Replies revealing

I SUBMITTED my comments on the draft walkability plan to the City of Joondalup, and received a summary of the comments.

There were 13 sets of submissions, including two from government departments.

Three who responded were worried that the work only applied to “tourist” paths.

Three others thought the paths were not wide enough or should have separate cycle lanes

Three more thought cycle lanes on the road were unsafe and a further three identified user problems such as parking on the footpath or maintenance problems.

In addition, two thought signs could be improved.

Most prominent were the five comments on the continuity of the paths, which zig zag from side to side of the road.

Concerning continuity, rail passengers arriving at Joondalup station outside shopping hours have to make a long detour into Joondalup streets. The council commented it would work with Lakeside shopping centre to improve access in areas the City did not manage. Therefore, who approved the design of the shopping centre?

I suggested the paths at junctions be straightened for pedestrians and cyclists, and supplied a typical plan.

Drivers do not have to deviate at junctions, so why should others?

Council’s response was that paths were designed in accordance with the present standard. I am pleased to see this because Main Roads’ standards would be my choice too.

Finally, I have to ask why we spend such piddling amounts on paths. Just $1 million is budgeted for this financial year.

Jack Moore, Sorrento