Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: 'Edmonton Project' could make river valley gondola a reality

  1. #1
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,801

    Default 'Edmonton Project' could make river valley gondola a reality

    'Edmonton Project' could make river valley gondola a reality

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...dola-1.4479078
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  2. #2
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,243

    Default

    I would love to see one from MacDonald Drive to end of Steel Park.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  3. #3

    Default

    Posted my mockup couple years ago on the funicular thread...I also stuck the station near Macdonald Drive...I like it there for the proximity to the CBD over Shaw:


  4. #4
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,243

    Default

    Love it.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  5. #5

    Default

    The only business case study of a urban Canadian project of this kind I know of: https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Doc...B496FEE689C0CF
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  6. #6

    Default

    I think costs were (for similar length of system) around $110 million to build and an annual $3 million in operations and maintenance.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  7. #7

    Default

    The funicular is $1M/year in o&m, I can't see a tramway coming in at only 3x that, especially not when run by the CoE.
    Giving less of a damn than everů Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  8. #8

    Default

    The funicular is at the Shaw (and elevators), now also a gondala, and also the high level tram (in summer) and also future LRT circulator?

    As I understand it, the LRT circulator is a key part of the LRT plan to enable expansion - so, this seems like expensive duplication. I'm sure it would look reasonably nice though.

  9. #9

    Default

    An LRT circulator would replace the high level tram, so a little less duplication.

    But It's not a key part of the LRT system nor is it required to enable expansion or increase capacity. It's required to stoke egos and temporarily satisfy desire for the shiny and new.
    There can only be one.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    But It's not a key part of the LRT system nor is it required to enable expansion or increase capacity. It's required to stoke egos and temporarily satisfy desire for the shiny and new.
    It creates a ton of operational efficiency though, you can really tweak schedules then down the different lines depending on where the demand is highest. If Sherwood Park needs a bit less, and Millwoods more, some trains circulate to double time on Millwoods for each one on Sherwood park.

    Agreed on high level - that's more a duplication issue now.

    I think it they did do this gondala, it needs to go to Churchill square, not to shaw.

  11. #11

    Default

    You can do the same with simple branching, without the whyte line.

    And in terms of this discussion, the South portion of the circulator is more of a duplication of existing crossings (almost the exact same path as the existing LRT) than either a High Level Tram extended to whyte, or an aerial tram on this proposed cross-river route.

    I like LRT but if we have money for just one new public transit river crossing I'll take this proposed tram over The LRT central circulator any day. Plus you could do this aerial tram, significant upgrades to the High Level Streetcar and significantly improve bus service on whyte for less than it would cost to build the LRT Circulator.
    There can only be one.

  12. #12

    Default

    ^its a valid option, the LRT will obviously create a lot of disruption on Whyte (it would look pretty too though).

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B.ike View Post
    Posted my mockup couple years ago on the funicular thread...I also stuck the station near Macdonald Drive...I like it there for the proximity to the CBD over Shaw:

    A straight line is far easier to engineer. You can fly over the old power plant or Edmonton Center Mall right to Rogers Centre. That would be a more useful route IMHO
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  14. #14

    Default

    ^The Rosedale stop off seems a bit silly since that's what the funicular is there for, isn't it? Probably better to stop at the top of funicular, then go to Churchill (perhaps over the top of a road).

  15. #15

    Default

    and not only lower cost, less land acquisition, less ripping up roads and infrastructure, screwing up traffic and in less time to build.

    All great ideas with many examples of successful urban aerial tramway services, both public and private.

    The COE will never, ever go for it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  16. #16
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    46,243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    The funicular is $1M/year in o&m, I can't see a tramway coming in at only 3x that, especially not when run by the CoE.
    2mil/yr I believe.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  17. #17

    Default

    This is really something that will only work if executed perfectly. On paper, the benefits are fantastic: boosted public transit accessibility, cheaper than reasonable alternatives, innovative aesthetic, and possibility of really differentiating Edmonton from other North American cities (in a positive way!).

    Unfortunately, I don't see this idea really ever getting off of the ground. The public perception around gondolas in general I can only assume is the view that they're a waste of public money; being good for fancy European ski lodges and that's about it.
    East of the Rockies, and west of the rest!

