Considering the average for 1 car lane in the US is up to 12 feet, wich would be 3,6 meters for us Europeans, it doesn't really come as a surprise. In Europe we are facing the opposite problem, our Streets are really narrow and Cars keep getting bigger and bigger. Infrastructure isn't the issue for us, its People and their vanity. Instead of opting for smaller hatchbacks they decide to get the biggest and widest Car they can get for a statussymbol and complain about not being able to go past parked Cars on some streets.
@bobhughes9628 Yeah they turned a 3 lane road with a center lane to a 2 lane road with bike lanes on each side in my city. In the 2 years its been like that I've seen maybe 1 or 2 bikes, but I've also seen a rear end because there's no turn lane now
@@bobhughes9628 If you build the infrastructure in a city, it will be utilized. Many places are unsafe to walk or bike, and many people would much prefer to do that.
But, if no one is using that bike lane, and the cars need the extra lanes, you actually have created more problems. Maybe underground wires would clear the sidewalks so bikes can use it, while still allowing cars enough infrastructure to prevent congestion.
😭😭 Heyyy at least in the DFW area we’ve seen - a little walkability progress, let’s just say theres a lot of walkable communities and redesigns being built as well as in the planning 👍🏾 we’ve also had some transit being planned and built, as well as some TOD… We’ve got a LONG way to go but don’t sleep on my Texas 🥲🙏🏾
@@jaylenjackson2403 I had no idea there's a train going between Fort Worth and Grapevine/DFW international. Dallas Dart exists. The public transport is popping
@@MayorofHopeville Yeah!!! It’s something I’m quite proud of! Dallas DART, or just DART, has a relatively good network - I think it gets slept on tho because there isn’t really that much density around most the stations 😬 but, I’ve noticed developers have been building really nice TOD around some of them - and hopefully that helps! Also along with DART and that train line from Fort Worth to the airport (TexRail) we also have the Trinity Railway Express - a small commuter rail line from downtown Fort Worth to downtown Dallas! In addition, DCTA operates trains from the Dart Green line up to Denton, northwest of Dallas - it probably needs a scheduling redo, but it has potential! And last one, the DART silver line is about to open up from Plano to DFW airport, it’ll use the same Stadler FLIRTs that TexRail uses, and I’m excited to see how it goes! Oh and we can’t forget that we’re really trying to get High speed rail from Fort Worth to Dallas, and on to Houston 👍🏾
@@jaylenjackson2403bike and pedestrian development is horrifically slow, and never really ideal, but one thing I'll give Dallas credit for is their persistence. They keep improving be bike trails little by little, never massive gains, but the progress pays dividends over decades.
Unless their research has shown the three lanes exceed the demand and won’t for at least 10 years, it makes no sense to reduce a lane for bikes. Cars should always have priority as that is the primary transportation in our society. Nobody will want to live in that neighborhood if it takes 15 minutes of traffic to turn into it.
The fact they had a three-lane one-way street, yet "not enough space" for a barrier-free sidewalk says everything you need to know 😅 Good thing they're finally making a change!
Sounds mostly good. I'm a little torn on that slip lane being made into a sharp corner. The huge boon for a long slip lane is that it is *WAY* safer for large trucks and the vehicles behind that truck. Simply less mistakes to make. I don't know the area, but this seems like something that should be taken into consideration.
It's the only way a semi can cross into Cincinnati from covington now that they've closed the I-75 on ramp to the Brent Spence bridge. No semi will be able to make that sharp right turn.
That is actually a good point, question is, if there are trucks, or enough trucks driving that way. Is ther any industrial or commercial area or just residential those Trucks have to get through? Or do they just drive the main street?
just so non-kentuckians know, this area has been heavily gentrified and the buildings were demolished for extremely expensive luxury apartments. the bike lane and widening of the sidewalk are great for all citizens, but this area is almost exclusively taylored for the wealthy. many lost their jobs when the building in that large empty lot was demolished. cities need to do more for their average citizens instead of catering to the rich
@@johnengland7770 praising average working class people losing their livelihood is weird, dude. if you don’t like any government body that employs civilians don’t look at the workers, look at who controls it and legislates it. the workers don’t write tax law. you’re mad at the wrong people. direct your anger at who deserves it and use it as a conduit for change instead of being happy that regular people lost their benefits and ability to care for their families. your comment has the same flawed reasoning people in poverty use to hate other people in poverty instead of the wealthy that control 99% of economic operations. think critically. in both scenarios it is not the working class that’s making the lives of others hard. those who control and mismanage resources and policy make the lives of others hard. Rejoicing in misery is a personal problem you should work on.
idk about gentrification on this site specifically. I'm sure it will be an issue as most new developments are. However, the building (not buildings as you purport) was demolished because the irs shut the whole operation down. They weren't going to/ probably weren't allowed to repurpose the building that obviously can no longer serve its former use. They were not "demolished for apartments".
@elipgoan i said the area in general has been gentrified. many buildings, plural, in the AREA have been demolished for luxury apartments whether this one was specifically or not. many people still lost their jobs due to the demolition of the building and either had to sever from service or seek employment in other areas. i’ll admit i don’t know the full code and zoning permissions of this specific building itself as i’m not affiliated with the city council or construction units that worked on the project but all of my points are still valid. the area was gentrified and is now a high cost, luxury housing area and the city needs to do more for its average residents and not just repurpose local buildings and areas for the uber wealthy. sorry my initial comment wasn’t eloquent enough to cover every specific talking point relative to one building in the large area that has been gentrified regardless.
Born and raised in Kentucky, and spent about seven years in the NKY area. The housing and shopping development for the former IRS site will only cater to the wealthy, but at least us poors *might* get dedicated bike lanes!
I mean, *someone* has to pay the cost of revamping an area like this. Everyone bitches about the wealthy paying their fair share, well who do you think will be paying the rent and patronizing the businesses to pay for the cost of renovation?
Right, I’m from Cincinnati, and I’ve spent a lot of time in Covington/ Newport area, it’s frustrating that they’d rather cater to people who don’t even live there, and price out those who already do, rather than do anything for the actually community there.
japan doesn't have this requirement too, yet they are doing great, because people and wheel chair can directly walk on the street, and cars must yield.
@@ProjectHana Yep, I've been to Japan, and I've seen how it works there. Many streets there are quite narrow, and all on 1 level, so are mixed use. On wide roads, with multiple lanes (so common in North America and Australia), there really should be a law that demands the presence of a wide, flat sidewalk when the traffic is too busy or high-speed for safe mixed use.
That bridge is used for local traffic to avoid the Over-used, end of life Brent Spence bridge. Replace that bridge first, THEN modify this bridge to two lanes.
YOOOOO this is the first time I've heard anything like this. I never heard of any other projects that want to be this walkable and accessible. They are not scared to revamp their roads, and if they follow through, I'm sure cycle and walking traffic would increase significantly.
@@nostrum6410 But can happen sometimes. When the cycle superhighways were upgraded in London, cycle traffic increased by 60%. Of course, this is one example in a different country. But in London, when GOOD cycle infrastructure is built, people cycle more than ever.
I love this so much, every detail of this is trying to make things safer for not only people on bikes and walking, but also people in. It's nice to see this level of thought being put into everyday spaces
I grew up there. It's a very high crime area. Trust me you wouldn't want to walk and you would get bike jacked if you tried riding through this neighborhood. It's right next to the Ohio River where there is a homeless encampment about a mile long along the river bank. It's also a block away from an area that hosts dozens of festivals that bring tens of thousands of people to the area that trash the place.
If you like this type of content you might also enjoy NotJustBikes on RUclips. He is a Canadian guy living in the Netherlands, he has made many comparisons between American and European infrastructure, it was mindblowing for me.
This bridge is a very busy road. Its right off the main highway bridge, and if there is any traffic on the main highway, alot of the traffic gets funneled on to this bridge. Adding a bike lane and getting rid of a vehicle lane might become really dangerous and cause major traffic build up. Especially since the bridge feeds right to the football stadium across the river.
Reducing the lanes on that bridge isn't going to help the traffic congestion and people sitting on the bridge waiting for the lights to change. If anything happens on the I-75 bridge (nearby), people divert to that bridge to get around the accident.
@@nostrum6410Man people will use bike infrastructures if they are good, efficient, and safe. I wish cities have alternative options than just driving. I'm saying this a guy who likes cars and big, lifted trucks.
Kentucky representation!! I absolutely love to see it from one of my creators. Please look for projects to cover in Lexington KY if you can! I’d be fascinated to get your takes on parts of my hometown
Do some research, understand the time and place that was put in. The short answer is instead of tearing down the neighborhood for a highway, oneway were roads grafted on to the existing streets grid. This plan works well for keeping though traffic on the highway route and off of the adjoining streets
These are probably my favorite videos of yours. Not just showing how bad intersections could be improved in theory, but how city governments are actually working to make life safer and less car-dependent
@@niceone99 That or the more common thing here, the Liberals blaming everything on Conservatives, Conservatives blaming everything on Liberals, Democrats blaming everything on Republicans, Republicans blaming everything on Democrats and remaining ignorant that they are just "a-logging" each other and ignorant of the fact those four and Communist party aren't the political parties that exist.
