kcantor
Senior Member
You are absolutely correct - their decisions are business based just like any other developer, contractor, architect, restaurant, grocer, shoe retailer or toy stores etc.So I dumped all of the posts from this thread into Chatgp and it came back telling me that IanO works for Westrich.
Seriously though, I don’t know IanO, but sounds like he only works for Westrich and being a developer their decisions are business based. It might not always work out for what we want, but we work within a free market economy.
All businesses make business based decisions. That doesn't mean that it's up to the city to subsidize their decisions in order to make them economically viable. We don't do that for contractors, architects, restaurants, grocers, shoe retailers or toy stores etc. and we shouldn't do that for developers either.
If Westrich can't afford to buy the site at the price they negotiated, they have options other than a subsidy from the city. They can negotiate a lower price or they can pass and let someone else buy the site or let Regency continue to own it.
As for the condition of the site, that absolutely needs to be addressed by the city, starting by not permitting the circumstances that led to it being abandoned like this repeat themselves in the future). But subsidizing Westrich like this on order to achieve that oh so Edmonton solution of "oh well, it could be worse" is not how to do that.
And if it is somehow okay for Westrich to get concessions from the city so they can afford to purchase this site, what about giving the same concessions to purchase the Arlington site? the Dueck Sites? the city's Kinistinaw site in the Quarters? Alldritt's sites?