LATEST COMMENTS

Ban cars from the city altogether.  It costs too much to park them anyway.  Large FREE car parks on train lines outside the city would make commuting much easier, eliminate traffic congestion, lower the level of pollution and create a quieter, more stress-free inner city.  Emergency and police vehicles would be allowed, of course, and delivery vehicles would be allowed only at night.  Free trams would provide efficient intra-city transport and, if free bicycles were added to the mix, as is done in Copenhagan and some other European cities, getting around Sydney would be a joy. 

Posted by: Bobuc2 on May 8, 2007 7:03 PM

There are many European cities that have greatly reduced the presence of automobiles, and I think some in the Third World, Curitiba in Brazil comes to mind.  Peak oil will sort out all the many problems of automania.  The rich only will then be able to drive, as is right and proper in the neo-feudalist paradise of market freedom.  Attempts to substitute ethanol for oil will fail, although the short term rise in corn prices will aid with the depopulation of the Third World, and the establishment of palm-oil plantations for bio-diesel will finish off what's left of tropical forests.  Our future is foretold in the Olduvai Hypothesis.  We are nearly half way through consuming the once only store of high energy resources, coal, oil and gas.  Possible substitutes, especially for transport are nowhere in sight, contain less energy, and often require almost as much energy expenditure in production as they provide.  So its back to the Olduvai Gorge for us.  At least the rest of creation will be happy! 

Posted by: Neuromantic on May 8, 2007 8:14 PM

It's not rocket science, and is already done all over Europe. 

The public transport in the (mostly pedestrianized) city centre needs to be constant.  I think this works best with trams.  Lots of them. 

Oh, and when I say city centre, of course I mean the centre for shopping! 

Posted by: Dingo on May 9, 2007 4:43 AM

Prioritisation has to be given to the pedestrian.  The car has to fit in after the walker - not the other way around

Posted by: Graeme on May 9, 2007 5:14 AM

Sydney streets are simply too narrow in many places to cope with the number of people.  We should also extend the Monorail instead of building more light rail and take a leaf out of Hong Kong's book, where many buildings are connected at first floor level with walkways.  Two thirds of pedestrians in HK would use these aerial footpaths, which takes a lot of pressure off the footpaths at street level.  We should do the same here. 

Posted by: Simon on May 9, 2007 6:10 AM

The comment from RTA is typical.  Have you ever noticed that pedestrians are granted about 10 seconds of green light time while cars get far more than that?  Also I don't know whether it was Gehl's idea but pedestrain lights in Melbourne turn green almost anytime the button is pushed (assuming that the lights are red for cars).  In Sydney, if the pedestrian button hasn't been pushed prior to the change to red for cars then you have to wait a full cycle before crossing.  No wonder people cross on the pedestain red light! 

Posted by: Mark Smith on May 9, 2007 6:56 AM

Of course pedestrians must be considered first and foremost - for anyone to even need to question that fact shows how far into the arms of Big Brother Oil cartel we have leapt.  We are all of us pedestrians for some considerable, and important, period of our lives - whether that be walking down the road to have a coffee with our friends, walking in the park with the dog or the children, walking home from the pub at night - or walking across the private courtyard from one's chauffeur-driven limousine to confer with one's private banker. 
LONG LIVE FEET! ( and wheelchairs, artificial limbs, and other aids to pedestrianism of course)
In a normal lifespan, it is expected that there will be long periods when we will be unable to drive, thus we must surely ensure that at least those places where humans gather in large numbers - ie cities - consider the pedestrian over and above any individual users of the infernal combustion engine and its brothers. 

Posted by: Sheena on May 9, 2007 7:20 AM

You won't fool me by throwing money around.  My vote is not for sale Mr Costello!As for Mr Howard,he is as cunning as a fox, but my vote still goes to Labor. 

Posted by: Tony on May 9, 2007 7:54 AM

The fascination of Australia, particularly Sydney, with USA values, way of speaking, way of governing, ethics, etc just shows in the CBD structure and priorities.  The term "the hole in the middle" is appropriate for Sydney CBD
Where is the culture and sophistication? 

Posted by: divyesh Shah on May 9, 2007 8:06 AM

A big start would be re-educate the RTA.  Judging by the results of their “engineering” it is clear they do not understand the needs of pedestrians.  Pedestrians are just an afterthought, if not an inconvenience to “the smooth flow of traffic”.  Hello!  Pedestrians are traffic too, you know. 