Yeah, and make ambulances be pedal-powered! Or better yet, use rickshaws like the Chinese! Nothing like the efficiency of riding in a wheelbarrow to the hospital for your broken leg.
i used to work right across from that lot at an apartment complex for seniors, crazy that they mentioned wheelchairs couldn’t fit onto the sidewalks as that’s a huge form of transportation for said seniors, glad that people are thinking of turning it into something more wheelchair accessible/walkable, and that will benefit the community rather than corporations!!
I’m from Northern Kentucky and that empty lot used to be an IRS building And what this video does not mention is that three lane Rd. that’s gonna be converted into a 2 Lane Rd. is packed at rush-hour
Yeah, and the theory goes that reducing the size of the road will encourage people to take other routes, or not drive at all, which will make traffic better. I have to say, I'm not convinced at all that this theory will work in the real world.
There is validity to the idea that accessibility for bicyclists and walking will reduce car traffic. It is, after all, the reason roads are as they are now - more lanes entices more people to drive as the road-filled environment gets more hostile to other forms of transport, in turn keeping the roads perpetually full. The inverse is possible, but requires a very large scale change for this accessibility. Busses or other public transport would also help, as would using some of the space given by phasing out roads to move housing and jobs closer together to further make walking and cycling a better option, but all of this would take so incredibly long to do in the meantime, which is a major reason it's usually successfully fought against. Of course, rush hour could just be removed from existence entirely if jobs (and schools) staggered when they start and end their shifts rather than everyone getting there and leaving at the same time (as well as providing better access for the people in those jobs to other services), but that's a whole other conversation entirely.
I’m a Cincinnati native, literally 5 miles from Covington Ky and from an insider perspective, Covington is one of the shitiest, most tryhard cities in the general area., and the fact that they’re spending their meager budget on bike lanes and sidewalks rather than trying to confront the overwhelming problem with heroin shows they care more about image and “marketability” than actually helping the people who live there.
@@Julia_and_the_City Yes they are. No one will use bike lanes because in either Cincy or Covington, they'd be stolen in two seconds. Plus eliminating a lane of traffic on a main highway going in and out of Cincy is ridiculous with the traffic backups and wrecks already occurring in the cities. That's just asking for more casualties.
@@Julia_and_the_City i don’t really have an opinion on bike lanes specifically. i generally think they’re fine and probably helpful for cyclists who live in a congested city. I do however know a few cyclists who don’t’ like them because apparently, from what they say, it’s common for the trash and debris from the street to get pushed into the bike lane and make it harder to ride. And a lot of these people say they’d rather just ride in the street. At least that’s what I’ve heard from my friends, but this is technically hearsay, and I’m not gonna speak on that particular topic, presuming any authority because I’m not a cyclist. But what i do know, is Cincinnati, and Covington Kentucky. And what i know, as an insider who’s grown up in this area for their entire life. Covington doesn’t need bike lanes. Especially not in the proposed areas. I knew the exact street when i saw the video, and those streets don’t get congested in the ways that a street in downtown cincy, or any other medium sized city might. Covington is a small, poor city that borders right up against Cincinnati a much much larger city. These streets were never so busy that you couldn’t ride a bike through there. This is the crux of my problem. The people making these decisions dont know how the city works, they’re just making these inconsequential decisions that look good on paper, when they could’ve spent the money elsewhere. I’m not against bike lanes, i am just against financial mismanagement, and what appears to be “image based”, egotistical city planning that in reality only serves to benefit a specific (upper middle class) demographic of people, who don’t in fact even live in that area. This kinda thing happens all over the area. The city insists on putting bike lanes in areas that don’t seem to make sense to put them, and in places where it was never congestion, and where it wasn’t really a challenge to just ride on the road.
@@josh-tp3we i live in Covington and ride a bike all the time in the area. you are right that there are issues with garbage/debris getting pushed into bike lanes. however, in this spot it could be very useful for getting pedestrian traffic back and forth into Cincinnati. I've also used this bridge for commuting on a bike back and forth to work. it can be a bit scary, considering there is not much of a shoulder to ride on.
@@AdamPFarnsworth my city has been adding bike lanes in the last few years and the number of people on bikes has exploded. Some roads are 50%+ bike traffic during peak hours. This is in the US
That depends on how easily the bikes can get there. The more bike infrastructure there is, the more bikes will be able to actually go places and use it all. Like if you only put bike lanes on one road, but there's no safe way for a bike to get to that road, of course it's not going to see much use.
I live in europe. My city has a bunch of bike lanes and many of them get a lot of use. They are also good for rentable scooters and keeping both cyclists and pedestrians safe
I normally agree with ample bike lanes. However, I have to wonder how many people are actually biking from Kentucky across the Ohio river into Cincinnati. It seems like a nice idea that doesn’t actually apply to the local area very well.
This is private money folks. They weren’t granted this land to put up affordable housing. The market will say what they build there. BUT, do they need lower priced housing in NKy, for sure. I’ve been here since 1988, btw.
Yeah cause traffic getting into and out of Cincinnati isn't bad enough. Especially since NO ONE ever walks or rides bikes around those neighborhoods because they don't want to be shot.🤦
Also no one is biking or walking around because the infrastructure for that doesn’t exist. This plan would provide that, and help with the traffic issue due to less people driving.
12 years in NKY and I can’t recall ever seeing anyone on a bike riding between NKY and Cincy. That doesn’t even consider the fact that no one in the area wants to visit that, or any other, forsaken part of Covington.
Have you considered that nobody rides a bike there because riding a bike there right now is a literal death trap? If you have infrastructure catering towards bicycles, people will start using bicycles.
@@LadyLucyna Cincinnati has put a ton of bike lanes in across the city. Unfortunately, they just dont get used. The infrastructure is there, but the weather is not applicable. Its either bitter cold or hot and humid. I appreciate city planners thinking outside of the box, but not when it means making vehicle traffic more congested.
Isn’t a one lane on a bridge risky cause if there’s any break downs (flat tires, busted radiators, etc.) that it blocks all lanes of traffic in that direction for hours and makes it nearly impossible for a tow truck to get to the broken down car?
@@birdrocket Well yes, but that doesn't support the argument. It's also why all cars are amphibious vehicles so they can cross the river in case the bridge isn't available.
When I visited my daughter in Phoenix, I explored the stadium connector trail that connects two spring training facilities. It was wonderful. Most of it was a dedicated, wide bike and pedestrian path. The parts on the road were protected from traffic by a 4 ft. concrete median. I put over a hundred miles on my bike and loved every minute of it. In addition to connecting the stadiums, the trail passed by many shopping and entertainment venues. There were loads of people using it. What would it be like if every road had these facilities? You could easily live car-free.
Can you try fixing the Drum Hill rotary? It’s said to be the reason why Americans, at least those who live near it, hate rotaries. 42°37'21"N 71°21'58"W
There's a few bridges like this in Jacksonville with protected pedestrian access and, at least as a tourist, it was nice to see the sunset set over the river
There better be reallyyyyy good signage and road blocks (I forget what the little bendable sticks are called) to warn people not to use the bike lane to get onto the bridge.
Indeed. He does say it's a buffered bicycle path, but they'd better make it a protected one, so that means a ridge between cars and bicycles. the green paint should help though.
I hope there are no truckers using that bridge. Taking out that slip lane is going to make it hard for any truck with a trailer to make that tight of a turn.
There’s a lot of this happening in tiny scales through a lot of cities which make it seem invisible but here in Pittsburgh I often see long blocks with little pedestrian pavements being refurbished and even split to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians, it’s a slow and steady process but eventually we will return to designing things correctly
Yeah..this is my neighborhood. All bad ideas. People adapt. People have adapted to this neighborhood as it is for decades. Millions of dollars are being spent inconveniencing and rerouting 10's of thousands of drivers a day for the 15 virtue-signalling cyclists a day who will use it from April to October. People here don't bike to work across the river because it is hot and humid in Cincinnati and there are no workplace showers to speak of and people don't want to work all day after a hot, sweaty commute. A bus would be useful.
I like that idea. There's going to be plenty of bridges once they build the new one plus the Middle Lane on that bridge is unique. During certain times of day the center lane is for helping traffic flow during rush hours. In the mornings it's used for going in the city. In the afternoon it's used for traffic out the city
It always amazes me to see the difference in size of American to German infrastructure. It’s not just that American cities often utilize more lanes, they also make them extremely wide. I can’t imagine how much those wide lanes would add to the construction, maintenance and removal costs.
It's a massive cost, 20% more than a place like Germany, not to mention the land use is way worse and the 20% is just on each lane. America really is an embarrassment
@@bldontmatter5319it’s a state highway and main arterial through town. The lanes need to be wide enough to accommodate truck traffic. That extra 3-6 feet across 3 lanes is absolutely worth it to not get sideswiped by a box truck or semi mirror.
If you reduce a busy city street or bridge down to one lane in each direction then a minor car accident, delivery truck, or road repair creates a huge traffic jam.
They're not interested in listening to you. They're going to push their agenda no matter what. They don't think of drivers as people making rational decisions, they think of them as a problem that needs to be eradicated.
@@AwangardaGames with "car dependency" you can always walk or cycle, even if you don't have as much dedicated infrastructure as you would like. Once you rip up half the roads, you lower the hard cap on how many people can drive at any given time. You've decided for them that a certain number ought to be cycling.
As someone who loves across that bridge, only a handful of people actually bike across the river. If they do, they use the other bridge with 2 pedestrian lanes 2 blocks the other way. Always way too much traffic happens on that bridge. The middle lane is lighted and regularly changes the lights above it to change whichever direction needs that extra lane
That's just what our cyclists need here in the Tri-State... More dedicated lanes that they DO NOT USE. We have added areas for cyclists all over the city. Do they use them? Absolutely not. Do they follow road laws? Absolutely not.
