Edmonton’s High Level Bridge has lights…now what?

In case you missed it, here’s my recap of the light up that took place on Canada Day. Now that the lights are turned on, I had some questions about them, and I heard some common questions from others too. So I reached out to the Light the Bridge team for answers. Here’s what I found out!

When will the bridge be lit?

Every single night, 365 days a year. You can always go check out the lights at night!

What time do the lights come on and off?

It varies depending on the time of year. In the summer, they’ll come on later at night and turn off sooner. In the winter the lights will come on earlier in the evening, and may also be on in the early morning to brighten the commute. The City of Edmonton will control this, and the exact schedule is still being determined.

How are the colors/animations decided?

Right now the bridge lights seem to alternate from one solid color to another – green to blue to yellow to red, etc. For special events, the bridge may be lit differently (for instance, green and gold for an Eskimos game). The City of Edmonton’s Civic Events department has final say over the light colors and animations. In the future, individuals and organizations will be able to request special colors or animations – processes for that are being developed now.

Can the lights be used for advertising?

No. Not only was this a core principle established early on in the project, but the trellis structure of the bridge means there are no flat surfaces upon which words or ads could be placed. The bridge is not meant to be a billboard.

How can I find out what the colors on a given night are for?

I love the Tower Lights site for the Empire State Building in New York. You can always go and see what the colors meant for any given day. I understand the City will be creating a similar online tool so that you can see why the bridge is lit a certain way.

Where are the lights controlled from?

The lights are controlled from the City of Edmonton’s Network Operations Centre.

Who maintains the lights and pays for that maintenance?

The City of Edmonton will maintain the LED lights, just as they maintain all other lights on the bridge.

How much does it cost to light the bridge?

The annual electrical costs of running the new LED lights on the bridge are about the same annual costs as running 3-4 houses (assuming the lights are on an average of 7 hours every day).

Will the bridge contribute to light pollution?

Lights on the bridge are pointed downwards, and using LED lights allows the lights to be projected at specific points on the bridge, which minimizes the impact of light pollution. There is little to no light pollution.

I bought one or more bulbs, how can I find their location?

There’s a tool up on the Light the Bridge site now that lets you search for the location of your bulb(s) by last name, email address, or dedication. I bought two: one is light #3-1-6 (East Facing) and the other is light #4-4-56 (East Facing). You can also browse the lights manually and look at all the names and dedications. It’s a pretty neat collection of stories!

We’ve come a long way from the waterfall. Go check out the lights!

Why the City of Edmonton should pay to light up our bridges and landmarks

Who knew that Dave Mowat’s presentation at Pecha Kucha Night 14 back in October would become such a big deal? Maybe he did, but I sure didn’t. It was a great presentation, but we’ve had lots of people come forward with ideas on how to beautify the city, and none of those took off. Furthermore, Dave wasn’t the first one to suggest lighting up the High Level Bridge, something he readily admits. So what made his presentation different?

Well for one thing, Dave Mowat is no ordinary citizen (despite how down-to-earth and approachable his bio sounds). He’s the President and CEO of ATB Financial, an organization with assets of about $27.4 billion, making it the largest Alberta-based financial institution. If we brought together a group of the city’s “power brokers” , Dave would probably have a seat at the table. When he picks up the phone to call EPCOR and asks for a couple hundred thousand dollars for his project, he gets it. I couldn’t do that, could you?

That’s one reason why I’m not a big fan of the proposed fundraising campaign. With an estimated cost of anywhere from $400,000 to nearly $2 million, Dave is going to need more than just the $225,000 committed by EPCOR. Gordon Kent reports:

He would like a few corporate sponsors to pay the bulk of the expenses, with 100 to 200 businesses making smaller contributions and 10,000 to 30,000 people donating about $10 each to “buy a diode.”

When he spoke to Executive Committee on January 14, Dave said, “I think a project like this lends itself toward grassroots funding.” We can disguise this as a “community project” by launching such a fundraising campaign, but that feels a bit disingenuous to me. Dave recognizes that selling diodes for $10 isn’t going to pay for the project, but will build awareness. Still, I’m concerned it’ll do more harm than good.

