Quote:
Originally Posted by Envitro
I'm pretty sure it's not a function of who is paying for what here at this point. The city is imposing new conditions as part of permitting that didn't exist in July when the deal was struck.
Sure, ultimately they'll have to figure out who pays for this as partners, but this is a net-new cost that wasn't even remotely considered at the time because it was never identified as a requirement by the city. All of the sudden now it is.
I think that's the issue at the heart of it. I'd imagine CSEC is thinking "what's next?"
|
The city's environmental policy from 2012 states:
"
The City of Calgary will:
• Integrate environmental considerations
into all decisions and approvals relating to
growth, planning, infrastructure, transportation
and development."
That they require some kind of green initiative/climate consideration on a project of this scale should not be a surprise
Sure, the "what" wasn't determined ahead of time, but how could it be? The planning department isn't involved in the arena's development at all, outside of the permitting processes.
Further to that, if you look back at one of Bunk's posts, he indicates that the City suggested the solar, but didn't mandate it. CSEC voluntarily agreed to it, provided they could address it before occupancy.