But with that said, I just don't see how this can be privately done cost wise without astronomical ticket prices. The full price tag for something like this has to be staggering. Let alone the legal aspects of rights of way, Burke Airport flight path, and purchasing property for the masts that would hold up the skylift at regular intervals..

 

This. 

 

 

Welcome, Envy2!

 

And I don't see how this gets in the way of Burke's flight path when the much taller World Trade Center on Dock 20 or the proposed high-rises north of Browns (FE) Stadium wouldn't have.

Well as I have said I love this idea. Will it become reality, probably not. But what I like most about this is that another person has stepped up to try and make a difference in their town. Over the last 3 or 4 years we have seen people such as Maron, Gies, McNulty and even Gilbert all looking to make a difference. We cant count on the olde guard like Jacobs or Forest City to matter anymore. They don't believe anymore, they don't dream anymore. And those who come into this thread just to call an idea 'stupid' or a 'pipe dream' are part of the problem and not the solution.

I believe in those who believe in us, and when you have that passion I support you. For this to be feasible I believe a smaller footprint at first would be the best. Maybe first a run from the lakefront up to the mall, docking at the new hotel, bridging that gap over the RR tracks. All I know if built this will become part of our image, It would be highlighted on any sport broadcast coming in and out of the breaks. Any image of Cleveland nationally would not just be the RHall anymore but the gondola flying past the RHall. The pictures would be great, especially at night. You just can't by that type of publicity.

I don't see all the guideways getting built. I would expect a good portion of the most profitable/highest volume sections to be built. It would make sense to have a central hub with gondola garage to store and maintain gondolas.  I'm sure with Leitner-Poma coming into town, they should provide some guidance as to the best routes and most efficient, centrally-located stations.

I look at the skylift as a novel new attraction. Cleveland is lacking things that differentiate it from other comparable cities. Everyone has casinos now, everyone has museums, everyone has large sporting venues. What can Cleveland have that other cities don't? This is the kind of forward thinking we need in the city. Yet, already it's bashed.

 

What an absurd comment.  Who cares if other cities have some (and certainly not all) of the aspects Cleveland has?  We should be about the business of sustaining and growing the diverse, cultural and substantive city we already have?  Your thinking is exactly the WRONG mindset for a project like this: if it's just about creating some kind of inferiority-complex driven "look-at-me" gimmick, then save the money. 

 

I think KJP has the right approach.  It could be a potentially interesting and useful means to connect the WFL and FEB with a SINGLE ROUTE to some generally inaccessible areas along the West Harbor, like Wendy Park.  And that's it.  This current proposal to crisscross the river and extend up and down the lake front linking FEB, Burke and the Tower City/new casino area duplicates the Waterfront Line and is way over the top: a project this extensive has the potential to be an eyesore and offers little benefit ... except to siphon riders for WFL.  If that's the plan, forget it.

 

And although a previous poster was a bit harsher about this proposal than I am, it does appear that this proposal, in many ways, is putting cart before the horse... The Flats, esp the East Bank, is still largely dead.  We have 1 very promising office/hotel project that is itself only partially open and still no date set for construction of the much more extensive Phase 2 of FEB although it appears all systems are go.  It would make more sense to continue to work on more tangible, down-to-earth projects, like building housing, retail, the Phase II casino... and other facilities to develop the pulse that simply isn't in the Flats as yet.  Let's do those things first before we go off full tilt and expand a skyLift from a single route that could be interesting and useful into some kind of monstrous eyesore/gimmick such as seen in the full-blown proposal.

I dunno.  I see where WestBLVD is coming from.  And i dont think it would be an inferiority project.  We are talking about an attraction.  When i go to Chicago, I go to the top of the Hancock.  When London, London Eye, When Rome, top of Vatican, When San Fran, Coit. I can go on.  People like height and people like different experiences.  My caveat with the whole project is too many towers downtown.  I think one in different destination neighborhoods, and parks.  I dont think we need 5 downtown.  I think less transportation, more tourism is the key.  RTA apparently supports the project, so they dont view as too large of a threat.

RTA apparently supports the project, so they dont view as too large of a threat.

I think that's a pretty safe position for RTA to take.

