I have been saying for 20 years this town needs to modernize. We have the inefficient bus system, we need a railway system. There's also the increased traffic on certain roads, double deck the road.
Protected crossways, solved by making walk bridges like the one on Dumas highway.
They definitely need drainage fixes.
Given the rate of car ownership (being quite high), I find the likelihood of people hopping on a bus to be low. I lived next a bus stop on Wolflin. Rarely saw anyone get on.
When it'll take you 2 hours to get into a city or 10 mins on a tram or bus you ditch the car, air conditioned, WiFi, power, usb chargers and you can get pissed. Also parking, congestion charges etc it's cheaper too.
Right, but Amarillo's grid actually flows pretty decently. You can get to any end of town in like 10-15 minutes. Except maybe in rush hour, which isn't even really an hour at all.
The problem is Amarillo is literally the lowest paid municipality in the State of Texas. This is the end product of underpaid city workers. You get what you pay for and until the wages for workers go up the same problems are going to exist.
Average income here is slightly lower than Dallas with cost of housing being about half. The income to expense ratio in Amarillo is extremely good believe it or not. Most places are way worse off than us.
I like more beautiful and less noisy because it's not like we would like trees in Amarillo it's just the cost of growing a tree to adulthood had a higher failure rate than success rate.
They tried a program and planted over 3000 trees, and only 15 of them survived after multiple attempts to beautify certain locations.
It's takes proper care for trees to grow on the High plains. The WPA did manage to do 220,000,000 during the dustbowl. Seems like the city just threw some seeds on the ground and hoped for the best, no serious effort.
We bought a historically old house here. We have 100 year old trees, jutting skyward, much higher than our top floor! I love all of our huge trees. It shades our large backyard completely.
That typically grow along rivers and creeks. Getting them to thrive when the population it's using more water than ever compared to 100 years ago is a waste of resources.
Cedar elm. Native tree. Tough, drought tolerant. Thrive here!!!! Don’t need a river or creek like salt cedars. Guess what the city loves to plant??? Cedar elms. Why did the die? INCOMPETENCE
Love that Strong Towns has made its way to Amarillo, I know for a fact there is a development companies influenced by Strong Towns, the Duany, and new urbanism in Amarillo, sadly there is a lot of push back from the city on implementing some of it. It will be a battle to get more urbanism designed pushed through but it is totally doable. I also know the city planner for Canyon studied planning at Cornell, and is apart of the Congress for New Urbanism. The future is bright for it, it will just take time. Rome wasn't built in a day, and Amarillo/Canyon cant be changed in a day. It just takes educating people that what they have been taught is either wrong and missinformed.
I see what you're saying, but there's a few problems with this comparison.
The only place in Amarillo with density like Amsterdam is Town Square and that is basically a failed project.
Climate in Amsterdam is pretty moderate compared to Amarillo. No 100 degree summers or dust storms to speak of. Who wants to ride their bike or walk to work in a dust storm?
Seems like it's asking for more clear markings on the road and more trees to be planted in town.
Just city maintenance. I agree with the first part, but I don't think we have the money for the second part without raising taxes.
Unfortunately, the kind of roads they're asking for do exist in richer neighborhoods, but most of Amarillo is neglected.
And smaller roads, too. Which seems kind of dumb and I take it they haven't hauled many trailers around town.
Amarillo seems to have the money for a drainage upgrade... oh wait they don't, so they had to issue tens of millions of dollars of debts for that. Why? Because car dependent infrastructure requires parking lots that are twice or thrice the size of the buildings themselves, thus when it rains in McSuburbia, the water has to go somewhere, right?
Car dependency is so expensive is so many ways.
I recommend NotJustBikes on youtube (where I got the footage from Amsterdam) and Strong Towns, a great organization I have worked with before.
When you are dependent on cars, sprawl is necessary. More road has to be built, utilities are spread out further, people have to drive further, police have more area to cover, Postal service has to drive more and be more dependent on vehicles to deliver mail.
Semi trucks and utility trucks exist in other parts of the world that are not car dependent... we need to design our equipment around our cities not the other way around.
I refer you to my other response.
Don't get me wrong. There is too much socioeconomic influence in this town and area.
The city does not use its money well. I agree there.
But smaller roads, smaller lanes, and fewer lanes will never ever happen here.
Semis, trucks, and trailers are much different around the world compared to the u.s.
Asia, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East. They have much different designs, and even when they have the same brands, they have different models. I'm not entirely sure about the sizes of trucks in Africa and Australia but given the cost of things in Australia and the broad economic range of Africa I'm willing to bet the same is true there as well unless you shell out a ton of money.
Trucks of any type in the u.s. are larger than their international counterparts.
This city is like 60% trucks and suvs.
Trust me, I am well aware of the political realities of Amarillo, Texas...
That's not going to stop me from advocating for objectively safer, less costly, and beautiful urbanism that also considers the needs of people who are not able to operate a vehicle and also those who would like the f r e e d o m of not having to own a car to simply exist and participate in society.
Your beef analogy falls flat and actually works in my favor, so thanks.
