Should Cities Install Moving Sidewalks?

theodp writes "The real problem nowadays is how to move crowds,' said the manager of the failed Trottoir Roulant Rapide high-speed (9 km/h) people mover project. 'They can travel fast over long distances with the TGV (high-speed train) or airplanes, but not over short distances (under 1 km).' Slate's Tom Vanderbilt explores whether moving walkways might be viable for urban transportation. The first moving sidewalks were unveiled at Chicago's 1893 Columbian Exposition, and at one point seemed destined to supplant some subways, but never took root in cities for a variety of reasons. Vanderbilt turns to science fiction for inspiration, where 30 mph walkways put today's tortoise-like speed ranges of .5-.83 m/s to shame. In the meantime, Jerry Seinfeld will just have to learn to live with 'the people who get onto the moving walkway and just stand there. Like it's a ride.'"

Comments

Obesity?

[DoofusOfDeath]

Wouldn't it be a better idea for people to walk those short distances, given how fat people are these days?

Re:Obesity?

[Locke2005]

It would be a lot cheaper to make people walk than to pay the lawsuits from people that fall getting on to or off of a 30 mph walkway! That and outdoor environments and mechanical equipment do not play well together. Just ask your local mall what they spend every year just cleaning gum off of the escalator.

Re:Obesity?

[Shados]

if you don't put those, they'll take their car. The amount of people who'll take a car to go what would have been a few minute walk is staggering.

Re:Obesity?

[dimethylxanthine]

Also, given how expensive it would be we'd also be better off finding some real use for that money. Planting a few trees, instead of concrete, building some green buildings, preventing obesity?

Re:Obesity?

[boristdog]

Yeah, if you can't walk at least 1km, you should probably have a wheelchair.
If it's just because you're lazy, then you should be walking anyway.

Personally I think bus stops are too close together. Put them at least 1/2 mile apart and ONLY stop at corners in between if the passenger is disabled.

Re:Obesity?

[eldavojohn]

Wouldn't it be a better idea for people to walk those short distances, given how fat people are these days?

I don't know if this is sound logic. If I were to believe your reasoning, I would assume that we would see a lower average of obesity in a city like New York City where walking is a large part of transportation but it turns out to be similar to other places:

New York City's adult obesity rate was 20% in 2003, compared to 23% nationwide in 2004. The national average has nearly doubled from 12% in 1993.

I could just as presumptuously argue that people will only walk a certain amount -- no more, no less. And that if you put in these sidewalks it would only increase their range of desired travel that is acceptable to them (usually on a time based limit). So if I'm only will to walk 10 blocks and suddenly these sidewalks put me twenty blocks one way or the other, I've greatly increased my distances. And if you look at the history of the interstate and roads, it is evident than increasing a populace's means of transportation and freedom will increase your economy.

And what caused it to double since 1993? Not a revolution in transportation, I'll assure you that. Maybe a revolution in how we do business over the internet and a number of other factors more important than new transportation technologies.

I don't think the introduction and mass spread of automobiles in the early 1900s caused obesity. I personally think that what we eat and how we are raised to be sedentary are bigger problems than not walking everywhere. There's a number of contributing factors and deciding not to investigate new modes of public transportation for high concentrations of citizens is just not a sound decision.

It might be tempting to blame technology for our laziness but let's face it: we've been pacified and are perfectly content to sit around to get fat--moving sidewalk or no moving sidewalk.

Re:Obesity?

[phoenix321]

Chewing gum is *the* single thing I truly despise in our free societies. It is ridiculously cheap, ubiquitous, popular - and more stable in the environment than granite. People chew that stuff all the time and spit it everywhere - all floors, streets, corners, sidewalks of all cities are riddled with that decades-old, positively eternal chewed chewing gum.

Just look at the streets on a busy intersection: thousands of flattened chewing gum remains, outlasting the tarmac they are embedded in by decades.

Sometimes when I look down on the city floor for some reason and notice the gum, I have a hard time regaining the faith in personal freedom, pushing back the urge to cry for Singaporean laws against that filth.

Honestly: what part of individual freedom demands that people can spit this stuff everywhere?

Re:Obesity?

[ByteSlicer]

So true. Once I was sitting in a Denny's with a couple of friends.
Then we saw this (20-ish) couple leave their motel on the other side of the road, get in their car, cross the road, park in front of the Denny's, get out and order some food inside.
OK, the roads are a bit wider in the US, but wtf ?!

Re:Obesity?