One thing I have to wonder about besides the zig zag nature of the initially proposed plan (I favor a direct line from Voinavich park or CBS to Edgewater), is how many towers are going to be needed?  When these are built on a mountain side many more are needed to keep the line going uphill, and the mountains tend to be fairly steep.  Over a flat terrain I could see less being needed and obviously this would reduce the overall cost.  This may cause more sag on the line, but that would not affect the actual performance of the gondola. 

 

I think there could be a real benefit here in connecting some of the disparate parks/attractions that are near downtown, but hard to get to. 

 

Hopefully the Leitner-Poma people can shed some more light about the technical details that the project would require. 

shouldn't this be in the transportation section?

 

since we don't have a boondoggle/waste of time section on the forum yet.

All these non-imaginative people here! (And don't use the tired "I'm just being realistic." That's what people without imagination say to justify their lack of imagination.)

Folks, argue the merits or lack of merits in the project, not the merits of the people who feel a certain way. If you can't convince enough people of the merits of a project, then find better merits or find a better project.

RTA apparently supports the project, so they dont view as too large of a threat.

 

That's not saying much.  RTA under Joe Calabrese has endorsed every transit program that hurts either existing rail or plans to it.  If he could snap his fingers and make our Rapid network disappear, he would.

shouldn't this be in the transportation section?

 

since we don't have a boondoggle/waste of time section on the forum yet.

 

I wondered about that myself... guess people don't consider it a serious transportation system but more of an amusement/novelty/tourist attraction.

Which is why this thread probably belongs in this section, not in the transportation section.

This just reminds me of the Simpsons.

 

 

Already posted.

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

 

Actually you'd be surprised, a lot of folks do use SF's cable cars as basic transportation.  It's we tourists who ride it for the fun.

^... and I might add that nothing in SF's vast transit network is more effective in attacking those steep SF hills than the cable cars which, I'm sure, is also a reason why they've survived.

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

 

I think the proposed pedestrian bridge is a far better solution, I understand it's difficult because of the need for permanent clearance for the ships...but certainly less difficult than a tram.

All these non-imaginative people here! (And don't use the tired "I'm just being realistic." That's what people without imagination say to justify their lack of imagination.)

 

I do have imagination, but the idea that this will encourage development, or resurrect the dead is false.

 

there are issues with connectivity but having a link from the flats to the Lakefront that can only move <750 person per hour. completely inadequate for events at the lakefront or in the flats.

 

 

at least if they use the gondolas pictured Above.

 

If you want more capacity like in Portland

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram

 

prepare to spend a lot of money.

 

Portland aerial tram was 400% over budget and ended up costing 57 million dollars to travel 1Km with only 2 stations and 3 towers. 

 

using 78 passenger cars

 

 

to put it bluntly either this guy is super naïve or intentionally misleading the public on what this is. 200 million dollar tourist trap?

 

as to whether this is " transportation" their website states:

 

Transporting people

 

The fastest-growing technology in moving people from place to place. Here in Cleveland, we'll be able to solve parking issues and increase access to our waterfront and parks.

 

SkyLift will amplify Cleveland's ability to provide outstanding public transportation to its community. Public access to various waterfront amenities is currently limited and congested. SkyLift would boost accessibility and use, allowing the public to enjoy the many diverse offerings of the coast without having to worry about the logistics of getting there.

 

so yes this should go in the transportation section there is NO development involved with this project.

The more I think about it, the more I oppose it. It won't carry enough people to play a significant role in public transportation, it'll interfere with views of the lake for everyone not on board, and once it has sat there for a couple years it'll start rusting and look terrible.

 

^I'm starting to form the same opinion.  I think it will serve a minimal benefit and be an eyesore before long (if not right at the start).  I want to see less towers/poles and wires in this City, not more.  I have to think there are better, more attractive ways to connect the Lakefront.

 

I do applaud the effort and energy of its proponents.

The more I think about it, the more I oppose it. It won't carry enough people to play a significant role in public transportation, it'll interfere with views of the lake for everyone not on board, and once it has sat there for a couple years it'll start rusting and look terrible.

 

Thank you! I am stunned by the support for this idea.. I think it will blemish our waterfront and prove to be a financial burden.

A ferris wheel would serve the same purpose as far as tourists though without the pretend transit benefit and be much more attractive. If there's a place for something like this, it's crossing the valley not the waterfront, but we've already got two pedestrian friendly bridges that do that.

^ No tacky ferris wheels please! Just build a damn space needle type structure and be done with it.  :wink:

^Either would be better looking than a Skylift.

