Author Topic: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill  (Read 1363 times)

Ken_FSU

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill
« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2020, 03:31:57 PM »
I'm sure it's clean lol. The fact that it was a working shipyard I'm sure didn't contribute to any issues in the previous 150 years.

I guess from Iguana's perspective, this would be a COJ responsibility. At a minimum, it would factor into the agreement $$$

Yeah, hard to imagine that the arsenic just suddenly stops there at the edge of the Shipyards property.


jaxlongtimer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 565
Re: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill
« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2020, 04:48:19 PM »
^ From what I recall, the reclaimable submerged lands may be even more polluted.

Metro Park area also used to be an oil tank farm so add some likely hydrocarbon spills to that Shipyard history  8).  And, the area was once crisscrossed with railroad sidings.  Railroads used to spray oil as a weed killer on their tracks in addition to lots of fluids dropping from train equipment and residues from creosote treated cross-ties.  Add it all up, and there is likely a major clean up in the cards for all of the land from the stadium to Metro Park to the Shipyards. 

Has anyone heard the results of the environmental testing for Lot J that Khan should have in hand by now?  That might be a preview of coming attractions.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2020, 10:21:02 PM by jaxlongtimer »

Ken_FSU

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill
« Reply #17 on: August 13, 2020, 09:19:49 PM »
^$6.3 million is the estimate for remediation at Lot J.

Pollution is mostly petroleum, apparently.

City will foot the bill if Lot J happens.

jaxlongtimer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 565
Re: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill
« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2020, 09:50:12 PM »
^$6.3 million is the estimate for remediation at Lot J.

Pollution is mostly petroleum, apparently.

City will foot the bill if Lot J happens.

Based on Google Maps, I estimate Lot J at about 10 +/- acres.  At that size, clean up would be $630K/acre.  I am guessing given the amount involved, there may also be some groundwater intrusion which can further complicate clean up. 

Given Lot J is likely "cleaner" than the other real estate Khan is eying, I would expect even higher costs per acre to clean up Metro Park and the Shipyards.

Wonder where Curry is going to keep pulling all these dollars from given COVID, crime initiatives, the Port's dredging, the buy-off of the police and fire for the fake pension fund fix, underfunded and deferred parks and road maintenance, etc. in the face of declining tax revenues.  So much for a Republican CPA/fiscal conservative.  He appears to favor bonding some of these things which is just pushing the fiscal can down the road for others to deal with.  One way or the other, this is a bubble that is going to burst.

Ken_FSU

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
Re: Curry administration to withdraw Metropolitan Park bill
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2020, 10:05:36 PM »
^$6.3 million is the estimate for remediation at Lot J.

Pollution is mostly petroleum, apparently.

City will foot the bill if Lot J happens.

Based on Google Maps, I estimate Lot J at about 10 +/- acres.  At that size, clean up would be $630K/acre.  I am guessing given the amount involved, there may also be some groundwater intrusion which can further complicate clean up. 

Given Lot J is likely "cleaner" than the other real estate Khan is eying, I would expect even higher costs per acre to clean up Metro Park and the Shipyards.

Wonder where Curry is going to keep pulling all these dollars from given COVID, crime initiatives, the Port's dredging, the buy-off of the police and fire for the fake pension fund fix, underfunded and deferred parks and road maintenance, etc. in the face of declining tax revenues.  So much for a Republican CPA/fiscal conservative.  He appears to favor bonding some of these things which is just pushing the fiscal can down the road for others to deal with.  One way or the other, this is a bubble that is going to burst.

^Groundwater is definitely something that the Jags tested for. The city did some work in the late 1990s at Lot J in conjunction with the EPA to prevent the petroleum from getting into the groundwater, but that was 20 years ago, so who knows.

For what it's worth, $35 million was what the Jags estimated the Shipyards remediation would cost.

The city is supposed to still be sitting on approximately $13.4 million (minus $750k for the 2016 EPA assessment) from our settlement with Landmar that's earmarked specifically for Shipyards remediation, but who knows if that money is still there or not.