is the only area with contamination that needs to be remediated to achieve site

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 17

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

closure. He outlined two options. The first option is excavation to remove the contamination. The second option is capping the area with an asphalt cap, such as a parking lot. In this option the DNR would require a long term cap maintenance plan, with annual checks to determine the condition of the cap. These options will be discussed in further detail below.

Cost: Estimated cost for additional borings and testing to define the extent of the contamination is $4,200. See below for estimated excavation costs.

2. The contamination above appears to be intermingled to the southeast with the contamination identified to the southeast of the loading dock. This area, located between the former loading dock and the west wall of the 1906 office building, has slightly different chemical constituents, and appears to be the result of a gasoline product release in this area. More typical gasoline constituents are present, and residual contaminant limits are exceeded at all three borings advanced in this area (B-4, B-20, and B-27). This contamination is undefined to the south and east due to the presence of buildings adjacent to the contamination. Again, no direct contact exceedances were identified in this area (no soil samples from within four feet of the ground surface were analyzed). Field screening during drilling and sampling with a photoionization detector did not detect organic vapors within four feet of the ground surface in this area. The contamination appears to extend from a depth of four feet into the water table area at 7 or 8 feet below the ground surface.

Recommendation: The contamination appears to be limited to the area north of the production building, west of the office building, and east of the loading dock. As it is intermingled with the fuel oil contamination discussed above, the two areas would be considered one for the purpose of excavation and/or capping. Additional borings could be advanced to the north to provide better

18 Village of Cross Plains, WI

definition of the extent of the contamination to determine the amount of soil excavation that would be required to remove soil exceeding State Standards from this area of the site and achieve site closure from the Department of Natural Resources. MSA does not recommend borings to the south and east (within the existing buildings) to define the extent of the contamination. It is possible that some contamination has migrated beneath the buildings. At the time of the request for case closure, closure will be granted with some contamination remaining, and will require that the site be on the DNR’s GIS Registry of Contaminated Sites. As it is already listed on this registry for the fuel oil tank on the east side of the office building, an additional listing will not affect property re-use.

Cost: Estimated costs for additional borings and analytical to define the extent of this contamination is $3,200.

3. Soil contamination was also detected in a shallow soil sample at boring B-1 on the west side of the building. While the petroleum contamination was low in this sample, several metals including arsenic, lead, and chromium exceeded residual contaminant levels in this sample. The extent of the petroleum contamination is undefined.

The extent of the higher levels of lead and other metals is undefined, as is the source of this contamination, as metals are not a usual contaminant at a creamery property, and may be from an adjoining property, or may represent higher background concentrations for the area.

Recommendation: MSA recommends that this contamination area be discussed with the Department of Natural Resources to develop a scope of work. Due to the low levels it is possible that the DNR will not require any further investigation in this area. However, additional sampling may need to be conducted in this area to define the extent of the previously detected contamination. If no further contamination is detected, and the contamination is limited to the

Chapter 2 levels and areas previously defined, remediation would likely not be required by the Department of Natural Resources. If contamination is more extensive than originally detected, soil excavation would be the likely remediation action in this area.

Cost: Estimated cost for additional borings and testing to define the extent of previously detected contaminants in this area, if necessary, is $1,300.

4. Soil arsenic concentrations exceeded the calculated residual contaminant level in several areas of the site, including B-1, B-5, and B-16.

The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection and the United States Geological Survey recently completed a study for the State of Wisconsin in which it was concluded that due to naturally occurring sources of arsenic in the bedrock and sediments of the State, the background concentration of arsenic is higher than any of the concentrations detected at this site.

Recommendation: MSA recommends that no further investigation be conducted to define the extent of the arsenic contamination.

5. Groundwater contamination exceeding State standards was detected in well MW-D, which is located in the area of gasoline contamination east of the loading dock and west of the 1906 office building. This is the only area of the property were petroleum groundwater standards were consistently exceeded.

Recommendation: MSA agrees with the recommendation by Foth that additional groundwater sampling should be conducted in monitoring well MW-D to establish trends in order to achieve closure of the site by the Department of Natural Resources.

Polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) should be added to the next sample rounds due to the adjacent diesel contamination in the loading dock area. The soil excavation in this area, recommended above due to the soil contamination issues, would also serve

to remove the source of the contamination to the groundwater. Two groundwater samples would be collected from each well prior to the excavation discussed below; two samples would be collected after the excavation to establish post-excavation groundwater concentrations.

Cost: Estimated Cost of Additional Groundwater Sampling is $6,000.

6. Chloromethane is sporadically detected in groundwater samples across the site. The source of the contamination is unknown, but has been speculated to be the release of refrigerants from outdoor coolers.

Recommendation: None of the concentrations have exceeded a Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 140 enforcement standard. Concentrations have occasionally exceeded the preventive action limit. Chloromethane is frequently detected at low levels in groundwater samples in Wisconsin, particularly in the Fall, and is a by-product of the burning of grass, wood, and leaves. Based on this, MSA does not recommend further investigation of the extent or degree of contamination in relationship to this compound.

7. Foth recommended two additional wells in the vicinity of B-1 due to the elevated levels of metals in that location, in particular arsenic and lead.

Recommendation: As discussed above, the arsenic level in this area is below the new DNR arsenic background level for Wisconsin.

However, the lead level is above the soil to groundwater leaching level of 27 mg/kg.

