PEREGIAN BEACH ACTIVE STREET - STAGE 1 PROGRESS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS (Deferred from the General Committee Meeting dated 16 March 2026) · Report

ORDINARY MEETING                                                                    19 MARCH 2026


•   Safety
•   Comfort
•   Directness and Coherence
•   Connectivity
•   Strategic alignment; and
•   Feasibility.




                   Figure 1 – Route Options Analysis

Route B (Lorikeet Drive) scored the highest or equal to the highest across all criteria and ranked the
highest in both total unweighted and weighted scoring. Key differentiators in scoring between Route
A (David Low Way) and Route B (Lorikeet, Shearwater, Piper, Plover) were Connectivity, Strategic
Alignment and Feasibility. Route A considered pathways on alternate sides of David Low Way,
whereas Route C and partially Route D considered pathway locations in the coastal foreshore
reserve. Route B was considered to connect with more attractors, align closer to the coast, be
easiest to implement and the lowest cost.

Several design treatments were also explored, including a Cycle St (Active Street), Advisory Bicycle
Lanes and a Shared Path. The treatment types were scored against the following criteria:
    •   Safety
    •   Connectivity
    •   Feasibility; and
    •   Impact.
The Active Street concept - supported by TMR - performed best for safety and feasibility.

The Peregian Beach south project was given a high priority (on a scale of low to very high) and
tentatively scheduled for 2023/24 and 2024/25 financial years in a draft implementation plan within
the final report. The priority ranking was based on: