HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #481  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 9:58 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
For tourist gondolas the number of stops is irrelevant - it's the view that counts. And for the price of a transit fare I'm sure it would get a reasonable number of tourists - just look at how many of them ride the Seabus.
Make it a 4 stop gondola

Stop one, Lougheed Town Centre. This would allow the Expo line not to be interlined with Millennium line.

Stop 2, SFU

Stop 3, Admiralty Point Park. Somewhere on the other side of the Bay. A possible tourist draw, and another way to build up that side of the bay.

Stop 4, end of Mt Seymour Pkwy. This could be the beginning/end of the North Shore's future rapid transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #482  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 10:25 AM
retro_orange retro_orange is offline
retro_orange
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: East Van
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
I can say that I've taken American and German tourists to SFU and they loved the view, the sense of place, and the locations from Stargate!
It would be cool if the gondola went across the Burrard inlet from Burnaby mountain to have a stop at Belcarra then across the inlet again, a stop on the other side near Deep Cove and terminating at Capilano university. That would definitely be a tourist attraction! I have no idea if it's even technically feasible let alone financially
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #483  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 4:40 PM
Bdawe Bdawe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunrise
Posts: 392
I always thought the problem with the gondola is that it's too sexy, as in, despite the technical case for it compared to existing bus service, it looks to many voters like some sort of frill for students perceived to be undeserving of such things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #484  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 7:27 PM
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdawe View Post
I always thought the problem with the gondola is that it's too sexy, as in, despite the technical case for it compared to existing bus service, it looks to many voters like some sort of frill for students perceived to be undeserving of such things.
I don't think it has anything to do with students.

When you say Gondola in this part of the world you think of tourist and ski hills. Most people around here don't think of it as transportation or commuting to work/school etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #485  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 9:43 PM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper View Post
I don't think it has anything to do with students.

When you say Gondola in this part of the world you think of tourist and ski hills. Most people around here don't think of it as transportation or commuting to work/school etc.
No the only issue was Mayor Corrigan who hates poor people and students. If anyone else was Mayor you could be certain that they would have included the Gondola in the transit plebiscite.

As for if it's cost effective, if it costs 3 million to operate, how much does the buses cost? http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and...ce-Review.aspx

135 - 6,210,000 annual boarding's, $7,496,000, cost per passenger $1.21
143 - 797,000 annual boarding's, $1,387,000, cost per passenger $1.74
144 - 1,842,000 annual boarding's, $3,447,000, cost per passenger $1.87
145 - 2,653,000 annual boarding's, $2,248,000, cost per passenger $0.85

The Gondola would directly replace the 145, and would likely truncate the other three to the gondola location.
144 is from Metrotown station so most of that bus route would be intact up to the Gondola station.
143 is from Coquitlam station, this likely gets replaced with the Evergreen line in 2017
135 is from Burrard Station, it does not overlap with the skytrain, so likely this would be the only bus still going up the mountain unless it gets re-routed to the Gondola.

Of note the 135 is completely down Hastings, and is more likely to be replaced with another Skytrain/Subway line if the capacity ever warranted that. So if no Gondola gets built, it's likely the rest of the line becomes rapid-transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #486  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 10:45 PM
Sheba Sheba is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 2,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai View Post
No the only issue was Mayor Corrigan who hates poor people and students. If anyone else was Mayor you could be certain that they would have included the Gondola in the transit plebiscite.
...and the only issue stopping the Skytrain continuing all the way to UBC is Point Grey.

Quote:
"It was a wish list, an attempt to get support around the region by promising everybody everything,” said Corrigan. “I wanted a more realistic, more focused plan. If you keep adding items to a wish list then pretty soon it becomes so unrealistic that no one ever believes it will be done."
Vancouver Sun
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #487  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2016, 11:45 PM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai View Post
No the only issue was Mayor Corrigan who hates poor people and students. If anyone else was Mayor you could be certain that they would have included the Gondola in the transit plebiscite.

As for if it's cost effective, if it costs 3 million to operate, how much does the buses cost? http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and...ce-Review.aspx

135 - 6,210,000 annual boarding's, $7,496,000, cost per passenger $1.21
143 - 797,000 annual boarding's, $1,387,000, cost per passenger $1.74
144 - 1,842,000 annual boarding's, $3,447,000, cost per passenger $1.87
145 - 2,653,000 annual boarding's, $2,248,000, cost per passenger $0.85

The Gondola would directly replace the 145, and would likely truncate the other three to the gondola location.
144 is from Metrotown station so most of that bus route would be intact up to the Gondola station.
143 is from Coquitlam station, this likely gets replaced with the Evergreen line in 2017
135 is from Burrard Station, it does not overlap with the skytrain, so likely this would be the only bus still going up the mountain unless it gets re-routed to the Gondola.

