cable car and pinnacle centre on mt wellingon hobart

[Nuts]

digitalgiraffe do you need to declare any commercial interest in the proposal?

[digitalgiraffe]

So a cable car installation is just some cables floating in the air ? Cabins and pylons are invisible ?

The cabins are smaller than a bus. There will be 2-3 maybe even 4 over the entire span? They don't have to be bright red like you see at ski resorts. With as little as 3 pylons I dare say that would be less offensive than what will happen if something like this doesn't go ahead which is the widening of the road, now thats a scar nobody wants to see again.

I'm still amazed that they can build a system like this in a WHA but of course it can't happen in Tasmania on a mountain that is so far from pristine wilderness it's not funny.

[digitalgiraffe]

digitalgiraffe do you need to declare any commercial interest in the proposal?

Not at all. I spend a lot of time on the mountain taking photos and riding my mountain bike. I'd just love to see this happen before I'm too old to enjoy the mountain bike side of it. I think it would be a great addition to not only Hobart but Tasmania.

[whynotwalk]

Why would there be a permanent high visibility scar? the cables are near invisible from a distance.

That's my point. It won't be "from a distance" for many people. Our skyline to the north runs above the trees from Knocklofty to the summit of kunanyi/Mt Wellington. That's very likely to be a significant part of the route from McRobeys. The "scar" will be the cables in that skyline, with regular "gondolas" travelling up & down on them.

Why are you worried about someones profits?

It's not the profits that worry me, it's who loses so those profits can be made.

cheers

Peter

[frenchy_84]

I'm still amazed that they can build a system like this in a WHA but of course it can't happen in Tasmania on a mountain that is so far from pristine wilderness it's not funny.

"Taking a look interstate you soon stumble across the Northern Queensland Skyrail Rainforest Cableway announcement of 1994 that saw passions rage over a proposed development through sensitive rainforest between Cains and Kuranda. The project since completed has taken out 24 state, national and international awards in the categories of Tourism and Sustainability.

Most notable among the Skyrail Cableways international accolades include winner of the 1996 EIBTM European Greening of Business Tourism Award for ‘Most Environmentally Conscious Visitor Attraction’ to the 1999 Winner for the Wet Tropics Management Authority Cassowary Award and then there was the 2000 Winner for British Airways ‘Tourism for Tomorrow’ International Environment Award. The once controversial Skyrail Cableway is now a best practice model for ecotourism right from the construction phase through to ongoing operations. North Queensland is now renowned for providing a high quality rainforest ecotourism experience for hundreds of thousands of visitors every year." (http://www.nationre.com.au/2011/07/06/m ... -vs-man-2/)

[digitalgiraffe]

That's my point. It won't be "from a distance" for many people. Our skyline to the north runs above the trees from Knocklofty to the summit of kunanyi/Mt Wellington. That's very likely to be a significant part of the route from McRobeys. The "scar" will be the cables in that skyline, with regular "gondolas" travelling up & down on them.

If you have a bit of time I would suggest reading through the FAQ on the cable car website. I'm pretty sure I read it there or on their facebook page that the cables are near invisible from 100-200m away. I live on the eastersnore looking directly at the mountain, I'm sure I'll see the odd shape moving up and down the mountain but when you live in a capital city you have to expect things will change over time, how did we get to have what we have now without change? It seems that people in Tasmania just want things to be frozen in time with what we currently have. I see headlights going up and down the mountain every night, if you had your way would you stop evening traffic also?

Cheers,

Paul

[frenchy_84]

It's not the profits that worry me, it's who loses so those profits can be made.

Well i hope that Hobartians then analyse the cost/benefit analysis of the proposal as a whole. For me, the "cost" of 2 cables and 3-4 pylons visible from some parts of town are out weighed by the potential benefits provided

[stepbystep]

That's my point. It won't be "from a distance" for many people. Our skyline to the north runs above the trees from Knocklofty to the summit of kunanyi/Mt Wellington. That's very likely to be a significant part of the route from McRobeys. The "scar" will be the cables in that skyline, with regular "gondolas" travelling up & down on them.