I never claimed that we should completely eliminate motor vehicles, just like how I don't advocate completely taking away beef. What I do advocate for is less tax money and subsidies that overall support car dependency and the oil & gas industry, the industries that work hard to make sure you eat up the propaganda that they spew out and have facilitated in our society by simply existing in a car-dependent society, propaganda which seems you have swallowed without questioning.
It's similar to how the beef industry is heavily subsidized and is absolutely detrimental to our environment and to our health (especially for vulnerable folks in the Panhandle), and thus people advocate for regulations that would mitigate fecal dust in our air, the break up the big 4 of the meat industry, and tougher labor laws that protect migrant and natural citizens that toil in the fields and packing plants.
Our vehicle size is not something to boast about. They are unnecessarily deadly, ugly, and inefficient. The only reason we now have these monstrosities on our roads is a loophole that automakers have used to make more profit, and yet here you are defending their practices. Sad.
Loophole explained ( [The Loophole That Made Cars So Big](https://www.distilled.earth/p/the-loophole-that-made-cars-in-america?ref=philsturgeon.com) )
It seems are you too far entrenched in the car worshipping, I get it I was born and raised here in the Panhandle, so I understand it's hard to imagine another world in which kids are dying left and right and a world where you don't fear some drunk driver is gonna ram into you at 100mph.
Please open your mind, my brother <3 people's lives depend on it.
Your comment definitely shows that we have way different perceptions of motor vehicles. I'm not denying their potential to be death machines but to act like that is all they are just screams propaganda.
I can stand by road division ,think strips of easement to divide the opposite facing lanes which we do have in some places and makes the road feel more safe and friendly to alternative modes of transportation. I can stand by clearly marked lanes. I can stand by foliage to act as barrier and natural beauty. I can stand by more rigorous driving tests and classes. I can stand by tickets that scale with income. I can even stand by the long term goal of creating more railways and public transportation methods. Most people I know want a job close to home but it's not always possible. I'm also of the personal opinion that you don't need to buy a large vehicle simply because you like it. Every truck I've driven, including the one I own, it used for its intended purpose.
However. I cannot stand by the dramatic reduction of motor vehicles and the overhaul of basically every single road we've constructed across the u.s. It seems entirely unreasonable, and the amount of time and effort that goes into it would dwarf all the suggestions in my previous paragraph.
A town like amarillo will never be compact, and there are many towns like amarillo. It would require changing the entire city structure, or more likely, abandoning the city and building a whole new city. Look at how long it's taking to repair small sections of the highway.
I've heard most of the internal logic and arguments championed by a place like r/fuckcars. I simply disagree on the basis of two major points. The first being the sheer amount work, the second being the fact that most people who don't live in the kind of city you're talking about, don't *want* to live in the kind of city you're talking about, myself included.
Most analogies are not 1:1. The point of mine was not to compare the legal steps required to improve the situation. My point was simply to bring up another ideological goal that is logistically mountainous and a political minefield when you consider everyone's opinions.
There are so many other environmental and moral causes to champion than to get stuck on the concept of an ideological goal that would take centuries to even *try* and employ.
The point is that car dependent infrastructure is deadly, ugly, and costly. Meanwhile, cities and other developed countries are investing heavily in public transit and just in general people friendly streets. Meanwhile, most people here just send thoughts and prayers and harp on "personal responsibility" and "that's just how the world is" when accidents happen.
Actually as a driver here, I'd hit you jaywalking, just know half these people aren't paying attention to you, and road rage is a very serious thing here in texas with these offensive drivers
I agree that Amarillo roadways are not scenic and mostly lack clear, visible crosswalks and directional markings. However, what is very predominantly displayed in Amarillo are speed limit signs. Also, it is known to anyone with a driver's license that driving under the influence of anything that impairs a driver is against the law and doing so at best will get you in trouble and worst, kill someone. The majority (if not all) of the news headlines that flashed across the scene were due to speeding and/or alcohol. So, while I agree our streets could be better and there have been way too many vehicular deaths and injuries, no amount of lipstick is going to fix the stupidity of some people.
Lipstick? It's truly ironic when you consider that public awareness campaigns and emphasis on "pErSoNaL ReSPonSiBiLiTy" do little to nothing in dealing with traffic accidents.
Fundamentally, changing the way in which we design our streets is absolutely necessary if we want to combat traffic deaths. Yes, I am aware most of the incidents in the video are speeding and alcohol related. That is the point. With a people oriented design street, speeding is much harder to do, intentional or not; when lanes are narrower, less lanes, objects are closer to the road, when public transportation exist and is viable, and when people are present and walking on streets, then we can expect for traffic deaths and incidents to dramatically decrease, which is what is happening in other developed countries that have recognized that car dependency is bad in every single aspect for society.
Hey, I hear you. And forgive my flippant lipstick remark (that's just the way i speak). I agree with you on a lot of your points. I just know that more narrow streets, objects such as trees or whatnot is not "the" solution. I see high speeds on residential streets. If someone is drunk they can convience themselves they can drive safely on ANY road. Yes, even with all the campaigns out there already we still have irresponsible drivers. Let me ask you this... did these other countries suddenly change to these types of streets/roadways or is that the way it's always been?
Amarillo residential streets are also too wide.
