Rossland Cover - Wire Bind · Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study I - 5 May 2009 a detachable...

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study i April 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0. INTRODUCTION .1 Background I – 1 .2 Location and Regional Context I – 2 .3 Goals and Objectives I – 3 .4 Examples of Similar Systems I – 3 .5 Scope of Work I – 11 2.0. TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT .1 Topographic Mapping and Aerial Photography II – 1 .2 Land Ownership II - 2 .3 Slope and Land Capability Analyses II – 3 .4 Existing Skier Visit Analysis II – 5 .5 Parking & Transportation II – 7 .6 Trail Network II – 8 .7 Existing Accommodation II - 8 .8 Skiers from Accommodation II – 13 .9 Skier Walking Distance II – 14 .10 Red Mountain Existing Base Area Staging Capacity II – 15 .11 Future Development Plans II – 16 .12 Future Skiers II - 18 3.0. GONDOLA ALTERNATIVES .1 Introduction III – 1 .2 Rossland Terminal Location III - 1 .3 Red Mountain Base Terminal III – 6 .4 Alignment Options III – 7 .5 Capacity Requirements III - 10 .6 Transportation Systems Alternatives III - 10 4.0 ECONOMICS .1 Introduction IV – 1 .2 Capital Budget IV – 1 .3 Operating Parameters IV – 5 .4 Operating and Maintenance Costs IV – 5

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study ii April 2009

5.0. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .1 Summary V – 1 .2 Preferred Solution V – 2 .3 Recommendation V - 3 LIST OF TABLES II.1 Red Mountain – Areas with Slopes Suitable for Development II – 4 II.2 Red Mountain 2007/09 Skier Visit Distribution Analysis II – 6 II.3 Red Mountain 2006/07 Skier Visit Distribution Analysis II – 6 II.4 Rossland Townsite Public Accommodation II – 10 II.5 Red Mountain Base – Existing Accommodation Inventory II – 12 II.6 Peak Period Occupancy & Skier Participation Rates II – 14 II.7 Skiers from Accommodation in Rossland II – 14 II.8 Potential Skiers within SWD of Gondola Terminal II - 15 II.9 Red Mountain Existing Base Area Staging Capacity II – 16 II.10 City of Rossland Development Potential in Equivalent Single Family Units II – 17 II.11 Skiers generated from City of Rossland Accommodation at Build-Out II – 18 II.12 Future Skiers within SWD of Proposed Gondola Terminals II – 18 III.1 Rossland Terminal Options – Opportunities & Constraints Analysis III – 4 III.2 Peak Period Gondola Capacity Requirements III -10 III.3 Rossland Red Mountain Gondola Alternatives III - 15 IV.1 People Mover Cost Estimates IV – 2 IV.2 Capital Budget Summary IV – 4 IV.3 Rossland People Mover Operating Periods IV – 5 IV.4 Projected Operating Expenses IV – 8

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study iii April 2009

LIST OF FIGURES 1. Area Location Map 2. Land Ownership Map 3. Mountain Slope & Land Capability Analysis 4a. Existing Dwelling Unit & Public Bed Analysis – Rossland 4b. Existing Bed & Skier Density Analysis – Red Mountain 4c. Future Dwelling Units & Public Bed Analysis – Rossland 5a. Gondola Alignment Options showing properties 5b. Gondola Alignment Options with Orthophoto 6a. Gondola Alignment A Profile 6b Gondola Route B Profile 7a. Gondola Concept – Rossland Station 7b. Gondola Concept - Red Mountain Station

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study I - 1 May 2009

1.0 INTRODUCTION .1 Background Rossland is a small city (pop. 3,400) located in the West Kootenay region of south central British Columbia, just north of the Canada-U.S. Boundary. The City has a long history of mining activity dating from the discovery of gold on Red Mountain in the late 19th century. Incorporated in 1897, Rossland quickly grew to a busy city of over 3,000 people by the turn of the century. Resident participation in outdoor recreation activities has a similarly long history. Although snowshoeing, skiing and horse drawn sleighs were common forms of transportation in the early days, local legend suggests that skiing for fun started with a race from the top of Red Mountain to the Catholic Church on February 15, 1896. Lift serviced skiing began in the 1930’s and Red Mountain was the first ski area in western Canada to install a chairlift when the original rope tow was replaced with a chairlift to the top of Red Mountain in 1947 by a local community association. Over the years, Rossland has produced many national team ski racers including Olympic medalists Nancy Greene-Raine and Kerrin Lee-Gartner.

Looking toward Red Mountain along Columbia Avenue


In May 2008 the City of Rossland completed its Strategic Sustainability Plan, the result of a two year community based process to develop a long term Community Vision. In October 2008, the City adopted a new Official Community Plan developed in parallel with the Strategic Sustainability Plan. As part of the Vision to Action process a Community Design Charette was held in 2007. During the charette, a long held desire for a gondola connection between the Rossland town centre and the ski area was raised and discussed. The City of Rossland has had a long-standing policy of promoting four-season tourism as a means for economic diversification and in 2007 the City was designated as a “Resort Municipality” by the provincial authorities. This designation, combined with the significant increase in recreational based development over the last four years, led the City to decide to investigate the viability of a gondola connection from Rossland to the ski area.

In December 2008, Ecosign Mountain Resort Planners Ltd., of Whistler British Columbia, Canada and Doppelmayr/CTEC of Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada were retained to undertake a pre-feasibility study of the connection. The primary objective of the study is to assess the technical feasibility of the connection and identify the constraints and benefits of the development of a gondola for the City of Rossland. As part of this study Ecosign and Doppelmayr have taken into consideration the following factors:

1. Existing and future land uses at Red Mountain Resort (RMR) and in the Rossland Downtown and Midtown areas.

2. Opportunities for improvements to the existing skiing, hiking and cycling trails between RMR and the City. Other all season uses of the lift were also considered.

3. Preliminary technical feasibility of the connection including terminal siting options, road crossings, tower locations, capacity and system configurations, equipment selection and geo-technical implications.

4. Economic considerations including capital and operating costs, potential revenue sources. Economic benefits

5. Land ownership and regulatory approvals. .2 Location and Regional Context The location of the City of Rossland and the Red Mountain Resort are illustrated on Figure 1, Area Location Map. The City of Rossland is situated in the south central portion of British Columbia. The City lies between the Monashee and Selkirk Mountain ranges at a mean elevation of 1,020 metres and is within the Regional District of Kootenay Boundary. Rossland is only ten kilometres from the Canada -USA border and approximately halfway between Vancouver, British Columbia and Calgary, Alberta. Rossland can be accessed via Highways 3B and 22. The closest


urban centres are Kelowna, BC (300 km northwest) and Spokane, WA (200 km south). Red Mountain Resort is located approximately 4.2 kilometres northwest of the Rossland downtown on Highway 3B. .3 Goals and Objectives Ecosign met with representatives of the City of Rossland, Red Mountain Ventures, Tourism Rossland and Teck Cominco to discuss the goals and objectives of creating an aerial connection from Rossland to the ski area. As the City of Rossland tries to move toward a sustainable future, they would like to move away from reliance on the automobile as the main means of transportation. A large portion of the population of Rossland participates in skiing and/or works at the Red Mountain and their primary mode of transportation to and from the resort is the private automobile. Tourism Rossland claims the single largest impediment to marketing Red/Rossland as a ski destination is the lack of public transportation between the town and the ski base. This background provided the following objectives:

1. An aerial transportation link should cater to both skiers and non skiers. 2. In addition to bringing skiers to the mountain, the connection must be able to

bring people staying in the resort accommodation into the town of Rossland. 3. The connection should offer the opportunity to expand the existing summer

hiking and mountain biking offerings. .4 Examples of other Similar Systems There are currently a number of gondolas and cabriolet lifts installed in mountain resort communities that function primarily as a means of transportation around a resort as people movers between different parts of a resort. Telluride - Mountain Village, Colorado Constructed in 1996, the Telluride Gondola links the historic Town of Telluride with the purpose built destination resort community of Mountain Village located on a plateau above Telluride, adjacent to the Telluride Ski Resort. The 11 minute gondola ride eliminates the 13 kilometer, 20 minute drive between the two towns. The gondola system runs, year round from 7 a.m. to midnight 7 days a week and is free of charge. It closes for 6 weeks in the Spring and for 3 weeks in the Fall during the quietest periods in the region and for maintenance. The gondola received the Mountain Sports and Living 1998 Design Award for Resort Access Innovation, and was named the 1999 Outstanding Transit Project by the Colorado Association of Transit Agencies.


The Town of Mountain Village was planned and built in the 1980s-90s for the purpose of adding resort facilities, parking and accommodation to support the Telluride Ski and Golf Resort without impacting the historic character of the Town of Telluride. The gondola provides an effective and attractive transportation solution for linking visitors and residents between the two communities. Visitors can take advantage of both the shopping, dining and nightlife found in Telluride while staying in convenient ski-in/ski-out condos in Mountain Village. In an economic sustainability model prepared for the Town of Mountain Village Home Owner’s Association by the consulting firm Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) in 2008, EPS estimated that more than 50% of the money spent by visitors staying in Mountain Village on food and beverage and retail purchases flows to the Town of Telluride.

People-mover Gondola, Mountain Village, Colorado

Snowmass - Sky Cab Gondola This six-passenger gondola connects the new Snowmass Base Village at the bottom of the hill with the existing slope side Village Mall and the snow front. The Sky Cab facilitates movement between the two commercial centres and allows for better utilization and access to conference and recreational facilities. The Sky Cab is


a detachable gondola system and the trip time between the two centres is approximately two minutes.

Sky Cab Gondola, Snowmass, Colorado

Mont Tremblant, Quebec Intrawest Corporation purchased Mont Tremblant in 1992 and Ecosign was soon to study the complete renovation of that area. At that time, there was a large parking lot at the bottom of the hill and the base of the main skiing lifts was located about 400 metres away and 33 vertical metres higher. The first cabriolet (open gondola) in North America was installed at Mont Tremblant with a capacity of 2,400 persons per hour. This lift allowed for a village infill development between the parking lots and the snow front. The convenient aerial cableway system allowed people to park; ride to the top, go skiing or to walk through the village during all seasons of the year. The Mont Tremblant cabriolet operates ten hours per day for some 320 days per year and is quite possibly the most ridden aerial lift in North America. The lift is free and has become so popular that some visitors ride up the lift, walk down through the village and ride up again several times during their stay, all of which helps support the restaurant and retail spaces in the Village at Tremblant.


The six-passenger cabriolet rises 26 vertical metres and is 312 metres horizontal, it transports 2,200 persons per hour and the trip time is just over one minute.

Mont Tremblant Cabriolet, Quebec, Canada


Blackcomb The Blackcomb Excalibur, a two section eight-passenger gondola with detachable grips is located in Whistler Village at the base of Whistler Mountain. It provides transportation to Base II on Blackcomb Mountain and access up the mountain. The first gondola section is 850 metres long with a trip time of three minutes. Section two is about 1.4 kilometres long and has a five minute ride time. Although the Excalibur is two separate lifts, when both sections are operating the gondolas move through the mid station from one lift to the other. In the evening during the ski season, only the lower section operates providing pedestrian access to the Tube Park and the new Olympic Sliding Centre located at Base II.