Pedestrians jay-walk and cross against red lights because they are sick of waiting so long for a green light.  If you just miss the green man you are expected to wait for a full cycle of the lights, something which could be as long as 3 minutes.  Waiting car drivers have it easy: they have their air-con, in-car entertainment, and full weather and blow-fly protection (a roof and windows), and the choice of recirculated air if the traffic exhaust fumes get too much – pedestrians only have an umbrella at most (an anti-social device on crowded streets). 

Pedestrian’s only get the green man for a few seconds which means that they get a very small share of the traffic light phase cycle.  Also, most crossing lights do not show the green man unless the crossing button has been pressed.  This means a pedestrian is very lucky to arrive at a crossing with the green man showing.  Of course it would be impractical/unhelpful to increase the length of time the green man is on, instead the frequency of the green man should be increased.  That way pedestrians will be more willing to wait for the green man rather than cross on red.  This would take some re-engineering of the traffic light controller, but the RTA already changes the phasing of lights both manually and automatically/dynamically depending on vehicular traffic and the time of day.  The traffic light controller should interpret the pressing of a pedestrian crossing button as a need to shorten the vehicular traffic’s green light time.  Repeated pressing of the same crossing button should be ignored.  If the button on the opposite side of the crossing is pressed then this should casue the green light’s time to be further shortened because now at least two pedestrians are wanting to cross the road. 

We want more diagonal crossings!  This cuts the number of separate crossings from 2 to 1.  After waiting for the first crossing most people are unwilling to repeat the preformance for the second crossing and jay-walk across the next street. 

Another frustration is the penny-pinching attitude to only installing pedestrian crossings on 2 sides of a T-junction.  This means that a pedestrian has to make 2 separate crossings, with all the associated waiting, when only one crossing was necessary. 

Posted by: Walk For Your Health on May 9, 2007 8:26 AM

One of my pet hates whenever I walk around the city is the incescant haze of cigarette smoke that you have to walk through.  It makes any walk in the city particularly unpleasant. 

Aside from all the usual traffic planning issues, any pedestrian plan also needs to find somewhere for smokers to go or simply banish them from public areas. 

Posted by: mark on May 9, 2007 8:39 AM

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with the USA, anyone who's been there would know that. 

The term 'doughnut' in general planning terms doesn't apply to the Sydney CBD.  If one were to compare Sydney to a number of American cities, it would be easy to see the difference.  In many American cities, the term 'doughnut' refers to the fact that jobs and shopping have left the center of the city, taking tax dollars, pedestrians and everything else with it.  Sydney has a, comparatively, vibrant CBD.  There are plenty of things happening there 7 days a week and while cars are a problem, they don't dominate Sydney's CBD.  Spend a day in Los Angeles and you'll be begging for Sydney. 

That's not to say that the CBD doesn't face many challenges, but to eliminate cars completely is not the solution nor is that even feasible.  Cars are a necessary evil, they keep eyes on the street and in they're own way help with safety.  Eliminate cars and what happens when the pedestrians go home?  You get desolate abandoned streets after hours.  That's not a good thing. 

More attention needs to be paid to traffic calming, not automobile elimination.  It would also help to educate drivers about pedestrian safety. 

Posted by: JS on May 9, 2007 8:50 AM

This sounds like such a stupid argument.  We cannot ban all vehicles from the city centre.  Plenty of businesses get things delivered by van/courier car/ute, and what about plumbers, builders, store deliveries, trucks (although most trucks fill Pitt Street Mall in early morning) etc? 

I think a city entry tax of some description (similar to the UK) for the fat cats insisting on driving in would be a good place to start.  But on the flip side, honestly, why would someone want to take public transport into the city when the PT system is so bad?  Stinky, packed, late wretched trains - ugh.  This problem is greater than just some people having to wait at lights or not looking where they're going when they cross the road. 

Sydney is dead on the weekends, unlike Melbourne which is a beautiful, interesting hub of people and bustling shops.  What makes it so attractive?  Excellent and inviting planning for one, but perhaps most importantly A FREE CITY CIRCLE TRAM encourages people to explore other parts of town.  God forbid the tightest city in the country give us something for free though....

The road is there to share, but for God's sake, look where you're going if you're crossing a road and don't blame someone else if you get hit.  Take some damn responsibility people. 

