Post by Steven Dale
Artists rendition of the London Cable Car
Yesterday Simon Hayes of Warf.co.uk wrote a piece on the upcoming London Thames Cable Car (Gondola).
Work apparently is to start this summer and everything but the legalities have been finalized. A bidder has been named, but will not be announced until all legal agreements have been signed.
A spokesman for Transport for London was even quoted as saying the gondolas will be “competitively priced in terms of being incorporated of London’s public transport network and Oyster will be accepted.”
In other words: There’s a good chance this system may actually be integrated by fare.
If so – and I’m not holding my breath – that would be a huge step towards treating this system as a component of the London transport network, rather than merely as a Toy for Tourists.
Nevertheless, there’s always a cynic. In the article, London Assembly member John Biggs is quoted as saying:
“It’s an excellent tourist attraction and will be effective at putting east London on the tourist map. I’ll welcome it if it happens, but it could never be part of the transport network.”
“There’s a massive shortage of river crossings, and we need at least one road crossing over the Thames here. The cable car is an attractive bit of kit, but it falls between two stools.”
It’s hard not to see Mr. Biggs’ viewpoint as somewhat narrow and his comments invite at least three major questions:
One: Why could it never be a part of the transport network? Why can a city that blends subways, double-decker buses and light rail not also incorporate a gondola or cable car system?
Is London incapable of accomplishing what Caracas, Medellin and several Algerian cities have already done?
Two: There is a shortage of above-ground river crossings in East London. Adding the cable car (gondola) increases the number of East London river crossings from zero to one. How then is this a bad thing?
Three: There’s no argument that East London requires at least one road crossing over the Thames. But such a crossing was estimated to cost £500m and could never have been completed in time for the Olympics – a prime impetus behind the cable car (gondola).
Why then view the cable car (gondola) and road crossing as competitors and mutually exclusive items? Just because one is built, that doesn’t necessarily mean the other won’t be, does it?
Why can the cable car (gondola) not be a first step towards getting the road crossing East London so clearly needs and deserves?
Why does it have to be one or the other? Can’t it be both?
Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.
Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.
