There’s a good piece in today’s Standard about the perils of being a pedestrian in Hong Kong:

Poor urban planning has turned “world class” Hong Kong into a “pedestrian-hostile city”, which last year led to the deaths of 202 people, says a Hong Kong University professor. “There are more people on public transport here in Hong Kong than anywhere else in the world”, Bill Barron, associate professor at the Hong Kong University’s Centre of Urban Planning and Environmental Management, said.

“That makes most of us pedestrians. Ironically, very little attention is paid to that”, he said. “Whenever the government has to make a choice between people and vehicles, it always prioritises vehicles”.

It has to be said that there are several areas of Hong Kong which are relatively good from the pedestrian point of view. It is possible to get around much of the Sheung Wan/Central/Wan Chai area by walking through shopping centres and using pedestrian bridges, though it does rather which direction you want to go.

Likewise, places such as Tsuen Wan, Tuen Mun and Sha Tin have vast networks of inter-connected shopping centres, though it is very easy to get totally lost, and frustrating when you can see somewhere at street level but no apparent way to get there!

In much of the rest of Hong Kong you have to take pot luck. There are sometimes reasonably pleasant walkways (and cycle routes) by the side of the road, but equally there are places where barriers have been built to prevent you crossing the road at street level and the bridges have no cover against rain or sun. Obviously it is tempting to try to cross the road even though you are not supposed to do so.

Poor urban planning encourages jaywalking, which is a root cause of many city accidents – and rocketing government compensation payouts. “Hong Kong is simply a pedestrian-hostile city”, Barron said.

I’m not sure that I’d agree that Hong Kong is a pedestrian-hostile city. Almost every city in the world has the same problem of trying to reconcile the needs of motorists and pedestrians, and there aren’t any easy answers. In London, the ‘congestion charge’ has cut traffic and Trafalgar Square is now a much safer place to walk, but the problem is much bigger than that. In Hong Kong, the closure of several streets in Causeway Bay (at certain times of the day) has been a success, and the new network of tunnels in Tsim Sha Tsui will make that area more pleasant.

There is something of a dilemma here (as Bill Barron points out), in that although car owners are a minority in Hong Kong, most of us do use the roads – as passengers in buses, minibuses and taxis. The drivers of the latter two forms of transport must represent the greatest threat to pedestrians (I have lost count of the number of times I have watched taxis in particular go through red lights at pedestrian crossings). The sheer number of buses is also a problem in some places, and poor planning has created a further problem where buses are forced to cut across several lanes to reach bus stops.

One small bonus in Hong Kong is that we don’t have many cyclists, and most of them (wisely) stick to the dedicated cycle paths. Cyclists may complain about car drivers, but pedestrians live in fear of cyclists!

According to The Standard, pedestrians do sometimes get prosecuted:

In the first three months of this year, 3,600 jaywalkers faced prosecution and another 15,000 were given verbal cautions. The fine for jaywalking is between HK$500 and HK$1,000 – less than that for a litterbug.

The funniest country for this is Germany. A few years ago I had the misfortune to spend a week working in Bonn, a sleepy town that was then the capital. A group of us were walking along in the evening and came to a junction which had a pedestrian crossing. As there was absolutely no traffic anywhere to be seen, we crossed the road without waiting for the lights to change. This prompted a local woman to remonstrate loudly with us for being so undisciplined. That’s Germany for you!

Posted in

10 responses to “Danger – people”

  1. fumier avatar

    I used to live in Bonn. We used to say that if you heard police sirens, it was because there was either a jaywalker or a cyclist riding without his lights on.

    Like

  2. mr tall avatar

    I think you’re right, Chris — calling HK a ‘pedestrian-hostile city’ is too much. Perhaps Mr Barron should try to foot it through just about any US city other than NYC/Manhattan?
    HK does pretty well, I think — I wonder how many of those 202 people were jaywalking? I’ve actually been very impressed here by numerous drivers managing not to hit pedestrians who’ve stepped right out into busy streets, just asking for a squishy demise. . . .