Based on this, the DNR may require that a groundwater sample be collected in this area to determine if the lead concentration has impacted groundwater. MSA recommends collection of a grab groundwater sample with a geoprobe in this location to determine if an exceedance exists.

If contamination exceeding State standards is detected in the grab sample, it may be necessary to install a well in the future to confirm the results.

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 19

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

Cost: The estimated cost of this work is included in #3 above.

8. A status report will be prepared with the results of the additional investigation and submitted to the DNR for review. This report will also include a remedial action plan defining the extent of the proposed excavation(s) to address the contamination at the site and obtain site closure.

Cost: Estimated cost to prepare this report is $3,000.

9. As discussed above, the remedial options for the soil by the loading dock area include excavation and capping with pavement. Anticipated future property use influences which option is most attractive. Excavation would remove the majority of the contamination, and would reduce limitations on future development of the property. Capping with pavement can be less expensive, but requires that the cap be maintained, and that periodic checks of the integrity of the cap be conducted. If the property is to be re-used as a Village park or parking lot, these requirements can be incorporated into the design of the park. Construction of buildings on the site, if conducted over an area of petroleum contamination, may require additional construction elements to eliminate infiltration of vapors into the structures. If the selected remedial option is excavation, removal of the contamination may remove this requirement. For the purposes of this cost estimate, MSA assumes the selected remedial option is excavation of all areas of soil with contamination exceeding State standards with the goal of achieving site closure without limitations.

Cost: The estimated cost of a soil excavation of approximately 450 tons, including all areas of the site, is $29,700. It is likely that the actual excavation would be much less. In the discussion with Mike Schmoller, project manager for the site from the Department of Natural Resources, he verbally estimated the required excavation amount at less than 200 tons.

20 Village of Cross Plains, WI

10. Well MW-D would be removed during the excavation in order to access all of the contaminated soil. This well would need to be replaced to conduct post-excavation groundwater sampling in the area of the former soil excavation.

Cost: The estimated cost to replace the well is $3,500.

11. After the post-excavation groundwater sampling is completed, a site closure request will be prepared for review and approval by the DNR. It is possible that some contamination will remain (as some may be under buildings or under the groundwater surface); in that event, the site will be listed on the Department of Natural Resources Geographic Information Services Registry of Contaminated Sites.

Cost: The estimated cost to prepare the closure request is $5,000.

12. After closure is granted by the DNR, the monitoring wells at the site will be abandoned according to Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 141. Abandonment documentation will be prepared and submitted to the DNR. Cost: The costs to abandon the five existing groundwater monitoring wells and submit the documentation of the abandonment to the DNR is $1,500.

MSA has also included costs for demolition of the existing buildings (numbered 1 through 7) on the property. The costs are based on the estimate provided by Veit in the April 2008 Revitalization Plan, adjusting for inflation of 8.11% since that time.

In addition, demolition of the existing structures on the property may have additional costs related to the removal of asbestos containing materials and abandonment of the on-site water supply well.

Depending upon the demolition method selected by the demolition contractor, it is not necessary to remove all of the asbestos prior to demolition.

Chapter 2 Costs of removal are dependent upon the extent and type of material and the demolition method.

It also depends on the amount of recycling performed during the demolition, as asbestos must be removed from materials targeted for recycling. The costs of asbestos removal in the table assumes removal of all asbestos containing materials prior to demolition, based on the July 2007 Asbestos Inspection Report by Liesch, and as such represents a worst case scenario.

Mercury and lead containing building fixtures and electrical panels can be removed and recycled

Task Additional Soil Borings, Loading Dock Area Additional Soil Borings – Area Between Loading Dock and 1906 Building Additional Soil Borings, Groundwater Sample, West Side of Building Status Report, Remedial Action Plan Groundwater Sampling – Pre-Excavation, 2 rounds Excavation of Contaminated Soil – All Areas- Estimate 450 tons Replace well MW-D after excavation Groundwater Sampling – Post Excavation, 2 rounds Preparation of DNR Closure Request Monitoring Well Abandonment SUBTOTAL – REMEDIATON COSTS Demolition – All Buildings, based on Veit Estimate, adjusted for inflation Asbestos Removal from all Buildings prior to Demolition Water Supply Well Abandonment Erosion Control During Demolition SUBTOTAL DEMOLITION COSTS TOTAL - PROJECT

MSA Cost Contractor

prior to demolition by the contractor; additional costs for removal of those items are not anticipated.

In addition, it is not known if Veit included costs for erosion control during the demolition. Due to the site’s proximity to Black Earth Creek, erosion control measures will need to be implemented to protect the creek.

The table below summarizes the estimated cost to investigate and remediate the identified contamination at the property. Demolition costs are also included, with the goal of establishing a site that is ready for redevelopment.

Driller

Lab

Total

$1,000

$2,000

$1,200

$4,200

$1,000

$1,000

$1,200

$3,200

$500

$500

$300

$1,300

$3,000

$3,000

$1,500 $6,000

$22,500

$1,000

$1,500

$3,000

$1,200

$29,700

$2,500

$1,500

$3,500 $1,500

$3,000

$5,000

$5,000

$1,500

$1,500

$22,000

$500

$22,500

$6,000

$6,900

$57,400

$187,030

$187,030

$45,000

$45,500

$600

$1,500

$2,100

$3,000

$3,000

$1,100

$235,030

$1,500

$23,100

$257,530

$7,500

$237,630 $6,900

$295,030

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 21

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

22 Village of Cross Plains, WI

Chapter 2

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 23

Chapter 2

Environmental Assessment

(This page intenĆ&#x;onally leĹŒ blank)

24 Village of Cross Plains, WI

CHAPTER 3 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLANS 26 Alternative One 27 Alternative Two 28 Alternative Three

The following chapter documents three site development alternatives for the Creamery and adjacent properties.

