SFU/Burnaby Mtn Gondola | Proposed

[SpongeG]

would this be in addition to busses? or just make the busses less frequent?

[touraccuracy]

would it be faster for me to catch the b-line up to como lake/north road then transfer to the 143 up to SFU (current commute) or to take the b-line right to lougheed, transfer to the skytrain for one stop, then transfer again to the gondola? probably the first option.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by touraccuracy

would it be faster for me to catch the b-line up to como lake/north road then transfer to the 143 up to SFU (current commute) or to take the b-line right to lougheed, transfer to the skytrain for one stop, then transfer again to the gondola? probably the first option.

Well, that far in the future, you'll have Evergreen Line instead of the B-Line. So if you were on the Evergreen line, you could ride it through to Production Way without transfer. With the more frequent service of the Gondola, I would wager it would be faster on average, because the transfer to the bus in Burquitlam would be variable, and possibly quite long. Whereas the capacity, and always there nature of the Gondola would make waits minimal. The only difference would be at peak times. But, I think it would take less time to wait in a long line for a gondola, than it does to currently wait for the bus, wait to get on the bus, wait for others to get on the bus, then wait for the bus to leave.

[Alex Mackinnon]

I'd bet money on the Gondola being faster than the bus regardless of wait times. Buses crawl up that hill, which is about 6km from the skytrain station to the top of the loop. Depending on the gondola system installed, you could have a line speed nearing 30km/h; which on a 3km long route would blow away the speed of the bus.

[madmigs]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I'd bet money on the Gondola being faster than the bus regardless of wait times. Buses crawl up that hill, which is about 6km from the skytrain station to the top of the loop. Depending on the gondola system installed, you could have a line speed nearing 30km/h; which on a 3km long route would blow away the speed of the bus.

Not to mention save on bus wear and tear. Climbing up and down the hill all day would really do a number to the brakes and probably require more engine/etc maintenance than buses on more regular/flatter routes.

ANd i guess it would depend on capacity and demand, but apart from people living on the burquitlam bus route to sfu(ie. already using the skytrain), would people use that bus to get to sfu or just continue on to Production way? It would be what 2 more stops at maybe 3-4 minutes longer(once the evergreen line is done). If I was translink, I would want to try to push everyone to Production way to use the gondola system.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by zivan56

I'm surprised that there is no mention of severe wear and tear on the buses. Ever since they stopped using the high floor 40 foot buses, it has been torturous for most buses to make it up/down the hill.

When SFU first opened BC Hydro purchased a special fleet of five Prevost diesel buses with manual transmissions to deal with the hill:



My photo, taken in 1974.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I'd bet money on the Gondola being faster than the bus regardless of wait times. Buses crawl up that hill, which is about 6km from the skytrain station to the top of the loop. Depending on the gondola system installed, you could have a line speed nearing 30km/h; which on a 3km long route would blow away the speed of the bus.

An earlier post said that the Gondola from Production SFU would run 8 - 10 minutes faster than the current buses. If your extra time to get to Production & on the Gondola is less than 8 minutes, you'll arrive at SFU faster.

I skimmed the report & noticed that once the Gondola is running Translink is expecting to stop running buses between Production & SFU (and reuse them on other routes).

What got me thinking was whether a 2nd Gondola from SFU to Clarke Rd @ Como Lake would be added (connecting to Evergreen line), or another new Gondola from SFU to Hastings @ Inlet Dr. (a new transit loop there so the 135 doesn't need to go all the way up to SFU)

[touraccuracy]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Well, that far in the future, you'll have Evergreen Line instead of the B-Line. So if you were on the Evergreen line, you could ride it through to Production Way without transfer. With the more frequent service of the Gondola, I would wager it would be faster on average, because the transfer to the bus in Burquitlam would be variable, and possibly quite long. Whereas the capacity, and always there nature of the Gondola would make waits minimal. The only difference would be at peak times. But, I think it would take less time to wait in a long line for a gondola, than it does to currently wait for the bus, wait to get on the bus, wait for others to get on the bus, then wait for the bus to leave.

ah good point, i hadn't even thought of the evergreen line being done. oh well, by the time that line and the gondola are done i'll be long gone from sfu and probably from coquitlam/port moody too!

[SpongeG]

the gondola according to the pic doesn't go to the main bus loop so it might sound quicker but people will have to walk a lot further to get where the bus used to take em

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

the gondola according to the pic doesn't go to the main bus loop so it might sound quicker but people will have to walk a lot further to get where the bus used to take em

The base destination choices:


The Destination choices:


The blue line was the segmented line.

Depends on if they want to focus on Univercity or the University. The Gondola's destination is a good compromise, but I'm not totally familiar with the best locations.

Anyone wish to comment on the best choices?

Of note, not shown is the possibility of running a segmented line from Lake City.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

An earlier post said that the Gondola from Production SFU would run 8 - 10 minutes faster than the current buses. If your extra time to get to Production & on the Gondola is less than 8 minutes, you'll arrive at SFU faster.

I skimmed the report & noticed that once the Gondola is running Translink is expecting to stop running buses between Production & SFU (and reuse them on other routes).

