Burnaby Jumps On the Gondola Bandwagon
Further proof that our regional politicians live in la,la land. Burnaby politicians want a $210 million plus gondola going to SFU.
For added insult the gondola lobby is playing the environmental/global warming card, which is sheer utter nonsense.
What Zwei sees is a municipal quid, pro quo between the three largest cities in metro Vancouver to build prestige transit projects. If Burnaby supports a $3 billion subway in Vancouver and a flip flop from LRT to light metro in Surrey, based on a fictional cost estimated by a now disgraced mayor, Vancouver and Surrey will support a politically prestigious gondola for Burnaby and SFU.
It is civic election year, TransLink is on its financial uppers and the politicians must show some positive news to justify their generous stipends being on the Mayor’s Council for Transit.
But is there more to the story? As reported in this blog on Sept. 20 202, SFU Gondola Update – Ah, the real story emerges
From 2011:
It seems there is interesting political connections with SFU and TransLink, with the gondola project. TransLink Board member, Howard Nemtin, President, Nemtin Consultants Ltd., is also a member of the The SFU Community Corporation board. Could it be that the Trust’s real estate development arm, UniverCity will use the gondola as a sales tool for their development on the mountain; of course paid for by the regional taxpayer through TransLink?
Other coincidental connections on the SFU Corporation Board include TransLink Board Chair, Nancy Olewiler, who also is the Director of the School of Public Policy in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Simon Fraser University and a blast from the past, Jane Bird, who is famous for her obfuscation with the Canada Line debacle.
One wonders if the same people are still pulling strings?
First said to cost $70 million, then increasing to $ 120 million and presently now said to cost $210 million or more, the SFU gondola is an extremely expensive kit to move $1 a day U-Pass SFU students and faculty to Simon Fraser University, especially when the money could be better spent elsewhere.
And then there are the annual operating costs…………………
Portland’s aerial tramway.
Postscript
The Portland’s gondola cost USD $57 (CAD $72.5) million to build—a nearly fourfold increase over initial cost estimates, which was one of several sources of controversy concerning the project and opened in 2006.
The tram’s operating costs are also higher than expected. Originally, originally expected to cost $915,000 (CAD $1.65 million) annually, but is now over $1.7 (CAD $2.2) million annually.
City of Burnaby backs gondola proposal for Burnaby Mountain
The City of Burnaby has thrown its support behind TransLink’s proposal to build a gondola at Burnaby Mountain.
The municipality has endorsed the Route 1 option, running from the Production Way-University SkyTrain station to UniverCity and Simon Fraser University.
“The Burnaby Mountain Gondola project will create a safe and reliable transit option for Burnaby residents travelling to and from Burnaby Mountain,” Mayor Mike Hurley said in a Friday news release.
“By taking cars and buses off the road, it will be one of the many changes we must make in our city to achieve the aggressive targets we’ve set for reducing carbon emissions.”
In 2020, TransLink and its partners developed the conceptual design of possible routes for the project, estimated to cost at least $210 million. If approved, the owners of two multi-family complexes would also receive compensation, as the gondola would pass over their properties.
According to TransLink, the gondola would support more than 25,000 trips up the mountain daily by SFU students, staff and faculty, and the residents of UniverCity. During its first round of public consultation, 85 per cent of its 13,000 survey respondents supported the idea.
Last February, the Simon Fraser University Student Society endorsed the project and its three shortest possible routes, citing transit chaos for students trying to access the Burnaby Mountain campus during snowstorms, and navigating regularly crowded buses. According to the student group, more than 88 per cent of its members use public transit to get to class.
The route endorsed by the City of Burnaby, according to its concept designs, would create only five towers along the entire gondola route, with no towers in the Forest Grove neighbourhood.
The next step is for the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation to consider it for inclusion in its new 10-year plan, expected to guide TransLink’s priorities for the next decade.
According to its website, TransLink will also conduct additional technical analysis to help build the business case, and aims to further engage the public in 2022. TransLink’s board of directors and mayors’ council will then provide direction on whether the project will advance.
– with files from Simon Little
As with any transit, or rapid transit project the devil is in the details!
It is quite clear they are still in the visioning portion of this project’s development. These statements from the article are key.
“In 2020, TransLink and its partners developed the conceptual design of possible routes for the project, estimated to cost at least $210 million. If approved, the owners of two multi-family complexes would also receive compensation, as the gondola would pass over their properties.”
and,
Last February, the Simon Fraser University Student Society endorsed the project and its three shortest possible routes, citing transit chaos for students trying to access the Burnaby Mountain campus during snowstorms, and navigating regularly crowded buses. According to the student group, more than 88 per cent of its members use public transit to get to class.
and,
The route endorsed by the City of Burnaby, according to its concept designs, would create only five towers along the entire gondola route, with no towers in the Forest Grove neighbourhood.
1. First point, they aren’t sure which route it will take and its clear that, Translink is more than comfortable having to pay off residents than the City of Burnaby is. This means Translink couldn’t care less if this goes above your house and don’t fear any local political backlash, where the City of Burnaby does and certainly should. Well of course university students support it. They need something to get to campus however, they generally as a group, don’t directly pay property taxes, are not long term residents in the area or own a home that they are still paying for, while somebody plans to build a gondola system on top of your roof. It says to me that Translink don’t expect any real problems, saying effectively, we are either, foolish, don’t care about local issues or don’t think this project will really happen but just aren’t saying anything about it publicly.
2. Translink has different ideas about what the actual building and operational plans of this Gondola will be than its other partners. The ever escalating cost and the shortness on detail about the project are important. These support towers are enormous and expensive, any plan that reduces the need to build and maintain 5 of these towers plus reduce political tensions as well as the need to pay off residents, should have immediately been answered with, “Yep, that is what we are doing”, there should not be need for further study around that subject. Again, there seem to be differing views on what an issue could be.
3. No one is saying what the operational plan for this thing is. There is more to this than building it, then turning it on and then saying,” come aboard”. How the vehicles operate is important, is it straight running or platooning the vehicles during peak demand for example. How and more importantly, when, is maintenance going to be handled. You can’t do the majority of work at night like with a bus or train network. You need light here to do it, it must be mostly done during the day. It maybe also too expensive to do at night given the highly specialized and most likely expensive, maintenance that the niche technology of this gondola will need.
Then there was this jem of a statement, “TransLink will also conduct additional technical analysis to help build the business case, and aims to further engage the public in 2022. TransLink’s board of directors and mayors’ council will then provide direction on whether the project will advance.”
4. You don’t have a business case yet and its already estimated to cost $210 million, 3 times the original price. There is no publicly understood, operational and maintenance plan and there are still questions about its route!. A business case estimate where Translink, the main operator, is ok paying off home owners and or renters, let that one sink in for a moment. All of this in an era, where Translink or anyone else really, has anything but the vaguest ideas of when their incoming ridership money and tax income, will return to pre pandemic levels. Hopefully, for residents near this project, I think this project is a long way off.
Zwei replies: I have tried 3 times now to get an answer to a rather simple question; :What is the ruling gradients for Gagliardi Way and University Drive East and the city of Burnaby will not release the figures, which makes me very suspect.
Also Metro Vancouver is also home to the Mad Aerial tramway cable cutter, who has struck twice in Squamish. Thus means extensive and expensive security measures must be taken.
You seem to consistently belittle subsidized pass holders on this blog and it is frankly disgusting. A transit rider is a transit rider. It shouldn’t matter how they got their pass. You can use this logic to defund transit service to many communities in need and to communities with seniors as well, since they also can get transit subsidies. The goal of transit is not to turn a profit. No one seems to ask whether highway 1 turns a profit and yet this system to always come up with transit costs.
Fundamentally the goals should be:
1. Induce new ridership a low cost per new rider
2. Decrease marginal operational costs per additional rider.
3. Decrease CO2 emissions per traveler regionally.
This project does all 3.
Also
“Also Metro Vancouver is also home to the Mad Aerial tramway cable cutter, who has struck twice in Squamish. Thus means extensive and expensive security measures must be taken.”
This is just insane FUD. I guess we shouldn’t build LRT because someone could put a bomb on one.
Zwei Replies: The U-Pass is heavily subsidized, which means others pay for $1 a day, ride at will, transit. Now that subsidy is either paid by the home owner or a reduction of service from the rest of the transit system.
And now for your points.
1) Actually no and for many reasons, as aerial tramways are expensive to operate and an entire new group of employees and maintenance staff must be hired. As there is no firm costs and everything is conceptual and I think you are being a little too quick to make such claims.
2) Actually, you are increasing coasts by forcing the transit customer to transfer onto the aerial tramway. As the vast majority of users will be using the $1 a day U-Pass, the apportioned fare could be as low as 10 cents per customer a day.
3) The decrease in CO2 would be minuscule and with new battery buses on order, the argument is moot.
It is a sad fact that when everything else goes against you, you bring up HWY 1. Well the aerial tramway will not take a car off the road, unless they ban parking at SFU and if that happens, buses will be once again serving the university because the areal tramway would not be able to cope with the ridership.
Sadly, your arguments are full of prunes and as TransLink will find it difficult to source the money, I think the SFU aerial tramway makes a nice politcal sound bite for the 2022 Burnaby civic election.