Now don’t get me wrong, I think it is fantastic that Dave and ATB have taken such an active role in driving this forward. I love that he decided to take action with his idea, rather than just talk about it, and I hope he has inspired other businesses and leaders in Edmonton to do the same.

And I think that lighting up our bridges is a great idea. It aligns nicely with our Winter City Strategy, I think it’ll make Edmontonians feel safer and happier crossing the bridge, and it could become our “signature shot” which would be a great thing for tourism, not to mention civic pride.

light it up

There are always going to be naysayers, but it seems to me that most people like the idea of lighting up the High Level Bridge, especially for its 100th anniversary this June. So why would we rely on the private sector to make it happen? If it’s such a good idea, why do we need to raise funds for it?

I think the City of Edmonton should pay for it. Maybe not all of it, but a majority of it. The High Level Bridge is an important piece of municipal infrastructure, it’s an important part of Edmonton’s history, and this project will benefit all Edmontonians.

There’s precedent for this too, as the report that went to Executive Committee noted:

The Langevin Bridge in Calgary was equipped with decorative LED lighting in 2009 at a cost of $370,000. Funding for this project was provided by the Calgary Municipal Land Corporation as part of a revitalization initiative in the East Village. The project included the installation of over 5600 LEDs with roughly the same power consumption of just three Alberta households.

City Manager Simon Farbrother made it clear that Edmonton would not be unique in providing funding to the project. “The reality is that large cities today illuminate themselves at night, and they do it in many ways, and the city has some work to do to catch up in this area.”

We’re spending $2 million this year on Edmonton’s image and brand, and millions more over the next few years. Why not take some of that budget and apply it to a concrete project like this, one that will actually help our brand? Or how about the 1% for Art program? Do you know what 1% of the estimated cost of the Southeast to West LRT expansion is? About $34 million. Considering we spent just 0.08% of the approved 2009-2011 Capital Budget on art, I’d be shocked if we spent anywhere close to that amount along the LRT line. Why not take some of that funding and apply it to the lighting project? It would certainly qualify as a “highly visible” project (and a quick read of policy C458C suggests this is possible).

I recognize that lighting up the High Level Bridge has never been considered in any of the City’s budgets. And I recognize that especially in an election year, this is going to be a tough sell. But I think this is a conversation that needs to take place.

When news first spread that Executive Committee had decided to take a look at contributing to the project, a number of people expressed their displeasure. It was unfortunate that it happened around the same time as YESS announced it could not meet its funding requirements, causing some people to incorrectly link the two. We should help YESS instead of beautifying our city, they said. I think Ryan Jespersen responded to that criticism well:

Along those lines, I wish that Dave had gone to Council and said something like, “this is an important project for Edmonton, and I want to help you make it happen.” Instead, he essentially said “this is a great idea and since we’re both resigned to the fact that spending public money on this can’t ever be a priority, I’m just going to go and fundraise it myself.” Good on him for taking action, but it doesn’t help to shift the conversation in the direction it needs to go. We need to be willing as a city to spend money on projects like this.

So what’s next? Executive Committee directed Administration to come back on March 11 with “a plan, including a budget proposal and a schedule” for the project. It also asked for a report on an integrated program for illuminating other key landmarks, including City Hall and other bridges, and that report should be finished by April 15. In the meantime, I’ve heard that Dave’s fundraising campaign is starting to take shape.

While we’re definitely running out of time to make something happen for June, I’m hopeful that we don’t rush the project. I think the magic happens when we can light up more than just the High Level Bridge. A phased approach is sensible, but it would be nice to have a vision for something larger.

As Councillor Henderson said, “If we’re going to do it, we should do it right.”