Blackcomb Gondola

Panorama The Panorama Village Gondola is an open cabin “cabriolet” pulse gondola system operating between the lower village and day skier parking lots adjacent to Toby Creek and the main village and snow front. The Panorama Pulse Gondola has a vertical rise of 40 metres and length of 217 metres with a ride time about one minute. The pulse gondola operates from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. during the ski season and from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. during the summer months. The property owner’s association pays for the operating costs of the gondola outside of the hours the ski area is open.


Panorama Village Gondola Top Station, Canada

Breckenridge Constructed in 2006, the BreckConnect gondola is a 3 section detachable gondola system that links the day skier lots in the Town of Breckenridge to the bases of Peak 7 and Peak 8 of the Breckenridge Ski Resort. This new mass transit device both raises the level of guest service and is environmentally friendly. For skiers, the 7.5 minute ride in a scenic sit-down gondola is a big improvement over the 16 minute plus trip in the old school buses that the gondola replaced. With an uphill capacity of 2,900 people per hour, the gondola is a far more efficient mechanism for transporting this many people. Local environmentalists estimate the gondola saves over 20,000 US gallons of diesel fuel per season due to a decrease in resort run buses. The lift is 2.3 kilometres long, has a vertical rise of 121 metres and intermediate stations at Shock Hill and Peak 7. The BreckConnect gondola is the result of a public-private partnership between the Town of Breckenridge and Breckenridge Ski Resort that includes a development plan for Peaks 7 and 8, the Skyway Skiway ski back trail to the valley parking lots and a transportation framework. The Town contributed approximately thirty percent of the US $20 million cost to install the gondola system. For its part, the ski area has guaranteed parking at the gondola base, transferred density from the parking lots to


the Peak 7 and Peak 8 bases and reduced commercial density in these bases to avoid competition with Breckenridge’s historic commercial centre.

BreckConnect Gondola, Breckenridge, Colorado, USA

Kadenwood Gondola, Whistler BC The Kadenwood Gondola is planned to provide transportation from the Whistler Creekside staging portal at Whistler Mountain up to an exclusive single family sub-division entitled Kadenwood, located high on the hillside. The proposed lift will be cost shared by the Kadenwood Property Owner’s Association and Intrawest, developer of the sub-division. The lift has a vertical rise of 222 metres and a horizontal distance of 755 metres. The pulse gondola has a 4x2x8 configuration with a capacity of 325 persons per hour. The trip time will be 5.9 minutes, far less than the time it would take someone to drive from the base up the steep subdivision access road. The Canyons, Utah The Canyons Resort near Park City, Utah has a cabriolet, people mover system similar to that at Mont Tremblant, Quebec. The bottom station is located adjacent to a large day skier parking lot near the main highway and the lift rises 58 vertical metres to the main plaza in the resort centre. The lift is 812 metres long with a trip


time of 2.7 minutes and has a capacity of 2,400 persons per hour. The Canyons cabriolet was installed to take parking out of the resort village and free up ground for real estate development in the resort village core. The lift operates primarily during the winter ski season.

The Canyons, Utah


.5 Scope of Work Ecosign has undertaken the Rossland pre-feasibility study based on the following five steps. The first step entailed the acquisition of mapping of the overall study area. This mapping was made up of 1:5000 scale mapping and orthophotos. Ecosign also met with City of Rossland and Red Mountain Ventures staff for the collection of data on skier visits, land ownership, zoning, transit etc. The second step in the feasibility process was a technical analysis of the lands between downtown Rossland and the Red Mountain Resort Base. The purpose of the technical assessment was to analysis the slope gradients of the terrain and to evaluate information with respect to physical and property ownership issue that might affect potential aerial cableway alignments. This step also took into account other four season recreational opportunities in terms of skiing hiking, Alpine Slides, etc that might generate potential revenues. The third step that Ecosign under took as part of the technical assessment was to complete an inventory the existing and potential overnight accommodation stretching from Downtown to Red Mountain Resort. The fourth step in the feasibility evaluation was to develop several aerial cable way alignments and evaluate system types. With the assistance of Doppelmayr/CTEC, equipment specifications, capacity requirements, location of lift towers as well as in the preparation of preliminary capital cost estimates were prepared. Daily and seasonal operational needs were also evaluated to prepare preliminary estimates of the costs to operate the system. The final step in the pre-feasibility study was the preparation of this report and presentation to the stake holders.

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study II - 1 May 2009

2.0 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT The purpose of the technical assessment section is to prepare an analysis of the existing situation and to look at opportunities and constraints within the study area using acceptable industry planning and design parameters. This analysis takes into account the existing characteristics of movement between the downtown core and the ski base area, then reviews plans for future development contemplated by City’s Official Community Plan to estimate the capacity requirements for an aerial connection between Rossland and Red Mountain. Factors influencing route selection such as topography, natural and man-made hazards and property ownership have been considered and documented. .1 Topographic Mapping and Aerial Photography Ecosign has assembled digital topographic mapping of the study area in AutoCAD format. This mapping was compiled from data provided by the City of Rossland, Red Mountain Venture’s consultant, Newell Land Design and Teck Cominco. The City’s mapping consists of information from their GIS system and new topographic mapping with a 1 metre contour interval prepared from aerial photography flown in the summer of 2008. The new topography covers the town, the base of Red Mountain Resort and the highway 3B corridor between the two, but does not include Red Mountain itself. An orthophoto covering the same area was provided with this mapping. The City supplied layers showing existing road alignments, legal property lines and existing buildings from their GIS system. Information on vegetation, water resources (streams and lakes) and other geographic features is from the Province’s TRIM database. In some instances, the information in the older mapping files is not completely aligned with the recent orthophoto. An aerial image from Google Earth covering Red Mountain was inserted into the orthophoto to provide complete coverage of the study area. The mapping of land controlled by Red Mountain Resort was provided by Newell Land Design, who had assembled it from various sources over the years. In the base area, there is topographic mapping with 1 metre contour intervals, obtained from recent aerial photography and supplemented with field surveys. In some areas on both Red and Granite Mountains, the mapping has a 5 metre contour interval and has been digitized from historic maps. In other areas, such as the south side of Red Mountain only 20 metre contour interval information was provided. Ecosign had topographic information for the southern side of Red Mountain with 5 metre intervals from our work done on the Red Mountain Master Plan in 1989.


However, at the transitions between the areas with different contour intervals, the contours do not always line up. Information on planimetric features such as vegetation, ski trails, logging roads, streams, creeks and wetland areas is limited above the Red Mountain base area. Teck Cominco provided digital scans of maps showing historical mining activity on Red Mountain and in the City of Rossland. .2 Land Ownership Figure 2, Land Ownership was prepared using information provided by the City of Rossland from their GIS database. On this map we have represented properties that are owned by either the City, the Province of BC, Teck Cominco Ltd. or Red Mountain Ventures in different colours. On Red Mountain itself, we have shown private property owned by other parties in blue. Within the built up portion of the City, any property that has not been coloured can be assumed to be privately owned. The City owns a large number of lots around the existing arena at the intersection of Spokane Street and Second Avenue. The arena site, the former EMCOM lands at Third and Spokane and a number of City owned properties along Third Street have been considered as having significant redevelopment potential and were the subject of a recent Request for Expressions of Interest from the development community. The City’s public works yard is located immediately northwest of the arena site. Both the arena site and the public works yard have previously been identified as potential locations for the Rossland terminal of a potential gondola, since a line originating in either of these locations would not need to cross over private property on the way out of the city. On Red Mountain, most of the land between the town and the ski area base is owned by either Teck Cominco, Red Mountain Ventures, the City of Rossland or the Province of British Columbia, with the exception of two parcels owned by other corporations on the south side of the summit and one parcel owned by a private individual on the south east flank above the reservoir. At the Red Mountain base, a large portion of the undeveloped land is owned by Red Mountain Ventures. Another developer has constructed most of the accommodation along Olaus Way and there are still a few parcels in this area remaining to be developed. The Ram’s Head Inn is privately owned and so is most of the land above and below the south end of Red Mountain Road. Projects under development such as TMP, Morning Star and Slalom Creek are also shown as having private ownership, although they are being developed by a subsidiary of Red Mountain Ventures.


.3 Slope and Land Capability Analyses A slope analysis of the area between downtown Rossland and Red Mountain base was prepared. For the area covered by the City’s new 1 metre contour interval topographic mapping, a slope analysis was prepared using Eagle Point software. For the terrain on Red Mountain, the mapping provided by Red Mountain Ventures did not have sufficient elevation information to perform a computer assisted slope analysis. Therefore a hand rendered slope map prepared in 1989 by Ecosign was used to cover the mountain area. A slope map is one of the most critical analysis maps for the ski area design and evaluation process. The slope analysis is presented in Figure 3, Slope and Land Capability Analyses. This map delineates the areas that can be negotiated by the various skier ability levels, the areas that are considered too flat or too steep for skiing and the areas that are considered suitable for various types of real estate development. The natural slope gradients were carefully measured and colour-coded into the following five classifications:

Slope Gradients Colour Type of Skiing/Development 0 - 8% white ● flats, marginal skiing ● good for parking lots, village style development 8 - 25% green ● beginner and novice skiing ● multi-family, townhouse & single family development 25 - 45% yellow ● intermediate skiing ● too steep for development 45 - 70% blue ● advanced and expert skiing 70% + red ● unskiable, hazard areas

As can be seen on Figure 3, most of the terrain on the upper portion of Red Mountain is too steep for novice, beginner and intermediate skiers, with the exception of one slope on the back (south) side of the summit outside the existing ski area boundary. The south side of Red Mountain has been extensively mined in the past and a there are a number of hazards such as pits and open audits still existing. The area indicated as “Closed to Trail Use” has been identified by the landowner, Teck Cominco, as having the most hazards and not suitable for any recreational use. On the north side of Red Mountain, the slopes flatten out somewhat below the 1,250 metre elevation.


The Rossland town site is located on a hillside, with most of the town having slopes in the 8 to 25% range. The sloping topography of Rossland tends to divide the town into 3 areas; lower Rossland south of Kootenay Avenue, the downtown around Columbia Street and upper Rossland from Second Avenue to the north. Public stairs have been installed between Leroi and Kootenay Avenues at Spokane Street and between Pioneer Park and Earl Street to help negotiate these grade changes. Within the study area there are two distinct benches of land that are relatively flat, one in the central business district along Columbia Street and the other between Second and Third Streets around the Rossland Arena. This area is known as the Mid Town Transition Area. The two areas are separated by a 25 metre elevation difference and the north-south streets connecting them have slopes of up to 15%. Eight areas on Red Mountain with slope ranges suitable for development are also identified on Figure 3. These areas were identified to determine if there could be an opportunity to construct slopeside real estate along a potential gondola alignment. The development potential of each of these areas has been estimated assuming an average density of 30 units per hectare for multi-family development. Of the eight parcels, only Parcels C, D and E are located within the areas that have detailed topographic information. For the other 5 parcels, more detailed mapping may reveal that the land is not as flat as it appears. The characteristics of these parcels are summarized in Table II.