The three development options include purchasing and remediating the site for either: •

Alternative One - Redevelopment (i.e. clean up and demolition for some portion of the property leaving some structures in place for renovation/ remodel for new private use),

•

Alternative Two - New Development (i.e. removing all buildings, cleaning up the site, and preparing it for new private investment), or

•

Alterative Three - A Public Use (i.e. park or parking lot).

Each of these alternatives are illustrated and discussed in greater detail on the following pages.

There are some common design themes within each alternative including: •

Incorporating historical markers, plaques, or outdoor art that pays tribute to the Zander family and former Creamery.

•

Providing areas for stormwater infiltration, such as the use of rain gardens or pervious pavement, to protect the water quality of the Black Earth Creek.

•

Developing a multi-purpose recreational trail to connect this site with Zander Park and other park and trail improvement projects further east.

•

Replacing the existing bridge across the creek with a new ADA compliant structure.

•

Enhancing the aesthetics along the creek through brush clearing and the use of native wild flower plantings.

•

Modifying existing zoning regulations to allow for best management practices for off street parking requirements including allowing for shared use parking standards.

Potentially modifying building height restrictions in mixed use designated areas to ensure sufficient height to allow three full stories.

•

Designing planned driveways, streets, and trails to align with Center Street.

In addition to descriptions and illustrations of each design alternative, an estimate of the anticipated land and improvement values has been calculated using the assumptions below.

•

$150 per square foot for retail buildings and $10 per square foot for retail land

•

$100 per square foot for office buildings and $7.50 per square foot for office land

•

$90 per square foot for mixed use buildings and $7.00 per square foot for mixed use land

As a reminder the total existing land value from all five parcels is $448,100 ($8.5/sq.ft.) and the combined improvement value is $567,300 ($15/ sq.ft.). For comparison, Coach’s Supper Club, which is a mixed use building that was remodeled in 2009, has an improvement to building square foot value of $66 and a land to square footage value of $7.50.

The following alternatives do not reflect the only options the Village may consider for public or private use of the study area. The site plans were created to inspire, rather than restrict, the creative reuse of the Creamery site and surrounding properties.

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 25

Chapter 3

Conceptual Site Plans

3.1 ALTERNATIVE ONE Alternative One includes demolition of the Schroeder property, all buildings on 1214 Main St., The Call of the Wild (1306 Main St.), and the Z Boys property (1310 Main St.).

New development includes the construction of a two-story mixed use building; 5,000 square feet of first floor retail and 6,000 square feet of second floor office use. The slightly smaller net floor area of the first floor reflects the incorporation of a center building pedestrian breezeway which would connect the rear parking lot to Main Street.

This concept assumes reusing the buildings on 1300 Main Street (brick office building and warehouse) for new office and restaurant use.

This concept assumes removing the second floor of the existing office building due to the condition deficiencies reported in Chapter 2. The existing front facade should be reconstructed to its original condition as pictured in Chapter 1. The warehouse would be remodeled for restaurant

26 Village of Cross Plains, WI

use, including using the existing concrete pad for an outdoor seating area. The face of the building would also need to be remodeled to met the Village’s Downtown Design Standards.

This concept could also be modified to include demolition and replacement of the existing buildings, although this may require additional setback from the creek. The removal of 1306 and 1310 Main Street for required parking allows the installation of curbed loading zone that is unique to this concept.

Potential New Construction Value: New Development #1: • Estimated Land Value: $239,351 • Est. Improvement Value: $1,350,000 Reuse Development #2 & 3: • Estimated Land Value: $212,525 • Est. Improvement Value: $1,025,000

Est. Net Change in Site Value: $1,815,212 Est. Net Change in Taxes Collected: $38,301 (assumes a tax rate of $21.10 per thousand)

Chapter 3 3.2 ALTERNATIVE TWO Alternative Two includes demolition of the Schroeder property, all buildings on 1214 Main St., the warehouse on 1300 Main St., and The Call of the Wild (1306 Main St.). The Z Boys property (1310 Main St.) would remain.

New development includes the construction of a three-story mixed use building; 3,000 square feet of first floor retail and two stories of residential use (up to six units). 6,000 square feet of second floor office use.

This concept assumes reusing the office building on 1300 Main Street for new restaurant use. This concept assumes removing the second floor of the existing office building due to the condition deficiencies reported in Chapter 2. A portion of the second floor could be used as an open air loft for additional dining space. The existing front facade should be reconstructed to its original condition as pictured in Chapter 1.

This alternative assumes the original brick office building and associated land remain in private use; however, the Village could acquire and rehabilitate the property for a unspecified public use. This alternative considers leaving the portion of the site with the trail and gazebo area under public ownership, instead of private ownership with an easement as assumed in Alternative 1.

Potential New Construction Value: New Development #1: • Estimated Land Value: $138,853 • Est. Improvement Value: $810,000 Reuse Development #2: • Estimated Land Value: $123,556 • Est. Improvement Value: $480,000

Est. Net Change in Site Value: $734,430 Est. Net Change in Taxes Collected: $15,496 (assumes a tax rate of $21.10 per thousand)

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 27

Chapter 3

Conceptual Site Plans

3.3 ALTERNATIVE THREE Alternative Three includes demolition of all of the Creamery buildings (1214 and 1300 Main St.) and maintaining the Schroeder property (1206 Main St.), The Call of the Wild (1306 Main St.), and the Z Boys property (1310 Main St.).

Under this alternative the Creamery is converted to a public park. A cul-de-sac is constructed to provide access to the park and two planned parking lots. An easement would be granted to the Schroeder and Coach’s Club property to allow continued movement of the one-way traffic. A portion of the original Creamery site is parceled off to The Call of the Wild to provide access to this business and its own designated off-street parking area. The remaining land is maintained as a pocket park.

28 Village of Cross Plains, WI

This concept requires the least property acquisition expenses of the three alternatives; however, it also has the least potential for new private construction revenues. The lack of revenue could be offset by the potential redevelopment of site number one.

The alternative depicts a potential scenario in which the land west of the cul-de-sac could be sold for private development. It is assumed this piece of property would be combined with the Schroeder property to provide a larger redevelopment site. the Potential New Construction Value below does not account for this potential alternative.

Potential New Construction Value: $0.00 Est. Net Change in Site Value: -$571,090 Est. Net Change in Taxes Collected: -$12,050 (assumes taxes are paid on 1214 Main St.)

CHAPTER 4 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS & FUNDING STRATEGIES 29 Financial Analysis 30 Funding Strategies

Chapter 2 provided an estimate for the cost to complete the remaining environmental assessments, clean up and demolition costs for the Creamery properties, with the goal of establishing a site that is ready for redevelopment.

The estimate for this work is $295,030, which could be considered a high estimate as it assumes all building would be demolished when in fact some of the conceptual site plan alternatives assume retaining some of the original buildings.

Chapter 2 however did not include additional costs for the demolition of adjacent properties, costs for property acquisition, or the costs for public improvements. These additional costs and the net impact from potential new construction revenue are explored further in this chapter along with identification of potential funding sources for remediation and infrastructure improvements.

4.1 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Land Acquisition Assumptions This study did not include completing an appraisal report for each of the study parcels.

For the purposes of this financial analysis the cost to acquire the study parcels is assumed to be equal to their 2013 fair market value as reported in Chapter 1, with the following exceptions.

•

Since 1214 Main St. has been delinquent in tax payments since 2004, and the Zander Creamery Inc. is bankrupt, it has been assumed that the Village could acquire this parcel through the Dane County Treasurers

Office for no cost in exchange for agreeing to remediate the environmental contamination on the property.

•

Since a portion of the documented contamination is on the 1300 Main St. parcel and the estimate cost for remediation services is higher than the 2013 fair market value ($283,054) of the property, it has been assumed that the Village could purchase this property far below its fair market value. The total environmental costs have been reduced by $81,082 to account for that fact that some of the building demolition costs are attributed to 1214 Main St. and the existing well on that property would need to be abandoned.

No other reductions in environmental costs have been assumed since their is minimal reductions in cost for performing the necessary testing, remediation, and closure services for one property and not the other.

Therefore, this analysis assumes the cost to acquire 1300 Main St. could be approximately $69,106. The actual purchase price would be determined by negotiations between the property owner and the Village after a property appraisal has been completed.

Total land acquisition costs: $510,000 • 1206 Main St. = $153,135 • 1214 Main St. = $0.00 • 1300 Main St. = $69,105 • 1306 Main St. = $93,754 • 1310 Main St. = $193,685

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 29

Chapter 4

Financial Analysis & Funding Strategies

Land Improvement Assumptions In addition to the estimated $295,030 in costs to clean up and prepare the Creamery properties for redevelopment the Village would also incur costs for the demolition of the adjacent properties and to construct the public improvements identified in the conceptual site plan alternatives. For the purposes of this financial analysis the following assumptions have been made:

Total land improvement costs: $385,000 • Environmental = $295,000 • Additional Demolition = $40,000 • Trail Construction = $10,000 • Site Enhancements = $10,000 • Bridge Replacement = $30,000

•

Demolition and site preparation of 1206, 1306, and 1310 Main St. = $40,000, assuming a per square foot cost of $6.

Demolition costs generally range between $4-$15 per square foot depending on a number of factors including whether any lead or asbestos abatement is required. It is unknown whether abatement would be required for these properties. The average demolition costs for the Creamery buildings, adjusted for inflation is $6.20 per sq.ft.

Land Sale Revenue Assumptions Conceptual site plan alternatives 1 & 2 assume the Village could recoup some of their land acquisition and improvement costs through land sales for new private investment. The amount of potential revenue is shown below for each alternative and is based on value of the improvement land:

•

Trail construction costs = $10,000, assuming a per linear foot cost of $10 and a 1,000 foot trail connecting east to the existing trails in Zander Park. The actual cost will vary based on trail width and material.

•

Site enhancements (landscaping, brush clearing, kiosks, gazebo, historical markers, bike racks, signage, etc.) costs = $10,000 - $50,000. The actual costs will depend on how extensive the improvements are.

