Social Impact Assessment and Preliminary Social Impact Management Plan now available

REDWatch Meeting – Hear Stockland talk on Waterloo South Concept Plan - 7 May

Information and Support in understanding the Concept & making submissions

What is the Concept Plan and Rezoning?

Scoping Applications for Development Applications for Stage 1 Waterloo South Lodged

Waterloo South Concept public exhibition until Tuesday 2^nd June 2026 & Documents

The Concept State Significant Development and Rezoning Application have been placed on exhibition for 28 days until 2^nd June 2026. Tenants were advised last Friday via this Homes NSW notification to Waterloo tenants of Concept Plan Exhibition - 1 May 2026 in line with advising tenants first.

This exhibition covers all of Waterloo South. All official documents are accessible through the planning portal. Feedback on the proposal must also be made directly through the Planning Portal to the Department of Planning. It cannot be made via the Consortium or Homes NSW which cannot submit it on your behalf.

The Exhibition Documents can be found at Planning NSW - Waterloo Estate (South) Concept Exhibition. Printed versions of these reports can also be accessed at Waterloo Connect.

The key document is the Waterloo South Concept Environmental Impact Statement to which almost all the other documents are Appendices supplying additional information. The last Appendix KK contains the Rezoning Report with the Draft LEP Maps, Revised Design Guide, Connecting with Country Framework and Retail Market Demand Assessment.

REDWatch has put together the full list of the exhibition documents and links to them below:

• Waterloo South Concept Environmental Impact Statement
• Appendix A - SEARs Compliance Table
• Appendix B - Statutory Compliance Table
• Appendix C - Mitigation and Management Measures
• Appendix D - Community Consultation Table
• Appendix E - Assessment against Waterloo South Design Guide
• Appendix F - Urban Design Report
• Appendix F - Urban Design Report Appendices
• Appendix G - Survey Plan
• Appendix H - Draft Subdivision Plans
• Appendix I - Designing with Country Report
• Appendix J - Public Domain and Landscape Report
• Appendix K - CPTED Assessment
• Appendix L - Preliminary Public Art Plan
• Appendix M - Engagement Outcomes Report
• Appendix N - Design Excellence Strategy
• Appendix O - Environmental Wind Report
• Appendix P - Visual Impact Assessment
• Appendix Q - Arboricultural Impact Assessment
• Appendix R - BDAR Waiver
• Appendix S - DSI incl. Review of ORAP
• Appendix T - Remediation Action Plan
• Appendix U - Stormwater Management Plan
• Appendix V - Historical Archaeological Assessment
• Appendix W - Archaeological Technical Report
• Appendix X - Statement of Heritage Impact
• Appendix Y - ACHAR (Public)
• Appendix Z - Infrastructure Delivery and Staging Plan
• Appendix AA - Flood Impact and Risk Assessment
• Appendix BB - Preliminary Noise Vibration Impact Assessment
• Appendix CC - Transport Impact Assessment
• Appendix DD - Waste Management Plan
• Appendix EE Social Impact Assessment
• Appendix EE - Social Impact Management Plan
• Appendix FF - ESD Report
• Appendix GG - Aviation Impact Assessment
• Appendix HH - Accessibility Assessment
• Appendix II - EDC Summary Letter
• Appendix JJ - Concept Envelope Plans
• Appendix KK - Rezoning Report
• Appendix KK - Attach A - Draft LEP Maps
• Appendix KK - Attach B - Revised Design Guide
• Appendix KK - Attach C - Connecting with Country Framework
• Appendix KK - Attach D - Retail Market Demand Assessment
• Application_20260417053618

At the top of the exhibition page is a link to “Make a submission”. Submissions are supposed to be made online by setting up an account in the Planning Portal if you don’t have one. If you can’t access online then ask for support from one of the agencies like Counterpoint or from representatives from the Department of Planning. Department of Planning representatives at the Stockland information sessions will have a form that can be used by those that cannot make electronic submissions. There is also a general guide on how to make submissions.

While the consortium will hold some information sessions they stand to benefit from the outcome and hence are not permitted to collect and submit feedback. Submissions must be made directly to the Department of planning. After all the input from the community and other agencies, like Council, is received, the Consortium will have a chance to provide a response and change things before the Department of Planning makes a final decision on the proposal.