Posted by: nml on May 9, 2007 8:56 AM

Theres nothing worse than sitting at a bus stop watching every car with only one person in it.  Why don't we encourage electric mopeds to get to work?  mmmm.... even better if work supplied them!  and free cbd bikes like amsterdam?  Wouldn't this solve a lot of congestion problems and help the environment, not to mention pedestrians breathing cleaner air...

Posted by: miff on May 9, 2007 9:13 AM

Wake up RTA - its 2007, not 1957. 
Things have changed.  You spend millions on roads to get cars to the city and then its a jam.  Charge a toll of $10 to enter the CBD, but keep cars off George, Pitt and York streets.  Get buses running on these streets from The Rocks to Central Station.  SIMPLE. 

Posted by: peter on May 9, 2007 9:20 AM

Remove the car parks and give the space back to the people and some native vegetation. 

Posted by: Matthew on May 9, 2007 9:34 AM

Driveways are a huge problem for pedestrians.  Most drivers do not give way to pedestrians on the footpath.  This is a major reason why parents are reluctant to let children walk unaccompanied. 
Every driveway at supermarkets, shopping centres, department stores, servos, office buildings, schools, universities, factories, warehoused, blocks of flats etc. ( but not single residences) should be required to have a stop sign with 'Give way to pedestrians on footpath' below it.  These signs should be two-way, applying to both entry and exit. 
Give way signs would not work, because most drivers interpret giving way to pedestrians as simply not hitting pedestrians in front of them, as opposed to checking for approaching pedestrians and letting them pass first. 
A related issue is under-building carparks with short steep driveway ramps that encourage drivers to accelerate towards the footpath.  This is dangerous and totally unacceptable.  As well as stop signs, they should be required to have speed bumps.  In extreme cases, ramps might have to be lengthened under the building, even if it reduces the car spaces. 
It should be illegal to have walls/fences/hedges etc.  that prevent drivers from checking for pedestrians until their vehicles are actually on the footpath.  It is true that there are a minority of existing buildings where it would be structurally impossible to eliminate walls that obscure vision, but in such cases speed bumps should be mandatory and mirrors could probably be installed. 
These physical requirements must be accompanied by media campaigns emphasising that drivers also have to give way to pedestrians when leaving/entering single residences. 
And the laws must be *enforced*: people should be booked for violating them, the same as they are for speeding etc.  Has any driver *ever* been booked for barrelling out of a driveway without looking?  Pedestrians already have right of way on footpaths, but currently anyone who takes this at face value is likely not to reach a ripe old age. 

Posted by: walker on May 9, 2007 10:02 AM

I think the best thing to do would be to abolish the RTA.  Their arrogance knows no bounds and they truly will not be happy until the entire city is covered in roads and pedestrians - along with buses, trains and trams - are abolished because they interfere with the flow of vehicles. 

They need to be brought down from their perceived position at the top of Sydney's transport needs to the bottom where they belong. 

Posted by: Waldo on May 9, 2007 10:06 AM

I'd ban dawdlers, window shoppers, people who can't walk in a straight line, people who stand on the right hand side of escalators, holiday makers who don't have any real reason for being in the city, ummm...

Posted by: matthew on May 9, 2007 10:14 AM

Surely we should adapt best practices from cities around the world to Sydney, which makes it all the more important to consult the public.  So many of us have experienced or seen things that work elsewhere, it is frustrating to see NSW planners miss the point.  The term "world class city" will continue to make me laugh until Sydney solves its transport woes.  The best way to encourage ownership and usage of our streets is to give people access to good public transport, not only at peak hour but ALL THE TIME, including week-ends.  I believe that roads shared by public transport and pedestrians, are the way to go. 

Posted by: sebrob on May 9, 2007 10:55 AM

There should be more pedestrian tunnels under George Street/Parramatta Road.  This will ease traffic congestion as pedestrians wouldn't have to wait at crossings and would also be able to cross freely without fear of being hit by a car.  Cars would be able to turn without waiting for all pedestrians to cross.  Sydney has almost no pedestrians tunnels under major roads. 

Posted by: Kieryn Reid on May 9, 2007 11:02 AM

Finally, some common sense for Sydney's CBD.  It is about time we looked to Melbourne and Europe for some inspiration instead of relying on the natural attributes of our harbour and beaches.  It is safer crossing the road in London or New York than in central Sydney where aggressive drivers rule the roost.  The Town Hall end of George St is an eyesore and I look forward to these changes. 

Posted by: Michael on May 9, 2007 11:06 AM

"It is safer crossing the road in London or New York than in central Sydney where aggressive drivers rule the roost. "  Sorry but I just cannot agree with this.  I come from the UK and Sydney drivers are laid back in comparison to those in London.  To those that think a congestion charge is the answeer it may have reduced traffic in Central London but it has heaped costs onto small businesses and reduced their custom.  It also allows the "fatcats " to carry on regardless and merely pushes the less well off to seek alternatives. 

Perhaps if many of the alternative routes were toll free then people might use them? 

Posted by: Ian on May 9, 2007 11:42 AM

peter at May 9, 2007 9:20 AM

and

Kieryn Reid at May 9, 2007 11:02 AM

TOP ideas :) You can get a heck of a long way around Melbourne city (as an example) by not stepping foot outside as many many shops connect either underground or via air-bridges. 

Posted by: nml on May 9, 2007 12:14 PM

Professor Gehl suggests creating a continuous footpath on main streets, so that cars have to drive over the raised area. " Then the cars have the problem," he said. 

We have enough problems without being subjected to another mad Dane.  The last one was Utzon, and we are still not over him. 

Posted by: Jock Lenehan on May 9, 2007 12:34 PM

Of course pedestrians should be given priority!  If so much time and money wasn't spent on the whims of 'certain groups' who would have us all on some sort of wheels perhaps we would have some sanity and amenity for the poor bloody pedestrian who gets the rawest deal in the world in Sydney.  The condition of the footpaths, both in structure and ever increasing clutter, is a disgrace, as is having to breathe in the secondhand smoke from the nicotine addicts who infest the footpaths.  And if one more bloody cyclist or skateboarder hits me on the footpath, I swear I am going to beat the tripe out of him or her!!! 

Posted by: Peddo Power on May 9, 2007 1:20 PM

I believe Sydney City does need to be more pedestrian friendly, however we need a decent public transport system to get us there in the first place. 

I would suggest turning George Street into a bus and tram thoroughfare all the way from Broadway to The Rocks with only emergency vehicles the exception.  I believe this would also reduce crime in the area and encourage visitors at night and on the weekend.  The area from the George Street cinema strip all the way to Central Station is a disgusting dump.  Have you ever noticed George Street is chocked with lowered 4 cylinder imported cars with ridiculously oversized wheels and loud exhausts to match with at least 4 inhabitants leering at pedestrians on the side walk.  If you do get the bus into the city, you sit in the chaos anyway.  Yuck, I avoid the city all together.  If people insist on driving into the city, tax them to use the other CBD roads and increase the parking fees. 

With these changes the heart of the city would be an awesome place to hang out, especially if a park is created where Woolworths is. 

Posted by: Justin - Newtown on May 9, 2007 2:40 PM

In North America, look at Vancouver BC.  For decades they have deliberately avoided new motorways, and planned for
1) Pedestrians first
2) Bicycles second
3) Public transport third
4) Then cars

Downtown is liveable.  To get to work on any mode of transport from nearby suburbs takes about the same amount of time.  Inspite of the wet weather, many people (incl us) do not own cars.  Vancouver BC is not perfect, but probably the best example in North America. 

Posted by: Montxsuz on May 9, 2007 3:52 PM

Whoa!!  RTA arrogance there. 

Why shouldn't the cars have to push the button to cross & leave the through-way to people walking? 

In Oz capitals I routinely watch 30-100 or more pedestrians waiting cross a CBD intersection while 20-50 cars pass. 

Posted by: Rust Perth on May 9, 2007 4:30 PM

First Floor Walkways are the way to go...
How many people walk down market street with the toxic fumes, rain, cigarettes, the sick aroma of garbabe
When they can do it in the comforts and joy of aircon, shelter and window shopping as they walk through. 

In the CBD fresh air is a myth, face it - filtered is safer

Posted by: Eva on May 9, 2007 4:35 PM

The city's "design" is definitely skewed too far against people and in favour of cars.  A $10 toll for cars entering the city area would be a wonderful idea.  This single measure, more than any other, would help things a lot. 
Number two on my list would be to something about government buses.  They are way too noisy, and they emit horrible smoke.  The existing buses should use an improved design, but electric trams running from Central to Circular Quay (with zero fares) would be a wonderful replacement.  The congestion tax on cars would defray the cost of operating the trams. 
My number three idea is that there should be strong regulations - which are actually enforced, and backed by serious fines - against excessivly loud vehicles of all kinds (buses, motorcycles, cars). 
Thank goodness the City Council is doing something about this.  The parliamentarians in Macquarie St. seem utterly useless. 