In addition, some of these costs, such as landscaping, may be bore by new private property owners depending on the final use and ownership of the property. For the purposes of this financial analysis a public improvement cost of $10,000 is assumed.

Annual Property Tax Revenue Assumptions Remaining public improvement costs would be repaid overtime through the increase in property tax revenue from the redeveloped properties. the amount of annual potential revenue is shown below for each alternative and is based on the assumptions described in Chapter 3:

•

Bridge replacement = $30,000, based on a 12 foot wide bridge approximately 20 feet long.

30 Village of Cross Plains, WI

Costs identified are preliminary estimates made prior to design considerations or additional engineering duties.

• • •

• • •

Alternative One = $451,876 Alternative Two = $316,410 Alternative Three = $5,191

Alternative One = $38,301 Alternative Two = $15,496 Alternative Three = $0.00 (tax exempt)

Impact to TID #3 The costs for property acquisition, remediation, and site improvements are TID eligible expenses. The tables on the next page provide an analysis of the impact to the TID given the cost and revenue assumptions herein described. As is expected, Alternative One provides the best financial rate of return. The total tax increment collected plus the proceeds from land sales is sufficient to cover the principal and interest on all borrowing to complete land acquisition, remediation, and site improvements.

$0 $0 $1,815,212 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$1,815,212

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $1,031,897 $2,904,051 $2,962,132 $3,021,375 $3,081,802 $3,143,438 $3,206,307 $3,270,433 $3,335,842 $3,402,559 $3,470,610 $3,540,022 $3,610,823 $3,683,039 $3,756,700 $3,831,834 $3,908,471 $3,986,640 $4,066,373 $4,147,700

TOTAL

YEAR

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $2,847,109 $2,904,051 $2,962,132 $3,021,375 $3,081,802 $3,143,438 $3,206,307 $3,270,433 $3,335,842 $3,402,559 $3,470,610 $3,540,022 $3,610,823 $3,683,039 $3,756,700 $3,831,834 $3,908,471 $3,986,640 $4,066,373 $4,147,700

VALUE

CUMULATIVE

D

INFLATION

$1,320,825

$0 $20,233 $56,942 $58,081 $59,243 $60,427 $61,636 $62,869 $64,126 $65,409 $66,717 $68,051 $69,412 $70,800 $72,216 $73,661 $75,134 $76,637 $78,169 $79,733 $81,327 $82,954

INCREMENT

$1,011,664 $1,031,897 $2,904,051 $2,962,132 $3,021,375 $3,081,802 $3,143,438 $3,206,307 $3,270,433 $3,335,842 $3,402,559 $3,470,610 $3,540,022 $3,610,823 $3,683,039 $3,756,700 $3,831,834 $3,908,471 $3,986,640 $4,066,373 $4,147,700 $4,230,654

VALUE

OF YEAR

END

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035

YEAR

TAX VALUE

ALTERNATIVE ONE SCENARIO E F G H TAX

$0 $20,233 $1,892,387 $1,950,468 $2,009,711 $2,070,138 $2,131,774 $2,194,643 $2,258,769 $2,324,178 $2,390,895 $2,458,946 $2,528,358 $2,599,159 $2,671,375 $2,745,036 $2,820,170 $2,896,807 $2,974,976 $3,054,709 $3,136,036 $3,218,990

VALUE

INCREMENT

ASSUMPTION 1. 2.0% percent annual inflation of assessed values.

2. $1,815,212 growth in new development, construction occurring in 2015 3. Tax rate remains constant at 2012 levels 4. Annual Debt Service Year 2014-2033 based on Principal of $895,000 and interest rate of 3.0%, fixed over 20 years 5. Principal expenses include land acquisition, environmental clean up and site improvements Year TID closes, statutory requirement

DEVELOPMENT

BASE

VALUE

DURING

VALUE FROM NEW

C

GROWTH IN

B

IMPROV.

A

Village of Cross Plains TID#3 I

$21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10

$1,000

RATE

TAX

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

YEAR

COLLECTION

J

K

$994,417

$0 $427 $39,929 $41,155 $42,405 $43,680 $44,980 $46,307 $47,660 $49,040 $50,448 $51,884 $53,348 $54,842 $56,366 $57,920 $59,506 $61,123 $62,772 $64,454 $66,170 $67,921

COLLECTED

INCREMENT

TAX

M

$1,191,276

$0 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $59,564 $0

SERVICE

DEBT

ANNUAL

N

$0 $0 $451,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

LAND SALES

FROM

PROCEEDS

O

$0 ($59,564) $332,748 $273,611 $253,977 $235,568 $218,409 $202,525 $187,942 $174,685 $162,781 $152,258 $143,142 $135,462 $129,246 $124,525 $121,327 $119,684 $119,625 $121,184 $124,393 $188,847

BALANCE

TID FUND

CUMULATIVE

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

YEAR

PAYMENT

P

Chapter 4

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 31

32 Village of Cross Plains, WI

$0 $0 $734,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$734,430

TOTAL

YEAR

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $1,766,327 $1,801,653 $1,837,687 $1,874,440 $1,911,929 $1,950,168 $1,989,171 $2,028,954 $2,069,533 $2,110,924 $2,153,143 $2,196,205 $2,240,130 $2,284,932 $2,330,631 $2,377,243 $2,424,788 $2,473,284 $2,522,750 $2,573,205