This is the official media statement. The SMH reported the exhibition in Hundreds of inner Sydney homes to be bulldozed for 3300 units. The initial SMH article wrongly said the first units would not be delivered until 2035 but this has subsequently been corrected to 2030 as confirmed by Stockland at the REDWatch meeting.

Social Impact Assessment and Preliminary Social Impact Management Plan now available

Two important Concept Plan documents, from REDWatch’s perspective, can be found in Appendix EE of exhibition documents. These are the Social Impact Assessment and the Preliminary Social Impact Management Plan. These reports specifically to look at the potential impacts both good and bad of the development on the surrounding community, especially the public housing community and what needs to happen to manage impacts. These reports also deal with some of the issues raised in Homes NSW’s People and Place Plan. This report was not available during the pre-lodgement consultation, so this will be the first time we get to look at these “people” parts of the redevelopment.

We have asked the Consortium to talk to these reports at the 7 May REDWatch meeting as well as providing an overview of the Concept proposal. REDWatch encourages people to look at these reports and raise any issues of concern.

REDWatch Meeting – Hear Stockland talk on Waterloo South Concept Plan - 7 May

The Concept Plan is on exhibition and the May 7 REDWatch meeting will do an initial unpack of the Waterloo South Concept Plan for tenants and the community. Given a short 28 days exhibition this will be a two-hour meeting dealing with both the built environment proposal as well as with the Social Impact Assessment (SIA). The SIA looks at the people impacts from the redevelopment as part of the exhibition and this information was not available during the pre-exhibition consultations.

This is a public meeting and everyone is welcome. You can join the meeting in person on 7 May from 6:00 pm at Counterpoint’s Factory Community Centre, 67 Raglan Street, Waterloo or join us on line by Zoom http://tinyurl.com/RedwatchMeetingZoom.

REDWatch meets at the local Community Centre and is pleased to celebrate Neighbourhood Centre Week in May as your place to connect.

Information and Support in understanding the Concept & making submissions

The consortium has revamped its Waterloo Partnership website at www.waterloorenewal.com.au and this site contains some high-level information on the Concept Proposal including some updated maps and Q&As. REDWatch suggests you have a look at this site.

The Consortium have produced a Community Guide to the Concept Application and Rezoning, Please note that this guide is not part of the formal application. The Consortium have produced it as an overview that might be helpful for people wanting to understand what is in the concept proposal however in the case of omissions or differences the exhibited documents are what need to be addressed, primarily the Waterloo South Concept Environmental Impact Statement.

Homes NSW has also updated its Waterloo South site to cover the exhibition.  The Consortium will also hold some information sessions (see details later in this update).

It should be noted that Homes NSW and the Consortium have prepared the 40+ documents in this exhibition and hence have their material available at the beginning of the exhibition. Independent assessment however will take longer for groups like REDWatch, services agencies like Counterpoint and City of Sydney Council which need to read and digest the reports before being able to raise any issues of concern. With this exhibition being only 28 days it is likely that even Council, with its dedicated planning staff will be unable to finalise its assessment within that time, let alone service providers and voluntary groups. As a result, concerns may only emerge from these independent organisations towards the end of the exhibition.

So please look out for later statements from community groups about concerns they think should be raised and please also feed any concerns you have from looking at the documents back to these independent parties to inform their comments and submissions.

Counterpoint Community Services, Redfern Legal Centre and Kinchela Boys Home Aboriginal Corporation have been funded by Council to provide independent advice and support during relocations and the redevelopment.

With many events during May there will be lots of opportunities to people to discuss concerns with workers independent of Homes NSW and the Consortium. Counterpoint in its newsletter says “You can chat with Counterpoint staff at any of our centres or at these events: Community Centre Week events; Volunteer Awards; Pet Day; and other neighbourhood activities across Waterloo. These are informal opportunities to ask questions, share concerns, or get help finding the right information”.

In this update REDWatch has not sought to assess the proposal. REDWatch will post material it becomes aware of on www.redwatch.org.au and / or issue an email update.

Here are some opportunities to attend activities which will focus on the Concept Plan (please note Events on 12 May and 26 May have been bought forward half an hour on earlier times  to minimise conflicts with other activities that these event overlap).