While this is a good step, so much more needs to be done to make bicycling easier to do. And while it's good Covington, Kentucky is doing this, would be good to see this occur in other cities in that state. Like i.e., I'd be surprised if other cities like Lexington, Bowling Green, Paducah, etc do this. Problem is that too many roads and developments, are car centric. I'd be surprised if other areas start to narrow roads, that are overbuilt for cars.
If the US doesn't change soon, this country will fall. It's a matter of time... As in a decade or two. People are unable to afford cars, and infrastructure is crumbling. It's time to ACTUALLY build back better, by changing things to how they USED TO BE, with walkable cities
Stop bike lanes. Yes on 8’ wide sidewalks in high use areas and 6’ on less traffic areas. If a hallway in a house has to meet a 3’ building code it should carry that a sidewalk with presumably two foot traffic or bicyclists should each have at least 3’ wide spacing to travel. Just my two cents.
My only worry is that there wont he enough road for people who actually need cars. I understand adding another lanes doesnt help till a certain point. But having too little is also bad. Some people NEED cars, disabled people, elderly people, stupid mothers that are too entitled to sweat or drive anything other than an oversized SUV. If it's a dense city i understand (except for the bridge that will be a nightmare), but if its a suburb then having only 1 lane in either direction may be a pain point unless its just for the downtown area. Its all about balance. The denser the city, the less cars make sense. The more rural it is, the more cars make sense. Thats also why places a lot of places having parking garages for cars, bikes, etc, next to the train stations. Its just more efficent to funnel people in rather then build out super expensive mega highways or rails out there.
Ah yes, the usual DURRR ELDERLY, DISABLED, ECT They'll be fine. Car traffic will decrease as people walk and bike, if they continue in the right direction. In Russia where I am at rn, there are walkable cities and old ladies walk around happily, it's good exercise. Americans wouldn't understand
Lol They're turning 3 lanes into 2 with a bike path, they're not closing the road No need to cry. Also bringing in disabled when the sidewalk isn't wide enough for wheelchair is crazy
I'm so glad to see civil engineers mentioning accessibility for disabled folks. So often we're ignored in situations like this. I hope he continues to make his city accessible for its disabled citizens
Just look at how much land they use for basically nothing but an asphalt desert and some increadibly unattractive buildings that are far apart, you cannot reach leisurely, and have the attractiveness of a view of an industrial zone.
This is America. They complained about concrete flats DURRR COMMUNISM but then they build these massive nothing concrete streets with tons of cars and no room to walk. It's absolutely bizarre
When I was younger, I always thought the irs building was a waste of space. And they should put in an elevated block of buildings that have a view of Cincinnati. Who knew I had the right idea.
@@CountJeffula truckers are more than capable of handling a right turn from a three lane road onto another three lane road. Besides, there are alternative routes to anywhere they’d be trying to get to from that bridge. Non issue.
@@birdrocket they are closing the slip lane for vehicle traffic and keeping it only for bikes and reducing the number of lanes. Did you watch or listen to the video at all? That turn is very hard to do in a long box truck, especially if there is oncoming traffic. You’d have to swing wide into the oncoming traffic and the back tires would go up and over the curb. I’ve seen this happen dozens of times in Milwaukee. Maybe physics works differently where you live.
@@CountJeffula it’s a 40’ right of way with two lanes to play with on the other end of the turn, AND it’s a redundant route. It’s really not an issue whatsoever, it just means that sometimes, some truck drivers might have to go a little bit slower. In return, bikes and pedestrians can travel much safer.
@@birdrocket how is the 40’ right of way relevant when they aren’t using all of it? Yes, they could make it more convenient for large vehicles, but they purposely are making it worse. I guess if the local businesses all want more expensive deliveries and to be outcompeted by bigger stores with accessible loading docks and economies of scale, then this is the perfect solution.
@@geckapusmore likely because of the lack of public safety. There are places where I’ve been told I shouldn’t even stop at red lights because so much sketchy stuff goes on in the area, who would want to walk or bike through a place like that?
NO! You had me until closing down an entire lane on a bridge. Covington not a ghost town and that bridge is a huge bottleneck. Nobody’s biking over that bridge anyway especially during the winter
@@ManWithUhDream “Nobody’s biking over that bridge anyway” - that’s basically like saying “we don’t need a bridge over this river, no one swims across it anyway!”
Maybe nobody’s cycling over the bridge because it’s not safe to do so, and there’s insufficient bicycle infrastructure to safely get from home to your destination before and after the bridge? Imagine how much less of a bottleneck it would be if many drivers would choose to use a bicycle instead for shorter trips.
Imagine showing up to work fucking drenched on a rainy day thanks to riding your bicycle. At an office job. With an errand to run on your lunch break or on the way back home. F that mess lol
@@cbh148 I think the most important thing is to have options. It needs to be possible to do things by car, but people should have the choice to do things by bike or even walking as well. There’s good clothes to keep you dry in the rain. In the Netherlands tons of people go to their (office) jobs by bike, disregarding the weather. In some Finnish cities even snow doesn’t deter cyclists in winter. But the car lanes aren’t closed, so you can still go by car. The more people who’ll choose to go by bike instead of car the less you’ll have to wait behind other cars.
I travel these roads all day long, very congested through there during peak hours. Interested to see how this plays out in ten years when it’s complete.
Uh yeah, it is a brilliant idea to ensure slow traffic *as they turn into a bridge with two-way traffic*, do you fucking want someone to slip lane into a head on collision?
Hey Streetcraft, you explain traffic theory so well that I'm addicted to your high quality shorts. Do you have a soapbox opinion about traffic? Like "why doesnt ever city build roads like X" for example. I'd love to hear.
Just widen the sidewalks and have the bikes use the sidewalk as well. You could do 2 lane with street parking that way. Would really help with the new walkable neighborhood as people could come visit it and have somewhere to park. The solution to bike lanes is to have sidewalks be directional like streets are and have bikes use the sidewalks.
The point of a slip road onto the bridge is not to "encourage cars to take it at high speeds", but rather to allow them to do so without stopping - both safer and more efficient.
In no way were they saying that that was the intention in the city planning, but having a continuous flow like that with a nice curve to it, encourages people to drive at high speeds because it's fun and convenient
Vehicles crossing intersections without stopping at high speeds is anything but safe. Imagine trying to walk across that slip lane without getting sideswiped by an car
@@KasabianFan44Safer only for drivers and motorcyclists, probably, as having to slow down or come to a complete stop increases the chance of a driver rear ending you. But I’d rather make things safer for pedestrians and cyclists, the people who don’t have tons of metal protecting them from distracted drivers.
Cincinnati resident here, you’re overlooking a few key things here. 1. This bridge connects to basically nothing on the Cincinnati side. It’s parking lots and industrial worksites at best. 2. They already removed highway access to 75 on that “highway” which has led to a lot more traffic. Reducing this even further by going to 2 lanes would make it even worse. 3. Both sides are crime ridden so they need to address that before there would even be human traffic in the area.
This original street layout probably made more sense back in the day and carried a lot of traffic from nearby manufacturing jobs that are no longer there. Im assuming this, based on my interest in urban decay in the cities i have life in overtime.
@@The_Big_Jay I've seen it happen personally. Usually after a week has passed, most people will realise "oh ill just get stuck there in traffic" and not go there anymore
1: there is a pedistrian only bridge in Newport Ky. Right next to Covington, maybe 2 miles from this location. 2: The skrinking of the bridge's vehicle traffic isn't exactly a bad thing, BUT at times it will be. Bengals, Reds, and Cyclones games bring large crowds. Downtown Covington, Newport, and Cincinnati experience a large influx of traffic before and after the games. Will not always be an issue, but WILL be an issue. 3: Covington/Newport/Cincinnati are already vey walkable with a decent public transit surrounding it. I can't tell you how many hours/miles I've logged walking all these areas doing photography. 4: Bicycle lane is a bad idea, if anything, it should be a motorcycle lane as more mopeds/bikes are coming through these areas than bicycles. 5: Concepts decent - but money should be spent on other things in the area.
They did this stuff near where i live and now its just a traffic jam and nobody bikes there who didn't previously when the sidewalks always worked without issue. Personal input not that it matters to literally anyone, cutting the 3 lane road down to 2 with added bike lane good, but cutting the sliplane for a important bridge entrance? THAT sort of thing is not. Removing actual junctions cars use efficiently isn't a good thing. You want some level of speed it means less density of traffic. Cutting fat where its not needed of course is good why not, but some proposals just make more problems. I fear people over-do the changes made for bikes too much and don't realize you can't "calm" traffic like that, it just gets more angry and more congested, it's really a balancing act. You can't make people not like their cars and presume they will now ride bikes, it doesn't work like that. A lot of this more pie in the sky stuff works if you city plan from the start but uprooting how a community already works usually doesn't. You can put the bike lanes in but if traffic just gets more hectic no one wants to ride a bike around that. A shared slip road onto the bridge at less speed could work but simply uprooting something that has already been foundational to a local area to make it more bike accessible is bad idea.
