You need to be signed in to add your comment.

What do you think about the Grand Pacific Walk?

by lbergmann, over 6 years ago

Use this space to discuss the Grand pacific Walk Masterplan and Stage One Concept Plan.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

Consultation has concluded

  • teddy326 over 6 years ago
    2 metres is not enough but we have to start somewhere and make gradual improvements. Somebody has to rob Peter to pay Paul because some residents dont want visitors.
    Linking the RNP to Otford Railway is a problem - its not a through route for vehicles so cant they be slowed down for some time.(Another Radar!!! make revenue to pay for a new walking track?)
    There are also walking tracks from Coalcliff and Stanwell going inland which have the same problem as RNP to Stanwell so I cant see that the RNP connection is a vastly higher priority.
    Seacliff bridge area is a through route for vehicles - what is going to be done about the narrow walkway there where our walking group encountered a skateboarder carrying a young child coming down the hill.
    Where are the cyclists going to go on any of this? One does not ride a bike only to be told to walk everywhere getting a bad back from pushing it.
    Minimal noise, minimal pollution, minimal space taken up to park it.
    The residents objector is not coming up with a solution other than banning cyclists and pedestrians on their dangerous road.
    Would the residents like a 15km/hour speed limit on the road? Its a bit like going to live near an Airport and then wanting the Airport moved.(i.e. live in a tourist area and not want anyone to come).
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • jote over 6 years ago
    The proposal is sound, however the width of the track needs to reflect a 50 year life with increasing use by a wide range of users.

    The Australian shared path standard is 3 metres. Unfortunately the concept and detailed drawings show shared path diagrams with 2 metres of effective space. Less where there are existing structures.

    While there are significant easement issues, private property and steep drop-offs, to construct a path of less than 3 metres because of initial costs will not do fair justice to the overall concept of something billed as being "Grand"!

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • libbywibbly over 6 years ago
    I consider the Grand Pacific to be a completely ill-conceived and extremely dangerous plan with little or no regard for the residents and ratepayers of the areas along the pathway. The nature of vast residential stretches of Lawrence Hargrave Drive ALREADYmakes entering and leaving homes along there fraught with difficulty and danger because of the bends and curves where there are regular accidents even now.
    To add unaware overconfident walkers, cyclists, children on scooters etc to this dangerous mix seems ridiculous. Vehicles reversing from the many driveways pose a serious hazard and it does not seem appropriate to lumber ratepayers with the responsibility for the safety of those who may, indeed, feel over confident as they are dallying along. It also seems little regard has been given to the privacy of residents where there is only their homes to look into for long stretches.
    I hold grave fears for the safety of any person walking along that road and would not want the invasion of privacy bound to be a side issue for residents.
    Hide replies (3)
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
    • defender over 6 years ago
      I can't leave such negativity about a great project go by without comment. In a perfect world without any eccomonic constrants a seperate cycle / walkway would be ideal; but the next best thing (given us ratepayers can't afford to purchase the required land) is the proposed shared pathway between the road and property boundries. It is much safer than riding in the dooring zone. Cyclists and adult pedestrians are well aware occassional careless resident / motorist reversing out of driveways at great haste. The problem will always exist as foot paths are in most demand on major roads and all residential and commercial properties with off street car parking have driveways crossing the foot path.
      The privacy issue - I'm dumbfounded. you might not like the ammenity of strangers walking past your house, but unless you have your your personal details displayed on a billboard in your front yard, how can a stranger learn anything private of yourself? Ammenity is important; but again I can't see a few cyclists and pedestrians having significant impact compared with all the motor vehicle traffic.
      Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
      • libbywibbly over 6 years ago
        I fear you have completely missed the point. IT IS not a normal road. It is a really DANGEROUS roadway.. Also If it is just a few going by then why do it? Have you ever tried to park between Scarborough and coledale on that side of the road ? There are so many issues not considered but then we are talking about wollongong council after all.
        Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
        • Hayley Walton over 6 years ago
          Having cycled to Clifton from Wollongong and back again last week I appreciate it is a dangerous road. If the walkway/cycleway is on the sea side of the road surely this makes it safer for all including house owners reversing out of driveways. Then cyclists and pedestrians will be away from houses. I have just looked at some masterplans and it appears on the whole that the new walkway is on the Eastern side of Lawrence Hargrave drive. I love the idea of such a plan as it continues the bike path from Thirroul further north and keeps cyclists away from traffic. We may even get a better view of the ocean too!
          Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • steven_noble over 6 years ago
    I'm a big fan of the proposal but as you extend the track, please also try to widen it and to separate cyclists from pedestrians whenever possible. On the existing path, I find myself regularly swerving onto the grass or breaking suddenly in order to avoid children, dogs and Sunday cyclists who have forgotten to stay on the left. I really don't want to put any of them into a wheel chair or worse but I feel like it's inevitable that I will on the confined path that we're currently dealing with. A path from Otford to Lake Illlawarra would be great. Two wide paths -- one for cyclists and another for pedestrians -- would be even better. And hopefully the cyclists' path will include signs every 50m reminding the Sunday cyclists to stay on the left for their own safety.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • Batmanfromoz over 6 years ago
    Fantastic proposal and will no doubt improve further with the ongoing community consultation. We are so spoilt in the Illawarra with so many natural wonders such as beaches and the escarpment. This will encourage visitors and locals to get out of their vehicles and enjoy these beautiful outdoor locations. It will be interesting to see how the connection is made from Stanwell Park to Bald Hill. This could be a world class attraction with outstanding views if done properly and safely although it won't be an easy task I imagine to plan and construct. Parking requirements will be needed where people travel to begin the walk at key points.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • Bruce of Coledale over 6 years ago
    Significant error in December 20113 WCC "Wollongong News" regarding Grand Pacific Walk.

    The "Have your say on the Grand Pacific Walk" story in the WCC Wollongong News states that the Grand Pacific Walk is a proposed shared pathway that will stretch from the "... Royal National Park to Lake Illawarra ..."

    It also states that "While we were developing the draft Grand Pacific Walk Masterplan, the need to fast-track improvements to pedestrian safety at Coalcliff became apparent."

    As someone who walked through the Royal National Park from Era to Otford yesterday (Friday 27 Dec 2013) I can tell you that the needs of pedestrian safety from the southern end of the RNP Coastal Track, through Otford and on to Bald Hill and down to Stanwell Park are vastly more important than the apparent needs at Coalcliff.

    The lack of a cleared footpath at Otford exposes walkers to real dangers by having to walk on the often very busy road even to get to from the RNP to the side track to the railway station.

    But - more importantly - there is, as far as I can determine, no safe means by which walkers can connect the southern end of the RNP Coastal Track with Bald Hill and down to Stanwell Park.

    Walking down Lawrence Hargraves Drive from Bald Hill to Stanwell Park is an absolute nightmare and not to be encouraged by any responsible person or authority.

    Until this section of a walking track is established (maybe making use of the old railway tunnel) there is absolutely no point in seeking to join the RNP Coastal Track with the roads and footpath networks south of Stanwell Park.

    It is this section of the walking track - from the southern end of RNP Coastal Track to Stanwell Park - which must be fast-tracked as a matter of top priority.

    Yours truly

    Bruce R

    PS. A young walker i know attended some of these Grand Pacific Walk masterplan workshops. He was amazed that there were so few genuine walkers present and, therefore, so few people who actually knew from experience what they were talking about when it comes to the needs of walkers.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • valamere2307 over 6 years ago
    It is a fantastic plan and a real boost to the health of locals and visitors, a world class walk and a lift to the local economy. Ignore the negative comments.- Positive girl
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link