This is the bit of the planning proposal that deals with how people might be impacted positively or negatively by the development. REDWatch is aware that Council and some other stakeholders have concerns about the adequacy of the existing recommendations. From REDWatch’s perspective more needs to happen in the management plan to guarantee that community cohesion is rebuilt and that a successful social mix outcome is achieved in the longer term.
For example, since 2010 there have been lots of meetings with a focus of what is necessary to deliver the promise of “social mix” from mixed tenure developments. The study and plan have a section on “Changing social mix and impact on existing communities” which it recognises as a “High Negative”. The management plan proposes a number of measures it expects to move the outcome to become a “High Positive”. REDWatch thinks public housing tenants will have some ideas on what needs to happen to deliver the best possible outcomes from the redevelopment, so if nothing else put your thoughts into a submission.
Across a range of areas, the Social Impact Management Plan makes 82 recommendations. There are three questions that need to be asked: a) have all the possible impacts (positive and negative) been identified; b) do the recommendations adequately address the problem and improve the situation, are there any recommendations needed but are missing and; c) what needs to happen to make sure that these recommendations are implemented so that positive improvements actually result.
The rezoning proposes to introduce “educational establishment” as a permissible use into the 5,000 sqm community facilities part of the development. The EIS on page 94 spells out that this needs to be a school or a tertiary institution constituted by or under an Act. REDWatch is concerned that Stockland seems to be talking publicly about something less formal that does not need this change. REDWatch would not want to see space that could be used for local community activities given over to an external educational facility. This is especially because there has been a lot of talk about what the community wants to see, but none of it is currently guaranteed. REDWatch would like to see people say what they want the redevelopment to deliver and for Stockland and Council to then cooperate about who will do what in their spaces. At the moment, because Council has not yet decided what it will do with the space it gets, it is easy for Stockland to make assumptions about what things the Council facility will do that will not happen.
REDWatch is concerned about the adequacy of the Retail Market Demand Assessment especially given the importance of the need for low cost retail to service the public housing community who are primarily on pensions and benefits. While a low-cost supermarket would go a long way towards servicing this cohort, there is also a need for other low-cost services and outlets – tenants complain about the recent loss of the cheap bread shop, the cheap greengrocer, bulk billing doctors and where to get a cheap haircut and perm.
The retail market demand assessment does not address this issue even though its figures show that 92% of social housing households have low incomes of under $52,000 per annum it does not look at what is necessary to service this part of the community in long term retail. It is clearly a desktop study with no input from locals about where they shop and why. It does not even distinguish between the lower cost full range supermarkets and the more expensive metro versions of the same brand. The Concept Plan needs to be able to guarantee there will be long-term low-cost facilities.
The Social Impact Management Plan makes some recommendations about what is needed to deliver “Improved retail access and diversity”. People should look at these and ask if they are adequate to move the impact from a “Low Negative” to a “High Positive”. With the approach to preserving diverse retail not mapped out, REDWatch remains concerned about Stockland’s proposal to move 2,000 sqm from non-resident, such as retail, to residential uses. Our concern is that if there is not enough non-residential space and effective mechanisms to reserve space for low-cost retail and community needs, that a shortage of space may lead to high rents and retail focusing increasingly on those who can pay more for goods and services.
REDWatch is keen to see all Affordable Housing in perpetuity. We are pleased to see that 7% remains in perpetuity and the undertaking in the EIS that the balance 13% will be for at least 25 years. If financing for an affordable housing block cannot be secured in perpetuity at the build stage REDWatch would like to see first right of refusal arrangements put into the contract so that if government policy has changed at the end of that period of at least 25 years or if the CHP has the financial capacity so it can acquire the stock in perpetuity at the end of the 25-year financing arrangement. There is a difference between the wording in the EIS and the design guide, which is not binding. To avoid ambiguity, REDWatch wants the development conditions to make all affordable housing based on a rent of no more than 30% of household income and managed by a CHP for both that which is in perpetuity and that guaranteed affordable for 25 years.
