Over at Human Transit, Jarrett Walker has an excellent post called Transit and the Hierarchy of Needs. In it, he explores Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs and its relationship to public transit.
His argument boils down to this: People will only care about high-order transit concerns such as urban design and technology choice once their lower-order concern of getting from Point A to Point B is sufficiently met. Regarding issues of urban design and transit-oriented development, Jarrett says this:
(Transit planners) shouldn’t expect these considerations to be very convincing to a citizen who’s stranded on a rainy streetcorner (sic), or in a stopped transit vehicle, because the city designed its transit to catalyse great urban life instead of to be fast and reliable. That person will see other people’s high-level needs being place (sic) above their low-level needs.
Jarrett presents a well-thought out and beguiling argument. He reaches his apex when he says:
. . . people are in a hurry and they have every right to be. If we can implement our great visions in ways that work with their lives, they’ll appreciate it. But when we hear that transit should be slower because it’s good for us, or that a transit line will be so sexy that we shouldn’t care if it’s reliable, be careful. If our visions get in the way of their lives, they’ll eventually rebel.
What we’ve seen in Medellin thus far epitomizes Jarrett’s idea of implementing great transit visions in ways that work with people’s lives. The Metrocable satisfied the most basic of needs in Medellin; moving people quickly, cheaply and reliably.
But it also contributed to so many other facets of the community: Decreased crime; increased civic pride; increased pedestrian space; higher quality urban design; decreased traffic; and increased economic opportunity.
Effectively servicing Medellin’s lower-order transit needs had dramatic impacts on higher-order needs down the line. But those higher-order needs came after basic needs were met.
I tend to bristle when people assume cable transit to be some niche-expensive-frill-novelty-dream-technology because it’s not.
Cable’s really pretty basic, which is why – I suspect – it’s received so much recent usage in the developing world. These are people meeting their very basic transit needs using an ancient (literally) technology that’s been updated to the present day. Colombia, Venezuela, Algeria and others wouldn’t be using this technology if it wasn’t practical, cost-effective, fast, safe and reliable.
That it accomplishes so much more is nothing more than a bonus.