• Thursday 7 May – REDWatch Meeting with Stockland on the Plan 6-8pm The Factory 67 Raglan Street Waterloo or on line via http://tinyurl.com/RedwatchMeetingZoom. You can see recording of this session at https://youtu.be/LqLmw_IjSWg
• Monday 11 May – Consortium Service Provider Briefing from 3pm to 4pm
• Tuesday 12 May – Consortium in person 10 am to 12.30pm (lunch included) Waterloo Neighbourhood Centre 95 Wellington Street (opposite OzHarvest)
• Saturday 16 May – Consortium Drop-in 10am to 12pm Chinese and Russian language interpreters will be available during this time
• Monday 18 May – Consortium Online session - 5pm to 6.30pm Register via the project website or email the Consortium for the meeting link
• Wednesday 20 May – Waterloo Redevelopment Group 2pm The Factory, 67 Raglan St, Waterloo
• Tuesday 26 May – Consortium morning tea with the team - Drop in between 10am and 12.30pm at Waterloo Connect Shop 2, 95 Wellington St (opposite OzHarvest) to speak to the team.
• Monday to Friday during exhibition – Consortium Drop-in to Waterloo Connect Shop 2, 95 Wellington St, Waterloo (opposite OzHarvest) or Connect with Homes NSW and the Consortium by calling 1800 997 318 Email: hello@waterloorenewal.com.au

What is the Concept Plan and Rezoning?

The total floorspace for this site was set in 2022. During the pre-lodgement consultation the developer, Stockland, discussed the need to change how that floorspace is distributed, changing heights and creating more ground level space, as well as showing where different sorts of housing go. This exhibition will change the planning controls that Stockland will then build within. Even though 10% design excellence bonus was added on top of the expected 3,000 units in the development in 2022 it has taken until now for Homes NSW and the Consortium to use the 3,300-unit figure. Even this is an estimate, as the planning controls divide the floorspace between tenures, not the number of units so how many units are delivered for that floor space will be determined by later planning.

The submission of the Concept Proposal to the Department of Planning says the proposal expects Waterloo South to provide 5650 rooms holding 7,000 people with a delivery cost excluding GST of AUD2,231,118,316.00. The development is expected to provide 1,781 construction jobs and 600 operation jobs.

The exhibition will show how the heights and floorspace distribution changes proposed differ from the approved 2022 controls. It will also include other information such as the distribution of different types of housing tenure, staging etc. Stockland has undertaken pre-lodgement consultation with tenants showing what it was considering, so there should be few major surprises in the key elements of the exhibited plan for those who were involved in the earlier consultation.

The formal exhibition does include a lot of unseen technical studies that are likely to be of interest. They cover wind, sun, shadowing. environmental issues, social impacts etc. (see full list earlier in this email)

You can also find out more about the concept application and zoning in Q&As on the Consortium’s  Concept Application and Rezoning page.

You can see Stockland presentation to REDWatch of the Concept Plan on YouTube at https://youtu.be/LqLmw_IjSWg

Scoping Applications for Development Applications for Stage 1 Waterloo South Lodged

The Homes NSW Waterloo Project website has been updated to advise that while this exhibition is underway, three scoping reports have been lodged with the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to obtain the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) for early works, Block 8 and Block 9. The SEARs will set out what studies must be completed and which stakeholders and community members must be consulted. Early engagement with the community will begin soon, to help inform the detailed applications.

REDWatch - Updated 9 May 2026

This submission is made on behalf of REDWatch Incorporated (REDWatch). REDWatch was set up in 2004 with the following objects in its constitution:

REDWatch is a group of community residents and friends from Redfern, Waterloo, Eveleigh and Darlington who support the existing diversity in these areas and wish to promote sustainable, responsible economic and social development.

REDWatch recognises the importance of the Aboriginal community to the area.

REDWatch has been formed to:

1. Monitor the activities of the Government (local, state and federal), the Redfern Waterloo Authority, and any other government instrumentality with responsibility for the Redfern, Waterloo, Darlington and Eveleigh area, to ensure that:

     (a) The strategy benefits a diverse community

     (b) Communication and consultation is comprehensive and responsive

     (c) Pressure is maintained on authorities

2. Provide a mechanism for discussion and action on community issues.

3. Enhance communication between community groups and encourage broad community participation.

This may involve: Holding regular meetings; Holding community forums and other events; Establishing a website; Communicating with the community through other means; Meeting with government representatives and authorities; Cooperating with other community organisations; And any other means the association deems appropriate.