REDWatch is concerned that the design excellence provisions are not following those of the City of Sydney for buildings over 35m. The project has committed to a tenure blind approach and yet the private buildings will have design excellence delivered by a design competition whereas for social and affordable housing, design excellence will be determined by a panel in response to a proposal put up by an invited architect. One other change proposed by the Concept is to allow the same architect to deliver more than one building on a block. In the 2022 proposal architects were limited to one building on a block to deliver diverse building designs.
To date the comparisons drawn against the concept proposal have been the 2022 approval to which the Department of Planning added 10%. There has not yet been an external examination of the Stockland Concept. REDWatch is aware that Council has a range of concerns about the planning controls and the concept proposal, but we have not seen the details and given the time available we have not been able to form our own views. It will be interesting to find out more about Council’s concerns. The Department of Planning will need to assess these potentially competing views.
One document that it is reasonably easy to get an idea of the changes proposed is the proposed Revised Design Guide. To make this easy-to-follow Stockland has used the 2022 design guide and track changes, to remove what it wants to take out and add in. Here you can also see the changed diagrams against the 2022 versions and get a good idea of what is proposed to change and what is not by flicking through and looking at what is in red. Just remember the Design Guide is just a guide and it does not have the same binding effect as the zoning or what the Department approves or conditions.
We know we have just scratched the surface of the issues that could be explored, but hopefully if you have not had time to dive into the documents, this gives some ideas to work on.
On the REDWatch website you can also see the Counterpoint Submission on Waterloo Concept Plan May 2026, which will give you more ideas.
This information is extracted from a REDWatch email update issued on 28 May 2026.
]]>On Monday 25 May the contractors started work to erect fencing and to undertake due diligence. The initial “Notice of Intention to Carry out Demolition Work” from the contractor lacked detail about what was happening and Homes NSW had to issue a follow up letter a couple of days later with a little more information. Homes NSW has been saying little about relocations and its issues so the information about numbers remaining have been conveyed verbally at meetings and are not in writing making what is happening with relocations very opaque and leaving room publicly for “eviction” and “demolishing buildings that still have people in them” narratives.
No one should be surprised that the demolition announcement has whipped up a reaction. After all, since the first notification 10 years ago, many tenants didn’t believe anything would happen, that changes when the demolition starts.
The demolition is also a focus for those with a myriad of concerns about the Waterloo South process. While many of the battles may have been lost for Waterloo South the demolition provides a focal point for political points to be made that protesters hope might influence this and future public housing decisions. This includes arguments about estate redevelopment vs new build on surplus government land and its associated impact on the housing waiting list, renovation vs knock-down and rebuild, arguments about if government or CHPs should run new housing, government funding of public housing vs the sell-off of government land. All these are valid concerns in the wider housing debate but they are also outside the current consultation parameters for Waterloo South. The issues did not go away and it shouldn’t be a surprise that imminent demolitions have provided a focus for them being raised.
In Waterloo these discussions are also very political because of statements before the last election about the ALP stopping the sell off of government land and the subsequent verbal gymnastics about what a sell off is or isn’t, alongside a lack of clarity about the contractual process. It is compounded because the public housing vote has been a strong supporter of local ALP MP Ron Hoenig so an opportunity to use his and the government’s missteps on public housing to weaken that grip is also in play.
The concern however is that political messages for effect often get articulated in exaggerated terms, and detail and nuance is lost. Photos for example of protesters taken in front of Matavai and Turanga use Waterloo public housing icons for a political message, but also draw protests from people living in those buildings as they are not impacted by the current demolitions, which are at the other end of the estate. The eviction language elicits images of people being put out on the street homeless and avoids the details that Homes NSW has to find places for the people needing to move, that people are being given choices of places to move to and time to make decisions about what best suits them.
Language is powerful and it can whip up people’s anxieties. In a public housing community that has concentrated people with a range of different issues we need to be mindful of the impact of how we talk about the redevelopment and protest so as not to unnecessarily whip up anxiety for Waterloo residents. Of course, that is difficult when the aim of the protest is to make the Government uncomfortable about its policy and practice.