TABLE II.1 RED MOUNTAIN

AREAS WITH SLOPES SUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT

Area Units Beds Ski-In Ease of(ha.) per Pot. per Pot. Ski-Out Views Exposure Road

Parcel ha. Units Unit Beds Potential Access

A 1300 1325 3.65 30 110 5 548 Yes City SE DifficultB 1200 1220 0.93 30 28 5 140 Yes Ski Base E GoodC 1200 1230 1.9 30 57 5 285 Yes Ski Base NE GoodD 1134 1137 0.92 30 28 5 138 Ski Home Reservoir E GoodE 1154 1164 0.9 30 27 5 135 Ski Home Reservoir E GoodF 1200 1215 1.43 30 43 5 215 Ski Home City SE MediumG 1155 1185 4.62 30 139 5 693 Ski Home City SE MediumH 1200 1230 4.53 30 136 5 680 Ski Home City SE Medium

Elev. Range(metres)

While it would be possible to construct a ski-back trail to most of these parcels, due to the steepness at the top of Red Mountain, the route would be suitable only for high intermediate and advanced skiers. With the exception of Parcel A, all of these parcels are located at too low an elevation and too far around the mountain to provide ski-out from the parcel to the Red Mountain base area. Parcel A is located at the bottom of Sally’s Alley where it connects with Dale’s Trail. Constructing a road and bringing


infrastructure up to this elevation could be costly. Parcels B and C are at the south edge of Red Mountain’s base area property and are currently planned for single family lot development. Parcels D and E are located just above the reservoir and could be accessed by improving an existing gravel road. These parcels may be in the area identified as “Fish Town” in the Community Design Charette. Parcels F, G and H are located on a bench above the existing town site and are on land owned by Teck Cominco and the City of Rossland. The old road to the “War Eagle” mine workings could be upgraded to provide access. .4 Existing Skier Visit Analysis To get an indication of the existing demand for transportation between the town and Red Mountain, we prepared an analysis of the distribution of skier visits at Red Mountain during the 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 ski seasons. Daily skier visit numbers separated into ticketholders and season’s passholder were provided by Red Mountain. This information was supplemented with discussions with representatives of Red Mountain. The results of the distribution analyses are presented in Table II.2 and Table II.3. Total annual visitation for both seasons was between 110,000 and 115,000 skiers. Season length varied from 114 to 122 days. The peak day during the two years occurred on January 4, 2008 and was 2,462 skiers; lift tickets were free on this day. Although representatives of Red Mountain stated that the existing Skier Carrying Capacity (SCC) of the mountain is approximately 4,500 skiers, each season there were less than 10 days that exceeded 2,000 skiers. The average of the top 20 days ranged from 1,772 skiers in 2007/08 to 1,828 skiers in 2006/2007. On a seasonal basis, the average visits per day was just under 1,000 skiers. More than half of the annual skier visits at Red Mountain are from season’s passholders. Management at Red Mountain stated that they typically sell between 1,150 and 1,250 season’s passes of which 800 to 900 are purchased by local Rossland residents. As might be expected, season’s pass use as a percentage of total visits drops somewhat on the busiest days. However, many Rossland residents are active in weekend ski programs and thus still come to ski on busy days. The daily scans indicate that between 500 and 1,370 passholders were skiing on the ten busiest days of the 2007/08 season and that weekend season’s pass use typically exceeds 800 skiers for most days during the peak season. For both seasons, the average season passholders per day exceeds 500 skiers.



2007/2008 SKIER VISIT DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS

Visitation Skier % of Cumulative Days of % CumulativeRange Visits Visits % of Visits Operation Days # of Days2000 + 8,843 8% 8% 4 4% 4

1,500 to 1,999 23,622 21% 29% 14 12% 181,000 to 1,499 35,869 32% 60% 29 25% 47

500 to 999 38,311 34% 94% 49 43% 960 to 499 7,145 6% 100% 18 16% 114Total 113,791 100% 114 100%

Peak Day 2,462 Average of Top 20 Days 1,772 Average of Top 10 Days 1,964 Average of Top 30 Days 1,633 Average Visits per Day 998 Passholders accounted for 53% of the business on a seasonal basis.On the average of the top 20 days, passholders are 45% of the skiers.

TABLE II.3

RED MOUNTAIN 2006/07 SKIER VISIT DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS

Visitation Skier % of Cumulative Days of % Cumulative

Range Visits Visits % of Visits Operation Days # of Days2000 + 15,524 14% 14% 7 6% 7

1,500 to 1,999 16,643 15% 29% 10 8% 171,000 to 1,499 31,180 28% 57% 26 21% 43

500 to 999 37,408 34% 90% 49 40% 920 to 499 10,836 10% 100% 30 25% 122

Total 111,590 100% 122 100%Peak Day 2,435 Average of Top 20 Days 1,828 Average of Top 10 Days 2,087 Average of Top 30 Days 1,640 Average Visits per Day 915 Passholders account for 56% of the business on a seasonal basis.On the average of the top 20 days, passholders are 46% of the skiers.

During the 2007/08 ski season, Red Mountain collected data on where the skiers were from. This data suggests that 38 percent of the skier visits come from BC, within 1.5 hours of the resort, another 18 percent from elsewhere in British Columbia, 15 percent from the rest of Canada, 20 percent from the United States and 9 percent from other international locations. The Red Mountain Master Plan has a Skier Carrying Capacity (SCC) of 6,800 skiers at build-out. That is a 51% increase over the existing SCC, and a 280% increase over the existing Peak Day business levels.


.5 Parking & Transportation The existing day skier parking lots are located adjacent to and below the Red Mountain daylodge. According to representatives from Red Mountain Ventures, Ltd., the existing day skier parking capacity is approximately 700 to 800 vehicles and there are days when the parking overflows onto the surrounding roads. Daily counts of parked vehicles are conducted mid day during the ski season. The highest count for the months of December 2008 and January 2009 was 818 vehicles on January 2nd. The capacity of the parking lots has been estimated at an average vehicle occupancy rate of 2.1 skiers per car. Our experience at other resorts has shown that the shorter the distance the day skiers drive to reach the ski area, the lower the average vehicle occupancy rate. The approved Red Mountain Master Plan contemplates that the existing parking lots will be developed for resort accommodation. New day skier parking lots with a capacity for approximately 1,000 vehicles are planned for the east side of Highway #3B and are to be connected to the ski front with a gondola or some other type of lift. Local transit is provided through the Kootenay-Boundary Transit System which provides weekday service between the communities of Rossland, Trail, Fruitvale and Montrose. The route from Trail comes into Rossland through lower Rossland to the downtown, then to upper Rossland, loops back to the downtown and from the downtown goes back through lower Rossland before heading south towards Trail and the other communities. On weekdays, service is provided 10 times daily with 4 trips in the morning and 6 trips in the afternoon. On Saturdays, there are 2 trips in the morning and 3 in the afternoon. During the ski season, the bus makes one trip per day on weekends and school holidays to Red Mountain from Fruitvale, Montrose, Trail and Rossland arriving at 8:30 a.m. and leaving at 3:45 p.m. Most riders are high school students. The transit service to Red Mountain is expected to increase next year to 4 trips per day and run on a daily basis throughout the ski season. There is no local taxi service. Red Mountain provides an on call shuttle service to Rossland as an additional service to its guest of the properties it manages; this year the serviced averaged 3 trips per day during the peak season. Red Mountain also operates a shuttle service between Castlegar Airport and Red Mountain for destination visitors. Tourism Rossland claims the lack of transportation between Rossland and Red Mountain is one of the biggest impediments to marketing Rossland/Red as a destination ski area. Currently the only convenient way to get between the town and the ski area is by car and most destination guests don’t want the additional cost of renting a car added to their vacation expenses.


.6 Trail Network The City of Rossland maintains the Centennial Trail which extends from the north end of the town site to the base of Red Mountain. A pedestrian tunnel allows the trail to pass safely under Highway #3B. In the winter, this trail is track set for cross-country skiing. Red Mountain has been exploring the potential of constructing a ski back trail from Red that would meet up with the Centennial Trail in the vicinity of the pedestrian underpass.

Within the City there are sections of trails, stairs and public right-of-ways that facilitate pedestrian movement between various parts of the City. A second pedestrian tunnel crosses under Columbia Avenue at Davis Street. This tunnel is closed in the winter due to the risk of snow dump. The City is working to extend its trail system throughout the town site as new developments occur and other opportunities arise. The Kootenay Columbia Trails Society manages 32 trails covering 170 kilometres and caters to hikers, mountain bikers, horseback riders and cross-country skiers in the Rossland area.

Pedestrian Tunnel under Columbia Avenue – closed in winter

.7 Existing Accommodation Ecosign completed an analysis of the existing public and private accommodation within the City of Rossland and the Red Mountain base area. The purpose of this analysis is to determine where visitors and residents are staying in relation to the ski area, since the movement between the accommodation and the ski hill at the beginning


and end of each day generally creates “peak hour” traffic conditions in mountain resort communities. Rossland Town Site A list of public beds within Rossland was provided by Tourism Rossland. This list includes all properties currently being actively rented through the Tourism Rossland central reservation system. The City of Rossland provided a map showing the number of existing dwelling units per city block for the area within a 700 metre radius of the Rossland Arena. This information is presented graphically in Figure 4a Existing Dwelling Units & Public Beds – Rossland. For the most part, Rossland has been developed with low density single family housing, with the exception of a few small apartment buildings. Historically the town site was laid out with streets on a rectilinear grid pattern with 20 lots and a public laneway contained within each city block. This lot pattern was established without reference to the topography of the town site, so that there are established road right of ways and subdivided lots traversing across some undevelopable areas. In many instances there have been less than 10 homes developed within a city block. According to the 2006 Census data, there were 1,656 dwelling units in the City of Rossland (including the Red Mountain base) of which 82% (1,356) were occupied by permanent residents. Public accommodation within the town site consists of 141 rooms providing accommodation for up to 574 people in a hotel, motels and Bed & Breakfast establishments. Public beds are shown in red on Figure 4a and listed in Table II.4.


TABLE II.4 ROSSLAND TOWNSITE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION

Name# of

Units# of

Pillows Location

Hotel/Motel/Hostel Prestige Mountain Resort 67 252 1919 Columbia Ave Casa Alpina (formerly Thriftlodge) 40 146 1199 Nancy Greene Highway Flying Steamshovel Inn 7 28 2003 Second Ave Rossland Motel 10 44 721 Highway 22 Mountain Shadow Hostel 7 42 2125 Columbia AveSubtotal Hotel/Motel 131 512

Bed & Breakfast Angela's B & B 2 12 1520 Spokane, 1882 Victoria Avalon Guest House 1 6 2598 Washington Dave's Place Bed & Breakfast 1 8 1492 Columbia Ave Greene's Guest House 1 6 2461 St. Paul Street Red Door Inn 1 4 2290 Leroi Red Barn Lodge B&B 1 2 1107 Black Bear Drive Red Barn Lodge Guesthouse 1 8 1115 Black Bear Drive Smith & Bean 1 8 Columbia & Monte Cristo St. White Tail Creek B & B 1 8 2410 Fourth AveSubtotal Bed & Breakfast 10 62 Total Rossland 141 574

Red Mountain Base Ecosign used information from the City of Rossland’s GIS system, Tourism Rossland and several websites to complete an inventory of the existing accommodation at Red Mountain. This information is listed in Table II.5 and presented graphically in Figure 4b, Red Mountain Bed Density Analysis. Currently there are over 230 units with the capacity to accommodate approximately 1,600 people in the vicinity of the Red Mountain base. Most of these units have been constructed since 2000. Over 50 percent of the units are actively rented to tourists through Tourism Rossland, Red Central Reservations by Red Property Management and/or the Village at Red Mountain. An unknown number of additional units are marketed directly by their owners through the internet. A few of the units are being used as permanent residences, since there is a limited supply of modern, well appointed multi-family units elsewhere in the Rossland area. Most of the existing units, with the exception of the 88 Creekside development and the northern half of the Olaus Way properties are within skier walking distance of the existing base lifts. An additional 60 units expected to contain another 500 beds are currently either under construction or in the process of being sold.


