Waterloo SSP: Updates from REDWatch

Some updates from our friends at REDWatch:

Dear REDWatch Members & Supporters & Agencies, 

The long awaited declaration of the Waterloo State Significant Precinct (SSP) happened in a Media Release dated 18 May which was made public on Friday 19 May 2017. The declaration means that master planning for the redevelopment of the Waterloo public housing estate can now start. Land and Housing Corporation (LAHC) which owns the estate expect capacity building to continue over the next month or so and for consultation workshops to start towards the end of June/beginning of July. The current relocation date for the first tenants to be moved from the estate has not been pushed back past mid-2018 even though the planning process is expected to take up to 18 months to complete from its commencement. 

Below is what we know from the declaration and the initial release of information by LAHC. 

The SSP declaration covers the entire area of the consolidated Waterloo public including the private property within the boundary of the consolidated estate. NSW Planning and Environment on the State Significant Precincts page for Waterloo spells out the implications for private property holders as “should rezoning take place, future development proposals would be assessed against new and amended planning controls”. The declaration also covers what will happen over the land being compulsorily required for the new underground Waterloo Metro Railway station. This area is now referred to as the Metro Quarter. Concerns have been expressed about the density that might be put above Metro station to help pay for Sydney Metro and the recommendations for what happens on this site will also be part of the SSP assessment. 

You can see the area covered in the 20-hectare precinct in the declaration’s map parts of Waterloo (PDF map, 3.6MB). If you compare this map with the map of the estate and the Metro site resumption on the Central to Eveleigh Waterloo page (reproduced here) you can see the private property areas along Wellington Street and Cope Street between Wellington and John Streets which are not coloured in the UrbanGrowth map. 

UrbanGrowth NSW will participate in master planning across the SSP site. In the Metro Quarter, UrbanGrowth will develop a comprehensive master plan. On the LAHC land it will assist LAHC with technical work involved in developing the master plan for its site. NSW Planning and Environment says that the metro station design and the master plan for the Waterloo estate will be integrated. The statement says FACS will organise a series of master planning workshops for the community, but it is not currently clear who will handle engagement for the private landowners whose properties presumably will not be master planned. The statement on the Communities Plus website makes no reference to the private land within the estate which FACS is master planning and nothing at all has been posted yet by UrbanGrowth since the SSP declaration. NSW Planning and Environment says it will write to property owners within the precinct to formally notify them of the rezoning investigation and explain the SSP process for Waterloo. 

The precinct will now be investigated for rezoning through the State Significant Precincts process. The specific studies to be undertaken over the next 12-18 months are expected to be made public in coming days. Undertakings were given by LAHC that the community will have access to the scope of the studies and will have the opportunity to ask for key issues of concern which are not already included to be added. 

Once the master plan process is completed FACS and UrbanGrowth NSW will submit a State Significant Precinct Study to support the rezoning proposals to NSW Planning and Environment. NSW Planning and Environment and the City of Sydney Council will jointly assess proposals within the State Significant Precinct Study. 

While the City of Sydney Council has been, and will continue to be, involved in within the SSP tent, City of Sydney Council has previously recognised around Central to Eveleigh that it also needs to work with residents so that it can make an informed input into the planning process. 

REDWatch has invited representatives from City of Sydney Council to the REDWatch meeting on Thursday 1st June to present on Density done Well - what does it mean for a redevelopment like Waterloo? 

A forum for Agencies dealing with the Waterloo community will take place at Projects 107, 107 Redfern St on Thursday 25th May, between 12pm and 3.30pm by Inner Sydney Voice (previously Inner Sydney Regional Council for Social Development). This forum will include input from LAHC on the master planning and is aimed to help agencies respond to their clients concerns heading into master planning. Agency representatives are encouraged to attend a the “Waterloo Redevelopment – Where Do We Start?’ forum. Please RSVP to Thomas at cb@innersydneyvoice.org.au to secure a spot and for catering purposes.

You can find information about various aspects of the Waterloo redevelopment and useful resources on the following websites:

· NSW Planning and Environment: www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Plans-for-your-area/State-significant-precincts/Waterloo and Ministerial Media Release Waterloo nominated as next state significant precinct 

· Family and Community Service / Land and Housing Corporation’s Communities Plus: www.communitiesplus.com.au/major-sites/waterloo 

· Sydney Metro Station component: www.sydneymetro.info/station/waterloo-station - There is no site currently for the development above the station. 

· UrbanGrowth NSW Central to Eveleigh: www.centraltoeveleigh.com.au/area/waterloo-estate/ - There is no site currently on the UrbanGrowth site for the Metro Station Site master plan. Please note: UrbanGrowth NSW (http://www.urbangrowth.nsw.gov.au/) and UrbanGrowth Development Corporation (www.ugdc.nsw.gov.au/growth-centres/redfern-waterloo) are in the process of being restructured. Central to Eveleigh, of which Waterloo is part, will be part of UrbanGrowth Development Corporation answering directly to the Premier rather than the Minister of Planning. 