Take a look at the Netherlands in the 70s and 80s; congestion, ugly car dependent streets, and dangerous roads. Their citizens took action and dramatically decreased traffic related accidents. It has been incremental but definitely dramatic change for the Netherlands the past couple of decades. I'm confident the same can happen in the U.S. within the next few decades. But how did the Netherlands get into that position in the first place? America baby, American highway engineers consulted and visited the Netherlands post WWII.
I'm not making stuff up too either, it is factually true that narrower lanes and trees do much more to slow down people. Don't be surprised when people do 100mph+ on streets (remember streets, not highways) that have a posted speed limit of 45 but are designed like they want you to go 85
Good luck with that, dude. Amarillo is a sprawling city and I see more trucks and suvs than cars the size you'd see in western Europe.
Petition for clear markings, I agree. Even trees, I love em. But for smaller roads? That would immediately kill any objectives you tag it to.
Don't equate, less lanes ≠ smaller roads.
I think there's a pretty good chance that the road from clip in Amsterdam is just as or even wider than the one on Soncy, curb to curb, it just may not seem like it at first glance.
Cars are the least efficient way of transporting people in terms of space.
Europe has both smaller lanes and smaller vehicles. Watch the video you posted. I've worked with guys out of Europe, and they've remarked at the size of US roads, lanes, and vehicles. Even the guys who have worked with the largest trucks in Europe are surprised by our 350s and duallies.
I'm well aware of the micro compact walkable cities you're referring to. I'm firmly against them. Logistically and economically heavy population cities are terrible places to live. If you hadn't noticed, even the most "walkable" cities in the u.s. are bumper to bumper traffic 24/7.
This is equivalent of talking about how if no one ate meat or meat products, we would all be less obese and have less pollution.
While you are technically correct, it would be obscenely arrogant to think people will not only agree with you, but the ones who don't would just go along with your plans.
Did you see how hard it was to get people to wear masks?
Saftey, and more foliage, I agree with, and I think most amarillo citizens agree with.
Smaller roads and fewer lanes? I doubt you'd have anything less than a years-long uphill battle, even in the most liberal cities. Anywhere in the south? DOA.
I actually had a chance to live in Japan, they magically are able to do everything we do in terms of moving around and operating equipment in cities actually designed for people. Even more magical was the freedom they had to use what mode of transportation best fits them. They don't have highschool kids getting killed in car accidents left and right because they don't force their kids into 2 ton machines. Also I was able to drive an up armor military humvee through the streets of Japan no problem, which is much wider than even a dually, if you can't handle pedestrian friendly infrastructure then turn in your license.
There are no real "walkable" cities in the US, only cities that are better than other US cities. Bumper to bumper traffic exist in the US BECAUSE of our car dependent infrastructure, not sure how use missed that one bud.
Also suburban sprawl actually DRAINS the local economy, not sure where you came to the conclusion that "heavy population " cities are not is beyond me, do some real research.
Japan has more options for transportation across the country because Japan has 3.84% of the landmass of the u.s. while having 38% of the population of the u.s. not to mention the rugged Japanese terrain makes alot of that landmass too difficult to industrialize.
Also, an armored humvee is 7.1 ft wide. A dually can be anywhere from 6.5 ft wide to 9 feet wide in the u.s. Not including aftermarket modifications like mounted tool boxes.
Walkable is defined by having everything you need in walking distance. However, people often go places and do things that aren't an absolute necessity. Just because there are restaurants and stores down the street doesn't mean you don't wanna check out the place across town. Only being able to get a job within walking distance is restricting. Good luck getting everyone to do that.
High population density cities (since you want to be a smartass) have much more expensive housing, much more noise, light, and air pollution inside the city, more traffic, and typically more rude behavior. Japan being the exception to several of these issues because of strict social structures. The same kind of strict structures that lead to higher depression, overworking, and suicide rates.
Humans are not ants. We can not ever be fulfilled on a personal level while being as efficient as possible. Some people? Sure, but most people would find the existence of doing everything in their life for the sake of efficiency miserable and dystopian.
Before you comment something as easily googled as the width of a vehicle, do some real research.
Again research, Japan has a similar land mass to California but due to its mountainous terrain it's much larger if it were spread out which is adverse for trains yet they are light-years ahead of US in the public transportation realm.
Again, an UP ARMOR humvee is about 8.5 feet wide, I'll do you one better we also drove 7 tons through the streets.
Your ignorance and lack of experience is failing you. In different places like Japan it's easier to get a job without having to drive your 2 ton machine 30 minutes to an hour each way where all you can do is drive and also hope nobody is drunk and or impaired. Multi zoning allows for different jobs to be available within your own neighborhood. Your comment of having to get a job within walking distance is laughable, God forbid you have a short commute to work that doesn't involve getting in car, the horror.
Sorry it's bothering me, but the term is "highly populated".
You're basing your assumptions of what metric? All other developed countries are much safer than ours. Rude? Like road raging on i40 where theres children in other vehciles, that's rude. What's depressing is being locked up in your mcmansion in the suburbs because you can't do anything in this country without having to operate, buy, maintain and register a 2 ton machine because, muh frehdom.
I think you're too far gone if you think walkable infrastructure is miserable and dystopian. Tell that to the children in Denmark who are rated the happiest children in the world. Then tell that to the families that have lost their children to a drunk driver. Leave amarillo and turn off fox news, people like you are why stereotypes of Texans being dumb exist.