Red Mountain Base Area viewed from Red Mountain


TABLE II.5 RED MOUNTAIN BASE

EXISTING ACCOMMODATION INVENTORY

Address Type Units Pillows

Hotels Red Shutter Inn 4420 Red Mtn. Road B & B 8 16 Ram's Head Inn 4465 Highway 3B Lodge 15 62 Sub-total Hotels 23 78

Village at Red Mountain Eagle's Nest 1013 Olaus Way Stacked TH 9 45 Redstone Chalets 1011 Mtn. View Road Townhouse 5 40 Powderview Lodge 1009 Mtn. View Road Condo units 11 48 Granite Mountain Chalets 1001, 1003 Mtn. View Rd. Townhouse 10 80 Cascade Lodge 1005 Mtn. View Rd. Condo units 18 144 Bear House Olaus Way SF 1 14 Village Suites 1007 Mountain View Duplexes 2 14 Villlage Cabins 1007 Mountain View Small SF 10 40 Log House 1007 Mountain View Single Family 1 14 Moose Lodge 1004 Olaus Way Duplex 2 16 Sub-total Red Mountain Village 69 455 Units in Red Mountain Village Rental Management Inventory 40 300 Percent in Rental Management 58% 66%

Red Property Management 88 Creekside at Red 1001, 1004 Creekside Trc Townhouses 14 112 Olaus House 1002 Olaus Way Single Family 1 14 The Lofts 1006 Olaus Way Townhouse 8 56 Copper Chalets 1007 Olaus Way Townhouse 7 70 Silvertip Lodge 1008 Olaus Way Condos 18 144 White Wolf Cabins 1009 Olaus Way Cluster SF 5 50 Grey Wolf Cabins 1011 Olaus Way Cluster SF 5 50 Carolyn's Corner 4440 Red Mountain Rd Townhouse 4 40 Red Rob's 4430 Red Mountain Rd Stacked TH 12 72 Slalom Creek 4310, 4320 Red Mtn Rd Condo Units 67 462 Sub-total Red 141 1,070 Units in Red Property Management Inventory 57 388 Percent in Rental Management 40% 36%TOTAL EXISTING ACCOMMODATION 233 1,603 Total Public Accommodation 120 766 Percent Public 52% 48%

Under Construction/Selling Morning Star 1000 Telemark Road Condo Units 18 118 The Mountain Project (TMP) Townhouse 10 70 Olaus Way Single Family SF 14 140 Caldera Phase 1 SF 18 180 Sub-total under Construction 60 508

TOTAL EXISTING/UNDER CONSTRUCTION 293 2,111 Equivalent Units 204


.8 Skiers from Accommodation While a gondola between Rossland and the mountain resort will be an attractive connection on a year round basis, it is the movement of skiers during the peak winter season that will place the largest demand on any transportation link and hence must be studied to establish the maximum capacity requirements of any proposed system. To do this, the number of skiers generated from the resort area accommodation on a typical weekend day during the peak season is estimated. Since Tourism Rossland could not provide data regarding peak period occupancy rates for the accommodation within Rossland or at the Red Mountain base, Ecosign has estimated these rates based on our experience at other resorts. The following observations have been used to guide our estimates:

• Even though a hotel room or chalet is rented, in many cases, not every bed in

it is used. For example a chalet capable of sleeping ten may be rented by a group of seven, or one couple may occupy a hotel room with four pillows.

• On any given day, not all of the guests staying at the resort will go downhill skiing

or snowboarding. Some of the guests may be non-skiers along with the family, some may be cross-country skiing or back country skiing, some may be taking a day off skiing and others may choose not to ski because it is the day they are arriving at, or leaving the resort. This percent of overnight visitors who choose to ski on any given day is called the skier participation rate.

The unit and pillow occupancy rates and skier participation rates assumed for the various categories of accommodation are outlined in Table II.6. The guest yield per pillow is determined by multiplying the unit occupancy rate by the bed occupancy rate and the skier yield is calculated by multiplying the guest yield by the skier participation rate. We have assumed fairly high occupancy rates for the public beds both in town and at the ski area. For the dwelling units within Rossland, we have applied an average occupancy of 2.42 people per dwelling unit based on data from the 2006 Census. We have assumed a 30% skier participation rate which implies that on peak days, thirty percent of the local population is skiing. Multiplying these two factors provides an estimate of 0.73 skiers from each occupied dwelling unit in Rossland.


TABLE II.6 PEAK PERIOD OCCUPANCY & SKIER PARTICIPATION RATES

Unit Bed Guest Skier SkierOccupancy Occupancy Yield Participation Yield

Hotel/B&B 90% 90% 81% 80% 65%Public Condos in Rental Pool 85% 75% 64% 80% 51%Private Condos 75% 75% 56% 80% 45%Permanent Residences 30% 73%2.42 people per dwelling unit

Using the skier yields in Table II.6, the existing accommodation within the City of Rossland, including the Red Mountain base is capable of generating just over 2,100 skiers during periods of peak occupancy, as shown in Table II.7. An additional 300 regional day skiers from outside the City boundaries would make up the observed peak days in the order of 2,400 skiers. With only one bus a day to the ski hill on weekends, most of the skiers staying in the Rossland town site currently drive.

TABLE II.7 SKIERS FROM ACCOMMODATION IN ROSSLAND

Units Beds Skiers

Skiers from Public Accommodation in Rossland 574 372 Skiers from Dwelling Units in Rossland 1,353 982 Skiers from Accommodation at Red Mt. 233 1,603 771 Total Skiers from Rossland Accommodation 2,125

.9 Skier Walking Distance The theoretical Skier Walking Distance (SWD) has been developed as an analysis tool to evaluate the layout of ski resort base areas. Skier walking distance is defined as the distance someone walking in ski boots and carrying ski equipment can comfortably walk in 10 minutes. A walking speed of 2.7 kilometres per hour is assumed, which translates to a skier walking distance of 450 metres over level ground. This distance is reduced by 4 metres for every 1 metre of vertical grade change since it is much more difficult to walk uphill. Skier walking distance circles for two potential gondola terminal locations within Rossland have been illustrated in Figure 4a. The two locations studied are on the Arena parking lot and Pioneer Park. The Pioneer Park location is within SWD of the Prestige Resort, however, because of the steep hill on Spokane Street, the Arena location is slightly beyond SWD of this hotel. The number of skiers within SWD of each of these potential terminal locations for a peak day under existing conditions is also shown.


In preparing these estimates, we have assumed that an additional 30 skiers could come from the one public transit bus that circulates through Rossland during the Saturday morning staging time. The number of skiers within skier walking distance of the two potential gondola terminal locations is listed in Table II.8.

TABLE II.8 POTENTIAL SKIERS WITHIN SWD OF GONDOLA TERMINAL

PEAK OCCUPANCY

Skiers SkiersDwelling Public from from Total

Units Beds Accom. Transit SkiersPioneer Park 195 326 354 30 384 Rossland Arena 232 28 188 30 218

.10 Red Mountain Existing Base Area Staging Capacity The base area staging capacity is the theoretical number of skiers the base area can supply to the mountain during periods of peak occupancy. Skiers are divided into two groups: “Day Skiers”, who are skiers that originate from outside the area and are coming to ski for one day only, and “Overnight Skiers”, who are skiers generated from accommodation within the resort. Overnight Skiers are further divided into those staying in ski-in/ski-out accommodation close to the lift bases and those who must drive or take public transportation to get to the ski lifts. If overnight skiers use their car to get to the lifts, there will then be less parking available for day skiers from outside the resort. At Red Mountain, most of the accommodation is at the resort base, with the exception of the 88 Creekside development and a few of the properties at the north end of Olaus Way, are within skier walking distance of one of the lifts. The base area capacity is the sum of the number of skiers that can arrive at the lifts from accommodation within walking distance of the lifts, plus the number of skiers coming from parking within walking distance of the lifts and from public transportation and shuttle bus systems. The existing base area staging capacity at Red Mountain is approximately 2,400 skiers as shown in Table II.9, which is comparable to the peak day recorded during the 2007/08 ski season.



EXISTING BASE AREA STAGING CAPACITY

Units Beds Guests SkiersSkiers from Accomodation at Red within SWD Hotel/B&B 23 78 63 50 Units in Rental Pool 83 576 367 294 Private Units 113 837 471 377 Sub-total Skiers from Accommodation 219 1,413 838 721

Cars Staff Skier SkiersParked Cars Cars 2.1/car

Skiers from parking at Red 820 30 790 1,659 Skiers from Bus (1 Bus on Weekends) 35 Total Base Area Staging Capacity 2,415 Note: Excludes Creekside Condos - beyond walking distance

.11 Future Development Plans Ecosign’s understanding of future development plans and/or approved development rights within the City of Rossland was obtained through conversations with the City’s Director of Planning, meetings with representatives of Red Mountain Ventures and Teck Cominco and reference to the following documents:

1. City of Rossland Official Community Plan, October 23, 2008 including the Red Mountain Sector Plan and the Midtown Transition Area Sector Neighbourhood Plan

2. Visions to Action City of Rossland Strategic Sustainability Plan, Sheltair Group, May 2008.

3. City of Rossland, Design Charette Report, Sheltair Group, October 2007

4. Development Yield Update Report, Urban Systems, Ltd., March 2007

5. City of Rossland Zoning Bylaw #1912, March 1999 While it is clear from the above that the citizens of Rossland value their small town character and ease of access to outdoor recreational pursuits, the potential for significant growth is enshrined in the Official Community Plan and there are significant outstanding development rights. In recent years, the pace of new development has exceeded population growth as a number of units targeted for the second home market have been constructed at the base of Red Mountain.


The following table, prepared from information provided in the Development Yield Update Report, suggests that Rossland could contain more than 3 times the number of dwelling units existing in 2006 by build-out. At the base of Red Mountain, there are approvals in place for up to 2,000 equivalent dwelling units, a twenty fold increase over what existed in 2006 and a tenfold increase from 2008. The Redstone Golf Course has approvals for 400 equivalent units. Within the city centre, there are a number of vacant lots. The Midtown Transition Area Neighbourhood Plan suggests the area could accommodate approximately 150 additional EU’s in mixed use development, while most of the C1 Zone along Columbia Street is also very underdeveloped in relation to the existing zoning.