    Like

  3. Ron avatar

    Car owners are a minority in Hong Kong because the local government out here thinks we share the rights to unconditionally grab money from the Greenspan Private Printing Press.
    Further to Hemlock’s repeated observation that only 17 of us pay taxes out here, I would point out that all car owners help pay for the road, traffic lights, traffic police, ambulance, and miscellaneous costs.
    Besides, we do support the insurance sector jobs with our annual NCB – No Claim Bonus payouts for insurance at discount, though we never use it as we are safe drivers.
    And of course, the annual car registration fees (get-out-of-here), is the only reason our bold and brave cropped hair one has the extra cash to throw grand parties at Chris Patten’s old hole or the government house.
    Yes, they suck the blood out of us. But…
    I must comfort myself that should I live beyond the age of 65 in Hong Kong, I will get “fruit money” and senior concessions for all this crap I have put up with in this place even if I don’t ask for it.
    Cheers!

    Like

  4. Chris avatar

    Well, car owners should pay for roads, traffic lights, traffic police and the rest! Car owners should be grateful that they are in a minority – if there were more of you, the traffic jams would be much worse.
    I owned a car when I lived in London, but I have never felt the need to buy one here (even though the purchase price is lower) because taxis and public transport are generally a cheaper and better alternative.

    Like

  5. Ron avatar

    OK how about franchised buses, and other modes of transportation like say LRT (Light Rail Transit)? They also end up using the same facilities and what have you.
    However, should you research the system, these category of vehicles escape the high ridiculous costs very conveniently and at times also end up with subsidies (sorry no link at moment)!
    Which is why I pointed out the unfair charges to the minority.
    And what a stupid government we have that it finds car owners a very convenient excuse to fill up the harbor and create a 16 lane highway. It escapes many that the main problem of congestions exacerbated after a lot of bus franchises were dished out over the past few years.
    Maybe some more friends of Tung want bus franchises or land for development.
    Cheers!

    Like

  6. Chris avatar

    It’s a complex subject. Car owners always believe that they are a persecuted minority, but in my opinion they aren’t persecuted enough!!
    Public transport is subsidised almost everywhere, and Hong Kong probably does have too many buses (at least during off-peak periods). The marginal cost of operating buses during the day must be very low, so it’s worth their while to run almost empty buses. However, a bus with 10 people on board must create less pollution and damage the roads less (in proportion) than the average car.
    Plus if there were fewer lorries and private cars on the roads, my journey to work (by bus) would be quicker.

    Like

  7. Ron avatar

    Your post, comments, and opinion clearly show prejudice towards car owners and you are willing to ignore the rationality towards sound judgment. That is all I can conclude.
    Buses and lorries in Hong Kong (at least most of them) still use diesel, whereas cars use unleaded gasoline and the newer models are “Ecotec” or environment friendly.
    I am not an expert on this subject, but my friend who bought a 10 million dollar apartment in Causeway Bay during 1996 and sold it for 4.xx million about one year ago did all these statistics and said it was simply not worth living in a house where all he could see was endless queue of buses oozing fumes and he wasn’t able to open his windows even for one day during the year.
    Sad but true.
    Cheers!

    Like

  8. Chris avatar

    I agree that there is a problem with too many buses in Hong Kong, but many of them do now run on clean diesel.
    Nevertheless, places like Causeway Bay and Mong Kok would be more pleasant if there were fewer cars, allowing buses to operate more efficiently (by not having to queue up to get to bus stops or wait so long at traffic lights).

    Like

  9. Ron avatar

    Whatever you say Chris…
    I hate the double-decker buses. But well, only the British would love them as they came up with this stupid idea.
    Cheers!

    Like

  10. Chris avatar

    How can you hate double decker buses? Sitting on the upper deck gives you a much better view of the world.

    Like

Leave a reply to mr tall Cancel reply