Posted by: Damien on May 9, 2007 4:35 PM

1.  Go back to the rule of keeping left

1a) or moving out of the way when browsing

2.  Police the cyclists riding on the footpaths (after proper cycle lanes are put in to protect the poor buggers)

3.  Trams.  Trams.  Trams

Posted by: Emma Jay on May 9, 2007 4:39 PM

Go Peddo Power. 
I am with you.  Let me know if you need a hand. 

When cyclists ring their tinkle bells (not to warn but to push past) I tell them they should be on the road and I have right of way, they wait for me. 
Usually stunned ignorant silence. 

And the 4WDs taking you out around the Moore Park area - especially the horsey types. 

Posted by: Emma Jay on May 9, 2007 4:50 PM

The root cause of Sydney's traffic problems is that there is no inner city light rail network. 

It's the solution world class cities use.  London has its tube, Paris has its Metro, New York has its subway, Berlin has its U Bahn, Tokyo has its J Trains, Hong Kong has its MTR.  Strewth, Melbourne has its trams. 

What does Syney have?  A few heavy rail commuter lines, with triple decker blunder buses that trundel in the punters from Mt Druitt, Cronulla, and Hornsby. 

They took away Sydney's trams in the 70's and replaced them with.....well....nothing. 

And that's the problem. 

Posted by: Stu on May 9, 2007 5:21 PM

The problem is obviously the traffic
-People dont want to pay to use the cross city tunnel, nor the ED.  The toll in those freeways should be abolished - instead the operators can get income from a congestion charge. 
-After work, everyone makes big queues at bus stops while waiting for one of the 10 or so different bus routes that stop at that stop - none of the buses get filled.  We need a way to funnel everyone out of the CBD to a proper interchange, where they can swap to their train/bus easily and without crowding footpaths/streets
-This is light rail - free lines in a loop around the CBD, with fares to travel further to the inner city
-Alternatively, cycling.  Heres a scheme: bike racks strategically placed round the city.  People swipe their TCard to be dispensed a bike, and they return it to the rack closest to them when they're done. 
-wider footpaths!!!  theres so many people and its so narrow - ban cars on Castlereagh street, and restrict all through traffic to freeways
-theres websites set up for people to discuss solutions (www.skyscrapercity.com - go to the ozscrapers forum, quite interesting)

Posted by: ausboy on May 9, 2007 6:34 PM

When I'm in the city, i'm often both a driver and a pedestrian. 

I'm often required to drive into the city to collect equipement or to deliver and install it. 

However at any other time I'm a pedestrian and then I try to take the drivers point of view. 

That is, being a driver forced into the city is a pain, no-one really enjoys it, not the driver nor the pedestrian, but there are simple ways to stop this being a pain. 

STOP BEING SELFISH! 

Trying to pull out of an under-building car-park is hell, no one stops walking for the 4 1/2 seconds it takes for the car to get out of the driveway and onto the road. 

I've waited 10mins to get out once and I only managed to do so because one gentleman decided to stop for the 4 seconds neccessary and others decided to follow suit. 

I thanked him and the others with a smile and a wave, whilst others to selfish to care carried on. 

The next thing is for drivers to recognise their own selfishness, don't block pedestrian crossings.... anticipate that the lights might turn red soon and wait behind the line until traffic ahead clears. 

I can move through-out the city as a pedestrian with ease, including waiting to cross, the light/crossing sequences in Sydney are fine... it's the other pedestrians that are my gripe. 

Crossing infront of cars waiting to move; not crossing at crossings; blocking corners at crossings having a conversations (take it to a caffee) idiots on their Blackberrys writing whilst walking and not being able to do the latter well. 

Or how about trying to drive down Elisabeth street, the pedestrians completly ignore the red crossing signle, they are to busy looking at the name of the song on their Ipoop. 

I don't want to drive in the city, but sometimes I must, therefore, I try to be both the best drive I can, and mindful of cars who also need to get about when I'm walking. 

People, It's not the RTA who needs to fix this, it's you!  Consider both worlds! 

If you get hit whilst crossing at a red crossing light, it's your fault; drivers, if you get caught in the middle of a crossing when the light changes, it's your fault! 

