Prairie Sky Gondola | 76.2m | ?s | Prairie Sky | DIALOG

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    59
JaayJR said:
I wonder if Prairie Sky would consider finding an alternate back up location instead of the Plant. Maybe the site west of Remax field? Its up for redevelopment anyway to be a “park”. A station would be a good fit there imo.
The only thing is it would still have to cross Rossdale, but a station is different than a tower.
I would rather see the station moved as a compromise than this project canned entirely.
Click to expand...
West of Remax is far more likely to have burial sites than the land directly east of the power plant where it's currently proposed.
 
I don't think council is going to be approving the leases even though they are conditional.

I think before getting to the current stage they are going to reverse the order of things and have an assessment on the site and maybe even something broader.

Based on their comments, Rutherford, Paquette and Janz are likely opposed to this gondola regardless of what comes from the burial ground analysis and would prefer it just die on Monday.

I'm surprised the city did not have to do any of this work in planning the Touch the Water project for the Rossdale section - since it's also disturbing land. And what about the entire west Rossdale development plan?
 
Last edited:
TAS said:
I don't think council is going to be approving the leases even though they are conditional.

I think before getting to the current stage they are going to reverse the order of things and have an assessment on the site and maybe even something broader.

Based on their comments, Rutherford, Paquette and Janz are likely opposed to this gondola regardless of what comes from the burial ground analysis and would prefer it just die on Monday.

I'm surprised the city did not have to do any of this work in planning the Touch the Water project for the Rossdale section - since it's also disturbing land. And what about the entire west Rossdale development plan?
Click to expand...
Interesting to refer to reverse order - I think that is a good point. Some of these assessments should have been done earlier.

I am not sure how far along Touch the Water actually is. The area it impacts might be a bit different and more compact, but it would make sense that some of the same issues might arise.

As for West Rossdale, nothing has been built there in decades and I doubt anything will happen in the next several years. It may be more of a pipe dream than the other two and again the location is slightly different.
 
Just joined this site since I am interested in the gondola moving forward!

I watched most of the council's meeting yesterday, and it seemed like some people (Sohi, Rutherford) are fine with the business aspect of the deal. However, they are concerned about the ability of Prairie Sky Gondola to conduct fair consultations with Indigenous peoples. I'm not sure if this is possible, but I had an idea that I thought could work.

Would it be possible to have the City of Edmonton and Prairie Sky Gondola conduct consultations with Indigenous peoples jointly? The costs in this scenario would be paid by Prairie Sky Gondola. Therefore, the City of Edmonton would be satisfied with the consultations since they would be one of the parties leading it.
 
Possibly, but it's a heck of a lot to ask of the gondola people without even giving them an assurance about the project. Simpler to approve the lease, if consultations/radar reveal a significant problem there (which seems unlikely because the burial ground is further west), the lease could be amended to move the location of that one tower/station.
 
XXIV94 said:
Just joined this site since I am interested in the gondola moving forward!

I watched most of the council's meeting yesterday, and it seemed like some people (Sohi, Rutherford) are fine with the business aspect of the deal. However, they are concerned about the ability of Prairie Sky Gondola to conduct fair consultations with Indigenous peoples. I'm not sure if this is possible, but I had an idea that I thought could work.

Would it be possible to have the City of Edmonton and Prairie Sky Gondola conduct consultations with Indigenous peoples jointly? The costs in this scenario would be paid by Prairie Sky Gondola. Therefore, the City of Edmonton would be satisfied with the consultations since they would be one of the parties leading it.
Click to expand...

Hi. I joined up as well after following this project, seems like a friendlier community than Twitter.

I'm confused that this project has gone this far without more input and involvement with indigenous peoples from the get-go. I think it could have cooled some of the city councilors reservations, specifically Aaron Paquette.

I'm not surprised that the city administration doesn't have more data on this supposed burial site though. I work in the nondestructive testing industry, I'm not certified for GPR though. I've seen it used, and my impression is it's pretty crude. I inspect ferromagnetic and paramagnetic metal, and we barely interpret our examinations anymore, it's too much liability. They keep bringing up GPR, but I'm not confident a technician or engineer, could extrapolate any more information from a GPR examination other than, dirt may have been disturbed here (or not). I doubt we will know for sure until sholves are in the ground.
 
TAS said:
I don't think council is going to be approving the leases even though they are conditional.

I think before getting to the current stage they are going to reverse the order of things and have an assessment on the site and maybe even something broader.

Based on their comments, Rutherford, Paquette and Janz are likely opposed to this gondola regardless of what comes from the burial ground analysis and would prefer it just die on Monday.