Adventure in Edmonton: Fort Edmonton Footbridge & Wolf Willow Ravine

Last year the City of Edmonton completed work on the new Fort Edmonton Footbridge. In addition to the bridge, the $28.2 million project included 2.5 km of access trails and stairs and a secondary bridge crossing at Wolf Willow Ravine. The design was selected to achieve the objective of “better design in a world class city.” Here’s what it looks like (from the east side looking west):

David Staples wrote about the new bridge in August, and both Sharon and I made a note of the article at the time. He wrote:

“The most beautiful structure you’ve not yet seen in Edmonton, the new Fort Edmonton Footbridge, now spans the North Saskatchewan River. It is a testament to the city’s new vision to invest in attractive infrastructure, not just the same old ugly.”

We had to see it for ourselves! A number of other recent “sightings” only increased our desire to check it out (a friend’s wedding photos and one of EIFF’s 24/ONE videos were shot there). Last weekend we finally made time to go. I fired up Google, and quickly arrived at this page on the City’s website. I was looking for an address or directions or something, but all that page offers is the following:

The footbridge crosses the North Saskatchewan River upstream of Fort Edmonton Park and affords a connection between the new multi-use Trans Canada Trail around Fort Edmonton Park and new park land purchased on the west side of the river (Centennial Lands) in 2007.

There’s also a link to this PDF map which shows the proposed design, not the final result. And because it’s a satellite image without labels, figuring out which route to take to get to the bridge is anything but simple. Thankfully, Google does show the crossing:

We still weren’t entirely sure how to get there, but at least that map narrowed it down. It looked closer to park at the end of Whitemud Road (yes, ignoring the no parking signs) and walk rather than driving into Wolf Willow, so that’s what we did. There’s probably a better way to get there. Oh how we need trail maps data in the data catalogue!

The drive/walk to the bridge was interesting, as the neighbourhood is full of mansions! The trail from Whitemud Road to the bridge is situated in between two very large houses. Must be nice to have the bridge in your backyard!

The bridge itself is beautiful. As you can see it is highest in the middle, so the incline upward from each shore combined with the cables gives it a nice effect in photos.

I’m also a fan of the asymmetrical layout, with one of these lookout points on the northwest side of the bridge and another on the southeast.

The trail to Wolf Willow Ravine on the west side of the bridge is very pretty. There were a bunch of photographers using the trail when we visited, including one taking what appeared to be engagement photos for a young couple.

I had no idea Wolf Willow Ravine even existed until our trip. It was a crisp and cool when we were there, and so quiet. Sharon remarked that she felt like we were in Banff – it was certainly a different side of Edmonton than we’re used to seeing!

You can see the rest of my photos here. Go visit the Fort Edmonton Footbridge when you get a chance. It’s a bit of a trek to get there, but it’s worth it!

Meet me on the bridge: The Edmonton City Centre Redevelopment

It was 1974 when City Centre Place was completed, part of the Edmonton Centre development across from Churchill Square. The shopping mall we now know as Edmonton City Centre has had an interesting history, to say the least. TD Tower was added to the complex in 1976, and Oxford Tower and the Sutton Place Hotel followed in 1978. As Christopher Leo notes (archive), downtown was the place to be back then:

In the 1970s, downtown Edmonton was the retail centre of the metropolitan area, and the city had a policy of sustaining that role by supporting the viability of residential neighbourhoods near the centre of the city and placing limits on the amount of permitted suburban shopping centre development.

The development of West Edmonton Mall by the Triple Five Corporation in the 1980s had a significant negative impact on downtown Edmonton, and on the City Centre mall in particular. The policy limiting suburban shopping centre development was forgotten. As a result, efforts to restore life to downtown began and Triple Five came along with a solution: Eaton Centre. Christopher has documented the ups and downs of that project very thoroughly, so suffice it to say that what was eventually built in 1987 was a mere shadow of the original vision.

The two malls staggered along until 1999 when the Eaton’s chain went bankrupt. It was around that time that Randy Ferguson came to Edmonton on a mission to straighten things out. He remembers his boss at Oxford Properties, Jon Love, telling him two things before he left. “Go get the job done in the best interest of the community and this company,” and “remember one thing: that’s my hometown”. Randy’s journey began on January 2, 2000.

“There was very little energy downtown,” he recalled. Eaton Centre and Edmonton Centre had separate identities. Thinking back to the amount of space they took up downtown Randy told me how he felt: “it was depressing.” He had a job to do however, and his first task was to convince the Oxford board that they should spend money in Edmonton, their weakest market. “We said, don’t think about this as a retail play.” Randy pointed out that 40% of the office space downtown fed into the property. Four office tower lobbies and two hotels directly. The board gave Randy the go-ahead, but with a budget of just $44 million.

Randy and his team made a number of big changes over the next few years. Randy felt that a department store facing Churchill Square was inappropriate, so they convinced The Bay to move to the other side of the mall, to the vacant Eaton’s location. They turned the basement of the now empty east side into a parkade, and managed to attract Sport Check, Winners, and CBC. There were challenges along the way, of course. In the fall of 2001, Randy had arranged to have the western executives in charge of CBC’s TV and Radio divisions come to Edmonton so that he could pitch the idea of consolidating CBC’s properties in the mall downtown. The morning of the presentation was September 11. Needless to say the deal didn’t happen until many months later!

Merging the separate Eaton Centre and Edmonton Centre identities was an important aspect of the redevelopment. Randy wanted to do something architecturally to combine the two properties, and thought about a pedway bridge. “I think our bridges are terrible,” he told me. “They’re ugly, utilitarian, and generic.” In fact, Randy dislikes our pedway bridges so much that he pitched the idea of wrapping each one in scenes depicting the events taking place at the 2001 World Championships in Athletics. Unfortunately, the City didn’t go for it.

Randy wanted the bridge joining the properties to be more than just a pathway, he wanted it to be iconic. That’s how he came up with the wide bridge concept. “I wanted it to become the meeting place,” he recalled. “You know, ‘let’s go for coffee…meet me on the bridge!’” He envisioned a Starbucks and a patisserie on the main level of the bridge, with the rest of the space available for seating. They built a second level as well, a space that Randy thought would make an excellent wine bar. “We put two circular staircases on the bridge, ran power, and even roughed in plumbing.” As it turns out, Randy’s vision was never fully realized. “It has never been programmed the way I imagined it.” Today the bridge is home to a Tim Horton’s, a Telus Mobility kiosk, and a few retailers including a Bell store. The second level is empty and inaccessible. That’s unlikely to change anytime soon, due to the leases that are in place.

Randy and his team had to be creative in order to achieve everything they wanted with the redevelopment project, which was finished in 2003. “We accomplished an $80 million spend on a budget of $44 million,” he said. He had spent some time studying funding programs elsewhere in North America, and came across a tax increment financing (TIF) project in Florida. “I liked it because it had a direct connection to rehabilitating the area, and it had a sunset, it wasn’t forever.” Randy worked with Al Maurer, City Manager and Randy Garvey, then the GM of Finance at the City of Edmonton, to see if he could make such a program work here. Alberta’s CRL legislation didn’t exist yet, so they could only apply the tax increment from the City to the project, the school taxes could not be touched. They followed the sunset model, whereby 100% of the tax increment went to the project in year one, 90% in year two, and so on. Randy thinks it might be the first example of a TIF used in Alberta.

When the time came to build the wide bridge, Randy again was out of money. Recognizing that it technically wasn’t on land that Oxford owned, they applied for a local improvement levy. The City studied the legislation and agreed that the funding mechanism was appropriate, so that’s where the money for the bridge came from. Further funding for the redevelopment project came through the creative use of a Commercial Mortgage Backed Security, something that would never happen today given the current recession.

Given his history with the concept, I asked Randy for his thoughts on the idea of using a CRL to help pay for the downtown arena. “I am a huge fan of CRL or TIF – it can make things happen that otherwise wouldn’t.” He doesn’t think the proposed formula is the best one, however. “I believe the school tax portion of CRL should be sacred, it shouldn’t be in play,” he told me. Randy also feels the sunset approach is better than 100% for 20 years as the current legislation allows. “We need to benefit from that growth, along with the guys that are making the investment.” He suggested that the City should get some local experience at the bargaining table, someone like Randy Garvey.

