MsacKkuenzre Mumpy & McALLIsTEr
» 2 June 21, 1994

event of negligence. A site profile must accompany any application
for rezoning, development permit, development variance permit,
demolition permit or subdivision where the site in question has in
the past been used for industrial or commercial purposes.

Third, and related to the second concern, given that the
freedom of information legislation is soon to be mads® applicable to
the City, the City may well incur liability fcr failing to disclose
certain historical information. The triggering event in Bill 26
primarily revolves around the historical use of a site. In
particular, where a site has in the past been used for industrial
or commercial purposes a vendor must summit a “site profile" prior
to any sale of the site. In considering whether a site may have
been used for industrial or commercial purposes or may be
contaminated, the primary source of information to a vendor or
purchaser will, no doubt, be the City.

Fourth, as the City has already experienced, Bill 26 will
have serious implications to the City’s tax base. There is nothing
in Bill 26 that protects against the reassessment of a site based
on the decrease in value so as to reflect the cost of remediation.

Fifth, there is a serious risk to the development
community, given the potentially enormous costs involved in
environmental clean ups.

Sixth, and related to the fifth concern, there is 4 real
risk that the City wiJl be left with large tracts of land that
given their historical use and cost of remediation will simply be
left, at best, undeveloped and, at worst, abandoned.

Seventh, there is a concern to the City as a current
property owner in that it may be required to provide site profiles
prior to initiating a rezoning of property it owns. If and when
the City adopts a new zoning bylaw for the entire City, the costs
and implications may be stagyering.

Eighth, there will be very little possibility of third
party liability insurance being available. The cost of remediation
will, in many cases, be staggering.

Finally, there is some serious concerns with respect to
the concentration levels proposed by the Regulations to Bill 26.
There is a growing concern that the acceptable levels of
contamination are not based on scientific evidence and do not pose

health hazards.

By way of illustration we provide an example of how Bill
26 would affect the City as a property owner. The example is
partially fact and to better serve as an example partially fiction.

ITEM |_PAGE