Comment 83962

By Gary Santucci (anonymous) | Posted December 15, 2012 at 07:47:48

If in fact there is asbestos or any other contaminant, it would have to be removed first before demolition(a cost to be picked up by the taxpayers). The land itself also becomes a liability to the taxpayers once it becomes a park and becomes worthless(in dollar value) until it is sold for another subsidized low income townhouse development. As the school population at Cathy Wever is on declining trajectory, never able to reach the 1200 student mark (the optimum number according to Tim Simmons) the block is destined to become another social services mega site. We need to focus on the economics on the ground to provide opportunity for employment to address the systemic poverty that has been the result of failed planning on all fronts. While only one small project, the adaptive re-use of Sanford School can be the beginning of a change in direction for our neighbourhood. The process should be reopened to allow the private sector to make the case for its re-purposing to create a mixed use property that can also meet the needs of the students of Cathy Wever School and contribute potentially $150,000.00 annually in tax revenue.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds