News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 7.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 7.6K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 2.6K     0 

Rossdale

It's been evaluated, costed and was passed on.

We aren't San Antonio, Venice, Oklahoma City (the model we were reviewing) or Ottawa.
 
There was a lot of work done behind the scenes, a trip by some to Oklahoma and multiple scenarios evaluated and explored.
 
itom987 wasn't commenting on how much work was done behind the scenes, he was making the observation that whoever was doing the evaluation and costing didn't work hard enough to be successful in getting it approved rather than having it passed on. from my perspective, it had little to do with the merits of the project and should have been approved. unfortunately we had just closed city centre airport and were embarking on blatchford as our major project commitment as a city and we had a new mayor who was not going to use any political capital on anything other than transit.
 
IanO, they probably spent over $20,000 for some delegates to look at Oklahoma City and come back with nothing to show for it. That money could have been used to build a weir, which is obviously the first thing we need to do before we even start working on the canals.
Why send people on expensive fact finding missions when google earth, websites and a telephone are all you need.
 
Last edited:
That article was from 2013, how much money did they raise? I believe 50 million is more than enough to build a wier that would solve a lot of the water recreation problems we have with the river. Then we could dig out a canal without any need to pump water from the river. The riverboat could go up and down the river without any worry of getting stuck as well.
 
Do you want a weir or a canal or both?

Are you going to chat with the environmentalists and undertake the impact study for that weir?
 
If a wier is built a path for fish to cross must be built as well. As for the environmental assessment, the river floods from time to time so the soils, plants, and animals are already prepared for it. There also is an excellent example to compare at Saskatoon; plus, their wier does not have much of a path for fish to cross. I am not sure exactly what the environmentalists would complaining about. If they do complain it would most likely be under the guise of NIMBYism.

How hard does that have to be?
 
It may be 'hard' as in time-consuming and having to deal with multiple levels of goverment, but the cards are literally stacked in our favour. This is a winnable project.

"In a Global Edmonton viewer poll, 62% of voters are in favour of the concept, while 38% oppose the idea." - from the article cited by IanO on post #38.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top