If you have a bit of time I would suggest reading through the FAQ on the cable car website. I'm pretty sure I read it there or on their facebook page that the cables are near invisible from 100-200m away. I live on the eastersnore looking directly at the mountain, I'm sure I'll see the odd shape moving up and down the mountain but when you live in a capital city you have to expect things will change over time, how did we get to have what we have now without change? It seems that people in Tasmania just want things to be frozen in time with what we currently have. I see headlights going up and down the mountain every night, if you had your way would you stop evening traffic also?

Cheers,

Paul

The FAQ on their website is incredibly subjective and lacking in detail. One quote "The actual size of a cabin can range from smaller than a Mini Cooper to as large as Mini Van" I've been in cable cars in Switzerland and Hong Kong that hold well over 30 people and are more the size of a shuttle bus or bigger. I'd like to see you and your mates get into a mini cooper, or a mini van for that matter with your bikes. I also see you have cherry picked other "facts" from this source.

You are obviously all for this development to make your downhill easier on you(just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you, walking uphill is quite hard) but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can support a proposal that lacks any actual detail. Until I see an ACTUAL proposal, no chance I'll support it, but hey guess I'm just ignorant

Nice pics on your sig link btw. Love your macro work.

[digitalgiraffe]

The FAQ on their website is incredibly subjective and lacking in detail. One quote "The actual size of a cabin can range from smaller than a Mini Cooper to as large as Mini Van" I've been in cable cars in Switzerland and Hong Kong that hold well over 30 people and are more the size of a shuttle bus or bigger. I'd like to see you and your mates get into a mini cooper, or a mini van for that matter with your bikes. I also see you have cherry picked other "facts" from this source.

You are obviously all for this development to make your downhill easier on you(just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you, walking uphill is quite hard) but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can support a proposal that lacks any actual detail. Until I see an ACTUAL proposal, no chance I'll support it, but hey guess I'm just ignorant

Nice pics on your sig link btw. Love your macro work.

A lot of the cablecars that are bike friendly have racks on the exterior to hold them securely so they aren't in the way of everyone. No cherry picking at all? I even said perviously that I'd imagine they would be of similar size to a bus which I think is fin. It would mean less gondolas.

I am all for this development because yes it will make downhill a lot easier for all the downhillers in Tasmania and it will help riders get bike specific trails which will separate bikes and walkers. We all know this isn't a great mix. North-South was supposed to be bike specific till walkers kicked up a fuss and now it's a shared trail. You can't relax and get into the flow of the trail without wondering if a walker is around the next corner. If wanting a recreational activity to develop to its full potential makes me selfish then I'm happy to wear that label.

Are you suggesting that downhillers should push their bikes back to the springs from the brewery after doing a single run?

I'm also all for this development because the pinnacle is a disgrace. If a private investor is willing to put money into the construction of a pinnacle centre then the pressure will be on them to maintain the area (could even be part of a contract). Not like what we have now where if you decide to do some exploring you are greeted with piles of toilet paper behind any rock large enough to hide a human. It's disgusting.

It would also be great to have the option to walk up the mountain or down the mountain and have a means of returning without having to walk if I don't want to.

You won't see an actual proposal until/if the WPMT decides to remove their ban on commercial development. It's also in the best interest of the proponent to listen to what the public would like to see. If it turns out that they want to clear a corridor or create some kind of giant monster on the mountain I'll swiftly remove my support.

Glad you like the photos. I'm looking forward to some wetter weather to get back up there and start shooting again.

Cheers,

Paul

[doogs]

It would be great to have a world class bike area like this http://bike.nevisrange.co.uk/index.asp , but that would need a lot more development than just a cable car!! The bikes would go on the outside of the gondola like this;

GOPR0271.jpg (137.57 KiB) Viewed 22637 times

Anyway I would assume that the vast majority of the customers wouldnt be taking a bike. Anyone from the North Island (mainland Australia) have anything to add from the tourist point of view?? If you were visiting the state would you use it??

[frenchy_84]

You are obviously all for this development to make your downhill easier on you(just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you, walking uphill is quite hard) but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can support a proposal that lacks any actual detail. Until I see an ACTUAL proposal, no chance I'll support it, but hey guess I'm just ignorant

Dan, it only takes a few slight edits to this statement to argue the otherway.

Some are obviously against this development becuase the cables will visible from south hobart (just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you). but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can be against a proposal that lacks any actual detail, at concept stage it looks like a good idea. Ill wait for the ACTUAL proposal to judge its true impact.

