Canada Dry returns

The old Canada Dry building that is adjacent to the Greensboro Coliseum is getting ready to be back in the news.  Tomorrow night our City Council will consider, again, whether or not to purchase the place.

Long mentioned as a possible site for the ACC Hall of Fame, the N&R has forwarded some rumors that another group may want to include such an attraction as part of a very ambitious, and very nebulous, development downtown.

In light of that news, and seeing as we don’t have any concrete plans in store for the heavily contaminated (Toublemaker) site on Lee Street, our city council would do well to hold on to our $3.7M for the time being.

That is not to say that the Canada Dry site is not worth developing, because it is.  But before we put that kind of money into property acquisition, we need a clear plan for what we will do with it and the taxpayers need to know how much it will cost.

This entry was posted in Greensboro Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

7 Comments

  1. Brenda Bowers
    Posted May 7, 2007 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    The city council, or Mitchell Johnson (perhaps one and the same according to some) seem bent on acquiring this property at an inflated price. The question is: Why? There are many properties available with far less problems to overcome before being usable if the city feels the need to acquire properties at all. When we don’t seem to be taking care of the properties and buildings we now own why is acquiring more even being considered? I have a lot of questions and I don’t believe I am alone in this regard. BB

  2. Posted May 7, 2007 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    “There are many properties available…”

    Not adjacent to the Coliseum complex, there aren’t.

    Location, location, location.

    Whether we need additional land adjacent to the Coliseum complex is another question.

    But if we do need it, then this particular parcel has specific value and is not interchangable with other properties in other locations.

  3. Posted May 7, 2007 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

    the place is a hazardous waste site ed…the same reason the baseball stadium was not built in the original spot..because of the hazardous waste stuff..it should be cleaned by the owner..or the cost of cleaning it up should be taken into serious consideration duirng the property is priced…ed keeps dodging that point..it is a hazardous waste site…that is the main issue here..and unappraised hazardous waste site…ed likes it cuz the powers like it…nothing more..nothing less…makes JR happy..makes ed happy

  4. Posted May 7, 2007 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

    I have no problem with the owner paying to clean it up, or with the sale price reflecting any clean-up costs assumed by the purchaser. Seems logical and fair to me, regardless of the seller and buyer.

    I’m merely pointing out that location is famously the most important consideration when valuing real estate. If the City decides it needs additional land adjacent to the Coliseum complex, inventory is limited.

    In any case, having an empty and apparently unusable building next to the Coliseum doesn’t seem like a very good thing for Greensboro, or for Lee St.

  5. Posted May 7, 2007 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

    Councilwoman Carmany has been trying to post the following comment but is getting rejected as spam – which is a mystery to me. If anyone else is getting rejected please email me: dhoggard@triad.rr.com.

    Sandy Carmany says…

    There are indeed concrete plans for use of the building now — by the Convention and Visitors Bureau, Sports Commission, and the Coliseum itself. If the ACC Hall of Champions ever materializes, it will be done on someone on someone else’s dime, not the city’s. The supposed asking price for the building being quoted out there sounds to be inflated. Significant progress has been made in addressing the contamination issues. Details of all to be made pubic tomorrow — stay tuned!

  6. Posted May 8, 2007 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

    Significant progress has been made in addressing the contamination issues. Details of all to be made pubic tomorrow

    ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    I will get to the bottom of it. Sandy has no proof of any kind of clean up. She is just saying what Mitch tells her to say. Ed, you love JR and Mitch..that is your main concern..being in bed w them.

  7. meblogin
    Posted May 9, 2007 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    location…location…location…
    If the site were clean it might be worth many millions more…you ever think about that. It may be that the price already reflects the need for cleaning. I don’t know…do you?
    Market value = an agreeable seller and buyer..estimates are simply guesses.

    Ben,

    It is not always a conspiracy.

    In my opinion your rude insults do very little to promote that you champion good. I don’t know you personally but you now come off as a school yard bully to me. If that is your goal….you nailed it.

    The news and record reported that there are issues. I see JR in a damned if he does…damned if he doesn’t.

    Many sites are dirty with some being resolved to be abandoned in place due to …for example…no wells..everyone is on city water… I wonder how many sites the city currently owns test as bad or worse than the Canada Dry building. With the building torn down the cleanup is easier…does this make sense?

    I think the city should buy this site, clean it and use it for our future growth.

    thanks