@@juliusdauksys2183 if people are excited to use those things absolutely. my problem is a lot of the city revamping crowd just focusing on making driving cars worse than wonders why nobody likes them. The ideas have merit but it needs to be more in harmony and slow paced at times with how it goes about itself, and i maintain the best way for it is honestly newly developed areas, not effectively gentrifying older already decided ones. If people focused on making newly developed areas nice, and functional, then that can be transferred over time but ripping up the status queue usually doesn't have the same effect even if the intentions are good.
Increases walkability of a city means less reliance on vehicles which in turn means fewer needs for them which, surprise, lowers traffic. It's a better plan than adding lanes which makes traffic worse.
@@TheresNoMorePrivacyThat is true in theory but not in practice. This is the US where a majority of people own a car. If you can drive you do. Cycling is lower by far. So the true best solution is to make traffic more efficent. This solution does not do any of that.
@@TheresNoMorePrivacy This bridge is a very busy road. Its right off the main highway bridge, and if there is any traffic on the main highway, alot of the traffic gets funneled on to this bridge. Adding a bike lane and getting rid of a vehicle lane might become really dangerous and cause major traffic build up. Especially since the bridge feeds right to the football stadium across the river.
@@Bone237 The "lol" at the end of my comment stand for "Laughing Out Loud". In other words, I found the video funny, not upsetting. Hopefully I could help you understand! I love to educate people so if you need anything else from me - just ask!
@@Bone237 Silly child lol. I never argued that using "LOL", which stands for "Laughing Out Loud", was grounds to circumvent criticism but rather that it shows one is not angry, bitter, sad, or lonely like A LOT of users on here, but rather joyful, happy, and elated to the point that I chose to have a Laugh Out Loud - an LOL if you will. Have a good day, my child. I will allow you the last word now if you would like. Here’s hoping your departure lives up to the grandiose image you’ve crafted for yourself. Farewell, and may your next interaction be as spectacularly ordinary as the one we just had.
As some one who drives that road every day at rush hour if any of that is done you will have people sitting for hours in traffic. that really isn't a place to build homes.
The "urbanists" want to make it so miserable to live outside the city that the city seems good in comparison. Because everyone should live next to 5,000 people on your block
@@kaanotta It's one thing to not build bigger roads to encourage smart growth. But tearing down existing infrastructure in the name of "urbanism" is dumb, and punishing people for assuming roads would continue to exist.
What a bunch of S**t. That three lane road is the only direct route the highway. You know the way most people use to get to and from this area. They already closed down the north bound entrance to I71 on this very street. Now in order to go north you get on going south, get off and then get back on to go north. This bridge they mention is used as an alternate north bound route. So we are going to narrow the street, narrow the bridge and what hope everyone starts biking to work from the surrounding counties.
Is it not three lane for a reason? How are they going to deal with the extra traffic flow congested into two lanes? Adding larger walking spaces and a bike layer are great obviously but seems like having it would be too small and tighter congestion would cause more problems like accidents? Unless there's more to it that I don't know?
I have a friend that cycles all over town so he's probably pretty excited about this, but I can't imagine doing that. Having grown up in Cincinnati, I can't imagine any City I would want to cycle in less with the possible exceptions of San Francisco and Pittsburgh just because of all of the hills.
As someone who commutes around the NJ/NYC area daily, this gives me nightmares and angers me. Traffic is horrific enough as it is. Getting rid of a lane to create bike paths and have bigger sidewalks is asking for lots of angry drivers and heavier traffic, especially around here. If anything, we need MORE lanes. They've cut down some lanes in my area for bike paths and such and all it's accomplished is narrowing existing lanes and empty bicycle lanes.
You of all people should know that in NYC, walkers run the place. Pedestrians in the middle of the street? You're legally required to yield to them anyway. E bike? Have to yield. One person at a 4 way stop sign? Yield. Empty intersection at a traffic light? Gotta wait until the light changes if you want to make a right, otherwise, a camera tickets you. Want to really solve NYC traffic? Ban using cars for Uber and Doordash. Taxi medallions were rationed for a reason
@@Demopans5990 and yet in probably the most walkable city in the states, they still have issues with car traffic. Almost as if this magical infrastructure isn't the solution yall crack it up to be. Also, less than half of Americans have a bike while 91% can use a car. Why should we be focusing on less than half the population instead of most of it? The point of government spending is to get the most benefit for the most people
@@i_am_a_toast_of_french And yet there are still traffic jams in which you can be stuck for hours. Edit: You mention a multi-lane bridge, but what about the one or two lane roadways that bottleneck there? You don't know the frustration of driving here until you've lived it.
The fact that you can get better sidewalks on both sides AND a protected bike lane by sacrificing 1 car lane is incredible
Yeah, all for the two bike riders per week, and half a dozen pedestrians.
Considering the average for 1 car lane in the US is up to 12 feet, wich would be 3,6 meters for us Europeans, it doesn't really come as a surprise.
In Europe we are facing the opposite problem, our Streets are really narrow and Cars keep getting bigger and bigger. Infrastructure isn't the issue for us, its People and their vanity. Instead of opting for smaller hatchbacks they decide to get the biggest and widest Car they can get for a statussymbol and complain about not being able to go past parked Cars on some streets.
@bobhughes9628 Yeah they turned a 3 lane road with a center lane to a 2 lane road with bike lanes on each side in my city. In the 2 years its been like that I've seen maybe 1 or 2 bikes, but I've also seen a rear end because there's no turn lane now
@@bobhughes9628 If you build the infrastructure in a city, it will be utilized. Many places are unsafe to walk or bike, and many people would much prefer to do that.
But, if no one is using that bike lane, and the cars need the extra lanes, you actually have created more problems. Maybe underground wires would clear the sidewalks so bikes can use it, while still allowing cars enough infrastructure to prevent congestion.
POV your city got the best possible council ever:
WHO Plans the City ?
True
In USA
POV: your city had the worst possible council before...
Where's the roundabout?
Texas: WHAT!? You're removing a car lane for pedestrian? Kentucky! How could you!?
Kentucky: Texas... it's not me... IT'S YOU!
😭😭 Heyyy at least in the DFW area we’ve seen - a little walkability progress, let’s just say theres a lot of walkable communities and redesigns being built as well as in the planning 👍🏾 we’ve also had some transit being planned and built, as well as some TOD… We’ve got a LONG way to go but don’t sleep on my Texas 🥲🙏🏾
@@jaylenjackson2403 I had no idea there's a train going between Fort Worth and Grapevine/DFW international. Dallas Dart exists. The public transport is popping
@@MayorofHopeville Yeah!!! It’s something I’m quite proud of! Dallas DART, or just DART, has a relatively good network - I think it gets slept on tho because there isn’t really that much density around most the stations 😬 but, I’ve noticed developers have been building really nice TOD around some of them - and hopefully that helps! Also along with DART and that train line from Fort Worth to the airport (TexRail) we also have the Trinity Railway Express - a small commuter rail line from downtown Fort Worth to downtown Dallas! In addition, DCTA operates trains from the Dart Green line up to Denton, northwest of Dallas - it probably needs a scheduling redo, but it has potential! And last one, the DART silver line is about to open up from Plano to DFW airport, it’ll use the same Stadler FLIRTs that TexRail uses, and I’m excited to see how it goes!
Oh and we can’t forget that we’re really trying to get High speed rail from Fort Worth to Dallas, and on to Houston 👍🏾
@@jaylenjackson2403bike and pedestrian development is horrifically slow, and never really ideal, but one thing I'll give Dallas credit for is their persistence. They keep improving be bike trails little by little, never massive gains, but the progress pays dividends over decades.
Unless their research has shown the three lanes exceed the demand and won’t for at least 10 years, it makes no sense to reduce a lane for bikes. Cars should always have priority as that is the primary transportation in our society. Nobody will want to live in that neighborhood if it takes 15 minutes of traffic to turn into it.
kentucky is one of the last places I’d expect to see good urbanism popping up, but good for them.
Covington is the same city cluster as Cincinnati just barely over the Ohio river, so don't get your hopes up
The thing is this part of town is old and pre-automobile. I used to live on Greenup, which crosses 4th and 5th. The area actually has good bones.
That’s basically Ohio the rest of KY would probably be different
@@sal-the-man honest question as an outsider: is Kentucky considered a backwards state?
Why?
Bro they gotta hire this guy
No, they need to do a utilization review to see if the bike lane will be used enough to make it worth increasing car congestion.
@@daniellejarvis157why are you assuming that congestion will be necessarily increased?
@@daniellejarvis157 *shows clip of a single car on the entire road*
@@daniellejarvis157 How many cars did you see driving in this video?
@@porcupinepunch6893 This video isn't a 24/7 snapshot of that street
your graphics work is so clean i love this channel
The fact they had a three-lane one-way street, yet "not enough space" for a barrier-free sidewalk says everything you need to know 😅
Good thing they're finally making a change!
They had planned more industrial in the region when they built it and it just did not fall into place
The fact that you have to point out that it would be "walkable" says even more in my opinion. 😂
That's more common than not with state highways, which were almost always designed by people who didn't live in the cities
Sounds mostly good.
I'm a little torn on that slip lane being made into a sharp corner. The huge boon for a long slip lane is that it is *WAY* safer for large trucks and the vehicles behind that truck. Simply less mistakes to make.
I don't know the area, but this seems like something that should be taken into consideration.
That bridge does have a good amount of semi-truck traffic. I live not far from there.
It's the only way a semi can cross into Cincinnati from covington now that they've closed the I-75 on ramp to the Brent Spence bridge. No semi will be able to make that sharp right turn.