· Previous Proposals - The previous proposal by the RWA / SMDA for the redevelopment of Redfern and Waterloo public housing can be found on the UGDC site under Draft Built Environment Plan Stage 2 (BEP 2). Land and Housing Corporation did not release the details of its Draft Master Plan from 2011-12, nor was the review by the Government Architect released. What is known from these studies can be found on the REDWatch website through Links to Waterloo Redevelopment History. 

· Inner Sydney Voice’s Winter 2016 issue – Redeveloping Public Housing (PDF) contains information on the Government framework for the redevelopment. It also contains articles on what can be learnt from previous estate redevelopments and the issues that need to be addressed. You can also see the articles online at http://www.innersydneyvoice.org.au/pub/category/past-editions/winter-2016/. 

· For information on what is already underway in the lead up to the Waterloo Masterplan see South Sydney Herald’s Who’s who in Waterloo – April 7, 2017 or “Community voices in Waterloo master planning” in Shelter NSW’s March issue of Around the House.
Material from the current redevelopment proposals is being posted on the REDWatch website at Waterloo Public Housing Redevelopment & Metro Station.

... and ...

Just after I pressed send on my earlier email I was advised that LAHC had posted details of consultants and summaries on their Communities Plus website. 

You can see them at the foot of the page at www.communitiesplus.com.au/major-sites/waterloo. Based on the study numbers the summaries seem to be put together around the Waterloo Estate studies. As mentioned in our earlier email there are differences between the studies for Waterloo Estate and Waterloo Quarter. It is not clear without further checking if the LAHC summary includes details also from the Waterloo Quarter requirements. 

Below are the links to the documents posted by LAHC with a brief description from the document: 

• Waterloo Requirements Table - This table provides a list of the Study Requirements and the studies that will be undertaken for the Waterloo precinct 

· Waterloo Summary of Studies - This document provides a summary of each of the studies that will be undertaken to meet the Study set by the Minister for Planning 

· Waterloo Study Requirements Summary – This is a summary of the Study Requirements. 

· Waterloo Consultants Table – This table provides a list of the studies that will be under taken to meet the Requirements and the technical consultants that will carry out the studies according to the Study Requirements. 

· Feedback Form - FACS is asking for feedback on the summary of studies. If you think there is something missing this is your opportunity to say so.

The City of Sydney have advised that at the REDWatch meeting they will deal with the density done well issue in the context of the study requirements. So the REDWatch meeting on Thursday at 6pm at The Factory should be helpful in formulating your response to LAHC on the adequacy of the studies.

Waterloo and other State Significant Development sites

Last week the NSW Ministers for Housing and Social Housing - Anthony Roberts and Pru Goward - announced that Waterloo has been nominated as a State Significant Precinct. This is the third time the idea of State Significant Developments has come up in an area that includes large tracts of land owned by the Land and Housing Corporation - the others being Riverwood North and the Ivanhoe Estate.

The Ministers explained State Significant Precincts as "areas where the NSW Government takes the lead role in the approval of planning proposals, which are of state or regional significance due to their social, economic and environmental characteristics."

We've previously said, in relation to Riverwood:

State Significant Precinct's are a creature of planning law - specifically the State Environmental Planning Policy (State Specific Precincts) 2005. Determining an area to be a State Significant Precinct allows the NSW Government to override local government planning processes by either adjusting applicable Local Environmental Plans (as has happened with areas around Macquarie Park), or adjusting the SEPP to include zoning and planning controls within the document itself (as has happened with the Redfern-Waterloo area). More information about State Significant Precincts can be found in this document: here.

Colleagues at Shelter NSW have since drawn our attention to a 2017 amendment to the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 - at clause 10 of schedule 2. This provides that a project to develop land identified as a Land and Housing Corporation Site that is within the State Significant Development Sites Maps will qualify as a State Significant Development if the project is carried out on behalf of the Land and Housing Corporation and has a capital investment value of more than $20 million.

That is, if land on public housing sites within a State Significant Development Site is to be "recycled" - as is the current buzzword - at a cost of $20 million or more, the NSW Government gets to oversee the planning process, rather than local government. This would also apply to land that is vacant, as long as it owned by the Land and Housing Corporation and falls within the State Significant Development Sites Map in the SEPP.

At the moment, there's not a lot of land outside of the Waterloo and Ivanhoe areas that would meet this criteria. But as we can see from the Riverwood North announcement of late last year, it's not out of the question that Government will, from time to time, seek to pull land on which public housing estates are built into this State Significant Developments scheme.

We're told that the Riverwood North site straddles a couple of different Local Government Areas, and that's what makes it necessary to treat is as a State Significant Precinct. No such concern seems to apply to the Ivanhoe Estate, or the land at Waterloo. In fact, where the Waterloo site is concerned, the Ministers' announcement says:

“Proposals to rezone the land will be assessed under a new collaborative arrangement between the Department of Planning and Environment and the City of Sydney Council, reflecting a commitment to work together to ensure good planning and design outcomes.”

Overriding a local council's planning mechanisms and then entering into a new "collaborative arrangement" to rezone and redevelop is an interesting move. We wonder if this commitment to working together comes in the form of a binding agreement, with clear lines of delegation?

Two other matters of importance to note from last week's announcement:

Minister for Social Housing Pru Goward said the Department of Family and Community Services would spearhead the future redevelopment of the Waterloo Estate through a series of master planning workshops, which will be held over the next 12 months.

