Comment 38661

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted March 11, 2010 at 12:42:40

^It's not a matter of "lack of cost control", it's a matter of there being absolutely no way to know who much brownfield remediation will cost without actually going through with the remediation. That by the way is why private developers generally won't buy a brownfield, there's too much inherent uncertainty.

Thing is, cities don't have the choice to pass on brownfield opportunities. The properties will be there no matter what and letting them sit empty and unremediated is a big lost opportunity to redevelop. If the city has to spend money remediating it before developers will step in, so be it.

It's no worse than the city spending money to service greenfields and build roads and parkways so developers can invest, and it's actually better because it reduces negative social costs like air pollution from all the driving in the suburbs.

Also let's remember that these "private investors" are only interested in this because there's a ton of public money at stake. They're rank opportunists who if they were serious about bringing a business focus would just invest privately without piggybacking on the city's money.

Fixing Hamilton's problems is a no-brainer

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds