Modern Transit: Cincinnati Speedwalk

Matt Novak over at the Smithsonian blog, Paleofuture, recently posted a really great article on a radical concept for rapid transit that once swept over the world: Moving Sidewalks.
(I'm referring to those proposals for long distances, because as we all know, they already exist and work well in smaller-scale versions today.)  Anyway, his article is a great source for the definition and history of the Moving Sidewalk as a mass transit system, so without regurgitating that info, I'll just review the few items relating Cincinnati's hat in this ring.

• • • • • • • • • •

"Closer Than We Think!" illo by Arthur Radebaugh.

Image source.

Possibly the first touch locally for this transit concept was in “The Roads Must Roll”, a sci-fi short written by Robert A. Heinlein (1940), about future cities built around moving sidewalks.

In Heinlein's story, massive conveyors replaced highways and rail as the dominant form of transportation in the US, but as dependence on them grew, they were susceptible to sabotage, which forms the overriding plot (perhaps not unlike the real story of the automakers supplant of the US rail system).  In his description of the landscape, he incorporates a Midwest trail which fairly resembles Ohio's scrapped 3C corridor:

Robert Heinlein imagined the United States—facing a war-strained petroleum shortage that meant the "end of the automobile era was in sight"—shifting to a series of massive commuter moving walkways.  Of the first "mechanized road," built between Cincinnati and Cleveland [in 1960], Heinlein writes: "It was, as one would expect, comparatively primitive in design, being based on the ore belt conveyors of ten years earlier. The fastest strip moved only thirty miles per hour, and was quite narrow, for no one had yet thought of the possibility of locating retail trade on the strips themselves." (Source.)

And detailing it further:

...there is a massive network of parallel moving belts, the inner ones faster. Passengers are screened from wind, and there are chairs and even shops on the belt. In the Heinlein work the fast lane runs at 100 mph (160 km/h)... The relative speed of two adjacent belts is 5 mph (8 km/h) (in the book the fast lane stops, and the second lane keeps running at 95 mph (152 km/h)). (Source.)

Image source.

In 1953, Goodyear turned fiction into reality.  Contributing to the mass transit dialogue, they offered their industrial conveyor belts as peoplemovers, which perked up local ears:

The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company proposed a new, technologically-advanced public transit system that wasn't quite "rapid transit," but was close enough. (Source.)

From Time Magazine (1954):

Goodyear has been working on the idea as a safe, fast method of travel in overcrowded cities. Last spring, with the Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Co. of Aurora, Ill., its partner in the new belt company, Goodyear installed its first project: a $75,000 "speedwalk" to carry New Jersey commuters 227 ft. from the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad's Jersey City terminal up an incline to the Erie Railroad station. 

Besides Manhattan, half a dozen big U.S. cities may soon be customers for the Goodyear passenger belt. Cincinnati is considering a belt-car system to serve 80 congested downtown blocks. So are Montreal, Cleveland, San Francisco, Atlanta, and São Paulo, Brazil, which is thinking of a web of conveyor-belt sidewalks. (Source.)

Popular Science (1954) continues:

Both New York City and Cincinnati are seriously considering plans for solving traffic problems with similar conveyor belts.  In New York, a four-block-long system extending from Times Square to Grand Central Station has been proposed.  This would take the place of overcrowded subway trains that now clatter back and forth over a so-called "shuttle" line.  And in downtown Cincinnati, a two-way subway belt-conveyor loop has been proposed to uncork bottlenecks in a six-block-long and three-block-wide area. (Source.)

 Image source.

From the City of Cincinnati:

"The Passenger Conveyor Belt for Cincinnati" promised a "modern subway system" for the Queen City.  This was an "ultra-modern transportation method" that would virtually eliminate motor and pedestrian traffic congestion, serving as the heart of the city's present public transportation system.  It would even eliminate the need for most on-street parking in the main business district. (Source.)

Though, slowly, these unbuilt concepts began gathering dust, and decades passed with waning local enthusiasm for this mode of transportation.

Yet, while conveyor belts for mass public transit became stale and unrealistic, there were areas of private infrastructure that handled enough bodies to float these concepts for themselves - and this can be seen throughout the world today, specifically in stadiums, theme parks, and airports. Harkening back to an era of unabashed enthusiasm for grandiose ideals:

[In 1953] Goodyear suggested other uses for the Speedwalk. Modern airports could use the moving sidewalk for two-way transportation: passengers could walk while on the moving belt and increase their speed by 50 percent, or they could stand still on the belt while being carried through the airport... (Source.)

Image source.

Finally, with a near palpable sense of nostalgia, the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Airport expansion in the 80s & 90s - particularly the construction of Delta's hub (the massive Concourse B) - saw a spike in foot traffic and responded with a loud yell:

A few novel ways to increase the flow of pedestrian traffic through the sprawling structure included the installation of the long-held dream: the Moving Sidewalk...