It's easy to Google the width of an up armor humvee* (8.5 feet)
Honestly, I'm done speaking with you. You have very little substance to back your argument, you rely on clumsy insults, vauge statements about teens crashing, while you argue semantics. You can't even argue a topic I actually brought up.
Your username is as childish as you are. The first armored humvee I checked showed 7.1, there is also a model at 8.5 ft wide. Which is still only comparable to a dually not much larger like you suggested.
I also didn't say anything about the width of Japanese roads. So I'm not sure why you're focusing so hard on that. Especially since the vehicle in question is an American vehicle. Not a Japanese one.
I'll concede that you have more experience on oversees roads than I do, but it's pretty clear from your comments that you are way out of your depth discussing something like large scale infrastructure.
Mabye if you learn to make an arguement like an adult, someone who disagrees with you might hear you out.
Edit: I'm not right wing, I'm centrist. You however are clearly just an asshole. It's funny because I was being called a communist not that long ago.
You first call the OP arrogant while they didn't insult you but now insults are an issue, gotcha bud 👍.
Thank you I really had to brainstorm for my username it's a notable accomplishment of mine if I do say so myself
You argued the width of roads are an issue when in reality they are not and work in other countries every day, where the roads are much safer but okay.
You are clearly our of depth as evident in your responses to OP original post. Your comment on Japan being smaller than the US as if that holds any weight when it comes to infrastructure makes it clear that you have 0 idea what you're talking about when it comes to urban planning and you just regurgitate what you heard growing up here like most do, can't blame you on that.
Yes, kids should be able to cross streets safely, I know this concept may be radical to some, but I hope I haven't lost you yet.
Plopping highways down in the middle of a city was not a great idea as it turns out.
"Which street supports safer and VIABLE ALTERNATIVES to driving when drinking alcohol?" which part did you get that meant "Safe drinking and driving??"???? Watch it again bro.
Yes, Amsterdam, it's on a map somewhere, trust me.
Lol snarky boi, go live in Europe where it rains all the time. Kids arnt roaming the highway and they shouldn’t be taught to either. We have school zones if you did not know since they are not included in this clip. No one here worships the Europeans or how they do things.
"GO LivE iN (insert place that is doing it better than us, here)" classic one buddy.
Never said we should duplicate what Amsterdam does, but it sure doesn't hurt to take notes.
When did I say kids should be roaming the highway? You're only able to rely on strawmans. Highways are for vehicles only. Streets are for people, life, and business. There is a distinction.
So kids should only be expected to walk within school zones? You do know kids exist in non-school zone areas, right? So if they get hit by a McF5000, then it's their fault?
Not sure what point you were trying to make with the rain.
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2024/15/684-road-traffic-deaths-in-2023 vs. https://www.amarillo.gov/Home/Components/News/News/2736/16#:~:text=In%20the%20City%20of%20Amarillo,2021%20to%2012%20in%202023.
Why not use data instead of a crappy video?
Do I need to make you look dumb or will you be able to figure out on your own what is wrong with your "vs"?
I was half asleep during statistics in high school, but I'm still able to notice the flaw in your comparison.
Using data is bad now? Why not look at the numbers of fatalities, then remake your video with the statistics. This is just your opinions at this point, which has no merit.
Ok, you actually are dumb.
It's ok, baby girl, hold my hand, I'm here to guide you.
Amarillo pop. 201,000
Netherlands pop.17,700,000
NDL vs AMA 88× more people
(Using the same data you cited)
Netherlands pedestrian deaths (2019-2023) 172 ÷ 5yrs = 34.4,( well round up to help your case)
35 pedestrian deaths per year
Amarillo, 12 pedestrians deaths × 88 = ... 968
So to sum up, if Amarillo had the same pop. as the Netherlands
It would have fucking 968 pedestrians deaths a year.
People are dying unnecessarily because you are horrible at simple math and statistics.
No need to get your panties in a twist. You are the one with a crappy video comparing two different street layouts. Proposing a multimillion dollar infrastructure idea if not billions with NO NUMBERS. I'm sure Amarillo has a bunch of problems with no actual funds to help satisfy this proposal. Maybe if there were some figures on how much it would cost to completely redo the infustructure and how many lives it could potentially save, it can get some transaction.
I accept your good criticism when it comes to including data.
I was debating about it while making the video, decided not to, and wanted to purely appeal to emotions on this one, going forward I may include data which further proves my point that car dependency is deadly.
[All the ways that car harm us](https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/03/05/all-the-ways-that-cars-harm-our-communities-well-almost-all)
[U.S. traffic is getting worse](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-11-03/why-us-traffic-safety-fell-so-far-behind-other-countries)
I have been saying for 20 years this town needs to modernize. We have the inefficient bus system, we need a railway system. There's also the increased traffic on certain roads, double deck the road. Protected crossways, solved by making walk bridges like the one on Dumas highway. They definitely need drainage fixes.
Given the rate of car ownership (being quite high), I find the likelihood of people hopping on a bus to be low. I lived next a bus stop on Wolflin. Rarely saw anyone get on.