How about a roundabout
It just needs a concrete apron at the departure so only trucks can mount it when needed
That is actually a good point, question is, if there are trucks, or enough trucks driving that way. Is ther any industrial or commercial area or just residential those Trucks have to get through?
Or do they just drive the main street?
just so non-kentuckians know, this area has been heavily gentrified and the buildings were demolished for extremely expensive luxury apartments. the bike lane and widening of the sidewalk are great for all citizens, but this area is almost exclusively taylored for the wealthy. many lost their jobs when the building in that large empty lot was demolished. cities need to do more for their average citizens instead of catering to the rich
Many IRS workers lost their jobs? GOOD!!!
@@johnengland7770 praising average working class people losing their livelihood is weird, dude. if you don’t like any government body that employs civilians don’t look at the workers, look at who controls it and legislates it. the workers don’t write tax law. you’re mad at the wrong people. direct your anger at who deserves it and use it as a conduit for change instead of being happy that regular people lost their benefits and ability to care for their families.
your comment has the same flawed reasoning people in poverty use to hate other people in poverty instead of the wealthy that control 99% of economic operations. think critically. in both scenarios it is not the working class that’s making the lives of others hard. those who control and mismanage resources and policy make the lives of others hard.
Rejoicing in misery is a personal problem you should work on.
@@blubeelyeah, sorry, they’re leaches. The IRS steals our money. If they choose to suck off that nipple and lose, that’s their business.
idk about gentrification on this site specifically. I'm sure it will be an issue as most new developments are. However, the building (not buildings as you purport) was demolished because the irs shut the whole operation down. They weren't going to/ probably weren't allowed to repurpose the building that obviously can no longer serve its former use. They were not "demolished for apartments".
@elipgoan i said the area in general has been gentrified. many buildings, plural, in the AREA have been demolished for luxury apartments whether this one was specifically or not. many people still lost their jobs due to the demolition of the building and either had to sever from service or seek employment in other areas. i’ll admit i don’t know the full code and zoning permissions of this specific building itself as i’m not affiliated with the city council or construction units that worked on the project but all of my points are still valid. the area was gentrified and is now a high cost, luxury housing area and the city needs to do more for its average residents and not just repurpose local buildings and areas for the uber wealthy. sorry my initial comment wasn’t eloquent enough to cover every specific talking point relative to one building in the large area that has been gentrified regardless.
Born and raised in Kentucky, and spent about seven years in the NKY area. The housing and shopping development for the former IRS site will only cater to the wealthy, but at least us poors *might* get dedicated bike lanes!
I mean, *someone* has to pay the cost of revamping an area like this. Everyone bitches about the wealthy paying their fair share, well who do you think will be paying the rent and patronizing the businesses to pay for the cost of renovation?
Right, I’m from Cincinnati, and I’ve spent a lot of time in Covington/ Newport area, it’s frustrating that they’d rather cater to people who don’t even live there, and price out those who already do, rather than do anything for the actually community there.
Exactly. Its going to be luxury condos for finance bros guranteed.
"New walkable neighborhood" doesnt mean "affordable housing".
A part of the new development is planned as social housing, integrated throughout the development.
it's wild that a sidewalk wide enough for a wheelchair user is not the minimum legal requirement nationwide and worldwide.
japan doesn't have this requirement too, yet they are doing great, because people and wheel chair can directly walk on the street, and cars must yield.
@@ProjectHana Yep, I've been to Japan, and I've seen how it works there. Many streets there are quite narrow, and all on 1 level, so are mixed use. On wide roads, with multiple lanes (so common in North America and Australia), there really should be a law that demands the presence of a wide, flat sidewalk when the traffic is too busy or high-speed for safe mixed use.
That bridge is used for local traffic to avoid the Over-used, end of life Brent Spence bridge. Replace that bridge first, THEN modify this bridge to two lanes.
YOOOOO this is the first time I've heard anything like this. I never heard of any other projects that want to be this walkable and accessible. They are not scared to revamp their roads, and if they follow through, I'm sure cycle and walking traffic would increase significantly.
@CheifDG if you build it they will come, isn't usually the case
@@nostrum6410 But can happen sometimes. When the cycle superhighways were upgraded in London, cycle traffic increased by 60%. Of course, this is one example in a different country. But in London, when GOOD cycle infrastructure is built, people cycle more than ever.
@@nostrum6410 "people don't go to work on this empty lot, why should we build an office building if there's no one here"
@@GTAmaniac1 ???
@@nostrum6410 just applying your argument to a different example
I love this so much, every detail of this is trying to make things safer for not only people on bikes and walking, but also people in. It's nice to see this level of thought being put into everyday spaces
I grew up there. It's a very high crime area. Trust me you wouldn't want to walk and you would get bike jacked if you tried riding through this neighborhood. It's right next to the Ohio River where there is a homeless encampment about a mile long along the river bank. It's also a block away from an area that hosts dozens of festivals that bring tens of thousands of people to the area that trash the place.
I really like your videos. You've opened my mind to new ways of thinking and that is a magnificent gift.
If you like this type of content you might also enjoy NotJustBikes on RUclips. He is a Canadian guy living in the Netherlands, he has made many comparisons between American and European infrastructure, it was mindblowing for me.
This bridge is a very busy road. Its right off the main highway bridge, and if there is any traffic on the main highway, alot of the traffic gets funneled on to this bridge. Adding a bike lane and getting rid of a vehicle lane might become really dangerous and cause major traffic build up. Especially since the bridge feeds right to the football stadium across the river.
Reducing the lanes on that bridge isn't going to help the traffic congestion and people sitting on the bridge waiting for the lights to change. If anything happens on the I-75 bridge (nearby), people divert to that bridge to get around the accident.
I love the progression to bikes and walking. I wish more places were invested in infrastructure like this!
@SkarletShadows I wish my city invested less in it
@@nostrum6410 you must not drive then, or haven't ever been in an accident
@mycelia_ow I want less money into bike lanes that get rarely used suggests I don't drive? I'd love to know what logic leads you to that
@@nostrum6410Man people will use bike infrastructures if they are good, efficient, and safe. I wish cities have alternative options than just driving. I'm saying this a guy who likes cars and big, lifted trucks.
@@JumpeeH its just completely unusable half the year and its very rare to see anybody using it the other half
Kentucky representation!! I absolutely love to see it from one of my creators. Please look for projects to cover in Lexington KY if you can! I’d be fascinated to get your takes on parts of my hometown
I don’t know what those first civil engineers were on when they built a one way three lane in a residential, but I want some.
Do some research, understand the time and place that was put in.
The short answer is instead of tearing down the neighborhood for a highway, oneway were roads grafted on to the existing streets grid. This plan works well for keeping though traffic on the highway route and off of the adjoining streets
all they need is small affordable housing, who keeps asking for all this luxury
These are probably my favorite videos of yours. Not just showing how bad intersections could be improved in theory, but how city governments are actually working to make life safer and less car-dependent
see america… ITS FUCKING POSSIBLE
But but communism...
- Americans probably
America: BUT WE NEED OUR OVERBLOWN INEFFICIENT METHODS OF TRAVEL! *Eagle screech* *American flag with national anthem*
(For context I'm American)
@@niceone99 That or the more common thing here, the Liberals blaming everything on Conservatives, Conservatives blaming everything on Liberals, Democrats blaming everything on Republicans, Republicans blaming everything on Democrats and remaining ignorant that they are just "a-logging" each other and ignorant of the fact those four and Communist party aren't the political parties that exist.
But does it actually benefit people?
Yeah, and make ambulances be pedal-powered! Or better yet, use rickshaws like the Chinese! Nothing like the efficiency of riding in a wheelbarrow to the hospital for your broken leg.
i used to work right across from that lot at an apartment complex for seniors, crazy that they mentioned wheelchairs couldn’t fit onto the sidewalks as that’s a huge form of transportation for said seniors, glad that people are thinking of turning it into something more wheelchair accessible/walkable, and that will benefit the community rather than corporations!!
I’m from Northern Kentucky and that empty lot used to be an IRS building And what this video does not mention is that three lane Rd. that’s gonna be converted into a 2 Lane Rd. is packed at rush-hour
Yeah, and the theory goes that reducing the size of the road will encourage people to take other routes, or not drive at all, which will make traffic better.
I have to say, I'm not convinced at all that this theory will work in the real world.
There is validity to the idea that accessibility for bicyclists and walking will reduce car traffic. It is, after all, the reason roads are as they are now - more lanes entices more people to drive as the road-filled environment gets more hostile to other forms of transport, in turn keeping the roads perpetually full. The inverse is possible, but requires a very large scale change for this accessibility. Busses or other public transport would also help, as would using some of the space given by phasing out roads to move housing and jobs closer together to further make walking and cycling a better option, but all of this would take so incredibly long to do in the meantime, which is a major reason it's usually successfully fought against.
Of course, rush hour could just be removed from existence entirely if jobs (and schools) staggered when they start and end their shifts rather than everyone getting there and leaving at the same time (as well as providing better access for the people in those jobs to other services), but that's a whole other conversation entirely.
If thats the bridge Im thinking of, then every day from 4-6pm is going to be absolutely crapshoot busy a.f.
I'm quickly becoming a fan of coming across these shorts.
