jakecopp
Joined 9 years ago
Joined 9 years ago
Perhaps you may enjoy the citation style if you’re not from Australia!
People riding bikes would always prefer a dedicated separated cycleway. Cyclists want to be on the footpath less than people walking want them there - they would only use it because it's safer than the road.
What usually happens here (and I assume is common in the US!) is the state transport department veto's taking away space from cars to build a proper bike lane, forcing people and bikes to fight over the scraps of street space left behind.
A particularly egregious example of exactly this scenario playing out: https://jakecoppinger.com/2024/09/another-broken-westconnex-...
If someone is arguing against shared paths - you should make sure they are arguing for bike lanes too. Otherwise they are not trying to be constructive.
Did you notice this article doesn't have a single mention of safe bike lanes? In Australia we spend ~0.2% of our transport budget on cycling and walking infrastructure - and see very low rates of cycling (and terrible safety outcomes) as a result. See stats on the Australian situation at https://australiancyclewaystats.jakecoppinger.com/
The BBC would have done well to read up on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_Council_of_Australi... before seeking quotes.
Yes - apologies. I didn't want to change the title from the original.
I've also done some basic analysis and embedded Observable charts. All documents and code is open source! Curious to hear what you think.
I don't think I was a particularly early user of Weathergraph - but when I finally had to retire my Pebble Time I only considered platforms that had your watchface.
Thanks very much for the attention to detail!
It's a record of how hard it is to get safe cycling intersections built in Sydney, even when the improvements are required approval conditions of a $4.3 billion portion of a motorway project (yes – Sydney is still building urban motorways this century).
That a “major design feature” or “key consideration of the proposal” could be deleted in secret, 2 years after going through community consultation, 3 years after the Review of Environmental Factors, 7 years after the initial M8 (WestConnex) approval condition B51 concept design, and announced by omission floored everyone in the room.
I'm also not clear on whether Google likes displaying OSM data on their map; it's a strange combination. I can't ever remember seeing "Copyright Google, Copyright OpenStreetMap contributors" in the footer of a page.
> It could be beneficial to have the ability filter out rural councils, and focus on denser urban areas.
I agree - I think comparisons by area and by density would be really interesting.
> For more retail appeal, you could consider some quick headline numbers at the top as bullet points. For example, the most cycle-friendly council, the worst (excluding rural), the most improved.
I hadn't thought of that but I think that's a great idea, thanks!