Randy supports the proposed arena project, even though it is competition for ProCura where he is COO. “It’s about critical mass. It’s about creating a new day.”

Recap: Walterdale Bridge & West Rossdale Open House

Last Thursday the City of Edmonton held an open house to discuss and gather feedback on two projects that will have a big impact on our river valley. The Walterdale Bridge, which has served Edmonton for nearly 100 years, is reaching the end of its usable life and needs to be replaced. The bridge connects the south side to Rossdale, the western part of which has been “rediscovered” and for which a new urban design plan has been created.

Held at the TransAlta Arts Barns, I thought the open house was fairly well-attended. I stayed for the first half, and by the time I left, around 120 people had signed in. Unfortunately the Walterdale Bridge presentation went long, so I didn’t learn much about West Rossdale other than what was shared on the information display boards. You can learn more about the West Rossdale Urban Design Plan here.

The Walterdale Bridge Strategic Planning Concept Study of 2008 concluded that the bridge is now too old to be rehabilitated, and must be replaced. These images of the current Walterdale Bridge come from Bing Maps:

It may be old, but I think the current Walterdale Bridge is distinct and recognizable.

The concept design for the replacement bridge calls for a “functional signature bridge”. Key design considerations include:

Access/traffic accommodation from 82 Avenue to 97 Avenue.
Grades at south approach.
Detours and closure impacts, utility staging.
Aesthetics – signature bridge.
Traditional Burial Grounds and Fort Edmonton Cemetery Commemoration Site, historical resources.
North Saskatchewan River Valley plans.
Environmental policies and procedures.
Integration with West Rossdale Urban Design Plan, EPCOR Rossdale repurposing, ~~EXPO 2017 bid~~, and other area plans.
Pedestrian and cyclist accommodation.

To date, the City has conducted meetings/interviews with 14 key stakeholder groups, including twice with Aboriginal Elders with a pipe ceremony. As you might expect, a wide range of issues have been raised in those stakeholder meetings, but this comment nicely sums it up:

The challenge for this project is to achieve a balance between providing improved access for private vehicles to downtown Edmonton and protecting/preserving the character, safety and integrity of the communities that the roadways approaching the bridge replacement will be impacting.

There were four options presented at the open house, though they weren’t mutually exclusive (PDF, 3.9 MB). Attendees were encouraged to leave feedback using sticky notes, and if they liked the south side of one option but the north side of another, the City representatives wanted to hear that. There are four bridge types being considered: girder, arch, extradosed, and cable-stayed (PDF, 320 KB).

All four alignment options get rid of the hairpin at Saskatchewan Drive and Queen Elizabeth Park Road. The first three options shift the bridge to the east slightly, whereas option four would see the replacement built significantly further east than the current bridge. Of the four options, the first seems to have the smallest impact.

I’m encouraged by the lip service paid to pedestrians and cyclists during the open house, and I hope that translates into tangible benefits for those two important types of travelers once the replacement is built. It was also encouraging to hear that 1% of the total cost of the bridge will be allocated to public art.

In the presentation, a “signature” bridge was described as one that Edmontonians feel proud of. While that’s a fair definition, I really wonder why we’d build something we’re not proud of. It seems to me that what is meant by “signature” is something different, perhaps something more along the lines of the new Art Gallery of Alberta. I think a signature bridge is one that gets Edmontonians and others talking about it.

The next steps for the Walterdale Bridge project are as follows:

An interim plan, with three options, will go to the Transportation & Public Works Committee in January 2011.
Additional public information sessions will take place in February/March 2011.
A final recommendation will go to City Council in April 2011.

Even without EXPO 2017, we need to replace the Walterdale Bridge, so I’m not sure what impact, if any, that loss will have on the project. The Walterdale Bridge is an important, busy bridge here in Edmonton. If you have feedback on how the replacement bridge should look or function, let the team know.

%d bloggers like this: