Lift-off for urban cable car projects as cities seek transport solutions

[ssiguy2]

Just looked up a link on the monorail site and her are 2 options which would be excellent for Toronto's Hydro corridors.

The first, www.skytrolley.com is sort of a hybrid between a regular monorail and gondola.
The second, www.aerobus.com is much more like the gondola's presented here but is much more geared towards rapid/mass transit and only requires supporting polers about every 600 meters................along a hydro corridor you wouldn't even notice them. Their added bonus is that they are much larger with capacity of 300 passengers per train.

Check em out.

 

[typezed]

This may be entering ferris wheel and monorail dreaming, but it can be an interesting thought experiment to imagine this solution for the Railway Lands. There a downtown urban area full of new development and density is badly served, and will probably continue to be badly served, by transit. Cable cars could negotiate the rail corridor and the Gardiner without having to tunnel, could cut across the area from highrise cluster to highrise cluster without needing to follow the street layout. Imagine a route something like this: Union Station from atop the new train shed to CityPlace/Skydome to Liberty Village to Ontario Place. If only it had been planned along with the development, so that stations could have been incorporated during construction. The east side has yet to be developed. Could go Union Station to WaterPark to George Brown/Sugar Beach to the Hines buildings to the Portlands (crossing water!), then up to the Distillery/West Donlands. That's if this up the air approach could be less expensive and more politically salable than the planned LRTs. It would add to our mix of transit modes, in a unique way in an area frequented by visitors and tourists.

 

[jamincan]

There are plenty of examples of gondolas being used in operating environments that are far different from the two that you proposed (Medellin for example).

I would think Medellin's cable cars are exactly one of the operating environments mentioned by Hipster Duck (ie. to traverse very steep terrain).

 

[gweed123]

They certainly have their place and hats off to cities that are trying to entertain alternative forms of transit.
There are only a few places I could see where it would be particularily useful in Toronto. The first is, of course, to the Islands and Button and the second would perhaps be a "connector" for the UT Scarborough campus to STC.

Interesting idea. Why not have it pass through Centennial too though? Call it the "College Connector" or something like that. There happens to be a river valley that runs almost directly between the two campuses. Impossible for any type of rail or road-based transit, but pretty easy work (not to mention a pretty scenic commute) for a gondola.

One area that it could be very useful and much faster would be along Toronto's Finch Hydro corridor. It would much cheaper than LRT, faster, easier to build, and no one could bitch about the overhead wires seeing it's going along the Hydro line. They can also be quite effective for point to point destinations using rail corridors and vacant lands along highways and the DVP comes to mind.

The FHC gondola would need to be a type of express service though. For stops, it would need to be something like Jane & Finch, Finch West Stn, Finch Stn, Old Cummer GO, Seneca.

Could be quite successful as a supplement to a BRT service along Finch.

I would think Medellin's cable cars are exactly one of the operating environments mentioned by Hipster Duck (ie. to traverse very steep terrain).

Yes, but it also has several lines through gentle rolling hills. For example this: http://www.eco-energies-nouvelles.fr/news_system/vignettes/metro cable.jpg Not exactly flat, but also not anything that couldn't be handled by a BRT or LRT.

 

[BurlOak]

Interesting idea. Why not have it pass through Centennial too though? Call it the "College Connector" or something like that. There happens to be a river valley that runs almost directly between the two campuses. Impossible for any type of rail or road-based transit, but pretty easy work (not to mention a pretty scenic commute) for a gondola.

It does seem that Centennial to UTS is a good route - assuming the SRT is built to SRT. It is about a 4km run, roughly in a straight line along Ellesmere and passes next to a hospital as well.

Maybe YYZ to a GO REX station along the Georgetown line and to Woodbine and Humber College would also work.

A few big problems are that:

1. The TTC does not seem to try to reduce capital cost when looking at transit.
2. The TTC sees the solution to all transit needs as LRT. (It odd, but I am sure the pro subway crowd would be much more interested in finding the appropriate technology for each area.)
3. The environmental crowd probably would not like the disruption to a ravine, although there would be an overall benefit to the environment by getting thousands of cars off the road.

 

[gweed123]

It does seem that Centennial to UTS is a good route - assuming the SRT is built to SRT. It is about a 4km run, roughly in a straight line along Ellesmere and passes next to a hospital as well.

Even if a B-D extension is built instead, an STC-Centennial-Hospital-UTSC route would be quite viable as well. The SRT ROW can be used between STC and Centennial if the LRT isn't built.

Maybe YYZ to a GO REX station along the Georgetown line and to Woodbine and Humber College would also work.

That would certainly be less expensive than extending the LINK system to Malton GO. And you could also extend the line southward to Renforth Gateway.

A few big problems are that:

1. The TTC does not seem to try to reduce capital cost when looking at transit.
2. The TTC sees the solution to all transit needs as LRT. (It odd, but I am sure the pro subway crowd would be much more interested in finding the appropriate technology for each area.)
3. The environmental crowd probably would not like the disruption to a ravine, although there would be an overall benefit to the environment by getting thousands of cars off the road.

Amen, especially on the first 2. And I would think the disruption to the ravine would be minimal, especially compared to plowing a road or LRT line through it. Plus it would give some pretty good scenery.

 

[Hipster Duck]

I dunno. I remain unsold on this technology for a flat city like Toronto. What are its inherent advantages to the kind of transit technologies we already have? Don't forget that the fact that we don't have this technology, have no shops or maintenance workers with any experience with this technology and live far away from the next city that has one is a major strike against it right from the start.

 

[rbt]

Don't forget that the fact that we don't have this technology, have no shops or maintenance workers with any experience with this technology and live far away from the next city that has one is a major strike against it right from the start.

Not entirely true. The people-mover at Pearson is essentially a cablecar, complete with hanging mechanism, but kinda upside-down in implementation which allows it to tolerate poor weather and have a thin-long car. Most gondola's and high-speed chairlifts have a guide track and secondary/slower power source at stations.

It's not TTC or Metrolinx staff; but the expertise is in the region if the Parks Department wanted to replace the ferry with a cable-car.

A pair of ferries for Center Island is $16M? It might be worth considering.

 

[diminutive]

I think the consensus that cable cars aren't going to form a huge part of Toronto's transit network is pretty bang on. The idea of a STC->UTSC connector though made me think of some other options.

From a notional Erindale REX station to UTM along the Credit.

Between the future Vaughan Metropolitan Center and Wonderland? But that's along a huge suburban arterial, so don't see how a rocket bus wouldn't be easier.

Not 'Toronto,' but maybe between St. Catherines GO Station and Niagara Falls?

That's really pushing the limits of where I think would be appropriate.

 

[ssiguy2]

In a city the size of Toronto I think Gondolas have limited applications but they are there. Toronto, however, is very myopic when it comes to transit with the new mantra being LRT and nothing but. All technologies have their best fit but you have to be willing to try alternative options especially in a city that builds subways at $300 million per km in suburban wastelands.

 

[M II A II R II K]

A Mass-Transit Proposal To Connect A City Using Aerial Gondolas

Read More: http://www.fastcodesign.com/1671214...sal-to-connect-a-city-using-aerial-gondolas#1


.....

At PSFK’s recent conference in San Francisco, Frog Principal Designer Michael McDaniel unveiled an ambitious plan called the Wire, which proposes a network of gondolas over Austin, Texas. McDaniel and his team imagine a system of 3S detachable gondolas connecting neighborhoods throughout the city, making it possible for cyclists and pedestrians to “hop” over particularly congested areas.

- Second-tier cities like Austin are tough places to implement comprehensive public transit systems beyond buses. If a city wants to build a system at street level, they’re faced with the issue of land rights: Building a light rail or tram through an urban core requires buying rights from dozens of landowners. They might choose to eschew the street for an underground subway system--but exorbitant costs and decades of gnarly construction work remain.