The more I think about it, the more I oppose it. It won't carry enough people to play a significant role in public transportation, it'll interfere with views of the lake for everyone not on board, and once it has sat there for a couple years it'll start rusting and look terrible.

 

Thank you! I am stunned by the support for this idea.. I think it will blemish our waterfront and prove to be a financial burden.

 

I agree too.  Something like this only belongs on ski resorts or amusement parks....the Geauga Lakes Amusement Parks of the world. (sigh..miss that place.)

^ its different and a risk.  But thats what makes cities different from one another.  The idea is from a company that is creative and thinks outside the box for a living.  i think if engineered correctly, it wont blemish our water, it could fit.  I think it would be another thing that would get people from other cities talking about..."when you go to cleveland, make sure you...." .  Once again, a risk and not a slam dunk, but with the right people i think could help alot

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

 

I think the proposed pedestrian bridge is a far better solution, I understand it's difficult because of the need for permanent clearance for the ships...but certainly less difficult than a tram.

 

I don't think there is a pedestrian bridge to connect the east and west bank of the flats.  Also, I believe the proposed link to Wendy park used the existing lift bridge by the salt mines. 

 

All these non-imaginative people here! (And don't use the tired "I'm just being realistic." That's what people without imagination say to justify their lack of imagination.)

 

I do have imagination, but the idea that this will encourage development, or resurrect the dead is false.

 

there are issues with connectivity but having a link from the flats to the Lakefront that can only move <750 person per hour. completely inadequate for events at the lakefront or in the flats.

 

 

at least if they use the gondolas pictured Above.

 

If you want more capacity like in Portland

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram

 

prepare to spend a lot of money.

 

Portland aerial tram was 400% over budget and ended up costing 57 million dollars to travel 1Km with only 2 stations and 3 towers. 

 

using 78 passenger cars

 

 

to put it bluntly either this guy is super naïve or intentionally misleading the public on what this is. 200 million dollar tourist trap?

 

as to whether this is " transportation" their website states:

 

Transporting people

 

The fastest-growing technology in moving people from place to place. Here in Cleveland, we'll be able to solve parking issues and increase access to our waterfront and parks.

 

SkyLift will amplify Cleveland's ability to provide outstanding public transportation to its community. Public access to various waterfront amenities is currently limited and congested. SkyLift would boost accessibility and use, allowing the public to enjoy the many diverse offerings of the coast without having to worry about the logistics of getting there.

 

so yes this should go in the transportation section there is NO development involved with this project.

 

Portland has a Tram system which as I explained is completely different than a Gondola System.  Trams transports between 2 fixed points while a Gondola operates on a loop and can have multiple stations.  Also, to your point about the capacity that isn't accurate either; while Telluride's Gondola is only currently set up for around 500 persons per hour it has the capacity for 1200 pph. See the "Moving People Around" section" here, also more info about their set up.  Their system was built by CTEC, which is a competitor of Leitner-Poma, in 1996 so the design specs may be different and have likely improved.

 

Having said all of that, this could still end up as a lemon.  But at this stage I don't think it is justified to dismiss it as un-workable.  I would say there are a good number of variables that we do not know, and until more information is released, or there is a public forum, we likely won't know.  There is a giant difference between an Arial Tram and a Gondola though, so make sure you are citing the correct system.

^ its different and a risk.  But thats what makes cities different from one another.  The idea is from a company that is creative and thinks outside the box for a living.  i think if engineered correctly, it wont blemish our water, it could fit.  I think it would be another thing that would get people from other cities talking about..."when you go to cleveland, make sure you...." .  Once again, a risk and not a slam dunk, but with the right people i think could help alot

 

A-freakin-men

This doesn't have to be ugly.  I'm neither for or opposed to this idea yet...I'd like to see what it's capacity would be, its route and what it would look like before making judgement.  And I do not pretend to think this is transportation, but I do think it is something unique that would be only here in this fashion.  If built right it could draw people here.  At first people thought the Eiffel Tower would be a blight on the Paris skyline (I know...apples to moon rocks comparison, but you see my point), but who now a can imagine Paris without it.

 

I think if real design went into the towers, the gondolas, even the wires, this could compliment the lakefront and be a unique attraction.  Imagine these towers, if iconic, glowing at night...or during the day being out on a boat watching these things float gracefully in the sky with the skyline as a backdrop.  The risk is bad or cheap design that looks like an out of place ski lift...that wold be a damning mistake.  If we're only dreaming of this dream big and make it an icon...people will love or hate it but make it a post card worthy icon only available here in Cleveland.

