[Kitchissippi]

I was thinking this could be a cool way to cross the River. Here's my crazy idea:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2053/2064952266_2b75616c7d_b.jpg

The NCC is thinking about putting a look-out at the foot of Bank Street anyway, so why not make it a hub?

http://www.ncc-ccn.ca/data/2/rec_imgs/1404_pi_bankartistic3.giffrom ncc-ccn.ca

A visitor centre here would be about the same distance to the Peace Tower than the existing ugly one, and the tent where all the tours start is actually along the way.

Aerial tramways can carry about 150 people, like this one in Austria:
http://www.tiscover.at/at/images/RGN/83/RGN583at/Ahornbahn-Neu.jpg from discover austria

A few cities use aerial tramways as public transport, ie New York City, Portland OR.

The cables would be unobtrusive to the view. On the Ottawa side the tram could come out the side of the escarpment from a structure that looks like part of the cliff, and on the Gatineau side, the terminal could be built into a new building, maybe incorporated into a new Museum, like this cool terminal in Portland:
http://archiv.ethlife.ethz.ch/images/seilbahn-l.jpg from ETH Life intl.

Tourists would love this thing, but i could see locals using it regularly. Civil Servants could go from the Portage complexes to the Ottawa govt offices quickly, courriers on foot/bicycle could extend their range, shoppers could shuttle between Sparks Street Mall/Bank Street Promenade and Place du Centre with ease.

It's just a fantasy I wanted to share....

[Mille Sabords]

:tup: It would certainly add to the "coolhood" of downtown. Now, for that to make sense, the Gatineau side would need "something" at the other end to draw people. The Museum of Civilization is quicker to get to by the Alexandra Bridge. Therefore, the Scott Paper factory or its site should be redeveloped in some other way than a park... That site cries out for a massive waterfront entertainment complex.

[lrt's friend]

I am all for it, but it is really a tourist attraction and does not significanly add to our transportation network. Ticket prices are usually high in order to cover the operating costs and they don't move a lot of people.

[the capital urbanite]

I've looked at this option in the past...surprisingly it doesn't exist in any of the NCC visions.

I think of it as more of a public transit option rather than a tourist draw. A Rapibus connection on the Gatineau side and a connection to an underground concourse in downtown Ottawa would provide an alternative for Ottawa-bound Gatinois/Gatinoises.

We would need a World's Fair to even contemplate this option (although it would be cheaper than building the transit loop that the NCC has been proposing).

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

That site cries out for a massive waterfront entertainment complex.

Like what?

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

I think of it as more of a public transit option rather than a tourist draw.

While I totally agree that it would be cool to have, I don't think it would be truly viable as a public transit option. From where you're proposing this thing goes to, buses(and who knows? Maybe in the future even LRT) would make it to those locations faster than this aerial tramway.

A Rapibus connection on the Gatineau side and a connection to an underground concourse in downtown Ottawa would provide an alternative for Ottawa-bound Gatinois/Gatinoises.

Perhaps, but I believe the Rapibus is going to terminate at the station at Laurier and Maisonneuve.

We would need a World's Fair to even contemplate this option (although it would be cheaper than building the transit loop that the NCC has been proposing).

Given our current budget woes, a world fair seems to have died. :haha:

But hey, we can dream can't we? :P

[Kitchissippi]

I am all for it, but it is really a tourist attraction and does not significanly add to our transportation network. Ticket prices are usually high in order to cover the operating costs and they don't move a lot of people.

Several cities have 2-station lines, which this essentially is (NYC's Times Sq.—Grand Central or London's Waterloo & City for example). I estimate a crossing would take about 5 minutes, at 160 people per load that's 2,200 people per car an hour. since there's usually two cars per system you could double that. Carrying 4,000 an hour is pretty respectable.

This would be a downtown to downtown link, an no other proposed route would be able to match this convenience or speed.

The Museum of Civilization is quicker to get to by the Alexandra Bridge.

Yeah, but the Alex bridge you have to walk, this you ride :) Plus after walking from Parliament to the Museum and then walking around the Museum for hours, do you really feel like backtracking a walk across the bridge again? With this plan, tourists could park at the escarpment garage, go up to the new visitor centre with a river view, take a tour of Parliament, walk to the Market, tour the Gallery, cross the Alex bridge, tour the Museum, then take the aerial tram back to their car. The less they move their car, the less traffic there will be downtown and across the bridges.