- “Part of the Wire concept is to circumvent this real estate issue by cheaply flying over the real estate allowing more access to areas that other modes of transit simply can not provide for the same costs. Once you couple that type of core circulator with an Amsterdam-style city bike program, under single fare, you get a door-to-door transit system that is implementable today.” After the Wire’s public debut on November 1, the team is planning to meet with Austin officials and gondola manufacturers about its feasibility, though McDaniel has no delusions about a timeframe.

- The plan is likely to inspire a good deal of debate, thanks to the polarizing nature of transit issues. Some advocates believe that separating cars from foot and bike traffic ultimately works against overall street safety--that drivers who don’t encounter bikes and pedestrians on a regular basis are more dangerous when they inevitably do.

- “Urban mobility networks that segregate by use and rely on totally new modes like ski lifts further dis-empower users of existing car-alternative modes like buses and bikes,” says one urban planner, Andrea Marpillero-Colomina, who is an Isador Lubin Fellow and PhD candidate in urban and public policy at the New School. “It reinforces to car drivers that they rule as dominators of the road, encouraging them to become further disengaged."

- But McDaniel explains that the Wire isn’t about completely separating foot and car traffic. Rather, the idea is to carefully insert "shortcuts" into the existing urban fabric, allowing cyclists and pedestrians to circumvent the worst areas. “First off we are not talking about totally segregating car, foot, and bike traffic, but combining them in a smart and pragmatic way,” he says. “If they meet us on the Wire we will have more ways and more money to help them cycle around the cities. What the Wire does is create more choices for commutes.”

.....

 

[EnviroTO]

Toronto, however, is very myopic when it comes to transit with the new mantra being LRT and nothing but.

What are you talking about? Are you talking about the Toronto with VIA, GO Rail (express rail planned as well), GO Bus, TTC Subway, TTC Suburban LRT, TTC Urban Streetcar, TTC Rocket Bus, TTC Bus, and plentiful AutoShare/Zip options and bike rental stations, or are you talking about a different Toronto?

 

[gweed123]

What are you talking about? Are you talking about the Toronto with VIA, GO Rail (express rail planned as well), GO Bus, TTC Subway, TTC Suburban LRT, TTC Urban Streetcar, TTC Rocket Bus, TTC Bus, and plentiful AutoShare/Zip options and bike rental stations, or are you talking about a different Toronto?

I think he was referring primarily to the City of Toronto, not GO or Metrolinx. And he's right, aside from the Spadina extension (which was primarily pushed for by Vaughan), the TTC is building nothing but LRT (or streetcar ROWs) for the foreseeable future. The DRL and the Yonge extension are the only two heavy rail subway projects currently even remotely being looked at, and they're both in the yet to be determined "next round".

 

[rbt]

I think he was referring primarily to the City of Toronto, not GO or Metrolinx. And he's right, aside from the Spadina extension (which was primarily pushed for by Vaughan), the TTC is building nothing but LRT (or streetcar ROWs) for the foreseeable future. The DRL and the Yonge extension are the only two heavy rail subway projects currently even remotely being looked at, and they're both in the yet to be determined "next round".

And take into consideration the 30 years before 2006. Consideration of LRT at all is a very recent thing.

 

[JayBeeGooner]

I think he was referring primarily to the City of Toronto, not GO or Metrolinx. And he's right, aside from the Spadina extension (which was primarily pushed for by Vaughan), the TTC is building nothing but LRT (or streetcar ROWs) for the foreseeable future. The DRL and the Yonge extension are the only two heavy rail subway projects currently even remotely being looked at, and they're both in the yet to be determined "next round".

Toronto only started seriously considering LRT. Toronto's "subways only" mentality since the 80's resulted in a couple of short extensions, and the Sheppard Subway. It's revisionist to say Toronto has never made subways priority. It can be argued that the subways only attitude stagnated transit growth in this city.