VALUE

CUMULATIVE

D

INFLATION

$827,111

$0 $20,233 $35,327 $36,033 $36,754 $37,489 $38,239 $39,003 $39,783 $40,579 $41,391 $42,218 $43,063 $43,924 $44,803 $45,699 $46,613 $47,545 $48,496 $49,466 $50,455 $51,464

INCREMENT

$1,011,664 $1,031,897 $1,801,653 $1,837,687 $1,874,440 $1,911,929 $1,950,168 $1,989,171 $2,028,954 $2,069,533 $2,110,924 $2,153,143 $2,196,205 $2,240,130 $2,284,932 $2,330,631 $2,377,243 $2,424,788 $2,473,284 $2,522,750 $2,573,205 $2,624,669

VALUE

OF YEAR

END

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035

YEAR

TAX VALUE

ALTERNATIVE TWO SCENARIO E F G H

$0 $20,233 $789,989 $826,023 $862,776 $900,265 $938,504 $977,507 $1,017,290 $1,057,869 $1,099,260 $1,141,479 $1,184,541 $1,228,466 $1,273,268 $1,318,967 $1,365,579 $1,413,124 $1,461,620 $1,511,086 $1,561,541 $1,613,005

VALUE

INCREMENT

TAX

ASSUMPTION 1. 2.0% percent annual inflation of assessed values.

2. $734,430 growth in new development, construction occurring in 2015 3. Tax rate remains constant at 2012 levels 4. Annual Debt Service Year 2014-2033 based on Principal of $675,000 and interest rate of 3.0%, fixed over 20 years 5. Principal expenses include land acquisition, environmental clean up and site improvements Year TID closes, statutory requirement

DEVELOPMENT

BASE

VALUE

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $1,031,897 $1,801,653 $1,837,687 $1,874,440 $1,911,929 $1,950,168 $1,989,171 $2,028,954 $2,069,533 $2,110,924 $2,153,143 $2,196,205 $2,240,130 $2,284,932 $2,330,631 $2,377,243 $2,424,788 $2,473,284 $2,522,750 $2,573,205

DURING

VALUE FROM NEW

C

GROWTH IN

B

IMPROV.

A

Village of Cross Plains TID#3 I

$21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10

$1,000

RATE

TAX

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

YEAR

COLLECTION

J

K

$463,132

$0 $427 $16,669 $17,429 $18,205 $18,996 $19,802 $20,625 $21,465 $22,321 $23,194 $24,085 $24,994 $25,921 $26,866 $27,830 $28,814 $29,817 $30,840 $31,884 $32,949 $34,034

COLLECTED

INCREMENT

TAX

M

$898,448

$0 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $44,922 $0

SERVICE

DEBT

ANNUAL

N

$0 $0 $262,409 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

LAND SALES

FROM

PROCEEDS

O

$0 ($44,922) $172,564 $128,068 $99,815 $72,321 $45,604 $19,677 ($5,443) ($29,740) ($53,198) ($75,799) ($97,527) ($118,364) ($138,293) ($157,295) ($175,351) ($192,443) ($208,552) ($223,658) ($237,740) ($205,856)

BALANCE

TID FUND

CUMULATIVE

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

YEAR

PAYMENT

P

Chapter 4

Financial Analysis & Funding Strategies

$0 $0 ($565,900) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

($565,900)

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $1,031,897 $475,318 $484,824 $494,521 $504,411 $514,499 $524,789 $535,285 $545,991 $556,910 $568,049 $579,410 $590,998 $602,818 $614,874 $627,172 $639,715 $652,509 $665,560 $678,871

TOTAL

YEAR

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

$1,011,664 $1,011,664 $465,998 $475,318 $484,824 $494,521 $504,411 $514,499 $524,789 $535,285 $545,991 $556,910 $568,049 $579,410 $590,998 $602,818 $614,874 $627,172 $639,715 $652,509 $665,560 $678,871

VALUE

CUMULATIVE

D

INFLATION

$233,106

$0 $20,233 $9,320 $9,506 $9,696 $9,890 $10,088 $10,290 $10,496 $10,706 $10,920 $11,138 $11,361 $11,588 $11,820 $12,056 $12,297 $12,543 $12,794 $13,050 $13,311 $13,577

INCREMENT

$1,011,664 $1,031,897 $475,318 $484,824 $494,521 $504,411 $514,499 $524,789 $535,285 $545,991 $556,910 $568,049 $579,410 $590,998 $602,818 $614,874 $627,172 $639,715 $652,509 $665,560 $678,871 $692,448

VALUE

OF YEAR

END

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035

YEAR

TAX VALUE

ALTERNATIVE THREE SCENARIO E F G H

$0 $20,233 ($536,346) ($526,840) ($517,143) ($507,253) ($497,165) ($486,875) ($476,379) ($465,673) ($454,754) ($443,615) ($432,254) ($420,666) ($408,846) ($396,790) ($384,492) ($371,949) ($359,155) ($346,104) ($332,793) ($319,216)

VALUE

INCREMENT

TAX

ASSUMPTION 1. 2.0% percent annual inflation of assessed values.

2. -$571,090 in property value lost from public property acquisition 3. Tax rate remains constant at 2012 levels 4. Annual Debt Service Year 2014-2033 based on Principal of $414,105 and interest rate of 3.0%, fixed over 20 years 5. Principal expenses include land acquisition, environmental clean up and site improvements Year TID closes, statutory requirement

DEVELOPMENT

BASE

VALUE

DURING

VALUE FROM NEW

C

GROWTH IN

B

IMPROV.