[SashaMan]

Be careful what you do with statistics. My guess is that New York City's rate is only slightly lower because, in addition to having a lot of walkers, it has a lot of poor people. For example, Manhattan has a much lower obesity rate, and while I could state that this is because Manhattan is the most easily walkable of all the boroughs, it's much more likely that it's because Manhattan has the most rich people.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/nyregion/22fat.html for some good information

Re:Obesity?

[Kjella]

If you go to that page, be sure to see the BMI >30 map for males (why no total?). The US is miles ahead of the rest with 44.2%, for comparison UK has 23.7% and Germany 22.9%. This corresponds well to what I've seen, many people all over Europe are getting chubby from office work, no exercise and fast food. But almost every time I see one of those quarter ton people, it's an American. There's just a completely different attitude to being really, really huge. It's no surprise many americans identify with Homer Simpson...

Re:Obesity?

[Brew Ha-Ha]

Wouldn't it be a better idea for people to walk those short distances, given how fat people are these days?

This assumes that people live within walking distance. I live a mile and a half from the closest store. I live 10 miles from the closest Walmart which would be the first real grocery store I hit. Most of the stores I go to are more than a mile apart so parking at one and walking to another is out of the question. Since most of this country is in a simular situation, cars will stay king.

What this observation misses though is that people would be more likely to get more exercise with moving sidewalks while causing less pollution and less traffic. As a much younger man I used to walk all over Portland from the Saturday Market to Powell's to the Library. I would park at one end of downtown and huff it. Now I couldn't see doing that becuase dragging kids along, or my elderly in-laws, and whatever bags would be too hard. Think about it, do you want to drag a kid that is too big for a stroller but still young enough to want to be picked up when they are tired over a 10 block trek back to the car? Right now, I would more likely skip downtown and go to my stores at the suburban strip malls rather than trek downtown and if I did go downtown I would probably drive location to location.

Re:Obesity?

[internic]

For some reason all I could think of after reading the parent post was this:

Dog carcass in alley this morning, tire tread on burst stomach. This city is afraid of me. I have seen it's true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"...

...and I'll look down, and whisper "no."

Re:Obesity?

[Nursie]

Yes! Because statistically valid data are far inferior to anecdotal evidence!

*facepalm*

I'm, sorry USA, whilst the rest of the west is getting chubby, nobody (and I mean nobody) does land-whales like the US of A.

Re:Obesity?

[SteeldrivingJon]

Those are probably areas that are not particularly walkable. Hell, stationary sidewalks aren't even omnipresent in the US suburbs, and these people think we should build maintenance-nightmare, energy wasting, moving sidewalks?

If you want these people to walk instead of drive, the first step would be to tear up the parking lots and install street-level retail where restaurants could be established.

The only person who would think moving sidewalks are a good idea is a person with a patent for a moving sidewalk and a PR firm on retainer.

Re:Obesity?

[Hognoxious]

Right. Because you could easily walk to your car, drive somewhere, park, order lunch, eat it, walk back to your car, drive back to the office and park in the same time.

Re:Obesity?

[Joe Tie.]

Statistics are nice, but frankly, I'm going on my own experience here.

Science is nice. But I'm just going to go by my experience and side with the flat earth theory.

Re:Obesity?

[BasilBrush]

Unfortunately it is a Western culture phenomena. Processed food and too much of it coupled with lack of exercise will make you fat - and that's guaranteed!

Let's be more specific... it's a US phenomenon being exported to the rest of the world.

Moving walkways will do us no good and will be a failure not least as they frequently break down - I assume this is why there tends to be severl short walkways in a line rather than one long one.

I guess it might also have something to do with the electric motor being at one (or possibly both) ends. There must be a balance to be made in length of walkway and size of motor.

People also do not seem to realise that walkways are meant to hasten your progress not allow users to rest between destinations. Walking on a moving platform increases progress. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

Some people like to have a breather and yet still feel like they are making progress. More so if they are obese or are carrying luggage. It's not that they don't get your concept, it's that their preference is just as reasonable as yours. Walkways are usually wide enough that both preferences can be accommodated. The only ones at fault are those that don't realise if they are stationary they need to be on the right.

On another note, why do so many people hae difficulty stepping off moving walkways? Which part is difficult?

Yes, they seem to have more difficulty than with escalators. Perhaps it's that escalators have a subtle in built warning that the end is coming, when the steps transform to a flat part. Maybe some people just aren't paying attention and don't notice the end of the walkway approaching. Maybe in other cases they are physically or visually impaired. Escalators often have an elevator as an alternative for people. The only alternative to moving walkways is stationary walkways. So maybe more physically/visually impaired people end up trying moving walkways than escalators.

