  Detroitman Member Username: Detroitman Post Number: 1021 Registered: 06-2004 |
Uniroyal cleanup tab hits $20M State bills four firms; deal could open door for ex-NFL star Bettis' retail, housing plans along river. David Josar / The Detroit News http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20061115/M ETRO/611150340 | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 119 Registered: 05-2006 |
Environmental cleanup costs are one reason the east riverfront is taking so long to develop. Developers always announce grandiose plans, then once they start doing tests and discover just how much industrial pollution needs to be abated they run for the hills (Bloomfield, that is). | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 7121 Registered: 10-2003 |
Everyone knew how polluted that land was. The delay has been in figuring out who is going to pay for the cleanup. Bettis isn't "running for the hills," he's just waiting for this process to work itself out. | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 122 Registered: 05-2006 |
And I’m sure he’ll keep waiting, so long as he doesn’t have to pay for the cleanup. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2314 Registered: 10-2003 |
Why shouldn't he keep waiting? He didn't put the pollution there. Why make him or the people buying his properties pay for a problem they didn't create. Make the companies that created the problem pay for the cleanup. | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 562 Registered: 11-2003 |
Anyone familiar with this type of cleanup? What exactly is involved in a cleanup that's priced at 20 million? Thanks. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 3267 Registered: 10-2003 |
Agreed NDavies... WHy let the companies that destroyed the land off the hook so easily? | ||
Barnesfoto Member Username: Barnesfoto Post Number: 2731 Registered: 10-2003 |
part of the problem was that when the Uniroyal Plant was demoed, they simply plowed over the basements... (Moving Detroit Forward, Coleman A. Young, Mayor.) | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 123 Registered: 05-2006 |
I misspoke; I should have said he’ll keep us waiting. Most of the companies that polluted that site (and the rest of the riverfront) don’t even exist anymore. That’s why it took so long to determine responsibility. But just because Detroit says it’s their fault doesn’t mean that these companies are going to pay up. Laws protecting the environment were different back then. The litigation could drag on for years. The city should have cleaned up that site years ago and billed whom ever they felt was responsible once that had been determined. They knew it had to be done. Putting it off only made the job more expensive. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 355 Registered: 06-2006 |
"...the soil contains so much mercury, coal tar and PCBs that the toxins are reaching the Detroit River, and hidden underground are former processing pits and hidden basements. Earlier inspections uncovered lead, benzene and other chemicals tied to cancers and birth defects." jeez...that site is dirty as hell.. I probably would be reluctant to live there even after they clean it up... No thanks | ||
Titancub Member Username: Titancub Post Number: 20 Registered: 08-2006 |
These larger (still existant)companies named almost always have insurance to pay for these types of environmental settlements - so its not as much of a direct hit to them. They fight it, and the whole process takes time, but it does work itself out esp. now that the EPA has the process this far along. The EPA has varying levels of remediation based on the new use of the site - thus the article mentions it'll cost more then the $20M since they'll remediate to get it to residential friendly levels (as opposed to industrial or commercial). | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1716 Registered: 06-2004 |
That's not what is important, is it? Don't current laws make the previous owners responsible? | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 124 Registered: 05-2006 |
I’m no lawyer, but I believe the Constitution prohibits retroactive laws. (Message edited by Ramcharger on November 15, 2006) | ||
Matt_the_deuce Member Username: Matt_the_deuce Post Number: 674 Registered: 10-2003 |
20 Million for industrial 40-50 million for residential - per the article in the freep. | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1717 Registered: 06-2004 |
Does anyone know for certain how that works? I was sure there's some kind of law in Michigan that makes companies responsible for past pollution of property... What about things like ADA where public facilities (even when privately owned) are required to bring existing facilities built prior to that time up to current code requirements? | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 4201 Registered: 10-2003 |
