“Just 100 extra homes”: Waterloo Estate redevelopment proceeds with controversy

By JOHN MOYLE

If you were to believe the Land and Housing Corporation’s updates on the relocation of tenants and the demolition and rebuild for the Waterloo South area of the Waterloo Public Housing Estate, you would get the impression that it is a done deal and that everything will proceed smoothly. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. 

The 12.3 hectares of Waterloo South makes up around 32 per cent of the estate and currently houses 749 social housing units, 120 private units and houses, plus some commercial properties. 

The NSW government intends to replace these dwellings with a mix of four high rise buildings between 27 and 33 stories, medium rise (between 6 and 13 stories) and low rise (between 2 and 5 stories) allowing for 3,012 new homes. 

These will comprise of 28 per cent social housing, 7.5 per cent affordable homes and 63 per cent private homes. 

With one bedroom unit prices in nearby Green Square averaging over $1 million, it is estimated that Waterloo South could realise more than $2 billion for the government. 

Not so quick say some of the stake holders in the project. 

“That mix is concerning us right now,” Richard Weeks, Waterloo Public Housing Action Group said. 

A powerful voice of dissent also came from the Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, when she said last week “The proposal sees just 100 extra social hosing homes than there is now, out of a 3,000 dwelling redevelopment . 

The social and affordable housing requirement must be increased. 

The proposal seeks to develop public housing, on public land, in the middle of a housing crisis.” 

The Lord Mayor also expressed concern that a revised mix is also critical to “ensuring the delivery of housing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in this culturally and historically significant area”. 

The City of Sydney has area-wide targets of 7.5 per cent of all housing to be social and 7.5 per cent to be affordable. 

Redfern Waterloo community group REDwatch spokesperson Geoff Turnbull suggested that there could be further adjustments to the plans. 

“There was a motion that went through the (NSW) State Labor Conference that indicated that Labor would do things a bit differently,” Turnbull said. 

“Also, the federal government is looking for places where they can put some of their social and affordable housing people, and Waterloo is reasonably well placed for this in terms of its time frame.”

2000 tenants to be relocated 

Touted as being ‘one of the largest social housing estate renewals in the world’  the project will affect more than 2,000 tenants, with no current locations or estimates of where and for how long they will be relocated. 

“They have to knock the buildings down and rebuilt, and then consider the water, the sewage, and then get the interiors done, so that could be three to four years,” Weeks said. 

There are a few options for relocation nearby, however the sites fall short of housing all of the displaced population. 

“They are talking longer term of using the units being built in the Waterloo Metro development and the PCYC development in Redfern,” Turnbull said. 

“Neither of these sites will be ready by the time that the LAHC want to start.” 

The PCYC site at 600-660 Elizabeth Street, Redfern, is expected to provide 300 new homes. 

Waterloo Metro Quarter

The Waterloo Metro Quarter is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2024 when Sydney Metro City and Southwest opens. 

Waterloo Metro Quarter will deliver 700 new homes, with just 70 apartments being allocated as social and affordable 

It is also understood that the Department of Communities and Justice have taken a head lease on the old Rachel Forster Hospital site at 134-144 Pitt Street, Redfern, that has up to 218 units. 

Even if all of these locations are in the mix for the relocations they still fall short for the total number of people expected to be in temporary housing. 

Not so quick LAHC, there are people in the way and they need to be considered before you barge in. 

LAHC were contacted repeatedly for comment but did not respond.