Re:Obesity?

[hedpe2003]

Human bite wounds, though relatively rare, have a higher rate of infections than cat or dog bites.

That is because most human bite wounds are on the hands (Hmm, where's the first place I'm going to think of punching that loud mouth and teach him a lesson?). The hands are quite prone to infection due to all the dogs and cats you touch (and money, and gas pumps, etc :).

I hate that wildly mischaracterized statistic. I hear it a lot with the fact that a "dogs mouth is cleaner than a humans," or that dogs saliva is sterile.

On a side note: did you know ice cream sales in an area/time are directly related to drownings? Couldn't have anything to do with a summer treat, and summer activity... ice cream is dangerous!

/rant

The Roads Must Roll?

[TheOldBear]

unintentionally blank

NO.

[SatanicPuppy]

NO. Jesus, walk a little bit people. If you've got to get somewhere faster, ride a bike, take a cab, take the train, drive your car.

Putting moving sidewalks everywhere is about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Forget the exercise argument: imagine the fricking maintenance costs!

escalators too

[butterflysrage]

this will just lead to the escalator effect... Rather then continuing to walk up or down the stairs as they move, people just get on and stand still. The same will happen with these walkways, rather then getting on and adding their own walking pace to the 9km/h, they will stand still and get in everyone elses way.

Re:escalators too

[phantomfive]

Really? Does that bother you? Because I thought that's what pretty much everyone does, at least in America. I'm trying to remember the last time I saw someone (besides me) walking up an escalator. They are there for convenience, after all, not for helping you get somewhere faster.

In Japan they have a cool solution: the escalator ends up having two lines. The people on the left keep walking, and those on the right stand. I guess for that to become a custom you'd need escalators that are typically crowded, which most in the US are not.

Speaking of stairs and escalators, England really needs to catch up on this one. When I was riding the train there I kept having little old ladies ask me to carry their luggage for them up the stairs. I can't imagine what wheelchaired people do.

Re:escalators too

[easterberry]

That's what we usually do here in Canada. Unless it gets really busy because inevitably someone in the "walking lane" will be a dick(or bitch lets not be gender exclusive here) stand still and back up the entire system which basically screws the whole line up for a while.

The worst is when you're trying to get down to the subway, and it's in the station and if you could propel yourself forwards you could make it but the idiot in front of you apparently just doesn't give a shit and you miss the train.

Re:escalators too

[nelsonal]

Washington DC's metro has an informal but strongly enforced walk on the left, stand on the right policy, but because of the slope and length of their escalators, they run slower than average. If you come here and stand, people will swear at you, and most of them will bump you when they pass.

Re:escalators too

[Grishnakh]

This seems to imply an extremely wide walkway. If these things are supposed to go where sidewalks go, then they're not going to be more than a few feet wide or so.

Also, even with a really wide walkway, you wouldn't be able to pass anyone, as no one would be walking, they'd all be standing still on their particular track, and happily blocking everyone behind them, just as they do now on roads. So walking for exercise would be a thing of the past.

Re:escalators too

[Grishnakh]

I don't think it's like that at all. Very, very, very few people walk up escalators, even if they have nothing in their hands. People are lazy. And if you try to pass them (even if the escalator is pretty wide), they get pissed and offended, just like they get pissed and offended if you pass them while driving.

Maybe it's different in other countries/societies, but here in the USA, most of the people don't want anyone to go any faster than they choose to go.

Re:escalators too

[Grishnakh]

Really? Does that bother you? Because I thought that's what pretty much everyone does, at least in America. I'm trying to remember the last time I saw someone (besides me) walking up an escalator. They are there for convenience, after all, not for helping you get somewhere faster.

In malls, that's true, but not everywhere. We have moving sidewalks in many airports, because terminals are so far apart, and people need to get between them quickly to make their connections.

In Japan they have a cool solution: the escalator ends up having two lines. The people on the left keep walking, and those on the right stand. I guess for that to become a custom you'd need escalators that are typically crowded, which most in the US are not.

That would never work in the USA. They've tried that with moving sidewalks in airports, and it doesn't work. The people who are lazy and don't want to walk (and don't care that you're trying to make a connection and your arrival was late) stand in the middle and take up the entire walkway with their fat asses and luggage, even though the signs clearly say that's for walking.

Technological solutions like this work well in Japan because people there have a society that values politeness and not being a flaming asshole. I've read they're so polite there that they even switch off their headlights at red lights, so they don't bother the people waiting on the opposite side. Over here, people happily leave their mis-aimed high beams on and blind people who are waiting for the light to change.