TABLE II.10 CITY OF ROSSLAND

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL IN EQUIVALENT SINGLE FAMILY UNITS

2006Add Total Add Total

Red Mountain 100 1,056 1,156 844 2,000 Redstone Golf Course - 400 400 83 483 Happy Valley 12 5 17 257 274 City Centre 1,425 353 1,778 410 2,188 Totals 1,537 1,814 3,351 1,594 4,945 Percent Growth 118% 218% 48% 148%Cumulative Growth 104% 322%Source: Development Yield Update Report, Urban Systems, Ltd., March 2007

Next 20 Years (2026) 2026 to Buildout

Based on the above information, and in discussion with the Director of Planning, we have made the following assumptions for growth in the vicinity of the potential locations for a Rossland gondola terminal: Midtown Transition Area

• Add 150 Equivalent Units • Of these assume one 30 unit tourist accommodation (10 EU, 90 tourist beds) • Assume remainder (140 EU) is permanent dwelling units built in a mixed use

configuration consistent with the Midtown Transition Plan. C1 Zone – Columbia Street

• Add 50 Equivalent Units • Of these assume one 60 unit tourist accommodation (20 EU, 180 tourist beds) • Assume remainder (30 EU) is mixed use permanent dwelling units.


.12 Future Skiers If we apply the same peak period occupancy and skier participation factors we used to estimate the potential skiers generated from existing accommodation in Rossland to the total amount of development planned for the City of Rossland at build-out, the City of Rossland could have the potential of generating approximately 8,500 skiers on peak days at build-out as shown in Table II.11. RMV stated the planned Skier Carrying Capacity of Red Mountain at build-out is 6,800 skiers. However, since the build-out scenario is more than 20 years in the future, it is unlikely existing occupancy trends would remain completely unchanged. As a larger variety of recreational activities are added at Red Mountain, there is more likelihood that a larger proportion of guests (and residents) may choose not to ski on any given day.

TABLE II.11 SKIERS GENERATED FROM CITY OF ROSSLAND AT BUILD-OUT

PEAK OCCUPANCY PERIODS

Units Beds SkiersSkiers from Public Accommodation in Rossland 844 547 Skiers from Dwelling Units in Rossland 2,945 2,150 Skiers from Accommodation at Red Mt. 2,000 12,000 5,774 Total Skiers from Rossland Accommodation 8,471

The skiers that could be derived from this new development around the two potential Rossland terminal locations during peak periods (using the same occupancy assumptions as the existing conditions) have been added to the existing condition and are shown in Figure 4c and summarized in Table II.12. We have assumed that an additional 60 skiers could take transit to reach the gondola station if weekend transit frequency increases to two trips during the morning staging period.

TABLE II.12 FUTURE SKIERS WITHIN SWD OF PRPOSED GONDOLA TERMINALS

PEAK OCCUPANCY PERIOD

Skiers SkiersDwelling Public from from Total

Units Beds Accom. Transit SkiersPioneer Park 295 596 602 60 662 Rossland Arena 347 118 330 60 390

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study III - 1 May 2009

3.0 GONDOLA ALTERNATIVES .1 Introduction The idea of a gondola between the downtown area of Rossland and Red Mountain has been around for many years. When Ecosign completed the Red Mountain Master Plan 1979, the potential for a gondola from a location in town near the Mining Museum to the top of Red Mountain was considered during the design process but not included in the Master Plan due to the patch work of land ownership and mining claims on Red Mountain. At that time the gondola was seen primarily as a means to bring skiers to the mountain. Now with the potential for development of over 2,000 dwelling units at the Red Mountain base, transportation to and from town for residents and guests of Red Mountain is also a major opportunity. In preliminary meetings Ecosign held with the City of Rossland and Tourism Rossland, the option of going from the Mining Museum to the top of Red Mountain was re-evaluated. A gondola to the summit would provide a summer attraction for sight seers and offer opportunities for downhill mountain biking and hiking. While this option has the advantage of being the shortest route and therefore the least expensive, it would only serve as an access lift to the upper Red Mountain terrain from Rossland; it does nothing to connect the growing community at the base of Red to the City. Further, due to the steep terrain at the top of Red Mountain, during the ski season, beginner and low intermediate skiers and snowboarders would be unable to use it because there is no easy way down to the rest of the ski area from the top of Red Mountain. The only accommodation within walking distance of a bottom terminal location at the Mining Museum is the Casa Alpina motel and a few homes. During our initial stakeholder meetings, it was established that the optimal solution should be capable of going from somewhere in the downtown area to the resort base to facilitate transportation in both directions during all hours and all seasons. Consequently only options that could achieve this goal were studied in more detail. .2 Rossland Terminal Location The search for a potential bottom terminal location was concentrated in the area from the downtown north. An ideal terminal location in Rossland would have the following characteristics:

• Close to public accommodation to aid skiers in getting to Red Mountain.


• Close to the highest density of private accommodation in Rossland. • Close to the downtown shops, restaurants and other public amenities for

residents and guests coming to town from Red Mountain. • Close to or on an existing or planned public transit route. • Near existing or planned parking. • Opportunity for private vehicle drop-offs. • Located on public property. • Little to no impact on neighbouring residences and/or properties.

Previous discussions about a potential gondola during the Design Charette had focused on the either the City Works yard or the Rossland Arena as potential locations for a gondola terminal. Both of these options allow lift alignments that remain over City owned land as the gondola leaves Rossland. After initial meetings and a site visit, Ecosign identified a third option in Pioneer Park, just north of Columbia Avenue. The City owns the Park, the Esling Lodge and the ravine immediately north of the lodge so that a gondola leaving from this location would still cross over public land as it leaves town. The opportunities and constraints related to these 3 potential terminal locations are outlined in Table III.1. Given the distance from the downtown to the City Works yard, it is our opinion that the two other locations are far superior.

City Works Yard


Looking up at Red Mountain from Rossland Arena parking lot, City Works Yard is in the centre of

the picture.


TABLE III.1 ROSSLAND TERMINAL OPTIONS

OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS

Location Opportunities Constraints City Works Yard • Closest to Red Mountain so

shortest gondola. • Within SWD of Rossland High

School so could assist with integration of racing programs & school.

• Would likely require relocation of some existing functions.

• Located at the edge of developed area rather than centrally.

• Provides no sense of arrival in Rossland.

• 520 metres from Columbia Ave. & 30 m higher, so not very effective in providing transportation between the Red Mt. base and downtown.

• 300 m from existing transit route. • Crossing of Hwy. #3B required.

Arena Parking Lot • Could be integrated into a redevelopment project creating a new civic precinct.

• Within SWD of Rossland High school so could assist with integration of racing programs & school.

• Might be able to use Arena parking when Arena not in use, potential to add additional parking as part of redevelopment.

• Within SWD of existing apartments on Nickelplate.

• 400 metres from Columbia Ave. & 25 m higher so beyond comfortable skier walking distance of downtown.

• 2 road crossings required – 3rd Ave. & Hwy. #3B.

• Beyond SWD for Prestige Resort. • Will eliminate some of arena

parking spaces. • Arena area not an attractive

entrance to down town for guests from Red until redevelopment of the site occurs.

Pioneer Park • Comes right into downtown – easy

access to shops & restaurants and Rossland’s historic buildings.

• Extends reach of gondola to some of lower Rossland.

• Opportunity to revitalize Sourdough Alley near Spokane St.

• Within walking distance of Prestige Resort (252 pillows).

• Within walking distance of public amenities – library, swimming pool, City hall

• 50 m from transit route. • May be opportunity to construct

private vehicle drop-off. • Could make it within walking

distance of some of lower Rossland by making pedestrian tunnel under Columbia useable in the winter.

• Visual impact on Esling Lodge. • May conflict with residence at

1860 First Avenue. • Right of way crosses property of

1844 First Avenue, but does not impact buildings.

• 3 road crossings required – 2nd & 3rd Ave., Hwy #3B

• Gondola route crosses over maintenance facility in Public Works yard.


Rossland Arena Parking Lot

Pioneer Park – Gondola would fit between Esling Lodge and the embankment.


.3 Red Mountain Base Terminal Ecosign met with representatives of Red Mountain Ventures to select a potential terminal location at the base of Red Mountain that would fit with their proposed development plans. Similarly to the Rossland terminal, the ideal location must be centrally located within the growing community, close to the snow front and near transit drop-off and parking. Ideally, guests should not have to cross a road when going from the gondola to the snow front. Based on these criteria, a location within the future high density village area at the base of Red Mountain, just 70 metres from the bottom of the Red Chair, was selected as shown on Figure 4d. This location is centrally located between the existing and future development at Red Mountain. The proposed terminal station is on the edge of the proposed short-term parking and drop-off loop which could allow a connection with a resort wide shuttle system if that develops in the future. Although the proposed gondola station conflicts with a few of the proposed buildings in the Red Mountain Base Area Master Plan, we have been advised by RMV that this plan is schematic in nature and that the building s can be shifted somewhat to accommodate the gondola terminal.

Base of Red Mountain – Gondola Terminal would be to the left.


.4 Alignment Options Three alternative lift alignment options were explored. In Figure 5a, the lift alignments are overlaid on a property ownership map to illustrate the impact of the gondola on existing properties. Skier walking distances are shown around the potential gondola terminals. In the Red Mountain base area, we have shown the Red Mountain Resort – Core Area Master Plan provided by Red Mountain Ventures. On Figure 5b, the gondola alignments are shown over a composite aerial photograph. From this figure, the extent of existing development at the Red Mountain base can be seen. Doppelmayr CTEC Canada Ltd. has prepared preliminary engineering, lift profiles and capital cost estimates for lifts on the Option A and Option B alignments. Doppelymayr’s designs are based on the topographic information provided by the City of Rossland and Red Mountain and assume normal geotechnical conditions. Tower locations have been selected to optimize span lengths and have taken into consideration road crossings. The preliminary engineering work has been done to a sufficient level of detail to determine that it is technically feasible to provide a lift on the alignments shown and to determine the size of equipment required to provide the specified capacity. In this pre-feasibility stage, the details of specific on-site requirements such as the relocation of existing buildings and/or utilities and the impact of the gondola installation on neighbouring properties has not been reviewed in any detail. The proposed lift profiles are illustrated in Figures 6a and 6b. The towers shown in the lift profiles are identified on the plans views in Figures 5a and 5b. Option A Option A is a straight line alignment with the bottom terminal in Rossland and the top terminal at the Red Mountain base. Any of the three potential Rossland terminal locations could work with this option. Doppelmayr has prepared a profile and capital cost estimates with the bottom terminal in the Pioneer Park location (A2) since this is the longest route for this alignment, and the most challenging for tower placement. The slope length of the route is 2,912 metres and the vertical rise is 113 metres. The lift profile prepared by Doppelmayr is illustrated in Figure 6a. Alignment A threads itself between Esling Park Lodge and the embankment between the homes on Earl Street and the Lodge. It appears technically feasible to string a gondola between the existing buildings, however, more precise mapping would be required to confirm this and determine the extent of the encroachment on


the rear yards 1844 and 1860 First Avenue, 2041 Earl Street and 2091A Spokane Street. Leaving town, the alignment crosses over the ravine to the north of Esling Lodge, the Arena parking lot and the City Works Yard. On Red Mountain, this alignment crosses over properties owned by Teck Cominco, the City of Rossland and Red Mountain Ventures as well as one parcel owned by a private individual. Coming into the base area, the alignment skirts the edge of Red Mountain Ventures’ proposed single family development. Option B The other two alignments involve two section gondolas with the first section going from Rossland to lands on Red Mountain with development potential and the section going from the development pod to the base of Red Mountain. In Option B the first stage goes from Rossland to a bench at the south end of RMV’s property, previously identified as Parcel C on Figure 3. This land is currently planned for single family housing, however, with a gondola could be up zoned to allow more intensive development. A ski-way to this location from Dale’s Trail could be constructed, however, ski-outs from here to the mountain base may be difficult to achieve at reasonable grades, suggesting that the second stage of the gondola would need additional capacity to pick up skiers from any accommodation that may be developed. Doppelmayr has prepared a profile and cost estimates for a two stage gondola on the Option B alignment with the Rossland terminal located in the arena parking lot (B1). The bottom terminal could however be located in Pioneer Park. The first stage of the gondola would have a slope length of 1,811 metres and a vertical rise of 131 metres. The second stage would have a slope length of 877 metres and a vertical rise of 43 metres. Since the two gondolas are separate from one another, passengers would have to unload and reload at the mid-station. The two stages of the gondola could have different operating schedules. Doppelmayr’s profile for this alternative is shown in Figure 6b. The Option B alignment avoids any interference with existing private property as it comes out of Rossland. On Red Mountain, it misses the privately owned parcel but crosses over land owned by Teck Cominco, the City of Rossland, the Province of BC and Red Mountain Ventures. In the base area it passes through the proposed single family subdivision, which would probably be up zoned for higher density in the vicinity of the transfer station between the two gondola sections.


