Laserfiche WebLink
Cninprchcmice Nci�hb�nirh��nd Studic> C�hzunc�crinn_ Dcclir,c <br />Randolph and Judd's case study of the Waterloo Estate, the largest of the <br />Sydney's inner-city public housing estates, characterize the problems. The estate <br />comprises approximately 2,500 properties, which accounts for close to 70% of all <br />dwellings, and 82% of the total population of the suburb of Waterloo. Compared to other <br />housing estates, Waterloo has a high percentage (51%) of high-rise flats set in open space <br />and is highly visible and easily distinguished from its mainly [errace house and light <br />industrial surroundings. It is a highly disadvantaged community falling within the lowest <br />10 per cent of all collectors districts in NSW according to the Australian Bureau of <br />Statistics (ABS) Socio-Economic Indicators far Areas. It has a well above average <br />concentration of elderly people, single person households, single parent households, <br />Aboriginal and Tones Strait Islanders, and particular ethnic groups such as <br />Russian/Ukraine and Vietnamese (ibid.). <br />The Waterloo area has suffered from high levels of unemployment (particularly <br />amongst youth), high dependency on govemment assistance, a significantly higher <br />incidence of inental illness, problems with drug and alcohol abuse, and high levels of <br />crime and vandalism. As a result, by the mid 1990's Waterloo had become a highly <br />stigmatised community with a high rejection rate of housing offers, high vacancy rates, <br />high rental arrears and high levels of nuisance, annoyance and vandalism (ibid.). <br />The pattem of population and urban growth or loss prior to 1991 in Australia can <br />be summarized as strong population growth in areas with large greenfield sites on the <br />urban fringe, accompanied by consistent population losses in the inner city and losses in <br />the middle suburbs (Departrnent of Infrastructure 1998). However the evidence presented <br />in the Australian s[udies indicate that neighbourhood change patterns in Australia's <br />largest capital cities have become more complex over the past years than the model of <br />inner and middle city decline and growth in the outer rings of urban development <br />(Badcock 2001, Department of Infrastructure 1998, Baker, Coffee and Hugo 2000). <br />The urban development trends occumng over the last 10-15 years represent a <br />substantial shift from earlier patterns. These are a revival of population growth and <br />residential development in the inner city, and the boom in the development and demand <br />for medium-density housing (Department of Infrastructure 1998). Inner-city revitalization <br />has proceeded right through the 1990s in Australia's all five largest cities (Sydney, <br />Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, PeRh) (Badcock 2001). <br />For example, inner city repopulation has occuned in Melboume between 199] <br />and 1996, arresting population decline since the turn of the century. In che first half of the <br />decade, the City of Melbourne local government area became the third fastest growing <br />municipality in the metropolitan area, growing by approximately 15 per cent in that <br />period. Sydney has also undergone a remarkable grow[h in its inner city population and <br />level of residential development since 1991 (DepartmenC of Infrastructure 1998). <br />The demographic profile of inner-city residents of Melboume showed that the <br />people repopula[ing the irmer city tend to be young, predominandy 20 to 29 year olds. <br />They are likely to have fewer children and to be highly educated. Inner city residents tend <br />to work in managerial or professional occupations in the service sec[or, particularly <br />—. <br />15 <br />