SFU/Burnaby Mtn Gondola | Proposed

[acjames76]

Originally Posted by madmigs

umm, having anything overhead, like a gondola, of that fuel processing/storage center is never going to happen. Too much of a safety hazard.

I'm not familiar with Stoney Creek - I'm guessing its the green zone behind Stoney Creek elementary that runs into Burnaby Lake? And if so, that is a good distance from any gondola route that i can foresee, unless the gondola were to come from Burquitlam. Even so, it should be easy enough not to place supports in a location that interferes with the creek.

You are right about not running the gondola over the fuel storage area. I should have paid more attention to that.

Stoney Creek is just one of the many creeks that have their headwaters on Burnaby Mountain. Stoney Creek watershed is marked in dark blue, except for the red tributary. It is red because the SFU Facilities shed for road salt storage has been contaminating the creek for the past 27 years. (They have promised to fix the problem, but little action to date.) The salmon eggs are threatened also by sediments from UniverCity construction, erosion from mountain biking (this would increase some with a gondola), activities on power- and pipe-lines, and construction of the Evergreen Skytrain line.

Makes me think that the name "Conservation Area" has lost its meaning.

Originally Posted by Spork

Would Stoney creek really be that much of an issue? Isn't a Gondola fairly non-invasive with 4-5 support columns?

The Feasibility Study says, "If a decision is made to proceed with the Burnaby Mountain Gondola Transit Project, the environmental impact to the conservation area will likely be minimal because gondola construction techniques can limit disturbance to the small footprints surrounding the tower locations."

It is the construction phase that is most likely to damage the creeks with increased sediment flow. Would they really use helicopters to set the tower pads in the Conservation Area or just bulldoze a trail up the mountain to save costs?

[tybuilding]

The stringing of the cables has some impact as well. The P2P gondola has a cleared path under it where I imagine the cables were laid for construction. Would this be a correct assumption?

[oy1234]

I don't have the information in front of me, however I believe I read in one of the studies that the construction cost of the gondola was about 35 million. The other half was for land acquisition and other costs.

[dleung]

I love armchair transit planners... Some idiot letter-writer to the Vancouver Sun concluded that $70 million is "too much". Apparently a cheaper alternative should be to build a skytrain extension underneath Burnaby Mountain. Uh, ok... 3km of subway, at a typical $150+ million per km, comes to nearly 7 times the cost... genius.

Originally Posted by tybuilding

The stringing of the cables has some impact as well. The P2P gondola has a cleared path under it where I imagine the cables were laid for construction. Would this be a correct assumption?

The cable for P2P was helicopter lifted to the other side of the valley. There's no other option especially in this case.

[madmigs]

Originally Posted by acjames76

You are right about not running the gondola over the fuel storage area. I should have paid more attention to that.

Stoney Creek is just one of the many creeks that have their headwaters on Burnaby Mountain. Stoney Creek watershed is marked in dark blue, except for the red tributary. It is red because the SFU Facilities shed for road salt storage has been contaminating the creek for the past 27 years. (They have promised to fix the problem, but little action to date.) The salmon eggs are threatened also by sediments from UniverCity construction, erosion from mountain biking (this would increase some with a gondola), activities on power- and pipe-lines, and construction of the Evergreen Skytrain line.

Makes me think that the name "Conservation Area" has lost its meaning.


The Feasibility Study says, "If a decision is made to proceed with the Burnaby Mountain Gondola Transit Project, the environmental impact to the conservation area will likely be minimal because gondola construction techniques can limit disturbance to the small footprints surrounding the tower locations."

It is the construction phase that is most likely to damage the creeks with increased sediment flow. Would they really use helicopters to set the tower pads in the Conservation Area or just bulldoze a trail up the mountain to save costs?

Thanks for the map. And umm while agree construction will likely cause increased sediment flow, but I wasn't aware bulldozers could handle those types of inclines. As a result would need long winding paths, thus resulting in a lot of cost simply to make the "road". Would airlifting men and equipment to each of the tower pads really be that much more expensive? Are there that many towers needed or that much machinery needed to construct each of these tower pads?

[Zassk]

There are already roads crisscrossing the hillside underneath the proposed path... I can't imagine that there would be much need for additional roads, or much justification for helicopters.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by Zassk

There are already roads crisscrossing the hillside underneath the proposed path... I can't imagine that there would be much need for additional roads, or much justification for helicopters.

Try to locate the towers as close to existing infrastructure you would really reduce the impact. Bulldozers and excavators can work at quite a steep incline. Think of winch cat snow grooming, they can work at 30 degree slopes. Dozers can also work with a winch. Excavators can use their arm and bucket to pull or push themselves up inclines. Rock trucks though are limited to about 20% grades.