  18. #18

    Default

    Cross-refs:


    River Valley Gondola - Bridging the City

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...dging-the-City


    Gondolas across the River Valley as part of the LRT System

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...the-LRT-System
    Last edited by KC; 10-01-2018 at 05:01 PM.

  19. #19

    Default

    Abmin. Please merge the threads. Thank you.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  20. #20

    Default

    Thd way things work / the good old herd mentality:

    11 urban gondolas changing the way people move - Curbed

    Gondolas aren’t just for skiing anymore
    By Megan [email protected] Sep 21, 2017


    Excerpt:

    “Elsewhere in the world, trams, gondolas, and funiculars are common, supplementing other mass transportation systems in an effort to reduce pollution, traffic, and crowding. Compared to subways, highways, or rail lines—which often require displacing huge numbers of people in urban areas or extensive (and expensive) below-ground building—gondolas are a relatively cheap option. ...”

    According to recent articles in the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, aerial cable-propelled transit systems are being considered in Brooklyn, Washington, Chicago, San Diego, Seattle, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Baton Rouge, Austin, Tampa Bay and Miami. In light of the potential boom of gondola projects here in the United States, we explore 11 gondolas around the world that have changed how people move in urban spaces. ...”


    https://www.curbed.com/2017/9/21/163...le-cars-cities

    Bolding is mine
    Last edited by KC; 10-01-2018 at 05:24 PM.

  21. #21

    Default

    It's a fair idea (transportation option) to traverse a difficult terrain. Some of those didn't seem... exceptional. I will rest on the fact that in its self the gondola in the next 10-15 isn't there yet in Edmonton, but within the next 20 years and as a component of the Rossdale development is the only success I see, from a business case POV.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  22. #22

    Default

    La Paz cable car system have cut commute times down from 1 hour to just 10 minutes


    Wiki Facts

    Number of lines 5 plus 6 in planning
    Number of stations 17 plus 11 in planning
    Number of vehicles 778 Gondola Cars Total: 443 (Red, Green, and Yellow Lines), 208 (Blue Line), 127 (Orange Line)
    Maximum capacity of 6000 passengers per hour on each color coded line.
    Headway 12 sec
    Current System length 17.3 km (10.7 mi)




    1. La Paz Leads the Way


    Unsurprisingly, the Bolivian capital makes it to the top of our list.


    Three years ago, La Paz-El Alto embarked on an incredible journey to revolutionize the city’s urban transport network. The Austrian ropeway giant, Doppelmayr alongside Mi Teleferico, now operates five Cable Propelled Transit (CPT) systems in the city. In March 2017, one of the world’s largest urban gondola projects (the longest system in La Paz-El Alto), Blue Line (5.0km, 5 stations), was successfully inaugurated. During its first weekend, the system recorded a peak of 41,000 passengers in one day. Today residents fly high above the skies of El Alto before descending into the valley below on the Red Line.


    A few months later in September 2017, the 4-station Orange Line (Spanish: Linea Naranja) invited riders to hop aboard with Bolivian President Evo Morales kicking off the celebrations. The Orange Line effectively extends the Red Line eastbound by another 2.6km and will be integrated with the upcoming White Line.


    Effectively, the two new urban gondolas not only increased the length of the city’s rapid transit network by 76%, it also added nine more stations (7 if you only count the two transfer stations as one station each).
    http://gondolaproject.com/



    UrbanOver the city roofs with the all-rounder
    The innovative ropeway systems from Doppelmayr/Garaventa offer a host of benefits in the urban environment. They cross residential areas, rivers and existing infrastructure with ease and glide over every traffic hindrance. As well as lending themselves perfectly to integration into urban planning concepts, ropeway solutions offer infinite scope for creativity. Structures and equipment can be individually designed to cater for cultures, local circumstances and customer preferences. Passengers enjoy entirely new perspectives of the cityscape, top comfort and rapid connections while using the safest means of transport in existence.


    Barrier-free loading and unloading make ropeways a positive experience for wheelchair users as well as passengers with strollers or bicycles. Environmentally friendly and efficient at the same time, ropeway systems provide an impressive answer to present and future traffic problems, and create added value for any city.


    Roughly 50% of the world’s population currently lives in cities and that figure is expected to rise to 70% in less than a generation. As a result of the growing distance between home and the workplace and unregulated urban sprawl, residential structures are becoming ever more complex and existing traffic infrastructures are increasingly hitting capacity limits.