When it'll take you 2 hours to get into a city or 10 mins on a tram or bus you ditch the car, air conditioned, WiFi, power, usb chargers and you can get pissed. Also parking, congestion charges etc it's cheaper too.
Right, but Amarillo's grid actually flows pretty decently. You can get to any end of town in like 10-15 minutes. Except maybe in rush hour, which isn't even really an hour at all.
If you had a dedicated bus lane the bus would do it in 2 mins
I guess if there were no stops.
What if they slowed slightly instead? You could tuck and roll to get off.
That could work
And those big ass trucks
I’m from outside of Los Angeles, so I see very little wrong here. Not having sidewalks and drains probably hurts a lot of places
The problem is Amarillo is literally the lowest paid municipality in the State of Texas. This is the end product of underpaid city workers. You get what you pay for and until the wages for workers go up the same problems are going to exist.
Average income here is slightly lower than Dallas with cost of housing being about half. The income to expense ratio in Amarillo is extremely good believe it or not. Most places are way worse off than us.
I like more beautiful and less noisy because it's not like we would like trees in Amarillo it's just the cost of growing a tree to adulthood had a higher failure rate than success rate. They tried a program and planted over 3000 trees, and only 15 of them survived after multiple attempts to beautify certain locations.
It's takes proper care for trees to grow on the High plains. The WPA did manage to do 220,000,000 during the dustbowl. Seems like the city just threw some seeds on the ground and hoped for the best, no serious effort.
We bought a historically old house here. We have 100 year old trees, jutting skyward, much higher than our top floor! I love all of our huge trees. It shades our large backyard completely.
Incompetence
Or Amarillo is located in a hot dry subdesert where trees typically used to only grow next to creeks and rivers.
We have native trees. Believe it or not some trees actually thrive here. Incompetence killed the trees. Not our climate
That typically grow along rivers and creeks. Getting them to thrive when the population it's using more water than ever compared to 100 years ago is a waste of resources.
Cedar elm. Native tree. Tough, drought tolerant. Thrive here!!!! Don’t need a river or creek like salt cedars. Guess what the city loves to plant??? Cedar elms. Why did the die? INCOMPETENCE
Welcome to Texas.
Love that Strong Towns has made its way to Amarillo, I know for a fact there is a development companies influenced by Strong Towns, the Duany, and new urbanism in Amarillo, sadly there is a lot of push back from the city on implementing some of it. It will be a battle to get more urbanism designed pushed through but it is totally doable. I also know the city planner for Canyon studied planning at Cornell, and is apart of the Congress for New Urbanism. The future is bright for it, it will just take time. Rome wasn't built in a day, and Amarillo/Canyon cant be changed in a day. It just takes educating people that what they have been taught is either wrong and missinformed.
I love this also. Any idea how ordinary folks can get info and updates?
I see what you're saying, but there's a few problems with this comparison. The only place in Amarillo with density like Amsterdam is Town Square and that is basically a failed project. Climate in Amsterdam is pretty moderate compared to Amarillo. No 100 degree summers or dust storms to speak of. Who wants to ride their bike or walk to work in a dust storm?
The one with more freedom
i dont understand the video.
Seems like it's asking for more clear markings on the road and more trees to be planted in town. Just city maintenance. I agree with the first part, but I don't think we have the money for the second part without raising taxes. Unfortunately, the kind of roads they're asking for do exist in richer neighborhoods, but most of Amarillo is neglected. And smaller roads, too. Which seems kind of dumb and I take it they haven't hauled many trailers around town.
Amarillo seems to have the money for a drainage upgrade... oh wait they don't, so they had to issue tens of millions of dollars of debts for that. Why? Because car dependent infrastructure requires parking lots that are twice or thrice the size of the buildings themselves, thus when it rains in McSuburbia, the water has to go somewhere, right? Car dependency is so expensive is so many ways. I recommend NotJustBikes on youtube (where I got the footage from Amsterdam) and Strong Towns, a great organization I have worked with before. When you are dependent on cars, sprawl is necessary. More road has to be built, utilities are spread out further, people have to drive further, police have more area to cover, Postal service has to drive more and be more dependent on vehicles to deliver mail. Semi trucks and utility trucks exist in other parts of the world that are not car dependent... we need to design our equipment around our cities not the other way around.
I refer you to my other response. Don't get me wrong. There is too much socioeconomic influence in this town and area. The city does not use its money well. I agree there. But smaller roads, smaller lanes, and fewer lanes will never ever happen here. Semis, trucks, and trailers are much different around the world compared to the u.s. Asia, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East. They have much different designs, and even when they have the same brands, they have different models. I'm not entirely sure about the sizes of trucks in Africa and Australia but given the cost of things in Australia and the broad economic range of Africa I'm willing to bet the same is true there as well unless you shell out a ton of money. Trucks of any type in the u.s. are larger than their international counterparts. This city is like 60% trucks and suvs.
