News · Development · Newcastle

Half the people who answered did not want the community space. The amended Ocean Baths DA makes it smaller

We reported what the amended Ocean Baths DA changes. This is the document underneath it: City of Newcastle's own 64-page engagement report, which records what 447 people said about the pavilion plans. The community space is the part they were coolest on. 49 per cent did not want it on a first floor and, of those who commented on the ground floor version, 36 per cent did not want it at all. The amended DA reduces it.

The Hunter Ledger · 29 August 2026 · from the council's own engagement report, read in full

---

Our companion report sets out what the amended DA for Stage Two changes, from the council's own element-by-element account. The obvious next question is what the community actually asked for, and the council has published that too: a Community Engagement Report, August 2023, prepared by City of Newcastle with Micromex Research, running to 64 pages. It is linked from the project page and, as far as we can tell, is not much read.

One thing to be clear about before the numbers. The council says the amendments respond to the December 2025 exhibition, the Urban Design Review Panel, Heritage NSW, independent experts, stakeholders and a Lord Mayoral Minute. It does not say they respond to this 2023 survey. What follows is the survey record set beside the amendments, not a claim that one caused the other.

The survey, and the part people liked least

The report records an online survey open 30 May to 12 June 2023 that received 447 responses, following a Community Reference Group workshop on 25 May 2023 which gave largely positive feedback, including support for a first floor on the northern pavilion for additional community space.

The wider survey was cooler. On the plans as a whole, 45% liking the plans and slightly less (38%) not liking the plans. On the community space it was sharper: support for the first-floor space saw 49% not wanting the additional space, and 38% saying 'yes' or 'yes, with changes'.

The reasons matter more than the percentages. The report says objections to the plan and to the community space focused on an expected increase in parking requirements related to use of the community space, with concerns about privacy, and potential uses of the community space. On the ground floor version, responses indicate some concerns about how the community space will be used, and possible impact on parking availability and the privacy of bathers.

So the objection was rarely to a room. It was to traffic, to strangers overlooking people who are half-dressed, and to not knowing who would end up using it.

Set that beside what the amended DA does

Read the two together and the amended design answers a good deal of it, whatever prompted the changes.

• The community space is reduced. The council's stated reason is to accommodate the other changes, not the survey, but it is the element that drew the most objection.
• Its allowable hours are clarified so the information is clearer to potential hirers. That speaks directly to the potential uses concern and the 27 per cent who wanted more information about what the space means.
• Unisex and family provision is expanded. Family change rooms are redistributed across the southern and central pavilions. The most common family suggestion in 2023 was additional unisex change facilities, at 23 per cent.
• Accessible amenities and the Changing Places facility move nearer accessible parking and the pool ramp. Parking and access for less mobile users were the two largest accessibility concerns, at 14 and 13 per cent.
• The cafe gets defined outdoor seating, awnings and a solid roof over its internal seating, and alcohol is confined indoors. Seating with shade was equal-top of the cafe comments at 27 per cent, and the most common wish was for somewhere simple.

The one that does not resolve is parking. It was the single most repeated concern across three separate questions, and nothing in the published account of the amendments addresses parking supply. If you are making a submission before 23 September, that is the gap in the record.

Correction, and a second report that says it better

Corrected 29 August 2026. This story first said that the 2023 survey was the deepest evidence on the public record and that we could not find a later consultation report. That was wrong. City of Newcastle has also published a 61-page Consultation report dated February 2025, covering a later round of feedback on the Stage Two concept plans, and it is linked from the same project page. We missed it on the first pass. The 2023 findings above are unchanged and still accurate; what follows is the newer document, which is both more recent and closer to what the amended DA actually does.

The 2024 round, and why it matters more

The February 2025 report covers feedback taken between 17 June and 5 August 2024 on the Stage Two concept plans, under the council's We Love Our Coast program. It records 357 comments and 580 reactions through an online interactive tool, plus 151 responses via an online form and two by email.

Read it beside the amended DA and the correspondence is hard to miss. On the community space the report records mixed views, including support for use by swimming clubs and community groups but concerns the space being used for private functions and perceived commercialisation of the Baths, and that while some wanted flexible use, others wanted to see more space allocated to change rooms and amenities. The amended DA reduces the community space and redistributes change rooms.

Three more line up almost item for item.

• The terrace. The report records Questions about the purpose of the terrace/balcony and who would have access to this, with some concerns about views being impacted from the hill above the baths overlooking the ocean. The amended DA removes the rooftop terrace.
• Alcohol. It records that Some expressed strong concerns about whether alcohol should be available, whilst others were supportive of a bar/restaurant similar to Merewether Surfhouse. The amended DA confines alcohol to inside the cafe.
• The weather and the seating. Food and drink feedback raised Protection from all-weather conditions (e.g. wind, rain, sun), particularly with the glass frontage and no awning, and potential conflict between customers and Baths users over available outdoor seating. The amended DA adds a matching awning, puts a solid roof over the internal seating, and defines the cafe's external furniture footprint so it is clear which seating is the cafe's and which is public.

Under usage and purpose, which the report puts at 14 per cent of comments, it notes concerns about over-commercialisation and records that the café/kiosk has always been run by a private operator and the proposal does not lead to further privatisation, while acknowledging concern that it would change the experience and/or character of the Baths.

The same caution applies as before: the council attributes the amendments to the December 2025 exhibition and to expert advice, not to this report. We still could not find a published report on that December 2025 round, and say so as a failure to locate rather than as evidence that none exists. But the 2024 evidence is on the record, it is recent, and the amended design answers a striking amount of it.

See something wrong? Request a correction and we will check it against the source and log the outcome here.