    This makes it essential to find new solutions to address present and future traffic problems. Ropeways and CABLE Liners are innovative approaches which can make a valuable contribution towards resolving this challenge.



    Urban transport at a glance
    Impressive ecological footprint
    Safest means of transport
    No noise, no exhaust emissions
    Simple link-up with other means of transport
    High availability, reliability and efficiency
    Benefits

    Uses a new level Urban ropeways follow a dedicated route that is independent of other modes of transport.
    High capacity with optimal energy efficiency
    Modern high-capacity installations carry up to 5,000 passengers per hour and direction.
    Short building phase without traffic hindrance
    Ropeway projects can be implemented rapidly thanks to a high level of modularization and optimized work processes.
    Spacious cabins
    Up to 35 passengers can be carried in one cabin – as well as bicycles, baby strollers and baggage items.
    The world’s safest means of transport
    Ropeways have a proven track record and are statistically the safest means of transport.
    Direct connection
    This means the fastest route from A to B in built-up areas or in the case of physical obstacles
    Simple integration into existing public transit systems
    Continuous movement ropeways don’t stop. Consequently,they have no problem interfacing with other modes of transportas there is no need to coordinate service frequency.
    Low space requirements for stations and towers
    A minimal structural footprint enables ropeways to be builtin densely populated cities.
    No waiting times in stationsRopeways are continuous movement transport systems.
    That means: constant availability of cabins and no need fortimetables.
    Barrier-free mobility for all
    Level access for wheelchair users and passengers with impairedmobility while cabins run at minimum speed or stop.
    Environmentally friendly and cost-effective
    Ropeways have a minimum impact on the environment andoffer an excellent cost-benefit ratio
    https://www.doppelmayr.com/en/applications/urban/

    PDF brochure of commercial systems file:///C:/Users/Eric/Downloads/Ropeways%20in%20the%20urban%20environment%20[EN].pdf
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
    It's a fair idea (transportation option) to traverse a difficult terrain. Some of those didn't seem... exceptional. I will rest on the fact that in its self the gondola in the next 10-15 isn't there yet in Edmonton, but within the next 20 years and as a component of the Rossdale development is the only success I see, from a business case POV.

    Build the cable car and the Rossdale redevelopment will bloom.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post

    A straight line is far easier to engineer. You can fly over the old power plant or Edmonton Center Mall right to Rogers Centre. That would be a more useful route IMHO
    I tried to avoid going over structures and running parallel directly above roads in that mockup - I noticed in various commuter gondola systems, they try to apply the same tactic if possible.

    But I note that current gondola systems, you can easily have 2km+ between towers, so what I have as support towers can easily be reduced and towers will be installed more for the gondolas to gain elevation as opposed to supporting the cables to reduce sag.

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^The Rosedale stop off seems a bit silly since that's what the funicular is there for, isn't it? Probably better to stop at the top of funicular, then go to Churchill (perhaps over the top of a road).
    I agree with moa that Churchill could be a logical terminus. But with regards to the comment about Rossdale having a stop, it is about 20minute walk from the bottom of the funicular to Rossdale, they are not very close together...a stop at Rossdale makes a lot of sense.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B.ike View Post

    I tried to avoid going over structures and running parallel directly above roads in that mockup - I noticed in various commuter gondola systems, they try to apply the same tactic if possible.

    But I note that current gondola systems, you can easily have 2km+ between towers, so what I have as support towers can easily be reduced and towers will be installed more for the gondolas to gain elevation as opposed to supporting the cables to reduce sag.

    ...
    Do they actually try to avoid roads, or are aerial trams mostly built in places where roads just can't go in a straight line? Generally tramways make sense where hills are to steep for direct roads.

    In this case, the south bank is that steep, and so is the north, at least east of 105st.

    The bigger problem with routes that go up existing streets is that it would be right outside resident's windows on the approach to the top of bank.
    There can only be one.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    The bigger problem with routes that go up existing streets is that it would be right outside resident's windows on the approach to the top of bank.
    By the same token, another condo can be built just beside existing condos. There are existing zoning regulations on how close you can build to residence windows. The existing owners will always freak out but that in NIMBYism. Personally I would rather have a tram going by my window that a sun blocking new condo in the same place.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •