Just wondering if I should add council parks with obvious pathways say more then a 1km long in route (a return trip from car park or a circuit)?
Example for Brisbane would be walking along the the river in South bank Brisbane, or on the Gold Coast (where I am based) say the Broadwater Parklands. There are really some nice hidden gems within the local region due to council promoting healthy lifestyle and walking. However I wonder if it should be added to this website as it isn’t say as such a “bushwalk” as they are typically on concrete paths (so they are wheelchair accessible). However with nice views and sometimes surrounded by nice gardens and bush. I feel like they might be a worth addition to the site.
Although I feel predominantly that this site is used by bush walkers, I’m sure the locals in my region may just want to go for a walk after dinner or a lazy stroll on a Sunday afternoon before the next work week.
So I guess I’m asking. Should I add a heap of easy/wheelchair accessible pathways to this site?
Hello, I have added several walks in council parks. I typically only add a walk the following is true: others would enjoy doing it, it is mostly in a natural environment, the distance at least 30 min or 2km, the route is clearly defined or it has a gazetted name. I’ll only add a short track if it has a significant view.
Examples: I have added previously Kangaroo Point River Walk, it complies with all the conditions above. The Southbank walk would also comply.
I would not map:
walks inside the Botanic Garden as they are too numerous and short
walks without clear direction/tracks (eg New Farm Park)
walks through the CBD unless they are clearly defined, have some historic significance, or are part of a larger walk (eg Great North Walk in Sydney traverses parts of the city and suburbia)
I like @Rob_N’s guidelines. Nature related and a specific route captures what the site generally has - though in some cases there there may be an area with tracks, but without specific routes that are worth capturing. I’m thinking places like Belmont Bushland Reserve where there are tracks in a bushland setting that we definitely want to help people find but where there may not be specific “named” walks.
In general I would err on the side of including walks rather than excluding them but as Rob says they should be of interest to other people, not simply “my afternoon walking route”.
Ok, so I’ll try and follow along what Rob_N has stated. These seem like some solid conditions that can be followed and they make sense for what I believe this site is mainly built/used for. Especially something with a significant view and direction. I’ll try upload a few within next week and post it here and see what you guys think.
I’m also struggling with adding a form of conservation area. There are mini tracks (say 500m long) within the area, however it’s a huge area where you can zigzag through all the different paths (almost like a botanical gardens, but way more bushland/swamplands), get lost in the back then walk back. I wouldn’t really call this a so called track, but I feel like a region doesn’t do this a trick either. Shall I just make it a track and say no, time/distance? I have walked to the back of the parklands and a pace of around 5k/hr and it’s taken me a good 2 hours, with hundreds of kangaroos around too. Place is called Coombabah Lakelands conservational area.
I’ve attached the council map so you can see what I mean. Any thoughts?
Coombabah Lakelands may fall into the same category as the Belmont Bushland Reserve. I’ve walked there once and I don’t think there was anything particularly notable about the tracks (i.e. they don’t visit any particular features).
We definitely want an entry for the area because it’s well worth a walk, but I don’t know that it’s worth listing all of those separate names. I would lean towards a single entry with no time/distance as you’ve suggested. The main downside of that approach is it won’t always show up when people search if they restrict walks based on time or distance.