I’m a Cincinnati native, literally 5 miles from Covington Ky and from an insider perspective, Covington is one of the shitiest, most tryhard cities in the general area., and the fact that they’re spending their meager budget on bike lanes and sidewalks rather than trying to confront the overwhelming problem with heroin shows they care more about image and “marketability” than actually helping the people who live there.
IKR! Can you imagine reducing the traffic flow out of Cincy?! This is the dumbest thing ever!
So do you think Covington just shouldn't put bike lanes in? Are bike lanes bad in your opinion?
@@Julia_and_the_City Yes they are. No one will use bike lanes because in either Cincy or Covington, they'd be stolen in two seconds. Plus eliminating a lane of traffic on a main highway going in and out of Cincy is ridiculous with the traffic backups and wrecks already occurring in the cities. That's just asking for more casualties.
@@Julia_and_the_City i don’t really have an opinion on bike lanes specifically. i generally think they’re fine and probably helpful for cyclists who live in a congested city. I do however know a few cyclists who don’t’ like them because apparently, from what they say, it’s common for the trash and debris from the street to get pushed into the bike lane and make it harder to ride. And a lot of these people say they’d rather just ride in the street. At least that’s what I’ve heard from my friends, but this is technically hearsay, and I’m not gonna speak on that particular topic, presuming any authority because I’m not a cyclist. But what i do know, is Cincinnati, and Covington Kentucky. And what i know, as an insider who’s grown up in this area for their entire life. Covington doesn’t need bike lanes. Especially not in the proposed areas. I knew the exact street when i saw the video, and those streets don’t get congested in the ways that a street in downtown cincy, or any other medium sized city might. Covington is a small, poor city that borders right up against Cincinnati a much much larger city. These streets were never so busy that you couldn’t ride a bike through there. This is the crux of my problem. The people making these decisions dont know how the city works, they’re just making these inconsequential decisions that look good on paper, when they could’ve spent the money elsewhere. I’m not against bike lanes, i am just against financial mismanagement, and what appears to be “image based”, egotistical city planning that in reality only serves to benefit a specific (upper middle class) demographic of people, who don’t in fact even live in that area. This kinda thing happens all over the area. The city insists on putting bike lanes in areas that don’t seem to make sense to put them, and in places where it was never congestion, and where it wasn’t really a challenge to just ride on the road.
@@josh-tp3we i live in Covington and ride a bike all the time in the area. you are right that there are issues with garbage/debris getting pushed into bike lanes. however, in this spot it could be very useful for getting pedestrian traffic back and forth into Cincinnati. I've also used this bridge for commuting on a bike back and forth to work. it can be a bit scary, considering there is not much of a shoulder to ride on.
In areas that have been redesigned for bikes, how much are bike lanes truly utilized?
@@AdamPFarnsworth my city has been adding bike lanes in the last few years and the number of people on bikes has exploded. Some roads are 50%+ bike traffic during peak hours. This is in the US
Depends entirely on the network and what places are connected.
Not at all. One city even tried to implement those electric scooters but had to take then back when residents kept breaking them or not using them.
That depends on how easily the bikes can get there. The more bike infrastructure there is, the more bikes will be able to actually go places and use it all. Like if you only put bike lanes on one road, but there's no safe way for a bike to get to that road, of course it's not going to see much use.
I live in europe. My city has a bunch of bike lanes and many of them get a lot of use. They are also good for rentable scooters and keeping both cyclists and pedestrians safe
3 lane AND one way is from the 1900s, damn
I normally agree with ample bike lanes. However, I have to wonder how many people are actually biking from Kentucky across the Ohio river into Cincinnati. It seems like a nice idea that doesn’t actually apply to the local area very well.
This is private money folks. They weren’t granted this land to put up affordable housing. The market will say what they build there. BUT, do they need lower priced housing in NKy, for sure. I’ve been here since 1988, btw.
Why would you want to slow down the cars getting on the bridge?
Fast cars are harder to maneuver and more likely to cause traffic accidents, especially if it crosses/merges with another road or it's a narrow place.
The bridge barely gets used and has a 25 or 35mph speed limit. Most people use it ro walk.
Yeah cause traffic getting into and out of Cincinnati isn't bad enough. Especially since NO ONE ever walks or rides bikes around those neighborhoods because they don't want to be shot.🤦
Thank you. And 💯 agree
You are not getting shot next to mainstrasse dude stop it
Also no one is biking or walking around because the infrastructure for that doesn’t exist. This plan would provide that, and help with the traffic issue due to less people driving.
@@Leadpaintwalls The last time I went there, two guys pointed a gun at me at a stop light right before I arrived.
12 years in NKY and I can’t recall ever seeing anyone on a bike riding between NKY and Cincy. That doesn’t even consider the fact that no one in the area wants to visit that, or any other, forsaken part of Covington.
Gotta waste that tax money somewhere
Have you considered that nobody rides a bike there because riding a bike there right now is a literal death trap? If you have infrastructure catering towards bicycles, people will start using bicycles.
@@LadyLucynafr. it’ll become more popular to use bikes anyways
@@LadyLucyna Cincinnati has put a ton of bike lanes in across the city. Unfortunately, they just dont get used. The infrastructure is there, but the weather is not applicable. Its either bitter cold or hot and humid. I appreciate city planners thinking outside of the box, but not when it means making vehicle traffic more congested.
that's incredible
i live in Cincinnati (north of the river) and i appreciate any good development ideas that connect KY and OH together!
Isn’t a one lane on a bridge risky cause if there’s any break downs (flat tires, busted radiators, etc.) that it blocks all lanes of traffic in that direction for hours and makes it nearly impossible for a tow truck to get to the broken down car?
I mean in a worst case scenario you _could_ drive on the bike lane
@@outatime626 two lane bridges already exist, no?
@@birdrocket Well yes, but that doesn't support the argument.
It's also why all cars are amphibious vehicles so they can cross the river in case the bridge isn't available.
there's another bridge 0.3 miles away
@@i_am_a_toast_of_french yoy really aren't that bright, are you?
When I visited my daughter in Phoenix, I explored the stadium connector trail that connects two spring training facilities. It was wonderful. Most of it was a dedicated, wide bike and pedestrian path. The parts on the road were protected from traffic by a 4 ft. concrete median. I put over a hundred miles on my bike and loved every minute of it. In addition to connecting the stadiums, the trail passed by many shopping and entertainment venues. There were loads of people using it. What would it be like if every road had these facilities? You could easily live car-free.
Can you try fixing the Drum Hill rotary? It’s said to be the reason why Americans, at least those who live near it, hate rotaries.
42°37'21"N 71°21'58"W
There's a few bridges like this in Jacksonville with protected pedestrian access and, at least as a tourist, it was nice to see the sunset set over the river
I hate driving through Covington. Especially under the overpasses.
The change for the bridge is probably a bad idea
There better be reallyyyyy good signage and road blocks (I forget what the little bendable sticks are called) to warn people not to use the bike lane to get onto the bridge.
Indeed. He does say it's a buffered bicycle path, but they'd better make it a protected one, so that means a ridge between cars and bicycles.
the green paint should help though.
The sticks are a type of bollard. There are quite a few types of bollards that are used for different situations.
I hope there are no truckers using that bridge. Taking out that slip lane is going to make it hard for any truck with a trailer to make that tight of a turn.
Another W for Kentucky
First W* 😂
@@gopackgo4036 What do you mean by first W bro
@@InsertUsername2 I mean Kentucky never has any W’s
There’s a lot of this happening in tiny scales through a lot of cities which make it seem invisible but here in Pittsburgh I often see long blocks with little pedestrian pavements being refurbished and even split to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians, it’s a slow and steady process but eventually we will return to designing things correctly
Wait, so actual bike infrastructure and not just a painted death trap?
I'm near there right now and that bridge needs some love.
Yeah..this is my neighborhood. All bad ideas. People adapt. People have adapted to this neighborhood as it is for decades. Millions of dollars are being spent inconveniencing and rerouting 10's of thousands of drivers a day for the 15 virtue-signalling cyclists a day who will use it from April to October. People here don't bike to work across the river because it is hot and humid in Cincinnati and there are no workplace showers to speak of and people don't want to work all day after a hot, sweaty commute. A bus would be useful.
I like that idea. There's going to be plenty of bridges once they build the new one plus the Middle Lane on that bridge is unique. During certain times of day the center lane is for helping traffic flow during rush hours. In the mornings it's used for going in the city. In the afternoon it's used for traffic out the city
It always amazes me to see the difference in size of American to German infrastructure.
It’s not just that American cities often utilize more lanes, they also make them extremely wide. I can’t imagine how much those wide lanes would add to the construction, maintenance and removal costs.
It's a massive cost, 20% more than a place like Germany, not to mention the land use is way worse and the 20% is just on each lane.
America really is an embarrassment
@@bldontmatter5319it’s a state highway and main arterial through town. The lanes need to be wide enough to accommodate truck traffic. That extra 3-6 feet across 3 lanes is absolutely worth it to not get sideswiped by a box truck or semi mirror.
Hilarious that you think we remove these roads!
Compare the size of America and Germany.
@@leckercidre160
I know that the US is bigger but why does it matter?
If you reduce a busy city street or bridge down to one lane in each direction then a minor car accident, delivery truck, or road repair creates a huge traffic jam.
Ok, use a different bridge in one of those rare scenarios
@@juliusdauksys2183 yeah let me just retroactively use a different bridge
@@KOKOKOKfjeij yeah, do you not look at traffic reports before leaving the house?