Of note the 135 is completely down Hastings, and is more likely to be replaced with another Skytrain/Subway line if the capacity ever warranted that. So if no Gondola gets built, it's likely the rest of the line becomes rapid-transit.
Would a Gondola be able to have the frequency needed?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #488  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2016, 12:44 AM
Sheba Sheba is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 2,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Would a Gondola be able to have the frequency needed?
They did the math and yes it would. Bonus that they could ramp up / down the number of 'cars' (like Skytrain can) to adjust for passenger volume too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #489  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2016, 1:41 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Would a Gondola be able to have the frequency needed?
The Emirates Air Line (built for the 2012 London Olympics) is roughly the same length as the SFU route. It's got 15-second headways and can support 5,000 riders per hour, so a gondola can definitely provide the needed frequency.

I suspect that the real question is whether or not Translink and/or Burnaby is willing to spend enough money to maintain such a high frequency.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #490  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2016, 3:02 AM
Bdawe Bdawe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunrise
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
The Emirates Air Line (built for the 2012 London Olympics) is roughly the same length as the SFU route. It's got 15-second headways and can support 5,000 riders per hour, so a gondola can definitely provide the needed frequency.

I suspect that the real question is whether or not Translink and/or Burnaby is willing to spend enough money to maintain such a high frequency.
I can't imagine that the marginal cost of putting another gondola on the line all that high, since they don't require individual operators
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #491  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 9:30 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,797
The Gondola is the same as the Canada Line, aka "the RAV line" was. People don't see a need for it because status quo wins. Before the Canada Line was built, people were saying how they think a train to Richmond is a bad idea because it's on a flood plain and it's not scheduled for massive growth etc. etc.

Portland has a gondola ( well, it's an aerial tram ) to access its university that had opposition as well.

As for cost-effectiveness, it would pay itself off ( in reduced cost and wear on the buses ) within the lifespan of a bus.

And yes it would be a tourist draw, just like the lowly Seabus is a tourist draw
And yes it would give SFU a leg up on UBC
And yes it would only have two stops.... like Grouse mountain. like the S2S Gondola.
And yes it would likely be priced higher in a distance-based fare system
And yes it would be popular with 95% of residents
And yes it would make taking a bike up to SFU less painful ( bikes are more easily accommodated in a gondola than buses )
And yes it makes a lot of sense... which is why:

No, it won't be built any time soon.

Seriously, we wouldn't see any movement on it until shovels are in the ground for a UBC line. The BC election can't come soon enough (that's when stuff happens, right?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #492  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 9:33 PM
Jebby's Avatar
Jebby Jebby is offline
Make America Great Again!
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 3,267
What was the estimated cost of the gondola?
__________________
In the heart of a busy metropolis skyscrapers are a vivid reminder of the constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #493  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 9:35 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kisai View Post
Of note the 135 is completely down Hastings, and is more likely to be replaced with another Skytrain/Subway line if the capacity ever warranted that. So if no Gondola gets built, it's likely the rest of the line becomes rapid-transit.
I don't see a Hastings Rapid transit Line getting as far as SFU, though... Maybe as far as Willingdon and then South along that route to BCIT, but that's a big maybe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #494  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 9:41 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jebby View Post
What was the estimated cost of the gondola?
You can check out the Business case here: http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and...n-Gondola.aspx

Quote:
4.1.2 Capital Costs
The total capital cost of the project is estimated at $114 million (2011$) and encompasses
the three potential procurement options. This is a comprehensive figure that includes all
TransLink and contractor costs including:

 Project management
 Preliminary investigations/engineering
 Environmental mitigation costs
 Private land purchases
 3S Gondola costs
 Terminal, tower, and alignment costs
 Transit integration costs
 Permits
 System start-up costs
 Interest during construction
 Premiums for project risks and contingencies

There is some variation in total capital costs among the three procurement options but it is
not sufficient to preclude any of them from consideration.

4.1.3 Operations and Maintenance Costs

Under all three procurement options the operations period is assumed to be 25 years. The
total annual O&M costs, including direct TransLink costs such as policing and risk
adjustments, are approximately $3 to $3.5 million per year. Again there is some variation
among the three procurement options but it is not sufficient to preclude any of them from
consideration.
A chart from the study which illustrates the costs over 25 years:



Basically, in year 28, it would break even from a financial perspective.
This doesn't take into account other benefits like
  • lower GHG emissions
  • lower noise for residents (although there are misplaced fears of impacting other residents' privacy)
  • increased quality of ride and service
  • better on-time performance in the winter
  • higher transit draw ( usage ) of a gondola
  • coolness factor (more studies should include this)

Last edited by twoNeurons; Sep 13, 2016 at 9:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #495  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 10:11 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,797
One more thing:

The benefit for Translink is that MOST of the cost of the BMGT is capital costs. If Burnaby/SFU/BC pick up the $100M tab to build it out, Translink's overall operating costs go down. That's always a good thing as it's WAY easier to get funding for sexy capital projects from politicians than for operating costs.