Speaking of stairs and escalators, England really needs to catch up on this one. When I was riding the train there I kept having little old ladies ask me to carry their luggage for them up the stairs. I can't imagine what wheelchaired people do.

Escalators and elevators are expensive. When you've given away all your money to welfare recipients and your taxes are so high you can't raise them any more, then things like elevators for disabled people don't get installed.

Re:escalators too

[nofx_3]

They aren't their for convenience, they are clearly there to move people faster. I ride mass transit to work in the morning and home in the afternoon. Both stations have escalators, both have very narrow staircases. The escalators are there so that a large volume of people (10 commuter train cars worth) can get in or out of the station quickly, since we all arrive at the same time. People completely ignore this and just stand their like a lummox. It is frustrating to no end. I can't even take the stairs because they are one or two people wide at best, and there is always someone lumbering up them extremely slowly.

Re:escalators too

[Moryath]

No kidding. Allow a 5-foot wide walkway to account for lardasses with humongous posteriors (and you'd have to otherwise they spill into adjoining lanes and hit people), and your top speed 30-mph is then 30 feet in... that's as wide as a 3-lane highway, requiring 60 ft plus any servicing areas on the sides to account for both directions.

And yeah, I already get mad at people who get on a peoplemover and stand still in front of me. Imagine the road rage of everyone standing behind the aforementioned lardass, wondering why he's in the 30mph lane when they want to add their own walking speed on top of it?

Re:escalators too

[Captain Splendid]

This must be a US thing. Every time I've used a moving walkway in a European airport, there's a always a sign somewhere to the effect that you stand on one side only, so that the people who want to walk can get past you.

So it seems a weird nitpick seeing as that's the part that's not rocket science.

Re:escalators too

[hb253]

I guess you've never been to New York City and environs.

Everywhere I go (NYC subways, PATH trains, stores, etc), people stand on the right on escalators and the left is reserved for people who walk up. Yes, there's an occasional clueless person, but a polite "excuse me" usually gets the message across.

Re:escalators too

[spitzak]

Climb on the left and stand on the right is true even in US escalators, at least busy ones in transit places such as train and subway stations. All I can guess is your only US experience is suburban mall escalators, where I agree everybody just stands still.

Re:escalators too

[Moryath]

I've seen those walkways. Problem is, they are maybe 3.5-4 feet wide, which means all it takes is one lazy lardass to make the whole "passing" idea impossible.

Re:escalators too

[Grishnakh]

Yes, all the moving walkways in the US airports have the same signs.

The problem is, about half of Americans are lazy self-important assholes who prefer to stand on the left or in the middle.

So it seems a weird nitpick seeing as that's the part that's not rocket science.

The problem is that social factors like this are very important, and frequently overlooked by engineers who come up with technological solutions to problems. If people behaved properly, in an orderly fashion, then many things would be possible which currently are not.

Moving sidewalks would be great in many places, but people like I've described will quickly make the whole thing unworkable. It only takes a few people to throw a monkey wrench into the works, so to speak. Strong enforcement could stop this behavior, but Western society has long since abandoned strong enforcement of anything because of lawsuits and cries of racism.

Re:escalators too

[Grishnakh]

This whole idea sounds very, very expensive. Much more expensive than regular cars and roads (which are already expensive when you account for the total costs).

If you want an efficient system for moving people around, install the SkyTran system. Since the cars aren't privately-owned, you don't have to deal with the problem of parking, so a trip of .5 - 1 mile would be perfectly feasible. Plus, you can also use them for longer trips, potentially across a continent if it's built out that far, and certainly for regular commuting to work.

Re:escalators too

[goofyspouse]

I'm really surprised you guys in the US don't do it this way...

I'm not surprised at all, as doing this requires two things I don't see a great deal of these days:

1) Common Courtesy, and

2) Awareness of "Others"

Re:escalators too

[brad3378]

I use the same technique in reverse to make my headlight switch last longer.

Re:escalators too

[arth1]

Lemme guess. I'm modded "flamebait" because some fatass didn't like being called a lardass, right?

No, you're being modded flamebait because you show absolutely no respect for the elderly or frail who don't dare walk lest they hurt themselves.

With two artificial hips and a fused spine, I look as healthy as the next man, but I tell you, the speed of which I have to get off the walkway is fast enough to pose a real problem. Yes, I stand still and gather strength for that (for me) monumental jump.
Never mind escalators, where I simply can't lift my feet high enough to climb the over-sized steps.