As someone that lives there. This will not end well. Traffic is bad enough.
They're not interested in listening to you. They're going to push their agenda no matter what. They don't think of drivers as people making rational decisions, they think of them as a problem that needs to be eradicated.
@@kapitankapital6580oh no, becoming less car dependant. The horror
@@juliusdauksys2183 it's not about dependency, it's about choice. You're making the choice for them.
@@kapitankapital6580 Choice? with car dependency your only comfortable choice for trips is a car.
@@AwangardaGames with "car dependency" you can always walk or cycle, even if you don't have as much dedicated infrastructure as you would like. Once you rip up half the roads, you lower the hard cap on how many people can drive at any given time. You've decided for them that a certain number ought to be cycling.
As someone who loves across that bridge, only a handful of people actually bike across the river. If they do, they use the other bridge with 2 pedestrian lanes 2 blocks the other way. Always way too much traffic happens on that bridge. The middle lane is lighted and regularly changes the lights above it to change whichever direction needs that extra lane
That's just what our cyclists need here in the Tri-State... More dedicated lanes that they DO NOT USE. We have added areas for cyclists all over the city. Do they use them? Absolutely not. Do they follow road laws? Absolutely not.
Mostly homeless people, riding bikes on the sidewalk 😮
Finally a place I actually thoroughly know
The USA is changing
it needs it lmao
While this is a good step, so much more needs to be done to make bicycling easier to do. And while it's good Covington, Kentucky is doing this, would be good to see this occur in other cities in that state. Like i.e., I'd be surprised if other cities like Lexington, Bowling Green, Paducah, etc do this. Problem is that too many roads and developments, are car centric. I'd be surprised if other areas start to narrow roads, that are overbuilt for cars.
If the US doesn't change soon, this country will fall. It's a matter of time... As in a decade or two. People are unable to afford cars, and infrastructure is crumbling. It's time to ACTUALLY build back better, by changing things to how they USED TO BE, with walkable cities
Stop bike lanes. Yes on 8’ wide sidewalks in high use areas and 6’ on less traffic areas. If a hallway in a house has to meet a 3’ building code it should carry that a sidewalk with presumably two foot traffic or bicyclists should each have at least 3’ wide spacing to travel.
Just my two cents.
My only worry is that there wont he enough road for people who actually need cars. I understand adding another lanes doesnt help till a certain point. But having too little is also bad. Some people NEED cars, disabled people, elderly people, stupid mothers that are too entitled to sweat or drive anything other than an oversized SUV. If it's a dense city i understand (except for the bridge that will be a nightmare), but if its a suburb then having only 1 lane in either direction may be a pain point unless its just for the downtown area.
Its all about balance. The denser the city, the less cars make sense. The more rural it is, the more cars make sense. Thats also why places a lot of places having parking garages for cars, bikes, etc, next to the train stations. Its just more efficent to funnel people in rather then build out super expensive mega highways or rails out there.
Ah yes, the usual DURRR ELDERLY, DISABLED, ECT
They'll be fine. Car traffic will decrease as people walk and bike, if they continue in the right direction. In Russia where I am at rn, there are walkable cities and old ladies walk around happily, it's good exercise. Americans wouldn't understand
Lol
They're turning 3 lanes into 2 with a bike path, they're not closing the road
No need to cry. Also bringing in disabled when the sidewalk isn't wide enough for wheelchair is crazy
I'm so glad to see civil engineers mentioning accessibility for disabled folks. So often we're ignored in situations like this. I hope he continues to make his city accessible for its disabled citizens
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Flying wheelchairs
Just look at how much land they use for basically nothing but an asphalt desert and some increadibly unattractive buildings that are far apart, you cannot reach leisurely, and have the attractiveness of a view of an industrial zone.
This is America. They complained about concrete flats DURRR COMMUNISM but then they build these massive nothing concrete streets with tons of cars and no room to walk.
It's absolutely bizarre
For anyone else who is wondering which bridge shows up in this video, it’s the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge.
About the slip lane at the end
Don't forget it's a state highway and there are a lot of long vehicles. They must be able to take this turn too.
When I was younger, I always thought the irs building was a waste of space. And they should put in an elevated block of buildings that have a view of Cincinnati. Who knew I had the right idea.
It will be interesting when an 18 wheeler attempts to take that impossibly sharp right turn.
Ain't no way they're taking that curved bit right now either, so really I don't know how they're already doing this turn.
@@CountJeffula truckers are more than capable of handling a right turn from a three lane road onto another three lane road. Besides, there are alternative routes to anywhere they’d be trying to get to from that bridge. Non issue.
@@birdrocket they are closing the slip lane for vehicle traffic and keeping it only for bikes and reducing the number of lanes. Did you watch or listen to the video at all? That turn is very hard to do in a long box truck, especially if there is oncoming traffic. You’d have to swing wide into the oncoming traffic and the back tires would go up and over the curb. I’ve seen this happen dozens of times in Milwaukee. Maybe physics works differently where you live.
@@CountJeffula it’s a 40’ right of way with two lanes to play with on the other end of the turn, AND it’s a redundant route. It’s really not an issue whatsoever, it just means that sometimes, some truck drivers might have to go a little bit slower. In return, bikes and pedestrians can travel much safer.
@@birdrocket how is the 40’ right of way relevant when they aren’t using all of it? Yes, they could make it more convenient for large vehicles, but they purposely are making it worse. I guess if the local businesses all want more expensive deliveries and to be outcompeted by bigger stores with accessible loading docks and economies of scale, then this is the perfect solution.
I already know someone is gonna use that bikelane as a road
There aren't any cyclists in covington, though
Maybe because of the lack of bike lanes
@@geckapusmore likely because of the lack of public safety. There are places where I’ve been told I shouldn’t even stop at red lights because so much sketchy stuff goes on in the area, who would want to walk or bike through a place like that?
This youtube channel should be called "Traffic Congestion Everywhere"
NO! You had me until closing down an entire lane on a bridge. Covington not a ghost town and that bridge is a huge bottleneck. Nobody’s biking over that bridge anyway especially during the winter
Yes. Close down a lane. It will reduce car traffic.
@@ManWithUhDream
“Nobody’s biking over that bridge anyway” - that’s basically like saying “we don’t need a bridge over this river, no one swims across it anyway!”
Maybe nobody’s cycling over the bridge because it’s not safe to do so, and there’s insufficient bicycle infrastructure to safely get from home to your destination before and after the bridge? Imagine how much less of a bottleneck it would be if many drivers would choose to use a bicycle instead for shorter trips.
Imagine showing up to work fucking drenched on a rainy day thanks to riding your bicycle. At an office job. With an errand to run on your lunch break or on the way back home. F that mess lol
@@cbh148 I think the most important thing is to have options. It needs to be possible to do things by car, but people should have the choice to do things by bike or even walking as well. There’s good clothes to keep you dry in the rain. In the Netherlands tons of people go to their (office) jobs by bike, disregarding the weather. In some Finnish cities even snow doesn’t deter cyclists in winter. But the car lanes aren’t closed, so you can still go by car. The more people who’ll choose to go by bike instead of car the less you’ll have to wait behind other cars.
I travel these roads all day long, very congested through there during peak hours. Interested to see how this plays out in ten years when it’s complete.
Slow down traffic. What a brilliant idea
Uh yeah, it is a brilliant idea to ensure slow traffic *as they turn into a bridge with two-way traffic*, do you fucking want someone to slip lane into a head on collision?
there is no traffic to slow down, silly
@@i_am_a_toast_of_frenchthen why is there a road there is there's no traffic?
@@MisterMick113Americans are terrible at road design?
There's no way to speed up traffic, by design car lanes will always be slow
Covington native here. So excited for this development!
what software do you use in your "fixing" shorts?
He uses Adobe Illustrator
@peciarda thank you
Hey Streetcraft, you explain traffic theory so well that I'm addicted to your high quality shorts. Do you have a soapbox opinion about traffic? Like "why doesnt ever city build roads like X" for example. I'd love to hear.
There is way too much traffic for that down through there this is crazy
Just widen the sidewalks and have the bikes use the sidewalk as well. You could do 2 lane with street parking that way. Would really help with the new walkable neighborhood as people could come visit it and have somewhere to park.
The solution to bike lanes is to have sidewalks be directional like streets are and have bikes use the sidewalks.
They keep taking car lanes and adding bike lanes in Michigan. The result, more traffic and no one in the bike lanes.
If the car traffic is so bad... get a bike
@@juliusdauksys2183 sure, let me throw all of my tools i need for work in my mountain bike and take a stroll in 20° weather for 30 miles each way.
@@juliusdauksys2183 ever biked in the winter?
@@MoctezumasRevenge1 take a bus 🤷♂️
@@juliusdauksys2183 sure, and all of my tools boxes and welding equipment.
This is exactly why I love the area where I live ❤
The point of a slip road onto the bridge is not to "encourage cars to take it at high speeds", but rather to allow them to do so without stopping - both safer and more efficient.
In no way were they saying that that was the intention in the city planning, but having a continuous flow like that with a nice curve to it, encourages people to drive at high speeds because it's fun and convenient
Vehicles crossing intersections without stopping at high speeds is anything but safe. Imagine trying to walk across that slip lane without getting sideswiped by an car
Safer? xD in what world
@@KasabianFan44Safer only for drivers and motorcyclists, probably, as having to slow down or come to a complete stop increases the chance of a driver rear ending you. But I’d rather make things safer for pedestrians and cyclists, the people who don’t have tons of metal protecting them from distracted drivers.