The South Eveleigh to Waterloo Metro walking and cycling improvements exhibition impacts the Redfern and Waterloo communities, including Waterloo public housing tenants, who are often not involved in these conversations. REDWatch through our social media, participation in community meetings and holding a public meeting makes the following submission.

REDWatch expresses its appreciation to Council for providing Sarah Brickhill to attend the REDWatch public meeting on March 5 to discuss this and wider traffic issues and for an extension to make this submission after that meeting.

What is this proposal about?

The exhibited proposal was styled as about “walking and cycling improvements”. It is certainly about improvement for cycling, the assertion that it makes “walking more comfortable along Henderson Road and Raglan Street” is however not discussed nor demonstrated as it is not clear how this proposal assists walkability and in fact seems to remove some footpath space outside the Metro with new verge plantings and does not examine light timing and surge footpath requirements.

The project however is also about prioritising buses and removing vehicle access from Botany Road and Henderson Road into Raglan Street. Without these changes the proposal would just be about cycling and walking improvements and would be better able to fit into the project area.

Wider Context to proposal and this submission

At the REDWatch meeting the need to assess the proposal in its wider context was evident. Such project proposals draw a line around the area and do not look at outside ramifications in any detail. Issues were raised at the meeting about how these changes interact with other changes in Erskineville and with how people from Alexandria move into Waterloo. There was discussion about the need for projects to be seen in a more regional context and for the interactions between this project and its implications to be made transparent.

A number of issues raised at the meeting were outside the current direct scope of the proposal but either interacted with it or were exacerbated by it. These issues are hence considered relevant to providing comprehensive feedback on the project proposal.

REDWatch understands that the current consultation is an early-stage proposal and hence encourages Council’s bike, pedestrian and traffic teams to consider the wider issues raised by the community about the proposed project. As the community has not been able to talk directly with TfNSW about its elements in the plan we urge Council to take these community concerns up with TfNSW on the community’s behalf.

As this project directly impacts residents on the Waterloo public housing estate both in terms of location and impacts, REDWatch requests Council carefully apply an equity lens over this project to ensure that the public housing community isn’t adversely impacted and that the needs and desires of the public housing community are given appropriate weight.

Traffic refunneling

Introducing major traffic changes under the guise of cycling and pedestrian improvements are fraught as the changes have ramifications outside the scope of the exhibited project. What do these changes mean for east west movements in Alexandria and Waterloo and north south movements through Redfern? None of this wider work was available to help people assess the impacts.

Given the proposed redevelopment of Waterloo South to accommodate around 2,500 extra homes and subsequent redevelopment of the north and central parts of the estate to add a further 2,000 homes there is a need for wider traffic modelling if the main thoroughfare is to be Wellington Street. While the Council argued that the streets could handle the change this was not demonstrated.

Stockland are in the process of doing traffic modelling for the Waterloo South redevelopment and along with Homes NSW were not aware of the proposed traffic changes.

At a community level the proposed closure of Raglan Street to general traffic and the funnelling of traffic through Wellington Street reawakened concerns that Pitt Street being opened to McEvoy might again be considered to cope with the traffic generated by the Waterloo South redevelopment. This proposal had earlier been dismissed in the 2022 rezoning.

Closing Raglan Street to traffic puts the discussion about the capacity and issues within Wellington Street as that flows from the proposal. People at the meeting raised concerns about the impact on pedestrians, cyclists and cars from stop signs being changed at the corner of George Street and Wellington to give Wellington Street priority.

Of concern was the lack of visibility on Wellington Street heading west at the corner of George Street. The earlier stop sign meant that cars had to stop and could see bikes and pedestrians. Given the location in the middle of an estate with many older and disadvantaged people there were also concerns about pedestrian safety both for motor vehicles as well as bikes on the existing bike path. A suggestion for this intersection to have a scatter crossing has been made.

Concerns were also raised about queueing and turns out of Wellington into Botany Road and also Elizabeth Street. This is particularly an issue at school times when children from Mount Carmel or Alexandria Park are moving through those intersections.

Problems on Wellington Street are expected to become worse if traffic into Waterloo South is channelled through Wellington Street with access closed to Raglan Street. In the short term this will also be the route for demolition and construction vehicles, and concerns were also raised about potential road closures in the street during construction if this was the main throughfare.