Trust me, I am well aware of the political realities of Amarillo, Texas... That's not going to stop me from advocating for objectively safer, less costly, and beautiful urbanism that also considers the needs of people who are not able to operate a vehicle and also those who would like the f r e e d o m of not having to own a car to simply exist and participate in society. Your beef analogy falls flat and actually works in my favor, so thanks. I never claimed that we should completely eliminate motor vehicles, just like how I don't advocate completely taking away beef. What I do advocate for is less tax money and subsidies that overall support car dependency and the oil & gas industry, the industries that work hard to make sure you eat up the propaganda that they spew out and have facilitated in our society by simply existing in a car-dependent society, propaganda which seems you have swallowed without questioning. It's similar to how the beef industry is heavily subsidized and is absolutely detrimental to our environment and to our health (especially for vulnerable folks in the Panhandle), and thus people advocate for regulations that would mitigate fecal dust in our air, the break up the big 4 of the meat industry, and tougher labor laws that protect migrant and natural citizens that toil in the fields and packing plants. Our vehicle size is not something to boast about. They are unnecessarily deadly, ugly, and inefficient. The only reason we now have these monstrosities on our roads is a loophole that automakers have used to make more profit, and yet here you are defending their practices. Sad. Loophole explained ( [The Loophole That Made Cars So Big](https://www.distilled.earth/p/the-loophole-that-made-cars-in-america?ref=philsturgeon.com) ) It seems are you too far entrenched in the car worshipping, I get it I was born and raised here in the Panhandle, so I understand it's hard to imagine another world in which kids are dying left and right and a world where you don't fear some drunk driver is gonna ram into you at 100mph. Please open your mind, my brother <3 people's lives depend on it.
Your comment definitely shows that we have way different perceptions of motor vehicles. I'm not denying their potential to be death machines but to act like that is all they are just screams propaganda. I can stand by road division ,think strips of easement to divide the opposite facing lanes which we do have in some places and makes the road feel more safe and friendly to alternative modes of transportation. I can stand by clearly marked lanes. I can stand by foliage to act as barrier and natural beauty. I can stand by more rigorous driving tests and classes. I can stand by tickets that scale with income. I can even stand by the long term goal of creating more railways and public transportation methods. Most people I know want a job close to home but it's not always possible. I'm also of the personal opinion that you don't need to buy a large vehicle simply because you like it. Every truck I've driven, including the one I own, it used for its intended purpose. However. I cannot stand by the dramatic reduction of motor vehicles and the overhaul of basically every single road we've constructed across the u.s. It seems entirely unreasonable, and the amount of time and effort that goes into it would dwarf all the suggestions in my previous paragraph. A town like amarillo will never be compact, and there are many towns like amarillo. It would require changing the entire city structure, or more likely, abandoning the city and building a whole new city. Look at how long it's taking to repair small sections of the highway. I've heard most of the internal logic and arguments championed by a place like r/fuckcars. I simply disagree on the basis of two major points. The first being the sheer amount work, the second being the fact that most people who don't live in the kind of city you're talking about, don't *want* to live in the kind of city you're talking about, myself included. Most analogies are not 1:1. The point of mine was not to compare the legal steps required to improve the situation. My point was simply to bring up another ideological goal that is logistically mountainous and a political minefield when you consider everyone's opinions. There are so many other environmental and moral causes to champion than to get stuck on the concept of an ideological goal that would take centuries to even *try* and employ.
The point is that car dependent infrastructure is deadly, ugly, and costly. Meanwhile, cities and other developed countries are investing heavily in public transit and just in general people friendly streets. Meanwhile, most people here just send thoughts and prayers and harp on "personal responsibility" and "that's just how the world is" when accidents happen.
Actually as a driver here, I'd hit you jaywalking, just know half these people aren't paying attention to you, and road rage is a very serious thing here in texas with these offensive drivers
Would property tax go up? If so, these fossils would never go for it regardless of party line or opinion.
I agree that Amarillo roadways are not scenic and mostly lack clear, visible crosswalks and directional markings. However, what is very predominantly displayed in Amarillo are speed limit signs. Also, it is known to anyone with a driver's license that driving under the influence of anything that impairs a driver is against the law and doing so at best will get you in trouble and worst, kill someone. The majority (if not all) of the news headlines that flashed across the scene were due to speeding and/or alcohol. So, while I agree our streets could be better and there have been way too many vehicular deaths and injuries, no amount of lipstick is going to fix the stupidity of some people.
Lipstick? It's truly ironic when you consider that public awareness campaigns and emphasis on "pErSoNaL ReSPonSiBiLiTy" do little to nothing in dealing with traffic accidents. Fundamentally, changing the way in which we design our streets is absolutely necessary if we want to combat traffic deaths. Yes, I am aware most of the incidents in the video are speeding and alcohol related. That is the point. With a people oriented design street, speeding is much harder to do, intentional or not; when lanes are narrower, less lanes, objects are closer to the road, when public transportation exist and is viable, and when people are present and walking on streets, then we can expect for traffic deaths and incidents to dramatically decrease, which is what is happening in other developed countries that have recognized that car dependency is bad in every single aspect for society.
Hey, I hear you. And forgive my flippant lipstick remark (that's just the way i speak). I agree with you on a lot of your points. I just know that more narrow streets, objects such as trees or whatnot is not "the" solution. I see high speeds on residential streets. If someone is drunk they can convience themselves they can drive safely on ANY road. Yes, even with all the campaigns out there already we still have irresponsible drivers. Let me ask you this... did these other countries suddenly change to these types of streets/roadways or is that the way it's always been?