Yeah. Screw the motorcyclists, they need to be pedaling anyway!
I love that large high-throughflow straight road through my walkable neighbourhood.
Brand new walkable = unaffordable
What
Sadly there's not many walkable places so they are expensive
Build more and ease the demand.
Cincinnati resident here, you’re overlooking a few key things here.
1. This bridge connects to basically nothing on the Cincinnati side. It’s parking lots and industrial worksites at best.
2. They already removed highway access to 75 on that “highway” which has led to a lot more traffic. Reducing this even further by going to 2 lanes would make it even worse.
3. Both sides are crime ridden so they need to address that before there would even be human traffic in the area.
We need to stop adding useless bicycle lanes that stay empty most of the time.
Those bike lanes need physical barriers, not those poles which people pretend are permanent
In case that bridge, so narrov turning not acceptable. Trucks need also safely turn,
This original street layout probably made more sense back in the day and carried a lot of traffic from nearby manufacturing jobs that are no longer there. Im assuming this, based on my interest in urban decay in the cities i have life in overtime.
Congestion ahoy.
Making more lanes doesn't solve traffic lmao, good city planning and traffic engineering does.
@@RhodokTribesman True, but if you cut 3 lanes down to 1, you'll probably get congestion.
For a week and thenit goes away magically
@@ZealothPL Is that what you believe?
@@The_Big_Jay I've seen it happen personally. Usually after a week has passed, most people will realise "oh ill just get stuck there in traffic" and not go there anymore
1: there is a pedistrian only bridge in Newport Ky. Right next to Covington, maybe 2 miles from this location.
2: The skrinking of the bridge's vehicle traffic isn't exactly a bad thing, BUT at times it will be. Bengals, Reds, and Cyclones games bring large crowds. Downtown Covington, Newport, and Cincinnati experience a large influx of traffic before and after the games. Will not always be an issue, but WILL be an issue.
3: Covington/Newport/Cincinnati are already vey walkable with a decent public transit surrounding it. I can't tell you how many hours/miles I've logged walking all these areas doing photography.
4: Bicycle lane is a bad idea, if anything, it should be a motorcycle lane as more mopeds/bikes are coming through these areas than bicycles.
5: Concepts decent - but money should be spent on other things in the area.
They did this stuff near where i live and now its just a traffic jam and nobody bikes there who didn't previously when the sidewalks always worked without issue.
Personal input not that it matters to literally anyone, cutting the 3 lane road down to 2 with added bike lane good, but cutting the sliplane for a important bridge entrance? THAT sort of thing is not. Removing actual junctions cars use efficiently isn't a good thing. You want some level of speed it means less density of traffic. Cutting fat where its not needed of course is good why not, but some proposals just make more problems.
I fear people over-do the changes made for bikes too much and don't realize you can't "calm" traffic like that, it just gets more angry and more congested, it's really a balancing act. You can't make people not like their cars and presume they will now ride bikes, it doesn't work like that. A lot of this more pie in the sky stuff works if you city plan from the start but uprooting how a community already works usually doesn't. You can put the bike lanes in but if traffic just gets more hectic no one wants to ride a bike around that. A shared slip road onto the bridge at less speed could work but simply uprooting something that has already been foundational to a local area to make it more bike accessible is bad idea.
Speed doesn't reduce traffic. Reducing the amount of cars on roads and good planning reduces traffic
@@juliusdauksys2183 how do you "reduce cars on the road" especially when its a important junction people are taking out of necessity.
@@Ottobon public transportation, walkable cities, more bike paths...
@@juliusdauksys2183 if people are excited to use those things absolutely. my problem is a lot of the city revamping crowd just focusing on making driving cars worse than wonders why nobody likes them.
The ideas have merit but it needs to be more in harmony and slow paced at times with how it goes about itself, and i maintain the best way for it is honestly newly developed areas, not effectively gentrifying older already decided ones. If people focused on making newly developed areas nice, and functional, then that can be transferred over time but ripping up the status queue usually doesn't have the same effect even if the intentions are good.
Yea most if not all cities in the US have this utility poll in the sidewalk issues. Good on them for fixing it
I hope they don't do this. Traffic is already terrible around there.
Increases walkability of a city means less reliance on vehicles which in turn means fewer needs for them which, surprise, lowers traffic. It's a better plan than adding lanes which makes traffic worse.
@@TheresNoMorePrivacyThat is true in theory but not in practice. This is the US where a majority of people own a car. If you can drive you do. Cycling is lower by far. So the true best solution is to make traffic more efficent. This solution does not do any of that.
@@TheresNoMorePrivacy This bridge is a very busy road. Its right off the main highway bridge, and if there is any traffic on the main highway, alot of the traffic gets funneled on to this bridge. Adding a bike lane and getting rid of a vehicle lane might become really dangerous and cause major traffic build up. Especially since the bridge feeds right to the football stadium across the river.
This is good! Good examples that work!
Holy shit bikers do not need access to every road lol.
Kentucky makes one road in a town bike accessible
You - waaah waaah
@@Bone237 The "lol" at the end of my comment stand for "Laughing Out Loud". In other words, I found the video funny, not upsetting. Hopefully I could help you understand! I love to educate people so if you need anything else from me - just ask!
@@MaxKeeble1 Wow, why are you taking me seriously? Oh sorry, I forgot to end my comment with an lol that negates all criticism.
@@Bone237 Silly child lol. I never argued that using "LOL", which stands for "Laughing Out Loud", was grounds to circumvent criticism but rather that it shows one is not angry, bitter, sad, or lonely like A LOT of users on here, but rather joyful, happy, and elated to the point that I chose to have a Laugh Out Loud - an LOL if you will.
Have a good day, my child. I will allow you the last word now if you would like. Here’s hoping your departure lives up to the grandiose image you’ve crafted for yourself. Farewell, and may your next interaction be as spectacularly ordinary as the one we just had.
@@MaxKeeble1 I didn't read that since I'm a child who hasn't started school yet. Maybe they'll teach me to like my own comments when I start.
Just made that right hand turn a nightmare for trucks
As some one who drives that road every day at rush hour if any of that is done you will have people sitting for hours in traffic. that really isn't a place to build homes.
The "urbanists" want to make it so miserable to live outside the city that the city seems good in comparison. Because everyone should live next to 5,000 people on your block
Dont wanna sit in traffic? I suggest you to hop on a bike
@@kaanotta It's one thing to not build bigger roads to encourage smart growth. But tearing down existing infrastructure in the name of "urbanism" is dumb, and punishing people for assuming roads would continue to exist.
@@timfischer roads are continuing to exist though? There are still two lanes for cars
@@kaanotta Cutting capacity by 33% while forcing the turn to be slower
What a bunch of S**t. That three lane road is the only direct route the highway. You know the way most people use to get to and from this area. They already closed down the north bound entrance to I71 on this very street. Now in order to go north you get on going south, get off and then get back on to go north. This bridge they mention is used as an alternate north bound route. So we are going to narrow the street, narrow the bridge and what hope everyone starts biking to work from the surrounding counties.
Is it not three lane for a reason? How are they going to deal with the extra traffic flow congested into two lanes? Adding larger walking spaces and a bike layer are great obviously but seems like having it would be too small and tighter congestion would cause more problems like accidents? Unless there's more to it that I don't know?
The US is known for planning giant streets and too many lanes for actual traffic.
Many years ago this was a two way street. During construction of I75 many streets were turned to one way pairs.
I have a friend that cycles all over town so he's probably pretty excited about this, but I can't imagine doing that. Having grown up in Cincinnati, I can't imagine any City I would want to cycle in less with the possible exceptions of San Francisco and Pittsburgh just because of all of the hills.
As someone who commutes around the NJ/NYC area daily, this gives me nightmares and angers me. Traffic is horrific enough as it is. Getting rid of a lane to create bike paths and have bigger sidewalks is asking for lots of angry drivers and heavier traffic, especially around here. If anything, we need MORE lanes.
They've cut down some lanes in my area for bike paths and such and all it's accomplished is narrowing existing lanes and empty bicycle lanes.
You of all people should know that in NYC, walkers run the place. Pedestrians in the middle of the street? You're legally required to yield to them anyway. E bike? Have to yield. One person at a 4 way stop sign? Yield. Empty intersection at a traffic light? Gotta wait until the light changes if you want to make a right, otherwise, a camera tickets you.
Want to really solve NYC traffic? Ban using cars for Uber and Doordash. Taxi medallions were rationed for a reason
you have a 14 lane suspension bridge crossing the hudson river, what more do you want?
@@Demopans5990 and yet in probably the most walkable city in the states, they still have issues with car traffic. Almost as if this magical infrastructure isn't the solution yall crack it up to be. Also, less than half of Americans have a bike while 91% can use a car. Why should we be focusing on less than half the population instead of most of it? The point of government spending is to get the most benefit for the most people
@@MisterMick113note how you use different numbers. You mention who can drive a car, but not how many people own one
@@i_am_a_toast_of_french And yet there are still traffic jams in which you can be stuck for hours.
Edit: You mention a multi-lane bridge, but what about the one or two lane roadways that bottleneck there? You don't know the frustration of driving here until you've lived it.
Company I work for is remodeling a historical
House just off the licking river and it’s costing roughly $2million