Option C The Option C alignment was proposed by RMV and was briefly investigated by them in 2004. It involves a two section gondola with the first section landing at a bench at the bottom of Sally’s Alley where it meets the ski-back Dale’s Trail, identified as Parcel A on Figure 3. The second section would go from the bottom of Sally’s Alley to the Red Mountain base. When RMV investigated this option, they envisioned constructing the gondola in two phases. The first phase would bring skiers from Rossland to the base of Sally’s Alley, since it is possible for all levels of skiers to negotiate Dale’s Trail to the ski area base. Summer use could be for hikers and mountain bikers as this location has excellent views of Rossland and the surrounding mountains. The second stage to the base of Red Mountain would be constructed at a later date to allow guests staying at the base of Red Mountain a transportation link to Rossland. The development envisioned for the area would probably need to have over snow rather than road access since it would be difficult and expensive to bring a road up to this elevation. Doppelmayr has not prepared a profile or a cost estimate for the Option C alignment at this time. Since the intermediate station is higher on the mountain, both sections of the lift would be longer and more expensive than the gondolas required for Option B. The slope length for the bottom section is 1,429 metres with a vertical of 265 metres and the top section has a slope length of 1,295 metres and a vertical of 180 metres.

Potential Terminal Location near end of Sally’s Alley


.5 Capacity Requirements Given the information presented in the preceding sections, the current peak day demand for transporting skiers would be in the order of 220 to 380 skiers depending on the Rossland terminal location. This number could be increased by providing more frequent transit service within Rossland to bring local skiers to the gondola station. At build-out, we have estimated t the peak period demand could increase to between 390 and 660 skiers per day. Typically most of the skiers tend to arrive at the ski area over a 2 to 2.5 hour morning staging period and leave the ski area over a shorter 1.5 to 2 hour area period. The required capacities in people per hour (pph) to move the anticipated number of skiers on peak days over a 2 hour or 2.5 hour arrival period are summarized in Table III.2 for each of the two Rossland terminal locations.

TABLE III.2 PEAK PERIOD

GONDOLA CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS (PPH)

Gondola 2 Hour 2.5 Hour 2 Hour 2.5 Hour Terminal Skiers Staging Staging Skiers Staging StagingLocation Period Period Period PeriodPioneer Park 384 192 77 662 331 265

Rossland Arena 218 109 87 390 195 156

Current Build-out

.6 Transportation System Alternatives Ecosign has identified three separate possible alignments which appear to be satisfactory given land ownership, road crossings and avoidance of the hazardous areas of the Teck Cominco properties. Whether the lift is one line or in two sections, the basic physical fact is that it is a distance of about three kilometres from Columbia Avenue in downtown Rossland to the base of the Red Mountain double chairlift. Having worked on several dozen projects with a similar configuration in Europe and in North America, the transportation system could be underground, on the ground or above ground. A funicular railway or even a rack railway system can be built in tunnels underground. We know from experience that the tunnel alone would cost in the order of $30 per m for three kilometres of length and the equipment would cost a similar amount so an underground funicular or rack railway system probably has costs in the rage of $60 to $75 per m. An on ground railway system may reduce some of the tunnel cost but the profile getting out of Rossland including several road crossings and at least one highway crossing probably means a combination of tunnels and bridges so this cost would also be prohibitively high.


Ecosign is convinced therefore that only aerial cableway systems can logically be considered in this case. In evaluating aerial transportation systems we must consider trip time, customer comfort, capital costs and of course operating costs. Aerial cableways have two basic gripping systems on the cable. One is called fixed grip technology where the clamps for each carrier, be it gondola or chairlift, are affixed to the cable with a special grip that is torqued to a specified strength. The grips stay in the same location on the rope throughout one operating season and are removed and replaced each and every operating year. This grip technology is considerably cheaper for both capital and operating costs than detachable grip technology. Detachable grip technology can be used on chairlifts, enclosed gondola cabins or open cabriolet gondola cabins as per the different systems described in Section 1.0 of this report. Given these basic parameters, Ecosign investigated the following three types of systems: Fixed Grip Chairlift A fixed grip chairlift would be possible on alignment A which is a straight line alignment with a slope length of 2,935 metres. Capacity could range from a few hundred per hour to as high as 2,400 persons per hour. The challenges with a circulating fixed grip chairlift include travel time, guest comfort, convenience and guest safety. The Canadian Standards Association Z98 Code limits maximum speed for fixed grip quadruple chairlifts to 2.3 metres per second which would result in a ride time of approximately 21 minutes from downtown Rossland to the Red Mountain base area, too long to convince people to get out of their cars. Loading and unloading is also difficult for non skiers as the cable is moving at a relatively high speed of 2.3 metres per second in the stations. While an open chairlift may be acceptable to skiers and snowboarders who are dressed for the outside weather, or provide an interesting summer sightseeing experience, such a system is not very comfortable for providing transportation throughout all seasons in all weather conditions. Finally, fixed grip chairlift systems are not amenable to transporting mountain bikes, the physically challenged and are somewhat dangerous for children who would need to be transported with adults. Based upon all of the above factors we were fairly quick to eliminate fixed grip mono-cable chairlift systems for the Rossland/Red Mountain people mover system.

Fixed Grip Pulse Gondola A pulse gondola is a hybrid technology containing elements of fixed grip chairlifts and detachable grip gondolas. The gondola cabins are attached to a single


continuous haul rope that circulates between the two end terminals. The cabins are attached to the haul rope with fixed grips, however instead of being equally spaced along the line, the cabins are grouped in clusters and then the clusters are spaced at equal intervals along the line. As a cluster of cabins enters either of the terminals, the haul rope speed slows to 0.1 metre per second to facilitate loading and unloading. Once the last gondola in the cluster departs the station, the rope speed automatically increases to a maximum speed of approximately 6.0 metres per second. The rope speed slows down again as the next cluster enters either of the terminals. It is this speeding up and slowing down of the haul rope that the term “pulse” refers to. If there are only 2 clusters along the line, then both clusters are in the terminals stations at either end of the route at the same time. If there are four clusters, one cluster in each direction will slow down at the mid point on the line while the other two clusters are unloading and loading at either end of the line. Capacities of pulsing systems are relatively low compared to detachable systems since the rope speed must be reduced as each cluster of cabins moves through the terminals. As more clusters of cabins are added to the line to increase capacity, the number of times the rope must slow down is increased, thereby increasing the time for a complete revolution of the lift, which reduces capacity. A diagrammatic example of a 4x3x8 (4 groups of 3 eight passenger cabins) is shown in Plate 1 below. The following photograph is the Spokane Aerial Falls Skyride which is a pulse gondola system with 6 clusters of 3 six passenger enclosed gondola cabins.

4 X 3 X 8 PULSE GONDOLA – PLAN VIEW

PLATE III.1


Spokane Falls Aerial Skyride – 6x3x6 Pulse Gondola

As illustrated, pulse gondolas are very often used as people movers in urban or resort village settings due to the lower capital and operating costs and the relative comfort provided to the passengers. Level entry walk-in cabins can be used to provide ease of access for people in wheelchairs, people with strollers, mountain bikes or other rolling equipment. The enclosed cabins provide protection from the weather making the lift useable in all seasons. Doppelmayr provided preliminary lift sizing and capital cost estimates for pulse gondola systems on the A and B alignments. If we utilize a 2x3x8 system then the transport time from downtown Rossland to Red Mountain on the A2 alignment would be about nine minutes. Passengers would be seated in enclosed cabins, sheltered from the elements but still enjoying the marvelous scenery during the trip. One way to increase capacity is go to four groups of three eight passenger cabins or a 4x3x8 MGFP system. This provides an opportunity to increase capacity from 180 persons per hour to 245 persons per hour on the Option A2 alignment but increases the trip time to 11.7 minutes due to the 2 additional loading/unloading periods. Ecosign believes that a pulse gondola system may well in fact be the optimal solution for the connection of the Rossland downtown core with the base area of Red Mountain, since the required capacities are fairly low. The Option B alignment breaks the lift into two sections to improve capacity and to connect to potential development areas. Option B1 bottom would be a 4x3x8 MGFP with a capacity of 334 persons per hour while the top section would be a


2x3x8 MGFP with a capacity of 344 persons per hour. Under this system the people would ride 1.8 kilometres from Rossland up to the interim station, unload on a platform and walk across to reload on the second section for the ride of 877 metres to the Red Mountain base area. If there was a lot of development at the middle station area, Option B1 top could have the capacity increased to a 4x3x8 MGFP. Option C top and C bottom would operate in a very similar fashion. Detachable Grip Systems Detachable grip systems generally use a mono-cable with towers and sheave assemblies and the haul rope is moving at a constant circulating speed of five metres per second. Either chairlifts or enclosed gondola cabins or open standing cabins (cabriolets) can be utilized on detachable grip systems. The carriers are decoupled from the haul cable in the stations during loading and unloading and move through the station on a separate track system at a moving speed ranging from 0.3 metres per second for gondolas to as high as 1.3 metres per second for chairlifts. The key point is that people load and unload level walk-in gondola cabins or chairlifts at a very slow and safe speed. The carrier is then accelerated with rubber tires with ever increasing speed until it matches the five metre per second cable speed at which time the grip is allowed to close and attach to the cable. When the carrier arrives at the upper station, the grip is opened and the carrier decelerated for unloading. Trip time for Option A2 with a detachable grip gondola system is about 9.6 minutes which is very similar to the pulse gondola system. Design capacity is variable from as little as 250 persons per hour up to 2,800 persons per hour with eight passenger gondolas. Our partner, Doppelmayr has provided options for eight passenger gondolas or six passenger gondolas with initial capacity of 500 persons per hour and ultimate capacity of 1,000 persons per hour per direction. If we had a high demand capacity requirement, detachable grip systems would logically be the preferred alternative. The negative points of detachable systems are significantly higher capital and maintenance costs. The detachable gripping systems must be inspected each year and one-fourth of the grips must go through a complete inspection and over haul system every year. A summary comparison of the pulse gondola versus detachable gondola systems designed and priced for Rossland by Doppelmayr is provided in Table III.3.


