|
Post by CHC8485 on Feb 14, 2018 20:46:36 GMT -5
Guys. I believe the property is still owned by Wyman Gordon. It has been owned by Wyman Gordon for years. The contamination on the site is virtually certain to be from Wyman Gordon’s operations.
When it comes to cleaning up contaminated property, federal, state, or local governments are not in the habit of paying for a clean up when the responsible party is known and still in existence.
Also sensible property buyers don’t agree to clean up the mess the prior owner left behind without significant concessions from the seller. When a property with known contamination transfers, liability for for clean up typically stays with the prior owner.
Bottom line, it’s a really complicated transaction and there’s a lot of negotiating to be done to get that property developed.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Feb 15, 2018 9:40:00 GMT -5
Happy to contribute my federal tax dollars to the task. If it doesn't qualify for that, it's your money that's going to pay for it, sir. Not mine. If I can spend my Worcester dollars towards a multi billion dollar big dig in Boston then people from Boston can spen their dollars towards a multi million dollar project in Worcester. (yes I saw the other posts and it's probably a moot point anyway). I don't live in either place and do not benefit very much from either one.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 15, 2018 10:36:18 GMT -5
As it stands, Wyman Gordon, as owner of the property, is liable for the cleanup. Its possible that the big forge press is/was government-owned, and if so, that's potentially a Federal liability. If Worcester was simply interested in building a new stadium, the easiest solution would be to cap the soil, and build atop the cap. However, it seems Worcester has a much greater scheme in mind. If Worcester were to use eminent domain, then I believe, under MA law, the city becomes financially responsible for the clean-up. There are brownfields provisions under Federal law, but these probably aren't applicable to a property that is not abandoned and is seized by eminent domain for the benefit if the city. The site, though contaminated, does not apparently present an immediate health hazard. See also: semspub.epa.gov/src/collection/01/SC34182I have not read the documents at the EPA link. The problem with attempting to re-use a contaminated site, where contamination remains in situ, is that insurance may not be available for owners / residents of new habitable buildings. No insurance, no mortgages. The presses that were government owned were never in Worcester The property being discussed for eminent domain was a Wyman-Gordon manufacturing from the late 19th century. Only a small segment of the parcel is used today. The main buildings were torn down around the turn of the century (20th to 21st). Wyman Gordon still owns that property today. After running a manufacturing facility for about 125 years, it is reasonable to assume that any contamination is from Wyman, Basically everybody assumes there is contamination. There is no reason to believe ever broke any environmental laws. However, what might have been environmentally legal in 1880 would probably make us cringe today. I would assume if they sit on the parcel, life goes on status quo. If they sell it, then they would be responsible for a clean up to 2018 standards. This could be why they have sat on that vacant lot for several years now. However, if the city takes the land by eminent domain as suggested as a possibility that could be a different story.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Feb 15, 2018 10:38:39 GMT -5
While I would love it if the Sox AAA team moved to Worcester, I have to say that one can never justify building a taxpayer constructed stadium from an economic point of view. If the taxpayers want to pay for a lifestyle option, go for it but do it eyes wide open. The new stadium in Hartford is very nice and a fun addition to downtown, but it remains a bad deal for a city with serious financial problems.
I also think that using eminent domain for urban revitalization is generally a bad idea. I did not always believe that but after I read Jeff Benedict's book, "Little Pink House" about the New London/Kelo case, I concluded that those cases in which it could be justified are likely few and far between.
If there are environmental concerns, use of eminent domain is awfully risky. While questions of valuation involve both federal and state law, I can tell you that Windham CT condemned some old thread mills arguing that they had no value due to remediation costs. They proposed paying $1. After years of litigation, they were found to owe $1.6 million. Legal and expert witness fees probably exceeded that.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Feb 15, 2018 10:40:52 GMT -5
I remember speaking with a friend who inspected closed military bases for contamination to see what remediation would be necessary for the land to be sold. There were so many "issues" that needed to be addressed that the government had a policy of simply closing the sites and keeping ownership (along with leaving much of the contamination in place). It worked in the short term, but long erm is a nightmare. The contamination can leak out of the property and land (that potentially could be worth millions to the communities in which it is located) helps no one. This is not government land, but the issues are similar. I hope Worcester can pull this off (with federal assistance if needed).
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Feb 15, 2018 15:21:54 GMT -5
I remember speaking with a friend who inspected closed military bases for contamination to see what remediation would be necessary for the land to be sold. There were so many "issues" that needed to be addressed that the government had a policy of simply closing the sites and keeping ownership (along with leaving much of the contamination in place). It worked in the short term, but long erm is a nightmare. The contamination can leak out of the property and land (that potentially could be worth millions to the communities in which it is located) helps no one. This is not government land, but the issues are similar. I hope Worcester can pull this off (with federal assistance of need). Rumor has it that there is some unexploded ordinance buried up at the former Fr Devens
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Feb 15, 2018 20:22:39 GMT -5
I remember speaking with a friend who inspected closed military bases for contamination to see what remediation would be necessary for the land to be sold. There were so many "issues" that needed to be addressed that the government had a policy of simply closing the sites and keeping ownership (along with leaving much of the contamination in place). It worked in the short term, but long erm is a nightmare. The contamination can leak out of the property and land (that potentially could be worth millions to the communities in which it is located) helps no one. This is not government land, but the issues are similar. I hope Worcester can pull this off (with federal assistance of need). Rumor has it that there is some unexploded ordinance buried up at the former Fr Devens For years now, the neighborhood around American University has been subject to recurring excavations, which have unearthed munitions from World War I, a lot of mustard gas. wtop.com/dc/2017/09/digging-stopped-wwi-munitions-site-d-c-7-hospitalized/
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Feb 15, 2018 21:51:13 GMT -5
That is nasty...about as terrible a "find" as one can imagine.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Feb 15, 2018 22:15:13 GMT -5
|
|