Quote:
Originally Posted by Kavvy
I don't get why people keep saying this.
The Calgary Flames have made it clear they will not pay any portion of the contamination clean up - they will not be a partner.
An "Anchor" tenant doesn't make the clean up any cheaper. Also, I don't think the CRL discussed by the Flames doesn't account for clean up costs.
If the contamination was cleaned up, and Bow Trail was realigned (all independent costs from the Flames CalgaryNEXT proposal), the area nearly becomes Class A in desirability for future development. CalgaryNEXT doesn't change this, or help it, it simply leeches a CRL which could go to infrastructure upgrades in the WV.
|
Their stance is that the contamination cleanup is so expensive, that it is too easy to keep putting it off (and has been put off for decades), whereas a major project like this would/could be the catalyst to garner provincial and/or federal funds to get it done.
And that would benefit the city immensely because, as you said, once it is cleaned up, that property becomes substantially more valuable, and tax revenues will rise as a result.