It's also why Translink won't touch it. Although it will save them money over 25 years or so, they'd much rather have someone else pony up the capital cost. To be fair, unless Translink is experienced at holding land, developing it and creating demand around stations (a model which I advocate, btw), they should not be involved in any capital costs anyhow.

I'd love Translink to start buying up land along the 10th avenue corridor where stations are planned, and then position stations so that they go through their properties, where they could lease space to businesses, but I just don't see the public liking this. It's definitely a more Asian model, but I think it works. In places like Japan and Hong Kong, train companies make some decisions about stations based on where they can buy up land and make money. It's how CP did it when they ran rail across the country as well.

One example is the new Chuo maglev line under construction, JR Central chose Shinagawa as a terminus because they owned more of the land around the area, and properties around stations like Shinjuku ( which would a more convenient location ) are locked up by JR East. There is a reason why these lines can be run at a profit and part of the reason is owning the land around the stations.

I wish Translink did more of this. That is TRUE TOD.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #496  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 10:29 PM
Sheba Sheba is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 2,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
I don't see a Hastings Rapid transit Line getting as far as SFU, though... Maybe as far as Willingdon and then South along that route to BCIT, but that's a big maybe.
At some point on here we checked the math and the grade is too steep to take Skytrain all the way up Burnaby Mountain. With current technology we're stuck with buses or a gondola.

I could see a Hastings Skytrain line going to Kootenay Loop, then dropping down on a diagonal along Douglas Road to Brentwood and continuing down Willingdon to Metrotown. There are a few routes it could follow after that (my pick would be to take either 41st or 49th to Canada Line).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #497  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 11:05 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
At some point on here we checked the math and the grade is too steep to take Skytrain all the way up Burnaby Mountain. With current technology we're stuck with buses or a gondola.

I could see a Hastings Skytrain line going to Kootenay Loop, then dropping down on a diagonal along Douglas Road to Brentwood and continuing down Willingdon to Metrotown. There are a few routes it could follow after that (my pick would be to take either 41st or 49th to Canada Line).
Oh I don't think it's impossible, it may have to be a deep underground station though.

From Hastings (@120m elevation) where Hastings veers past Cliff South to the SFU bus loop (@320m elevation) it's ~2.2km

Seattle did an LRT station about 50m deep for their Capitol Hill LRT station.

Assuming you're elevated 10m on Hastings, you'd have a climb of 140m over 2.2km for a 50m deep station... which is about a 6.3% grade.

Malaysia's system in Kelana (SkyTrain) has max grades of 5% so I don't think 6% is outside the realm of possibility, but I do agree that it would likely be expensive... and I think a gondola is a MUCH saner alternative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #498  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 11:37 PM
jsbertram jsbertram is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
Oh I don't think it's impossible, it may have to be a deep underground station though.

From Hastings (@120m elevation) where Hastings veers past Cliff South to the SFU bus loop (@320m elevation) it's ~2.2km

Seattle did an LRT station about 50m deep for their Capitol Hill LRT station.

Assuming you're elevated 10m on Hastings, you'd have a climb of 140m over 2.2km for a 50m deep station... which is about a 6.3% grade.

Malaysia's system in Kelana (SkyTrain) has max grades of 5% so I don't think 6% is outside the realm of possibility, but I do agree that it would likely be expensive... and I think a gondola is a MUCH saner alternative.
This is assuming a straight line from Hastings @ Barnet (actually Inlet Dr) to SFU, but by tunneling using a large S curve instead, you can get a longer line to SFU at a lower grade.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #499  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2016, 11:59 PM
retro_orange retro_orange is offline
retro_orange
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: East Van
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbertram View Post
This is assuming a straight line from Hastings @ Barnet (actually Inlet Dr) to SFU, but by tunneling using a large S curve instead, you can get a longer line to SFU at a lower grade.
As tunneling has been a smooth and efficient process in the area to date
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #500  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2016, 1:13 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by twoNeurons View Post
Oh I don't think it's impossible, it may have to be a deep underground station though

-snip-

Assuming you're elevated 10m on Hastings, you'd have a climb of 140m over 2.2km for a 50m deep station... which is about a 6.3% grade.
And even if such a station were possible, I highly doubt SFU students OR faculty would prefer walking up and down ten flights of escalators for 4-5 days a week.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:24 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.