# Presentation: 094744

## Alternative Transportation Systems in Federal Lands: Reconsideration of Driverless Transit

- Wayne D. Cottrell, Assistant Professor
- Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering
- 122 South Central Campus Drive, Room 104
- University of Utah
- Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0561
- 801-587-9015 (phone); 801-585-5477 (fax)
- _[wcottrel@eng.utah.edu](mailto:wcottrel@eng.utah.edu)_

## Alternative Transportation Systems in Federal Lands

- Federal study completed in 2001
- National Parks, Fish & Wildlife Refuges, and BLM Lands
- 31 alternative modes considered
- 6 driverless transit modes included

## Driverless Transit Modes

- Aerial tramways
- Funiculars
- Gondolas
- Monorail
- Moving cableway shuttle transit
- People movers

## Aerial Tramways

- Palm Springs
*townnews.atevo.com*

## Aerial Tramways

- Overhead cables & support towers
- Large vehicles: 40 to 180 persons
- Moving cable, passive vehicle
- Vehicle hangs from cable
- $2 to $6 million per km

## Funiculars

- Lookout Mountain – *web.presby.edu/~jtbell*

## Funiculars

- Also called “inclines”
- Vehicle travels along track
- Moving cable, passive vehicle
- Climbs & descends steep gradients
- $500,000 to $1 million per vehicle
- $2.5 to $4.5 million per km
- 	

- Funiculi Funicula

## Gondolas

- Winter Park, Colorado
*www.skiwinterpark.com*

## Gondolas

- Overhead cables & support towers
- Small vehicles: up to 10 persons
- Moving cable, passive vehicle
- Vehicle hangs from cable
- $10,000 to $20,000 per station
- $25,000 to $40,000 per vehicle
- $400,000 to $700,000 per tower pair

## Monorail

- Miami Metrozoo
*www.monorails.org*

## Monorail

- Narrow, overhead guideway
- Train straddles track
- Train generally self-propelled
- Automation or operator
- $1 to $2 million per vehicle
- $25 to $55 million per km

## Moving Cableway Shuttle Transit

- J. Paul Getty Center, Los Angeles
*www.elevator-world.com*

## Moving Cableway Shuttle Transit

- Elevated guideway
- Small vehicle, supported or suspended
- Moving cable, passive vehicle
- Similar to people mover, but cheaper
- $100,000 to $300,000 per vehicle
- $10 to $20 million per km

## People Movers

- Schwalmstadt-Ziegenhain Hospital, Germany
*Cabinlift*

## People Movers

- Elevated guideway
- Small vehicle, supported or suspended
- Self-propelled vehicle
- $1 to $2 million per vehicle
- $25 to $40 million per km
- Commonly found at airports

## Leisure Applications of Driverless Transit

- 27 leisure APM systems worldwide (2002)
- Resort hotels, theme parks, zoos, expos
- 3,000+ ropeways in U.S. & Canada (1985)
- 50 gondola & aerial tramway installations
*	**	**APM = people mover, cable transit*
*	**	**Ropeway = gondola, tram, ski lift, tow*

## Disadvantages of Driverless Transit

- High capital costs relative to bus transit
- Stable, high patronage needed
- Visual intrusion of guideways or cables
- Fixed service area
- Supplier limitations
- Support columns & towers consume space
- 				$$$$$$$$$$

## Parkland Visitor Demands

- Seasonal (*May – September*)
- Weekends and holidays
- Daytime hours (*10 AM – 3 PM*)
- 	Ideal System:
- Flexible, variable capacity
- Conducive to peak month operations

## Accommodating Variable Demands

- Bus transit: very flexible
- Driverless transit: vary service frequency
- Driverless transit: personalize service
- Both: shut down service in off season
*	**Dormant infrastructure may be costly option*
- 	

## 	Patronage Needs

- 	Asano (1991) – Japanese urban areas:
- < 5,000 persons/hour  bus transit
- 5,000-15,000 persons/hour  driverless
- > 15,000 persons/hour  heavy rail
- 	Rudimentary analysis (*0.3% in peak hour*):
- _>_ 1.7 million visitors per year needed for driverless transit

## 	Popular Parks		

- Annual visitors > 1.7 million at 30 parks
- Acadia, Olympic, Yosemite, Zion, etc.
- 	Other factors:
- Roadway capacity		Terrain & topo
- Number of entrances	Parking supply
- Size & layout of park	Environment

## Advantages of Driverless Transit

- Lower operating costs than bus transit
- No emissions
- Transit infrastructure becomes a fixture
- Areas with no roads can be accessed
- System may be an attraction
- More reliable than buses
- Safer than street transit

- 

## Driverless Transit TechnologyPassive vs. Active Vehicle

- 	ADVANTAGES
- Less expensive vehicle
- Less expensive infrastructure
- Adaptable to rugged terrain
- Wide spacing between support towers
- 	DISADVANTAGES
- Low speeds and capacities
- Difficult to network

- 	

- 

## Conclusions

- Driverless transit feasible in busy parks
- Cable-driven technology may be best
- Consider safety & reliability benefits
- System may attract park visitors
- Areas with no roads may be accessible
- Site-specific studies needed
- 	Wayne D. Cottrell, University of Utah