To me this mentallity appears to be an issue in Tasmania. When a development of any sort is proposed, rather than be an attitude of yes, this could work if such and such is done to ensure this and this is looked after. Instead its the automatic no, I dont want it.

[stepbystep]

You are obviously all for this development to make your downhill easier on you(just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you, walking uphill is quite hard) but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can support a proposal that lacks any actual detail. Until I see an ACTUAL proposal, no chance I'll support it, but hey guess I'm just ignorant

Dan, it only takes a few slight edits to this statement to argue the otherway.

Some are obviously against this development becuase the cables will visible from south hobart (just a tiny bit selfish, but all power to you). but the proponents have yet to decide on a route or a business model. Personally I'm amazed you can be against a proposal that lacks any actual detail, at concept stage it looks like a good idea. Ill wait for the ACTUAL proposal to judge its true impact.

To me this mentallity appears to be an issue in Tasmania. When a development of any sort is proposed, rather than be an attitude of yes, this could work if such and such is done to ensure this and this is looked after. Instead its the automatic no, I dont want it.

Haha, very true! You and the digitalgiraffe are of course entitled to your views.

As I have stated here and elsewhere I'm not against development on the mountain, and other places. In particular decent visitor facitlities up there, increased mountain bike facilities which could stretch throughout the range and I'm open to other things too, I just don't like the idea of a cable car, sorry.
The proponents aren't doing themselves any favours with a wishy washy website with "facts" such as their cabin examples which are blatantly misleading.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Im sure I read somewhere that the maintenance costs would be so high, the car would have to carry a certain amount of passengers per day to make it profitable. Anyone know more on this??

As us Hobartians know, there are many many many many many days per year where it would just be too dangerous to run....

[digitalgiraffe]

Im sure I read somewhere that the maintenance costs would be so high, the car would have to carry a certain amount of passengers per day to make it profitable. Anyone know more on this??

As us Hobartians know, there are many many many many many days per year where it would just be too dangerous to run....

I can't comment on the required maintenance side of things but cable life is around 80years.

Sure there would be the odd occasion it couldn't run but I don't see how the weather on Mt. Wellington is any worse than in the Alps, Pyrenees or Canadian Rockies etc? A factor that does work in Mt. Wellingtons favour is that GENERALLY when we have bad weather it is from the W-SW and this leaves the East face of the mountain relatively sheltered until you get to the pinnacle. Modern examples of CC can run in wind of up to 120kmh.

When I was in Andorra we used a small gondola setup that only carried approx 10 people per cabin and while the wind was strong it still felt very safe.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Gets pretty cold and nasty up there, im not sure the average tourist would even WANT to get out of the car 75% of the time!!

[Hallu]

I'm still amazed that they can build a system like this in a WHA but of course it can't happen in Tasmania on a mountain that is so far from pristine wilderness it's not funny.

"Taking a look interstate you soon stumble across the Northern Queensland Skyrail Rainforest Cableway announcement of 1994 that saw passions rage over a proposed development through sensitive rainforest between Cains and Kuranda. The project since completed has taken out 24 state, national and international awards in the categories of Tourism and Sustainability.

Most notable among the Skyrail Cableways international accolades include winner of the 1996 EIBTM European Greening of Business Tourism Award for ‘Most Environmentally Conscious Visitor Attraction’ to the 1999 Winner for the Wet Tropics Management Authority Cassowary Award and then there was the 2000 Winner for British Airways ‘Tourism for Tomorrow’ International Environment Award. The once controversial Skyrail Cableway is now a best practice model for ecotourism right from the construction phase through to ongoing operations. North Queensland is now renowned for providing a high quality rainforest ecotourism experience for hundreds of thousands of visitors every year." (http://www.nationre.com.au/2011/07/06/m ... -vs-man-2/)

Let's be serious please. Queensland is without a doubt the worst state in Australia in terms of conservation. They harm more than protect the Great Barrier Reef and the associated and indispensable coastline ecosystem, and they still refuse to turn Cape York Peninsula into the biggest and most amazing NP in Australia. They're also the state where the NP problem in Australia is the most visible : a ton of tiny pockets are made into NPs, instead of protecting a large area, in order to keep the best mining/logging/farming spots... Those "awards" are ridiculous and have absolutely no merit conservation-wise (and 75% of them have been given by Australian or Queensland associations)...