[BCPhil]

I believe they use helicopters to build Hydro towers in remote and sensitive areas, and heli-logging in many cases is still very profitable, and I've even seen a helicopter (the Coulson aircrane) put a roof on someone's house. I don't think it would be that much more costly (and not impossible) to use an aircrane if a tower is needed in a sensitive area.

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I believe they use helicopters to build Hydro towers in remote and sensitive areas, and heli-logging in many cases is still very profitable, and I've even seen a helicopter (the Coulson aircrane) put a roof on someone's house. I don't think it would be that much more costly (and not impossible) to use an aircrane if a tower is needed in a sensitive area.

That's what I was thinking. And I mean, whatever get's torn down can just be planted back It's not like anyone's going to touch it for a long time, it can grow back!

I really hope this goes forward, although a bit pricey, I think in the long run it'll turn out be be cost-efficient. No more need to run buses, time savings, and way more reliable in any weather circumstance (well maybe extreme winds could take this out, but doubtful as they have these high up on mountains!)

[acjames76]

Originally Posted by eduardo88

That's what I was thinking. And I mean, whatever get's torn down can just be planted back It's not like anyone's going to touch it for a long time, it can grow back!

I really hope this goes forward, although a bit pricey, I think in the long run it'll turn out be be cost-efficient. No more need to run buses, time savings, and way more reliable in any weather circumstance (well maybe extreme winds could take this out, but doubtful as they have these high up on mountains!)

The fewer trees lost to construction the better. Our experience with the power and pipeline ROWs is that maintenance budgets dwindle over time and the invasive, non-native plants take over. This robs the wildlife of their habitat and food supply.


Still, I agree that the gondola is a good long-term solution for access to the mountain top from the energy and GHG perspective.

[SpongeG]

some people...

A gondola always results in a revolving restaurant

First, there was a privately owned viewing tower proposed for Queen Elizabeth Park in Vancouver [“Mayors and B.C. government sign agreement on Metro Vancouver transit strategy”, web-only]. Then, a commercial zip-line adventure operation was proposed in Mundy Park in Coquitlam.

Last week, various media reported that TransLink has issued a request for proposals for a study on the feasibility of a cable car linking the Production Way SkyTrain Station to the top of Burnaby Mountain.

...


I predict that the proposed upper gondola terminal will feature a viewing tower, a revolving restaurant, and a wind turbine. Undoubtedly, a $5 AddFare for down-bound passengers will be examined in the feasibility study to recoup the estimated $70-million cost (as is charged to passengers boarding the Canada Line at Vancouver International Airport).

> Derek Wilson / Port Moody

http://www.straight.com/article-3503...ing-restaurant

[SpongeG]

Gondola sounds snazzy, but there are simpler solutions


By Jennifer Soti, Vancouver Sun September 29, 2010

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/G...#ixzz115szcC4e

[nname]

And yet there is no route in SOF - not a single one - that has more ridership than the 145. The 145 is THE most under-served route in Metro Vancouver in terms of rider per hour... It of course would warrent something better, even if there's no snow problem..

=====================
Ridership per service hour for the busiest routes (2007 data)

Route	Rider/Hour
999	630.7
998	614.4
997	476.8
145	170.2
99	153.0
996	135.4
3	120.8
20	120.4
106	111.1
9	105.4
41	105.2
5	101.3
239	 98.5
98	 98.3
8	 97.8
22	 94.4
25	 91.6
16	 90.3
97	 85.5
19	 82.2
49	 81.0
10	 80.9
135	 79.3
321	 79.1
17	 78.4
7	 74.9
15	 57.3
701	 57.0
502	 53.6
601	 35.0

Hmm... just think of this... If the cost per hour for conventional bus is about $100, the average fare per boarding is $1.20, and the layover/recovery/deadheading time is about 1/3 of service hour.. does this means the routes with more than 111 boardings per hour (145, 99, 3, 20, 106) are profitable?

[GeeCee]

I don't know if you can still go by the average fare when the vast majority of your riders on a given route are using a U-Pass.

[tybuilding]

The article mentions getting from Kwantlen Polytechnic University's Surrey campus to its Langley campus

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/G...#ixzz118QoD6Et

It takes a minimum of 1 hour to 1 hour 25 min with 3 transfers to get there. Driving is 20 km or 32 min according to Google. I think it would take me longer to run there. But biking on the other I routinely beat the bus, even a single bus. Yesterday I was even ahead of a car for 20 blocks through Whalley in Surrey.

[cornholio]

With the red line there is also a huge opportunity for some redevelopment and a station up on Forest Grove and Ash grove. The gondola would go immediately over the town square and the heart of the Forest Grove area where lots of people live, especially middle to lower class families in coops. Not to mention that many of of coops in the area, including the one that would be under the route just north of this potential station are in poor shape and are almost ready to be rebuilt, with more density. Just like the coops up around Lougheed mall and Government street that were the same design, same age and had the same problems(leaking one big one), those were torn down and redeveloped a few years ago with much higher density. The Forest grove area has thousands of people and can fit many more with redevelopment, which is right around the corner for and good chunck of the buildings.