^ totally agree, it can be designed to be iconic.

 

 

fyi here is wiki roosevelt island tram info:

 

Each cabin has a capacity of up to 110 people and makes approximately 115 trips per day. The tram moves at about 17.9 mph (28.8 km/h) and travels 3,100 feet (940 m) in 3 minutes. At its peak it climbs to 250 feet (76 m) above the East River

Totally forgot about this, but London has a Gondola system that was built for the Olympics last year.  It was way over budget and has had declining ridership, but that could be because it was built as a showpiece.  And for the Olympics, which like the World Cup, always means budget overruns.

 

Anyway, this is an interesting project but there are a lot of hoops that are going to need to be jumped through to show that this can work.

If they offer monthly rates, I could see people living downtown and using this to go to the parks.  If both sides of the flats and/or the lakefront get developed within the next fifteen years, this project could also make an interesting impact.  For me, this is too early to consider the impact one way or the other.  It is hard to project the success of the areas that this is running through and the efficiency of the product, itself.  I do not, however, believe this to be an 'inferiority complex' idea.

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

 

I think the proposed pedestrian bridge is a far better solution, I understand it's difficult because of the need for permanent clearance for the ships...but certainly less difficult than a tram.

 

I don't think there is a pedestrian bridge to connect the east and west bank of the flats.  Also, I believe the proposed link to Wendy park used the existing lift bridge by the salt mines. 

 

If you had 200 Million dollars to spend, you could build 4 pedestrian lift bridges. and pedestrian bridge from the flats to the stadium.

 

All these non-imaginative people here! (And don't use the tired "I'm just being realistic." That's what people without imagination say to justify their lack of imagination.)

 

I do have imagination, but the idea that this will encourage development, or resurrect the dead is false.

 

there are issues with connectivity but having a link from the flats to the Lakefront that can only move <750 person per hour. completely inadequate for events at the lakefront or in the flats.

 

 

at least if they use the gondolas pictured Above.

 

If you want more capacity like in Portland

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram

 

prepare to spend a lot of money.

 

Portland aerial tram was 400% over budget and ended up costing 57 million dollars to travel 1Km with only 2 stations and 3 towers. 

 

using 78 passenger cars

 

 

to put it bluntly either this guy is super naïve or intentionally misleading the public on what this is. 200 million dollar tourist trap?

 

as to whether this is " transportation" their website states:

 

Transporting people

 

The fastest-growing technology in moving people from place to place. Here in Cleveland, we'll be able to solve parking issues and increase access to our waterfront and parks.

 

SkyLift will amplify Cleveland's ability to provide outstanding public transportation to its community. Public access to various waterfront amenities is currently limited and congested. SkyLift would boost accessibility and use, allowing the public to enjoy the many diverse offerings of the coast without having to worry about the logistics of getting there.

 

so yes this should go in the transportation section there is NO development involved with this project.

 

Portland has a Tram system which as I explained is completely different than a Gondola System.  Trams transports between 2 fixed points while a Gondola operates on a loop and can have multiple stations.  Also, to your point about the capacity that isn't accurate either; while Telluride's Gondola is only currently set up for around 500 persons per hour it has the capacity for 1200 pph. See the "Moving People Around" section" here, also more info about their set up.  Their system was built by CTEC, which is a competitor of Leitner-Poma, in 1996 so the design specs may be different and have likely improved.

 

Having said all of that, this could still end up as a lemon.  But at this stage I don't think it is justified to dismiss it as un-workable.  I would say there are a good number of variables that we do not know, and until more information is released, or there is a public forum, we likely won't know.  There is a giant difference between an Arial Tram and a Gondola though, so make sure you are citing the correct system.

 

the site you cited uses much larger Gondolas than what is being proposed.  My point being they are showing a demo of a gondola type that is woefully inadequate for what they are proposing

 

200 million on this?

 

 

 

 

^ totally agree, it can be designed to be iconic.

 

 

fyi here is wiki Roosevelt island tram info:

 

Each cabin has a capacity of up to 110 people and makes approximately 115 trips per day. The tram moves at about 17.9 mph (28.8 km/h) and travels 3,100 feet (940 m) in 3 minutes. At its peak it climbs to 250 feet (76 m) above the East River

 

Interesting but the vast majority of resident on Roosevelt Island use the subway to commute not the tramway.