So residents can expect to be consulted by FACS, on planning. And:

“Under the Communities Plus program, the revitalisation of Waterloo will see no loss of social housing dwellings and a new community of social, affordable and private housing,” Ms Goward said.

So a further commitment to retain the current level of social housing in the area, as part of increasing density.

Proposed rezoning of Arncliffe, Banksia and Cooks Cove

The NSW Department of Planning and Environment is seeking feedback on their proposed Bayside West Precincts Land Use and Infrastructure Strategy, including through an online survey here.

From the Planning and Environment website:

The Bayside West Precincts Land Use and Infrastructure Strategy is now on exhibition until 28 February 2017. We are keen to hear more about what you think is important for the precinct and the strategy.

And in a media release today, Social Housing Minister Brad Hazzard suggests this includes plans to "boost social housing in Arncliffe" with the proposed redevelopment of a Land and Housing Corporation site. The proposal would see 142 one, two and three bedroom public housing dwellings demolished to make way for up to 600 new private, affordable and social housing dwellings, using the Communities Plus renewal model.

The full media release is reproduced below:

30 PER CENT BOOST TO ARNCLIFFE SOCIAL HOUSING

More social and affordable housing and new private housing is on the way with the proposed redevelopment of a Land and Housing Corporation site in Arncliffe. 

Minister for Social Housing Brad Hazzard said sites big and small across the state were being redeveloped under the Communities Plus program. 

“We are taking tired old housing in Arncliffe, partnering with the private sector and community housing providers to redevelop it at no cost to taxpayers – and getting 30 per cent more new social housing, along with affordable and private housing. 

“It’s a win-win for existing tenants who will get the new homes and for vulnerable families and individuals on the waiting list needing new homes. 

“All the evidence is that mixed communities deliver better social outcomes and residents of Eden Street, Arncliffe will benefit from the new opportunities coming their way.” 

The proposed rezoning of the site is part of a larger exhibition by the Department of Planning and Environment of a proposed rezoning to precincts within Arncliffe, Banksia and Cooks Cove. 

The site currently has 142 social housing units, a mix of studios, 1, 2, and 3 bedroom homes. Under new proposals, the site could be re-zoned and replaced with a mix of up to approximately 600 private, affordable and social housing dwellings. 

Mr Hazzard said housing officers had great experience helping vulnerable tenants through temporary relocations, before tenants moved back on site into new homes. Tenants will be assisted and kept informed of timelines, and are encouraged to view the draft plans and give their feedback. 

Communities Plus will deliver up to 23,000 new and replacement social housing dwellings, 500 affordable housing dwellings and up to 40,000 private dwellings over a 10 year period, in a $22 billion investment program with the private and not-for-profit sectors. 

Other major sites already announced as part of the Communities Plus program include Ivanhoe, Telopea, Riverwood and Waterloo.

Waterloo screening at 107 Projects

At the end of last year the Premier announced plans for the redevelopment of the Waterloo Public Housing Estates as part of Communities Plus.  The Waterloo community, especially public housing residents, responded quickly to ensure their voices will be heard throughout the planning process. This has included, though not at all limited to, setting up a platform for documenting and sharing residents’ concerns about the future of Waterloo via the website We Live Here.

Next week 107 Projects will be hosting a screening event of Tom Zubrycki’s documentary Waterloo from 1981.  Waterloo provides an important account of residents’ campaign to save the area from slum clearance and redevelopment by public housing authorities through the 1970s.

The event will also screen an early trailer for a documentary currently being filmed - We Live Here 2017 – that aims to tell the story of people who live in public housing at Waterloo now and the place they call home.

Details for the event:
WHEN: 6.30pm - 8 Nov 2016
WHERE: 107 PROJECTS
COST: DONATION

As the organisers of the event explain: “With the impending threat of destruction by the state government, narratives around sense of place and cultural heritage have never been more relevant.”

Brad Hazzard media release: Ivanhoe Estate + new Communities Plus sites

Posted without comment:

Thursday, 25 August 2016

HOUSING PROJECT DELIVERS STRONG INTEREST

The first Communities Plus renewal project at Ivanhoe (Macquarie Park) has sparked strong interest from the private sector development industry and Community Housing Providers (CHPs), said Minister for Social Housing, Brad Hazzard.

“The three shortlisted organisations represent the top echelon of the private development sector and strong Community Housing Providers,” Mr Hazzard said.

“This is an extremely positive response to the Communities Plus program and shows how Government, the private sector and CHPs can be innovative and band together to deliver more housing and better social outcomes.”

The shortlisted groups are: Exemplar Living (Lend Lease) with St George Community Housing and Capella Capital; Frasers Property with Mission Australian Housing and Citta Property Group; and Stockland with Evolve Housing and Brookfield Multiplex Constructions.

The renewal project at Ivanhoe will boost social housing, more than doubling the current 259 social housing dwellings. The project will see 556 new social housing dwellings, at least 128 new affordable housing dwellings and some 1900 private dwellings on the eight hectare site.

The NSW Government has also announced that the second Communities Plus Neighbourhood Renewal package will be offered through an Expression of Interest to Community Housing Providers and small to medium sized private developers. These ten sites will deliver an estimated 790 new private, social and affordable homes into the high demand NSW housing market.

“These ten sites will provide a 300% increase from the current number of social housing dwellings and give residents modern new homes,” Mr Hazzard said.

Neighbourhood Renewal Release 2 involves sites in Corrimal, Wagga Wagga, St Marys, Padstow, Liverpool, South Granville (two sites), Warwick Farm, Parramatta North and Lane Cove.

Communities Plus is a $22 billion redevelopment of NSW Government owned social housing estates to deliver 23,000 new social housing dwellings and 40,500 private and affordable homes in integrated communities with better community outcomes.

Estate renewal study for Airds-Bradbury

NSW Health has published a study examining the impact of the renewal of Public Housing on the "health, particularly chronic disease, quality of life and wellbeing" of affected tenants. The 'health impact assessment' examines the short and long-term consequences of relocation for tenants affected by the demolition and redevelopment of Public Housing estates in Airds and Bradbury, near Campbelltown. 

The redevelopment project will deliver a 'mixed tenure' community of approximately 2000 dwellings, of which 30% will be Social Housing and 70% private market housing. Demolition, reconstruction, and tenant relocations are progressing slowly, and are expected to continue past 2020. According to the study, 3507 people lived in the estates when works commenced in 2011. Tenants have the opportunity to move back into Airds-Bradbury as new Social Housing becomes available, though many have opted to relocate elsewhere in the Campbelltown area. 

Above: land clearing works at Airds

The study describes the old estates as "poor quality", and posits that poor housing - particularly limited access to recreation spaces, healthy food, and social and health care services - is a driver of poor health. It also suggests that health issues experienced by Airds-Bradbury tenants are compounded by the area's status as "one of the most socially and economically disadvantaged areas in NSW". Given works commenced relatively recently, the study only makes short-term findings. 

In relation to the relocation and rehousing process, the study concludes broadly that the process has had "positive and negative health impacts, often dependent on the individual, the circumstances of their relocation and their perceived sense of control". Residents who were actively involved throughout the relocation process, and who received personalised support, reported a more positive impact.

Findings related to tenants leaving the 'poor' built environment of the old estates for higher quality housing were similarly mixed. Some reported "reduced stress, increased physical accessibility and an improved sense of privacy and safety", and positive impact related to the provision of housing according to their individual needs. Similarly, many reported increased feelings of safety and security. However, single people and childless couples reported negative psychological health impacts when required to move to smaller properties. 

The impact of relocation on tenants' community networks was identified as problematic. Many reported negative impacts, related to either displacement or isolation for those relocated within the depopulated estate. This is particularly concerning as such networks are something that, according to the report, "socioeconomically disadvantaged groups tend to rely quite strongly on...for their physical and mental health".

The study ultimately finds that housing providers and health organisations should attend to four major considerations in the administration of estate redevelopments:

"1. [New] housing and neighbourhood generally are planned and built to high design standards;

2. Disruptions and inconveniences to individuals and the community during the actual redevelopment are reduced to the minimum;

3. There are appropriate services and procedures in place to support residents during each stage of the planning, renewal and relocation process; and

4. The needs and preferences of individual residents are taken into account."

Though the scale of the Airds-Bradbury redevelopment is itself considerable, the study is of potentially broader relevance. Both the suite of Communities Plus projects and the renewal project at Cowper Street, Glebe, involve the demolition of Public Housing for 'mixed communities' at the 30-70 ratio. 

We welcome feedback from all tenants affected by estate renewal works, including those at Airds and Bradbury. This may be provided anonymously to contact [@] tenantsunion.org.au.

Ivanhoe Estate redevelopment timeline

The Land and Housing Corporation-lead redevelopment of the Ivanhoe Estate in Macquarie Park was announced in September 2015. Six months later and on the ground work has commenced, with the relocation of current tenants now taking place. 

But the proposal existed, in a number of distinct incarnations, for over four years prior to last year's decision. The Ivanhoe Estate Tenant Group has posted a timeline to its Facebook page of events leading up to the September announcement (original link here). The story it tells is one of equivocation, referral, and delay - as well as years of uncertainty for the residents affected:

Telopea redevelopment overview

The NSW Government has announced a 'master plan' for the redevelopment of a large portion of Telopea, north of Parramatta, over the next 10-15 years. 

Public Housing is a prominent feature of Telopea. According to 2011 Census figures, Telopea contains 468 Public Housing dwellings, making up 20% of the suburb as a whole. 

An information sheet provided to Public Housing tenants by FACS Housing confirms that Public Housing tenants will be relocated for works completed under the scheme, without precisely indicating who will be moved or when. It states, "The first relocations will not take place until late-2017...", and "[Affected] tenants will have the opportunity to return to Telopea after redevelopment".