Being coops also makes it much easier to consolidate and rebuild.

That area would be absolutely perfect for a station.

Like I said before I think this project is a absolute no brainer, it A) likely saves huge operational costs, B) makes transit more reliable and efficient, C) attracts riders, D) shapes significant development and redevelopment, E) doesnt cannibalize riders from any other routes. If they could get it done for 70million then thats cheap for a "rapid transit" line that would stretch nearly 3km and handle significant ridership on opening day. Not to mention that with a p3 partnership its likely this thing could be payed for plus some, after all anyone who is in the business of developing or selling anything up on Buranby mountain or in the Forest Grove area would do anything possible to get this thing built, not to mention SFU.

[BCPhil]

With the cost of replacing and maintaining the buses (brakes, engines, transmissions) you would think that over the course of 25 or so years the gondola would save millions of dollars over operating the buses (comparing capital+operating costs). I wonder how much.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

The article mentions getting from Kwantlen Polytechnic University's Surrey campus to its Langley campus

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/G...#ixzz118QoD6Et

It takes a minimum of 1 hour to 1 hour 25 min with 3 transfers to get there. Driving is 20 km or 32 min according to Google. I think it would take me longer to run there. But biking on the other I routinely beat the bus, even a single bus. Yesterday I was even ahead of a car for 20 blocks through Whalley in Surrey.

thats bus travel south of the fraser - they seem to set up all the routes to get you from where in surrey to the centre of the universe skytrain station since gawd knows you don't want to get from point a to b in surrey but point a to vancouver my friend's transit commute in surrey sounded like a nightmore i don't know how he did it

[punface]

http://www.burnabynow.com/Scrap+stee...664/story.html

Scrap steel cable, anyone?
BY KEN JESSEN, P.ENG., BURNABY NOW OCTOBER 2, 2010

Dear Editor:

I always marvel at the ingenuity of our elected leaders. Take the proposed Burnaby Mountain (SFU) sky ride and do some simple math: The distance from the Lougheed SkyTrain station to SFU is over twice the distance as the sky ride going up Grouse Mountain. I suspect that during peak morning rush, the proposed gondola will have to move twice as many bodies as the sky ride does during the peak rush up Grouse Mountain. Oh - and Grouse Mountain has two sky rides.

So do some simple math: 2 x 2 x 2 = 8. So each car will have to be some combination of up to eight times faster and up to eight times bigger. We should call this the "Flying Fast Ferry."

I wonder what the scrap value of six kilometres of hardened steel cable is?

Ken Jessen, P.Eng., New Westminster

I assume what this gentleman is missing is that this proposal will have dozens of cars (like the Peak2Peak in Whistler) and not just two cars like the Grouse Mountain SkyRide?

Is this a matter of not using the correct term (gondola vs. aerial tram, according to wikipedia)? What should be used to describe the Grouse Mountain Skyride vs. the Peak2Peak?

Or is he correct and it is just a matter of 2x2x2=8?

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by punface

http://www.burnabynow.com/Scrap+stee...664/story.html



I assume what this gentleman is missing is that this proposal will have dozens of cars (like the Peak2Peak in Whistler) and not just two cars like the Grouse Mountain SkyRide?

Is this a matter of not using the correct term (gondola vs. aerial tram, according to wikipedia)? What should be used to describe the Grouse Mountain Skyride vs. the Peak2Peak?

Or is he correct and it is just a matter of 2x2x2=8?

The Skyride is an aerial tram. There are two large cabins must carry like 28 people standing up and they go back and forth on the two lines. It takes a 15 min for each cab to move from the top to the bottom so you have to wait to get on. It should be noted there are a blue and the red skyride, but the blue one is the original one and now just for staff and cargo, and the paying passengers always use the red one.

The Peak2Peak gondola has 28 cabins and each one carries 22-28 people and it only takes 11 min for each cabin to travel to the end. These cabins go around and come back the other side. In other words the wait is like 2 min between cabins on each side. The total cost was only $51 million and it was a larger project than the proposed one, although that was 3 years ago.

Either way, it does have a waiting time about 1/8 of the skyride and a capacity more than 8 times as large.

Anyway, using gondolas is not just a 'cool idea', but an economic idea, which is why many places in the world from Hong Kong to Portland, not just remote ski resorts, use them to move people up mountains. It can provide better service than buses for less money in the long run: There will be far shorter waiting times at either end, Shorter trips, Faster trips, Snow won't be a problem, maintenance will be cheaper, and once it's paid for, you don't need to replace it for like 50+ years.