There are plenty of pedestrian only areas in Sydney; Martin Place, Pitt Street, Hay market are just to name a few, but some select ares would be great, how about all of Pitt Street, leaving the rest for servicing the driving public and deliveries etc. 

Then run a FREE tram up the whole of Pitt Street. 

It's already been started (pitt street mall) so finish it and leave the reast of the streets alone. 

Posted by: Paul on May 9, 2007 6:50 PM

"Stu at May 9, 2007 5:21 PM
"
I think you'll find that the trams were taken out of Sydney by 1961, not the 70s.  They were replaced with buses. 

Posted by: Anon1960 on May 9, 2007 7:11 PM

I always found it quite easy to walk around the centre of Sydney, by using pedestrian subways to the train stations and the walkways between the various shopping centres.  I used to be able to get from the Westpac building in Martin Place to Town Hall Station without once having to cross a street at the pedestrian lights.  It might take slightly longer but at least when it was raining I never got wet. 

Posted by: Emma on May 9, 2007 9:30 PM

It's no fun being a pedestrian in the centre of Sydney.  How about three fixes:
1.  Encourage people to walk on the left (crowded footpaths would be easier to navigate)
2.  Target buses and taxis that accelerate on the orange light or deliberately run red lights.  They do it because they know they have a few seconds' grace before the green man lights up
3.  Introduce more, more, more diagonal crossings like that at Town Hall. 

Posted by: Suze Q on May 9, 2007 9:40 PM

1.  Pedestrians need to start to be more considerate of one another - keep left, maintain reasonable walking speed, try not to bash other pedestrians with your baggage. 

2.  Roads are for cars - wait for the green light before crossing.  It's rarely more than a couple of minutes wait.  What's the rush? 

The answer...TRAMS, TRAMS AND MORE TRAMS!!!!!!!  And I'm not saying this because Melbourne has them, I'm saying it because Sydney USED to have them, and should have them now. 

In fact, if Sydney were simply to replicate the tram network it had in the 1920s it would still be bigger than what Melbourne's tram network is now, and would have more than double the amount of trams. 

Not only that, but trams, contrary to popular belief, actually improve traffic flow, because they carry more people per vehicle than buses, effectively removing the need saturate the streets with buses.  The fact that they travel in the centre of the road means that they never block it like a bus when they swing in and out at bus stops...this means that there is also always a free lane for cars and private traffic on either side of the road. 

Trams also have clearly visible routes, you can see the track so thefore you can see where the tram will go, giving riders more self confidence to take it as a form of public transport and leave their cars behind. 

They are modern and don't pollute either, are more comfortable, smoother.  But anyway, I'm getting side tracked. 

Trams force the road to be more pedestrian friendly, because they are boarded from the centre of the road, so pedestrian islands are built.  That's why you often see trams in the middle of a pedestrian shopping mall, you wouldn't see that with a bus.  They improve streetscapes in other ways as well.  In some tram systems in Europe, the tracks are built then grass is planted between them creating a perfectly manicured nature strip - ok so that's not possibly on George Street, but on a leafy route like Anzac Parade it would be stunning. 

The pros outweigh the cons so much with trams that the cons are virtually non existant.  John Watkins, the NSW transport minister couldn't be more wrong promoting buses for Sydney...they don't work and it clearly shows. 

Now if you don't mind, I'm off to wonder what Sydney would be like with a large tram network...a public transport utopia

Posted by: Yimon on May 10, 2007 12:25 AM

Though I say pedestrians should have priority, I believe there needs to be some sort of pedestrian licence, where you have to stay home if you don't have one.  It would involve learning and being tested on walking on the left, not stopping suddenly, not changing direction without checking if anyone is coming up beside you, not loitering under shelter right outside Town Hall station entries because it is raining, safe use of an umbrella, speed limits (ie; not running for buses/trains), not walking in multiple file (especially for fat people) and so on and so forth. 

What I'd like to see is a "Reclaim the City" event where us pedestrians form a giant loop around the CBD and hold hands and don't let any vehicles in (or out) for say an hour. 

Posted by: Kurmudgeon on May 10, 2007 12:25 AM

people in cars should be more polite

Posted by: be nice on May 10, 2007 8:39 AM

Protected bike lanes throughout the city.  Have all cars adopt e-tags and charge $5 for every street up to a maximum of $30 per day.  Watch the cars disappear.