 

 

After talking with the Leitner-Poma reps, the SkyLift people have revised their proposed stations somewhat and posted a new map on their Facebook page:

 

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?vps=2&hl=en&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=204639027144984272004.0004e2f5b6e27fe8be979&dg=feature

Now I've gone from a proponent to an opponent. Except for the West Bank station, this duplicates the Waterfront Line.

Now I've gone from a proponent to an opponent. Except for the West Bank station, this duplicates the Waterfront Line.

 

:?

Couldn't this be considered analogous to the cable cars in SF?  For the most part they are tourist attractions with limited public transit benefit.  I would view this proposal similarly.

 

We can debate the stops and set up to death about this project, but one thing I think everyone would agree with is that there are some severely disconnected areas; FEB->West Bank particularly along with Wendy Park.  It is this area where I see the most benefit.  If anyone has any better ways to connect these areas I would be interested to hear them. 

 

I think the proposed pedestrian bridge is a far better solution, I understand it's difficult because of the need for permanent clearance for the ships...but certainly less difficult than a tram.

 

I don't think there is a pedestrian bridge to connect the east and west bank of the flats.  Also, I believe the proposed link to Wendy park used the existing lift bridge by the salt mines. 

 

If you had 200 Million dollars to spend, you could build 4 pedestrian lift bridges. and pedestrian bridge from the flats to the stadium.

 

If we want the river used by more than just Arcclor Mittal and the rowing community when FEB opens then we don't want to add more lift bridges that effectively block the river to boat traffic.  The railroad lift bridge is already a hindrance to the boating community on Cuyahoga as nothing bigger than a dinghy can fit under it. 

 

All these non-imaginative people here! (And don't use the tired "I'm just being realistic." That's what people without imagination say to justify their lack of imagination.)

 

I do have imagination, but the idea that this will encourage development, or resurrect the dead is false.

 

there are issues with connectivity but having a link from the flats to the Lakefront that can only move <750 person per hour. completely inadequate for events at the lakefront or in the flats.

 

 

at least if they use the gondolas pictured Above.

 

If you want more capacity like in Portland

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram

 

prepare to spend a lot of money.

 

Portland aerial tram was 400% over budget and ended up costing 57 million dollars to travel 1Km with only 2 stations and 3 towers. 

 

using 78 passenger cars

 

 

to put it bluntly either this guy is super naïve or intentionally misleading the public on what this is. 200 million dollar tourist trap?

 

as to whether this is " transportation" their website states:

 

Transporting people

 

The fastest-growing technology in moving people from place to place. Here in Cleveland, we'll be able to solve parking issues and increase access to our waterfront and parks.

 

SkyLift will amplify Cleveland's ability to provide outstanding public transportation to its community. Public access to various waterfront amenities is currently limited and congested. SkyLift would boost accessibility and use, allowing the public to enjoy the many diverse offerings of the coast without having to worry about the logistics of getting there.

 

so yes this should go in the transportation section there is NO development involved with this project.

 

Portland has a Tram system which as I explained is completely different than a Gondola System.  Trams transports between 2 fixed points while a Gondola operates on a loop and can have multiple stations.  Also, to your point about the capacity that isn't accurate either; while Telluride's Gondola is only currently set up for around 500 persons per hour it has the capacity for 1200 pph. See the "Moving People Around" section" here, also more info about their set up.  Their system was built by CTEC, which is a competitor of Leitner-Poma, in 1996 so the design specs may be different and have likely improved.

 

Having said all of that, this could still end up as a lemon.  But at this stage I don't think it is justified to dismiss it as un-workable.  I would say there are a good number of variables that we do not know, and until more information is released, or there is a public forum, we likely won't know.  There is a giant difference between an Arial Tram and a Gondola though, so make sure you are citing the correct system.

 

the site you cited uses much larger Gondolas than what is being proposed.  My point being they are showing a demo of a gondola type that is woefully inadequate for what they are proposing

 

200 million on this?

 

 

That is incorrect.  The Telluride Gondola is the same 8 passenger system that is proposed here.  Whether or not that size gondola is adequate for the level of service is not known at this point.  There has been no feasability study to determine what the demand would be, so seems strange to dismiss this out of hand.