[Nuts]

Cape Town/ Table Mtn, probably approaching a more comparable climate/span(?) is down 3/4 mths a year inc. maintenance? I do agree that (even without settling a proposal) lots of info 'could' be made available, help (or not). Also that Profit (and particularly it's distribution) from any natural asset is Very important, even (or particularly?) to those with no personal interest in a cable car.

How about an invitation to the executive to answer questions here (i notice they are active on facebook and quick to link our 'poll'). At the end of the day, on the record, f'book cut and thrust is hardly impartial.

(ps. i'm down to one leg sbs, recommend a good book? )

[tastrax]

The Queenstown (NZ) Gondola is quite short compared to any of the proposed Mt Wellington Cable car routes but it does give a glimpse of sort of activities that go on at the site and the sorts of prices that MIGHT be charged for something similar

http://www.skyline.co.nz/queenstown/pricing/

Maybe we could have the luge run down the road?

[wayno]

queenstown get a million tourists a year who are there for other reasons anyway. no shortage of customers....
the cable car there just goes up to an outcrop on a spur, doesnt go anywhere near the top of the mountain it's on... its quite low down relatively speaking

[tastrax]

Correct - I have been one of those millions on quite a few occasions.

[roysta]

What a pity that Queenstown gondola doesn't travel an extra 800 odd metres up from Bobs Peak to Ben Lomond.

[wayno]

aint going to happen anywhere in that area.... there's too many serious outdoors people who would put a stop to it happening...

[mwcc-director]

Cape Town/ Table Mtn, probably approaching a more comparable climate/span(?) is down 3/4 mths a year inc. maintenance? I do agree that (even without settling a proposal) lots of info 'could' be made available, help (or not). Also that Profit (and particularly it's distribution) from any natural asset is Very important, even (or particularly?) to those with no personal interest in a cable car.

How about an invitation to the executive to answer questions here (i notice they are active on facebook and quick to link our 'poll'). At the end of the day, on the record, f'book cut and thrust is hardly impartial.

Hi there, have registered for this forum on behalf of Mt Wellington Cableway Company to help out with some ambiguity where I can.

We agree that more information can and should be made publicly available, in due course. Our investors have a lot riding on the outcome of the park trust's future management plan and there is certain information which is commercially sensitive; i.e great for public awareness on the topical issue, but commercially risky at this time till the entity has clearer planning certainty.

FYI, if all goes to plan with the new Park management plan, we hope to set up an information booth for public display purposes, and open up a raft of new and accurate detail on our website.

We have on good authority (read: financial controller, ceo and maintenance supervisor) from TMAC (Table Mountain Aerial Cableway Co) that their operation is down for 2 weeks per annum for regular maintenance. Every 5-10 years they require major part replacement, and all maintenance & parts both annually and extraordinary expenditure is fully-funded from a sinking fund, built into their daily ticket price. This is the standard recommended practice procedure for half a dozen other operators we've liaised with on 4 continents. TMAC uses a traditional form of ropeway which, despite having 4000 litres of ballast in each of their two, 65pax carriers, isn't capable of comfortable operation above 60km. TMAC is exposed to 2 oceans and this is their limiting factor to increased profitability.

As digital-giraffe points out, newer systems have better stability and can cater for above 100kmh wind. The system we hope to ultimately select will be a cost-benefit trade-off between capacity, wind resistance, tower quantity. The parameters we have given our feasibility team is to ensure no vegetation is cleared (no scar) and that we can operate safely and comfortably in high wind if required. This is all possible, at a cost, and the desired route also plays a strong part in mitigating wind, maximising patronage and minimising towers.

We can't provide much more information on the actual proposal yet because the full technical feasibility hasn't been conducted yet, which can only happen when our investors can confidently write cheques knowing there is a clear path and planning process that will genuinely consider a proposal.

The financial feasibility has been conducted, which is why we have sourced and successfully secured investors, who have verified this by also doing their own financial analysis of the opportunity. The details of the feasibility, including all operations & maintenance costs right down to the stationery, are commercial in confidence until such time we decide to raise further capital through a public offering (IPO) on the Australian Stock Exchange. This is unlikely to be necessary.

