Yep! But I don't think a ban is needed to remove cars. Just make it undesirable to have one. Remove incentives to drive. For example, removing parking (free parking especially) is a great way to remove cars.
Skip the red light camera phase and just start redesigning the streets so they don't invite speeding and dangerous driving. No amount of enforcement is ever going to stop assholes. Making them feel like they might hurt THEMSELVES if they drive recklessly will.
It's the giant SUVs. The answer is obvious just by walking around, but the data is an obvious correlation as well. Any car that you can't see a child out of should be illegal.
Flat, simple logo design has nothing to do with "going digital" - all the gradients and chrome shit layered on top of the existing logo are far more "digital" than anything that came before or after.
Lots of definitive-sounding opinions from people who clearly don't have design experience. It's fun to be equipped to see through comments that sound good but are total bullshit to someone who knows what they're talking about - I don't often get that on here :)
Hate to break it to you, but all these "problems" with the logo were exactly the same in the old logo. You got distracted by the ham-fisted layer styles and fooled into thinking that made it good.
The fact that you said "makes the letters pop" would send shivers down any designer's spine.
This article is just a guy whining about how he personally doesn't like a logo. This logo is just fine, and it's certainly better than the old one that tried to look like it was made of physical material. Obviously the logos that are applied to the cars will look metallic because, well, they will be made of metal. This is a better logo in general, especially for print and online purposes. No excessive fake gradients and material renders, simpler lines and colors that will reduce well, and it goes back to the original state of their logo before they piled a bunch of fake chrome on it in the last couple decades.