 

Note that I am not in favor at all of the connections between Muny Lot->Burke, Voinavich Park->Convention Center, or the connection from the flats to Tower City.  In my mind the only portion that makes any sense is the connection from Edgewater->Wendy Park->FEB->Rock Hall area->Muny Lot.  This East-West configuration connects many of our attractions that are currently disconnect.

 

Also, I do believe the pedestrian bridges that links Wendy Park and the West Bank, along with the bridge from the convention center are sorely needed. 

^ totally agree, it can be designed to be iconic.

 

 

fyi here is wiki Roosevelt island tram info:

 

Each cabin has a capacity of up to 110 people and makes approximately 115 trips per day. The tram moves at about 17.9 mph (28.8 km/h) and travels 3,100 feet (940 m) in 3 minutes. At its peak it climbs to 250 feet (76 m) above the East River

 

Interesting but the vast majority of resident on Roosevelt Island use the subway to commute not the tramway.

 

 

 

 

of course and probably more commute from there using busses as well, yet commuters definately still use the tram too. i have experienced riding on it when it was packed full of rush hour commuters myself. RI has grown quite a bit since the subway opened and much more development is on the way, so its still needed.

 

but thats not really the point. i just put that info up as an example because people wonder about tram vs gondola and what the practical capacity for these things can be.

 

Now I've gone from a proponent to an opponent. Except for the West Bank station, this duplicates the Waterfront Line.

 

:?

Now I've gone from a proponent to an opponent. Except for the West Bank station, this duplicates the Waterfront Line.

 

absolutely agree. the new blue route is a ridiculous duplication of the rapid wfl.

 

i kind of like the original yellow route along the lake to edgewater. although a more traditional transit option from tc along a calmed shoreway/clifton would be better, it doesnt seem like that is going to happen anytime soon. well, maybe brt lanes will be built someday i suppose, which wouldnt be awful. of course anything rail or brt would have higher capacity and have much better access to edgewater than a tram.

 

i think the yellow edgewater route and another seperate route, a tram from the westside market parking lot down into the flats (center st? french st?) and up to tower city would be the most ideal for now and would actually meet more people's needs than what they are trying to do with this new redundant blue route. bonus is a wsm-downtown tram would really fit in well in those surroundings and look cool and it might even help push forward scranton redevelopment.

 

At least this is generating conversation.

 

I think the gaps this is pointing out that need to be filled are connecting the stadium/science center/Rock Hall to the rest of downtown (probably via the Mall) and connecting the east and west banks of the Flats.  But there's probably cheaper ways to bridge these two gaps.

I'm thinking the leitner-poma engineers never saw Ohio City. The zig zagging looks stupid on the map. I'm sure the guy that is pushing this has a vision of hopping on a gondola from the muni lot straight to hornblower. I would think it would be good enough to start from the rock hall plaza, over to roof of future amtrak parking deck (which connects to cc)then in some flats spot if the wolsteins are interested. Finally heading across the river towards Ohio city. This would be packed with people all the time.

All I want is to connect the East and West Banks of the Flats.  And all we really need to achieve that is one gondola, hanging like a giant pendulum from the bottom of the Shoreway.  Load it up on one side and let go, repeat.  Fast and energy efficient.

All I want is to connect the East and West Banks of the Flats.  And all we really need to achieve that is one gondola, hanging like a giant pendulum from the bottom of the Shoreway.  Load it up on one side and let go, repeat.  Fast and energy efficient.

 

I vote for this!  This could easily be designed as iconic and interesting.

^^ You want simple and efficient, how about a sling shot? Talk about iconic.

 

Load it up. *fwip* Over the river.

All I want is to connect the East and West Banks of the Flats.  And all we really need to achieve that is one gondola, hanging like a giant pendulum from the bottom of the Shoreway.  Load it up on one side and let go, repeat.  Fast and energy efficient.

 

Like a big swing?  Hahaha, that would be cool.  Does that exist anywhere?

All I want is to connect the East and West Banks of the Flats.  And all we really need to achieve that is one gondola, hanging like a giant pendulum from the bottom of the Shoreway.  Load it up on one side and let go, repeat.  Fast and energy efficient.

 

This would be nice, and you can have more than one gondola too!!  A Tram may work as well, but you wouldn't need a 80 person tram like Portland, probably 50 would suffice.