[mwcc-director]

Let's be serious please. Queensland is without a doubt the worst state in Australia in terms of conservation. They harm more than protect the Great Barrier Reef and the associated and indispensable coastline ecosystem, and they still refuse to turn Cape York Peninsula into the biggest and most amazing NP in Australia. They're also the state where the NP problem in Australia is the most visible : a ton of tiny pockets are made into NPs, instead of protecting a large area, in order to keep the best mining/logging/farming spots... Those "awards" are ridiculous and have absolutely no merit conservation-wise (and 75% of them have been given by Australian or Queensland associations)...

How about Earthcheck Platinum, and ISO 14001? They were named the most environmentally sustainable tourism business in the PACIFIC region.
http://www.skyrail.com.au/rainforests/e ... tal-policy

[fenlok]

Being that on occasion people have actually had trouble with their central locking in the current carpark, due to the nearby transmission tower, has any consideration of the likelihood of any future pinnacle centre being a cancer-cluster in the making???

[wayno]

that will depend what the building is made out of as to the effect the radiation from the towers will have... you really dont want glass on the walls facing the towers. that won't do anything to stop the radiation.

[stepbystep]

Hi there, have registered for this forum on behalf of Mt Wellington Cableway Company to help out with some ambiguity where I can.
Thanks for putting in
We agree that more information can and should be made publicly available, in due course. Our investors have a lot riding on the outcome of the park trust's future management plan and there is certain information which is commercially sensitive; i.e great for public awareness on the topical issue, but commercially risky at this time till the entity has clearer planning certainty.

FYI, if all goes to plan with the new Park management plan, we hope to set up an information booth for public display purposes, and open up a raft of new and accurate detail on our website.
One of the better public consultation processes to date
We have on good authority (read: financial controller, ceo and maintenance supervisor) from TMAC (Table Mountain Aerial Cableway Co) that their operation is down for 2 weeks per annum for regular maintenance. Every 5-10 years they require major part replacement, and all maintenance & parts both annually and extraordinary expenditure is fully-funded from a sinking fund, built into their daily ticket price. This is the standard recommended practice procedure for half a dozen other operators we've liaised with on 4 continents. TMAC uses a traditional form of ropeway which, despite having 4000 litres of ballast in each of their two, 65pax carriers, isn't capable of comfortable operation above 60km. TMAC is exposed to 2 oceans and this is their limiting factor to increased profitability.
TMAC, imho, as I remember it is extremely ugly as seen from Cape Town and detracts from the magnificent edifice of a grand mountain, it wasn't running when I was there due to technical issues, not weather
As digital-giraffe points out, newer systems have better stability and can cater for above 100kmh wind. The system we hope to ultimately select will be a cost-benefit trade-off between capacity, wind resistance, tower quantity. The parameters we have given our feasibility team is to ensure no vegetation is cleared (no scar) and that we can operate safely and comfortably in high wind if required. This is all possible, at a cost, and the desired route also plays a strong part in mitigating wind, maximising patronage and minimising towers.

We can't provide much more information on the actual proposal yet because the full technical feasibility hasn't been conducted yet, which can only happen when our investors can confidently write cheques knowing there is a clear path and planning process that will genuinely consider a proposal.
Then why bother with a public consultation process if we aren't properly informed.? Pick your model and back yourself.
The financial feasibility has been conducted, which is why we have sourced and successfully secured investors, who have verified this by also doing their own financial analysis of the opportunity. The details of the feasibility, including all operations & maintenance costs right down to the stationery, are commercial in confidence until such time we decide to raise further capital through a public offering (IPO) on the Australian Stock Exchange. This is unlikely to be necessary.[/quote]
If you've had a financial feasibility study that is attracting investors, then lets see the model. Investors aren't going to back a maybe this, maybe that model are they?

[Strider]

Being that on occasion people have actually had trouble with their central locking in the current carpark, due to the nearby transmission tower, has any consideration of the likelihood of any future pinnacle centre being a cancer-cluster in the making???

It also depends on where at the Pinnacle the centre is located. Or it might not depend on anything - it's only radio interference after all.

[wayno]

radio waves can damage the health,, i'd be more worried if i had to work at the pinnacle centre. the odd visit isnt likely to affect your health
http://www.chronicexposure.org/transmitters.html

[Strider]

I think you're getting ahead of yourselves a bit...