“WestConnex is building a pedestrian bridge over the CityWest Link and removing all active travel surface access from Haberfield to Timbrell Park “for safety reasons”. But is there a higher priority and will the bridge encourage or discourage active travel?”

The recent decision to build a pedestrian bridge over Dobroyd Parade, better known as the CityWest Link (CWL), at the intersection with Waratah Street in Haberfield, is a continuation of the dismantling of an environment conducive to walking and riding, and replacing it with one that is hostile and discouraging where it is most prevalent [1].

While Transport for NSW (TfNSW) claims the bridge prioritises a “safer crossing for pedestrians”, there is a question as to whose interests it really serves. Presently the intersection supports motor vehicles travelling into and out of Haberfield using the CWL. The pedestrian crossing at the Waratah Street intersection is a critical connection to Timbrell Park for Haberfield and North Ashfield residents.

Timbrell Park is an extensive and popular recreational area supporting a flagship Livvi’s Place Playground and Cafe (designed based on Inclusive Play principles) [3], running, cycling and BMX tracks, numerous sporting fields and a focal point for active and passive recreation such as dog walking and yoga/ pilates.

*Livvi’s Place Playground and Cafe, Timbrell Park, Five Dock.*

The final bridge design will provide access via stairs and a lift at each end. There will be no ramps, requiring all those who cannot negotiate two sets of stairs to rely on a lift that may or may not be functioning. While traffic lights will remain to govern the flow of cars, ground access to the crossing will be denied to people walking and riding, with their way to be blocked with fences and concrete barriers.
Community engagement with the proposal reflected concern at the extent to which the removal of the at-grade crossing would discourage and exclude people who wanted to walk, ride or roll to the park. There is a body of research supporting this concern. Solioz and Lopez [4] have noted:

“If a [pedestrian bridge] is not universally accessible, convenient and well-utilized by a diversity of active travelers, then it might be better described as a disabling apparatus, a monument of immobility or an anti-pedestrian bridge.”

The Inner West Council initially argued for the crossing to be retained at-grade with a single phase, while the Haberfield Association found that TfNSW had no interest in remedying its own experience of unsafe driving behaviour. Despite abundant traffic cameras, they are only for flow management rather than enforcement of dangerous driving. It became apparent that giving over the space entirely to cars was more the priority. [5]
In this way the community itself arrived at the conclusions of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) [6]:

“…by displacing people, pedestrian bridges simply reinforce the dominion of vehicles over people on the streets. Pedestrian bridges discourage walking and cycling and exacerbate poor road safety for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists alike. Separating people from the street reinforces the prioritization of personal motor vehicles, while encouraging speeding, driver negligence, and traffic fatalities.”

The millions of dollars that this bridge, (estimated cost $9 million [6]) will cost could be better used to build better connections for people walking and riding bicycles in the neighbourhood.

[1] WalkSydney, 2024. WalkSydney’s submission to the current Parliamentary Inquiry into the Impact of the Rozelle Interchange
[2] For more information on Livvi’s Place playgrounds see
https://www.touchedbyolivia.com.au/
[3] Soliz, Aryana & Pérez López, Ruth. (2022). ‘Footbridges’: pedestrian infrastructure or urban barrier?
[4] The Haberfield Association. (2023).
https://haberfield.asn.au/cwl-waratah-st-bridge-habas-submission/
[5] Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (2024): "Pedestrian Bridges make cities less walkable why do cities keep building them?"
[6] Compared to the (shorter) Heathcote pedestrian bridge at Princes Highway which is reported to have cost $5.5 million in 2014, an estimated cost for the Haberfield bridge (+32% as per the relevant ABS cost index and an additional margin to account for the longer bridge) is around $9 million.

Whose Interests are Served by Pedestrian Bridges?

How is the road user space allocation policy being implemented in NSW?

$5 Million for WA’s Streets Alive program