REDWatch members reflect the community diversity and we have members involved in the current demolition protests and those who can’t see the development come soon enough. Given this diversity REDWatch has not lent its name to this action, but recognises the importance and validity of many of the issues being raised.
Geoff Turnbull, REDWatch Spokesperson 28 May 2026
]]>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
The Concept State Significant Development and Rezoning Application have been placed on exhibition for 28 days until 2nd 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:
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.
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.
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).
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
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
]]>Waterloo South is Australia’s largest and most transformative public housing renewal and a cornerstone of the NSW Government’s historic $6.6 billion Building Homes for NSW program, which will deliver:
The proposal sets out a vision for a vibrant new inner-city neighbourhood that could enable around 3,300 new homes, where at least half would be delivered as social or affordable housing.
This will more than double the number of social and affordable homes currently on the site.
Central to the proposal are two new public parks, including a two-hectare main park and a 1,000 square metre community park, which will form the heart of the new Waterloo South and provide welcoming places for people to relax, gather and connect on Gadigal land.
The new homes will sit alongside transport, local shops and cafés, a new supermarket, essential services, and community facilities designed to support health, wellbeing and social connection.
First announced in 2015, the Waterloo South renewal stalled for years, with little progress until 2022. Since our election in 2023, we’ve turned vision into action by increasing public and affordable housing to 50 per cent, fully funding the project, completing the first stage of relocations, lodging the Concept SSDA and now moving toward demolition and delivery.
To enable this transformation, Homes NSW and Stockland, the lead delivery partner, have now lodged a Concept State Significant Development Application (SSDA).
While Waterloo South was initially rezoned in 2022, a new rezoning will be lodged at the same time, proposing minor updates to ensure they align with the Concept SSDA.
The Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) will now assess a combined rezoning and Concept SSDA.
The Waterloo South renewal will be delivered in stages over the coming years to support a carefully managed transition for existing residents.
Some residents in the first stage of relocations have already moved into brand new homes at the Waterloo Metro Quarter and Boronia apartments.
Any residents required to relocate for the renewal will be given at least six months’ written notice before needing to move and will be supported throughout the process.
The proposal is currently on public exhibition and members of the community are encouraged to provide feedback until Tuesday, 2 June 2026.
For more information and to make a submission, please visit: planningportal.nsw.gov.au
Quotes attributable to Minister for Planning and Public Spaces Paul Scully:
“This concept DA brings thousands of new public, affordable and market homes on the doorstep of the Waterloo Metro station another step closer to reality.
“Importantly, alongside the new homes the plan also proposes new open space where residents and the broader community can gather, relax and play.
“The Waterloo South renewal is a project that will reshape the area for decades to come so I encourage people to view the plans and share their feedback during the exhibition period.”
Quotes attributable to Minister for Housing and Homelessness Rose Jackson:
“This is one of the most significant housing renewals in the country and I’m thrilled to be moving into the next stage, offering the community their first look at the new Waterloo South.
“When we came to government, we immediately reviewed the plans for the Waterloo renewal and boosted the number of public and affordable homes from 35 to 50 per cent. This was a crucial step to ensure Waterloo remains a welcoming place for people from all walks of life to call home now and into the future.
“We know how important this project is to the community and we want to hear from residents to help shape what comes next.
“There is no time to waste in a housing crisis. I feel that urgency every day and I’m looking forward to moving to the next stage of this renewal project that will deliver more than four times the number of homes currently on this site.”
Quotes attributable to Stockland Managing Director and CEO Tarun Gupta:
“As delivery partner, Stockland is proud to be working with the NSW Government on the renewal of Waterloo South – a significant project with community at its heart.
“The Concept Plan sets the framework for a liveable and inclusive neighbourhood with new social, affordable and market housing, supported by parks, services and community infrastructure.
“We look forward to continuing to work closely with Homes NSW and our community housing partners to deliver a place where the community can thrive over the long term.”
Source: https://www.nsw.gov.au/ministerial-releases/waterloo-south-application-public-exhibition
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
]]>