Image source.

...the only remaining tangible vestibule to this futuristic transit concept of Cincinnati's past.

Sources:

Moving Sidewalks Before the Jetsons

Matt Novak, Paleofuture blog / Smithsonian.com (January 11, 2012)

Should Cities Install Moving Sidewalks?

An idea for urban transport, cribbed from the airport.

Slate Magazine (July 6, 2010)

The Cincinnati Subway: History of Rapid Transit

Allen J. Singer (2003) 

Subway of the Future

Time Magazine (November 15, 1954)

Conveyor Belts to Move Crowds

Popular Science Magazine (February 1954)

Definitions:

Moving Walkway

Wikipedia

Escalator

New World Encyclopedia

Further reading:

Fast Moving Sidewalks

Mike Treder, Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (August 9, 2009)

The Paris Sidewalks of Yesterday's Future

Cedric Benetti, Paris 2e (April 2, 2008)

Moving Sidewalk Mechanics (1900)

Matt Novak, Paleo-Future (June 25, 2007)

40 Years in the Future?

James R. Berry, Mechanix Illustrated (November 1968)

Modern Transit series

"Science on the March", Popular Mechanics (January 1952).
Illustrated by A. Leydenfrost.

Image Source.

Cincinnati is not one to shy away from, at the very least, thinking about ways to improve city life, draw interest in it's surroundings, and ultimately push our sprawling metropolis into the front seat of a shiny new ultra-modern urban utopia.  (That would be the goal, I would hope.)

While most of these futuristic prognostications have been lit through decades of re-evaluating our bricks and mortar, local transit has shadowed this infatuation by nearly the same level.  And it's no surprise since, by foot, ship, rail, horse, or carriage, Cincinnati has historically been a city open to embrace new forms of transportation.

Geared for constant change, though admittedly, not always following through.

Nevertheless, the philosophical transmutation of current modes of living into something idealized is nothing new in the history of society - aka Optimistic Futurism (a noble tenet to live by, in my opinion) - and it is constantly seen in the minds, and occasionally the works, of our local culture as well.  Thus, it will be reflected again here, through a new series upcoming on Cincinnati Revisited:

Modern Transit: Far-reaching conceptualizations for local travel.

Stay tuned.

Revisiting Cincinnati Stadia

 Cincinnati Riverfront Master Plan

+ Overview of proposed Smale Riverfront Park.

Source.

There's been a lot of talk lately about how to make the operations for the recently built stadiums on the riverfront profitable (or at the very least balanced) - with the funds annually threatening red, resulting in secret backroom deals, general anxiety, and who knows what else.  Since the plow hit the soil, it seems, questions persist as to whether the county received a bad deal (+), and whether stadium construction in general creates the substantial societal and financial impact that the public is promised.

Having taken the guided behind-the-scenes tours of both new riverfront facilities, and attended numerous events in all big four local stadiums, I've come away with these general observations of the existing Cincinnati mega-stadiums (click on any image for a larger view):

Great American Ballpark was designed comfortably - enjoyable just to meander throughout, with unique lures / stopping points spread between each section - and feels like part of a neighborhood, even when closed.  The attached Hall of Fame Museum adds to the stadium's perception of year-round accessibility, but the fact that the season is 6+ months long alone lends to its true viability.  When not watching the main event, there's plenty of family-oriented + adult-centric things to do to enjoyably bide the time.

Great American Ballpark, Cincinnati riverfront.

First-generation rendering of the new riverfront ballpark.

Image source: UrbanCincy + Hamilton County.

Lindner Family Tennis Center is actually comprised of four stadiums (Center Court, Grandstand Court + 2 additional with seating) + many other satellite courts. Located in Mason, there's room for growth indefinitely, and with its continued expansion (through bricks & mortar + tournament building) its relevance on the world stage is continually amplified. Even with its roomy suburban digs, the grounds are oriented so that meandering between matches on several different courts is easy, with the stadiums themselves airy and comfortable.  Great food, shopping and tennis facilities overall draw fringe jocks to socialites and everyone else in between, resulting in a vibrant mixture during the day or evening daily sessions.  It also doesn't hurt that the complex sidles the Jack Nicklaus-designed Kings Island Golf Center + Kings Island itself, among other attractions.  A veritable playground.

Lindner Family Tennis Center, Mason, Ohio.

The latest master plan expansion for the burgeoning Cincinnati tourney.

Image source: W&S Open.

Nippert Stadium is shoved so tight within UC's campus that it's hard for it to breath, so expansion proposals are often unique concepts (rarely ever actually realized) - though, this restriction is a blessing in disguise: Walking around a huge stadium without encountering acres of parking asphalt is a godsend.  Instead, it's surrounded by some of the most amazing architecture and a vibrant student population, which makes it feel like a lively city within a city, which is very cool.