TABLE III.3 ROSSLAND-RED MOUNTAIN GONDOLA ALTERNATIVES

Bottom Top Total Bottom Top TotalPulse Detachable 8 Detachable 6 Pulse Pulse B

4x3x8 MGFP 8MGD 6MGD 4x3x8 MGFP 2x3x8 MGFP

Drive LocationRed Mountain

BaseRed Mountain

BaseRed Mountain

Base Slope Length (m) 2,935 2,912 2,912 1,811 877 2,688 1,429 1,295 2,724 Vertical (m) 113 113 113 131 43 174 265 180 445

Carrier Type 8 passenger level walk-in

8 passenger level walk-in




Operating Speed (m/s) 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 Trip Time (minutes) 11.7 9.6 9.6 8.6 4.2 12.8 Initial Capacity (pph) 245 500 500 334 344

Initial Carriers 12

4 clusters of 3 22 29 12

4 clusters of 3 6

2 clusters of 3 Design Capacity (pph) 245 1,000 1,000 334 344

Design Carriers 12

4 clusters of 3 44 59 12

4 clusters of 3 6

2 clusters of 3 Equipment Cost Estimate C$ million 6.05$ 9.04$ 8.85$ 4.79$ 3.63$ 8.42$ More than Alignment B

Alignment A Alignment B

On mountain at the top of each gondola.

Alignment C

Detachable Gondola System – Aspen, Colorado

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study IV - 1 May 2009

IV. ECONOMICS .1 Introduction Economic considerations including capital and operating costs, potential revenue sources are extremely important in evaluating the feasibility of the project in general and more specifically, each of the options that have been proposed. The objectives of the financial plan are two-fold:

1. Determine the capital costs of each people mover option that has been proposed.

2. Develop an estimate for the annual operating costs of each option that has been

proposed. .2 Capital Budget Three different equipment configurations (Pulse gondola and 6-passenger and 8-passenger detachable gondolas) for alignment A have been proposed and a second two-section alignment option for a pulse gondola has also been proposed between the City of Rossland and the Red Mountain Resort. The estimated capital costs have been broken into 10 accounts. Within each of the major accounts, sub-projects have been costed out either as a lump sum or, where appropriate, on a per unit basis. The capital cost estimates are based on construction and/or installation costs and the new lift costing supplied by Doppelmayr Lifts of Kelowna B.C. All capital costs are estimated in 2009 Canadian dollars and have been rounded to the nearest $000. The GST has been assumed to be a “pass-through” cost which will be offset during the future operation of the facility. The capital budgets have been prepared given the following assumptions. Pre-Development Planning - #01 All costs associated with the Rossland People Mover planning process including planning and design, preliminary engineering and mapping are in this account. Generally, it is assumed that certain sub-accounts within this account would cease, following the planning submission, or when construction commences, however, before the actual construction takes place further planning and layout, surveying, architecture, engineering, etc., will be required.


Engineering is based on 9 percent of the Buildings, Utilities, and the Parking and Roads Accounts. Architecture costs are estimated at 9 percent of the Building Development account and include structural, mechanical and electrical engineering for the building. A lump sum has been allocated for the profile surveying of all of the people mover and the lift right-of-way, terminal locations, terminal grading plans, etc. We have assumed that no special environmental work or studies will be required for this project. Building Development - #02 No building development is included in the budget. Aerial Cableways - #03 Doppelmayr/CTEC Lifts of Kelowna, B.C. has provided preliminary aerial cableway budgetary cost estimates for the proposed people mover systems as listed in Table IV.1. These estimates include all mechanical equipment and “turn-key” installation, prefabricated operator houses and 7 percent PST. The Doppelmayr cost estimate of March 5, 2009 does not include roads to terminals suitable for un assisted concrete trucks, electrical services, terminal enclosures or architectural treatments, removal of interfering structures, grading work and terminal site prep, loading and unloading platforms, stairs and railing.

TABLE IV.1 PEOPLE MOVER COSTS ESTIMATES

Pulse Gondola Options

Option A2 Option B1 (top) Option B1 (bottom) Option A2 Option A2Model 4x3x8 MGFP 2x3x8 MGFP 4x3x8 MGFP 8MGD UNIG-L 6MGD UNIG-LDrive location Top Top Top Top TopTension location Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom BottomDrive elevation (m) 1,152 1,195 1,195 1,152 1,152 Slope Length (m) 2,935 877 1,811 2,912 2,912 Horizontal Length (m) 2,900 873 1,799 2,900 2,900 Vertical (m) 113 46- 131 113 113 Speed (m/s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 Trip Time (minutes) 11.7 4.2 8.6 9.6 9.6 Initial Capacity (pphpd) 245 344 344 500 500 Initial Carriers 12 (4 clusters of 3) 6 (2 clusters of 3) 6 (2 clusters of 3) 22 29 Design Capacity (pphpd) 245 344 344 1,000 1,000 Design Carriers 12 (4 clusters of 3) 6 (2 clusters of 3) 6 (2 clusters of 3) 44 59VTFH (p-ft/hr) 91 72 144 371 371 Downhill load (100%) 100 100 100 100 100 Continous kW 369 205 285 272 283 Main Drive DC Motor DC Motor DC Motor DC Motor DC MotorAux. Diesel Drive (m/s) N/A N/A N/A 4 4 Rope Diameter (mm) 45 45 45 46 46 Type of Cabin LWI 8-Passenger LWI 8-Passenger LWI 8-Passenger LWI 8-Passenger LWI 8-PassengerSubtotal 6,050,500$ 3,632,900$ 4,791,700$ Turn Key 6,050,500$ 9,037,900$ 8,848,700$ $8,424,600

Detachable Gondola Options


We have allocated a lump sum of $20,000 per lift for terminal grading and site preparations. Trails - #04 No ski trails are included in this analysis. Roads and Parking - #05 Option B will require a gravel road to the mid station area for truck access for equipment and concrete deliveries. This road requires grades suitable for a concrete truck to negotiate them unassisted. We have allocated a total of 350 meters of gravel access road with grade not exceeding 8 percent at a cost of $50 per meter. This cost includes timber removal, cut and fills and gravel surfacing. Infrastructure - #06 Infrastructure will include underground electrical feed from near by existing electrical distribution lines, transformer and switchgear to each drive terminal. The electrical distribution costs assume that the Option A2 and upper section of the Option B alignment lifts are top drives tapping into the electrical distribution system at the Red Mountain Resort. The lower section of Option B should be a bottom drive lift that can tap into the electrical distribution system in town. The lift drive station switchgear and transformers are costed at $45,000 each. For each drive station, we have allocated a 200 meter feed from the switchgear and transformer to the drive station. Cost estimates to move overhead utilities that may be in conflict with the gondola have not been prepared for this level analysis. Equipment - #07 Funds allocated for the acquisition of specialize equipment relating to the people mover lift is costed as a lump sum of 15,000. Miscellaneous Operating - #08 Funds allocated for the project management of contracts associated with the ski area development and acquisition of equipment is costed as 4 percent of the total cost of all goods, services and equipment, except the pre-development costs. While some contracts are turn key, they will require coordination. Permits include electrical, lift, building, etc., and are included at 4 percent of the respective accounts.


Miscellaneous Legal - #09 On projects of this type, there are certain legal requirements, operating agreements, contracts with suppliers, etc., which require the use of lawyers. We have allocated a contingency for legal fees at 1 percent of all expenses.

Contingency - #10 All projects of this magnitude include contingencies to cover the costs of any unforeseen conditions. Since most of the total account budgets do not allow for contingencies, we have used 10 percent as an overall goal. A summary of the capital budget is listed in Table IV.2.

TABLE IV.2 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY

Units Quantity Unit Pulse Gondola Options

Description Price Option A2 Option B1 (top) Option B1 (bottom) Option A2 Option A2#01 Pre-DevelopmentMaster Plan lump sum 1 100,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Engineering Accounts 2, 4 to 6 9% 5,220$ 10,575$ 5,220$ 5,220$ Architecture Account 2 9% -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Surveying lump sum 1 30,000 15,000 15,000 30,000 30,000 Site Planning & Field Layout lump sum 1 20,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 Total Pre-Development 155,220$ 160,575$ 155,220$ 155,220$ #02 BuildingsTicket Buildings Top and BottomTotal Buildings#03 LiftsLift Equipment Installed lump sum 6,050,500$ 3,632,900$ 4,791,700$ 9,037,900$ 8,848,700$ Terminal Site Prep lump sum 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ Total Lifts 6,070,500$ 8,464,600$ 9,057,900$ 8,868,700$ #04 TrailsTotal Ski Trails and Snowmaking#05 Roads and ParkingAccess Road to Mid Station Meter 350 50.00$ 17,500 Total Roads and Parking 0 17,500$ 0 0#06 Mountain InfrastructureElectrical Feed to Drive Stations Meter 200 40.00$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,000$ Lift Switchgear & Transformer at Drive Stations lump sum 1 45,000$ 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000

Communitactions to Lift lump sum 1 5,000$ 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Total Mountain Infrastructure 58,000$ 100,000$ 58,000$ 58,000$ #07 EquipmentMisc. Equipmpent lump sum 1 15,000.00 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ Total Vehicles and Equipment 30,000$ #08 MiscellaneousConstruction Management Accounts 2 to 6 4% 245,140$ 343,284$ 364,636$ 357,068$ Permits Accounts 2,3, 5, 6 2% 122,570$ 171,642$ 182,318$ 178,534$ Total Miscellaneous 367,710$ 514,926$ 546,954$ 535,602$ #08 Misc. Legal Fees All Accounts 1% 66,514$ 92,876$ 98,181$ 96,175$ Project Subtotal 6,717,944$ 9,380,477$ 9,916,255$ 9,713,697$ #9 Contingency Project Subtotal 10% 671,794 938,048 991,625 971,370 Project Total 7,389,739 10,318,525 10,907,880 10,685,067



.3 Operating Parameters The financial success of the Rossland to Red Mountain People Mover is dependent on a number of factors which have been identified in this analysis. Within each category, the key factors and any assumptions and/or sources for each factor are listed. Operating Characteristics Each project has its own operating characteristics which are significantly influenced by the type of operation. The Rossland People movers will have four basic modes of operation as outlined in Table IV.3. This includes a operating periods for the Winter, Summer and Fall Seasons. Maintenance periods would take place during the “mud” seasons between the Winter and Summer operation and between the Fall and Winter operation

TABLE IV.3 ROSSLAND PEOPLE MOVER OPERATING PERIODS

Annual Annual

Number Operating MaintenanceOperating Period of Days Open Closed Total Hours HoursWinter Season

15-Nov to 30-Apr 166 9:00 22:00 13 2,158 Maintenance Period

01-May to 20-Jun 50 n/a n/a n/a 320 Summer Season

20-Jun to 01-Sep 73 9:00 22:00 13 949 Fall Season

02-Sep to 15-Oct 43 12:00 18:00 6 258 Maintenance Period

16-Oct to 14-Nov 29 n/a n/a n/a 160 TOTAL 3,365 480

Hours

.4 Operating and Maintenance Costs We have examined several different operating systems between Rossland and Red Mountain and it is Ecosign’s opinion that the only economically viable way for this to occur would be for the City to enter into an operating agreement with Red Mountain Ventures to operate the gondola line. This is because Red Mountain already has certified mechanics, millwrights, electrical engineers and trained staff and therefore, they would be completely competent and staffed to handle operations and maintenance of a people mover gondola system between Rossland and Red Mountain.


