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

[ChazYEG]

What was ETS's position since the project would be tied into its operation?

As far as the connection to ETS, conversations were ongoing, but teir biggest issue was, again, having to take over operations and footing the bill to avoid interruptions, should the private enterprise go under. At the time, one solution that was being studied to alleviate that risk was federal or provincial funding that would subsidize around 50% of the fare for ETS pass users. That would've brought the cost for anyone with a transit pass or an ARC Card to $2.50, keeping the fare for other users at $5.
Because the project was never greenlit by he City, application for federal and provincial subsidies was not possible.
Today, especially with the current Liberal government being more business and infrastructure friendly, I could see this being a relatively easy task.

 

[Out of Towner]

As far as the connection to ETS, conversations were ongoing, but teir biggest issue was, again, having to take over operations and footing the bill to avoid interruptions, should the private enterprise go under. At the time, one solution that was being studied to alleviate that risk was federal or provincial funding that would subsidize around 50% of the fare for ETS pass users. That would've brought the cost for anyone with a transit pass or an ARC Card to $2.50, keeping the fare for other users at $5.
Because the project was never greenlit by he City, application for federal and provincial subsidies was not possible.
Today, especially with the current Liberal government being more business and infrastructure friendly, I could see this being a relatively easy task.

Not sure if a government subsidy to ETS passengers would be a Liberal policy or an NDP policy. However, if that was the case, then I assume somebody would need to go hat in hand to the Province or the Feds. You want to do it on behalf of the City and Prairie Gondola? lol No? How come? Actually, I wouldn't blame you unless you're a fan of lead balloons.

 

[Barnaby]

ETS should just take the project and run with it, integrate it into ARC. This combined with development of Rossdale powerplant would be financially sufficient like The Forks in Winnipeg.

Naysayers of the gondola don't understand how difficult it is to get from Strathcona to DT.

 

[Out of Towner]

ETS should just take the project and run with it, integrate it into ARC. This combined with development of Rossdale powerplant would be financially sufficient like The Forks in Winnipeg.

Naysayers of the gondola don't understand how difficult it is to get from Strathcona to DT.

Ferry during the summer would be much cheaper. NYC does it.

 

[Barnaby]

Ferry would be much cheaper. NYC does it.

Have you ever been to Edmonton? The River Valley is like 400' deep.

 

[Out of Towner]

Have you ever been to Edmonton? The River Valley is like 400' deep.

What about the Edmonton Queen dock? What's wrong with that?

 

[positive1]

What about the Edmonton Queen dock? What's wrong with that?

Have you ever been to Edmonton? The River Valley is like 400' deep.

If you hover over the person's username you can hit ignore and it hides that person's posts. Saves me a lot of angst

 

[ChazYEG]

Not sure if a government subsidy to ETS passengers would be a Liberal policy or an NDP policy. However, if that was the case, then I assume somebody would need to go hat in hand to the Province or the Feds. You want to do it on behalf of the City and Prairie Gondola? lol No? How come? Actually, I wouldn't blame you unless you're a fan of lead balloons.

When we were working on the project, part of the capital funding would've come from federal funding, which is a normal thing even for privately owned infrastructure projects.
What I was referring to was operational subsidy, which could've not been applied for before the project was greenlit by the City. Now, since you seem to have interpretation issues, I'll be clear and stress out: OPERATIONAL subsidies, which is the financial commitment that would lower fares for ETS users, CANNOT be applied for if there are no operations (either current or under development). Should it have been approved, our financing team would have gone to both Feds and the Province for that, it was part of the plan.
Your absolute lack of interpretation skills and understanding of how project financing works, and the differences between capital funds and operational funds made your attempts at sarcasm fall flat. Please, try again.

 

[ChazYEG]

ETS should just take the project and run with it, integrate it into ARC. This combined with development of Rossdale powerplant would be financially sufficient like The Forks in Winnipeg.

In an ideal world, yes, that would be neat, but it is a political hot potato as it is, with no City money going into it. Think about how contentious the Valley Line was, or bike lanes are. Most people (average suburbanites) would only see this as a vanity project, if it were to be done by the city.

 

[Out of Towner]

When we were working on the project, part of the capital funding would've come from federal funding, which is a normal thing even for privately owned infrastructure projects.
What I was referring to was operational subsidy, which could've not been applied for before the project was greenlit by the City. Now, since you seem to have interpretation issues, I'll be clear and stress out: OPERATIONAL subsidies, which is the financial commitment that would lower fares for ETS users, CANNOT be applied for if there are no operations (either current or under development). Should it have been approved, our financing team would have gone to both Feds and the Province for that, it was part of the plan.
Your absolute lack of interpretation skills and understanding of how project financing works, and the differences between capital funds and operational funds made your attempts at sarcasm fall flat. Please, try again.