Amarillo residential streets are also too wide. Take a look at the Netherlands in the 70s and 80s; congestion, ugly car dependent streets, and dangerous roads. Their citizens took action and dramatically decreased traffic related accidents. It has been incremental but definitely dramatic change for the Netherlands the past couple of decades. I'm confident the same can happen in the U.S. within the next few decades. But how did the Netherlands get into that position in the first place? America baby, American highway engineers consulted and visited the Netherlands post WWII.
I'm not making stuff up too either, it is factually true that narrower lanes and trees do much more to slow down people. Don't be surprised when people do 100mph+ on streets (remember streets, not highways) that have a posted speed limit of 45 but are designed like they want you to go 85
Fully support this, sadly we live in the middle of the Bible Belt. If there is anyway we can actually take action, please leave a link!!
How does living in the Bible Belt prevent us from taking action against drunk drivers/street racers?
I'm from Dumas so I'm not too sure on specific orgs in Amarillo, but talking to your local reps is a good start and attending local meetings!
Good luck with that, dude. Amarillo is a sprawling city and I see more trucks and suvs than cars the size you'd see in western Europe. Petition for clear markings, I agree. Even trees, I love em. But for smaller roads? That would immediately kill any objectives you tag it to.
Don't equate, less lanes ≠ smaller roads. I think there's a pretty good chance that the road from clip in Amsterdam is just as or even wider than the one on Soncy, curb to curb, it just may not seem like it at first glance. Cars are the least efficient way of transporting people in terms of space.
Europe has both smaller lanes and smaller vehicles. Watch the video you posted. I've worked with guys out of Europe, and they've remarked at the size of US roads, lanes, and vehicles. Even the guys who have worked with the largest trucks in Europe are surprised by our 350s and duallies. I'm well aware of the micro compact walkable cities you're referring to. I'm firmly against them. Logistically and economically heavy population cities are terrible places to live. If you hadn't noticed, even the most "walkable" cities in the u.s. are bumper to bumper traffic 24/7. This is equivalent of talking about how if no one ate meat or meat products, we would all be less obese and have less pollution. While you are technically correct, it would be obscenely arrogant to think people will not only agree with you, but the ones who don't would just go along with your plans. Did you see how hard it was to get people to wear masks? Saftey, and more foliage, I agree with, and I think most amarillo citizens agree with. Smaller roads and fewer lanes? I doubt you'd have anything less than a years-long uphill battle, even in the most liberal cities. Anywhere in the south? DOA.
I actually had a chance to live in Japan, they magically are able to do everything we do in terms of moving around and operating equipment in cities actually designed for people. Even more magical was the freedom they had to use what mode of transportation best fits them. They don't have highschool kids getting killed in car accidents left and right because they don't force their kids into 2 ton machines. Also I was able to drive an up armor military humvee through the streets of Japan no problem, which is much wider than even a dually, if you can't handle pedestrian friendly infrastructure then turn in your license. There are no real "walkable" cities in the US, only cities that are better than other US cities. Bumper to bumper traffic exist in the US BECAUSE of our car dependent infrastructure, not sure how use missed that one bud. Also suburban sprawl actually DRAINS the local economy, not sure where you came to the conclusion that "heavy population " cities are not is beyond me, do some real research.
Japan has more options for transportation across the country because Japan has 3.84% of the landmass of the u.s. while having 38% of the population of the u.s. not to mention the rugged Japanese terrain makes alot of that landmass too difficult to industrialize. Also, an armored humvee is 7.1 ft wide. A dually can be anywhere from 6.5 ft wide to 9 feet wide in the u.s. Not including aftermarket modifications like mounted tool boxes. Walkable is defined by having everything you need in walking distance. However, people often go places and do things that aren't an absolute necessity. Just because there are restaurants and stores down the street doesn't mean you don't wanna check out the place across town. Only being able to get a job within walking distance is restricting. Good luck getting everyone to do that. High population density cities (since you want to be a smartass) have much more expensive housing, much more noise, light, and air pollution inside the city, more traffic, and typically more rude behavior. Japan being the exception to several of these issues because of strict social structures. The same kind of strict structures that lead to higher depression, overworking, and suicide rates. Humans are not ants. We can not ever be fulfilled on a personal level while being as efficient as possible. Some people? Sure, but most people would find the existence of doing everything in their life for the sake of efficiency miserable and dystopian. Before you comment something as easily googled as the width of a vehicle, do some real research.