While Wellington will take the bulk of the traffic from the east, south and west, it is expected that closing Raglan Street will also lead to more traffic through Redfern from the north with traffic needing to go down Pitt and to a lesser extent George Street.

Questions were also raised about the impact of the proposed Raglan Street closure on the Cope Street kiss and ride. It was suggested that people are unlikely to use the kiss and ride if they cannot easily get back onto the main road and are hence more likely to do drop offs in easier locations impacting traffic movements.

All this seems out of scope of the exhibited proposal, but at a community level is very much part of the discussion as the proposal required the existing traffic using Raglan Street to go somewhere.

Bus issues

The creation of the bus only section in Raglan Street opposite the Metro reignited the debate about the appropriateness of the 392 bus route on Raglan Street east of Pitt Street which was introduced 6-7 years ago rather than buses being routed via Wellington Street as was the case with the 355 bus route. Raglan Street east has many heritage properties facing onto a hill with noise and vibration concerns – see this Current Affair story about the issues which were raised at the meeting.

Local residents also complain that allowing buses to make a right turn from Elizabeth Street into Raglan against the no right turn sign, locals argued that this has encouraged many cars to follow suit. For cars this intersection is supposed to be only left in and left out.

At the meeting concerns were raised about what appeared to be the movement of the Raglan Street bus stop to in front of the Metro. The point was made that if the stop was moved to the Metro then tenants would have to walk up and down the hill to get from their homes to the bus and that local mobility needed to be considered not just for people getting on and off the Metro. This is especially a concern given the mobility concerns for aged and disabled people among the public housing tenants on the estate. These are clearly walking issues that are within scope if the proposal includes the relocation of any of the Raglan Street bus stops.

While TfNSW fed into the exhibited plans, it was not in attendance to answer questions about the changes it had proposed in the plan and its implication for its services. It is not helpful for the community to be told that it is a TfNSW issue when its elements are included in a City of Sydney exhibited plan without proper explanation.

Bike Issues

The missing link in the George Street Cycleway is also appears out of scope. This was caused by the 1970s closure of George Street as part of the Endeavour public housing project. Council have been unable to negotiate a solution with Homes NSW for the bike path to continue across Waterloo Green which is LAHC owned land.

This sees a dedicated cycleway to the North and South of Waterloo Green with a nominal “low traffic street or bike lane” around LAHC land via Raglan, Cope and Phillip Streets to join the dedicated paths. In practice cyclists do not dismount or use the alternative path but continue to ride across Waterloo Green.

It seems unlikely that Homes NSW will allow a separated bike path across its land until Waterloo North is redeveloped and potentially George Street is reopened. Thought needs to be given as to what might happen over the next 10-20 years until this might happen.

Linking the Henderson Street cycle path to George Street next to Waterloo Green will increase the number of people who cycle across Waterloo Green rather than dismount and walk across.

There is an opportunity with the proposed cycleway to encourage cyclists to use the other two legs of the bike route via Cope Street north of Raglan and Phillip Street to access the northern section of the George Street cycleway. As earlier stated, this route already appears as a “low traffic street or bike lane” on the Council’s cycling map and it should be formalised and positively encouraged.

Alongside this, tenants are looking to Council to actively discourage bike riding across Waterloo Green along with education and enforcement measures. This issue cannot be ignored and should not be considered out of scope. One way of doing this is to not provide an easy exit off the bike path towards Waterloo Green as well as well-placed signs in both directions where the two cycleways meet.

At the meeting people raised concerns about the viability of cyclists heading south on George Street north of Phillip Street. Concern was raised about the height of plantings and the need for regular maintenance. There was also concern about both the visibility and speed of bikes to cars on Phillip Street and of bikes entering LAHC land, often at high-speed coming down the hill.

Directing bikes to the Phillip Street low traffic street / bike path would also enable the redirection of bikes away from Waterloo Green and the issues raised by tenants at this location to be addressed.

Also considered out of scope were community questions about why the bike path was going down Raglan Street when Wellington Street is already on cycle maps as a “low traffic street or bike lane” shown on Council’s cycling map which links through to Mitchell Road and Erskineville. Channelling bikes through the high traffic Henderson, Wyndham Botany Road intersections was seen as a higher risk alternative to using the bike route down Wellington past Alexandria Park.