Above: the boundaries of the master plan area, taking in almost half of Telopea

Indeed it appears probable that redevelopment of Public Housing sites will be a major component of the project. Social Housing Minister Brad Hazzard's announcement says the project "will deliver an estimated $2.5 billion of new social, private and affordable housing and housing infrastructure". FACS Housing's Telopea Master Planning Team has provided that the Government will deliver estates with a mix of Social, Affordable and private market housing, in partnership with developers and the not-for-profit sector. And a Parramatta Advertiser report posits that such construction will comprise approximately 70% private dwellings and 30% Social Housing. This strongly resembles the Public Housing estate redevelopment strategy utilised in Communities Plus projects (as well as the preferred development style of the Social and Affordable Housing Fund). 

However, it also appears that redevelopment may stretch beyond NSW Land & Housing Corporation sites. The tenant information sheet provides that "all land within this [master plan] area will be considered by the master plan, regardless of who owns the land".

Little beyond the boundaries of the precinct to be affected by the master plan appears to have been finalised. The Master Planning Team have said that the plan will continue to be developed through 2016, with local stakeholders invited to participate. 

Why Telopea?

The Telopea Master Planning Team has provided a dual rationale for development and implementation of the scheme. 

First, the Parramatta Light Rail Project will include construction of a northern line between Camellia and Carlingford. Whilst stations and their locations have not been set at this time, the line is expected to run through Telopea. Construction of the line will commence in 2018-19 and conclude by 2036. 

Second, the planning team has determined that current Public Housing stock in the suburb, "does not meet the needs of many of the tenants". It cites the age of the stock, inappropriate bedroom configurations, and a lack of circulation space in reaching this conclusion.* This position is strongly reminiscent of the position regarding under-occupancy of Social Housing expressed in the Future Directions strategy for development of the State portfolio as a whole. One of three strategies proposed to reduce under occupancy therein is the construction of "more smaller, fit for purpose dwellings to match the needs of new and future tenants". The Master Planning Team also notes that the cost to NSW Land & Housing Corporation of maintaining the stock is rising as the properties age.

Current redevelopment

The team provided that the pre-existing Communities Plus project for redevelopment of public housing sites at Moffats Drive and Sturt Street, Telopea, will "be taken into account" in the ongoing development of the Government's plan for the suburb. However, the master plan project has no direct relationship to the project or to Communities Plus in general. 

Our response

The announcement that Telopea is to be redeveloped appears broadly familiar to Communities Plus, though far less detailed at this stage. The bold red line denoting the boundaries of the 'master plan' encircles half the suburb, and evokes a sense of dramatic change. But the truth is that little beyond a general intention, to be realised over a period of decades, has been revealed. 

A community group operating in the Telopea area has confirmed that local tenants are scarcely better informed on the particulars of how the project is to proceed. This should be addressed as a matter of priority, with tenants informed and engaged at every step. Such an approach would minimise the rumours and feelings of uncertainty that such projects stimulate, as well as provide valuable local perspective to those overseeing the redevelopment.

One of the precious few details confirmed is that at least some, and possibly many, Public Housing tenants will be relocated. And in this regard we note the same concerns as apply to estate redevelopments across NSW. Relocations are inherently stressful for those losing their homes. The needs and interests of affected tenants should be prioritised throughout the process, and the right to return under the same conditions should be upheld for those that wish to do so.

Moreover, if NSW Land & Housing Corporation sites are to be demolished for mixed tenure communities, this ought to facilitate an increase in the total number of both Social and Affordable housing dwellings in Telopea. At present there is no guarantee that stock will be increased or even retained at present levels.

Will its close proximity to Parramatta, expanding rail connections, and high quantity of publicly owned land, it is not difficult to see why Telopea has been targeted for renewal. But any properly realised vision of the suburb as a modern part of the burgeoning "Capital of Western Sydney" needs to account for tenants both current and future. 


* We welcome feedback from Social Housing tenants on the suitability and condition of their homes, or any other redevelopment issues. Contact us at clearinghouse@tenantsunion.org.au. Your anonymity will be respected.

The Telopea Master Planning team are also available for contact on 1800 761 434 or TelopeaMasterPlan@facs.nsw.gov.au. 

Let's walk the talk in Waterloo

Cross posted from The Brown Couch

Today's entry on The Brown Couch is by Julie Foreman, Executive Officer at the Tenants' Union of NSW. 

Last Thursday (February 11), I attended a public meeting on the redevelopment of the Waterloo public housing estates hosted by Jenny Leong MP, one of two Members of Parliament representing the suburb. Over one hundred local tenants attended. Also in attendance was the Social Housing Minister, Brad Hazzard MP, shadow Social Housing Minister Tania Mihailuk MP, and FACS Deputy Secretary Southern Cluster, Paul Vevers. I was heartened by the level of interest and attendance by all stakeholders.

Can the Government balance competing interests and walk the talk in Waterloo?

Tenants expressed anxiety and confusion about the announcement. The following snippets capture the questions and concerns raised:

“Is my home being demolished?”

“When will I be moving?”

“Where will I be moving to?”

“Will I get a like-for-like house when I move?”

"Why do I have to lose my home, my community, my security?"

“I feel like my life will be on hold for the next 5 years."

“How are you going to deal with all the extra parking needed?”

“I am afraid of moving away from my health supports and friends”

“Will you cover my moving costs?”

“Why didn’t you take the last 10 years of consultations into account?”

“You just sprung it on us before Christmas with a flyer under my door!”