http://www.carrs.msu.edu/green pieces/2004/Honke.pdf#search='Michigan%20brownfield%20remed iation%20liability' | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4703 Registered: 10-2003 |
I can't believe that anyone is even implying that this is Bettis & Betters' fault, and that they should be rushing to develop this and should be obligated to clean-up the site. This isn't a Detroit story, rather a story of every old industrial site in America. Bettis & Betters, as businessmen, are doing exactly what they should be doing, and that's waiting to see how much money can be brought back from other parties and grants to help clean-up this site. I hope no one actually thought that this would be a quick process. | ||
Dabirch Member Username: Dabirch Post Number: 1944 Registered: 06-2004 |
Llyn -- Nobody is certain as to how the law works...clearly nobody who tries to post it on a one sentence response in a forum. I have studied SUPERFUND and brownfield developments both as a student and professionally, and my wife has been doing CERCLA work for more than a decade. Nothing clean and easy about it. Let's just say that everybody who has ever been there, ever owned the property, ever rented the property, ever stored anything on the property, ever squatted on the property, etc., has the burden of proving that they are not responsible. And absent absolute fact to the contrary, a negative burden is nearly impossible to prove. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3085 Registered: 08-2004 |
And when buying a company, the term "buyer beware" is soooooo true for purchasing industrial companies. Wasn't it Federal Mogul that purchased some company that had some serious pollution problems in the past, and now Federal Mogul went into bankrupcy because it was now responsible for the past sins of the company it purchased? (Or am I thinking of the wrong company?) | ||
Flybydon Member Username: Flybydon Post Number: 52 Registered: 01-2005 |
 9/27/2006 | ||
Dabirch Member Username: Dabirch Post Number: 1945 Registered: 06-2004 |
Federal Mogul purchased multiple companies with Asbestos liabilities looming. It was not a surprise, and it was a measured gamble that they took. Ultimately, they made seven purchases of company's with ranging asbestos liability - it was part of a strategy -- and I believe they ultimately thought the Government would limit liabilities -- or spread liabilities differently amongst participants. It did not. Also, Asbestos was only a portion of the reason they filed -- $6b worth of debt due to a staggering acquisition spree added much to the problem. | ||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 1030 Registered: 12-2005 |
So basically, the dirt's too dirty. How ironic. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1893 Registered: 07-2004 |
How much of the land under the former Uniroyal parking lot would be contaminated? Just curious. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4705 Registered: 10-2003 |
Jimaz, that's often the case. Remediation usually includes taking up feet of soil and disposing of it, and especially on a site as dirty as the Uniroyal site. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2083 Registered: 12-2004 |
Interesting sidenote: the Clean Michigan Initiative originally allocated several million dollars to clean up environmental contamination in that area. Mayor Kilpatrick, however, decided it would be better to use those funds to knock down the former Statler Hilton Hotel. Almost two years later, we have the Statler site as a vacant lot, in spite of assurances from the DEGC that there were several parties interested in building on the site "as soon as it was cleared", and no clue where the money to clean-up pollution along the east riverfront is going to come from. | ||
Ramcharger Member Username: Ramcharger Post Number: 126 Registered: 05-2006 |
Hopefully they don’t dispose of it the way Coleman Young disposed of contaminated soil when the city built the St. Aubin Marina… by dumping it in Rouge Park and putting a chain link fence up around it. | ||
Dds Member Username: Dds Post Number: 26 Registered: 10-2006 |
My unprofessional assumption (which is loosely based on a conversation with a wildlife biologist who works for the US Corps of Engineers) would be as follows: Since they just bulldozed everything into the subfloors of the plant, and considering that there would be some toxins leeching into the soil underneath the foundation, they would probably have to grade off at least 15-20 feet of the surface to most of the area. Like I said, it's my assumption, and if anyone has accurate information, I would like to hear it. I would also have to assume that nobody in their right mind would touch this property with a 10 foot pole, considering the circumstances. If anyone is familiar with the fiasco of Bay Harbor of Petosky, the risk, expense, etc. would not be worth it. |
