Thanks. I'd appreciate that.
I remember hearing at one point that the project at Waterfront Toronto used some very sophisticated on-site remediation techniques and the latest research. I believe it was first done in the Netherlands, and we imported the technology and used it here.
Thank you. I will be looking into that more myself.
I'll move on to a more practical question. In many cases, as is the case with the project in south Mississauga, there are what we might call unsightly landmarks that we have to work around when we're promoting or creating urban conservation areas. They're a fact of life, like the Lakeview water treatment plant, for example. It's 67 acres, and it's not going anywhere any time soon because it cleans the water and supplies water for all of Mississauga, Brampton, parts of Caledon, and recently we've made a deal to supply clean water to York region as well.
We need to work around these types of things. Do you think it's possible? Do you think this in any way compromises our goal of urban conservation? What advice would you give us on how to promote urban conservation and connect city people with nature while still being realistic about what kinds of things need to be done in cities?