[the capital urbanite]

While I totally agree that it would be cool to have, I don't think it would be truly viable as a public transit option. From where you're proposing this thing goes to, buses(and who knows? Maybe in the future even LRT) would make it to those locations faster than this aerial tramway.


buses or LRT would be slower....an aerial tram can cover the roughly 500m span in less than 3 minutes. The Portland aerial tram (public transit) route is 1km and takes 3 minutes.

This would be a relatively easy answer to the current problem associated with STO routes running into downtown Ottawa. It would also bridge the gap between BRT running in Gatineau and a future LRT tunnel running through Ottawa's CBD.

operational costs may however be higher than bus or LRT?

[Kitchissippi]

I would imagine it's like running a huge elevator. Maintaining cables should be easier and cheaper than rails or roadways.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

The less they move their car, the less traffic there will be downtown and across the bridges.

Yes, because tourists contribute sooooo much to our clogged streets... :rolleyes: :haha:

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

buses or LRT would be slower....an aerial tram can cover the roughly 500m span in less than 3 minutes. The Portland aerial tram (public transit) route is 1km and takes 3 minutes.

I'll debate that, since I'm pretty sure an STO bus can get you from point A to point B in the same time frame by using either the Portage or Alexandra Bridges.

[jeremy_haak]

I'll debate that, since I'm pretty sure an STO bus can get you from point A to point B in the same time frame by using either the Portage or Alexandra Bridges.

Would they have such a high frequency though? The wait time makes a huge difference in utility.

[adam-machiavelli]

I see this as the Ottawa version of the London Eye. A slick addition to the skyline and not much else.

[lrt's friend]

If we were to do this, and use it as the Rapidbus terminus, we would need a major bus station on the Hull side. Forget the Museum.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

That just made me think of something; what is the practicality of using this as a transfer from Hull STO buses to Ottawa OC Transpo buses? You'd just be creating TWO extra transfers for nothing! :rolleyes: :haha:

I mean think about it; you're in Hull and you want to get to Ottawa. Most STO buses cross over into Ottawa along Wellington/Rideau, so no transfers adn it's still fairly quick. If you want/need to transfer to an OC Transpo bus, then that means only one transfer, max.

If this aerial tramway were to be used/marketed as public transit, what is the point? You'd ahve to get to a major STO transfer station, then get on the tramway, then get on an OC Transpo bus. That's two transfers for no real reason... :koko:

If it were to be built(and it would be awesome if it was), it would be solely tourist based.

I am for this project entirely, but not as a viable public transit option.

[ac888yow]

I like the idea but I think the best use for it is in a gimmicky, touristy type of application. People always love to take rides in trams/gondolas/etc. and they love 'water and stuff' so they would feast on this and the unique views it would offer.

[lrt's friend]

This would be essentially the same as a Confederation Boulevard tramway. It too would be mostly for tourists. I recall many years ago an attempt to provide a bus transit loop between downtown Ottawa and downtown Hull. Since most people actually want to travel beyond that loop route, it turned out to be a dismal failure and was discontinued.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

This would be essentially the same as a Confederation Boulevard tramway.

Uhh, no.

[lrt's friend]

Uhh, no.

Different technology, different route, serves the same purpose, mainly for tourists travelling between tourist attractions.

[Kitchissippi]

That just made me think of something; what is the practicality of using this as a transfer from Hull STO buses to Ottawa OC Transpo buses? You'd just be creating TWO extra transfers for nothing! :rolleyes: :haha:

I mean think about it; you're in Hull and you want to get to Ottawa. Most STO buses cross over into Ottawa along Wellington/Rideau, so no transfers adn it's still fairly quick. If you want/need to transfer to an OC Transpo bus, then that means only one transfer, max.

If this aerial tramway were to be used/marketed as public transit, what is the point? You'd ahve to get to a major STO transfer station, then get on the tramway, then get on an OC Transpo bus. That's two transfers for no real reason... :koko:

If it were to be built(and it would be awesome if it was), it would be solely tourist based.

I am for this project entirely, but not as a viable public transit option.

You're looking at downtown as if it were some pass-though hub. It's more than that. There is a huge need to facilitate circulation within the core area.

There are a lot of inter-departmental meetings that involve people from either side of the river. Ask an office manager in Hull how much they spend on taxi chits to get them to the other side.

If you worked downtown, you'd get tired of going to the same places for lunch day in and day out. Imagine being able to cross the river so easily that Sparks/ Bank was mutually accessible with Place Aubry? I think this Aerial Tramway should be a free federal facility, much like the bridges. In fact this IS a bridge, a bridge that happens to move.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

You're looking at downtown as if it were some pass-though hub. It's more than that. There is a huge need to facilitate circulation within the core area.

