03-29-2017, 02:00 PM
(03-29-2017, 11:30 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(03-29-2017, 11:12 AM)KevinT Wrote: How so? I'll admit it's a bit weird that it's not right on the King St corridor, but my understanding is that there were no viable King St options available. While this leaves Waterloo St too narrow to be called a street, that's no biggie as it's permanently closed at the tracks anyway.
As I understand it, there were options available, they were just "expensive", and required environmental remediation. Specifically, I think the original plan was to locate it along the mainline Metrolinx tracks behind the school of pharmacy building. It's a great location, nobody will want to build there, it's behind everything and out of the way. However, contamination was found on the site and in order to build on it, the contamination would have to be cleaned up. So, they picked a far inferior site in order to save costs.
I’ve never understood this. The contamination is bad enough that it must be cleaned up if anything is done with the site, but not bad enough that it can’t just sit there indefinitely. What’s wrong with pouring a concrete pad on top of the existing ground and dropping the TPSS on the pad? Or, if that’s not OK, how is it OK to just leave the contamination there?