Redwood Park vs Tea Tree Gully, SA Suburb Comparison

Redwood Park for families; Tea Tree Gully for retirees and investment.

See which suburb leads on livability, safety, schools, and lifestyle.

Head to head

Visual comparison

Redwood ParkTea Tree Gully

Overall score

Redwood Park

51.1/100

Tea Tree Gully

57.7/100

Crime rate

Redwood Park

16.1 / 1k

Tea Tree Gully

20.5 / 1k

Nearby amenities

Redwood Park

105

Tea Tree Gully

122

Population

Redwood Park

5,367

Tea Tree Gully

3,499

Metric leadRedwood Park 5Tea Tree Gully 61 tiedacross 12 compared metrics

Livability profile

Desirability pillars scored 0–100 vs comparable suburbs

Audience fit

Who each suburb suits — composite scores out of 100

All metrics

Side-by-side scores for every compared metric.

Full comparison table

Exact figures for every metric — winner highlighted in bold.

CategoryRedwood ParkTea Tree Gully
Overall score51.1/10057.7/100
Housing (desirability)66.7/10070.8/100
Crime rate16.1 / 1k20.5 / 1k
Schools & preschools23
Weather (desirability)37.3/10037.3/100
Parks & reserves—2
Public transport stops2523
Walkability61.0/10050.0/100
Nearby amenities105122
Planning activity5155
Green cover10.3%34.0%
Population5,3673,499
SEIFA (IRSAD decile)6/107/10

Comparison summary

Redwood Park is an energetic metro mid-sized suburb where cafés and local life overlap, while Tea Tree Gully is a leafier hillside mid-sized suburb with elevated outlooks. Tea Tree Gully sits among greener hillside streets, while Redwood Park keeps a flatter suburban layout.

On the data, Redwood Park is stronger for housing affordability, a quieter safety profile, and public transport access; Tea Tree Gully answers with schools and education options, nearby cafés and amenities, and tree cover and green space.

On balance, retirees, families, investors, and value-focused buyers are more likely to prefer Redwood Park, while Tea Tree Gully remains a solid alternative depending on what matters most day to day.

Generated from the official metrics on this page. It can omit nuance or contain errors — check the tables and source notes before relying on it.

Related comparisons