While we see the problem with the Henderson Road bike path not connecting, the preferred link for this path is the connection between Railway Parade and Wilson Street via Alexander Street and Locomotive Street. The dream of this connection was on the cover of an earlier City of Sydney Cycling Plan.

REDWatch with FOE and ARAG have recently formed the Eveleigh Bridge Alliance to expand the push for a pedestrian and cycle bridge across the railway corridor near Carriageworks. The first action of the Eveleigh Bridge Alliance was to access documents with a GIPA application which shows TfNSW in June 2025 decided on a preferred location for a bridge and a way to construct it. Council has long supported a potential Cycle and Pedestrian Bridge at this location and with some of the technical issues addressed to some extent the possibility for this connection between the Henderson Street and Wilson Street Cycleways may still be achievable.

REDWatch encourages Council to consider all the issues raised above as related to the exhibition and to investigate how they can be addressed.

Comments on the Exhibited Plan

In commenting on the proposal as set out we will do so in relation to separate elements, the Bike Path, traffic changes to deliver the path, the Raglan bus only proposal and walkability. REDWatch’s comments reflect issues raised that need to be explored in further development work.

The Bike path

There is strong support from cyclists for the connection of the Henderson Cycleway to the George Street Cycleway. There is also strong support from cyclists for the George Street cycleway to extend across Waterloo Green which is opposed by public housing tenants on safety grounds.

On the flip side there is strong concern about the impact of the proposal from the loss of so much scarce inner-city parking and how that might impact local residents, visitors and deliveries. Special concerns were raised in relation to loading zones near the Waterloo shops and the Abbotts Hotel which can only get deliveries in Raglan Street.

Concern was also raised about access to parking for those delivering services and visiting those in public housing. It was however recognised that a lot of parking in the area in unrestricted parking was from people parking and then going to work.

Earlier in our submission we have raised issues about the proposal increasing the number of people who ride across Waterloo Green. To minimise this REDWatch has suggested that the bike connection in Cope Street north of Raglan be encouraged at the link to the Redfern end of the George Street cycleway via Phillip Street.

We have also proposed that the Bike path in Raglan and Phillip with George not facilitate easy access off the bike path to the pedestrian path across Waterloo Green. At both places where the George Street cycleway leads onto LAHC land we request clear signage to stop bikes and direct them via Cope Street which is the formal link shown on Council’s bike path maps.

REDWatch is sure Council will get lots of submissions both supporting the bike path and raising its impacts on those who are directly impacted. Council will need to weigh up the impacts and find solutions that lessen the bike lane impact on local residents and businesses for this to proceed.

Traffic changes to deliver the path

Concern has been raised about the traffic changes needed to facilitate the bike lane in Henderson Road. At the REDWatch meeting there was concern that at high road use times the restriction on two lanes turning from Mitchell Road into Henderson Road will be problematic. It is not clear why Henderson Road has only one east bound lane at Davey Road when it becomes 2 lanes within the next block.

As traffic heading onto or across Botany Road is expected to be similar to the present, it is not clear if a single lane will be adequate in Henderson Road at Botany Road. It might be adequate if all traffic has to turn right and there are not greater pedestrian crossing delays. If motor vehicles are allowed to continue onto Raglan Street then the existing delays in being able to turn right will impact through traffic which is solved by the current two lanes.

The community would like the City of Sydney to complete traffic modelling on the proposed changes and the flow on impacts before finalising the proposal.

Raglan bus only proposal

There is concern about the aspect of the proposal that makes Raglan Street into a bus only zone as the community has not seen any modelling of this change and its impacts. While the change directly means that traffic which approaches Raglan Street from Henderson Road will have to turn right and use Wellington Street, this will also increase traffic through Pitt and to a lesser extent George Street Redfern.

While the change may stop cars to and from Alexandria and Erskineville using Raglan Street to get to Elizabeth Street which some locals consider a rat run, its closure means that travel times for those trips will also increase, putting more car minutes and congestion on the road for those who need to use a car.

We have highlighted earlier some of the community concerns about the impact on Wellington Street and public housing tenant concerns.

Council should consider the possibility of Raglan Street remaining open to motor vehicles even if the bike lane proceeds. If the proposal proceeds as currently drafted then the wider traffic impacts need to be assessed and impacts made transparent alongside what will be done to mitigate the impacts.