I'm surprised the city did not have to do any of this work in planning the Touch the Water project for the Rossdale section - since it's also disturbing land. And what about the entire west Rossdale development plan?
Click to expand...
They do have to do this work & admin spoke to the multiple places where it's in progress for those projects last night. There have also been ~24? different heritage resource impact assessments in the area. The archeologist spoke to his involvement with other work done, (as did Cheif Miskis) including the Walterdale bridge & another site. Is more needed? Probably, do ww have alot of info already? Definitely. But this Council is new & I doubt most of them have this context & despite it being referenced by many it wasn't spelled out super concretely.
 
Will the council be voting on the project on Monday? If so, how do we see the vote shaking out? I am a bit worried right now.
 
edmontonidiot said:
Hi. I joined up as well after following this project, seems like a friendlier community than Twitter.

I'm confused that this project has gone this far without more input and involvement with indigenous peoples from the get-go. I think it could have cooled some of the city councilors reservations, specifically Aaron Paquette.

I'm not surprised that the city administration doesn't have more data on this supposed burial site though. I work in the nondestructive testing industry, I'm not certified for GPR though. I've seen it used, and my impression is it's pretty crude. I inspect ferromagnetic and paramagnetic metal, and we barely interpret our examinations anymore, it's too much liability. They keep bringing up GPR, but I'm not confident a technician or engineer, could extrapolate any more information from a GPR examination other than, dirt may have been disturbed here (or not). I doubt we will know for sure until sholves are in the ground.
Click to expand...
The challenge is that the site in question is covered in concrete & has a small structure on it so GPR before disturbance makes sense. It also right next to where 50ft down catwalks are in the plant. So I really wonder what could be under there. The archeologist's presentation was great! He's worked in the area on multiple occasions. I really think that human remains would he a deal breaker for everyone & that if they are under concrete that maybe isn't particularly respectful. But I get not moving them if that's the case.

Also there were many Indigenous voices who supported next steps yesterday, including people involved in the fight to gain recognition & designation of the cemetery, repatriate remains & current monitoring of anything EPCOR does on the site.

With all the HRIAs & the ongoing work PrarieSky has done building relationshios through protocol & ceremony as referenced by Indigenous leaders yesterday & the ongoing work of the City at River Crossing I think it's disingenuous a best to suggest there hasn't been consultation & it rejects the testimony of many Indigenous people who have been working on issues related to that land for decades. The rejection of this complexity doesn't do anyone any favors.
archited said:
Chief Darlene Misik -- Papaschase First Nation
Click to expand...
Yes!
XXIV94 said:
Will the council be voting on the project on Monday? If so, how do we see the vote shaking out? I am a bit worried right now.
Click to expand...
Looks like it, it's item 7.5.
Vote intention is a bit hard to assess. My guess:

Sohi (if he can be assured that everything will stop re: human remains I think he could support but he needs a very clear way to assure people of that) leaning no

Janz - no (honestly wondering if his anti-gondola petition doesn't violate the code of conduct - his current violation will be discussed by Council on Monday too - which could have some indirect influence to the positive since he was so oppositional on this & he's bound to be making their jobs harder because he keeps picking fights.
Rice - likely yes
Rutherford - likely no (much like Sohi needs something concrete she can point to re: burial grounds)
Stevenson - I was thinking yes, but Rob Houle was working in her office & is not a fan so maybe not?
Salvador - probably yes - she gets the process
Hamilton - probably yes
Cartmell - probably yes
Principe - probably yes
Wright - probably no
Knack - probably yes
Paquette - no
Tang - maybe yes? But not sure.

So there is a path based on this but likely requires some very clear communications with Stevenson & Sohi & Tang about steps that would be taken if likely human remains were located by GPR or test digs & a mechanism for them to assure their constituents. Some more comprehensive information re: the amount of work done in the area to date would be good for them to have in front of them too. (HRIAs River Crossing engagements etc) that could swing Rutherford as well I think?

It will be tight. If it's last item before a break it will be less likely, right after a break more likely to pass. (Decision fatigue makes people risk averse).

Super curious what others think. Listening on Monday will give us a better idea but by then it's too late.

I do think support letters expressing support for next steps and support for halting if there are human remains & encouraging robust consultation once these are in place might help. Maybe a checkpoint with Council as "for information" that gives them info during engagement/archeology prior to an actual public hearing.
 
I think that there is enough studied response to the Gondola vis-a-vis First Nations concerns that the less brave of our "fearless leaders" will try to punt this down the road under the cover of "more study is needed". Sadly, I don't expect a clear resolution of this on Monday or anytime soon. Gondola may suffer death by a thousand cuts. Incidentally, I listened to the whole show on Wednesday. Some of the First Nation members were actually acerbic in their dissertations referring to "white capitalist men" (as opposed to non-white socialist women?)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top