Opinion: Concerns on the Proposed Swyft Cities “Gondola” Project at the Great Park

  • May 5, 2025, 9:54 pm America/Los_Angeles

Having spent +20 years working in IT/web development, I am familiar with how one should methodically and carefully assess and choose vendors and solution providers – especially for multi-million-dollar projects.

At the April 22, 2025 Great Park board meeting, the City Council voted to have the city staff proceed with contract negotiations with Swyft Cities to install an aerial transport “gondola” system at the Great Park. The gondola system is based on proprietary Whoosh® cable technology that is licensed exclusively to Swyft Cities.

And so far, $512,000 has been spent to evaluate various transit systems in the Great Park of which the Swyft Cities gondola system appears to be the only one that is being actively considered.

But after reviewing public documents and reports, videos of recent Great Park board meetings, and news accounts about the proposed Swyft Cities gondola system, I have some concerns.

  1. The 2023 engineering and financial study to evaluate transit system options in the Great Park did not include the Swyft Cities option.

In May 2023, as part of the city staff’s work to carry out the City Council-approved Great Park Framework Plan, the city awarded a contract for $55,944 to Sam Schwartz Engineering, an engineering firm that specializes in sustainable transportation systems. Schwartz Engineering designed recommended transit routes within the Great Park, as well as viable transit systems that could be implemented, based on engineering and financial analyses and reviewing case studies of transit systems at other park locations.

Schwartz issued a detailed 30-page final report in November 2023 which presented recommended transit routes, both as “circular” routes with fixed cycle times, and as an on-demand service through the use of a phone app or other technologies. Read the Schwartz Engineering report

The Schwartz report went on to recommend the use of small electric vehicles that can, in the future, incorporate autonomous vehicle (AV) “driverless” technology to minimize operating costs, as the AV technology is expected to mature in the coming years.

These electric vehicle solutions (both human-driven and driverless) were studied to ensure that they can meet the expected capacity and demand at the Great Park, both at low- and high-peak times. Four viable AV manufacturer solutions that are currently in production were included in the report.

However, the Schwartz report did not include the Swyft Cities gondola system as part of their engineering and financial analysis as it wasn’t an option being considered by city staff at that time.

  1. Another firm, HDR is assessing the Swyft Cities option but it’s not finished – even though the City has started to negotiate a contract with Swyft Cities.

After Schwartz Engineering issued their report in November 2023, sometime during 2024, the Swyft Cities gondola solution was brought to the city staff’s attention by Kellenberg Studios who did the mobility planning as part of the Great Park Framework Plan.

One option for the city staff was to go back to Schwartz Engineering and have them amend their report by including the Swyft Cities option, based on their completed transit model for expected ridership and demand and recommended routes within the Great Park – as well as a financial analysis of the Swyft Cities system itself.

Instead, in February 2025 the city staff signed a contract for $50,000 with another engineering & transportation firm, HDR, Inc. But, HDR was hired to evaluate only the Swyft Cities solution with no comparison to other transit options such as those presented in the Schwartz report. Also, HDR was not hired to perform any financial analysis of the Swyft Cities solution.

HDR has presented their preliminary results to city staff. But their work is not yet completed.

Also, it is my understanding that the city staff is completing a financial analysis of the Swyft Cities solution instead of hiring an outside firm that is experienced in assessing complex transportation solutions.

  1. Other Swyft Cities contracts have already been signed with no input or opportunity for feedback by the City Council.

The city signed the following two contracts with Swyft Cities, which did not require City Council approval per the city’s financial policies & procedures:

  • In December 2024, a contract was signed for $198,000 for preliminary engineering and safety certification strategy. Though city policies & procedures were followed, note that the $198,000 amount is just shy of the $200,000 minimum threshold, which triggers City Council approval.
  • In March 2025, a contract was signed for $65,200 to create a virtual reality model to demonstrate the Swyft Cities system in the Great Park. This is troubling in which the city will proceed with paying +$65K for a VR demo for a transit system of which the engineering and financial analysis has not yet been completed by HDR and city staff.
  1. Swyft Cities have NO installed projects and their Whoosh® technology has not been approved yet by any California regulatory agency.

Swyft Cities does not have any installations of their gondola transit system. They only have a small demonstration system – based on a one-quarter-scale prototype – at a “Whoosh lab” in New Zealand.