The alternative system would be such as was done by the Town of Mountain Village Owners Association in Telluride, Colorado, who operate three sections of eight passenger gondolas connecting the Town of Mountain Village with the Town of Telluride. Total cost to operate these three sections of gondolas in Telluride is $4.725 million per year, about one-fourth of which is to handle overhead and allocated costs. The operations and maintenance costs are $1.45 million and $1.2 million respectively with another $1.2 million for capital replacement provisions. Basically what the Town of Mountain Village has done is set up its own lift operating and maintenance company to operate the Telluride people movers and these systems operate completely independently and at great expense from the Telluride Ski Area. We examined a similar system for the Resort Municipality of Whistler some ten years ago and found that if the Municipality ran a people mover system the costs would be about three times greater than if the operation and maintenance were undertaken by the Whistler/Blackcomb Ski Areas. Therefore, we developed the following operating and maintenance costs on the assumption that Red Mountain Ski Area operates the people mover systems and enters into an agreement with BC Transit and the City of Rossland to do so as this in our opinion is the only logical and affordable alternative. Lift Operations Direct Wages and Salaries As determined in the previous section we have estimated 3,365 hours of operation annually and an additional 480 hours of maintenance. Lift operations and maintenance and repair wages are based on the proposed staffing levels and hourly wages listed in Table IV.4. The wages shown are fully loaded payroll including a burden of approximately 21% which is common in the ski industry. We provide for a supervisor/lead hand and two operators for Option A2 and four operators for Option B1. Annual maintenance costs have been determined utilizing information from both Telluride and Panorama which operates a pulse gondola. Utilities are for power costs based upon operation of the Panorama Gondola depending on the size of motors and hours of operation. As listed in Table IV.4, the total staff and other direct costs for Option A2 are estimated to be $187,500 per year which works out to be a cash operating cost of $55.74 per hour. Operating two pulse gondolas as in Option B1 are about $100,000 higher or $283,650 and the cash operating cost per hour of operation are $84.29.


The detachable gondola options have substantially higher operating and maintenance costs due to the requirement to have personnel on both the up hill and downhill loading side to meet CSA Z98 lift code and the significantly higher costs to maintain the detachable grips and line equipment. Total annual cash costs for the detachable gondola options are around $375,000 per year, more-or-less double the Option A2 pulse gondola. Cash operating cost per hour for the detachable grip gondola options are $110 per hour. Depreciation and Amortization We have listed depreciation and amortization as a separate cost as it is not truly and hourly or daily cash cost for the operation of the people mover which must be compared with operating bus systems for example. However, the equipment will wear out over time, even if well maintained so we have assumed a twenty year amortization which might be held in a capital reserve. However, we believe that it is likely that the Rossland/Red Mountain people mover system may well be funded by BC Transit or special programs or a separate levy and so depreciation and amortization may well not be an actual cash cost but rather an allowance for replacement after twenty or even thirty years. If well maintained, the equipment proposed should easily operate for a thirty year life time. We have used standard accounting principles or GAAP for twenty year amortization period and fifteen percent salvage value at the end of twenty years. Capital Costs Per Person Per Hour It can be seen that the pulse gondola system is about one-half the cost per hour to operate compared to the detachable grips systems. The detachable systems do have higher potential hourly capacities. This is shown in the capital costs per person per hour. Total capital costs for the Option A2 pulse gondola system is $7.4 million for a capacity of 245 persons per hour or capital costs per person per hour of $30,162. The two pulse gondolas in Option B1 top and B1 bottom have a total capital cost of $10.3 million but a higher capacity of 344 persons per hour for capital cost of $29,995 per person per hour. The detachable gondola options on the A1 alignment have capacity of 500 persons per hour for a capital cost per person per hour of $21,815.


TABLE IV.4

PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENSES

Description Number Hours Rate Pulse Gondola Options(Loaded) Option A2 Option B1 (top) Option B1 (bottom) Option A2 8MGD Option A2 6MGD

StaffSupervisor/Lead Hand 1 3,365 13.31$ 44,788.15$ 44,788.15$ 44,788.15$ 44,788.15$ Operators 2 3,365 10.89$ 73,289.70$ 73,289.70$ 73,289.70$ 73,289.70$ Operators 2 3,365 10.89$ 73,289.70$ 73,289.70$ 73,289.70$ Total Operations Staff 118,077.85$ 118,077.85$ 73,289.70$ 191,367.55$ 191,367.55$ OTHER DIRECTAnnual Maintenance Cost 57,195.00$ 31,775.00$ 44,175.00$ 168,640.00$ 175,460.00$ Utilities 12,300.00$ 6,833.33$ 9,500.00$ 9,066.67$ 9,433.33$ Subtotal Annual Other Direct Costs 69,495.00$ 38,608.33$ 53,675.00$ 177,706.67$ 184,893.33$ TOTAL STAFF AND OTHER DIRECT COSTS 187,572.85$ 283,650.88$ 369,074.22$ 376,260.88$ Depreciation and Amortization 314,063.90$ 438,537.30$ 463,584.91$ 454,115.35$ TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION COSTS 501,636.75$ 722,188.18$ 832,659.13$ 830,376.23$

Cash Operating Cost per Hour of OperationTotal Operating Hours 3,365 3,365 3,365 3,365 Cash Operating Cost per Hour of Operation 55.74$ 84.29$ 109.68$ 111.82$ Cash Operating Cost per Day of OperationWinter Season 724.65$ 1,095.83$ 1,425.84$ 1,453.61$ Summer Season 724.65$ 1,095.83$ 1,425.84$ 1,453.61$ Fall Season 334.45$ 505.77$ 658.08$ 670.90$ Capital Cost Per Person per HourTotal Capital Cost 7,389,739$ 10,318,525$ 10,907,880$ 10,685,067$ Hourly Capacity (pph) 245 344 500 500 Capital Cost per Hourly Capacity 30,162.20$ 29,995.71$ 21,815.76$ 21,370.13$


It is assumed that the Red Mountain Resort would operate the lift under its organization. Other costs such as insurance and marketing have not been included in this analysis.

Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study V - 1 May 2009

5.0 SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS .1 Summary The citizens of Rossland have requested an investigation of the feasibility of a people mover connection between the town and Red Mountain Resort to reduce their dependence on the private automobile as a means of transportation between the two locations. Ecosign Mountain Resort Planners, Ltd. and Doppelmayr CTEC Canada Ltd. were retained to prepare a pre-feasibility study on such a link. Key findings from our investigation are as follows: Demand • The majority of the public accommodation in the City of Rossland now and in the

future is located at the base of Red Mountain. • Opportunities for redevelopment in the central business district and in the Mid

Town Transition Area could result in a few more public accommodation properties in the town centre; likely the total public beds in this area won’t exceed 600.

• The existing pattern of residential development in the town is low density single family; however the Official Community Plan and the Zoning Bylaw support higher density redevelopment in the core commercial zone and the Mid Town Transition area.

• Currently more than half of Red Mountain’s business is from season’s passholders who represent a good market for a transit solution. Average daily season’s pass use exceeds 500 skiers.

• Without an increase in local transit frequency, current peak period demand is estimated at 200 to 400 skiers depending on the Rossland terminal location.

• Build-out peak period demand is in the order of 400 to 700 skiers depending on Rossland terminal location.

• As development continues at Red Mountain, the desire for public transit into the town centre will increase.

• An aerial cableway from Red Mountain to the Rossland downtown core would provide a unique, safe and interesting experience and stimulate the demand for such as system.

Rossland Terminal Location The Pioneer Park location offers the best opportunity to bring the gondola within reach of the largest number of Rossland residents and hotel guests both now and in


the future. Immediately adjacent to Columbia Avenue, this location also brings residents and guests staying at Red Mountain right into the centre of town for shopping and dining opportunities. Pioneer Park is within 50 metres of the existing local transit system and one of the hubs of the growing pedestrian trail network within the City. Gondola Alignment Three alternative gondola alignments were reviewed. A straight alignment from Rossland to the Red Mountain base is the least expensive solution and results in the shortest trip time for users. While a two section gondola offers the opportunity to create potential development nodes on Red Mountain, at this point in time there appears to be more than enough existing approved development capacity within the Rossland town site, at the base of Red Mountain and in the Redstone golf resort area to meet Rossland’s expected growth for the foreseeable future. We therefore, do not see a large benefit to expanding the development footprint of the community further up Red Mountain. Economics Preliminary capital costs for a gondola system range from $7.4 million for a pulse gondola on the straight line A2 alignment to over $10 million for any of the other options investigated. Operating costs can vary considerably depending on the desired operating hours. For the purposes of this study, we prepared an estimate of operating costs based on fairly high level of service, with the gondola open from morning till evening for extended winter and summer seasons for a total of 3,365 hours per year. With this level of service, annual operating and maintenance costs ranged from $188,000 for the A2 pulse gondola to $369,000 for a 6 passenger detachable lift on the same alignment. Depending on the anticipated number and travel demands of both residents and guests throughout the year, these estimates could be adjusted to more accurately reflect the requirements of the citizens of Rossland. .2 Preferred Solution Our preferred solution is a straight line alignment from Pioneer Park to the Red Mountain base. The proposed locations of the top and bottom terminals are shown in Figures 7a and 7b. A sixteen metre right of way along the gondola alignment is also illustrated. From Ecosign’s site visit and Doppelmayr’s preliminary engineering work using the City’s topographic mapping, it appears to be technically feasible to


bring the gondola into Pioneer Park. Determining the impact of a gondola right of way on the two single family home properties to the west (1844 and 1860 First Avenue) will require a ground survey that locates the existing structures more accurately. Based on our analysis of the existing and future number of skiers who would be within walking distance of a Pioneer Park terminal, it appears as if a pulse gondola system will have sufficient capacity to move the peak day skiers from Rossland to the resort within a reasonable morning staging period. However, improvements to the frequency of local transit within Rossland could bring a much larger proportion of the Rossland bed base within reach of the gondola and this could result in higher numbers of skiers wishing to take the gondola. Future planning for the gondola should take into consideration planned increases in transit frequency. .3 Recommendations We recommend the City of Rossland preserve a 16 metre right of way for a future gondola along the A2 alignment and search for sources of funding. An aerial connection between Red Mountain Resort and the downtown area will increase the ability to market Rossland/Red as a tourism destination and offer an additional summer amenity. The interconnection between the historic mining town and the recreational resort provides differentiation from other BC mountain resorts. The ability to move easily between the resort and the downtown will increase the ability to market Red as a conference location and extend its business in to the shoulder seasons. An electrically driven gondola can be viewed as a green solution to providing transportation between the resort and the town and embraces the City’s desire to move towards a more sustainable future.

Rossland Cover - Wire Bind · Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study I - 5 May 2009 a detachable...

Documents

Transcript of Rossland Cover - Wire Bind · Rossland Gondola Pre-Feasibility Study I - 5 May 2009 a detachable...