There are a lot of inter-departmental meetings that involve people from either side of the river. Ask an office manager in Hull how much they spend on taxi chits to get them to the other side.

If you worked downtown, you'd get tired of going to the same places for lunch day in and day out. Imagine being able to cross the river so easily that Sparks/ Bank was mutually accessible with Place Aubry? I think this Aerial Tramway should be a free federal facility, much like the bridges. In fact this IS a bridge, a bridge that happens to move.

How am I looking at downtown as a pass-through hub? I'm trying to illustrate that you can get to the same places in roughly the same time and with fewer transfers.

[JM1]

With new systems that have emerged since this thread was started and new high speed detachable gondolas, a continuous bi-directional system could be worked out. While I like the idea of connecting bank to Gatineau downtown, it has to be more than a tourist attraction. LeBreton or Bayview could be connected to the Gatineau BRT. This may even be the first step in a loop system around the Ottawa-Gatineau downtown core. (Gondola across the MacDonald Cartier and across the river west of Chaudiere connect BRT and LRT on the two sides).

[JM1]

And modern gondola systems, unlike aerial trams, do not requiring waiting for one of two cars.

What is more, they can have multiple stations. How about Rideau/Kind Edward, King Edward/Sussex, Maisonneuve, Portage, BRT Terminus (would need to be worked out), LeBreton/Bayview as stops.

I haven't thought this out fully, but there is great potential. And maybe there is a better way to tie into the current LRT plans in the East (i.e. by bringing it up Dalhousie or across next to the Alexandria bridge (imagine the views of Parliament)).

Some of you out there must have some great ideas that could be added here.

[JM1]

Okay, One more shot at getting this thread restarted. Here is a proposed gondola route map with some comments below.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/44515488/Ottawa-Gatineau%20Gondola%20Connections.jpg

I would like to consider a gondola system to connect the Rapidbus to the Ottawa LRT in a relatively convenient way. Costs would not be insignificant, but would be much cheaper than more LRT or LRT tunnels and capacity could be significant with multiple crossings of the river. I figure this could be quite scenic and could supply a lot of real commuter capacity (9,000 to 20,000 pphpd with three distinct crossings that don't interfere with existing views of Parliament, the Rideau canal lock steps or the Museum of Civilization. The connections would be to the Montcalm station on the Gatineau side and to the Rideau, Le Breton and Bayview stations on the Ottawa side (to ensure connectivity to the O-train).

I figure the cost for the system would be about 100-200 Million (but this is based on other projects and extrapolating). Unfortunately, the only reason is so expensive is that it really achieves two things -- the long sought after "downtown Ottawa/Gatineau loop" and a connection to Rapidbus (whose planners never thought they needed to connect to downtown Gatineau, let alone Ottawa rapid transit).

The gondolas could carry between 10 and 20 passengers each, which is much smaller than a city bus, but there would be many of them providing convenient service. It would also be much more efficient than running diesel buses, producing no greenhouse emissions on site.

Air rights from Rideau (presumably from atop the new addition to the Rideau centre) out over the market might be an issue, but at present, structures do not interfere. Other rights of way are over roads or public land.

Note that there are two routes or "lines", but in reality, at each junction, gondolas could be switched in whatever direction you want, so there could be gondolas that share the same connection wire, but go in different directions after a junction point. You might imagine getting on a gondola flashing a specific colour code at one place knowing that that gondola would be routed to your final station using the shortest route (i.e. you are grouped with passengers making the same transfers when you get into the gondola).

As for cooling and heating, this is a small issue. You could exchange the air in each gondola at the stations, or heat or cool rapidly by use of a thermocouple of some sort at the stations, but eventually ambient temperatures would return to outside temperatures. Given the short distances between stations, there might not be a problem.

I have avoided connections across the Prince of Wales ROW because I don't think its demand would be high in light of other connections. I have also included a connection to Bank street even though it does connect directly to the LRT because it would be useful for commuters working in centrally located government buildings.

I have not created a station at the museum of civilization but have opted instead for an interchange point over the Domtar properties at Portage to serve the employment node.

While I have included a stop on Victoria Island, this could be changed to the other island to reflect future development.

This system could be built in stages. I would start with the Rideau to Montcalm or the Montcalm to LeBreton sections to provide a first connection from BRT to LRT. Only in later stages would I do the Maisonneuve and Bank Street and Bayview sections.