The Minister suggested to participants that meetings such as these just scare and raise anxiety. I believe they reflect honest and real concerns.

Unfortunately, the issues raised do not surprise me – they are what I have heard at every gathering (large, small or one on one) of social housing tenants facing or experiencing redevelopment. I heard it in Riverwood, Bonnyrigg, Minto, Claymore, and Ivanhoe. This is not to deny that there are also some tenants who want to move, in the hope of changing their overall circumstances.

What did surprise me was that FACS Housing and the Minister had not anticipated this response, and adjusted their usual announcement process accordingly. The public housing agency has been through this a number of times, and assures us over and over that they have learnt from their mistakes. 

The Minister did assure us at the meeting that he would make sure those affected in Waterloo would be treated sensitively, and be consulted at every step along the way. I am not yet cynical enough to believe that he was just ‘talking the talk’ and not prepared to ‘walk the walk’. That is because Minister Hazzard and Mr Vevers did make some commitments. He agreed that additional supports for tenants would be needed during this period. He agreed that with a local, annual turnover rate of between 8-9% of public housing tenants, those affected by redevelopment works could be rehoused within the area as works progressed. He indicated that he would personally hold regular, local consultations. And he said there would be no rush to relocate tenants. He even committed to answering questions raised at the meeting at a consultation he is to host this week.

So here at the TU we have put together a list to help all of us - tenants, FACS Housing, Minister Hazard, and community organisations - ‘walk the talk’, and thus increase the prospect of sensitive, appropriate and effective redevelopment. Collective learning from research commissioned by FACS Housing, built on consultations over a number of years with tenant groups and the non-government sector, informs the list:

- Acknowledge the strengths and history of the existing community;

- Progressively move people within the estate as new buildings are constructed;

- Undertake a social impact assessment to inform the best plans and processes for tenants and their communities;

- Fund additional supports and independent tenant advice while maintaining funding of existing services and supports;

- Include genuine community empowerment and involvement at appropriate levels;

- Don’t give undertakings that cannot be met;

- Make available past plans or reports on consultations, to enable tenants to participate in informed discussions;

- Make sure communication is clear, regular and takes place in different forms;

- Provide additional training and support to FACS Housing staff tasked with working as relocation officers. This training should include presentations from tenants who have lived through the experience of redevelopment in other areas;

- Undertake ongoing evaluation;

- Follow up and support tenants that have moved;

- Carefully consider allocations to ensure they are appropriate;

- Listen to tenants and treat them with respect! This sounds easy but is anything but if really taken seriously.

Similarly, research and past experiences have provided evidence on practices to avoid – worst practice principles, if you like. So on this note, be sure not to engage in:

- Tokenism in forming partnerships and building community involvement;

- Short-term 'quick fixes'. Good outcomes take time;

- Public representations and narratives of disadvantaged locations, which entrench the problem by exaggerating an area's dysfunction;

- Actions which merely displace the problem. Projects that merely move people to new locations do not solve problems of poverty and disadvantage.

Read more about what the experts say about best and worst practice in redevelopments here.

Communities Plus update

A paper released by the NSW Government in relation to the tender process for Communities Plus has revealed new details about the scheme. The document, published on NSW e-tendering and entitled 'Expressions of Interest: First Six Sites of the Communities Plus Program', is intended for developers and community housing providers with an interest in participating in the scheme. It concerns the sites at Gosford, Warwick Farm, Glendale, Seven Hills, Telopea, and Tweed Heads. A standalone equivalent is expected to be released for the larger Macquarie Park site. 

The Communities Plus Telopea site

Build characteristics

The paper most comprehensively discusses build characteristics. It describes the project as consisting of "medium and high density" construction. At present, the Seven Hills, Telopea, and Warwick Farm blocks are zoned for high density residential, Glendale and Tweed Heads are zoned for medium density residential, whilst Gosford is designated mixed use. It is provided further that “The program is predominantly seeking one and two bedroom dwellings as social housing, with a preference for more two bedroom dwellings. A number of dual key dwellings could be attractive as they provide greater flexibility.” 

Regarding the quality of residences to be delivered, the paper states that “as a minimum, the social housing will be required to meet the Silver Level of the Liveable Housing Design Guidelines as published by Liveable Housing Australia.” Liveable Housing Australia describes itself as a "not-for-profit partnership between community and consumer groups, government and the residential building industry". Its primary function is to "advocate the mainstream adoption of liveable housing design principles in all new homes..." - especially housing that "better respond[s] to the changing needs and abilities of people over their lifetime". It has not made its housing design guidelines publicly available. 

The residences constructed will also incorporate energy efficient design features; “Passive environmental design, which maximise solar access, orientation and cross flow ventilation to reduce energy heating, cooling, lighting and clothes drying costs...will be a requirement”.

Commercial arrangements

The paper also addresses anticipated commercial arrangements between LAHC, developers, and community housing providers - including the overarching commercial objectives of the project. LAHC will seek to optimise its commercial return for the land it contributes to the project, whilst adding to the overall supply of social housing and "seamlessly integrating" social, affordable, and private market housing.

The paper contemplates the manner in which the Government will dispose of and/or retain the sites earmarked for development in some detail. Although there will be no mandatory commercial structure, it outlines two "non-binding" arrangements. Under 'Contract for Sale of Land', LAHC would concurrently "offer a Contract for the Sale of Land to sell the site and a Contract for the Sale of Land to purchase the completed social housing dwellings.” Under 'Project Delivery Agreement (PDA)', "LAHC would retain ownership of the land until the project is completed and would appoint a Proponent to develop the site at the Proponent's cost. The proponent earns a return through a development fee equal to the proceeds of sale...[and] will be responsible for and accept all risk selling the private dwellings".

The affordable housing component of Communities Plus developments is also discussed. The Government anticipates that affordable residences will be owned or controlled by the developers, and managed by a registered community housing provider. Further, “it is not intended the value of land contributed by LAHC will fund the affordable housing component.” These residences will be managed according to Department of Family and Community Service guidelines as to what constitutes affordable rental housing. 

The paper also notes that parties contracted to construct and manage the sites will not be able to draw on funding from other NSW Government housing initiatives, such as the Social and Affordable Housing Fund. 

Locals respond to Waterloo announcement

Local community organisations, politicians, and the media have made statements in response to the NSW Government's recent announcement that Waterloo is to be extensively redeveloped. Much of it is focused on the impact to the suburb's social housing tenants, and the public housing portfolio in NSW.

Aerial view of Waterloo

Community services

The Factory Community Centre auspices a range of social and community services for residents of Waterloo and Redfern. Many of their clients are public housing tenants. They are also based out of a Waterloo property owned by NSW Land and Housing Corporation (LAHC). 

The centre's statement welcomed Social Housing Minister Brad Hazzard's announcement that there would be no loss of social housing dwellings in Waterloo, noting an "increase in social housing stock is desperately needed given the length of the current waiting list for public housing." It also acknowledged the Minister's assurance that relocated public housing residents would be allowed to return to Waterloo, and that services operating out of LAHC properties would not be evicted. However, the Centre was critical of the Government's failure to consult with it prior to announcing the project; "...again we find ourselves in the position that the community will be consulted after the decision has already been made."

Redfern Legal Centre is a Community Legal Centre whose catchment area includes the Waterloo area. Its services include the specialist Inner Sydney Tenants' Service. The Centre's statement expresses much the same concerns as Factory Community Centre; "These [concerns] include the lack of consultation with public housing tenants about the new plans and the concern that often final plans do not match assurances given at the outset. We hope the current and any future government honour commitment that there will be no reduction in social housing, all current tenants will be given the opportunity to return to the area and that the relocations will be done in a calm and considered way."

REDWatch is a community group based in Redfern, Waterloo, Eveleigh, and Darlington, with a longstanding interest in local social housing issues. In a statement, REDWatch questioned how the Government would ensure positive outcomes for current public housing tenants out of the redevelopment; "...where does the Minister propose to temporarily relocate the residents displaced during the construction of the new development?" The group asked further, "If tenants are to be moved from public housing to either affordable or community housing, how does the Minister propose to guarantee their existing tenancy and rental arrangements?" REDWatch is also collating public statements made by significant figures concerning the project, here. 

NSW politicians

Waterloo is located mostly within the NSW Electoral District of Heffron. The Member for Heffron, Ron Hoenig (ALP), has not made public comment on the redevelopment. A small section of northern Waterloo is located in the Electoral District of Newtown. The Member for Newtown, Jenny Leong (Greens), did issue a statement concerning the project. Ms. Leong says that the Government must ensure there is no decrease in the number of social housing residents in Waterloo, rather than simply provide for no decrease in dwellings; "Whilst we acknowledge the Government's commitment that the number of social housing dwellings will be maintained in the new development, we need to ensure that these dwellings will continue to house the same number of residents...As a minimum we need a commitment that there will be no reduction in the number of bedrooms or number of residents that can be housed." Ms. Leong's statement also says the area needs more social housing;  "Our community needs a significant investment in affordable housing, which needs to come on top of any commitment to maintain existing public housing..." 

NSW Greens spokesperson for Housing, Social Housing and Homelessness, Jan Barham MLC, issued a statement echoing Ms. Leong's call for more social housing; "With almost 60,000 people on the waiting list for social housing in NSW it's not enough to maintain existing numbers of social housing properties. The redevelopment around Waterloo is a prime opportunity to provide more inner-city social housing..." 

The Shadow Minister for Social Housing, Tania Mihailuk MP, published a comment on her Facebook page. It reads, in full, "On the 8th day before Christmas this cold and callous Govt has announced that 4000 people in Waterloo will have their homes torn down. This Govt simply wants to make money out of these sites - the winners are investors and developers yet again." 

Local politicians 

Waterloo is located within the City of Sydney Local Government Area. Councillor Linda Scott (ALP) issued a comment calling for the interests of public housing tenants to be protected throughout the redevelopment process; "The urban renewal of Waterloo...must be done with great sensitivity, in-depth community consultation, and with a commitment to invest in infrastructure...Current public housing tenants in Waterloo affected by these plans must be given iron-clad assurances of returning to the upgraded social housing dwellings." In a blog post on the announcement, Councillor Irene Doutney (Greens) said, "I will be scrutinising these plans closely to ensure that public housing remains in Waterloo."