What got me thinking was whether a 2nd Gondola from SFU to Clarke Rd @ Como Lake would be added (connecting to Evergreen line), or another new Gondola from SFU to Hastings @ Inlet Dr. (a new transit loop there so the 135 doesn't need to go all the way up to SFU)

The gondola would also have less waiting time at both ends as the gondolas come constantly where the bus comes every 15 minutes, at least when I have ridden in the evenings and on weekends.

[acjames76]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

The blue line was the segmented line.

Depends on if they want to focus on Univercity or the University. The Gondola's destination is a good compromise, but I'm not totally familiar with the best locations.

Anyone wish to comment on the best choices?

Of note, not shown is the possibility of running a segmented line from Lake City.

It may not be necessary to have a segmented line from Lake City Way. The green dotted route has several features not considered in the feasibility study:
1. puts SFU end closer to students needs (I know UniverCity is pushing a more eastern terminal for the residents, but the student population will always outnumber the residents.)
2. is further from the headwaters of Stoney Creek, the best salmon-bearing stream in the region. (The feasibility study only referenced a 1997 biophysical report. At that time, there were no salmon spawning in the upper reaches of Stoney Creek. Since 2004, there have been. Now there are Coho, Chum, Pinks, and resident cuthroat trout. Also, the endangered Nooksack Dace are found in the lower part. )
3. the study did mention that "much less infrastructure existing around this SkyTrain station, there are more options for the placement of a Bottom Terminal"

The direct Lake City Way skytrain station to SFU campus must be looked at in the same detail as the other options presented.

[Spork]

The red alignment is vastly superior. It has potential to be integrated with any developments South of the Cornerstone building, isn't down a steep incline (yellow & segmented blue), and would straddle future residential developments and current university developments perfectly.

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

[madmigs]

Originally Posted by acjames76

It may not be necessary to have a segmented line from Lake City Way. The green dotted route has several features not considered in the feasibility study:
1. puts SFU end closer to students needs (I know UniverCity is pushing a more eastern terminal for the residents, but the student population will always outnumber the residents.)
2. is further from the headwaters of Stoney Creek, the best salmon-bearing stream in the region. (The feasibility study only referenced a 1997 biophysical report. At that time, there were no salmon spawning in the upper reaches of Stoney Creek. Since 2004, there have been. Now there are Coho, Chum, Pinks, and resident cuthroat trout. Also, the endangered Nooksack Dace are found in the lower part. )
3. the study did mention that "much less infrastructure existing around this SkyTrain station, there are more options for the placement of a Bottom Terminal"

The direct Lake City Way skytrain station to SFU campus must be looked at in the same detail as the other options presented.

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.

[wrenegade]

I don't know the area very well, but just looking at the ariel view, it looks like the red alignment makes the most sense. It passes over few houses, has a central top terminal and most importantly has it's base terminal and the right location. It also is the shortest route of all of them. However, $70M is a lot of money especially when Translink is still $400M short on the Evergreen Line.

Question, does anyone know what this is budgeted to cost $15M-$20M more than the Whistler Peak-to-Peak? It seems like that would have been a much more difficult (expensive) construction process.

[Zassk]

I speculate that the price difference is mainly because Peak 2 Peak only runs for about 6 hours/day, while this gondola will be expected to run 20.5 hours/day.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by awvan

I don't know the area very well, but just looking at the ariel view, it looks like the red alignment makes the most sense. It passes over few houses, has a central top terminal and most importantly has it's base terminal and the right location. It also is the shortest route of all of them. However, $70M is a lot of money especially when Translink is still $400M short on the Evergreen Line.

Question, does anyone know what this is budgeted to cost $15M-$20M more than the Whistler Peak-to-Peak? It seems like that would have been a much more difficult (expensive) construction process.

Property purchases? or can the gondola go directly over all of the buildings?

[twoNeurons]

I believe the red line was the preferred route in the study.

Also, you definitely want to serve Univercity. During the summer, you don't want ridership to suffer.

In addition, that is pretty much where the existing transit loop is. Putting it elsewhere is similar to putting a SkyTrain station at West Port Moody instead of at the Transit Loop. (Apologies if you aren't following the Evergreen Line thread).

The eastern segmented line is only put in there for one reason, to show a cost differential for a line that doesn't go over any houses.

I doubt it would go forward there, but it has to be put in so that when people complain that they should've chosen a route that doesn't go over their house, they can point to the study which shows that it would be a lot more expensive. That's my guess, anyhow.

[wrenegade]

Originally Posted by Zassk

I speculate that the price difference is mainly because Peak 2 Peak only runs for about 6 hours/day, while this gondola will be expected to run 20.5 hours/day.

Is the $70M quoted figure including operating costs for a certain period? I was under the impression it was construction costs. Also, I believe the length of the W/B P2P is 4.1km and this is 2.8km although the P2P is 4 towers as opposed to 5 here.

If it includes land acquisition costs I could see why it would be up there, the land was free (essentially) as W/B already owned theirs. Seems like an awful lot of money either way.

[Zassk]

Well, I figured that the construction costs would not be the same for a gondola that runs nearly 24/7 vs. one that only runs probably less than 1/4 as many hours per year. I doubt the design requirements are the same for both.