The next time you feel irritated by someone standing still, chill. And seek professional help if necessary, because becoming agitated over something as unimportant as that can't be healthy.

Re:escalators too

[Tom]

The problem is never asking people for something.

It is being in the position of the one asking if by rights it should be the other way around.

Example: If you want to smoke in a restaurant, the proper thing to do is to ask around if anyone minds. It is not ok to just start and see if someone asks you to stop.

It's a question of exercising power. Standing somewhere where people can be expected to stand and being asked to step aside is not a problem for either party. However, standing around in the middle of a traffic area and expecting to be asked politely to step aside each time is obnoxious. Here you are putting a burden on other people by standing where you should not be standing.

It's a bit of a subtle thing, but it is also part of society. Society works because we do not have to negotiate every single detail with everyone we meet, over and over again. We have customs to solve that kind of things. We have standards for greeting someone, we drive on the same side of the road, we walk at green and stop at red. All that is just arbitrary customs because society as a whole works more smoothly if people agree on how to do things.

So, if the custom is to stand on the right and walk on the left, and you stand on the right, you're behaving in an anti-social matter. Most of us are too nice to give you any trouble, but quite frankly, there are days where I wish ill on all the antisocial assholes who move around in society as if nobody except themselves existed.

Re:escalators too

[ArsenneLupin]

London? Shouldn't that be the other way round?

Foundation's Friends....

[gandhi_2]

I can't be the only one here to think of strip-running or Asimov.

Large Cities

[imunfair]

For large cities an idea like this would be very neat. I live near Chicago, am not fat, and would love to be able to travel around the city on 30mph moving walkways. Ideally they would be structured like a highway with multiple lanes, one going 10mph, next one over is 20mph, fastest is 30mph.

Something like this would have maintenance costs sure, but it would also remove a huge load off public transit, and reduce taxi traffic majorly. You'd really only need a shuttle for people with large/heavy items, or elderly.

Think about how pleasant it would be if you could stroll down the street at 30mph directly toward your destination, rather than having decide which subway or bus will get you to your destination in a roundabout way (possibly even needing to change bus/trains mid-trip).

Of course this idea will never happen because of the cost and effort - but it is a lovely utopian idea.

Airports

[MachineShedFred]

Moving walkways are great in airports, where you have stuff you're carrying with you, and they are sheltered from weather.

Moving walkways outdoors, where sidewalks are supposed to be, would be a maintenance disaster; especially in a time where many states and municipalities are drowning in debt already.

Get off your ass and walk.

The "Real" problem?

[Rinnon]

Seriously? THAT'S the real problem nowadays? It's not climate change or world hunger or war, it's how we can move people around our dense urban environments as fast as possible? Aren't we all moving fast enough already? I mean, maintenance and obesity aside, do we really as a society NEED to get everywhere that much faster? Everyone seems to need instant gratification these days. People have Facebook so they can get instant feedback from friends on when they are hanging out, Employers provide Blackberries so they can call their employees instantly so there is no where they can't be reached. People seem to want things now now now all the time. It seems pretty hard to just stop and smell the roses when you're whizzing by them at thirty miles per hour.

Re:The "Real" problem?

[stanlyb]

Yes, it is a real problem. Let me give an example. With the normal walking speed of 4-6 km/h, i could "walk" 6km in 1h. If i want take the subway, i will spend: 15min. to go to the subway station, 5min to wait for the next train, 15min travel time, 15min to get out of the subway to the designated place. Or, with other words, 50min, and some $2-$3 for ticket. Or with other words, i have to pay $2-$3 in order to save 10min??? It is simply ridiculous.

Re:The "Real" problem?

[daithesong]

In a sense, it is. One of the big problems with US cities is that their low-density is designed around, and encourage, car use. The provision of parking lots and wide roads mean that the density drops to where public transit is not so viable. Solutions to longer-distance movement that help keep cities dense and transit shared are a part of a solution. I rode the TRR, I've been on the levels in Hong Kong, and in societies...well, that are societies in the sense that people realize that there are other people around...people stand to one side and walk the other. Moving walkways work well for medium distances under those circumstances, and they can manage a higher density, and hence rate, than plain walking (either people walk as well, or they stand closer together than when walking).

Yay

[The AtomicPunk]

I can cover 1 km pretty quickly, but then I'm far from being one of the 30%+ of obese Americans ...

This sounds like a perfect government project - make people unhealthy, solve a problem that doesn't need a solution, and do it all by milking the tax payers for billions of dollars to funnel to unions and cronies.

RAH future history

[rossdee]

Don't you need Douglas-Martin sunpower screens to power the thing