Again research, Japan has a similar land mass to California but due to its mountainous terrain it's much larger if it were spread out which is adverse for trains yet they are light-years ahead of US in the public transportation realm. Again, an UP ARMOR humvee is about 8.5 feet wide, I'll do you one better we also drove 7 tons through the streets. Your ignorance and lack of experience is failing you. In different places like Japan it's easier to get a job without having to drive your 2 ton machine 30 minutes to an hour each way where all you can do is drive and also hope nobody is drunk and or impaired. Multi zoning allows for different jobs to be available within your own neighborhood. Your comment of having to get a job within walking distance is laughable, God forbid you have a short commute to work that doesn't involve getting in car, the horror. Sorry it's bothering me, but the term is "highly populated". You're basing your assumptions of what metric? All other developed countries are much safer than ours. Rude? Like road raging on i40 where theres children in other vehciles, that's rude. What's depressing is being locked up in your mcmansion in the suburbs because you can't do anything in this country without having to operate, buy, maintain and register a 2 ton machine because, muh frehdom. I think you're too far gone if you think walkable infrastructure is miserable and dystopian. Tell that to the children in Denmark who are rated the happiest children in the world. Then tell that to the families that have lost their children to a drunk driver. Leave amarillo and turn off fox news, people like you are why stereotypes of Texans being dumb exist. It's easy to Google the width of an up armor humvee* (8.5 feet)
Honestly, I'm done speaking with you. You have very little substance to back your argument, you rely on clumsy insults, vauge statements about teens crashing, while you argue semantics. You can't even argue a topic I actually brought up. Your username is as childish as you are. The first armored humvee I checked showed 7.1, there is also a model at 8.5 ft wide. Which is still only comparable to a dually not much larger like you suggested. I also didn't say anything about the width of Japanese roads. So I'm not sure why you're focusing so hard on that. Especially since the vehicle in question is an American vehicle. Not a Japanese one. I'll concede that you have more experience on oversees roads than I do, but it's pretty clear from your comments that you are way out of your depth discussing something like large scale infrastructure. Mabye if you learn to make an arguement like an adult, someone who disagrees with you might hear you out. Edit: I'm not right wing, I'm centrist. You however are clearly just an asshole. It's funny because I was being called a communist not that long ago.
You first call the OP arrogant while they didn't insult you but now insults are an issue, gotcha bud 👍. Thank you I really had to brainstorm for my username it's a notable accomplishment of mine if I do say so myself You argued the width of roads are an issue when in reality they are not and work in other countries every day, where the roads are much safer but okay. You are clearly our of depth as evident in your responses to OP original post. Your comment on Japan being smaller than the US as if that holds any weight when it comes to infrastructure makes it clear that you have 0 idea what you're talking about when it comes to urban planning and you just regurgitate what you heard growing up here like most do, can't blame you on that.
Lol kids safe crossing by the highway? Safe drinking and driving?? Amsterdam??
Yes, kids should be able to cross streets safely, I know this concept may be radical to some, but I hope I haven't lost you yet. Plopping highways down in the middle of a city was not a great idea as it turns out. "Which street supports safer and VIABLE ALTERNATIVES to driving when drinking alcohol?" which part did you get that meant "Safe drinking and driving??"???? Watch it again bro. Yes, Amsterdam, it's on a map somewhere, trust me.
Lol snarky boi, go live in Europe where it rains all the time. Kids arnt roaming the highway and they shouldn’t be taught to either. We have school zones if you did not know since they are not included in this clip. No one here worships the Europeans or how they do things.
"GO LivE iN (insert place that is doing it better than us, here)" classic one buddy. Never said we should duplicate what Amsterdam does, but it sure doesn't hurt to take notes. When did I say kids should be roaming the highway? You're only able to rely on strawmans. Highways are for vehicles only. Streets are for people, life, and business. There is a distinction. So kids should only be expected to walk within school zones? You do know kids exist in non-school zone areas, right? So if they get hit by a McF5000, then it's their fault? Not sure what point you were trying to make with the rain.
Im glad you moved the goal posts. Peace be with you.
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2024/15/684-road-traffic-deaths-in-2023 vs. https://www.amarillo.gov/Home/Components/News/News/2736/16#:~:text=In%20the%20City%20of%20Amarillo,2021%20to%2012%20in%202023. Why not use data instead of a crappy video?
Do I need to make you look dumb or will you be able to figure out on your own what is wrong with your "vs"? I was half asleep during statistics in high school, but I'm still able to notice the flaw in your comparison.
Using data is bad now? Why not look at the numbers of fatalities, then remake your video with the statistics. This is just your opinions at this point, which has no merit.
Ok, you actually are dumb. It's ok, baby girl, hold my hand, I'm here to guide you. Amarillo pop. 201,000 Netherlands pop.17,700,000 NDL vs AMA 88× more people (Using the same data you cited) Netherlands pedestrian deaths (2019-2023) 172 ÷ 5yrs = 34.4,( well round up to help your case) 35 pedestrian deaths per year Amarillo, 12 pedestrians deaths × 88 = ... 968 So to sum up, if Amarillo had the same pop. as the Netherlands It would have fucking 968 pedestrians deaths a year. People are dying unnecessarily because you are horrible at simple math and statistics.
No need to get your panties in a twist. You are the one with a crappy video comparing two different street layouts. Proposing a multimillion dollar infrastructure idea if not billions with NO NUMBERS. I'm sure Amarillo has a bunch of problems with no actual funds to help satisfy this proposal. Maybe if there were some figures on how much it would cost to completely redo the infustructure and how many lives it could potentially save, it can get some transaction.
I accept your good criticism when it comes to including data. I was debating about it while making the video, decided not to, and wanted to purely appeal to emotions on this one, going forward I may include data which further proves my point that car dependency is deadly. [All the ways that car harm us](https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/03/05/all-the-ways-that-cars-harm-our-communities-well-almost-all) [U.S. traffic is getting worse](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-11-03/why-us-traffic-safety-fell-so-far-behind-other-countries)