Walkability

It is not clear how the current proposal improves walkability. REDWatch has argued that TfNSW and Council need to address the pedestrian improvements needed on pedestrian desire lines from the Waterloo Metro. The pathway towards Redfern’s Southern Concourse and Boundary Street for South Eveleigh are especially problematic.

While this proposal claims to be also about pedestrian improvements this is not evident in the proposal. In fact, the proposal seems to reduce pedestrian space in some locations such as in front of the Metro. The proposal also does not assess if the footpath design with grass verges remains appropriate for pedestrian surges as a result of long light wait times combined with periodic pedestrian discharges from the station.

The proposal also does not demonstrate if the traffic changes and potential light phasing may improve or impact walking times.

Improving the movement of people from the Metro towards South Eveleigh and Sydney University should be a major focus of Council.

It has to be remembered that currently the Bankstown line is not directly connected to the Metro so it is likely that some people are currently accessing South Eveleigh via Redfern Station who will remain on the Metro and hence want to move to South Eveleigh or Sydney University from Waterloo Metro.

Conclusion

In our submission REDWatch has covered broader community concerns inked to the project proposal that need to also be taken into account in refining the proposal. We have also raised some concerns about the facets of the exhibited proposal that we would also like to clarified.

REDWatch requests Council to take these community concerns into account in its next steps on this proposal. We also encourage Council to be able to provide clear impact and remediation proposals for the refined plan so people can assess the proposal and its surrounding implications.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal and the extension of time to accommodate this feedback after our meeting.

Yours Faithfully 

Geoffrey Turnbull 

Spokesperson 

On behalf of REDWatch Inc 

c/- Counterpoint Community Services 

67 Raglan Street Waterloo NSW 2017                                         

Ph Wk: (02) 8004 1490                                                     

email: mail@redwatch.org.au

web: www.redwatch.org.au

A June 2025 Transport for NSW (TfNSW) ‘Optioneering Report’ reveals a preferred Eveleigh bridge concept, location and an approved way to launch the bridge across the railway corridor.

The preferred bridge would ramp from Wilson Street Darlington near Carriageworks over the railway corridor to Locomotive Street South Eveleigh between the Large Erecting Shop and the Locomotive Workshops. It is not possible to ramp in South Eveleigh and a combination of lifts and escalators are proposed at that end.

Construction could be by launching a steel truss, bridge built next to the site in stages across the railway tracks. The process requires supports at both ends and a permanent pier in the middle. Two temporary piers are required for construction. A steel trust launch methodology was developed for the Redfern Station Southern Concourse in 2020 in consultation with Sydney Trains but was not adopted as it did not result in savings for that site.

The TfNSW ‘Optioneering Report’ was one of the documents received when REDWatch on behalf of the Eveleigh Bridge Alliance (EBA) made a Government Information Public Access (GIPA) request for bridge studies since 2020.

The EBA was formed by REDWatch, Friends of Erskineville (FOE) and the Alexandria Residents Action Group (ARAG) to kick start a broad-based community campaign for the delivery of the bridge.

The 338 pages of released documents also include engineering feasibility studies by ARUP on a number of bridge and tunnel options, a ‘Heritage Assessment’ by Curio Projects and three versions of a ‘Bridge catchment analysis’ by SCT Consulting. The catchment studies are based on an earlier option to the east of the Paint shop. Costings of options were not released.

The EBA was pleased to find that TfNSW continued to assess options after it ruled a bridge out of scope during the North Eveleigh rezoning. While TfNSW has addressed some of the major technical barriers its reports also indicate it does not think that usage of the bridge will be high enough to justify the expense of building across an active railway corridor.

Media reports indicate that a consortium preparing a bid for the Paint Shop Precinct in North Eveleigh plan to include a bridge in their bid to provide sound stages and film studio facilities when the NSW Government calls for expressions of Interest in March 2026.

The EBA plans to work with surrounding institutions, businesses and the potential users of the bridge to convince the government that the bridge, promised in 2004, needs to be delivered one way or another. A website and social media presence for the EBA is under construction.

Looking at the GIPA documents

Geoff Turnbull REDWatch for Eveleigh Bridge Alliance – 1 March 2026.

(Some of this information also appears in the March South Sydney Herald.)