The City of Sydney itself has not made public comment on the announcement. However, in its Housing Issues Paper published in April 2015, it identifies a redevelopment of Waterloo as one of four "Critical one off opportunities to delivering substantial [social and affordable housing] supply in the inner city."

Federal politicians 

Waterloo is located in the federal electorate of Sydney. The Member for Sydney, Tanya Plibersek MP (ALP), has not made public comment on the announcement. Ms. Plibersek was also Housing Minister from December 2007 to September 2010 - the first time the Ministry had existed as a standalone portfolio since 1994. The position was abolished following the 2013 election. 

In September 2015, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull created the first Cities and The Built Environment Ministry at the federal level of Government. Prior to his resignation from Cabinet, the former Minister Jamie Briggs MP did not make any comment on the announcement. Nor did Shadow Cities Minister Anthony Albanese MP. 

News media

The Sydney Morning Herald published a masthead editorial which addresses the housing and tenancy ramifications of the announcement at some length: 

"Some potential problems need to be overcome to make this an urban renewal success. Existing public housing tenants will be relocated temporarily. This is a difficult logistical task and an emotionally fraught one for long-time residents. It is easy to forget that for all the bad reputation of the Waterloo tower blocks, most of the people who live there are law abiding, productive citizens. The key will be bringing them along with the process, thereby allaying their fears that they are being driven out for the sake of what one long term resident has called a "yuppie invasion"... But given the process is being conducted over two decades, future governments will be under enormous pressure to reduce the proportion of public or affordable housing and sell it for revenue."

Major redevelopment of Waterloo

The NSW government has announced an extensive redevelopment of the inner city suburb of Waterloo. According to The Sydney Morning Herald, a total of 10,000 new dwellings, accommodating 30,000 new residents, will be built over a period of 20 years. The project will be centred around a new railway station - part of the 'Sydney Metro' line that will link southwest Sydney through to Bankstown with northwest Sydney through to Rouse Hill. It will form part of the wider 'Communities Plus' project. 

Matavai and Turanga towers, Waterloo

The Herald story states that new dwellings will initially be built on a State-owned, 13 hectare site, held principally by NSW Land and Housing Corporation. The final redevelopment will cover 40 hectares. According to The Daily Telegraph, the 30-storey Turanga and Matavai towers on Phillip Street, and surrounding, lower-density public housing apartments, will be demolished as part of the redevelopment. This will require the relocation of approximately 2000 public housing tenants over the life of the project.

The Government has said that one third of the 10,000 new dwellings will be social and affordable housing, with the remainder for the private market. Premier Mike Baird told the Herald that there will be no loss in the number of social housing dwellings in the suburb from current numbers. The Premier did not speak on whether the social housing dwellings built to replace current stock will also contain the same number of bedrooms. 

On the subject of relocations, the Premier said, "Every single [affected] tenant will have the right to come back". This comment was echoed by Social Housing Minister Brad Hazzard. A letter sent to public housing tenants in Waterloo from the Minister, dated 16 December 2015, states, "I want to assure you that tenants who live at Waterloo can remain in Waterloo after the redevelopment. While some tenants may need to relocate on an interim basis into other housing in the local area, many will be able to move directly into the new social housing as the site is redeveloped."

The Telegraph states that relocations from public housing blocks marked for demolition are expected to commence in 2017, with construction to begin in 2018. 

According to a Transport for NSW statement, the precise location of the centrepiece railway station has not yet been determined. The station is not due to open until 2036. 

Our concerns

On the information available, the Waterloo redevelopment appears to be of substantially similar form to the Macquarie Park UAP, the smaller 'Communities Plus' developments, and the development on Cowper Street, Glebe. All involve the demolition of tenanted public housing blocks for larger mixed residential apartments, and thus the relocation of many households. 

Relocations are inherently painful experiences for those affected. FACS claims its staff are experienced in assisting tenants through relocation processes, having learnt much from earlier renewal projects. But testimonial from places such as Millers Point, Claymore, and Bonnyrigg give a different perspective. Independent research into the impact of relocation - and what specifically helped long-term tenants adjust to new homes, neighbourhoods and communities - should be commissioned and considered before proceeding with any projects involving the renewal or disposal of currently tenanted stock. We support the Minister's claim that tenants will be able to remain in the Waterloo area and believe it is important that this is adhered to. In this regard, we believe it is important that FACS formalises clear policies and processes concerning management of relocations. This did not happen in the aforementioned relocations. 

The stated timeframe for the project is also extremely tight; the Government intends to commence construction in just over two years. This is concerning as it indicates that tenants may be compelled to relocate to unsuitable properties to facilitate construction.

Finally, given this development will be incorporated into the Communities Plus program, we also maintain the same concerns regarding loss of independence for social housing tenants as for other Communities Plus sites. Concepts such as 'mutual obligation', and burdensome tenancy management, further enmesh social housing tenants in the welfare system. Support services should of course be available to social housing tenants - not least in a period of relocations - but not mandated as a condition of tenure. Furthermore, the expectation that tenants eligible for social housing should promptly resolve their need for assistance and exit into an expensive and insecure private rental market is both unrealistic and cruel.