A

Village of Cross Plains TID#3 I

$21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10 $21.10

$1,000

RATE

TAX

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

YEAR

COLLECTION

J

K

($176,077)

$0 $427 ($11,317) ($11,116) ($10,912) ($10,703) ($10,490) ($10,273) ($10,052) ($9,826) ($9,595) ($9,360) ($9,121) ($8,876) ($8,627) ($8,372) ($8,113) ($7,848) ($7,578) ($7,303) ($7,022) ($6,735)

COLLECTED

INCREMENT

TAX

M

$551,188

$0 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $27,559 $0

SERVICE

DEBT

ANNUAL

N

$0 $0 $5,191 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

LAND SALES

FROM

PROCEEDS

O

$0 ($27,559) ($49,928) ($77,061) ($115,937) ($154,613) ($193,084) ($231,346) ($269,396) ($307,228) ($344,839) ($382,224) ($419,379) ($456,299) ($492,979) ($529,414) ($565,600) ($601,532) ($637,204) ($672,612) ($707,749) ($715,052)

BALANCE

TID FUND

CUMULATIVE

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

YEAR

PAYMENT

P

Chapter 4

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 33

Chapter 4

Financial Analysis & Funding Strategies for the contamination that are both subject to an environmental enforcement action and able to pay for the cleanup, etc.). All loans are zero interest and generally for projects over $250,000. The maximum grant amount is $200,000 with a 22% local match. Eligible Activities include cleanup actions, demolition or site preparation (only if demolition is required to access contaminated soils beneath a structure, monitoring, consulting fees, etc.). Applications may be submitted on an on-going basis.

4.2 FUNDING STRATEGIES Funding for property acquisition, remediation, and site improvements is likely to come from two primary sources, Tax Increment Financing District #3, as previously discussed, and grant programs offered by state and federal agencies.

The financial analysis on the previous page does not assume any costs are offset by grant funding.

However, there are a number of grant programs the Village could apply for aid in either property acquisition, remediation, or site improvements.

The three granting agencies most likely to assist with the redevelopment of the study area include the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The previous environmental site assessments described in Chapter 2 were funded using Site Assessment Grants (SAG) from the DNR. Additional grant programs that appear viable for the Village to pursue are described below. In addition, the following pages provide matrices of brownfield grant programs offered by the DNR, WEDC, and EPA. Program goals and eligibility criteria can change; therefore, it is best to consult with each granting agency.

•

•

The Village could approach WEDC for additional SAG money for additional site investigation recommended in Chapter 2. The Village must show that it has access to the property to conduct the audit and demonstrate that the party that caused the contamination is unknown, can’t be located, or does not have the resources to contribute to the environmental investigation of the soil and/or groundwater. Eligible activities include the investigation of environmental contamination, demolition of structures or buildings, and asbestos abatement. Applications may be submitted on an on-going basis.

Ready for ReUse loans and grants from the DNR might be applicable for remediation costs if the community can meet the eligibility requirements (e.g. the Village must own the property, there must be no persons responsible

34 Village of Cross Plains, WI

•

Blight Elimination/Brownfield Redevelopment (BEBR) grants from WEDC could apply, if the Village can show a prospective purchaser with job creation. In addition to clean up activities, the grants can be used for property acquisition.

Grants require a 20% to 50% match depending on the size of the grant award. Applications may be submitted on an on-going basis.

•

The DNR’s Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program and Recreational Trails program could provide the Village with 50% matching funds for the acquisition of property or the development of recreational trails. Any land or easements acquired with grant dollars would be required to stay in public ownership. Grant dollars can only be used for nature based outdoor recreation improvements. Applications are due annual on May 1.

Next Steps to Consider • Submit a SAG grant application and conduct additional environmental testing.

•

Obtain Creamery properties through Dane County (1214 Main) and direct purchase (1300 Main). Negotiate adjacent property acquisitions as needed based on desired concept plan.

•

Submit addititional WEDC or DNR grant and loan applications for property clean up.

•

Submit grant for Stewarship funding for trail and public site improvements.

•

Site clean up activities.

•

Design and construction of public improvements.

•

Potential land sales for private development.

Covered Costs

dnr.wi.gov/topic/Brownfields/csa. html

■ Minimum award: Phase I services ■ Maximum award: Approx. $35,000 (for all services) ■ May be awarded to site where causer is known (case-by-case)

Applications accepted as long as funding is available

LGUs, private entities, other public entities, Tribes, non-profits

■ Hazardous & Petroleum ■ Phase I & II assessments ■ Limited NR716 Site Investigation

WAM Contractor Services

Ready for Reuse 0% Interest Loans

Applications accepted year-round

LGUs

Municipalities, Tribes, redevelopment, community development and housing authorities

Municipalities, Tribes, individuals, businesses, nonprofits

Match required

■ Must meet the state definition of a brownfield** ■ RP unknown, can’t be located, or unable to pay ■ Applicant cannot have caused contamination or owned the contaminant

Information on other state and federal brownfields financial resources can be found in the Financial Resource Guide (PUB RR-539) at dnr.wi.gov/topic/Brownfields/ Financial.html

inwisconsin.com

Community Account Managers inwisconsin.com/cam-contacts

■ Grant < $300,000 → 20% match ■ $300,000 <Grant < $500,000 → 35% match ■ Match can be cash or in-kind