This is a cost effective, efficient system that could handle more than enough traffic and would be cool for commuters (and as an afterthought, tourists) to use. Imagine flying over the market, the Ottawa river, the Chaudiere falls or along the avenues of Gatineau as you commute to work. Commuting with a view (while avoiding interference with the existing views of capital Ottawa).

[Harley613]

it's a neat idea but i think a short circuit elevated system like the Detroit Peoplemover would be more practical/speedy/climate controlled. I had a blast riding around downtown on this thing!
http://www.railforthevalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/1_1252164192_people-mover.jpg

I had even more fun riding the Kuala Lumpur Monorail but I don't think Ottawa is progressive enough to ever look at such an option.
http://www.halcrow.com/Global/Images/rail/kuala_lumpur_monorail_512.jpg

[McC]

Monorails are just "too Brockway" for us simple folk.

[jeremy_haak]

I don't know; it seems more North Haverbrook to me.

Regarding the whole aerial tram thing, they have two benefits as far as I can tell. They can negotiate difficult terrain, and they are kind of flashy and novel. This would make it a pretty interesting choice for an Ottawa River crossing, particularly for tourist traffic. It seems harder to justify for areas where more conventional options would work.

[lrt's friend]

It seems to me that cities that have installed monorails or elevated people movers have not ended up with successful rail systems. I read that Sydney Australia is intending to demolish their monorail. The monorail in Seattle was not worth extending. The monorail in Las Vegas has been highly criticized for its inconvenient location. Service on the Detroit people mover has been cut and has never been extended as originally planned. The people mover in Jacksonville Florida has not been an overwhelming success as a starting point for rail transit.

[McC]

I think that the beginning of Bank across to the Museum is the only place it might make sense, it has the steep grade change, a relatively long-ish crossing for a bridge or tunnel compared to available alternatives (the depth problematic too), and big potential for iconic views in all directions. In that use, it's more of a novelty and tourist thing that would also happen to be useful for some very specific local and commuting movements. But we'll see this in Vancouver from Lougheed up to SFU long before we ever do in Ottawa (like with LRT)

[Kitchissippi]

It could be a great way to repurpose that ugly digester tower next to the museum! :D

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8345/8247863635_61efe35b22_b.jpg

[Aylmer]

I'd be more favourable to the idea of a non-vehicular bridge with a tram. Instead of having a loop like it was proposed in the inter provincial study (may it rest in peace), have a tram from Promenade du Portage, right on Hôtel-de-ville and continue over Laurier and onto Bank. Then left onto Sparks and have it continue to Rideau.

At the same time, it would provide a much-needed direct pedestrian and bike connection between downtowns. It would also take STO busses of Wellington.

[Harley613]

This would all require OC and STO talking to each other and integrating. It hasn't happened properly with buses or the O-train, and I doubt it will ever happen unfortunately.

[JM1]

it's a neat idea but i think a short circuit elevated system like the Detroit Peoplemover would be more practical/speedy/climate controlled. I had a blast riding around downtown on this thing!
http://www.railforthevalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/1_1252164192_people-mover.jpg

I had even more fun riding the Kuala Lumpur Monorail but I don't think Ottawa is progressive enough to ever look at such an option.
http://www.halcrow.com/Global/Images/rail/kuala_lumpur_monorail_512.jpg

I like monorails too, but I think the gondolas have the advantage of being able to be strung across the river without the need for all those fixed supports. Plus they would provide a cool factor as others have mentioned.

Other cities are building them, but nobody to my knowledge has built a network.

I think the coolest part is that you never need to switch gondolas. The system can simply flag gondolas for specific routes.

They are also much cheaper than tunnels and bridges and do have significant capacity if you use modern technology. Also they are very efficient and probably cheaper to maintain because there are fewer mechnical drives. That said, if one of the drives goes out, a whole route is knocked out. But I have been stuck on ski lifts before and they always seem to get them going again in short order.

[JM1]

[QUOTE=Kitchissippi;5926834]It could be a great way to repurpose that ugly digester tower next to the museum! :D

...

Love the photo, but I prefer gondolas like these...

In Rio de Janeiro... (care of the calgary herald)
http://postmediacalgaryherald.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/gondola.jpg
http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2012/02/16/share-your-urban-gondola-experiences/

or these ideas
http://thecityfix.com/files/2012/11/wire3.jpeg
care of http://thecityfix.com/blog/friday-fun-its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-a-gondola/

or this rendering (care of http://gondolaproject.com/2010/05/18/calgarys-plus-15-network-the-key-to-urban-gondolas/

http://gondolaproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Baden-Image-1.jpg