I'm well aware that granting operational funding before a project is approved would be putting the cart ahead of the horse. However, it's not uncommon to have MOU's to address situations as that. Exactly which Federal or Provincial subsidy program would fund ETS passengers though. That's the question because it can become politically difficult to justify narrowly targeted funding when a private company is a beneficiary. Prairie Gondola would need to demonstrate that its project has merit beyond transporting people back and forth across the river because Bob's Ride Sharing could do that too. Same with ChazYEG's Taxi, Jim's Limousine, and Constance's Cab Company. All kinds of different transportation company's could transport people back and forth and they'd want an explanation on why Prairie Gondola is the only operation getting the fare subsidy.

 

[lemongrab]

So you're saying that the response team would have all the necessary equipment and require no training to conduct a gondola rescue of passengers. Ok. I defer to you then. I wouldn't have assumed that that's within their scope of operational readiness but ok, if it is then it is.

I expect EFD actually is trained and equipped for rescue at heights. The likely rapel scenarios would be things like window washers, construction workers on a bridge or tall structure, an elevator shaft, or a kid finding their way into a weird spot, but of course there is also ladder extraction from a burning building, or even more seriously a cat in a tree.

But I'm sure they would scale up to specifically address a gondola rescue. Of course Edmonton already has a handful of chairlifts. I'm sure each hill has staff trained for this, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if EFD is part of those response plans and/or participates in annual training.

 

[EdwardEdm]

So you're saying that the response team would have all the necessary equipment and require no training to conduct a gondola rescue of passengers. Ok. I defer to you then. I wouldn't have assumed that that's within their scope of operational readiness but ok, if it is then it is.

When the hell did I state that? I simply stated when the relevant teams and equipment are stationed. I've watched the Technical Rescue team practise using the High Level Bridge for high angle rescues though. They would certainly get any extra training and equipment of needed.

 

[Out of Towner]

When the hell did I state that? I simply stated when the relevant teams and equipment are stationed. I've watched the Technical Rescue team practise using the High Level Bridge for high angle rescues though. They would certainly get any extra training and equipment of needed.

Sounds like we're on the same page then. A response wouldn't be starting from scratch because the City does have some trained and equipped personal. However, consider an emergency occurrence at night in January during rush hour and the river was frozen or in spring when ice flows come down the river. Passengers couldn't be rappelled down to watercraft on the river in that scenario. A helicopter airlift would probably be the only way to rescue people. So would a gondola over the river actually be worth it?

 

[thommyjo]

I honestly can't see any kind of redevelopment at the power plant being very successful without something like a gondola. There isn't a lot of space for parking on site and there shouldn't be any plans to allow for public parking at this location, if they want it to be successful. The area doesn't need a parkade and having a novel way to get to whatever the power plant becomes would add to the experience of getting there. Taking the bus just doesn't have the same excitement.

If the gondola were to go bust for some reason, and I don't think it would, if the power plant is to become a destination, then either ETS could take it over and run it or the City could sell it. These are modular systems that are scalable and can be moved/sold from one ski resort to another. After the Whistler Olympics, a chairlift was moved from Whister to Sunshine Village in Banff. Sunshine Village sold their 35 year old Angle Chair to Castle Resort in southern Alberta. Lake Louise gondola came from Palisades Tahoe in California, and lastly, the Polar Peak chair at Fernie was previously installed at Nakiska. These things hold their value, even when they are decades old. I know some people brought up the concrete foundations as a remediation issue, but maybe the City could have interpretive art installations around each tower or something to turn it into its own destination, which could then be incorporated into the concrete so that it could just be left in the ground in the event of a removal. I', not saying this is the best solution, but there are ways around this.

I don't think the City should be on the hook for rescue services, in the event of a failure. Ski resorts have trained staff for emergency evacuations and do not rely on the local fire department. Whistler has the Peak to Peak gondola, which is over 400m above the ground and a rescue on that would be far more complicated than anything in Edmonton.

Reminder to the haters that things like Granville island keep a whole water taxi business afloat. The gondola needs rossdale and vice versa. But to act like cities haven’t successfully built out unique transportation businesses/modes to service unique commercial areas is silly.

Lots of people hated on lime that it’s never work here, yet we’re one of their top cities globally.

 

[Out of Towner]

Reminder to the haters that things like Granville island keep a whole water taxi business afloat. The gondola needs rossdale and vice versa. But to act like cities haven’t successfully built out unique transportation businesses/modes to service unique commercial areas is silly.

Lots of people hated on lime that it’s never work here, yet we’re one of their top cities globally.

How would you address the public safety concerns if you were in a position of trust and responsibility? It's easy to make lofty generalizations about anything but to move something forward, you'll discover that answers that satisfy problems are necessary.