Nippert Stadium, University of Cincinnati.

Nippert is just one part of UC's huge sports complex, which hosts

a ton of teams' fields, courts, etc.

Image source: Heritage Uniforms & Jerseys.

Paul Brown Stadium - a huge leap from the Bengals original home in Nippert Stadium (1968-69) - is architecturally significant and provides great aerial shots, but when inside, the Brutalist-like concrete interior on cold game days kind of makes you feel like you're on the movie set of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich...or maybe a zoo holding pen.  It would be nice if pre- or post-game attractions were built into the stadium somehow to extend its gameday (or potentially game-week) life, but I'm not familiar with them (if they exist).  For the most part, tailgating is stuck to the underpasses and the rest to the bars, but I'll bet that those living in the Club-level have a much different take on this.

Paul Brown Stadium, Cincinnati riverfront.

Designed by NBBJ Sports and Entertainment Architects of LA.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

Anyway, it's ironic that of all the stadiums in town, Paul Brown Stadium was the most expensive to build, has produced the least-winning teams, is used the least period of time (just 10 days/year for the Bengals), and most importantly, is the most shut off from the surrounding environment even though it lives in arguably the most prominent neighborhood in the city: the Riverfront District.  I'm no fair-weather fan and am glad we have a pro team, but... well, I'll leave it at that.

Still, overall, I'd say yes, the stadiums impact the city in a socially and financially significant (usually positive) way - its hard to imagine what the city would be without them. Not only do they draw international interest, but enliven the residents, and overall, make the city money.  They make our mid-size city feel much much larger, and frankly, we're lucky to have these assets.

The X-factor, of course, is the main event: whether we win or lose.  Even when the city went through massive renovation and growth (business and construction) primarily in the late-70's to 80s, I've heard some say that the optimistic air surrounding that "boom time" was attributed greatly to our dominance in pro sports.  That's the perception, and as a result, perhaps the true value of the stadiums - the city's collective attitude buoys with the teams' successes or failures, and thus, sometimes how the structures themselves are received.

Nevertheless, bucking the long-standing perception of Mark Twain (et al.) that the city is intolerant or slow to change, no matter the population numbers, economy, team scores, or outcome of concept, Cincinnati never ceases to dream big, which itself makes this this relatively small town always feel like a promising metropolis.

So, riding this optimistic wave of idealism, here's a short retrospective of some of the great initial, conceptual illustrations of these behemoths + fantastical stadium visions that never got off the drawing board:

Cincinnati Riverfront Rehabilitation proposal (1926).

Note the rudimentary football/track field in the middle, obviously unbuilt.

Image source: Cincinnati Transit.

Cincinnati Riverfront Redevelopment plan (1948).

Another unbuilt stadium proposal for another unbuilt riverfront concept (view larger).

Image source: Cincinnati Transit.

Riverfront Stadium concept (1966). 
A proposed domed stadium on the site of the then Riverfront Stadium.

Image source: Visual History Gallery.

Cincinnati Riverfront Redevelopment concept (early 1990s). 
Commissioned by the then-city manager during the city boom era & early talk

of The Banks, this shows the stadiums on opposite ends of the city from where they exist now.

Image source: UrbanOhio.

Riverfront Stadium / Cinergy Field renovation proposal (1997).

This plan would've saved some bucks by retrofitting the existing stadium

instead of building the new one we have today.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

Cincinnati Reds stadium proposal, Broadway Commons (1998).

A failed attempt to move the new stadium to Over the Rhine.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

Great American Ballpark, early concept (1998).

In the fight against the Broadway Commons proposal, the Reds released this rendering of

keeping the stadium on the river.  It obviously was built here, but with a different design.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

Nippert Stadium expansion proposal, University of Cincinnati (2008).

Very cool unbuilt concept that fits in with the contemporary feel of the new campus.

Image source: UrbanCincy + Trahan Architects.

Cincinnati's 2012 Olympic bid, event facilities (2000).

A proposed retrofitted, domed Nippert Stadium would've hosted gymnastics.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

Cincinnati's 2012 Olympic bid, master plan (2000).

This grandaddy of all Cincinnati master plans showcases a transformed riverfront which

would've included an Olympic Stadium, left, and other supporting fields/stadiums.

Image source: Cincinnati Enquirer.

• Read more about the general impact of stadiums: 
Do New Stadiums Have an Economic Impact? from Diehard Sport
Sport, Jobs, & Taxes: Are New Stadiums Worth the Cost? from Brookings Institution
The Stadium Gambit and Local Economic Development from Regulation Mag / CATO Institute
The Economic Impact of Sports Facilities from The Sports Digest
Corporate Welfare, Publicly Funded Stadiums (+ comprehensive link list) from AK Dart