■ Must meet the state definition of a brownfield** ■ RP unknown, can’t be located, or unable to pay ■ Applicant cannot have caused contamination or owned the contaminant ■ Phase I & II need to be completed

Applications accepted yearround

■ Removal of USTs ■Phase I & II assessments ■ Site Investigation ■ Removal of abandoned containers ■ Demolition, including asbestos abatement

■ Property acquisition ■ Site investigation ■ Remediation ■ Removal of abandoned containers ■ Demolition, asbestos abatement ■ Groundwater monitoring ■ Building rehab

Applications accepted year-round

Site Assessment Grants (SAG)

Brownfields Grant Program

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 7921 Madison, WI 53707 dnr.wi.gov, search “Brownfields”

dnr.wi.gov/topic/Brownfields/rlf.html

■ Public Participation component ■ Applicant must provide 22% match

Current owner has no CERCLA liability: ■ Did not cause contamination; ■ Completed AAI; ■ Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser or Involuntary Acquisition; and ■ Did not own property when discharge occured

Must meet the federal definition of a brownfield*

Applications accepted year-round

LGUs, non-profits, Tribes (applicant must own property)

■ Hazardous & Petroleum ■ Short-term monitoring ■ Cleanup ■ Consulting & WDNR ■ Remedial Action Plan fees ■ Demo/Site Prep/ ■ Public participation Asbestos abatement (if costs necessary to do cleanup) ■ Tank removal

Ready for Reuse Grants

February 2013

Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation

State-Administered Funding Programs

BROWNFIELDS FUNDING MATRIX

Department of Natural Resources

■ Must meet the federal definition of a brownfield* ■ Intended for smaller (<10 acres) closed / closing manufacturing sites, but does not need to be a WPRI site or a recent closing ■ Applicant does not have to own site, but must have access agreement in place

Eligible Entities

Conditions

Terms

More Info

Covered Costs Eligible Entities Conditions Terms More Info

PUB # RR-932

Chapter 4

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 35

Covered Costs

Eligible Entities

Conditions

Terms

36 Village of Cross Plains, WI Brownfield Assessment GrantCoalition

■ Single site ■ May only apply for one site-specific grant per grant cycle

■ Up to $200,000 hazardous or petroleum ■ May request a waiver for up to $350,000 ■ Three year grant

■ Area-wide assessment ■ Can also apply for a site- specific grant

■ Up to $200,000 for hazardous and/or $200,000 for petroleum (max. combine $400,000) ■ No waiver of funding limit ■ Three year grant

Governmental Entities: LGU, land clearance authority, state agency, regional council, redevelopment agency, school district, Tribe ■ Non-profits not eligible

■ Governmental Entities ■ Non-profits are not eligible

■ Up to $1,000,000 ■ 20% cost share ■ At least 50% loans ■ Limit of $200,000 subgrant per site ■ Five year grant period

Cannot be part of a RLF Coalition

■ Up to $1,000,000 per coalition member ■ May not subgrant to coalition members ■ At least 50% loans ■ Limit of $200,000 subgrant per site ■ Five year grant period

■ May not have an active RLF grant ■ May not subgrant to coalition members

2 or more eligible entities

■ Environmental consulting fees ■ Public Participation costs ■ Tank removal ■ Programmatic management

Brownfield Revolving Loan Fund GrantCoalition

■ $200,000 max (combined) per site ■ 20% cost share ■ Up to 3 proposals per applicant ■ Must submit eligibility letter for petroleum sites

■ Site-specific ■ Applicants must own site and maintain ownership for duration of cleanup ■ Completed Phase I and Phase II

■ Governmental Entities ■ Non-profits

■ Clean up ■ Demolition, if part of clean up ■ Removal of some abandoned containers & USTs

Brownfield Cleanup Grant

This document contains information about certain state statutes and administrative rules, but does not necessarily include all of the details found in the statutes and rules. Readers should consult the actual language of the statutes and rules to answer specific questions. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20204. This publication is available in alternative format upon request. Please call 608-267-3543 for more information.

www.epa.gov/brownfields/grant_info/

■ Up to $600,000 in combined hazardous and petroleum ■ Minimum of five sites must be assessed ■ Three year grant

■ Area-wide assessment ■ Memorandum of Agreement ■ Cannot be part of another coalition or be applying individually

Applications are due in late fall

3 or more eligible entities

■ Clean up ■ Remedial Action Plan ■ Demolition/Site Prep (must be pre-approved) ■ Asbestos and lead abatement ■ Short-term monitoring

Brownfield Revolving Loan Fund GrantIndividual

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Federally Administered Funding Programs

■ LGUs may use 10% toward health monitoring, enforcement of institutional controls, other related program development and activities ■ Environmental insurance

Brownfield Assessment GrantSite-Specific

■ Inventory characterization ■ Phase I & II assessments ■ Site Investigation ■ Remediation planning & design ■ Community Involvement

Brownfield Assessment GrantCommunity-Wide

* Federal definition of brownfield: 42 U.S.C. б9601, amended 2002 ** State definition of brownfield: sec. 560.13, Wisc. Stats.

More Info

Chapter 4

Financial Analysis & Funding Strategies

Chapter 4

Zander Creamery Redevelopment Report 37