The only customer site cited by Swyft Cities is a small, 370-acre resort in Queensland, New Zealand. (The Great Park is 3-1/2 times bigger at 1,300 acres.) It was reported last September that construction for a pilot project is supposed to start this year. But there are no project updates on the Swyft Cities website or social media sites nor any local news accounts on if construction has begun. Read the news article on the Radio New Zealand website.

Also, because the Whoosh® proprietary technology is brand-new, it has not been certified and approved by state and local agencies such as the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA), among other agencies. 

Safety will be the utmost concern with transporting people +200 feet up in the air – never mind an evacuation plan when the system breaks down. For a brand-new transit technology, which involves liability risk and human lives, we should expect a lengthy regulatory approval process by the state and local agencies.

Let Someone Else Be the First to Try New Technology; Also, Transit Should Be Cost-Effective and Work – It Doesn’t Have to Be “Sexy”

“Deinstalling” Gondola Towers is Not Like Software: One thing that I’ve learned while working in IT is when you’re evaluating a software solution or new technology, you never want to be the first customer site. 

For brand-new software or technology, there are always unforeseen issues and project schedules are often delayed with missed deadlines. But, even if the software or technology turns out to be the wrong choice, it’s relatively simple to deinstall it from the servers and mobile devices.

But, “deinstalling” infrastructure – especially a gondola system with 200-feet concrete towers – is different. If the Swyft Cities system doesn’t work as promised and “deinstallation” is stipulated in the contract, there will be unforeseen issues with removing 200-feet towers with unplanned costs and costly litigation if the contract terms aren’t adhered to.

Board in Utah is Wisely Holding Off On Swyft Cities: An article in Building Salt Lake, a real estate news site, mentioned that the Board for a planned development, Point of the Mountain near Salt Lake City, decided to defer a feasibility study with Swyft Cities in which “some board members expressed reservations about its cost, particularly the upfront investment, and the timing, given that similar systems are still under development internationally.”

Interestingly, the news article mentioned Steve Kellenberg as the consultant for the Swyft Cities project proposal – Mr. Kellenberg is with Kellenberg Studios which brought the Swyft Cities system to the city staff’s attention in 2024.

San Diego Wild Animal Park Learned from Their Original Transit System: Many years ago, the Wild Animal Park installed a 5-mile electric monorail to transport visitors around the park to view the animals. But over the years, the monorail started to experience frequent breakdowns and other mechanical issues.

The park decided to later replace their fixed monorail with open-air shuttle buses because the buses were less costly, provided flexible route changes based on future needs (unlike their fixed monorail system), and it resolved visitor traffic jams and evacuation issues when the monorail stopped working.

LA Gondola Project is in Jeopardy: A privately funded gondola project to be built by Aerial Rapid Transit Technologies, LLC to transport riders between LA Union Station and Dodger Stadium has been in the planning stages since it was first proposed in 2018.

But the project has faced numerous setbacks, with the most recent on May 1st when the state appeals court rejected LA Metro’s approval of the environmental impact report for the project. Also, the project has yet to receive approval from the LA City Council, Caltrans and the state parks agency. This and other delays have already jeopardized the goal for the gondola system to be open in time for the 2028 Olympics. Read the news story on the KTLA news site

Conclusion

Selecting a transit system in the Great Park should not be rushed process as it is now, and should be done thoughtfully and methodically with outside, transit experts who are independent of Swyft Cities and others under consideration.

The Swyft Cities system should NOT be the only transit option presented by the city staff for the City Council’s consideration. I have concerns about Swyft Cities’ lack of installations, their reliance on the Whoosh® proprietary technology which limits the city’s options for cost-effective maintenance, and zero flexibility in future route changes based on the Great Park’s visitor traffic patterns, which is likely change over the next 10-30 years.

The technology landscape is littered with hundreds of failed startups in which 63% of all tech businesses fail within the first 5 years. The City Council should consider the risk of choosing Swyft Cities, which is still a startup that has been in business for less than 4 years.

The Schwartz Engineering report and their transit recommendations should be seriously considered as it offers numerous case studies of successful park transit systems along with multiple, viable choices in transit providers which, unlike Swyft Cities, are not based on a closed, proprietary technology.

And if you need further information, I give you the Springfield monorail video, courtesy of TV comedy series, The Simpsons.