News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
-
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:31 pm
Re: Adelaide Density
that doesn't sound right to me...?
we all know that Sydney has higher densities, you not only see this in the built form but also in geographical maps which show densities are higher in the larger capitals.
what is the source, maybe check this again..
we all know that Sydney has higher densities, you not only see this in the built form but also in geographical maps which show densities are higher in the larger capitals.
what is the source, maybe check this again..
Re: Adelaide Density
Hippodamus wrote:that doesn't sound right to me...?
we all know that Sydney has higher densities, you not only see this in the built form but also in geographical maps which show densities are higher in the larger capitals.
what is the source, maybe check this again..
i thought that adelaide has the lowest density and one of the highest urban sprawl's in australia.
Re: Adelaide Density
can you show me how you got this? I would love to post it on SSc but i would like some more proof please
Re: Adelaide Density
Straight from the horse's mouth:
http://abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.n ... enDocument
As per the 2006 Census, for the entire statistical areas:
Sydney: 2058/sqkm
Melbourne: 1532/sqkm
Brisbane: 918/sqkm
Adelaide: 1295/sqkm
Perth: 1090/sqkm
Hobart: 895/sqkm
Darwin: 926/sqkm
Canberra/Queanbeyan: 1005/sqkm
http://abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.n ... enDocument
As per the 2006 Census, for the entire statistical areas:
Sydney: 2058/sqkm
Melbourne: 1532/sqkm
Brisbane: 918/sqkm
Adelaide: 1295/sqkm
Perth: 1090/sqkm
Hobart: 895/sqkm
Darwin: 926/sqkm
Canberra/Queanbeyan: 1005/sqkm
Re: Adelaide Density
This figure really depends on two things: how the area included in determined, and what the population within that area is. For example, including a lot of empty undeveloped land such as the extensive number of national parks located within the Sydney metropolitan area would drive down the number for population density a fair bit. Also, Adelaide doesn't really have many features such as large rivers, harbours or large hills located within the metropolitan area.
AtD's figures are more reliable.
AtD's figures are more reliable.
Re: Adelaide Density
I edited Wikipedia to make sure I'm right!
Seriously, though, the numbers quoted had no reference.
Seriously, though, the numbers quoted had no reference.
- Düsseldorfer
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:52 am
Re: Adelaide Density
Stats from Wikipedia:Compate this to Stuttgart (my old home town), which has a density of 2,847 /km²
Adelaide Population: 1,146,119 Density: 1295/km²
Sydney Population: 4,284,379 Density: 2058/km²
Stuttgart Population: 590,429 Density: 2,847/km²
Düsseldorf Population: 581,858 Density: 2,681/km²
haha Düsseldorf (my old town) and Stuttgart are similar size in Both population and density
so according to wikipedia Adelaide has approx' twice the population of D-dorf/Stuttgart and approx' half the density...
Re: Adelaide Density
Düsseldorfer wrote:Stats from Wikipedia:Compate this to Stuttgart (my old home town), which has a density of 2,847 /km²
Adelaide Population: 1,146,119 Density: 1295/km²
Sydney Population: 4,284,379 Density: 2058/km²
Stuttgart Population: 590,429 Density: 2,847/km²
Düsseldorf Population: 581,858 Density: 2,681/km²
haha Düsseldorf (my old town) and Stuttgart are similar size in Both population and density
so according to wikipedia Adelaide has approx' twice the population of D-dorf/Stuttgart and approx' half the density...
lol.....AtD wrote:I edited Wikipedia to make sure I'm right!
Seriously, though, the numbers quoted had no reference.
Re: Adelaide Density
Statistical areas are by no means representative of metropolitan/urban areas, and are defined remarkably differently from one country to another. It's very hard to make judgements without some knowledge of the geography of a given area.
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
This seemed to loosely fit in with this topic.
From today's Advertiser at page 4
From today's Advertiser at page 4
Full article and map herePlanning Minister John Rau releases map of environment and food protection areas forming boundary around greater Adelaide
-
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 2:32 am
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
Good to see Adelaide, at least in the city increasing density a bit
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
I can't read the article but I assume the salt pans are in the development area.
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
Everything west of Port Wakefield road up to Gawler River is marked for zoning changesWaewick wrote:I can't read the article but I assume the salt pans are in the development area.
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density
I can't upload the map from my phone.
But essentially the boundary is the Hills Face Zone to the east.
Gawler River to the north. However, the Angle Vale food bowl is protected - so theres basically a cut out between the east side of Port Wakefield Road and the Northern Expressway to Gawler.
Concordia, Two Wells and Roseworthy are primed for major expansions of the existing townships.
Mount Barker is set to at least triple its urban footprint to an area roughly the size of the Adelaide CBD / North Adelaide including the parklands. For comparision's sake. Same goes for Murray Bridge expanding south of the SE Freeway.
The southern suburbs sees very little change to the existing urban footprint now. Only Seaford Heights and a small bit of Aldinga set to expand.
The overwhelming bulk of the new greenfields growth in the next 100 years will be in the northern suburbs.
But essentially the boundary is the Hills Face Zone to the east.
Gawler River to the north. However, the Angle Vale food bowl is protected - so theres basically a cut out between the east side of Port Wakefield Road and the Northern Expressway to Gawler.
Concordia, Two Wells and Roseworthy are primed for major expansions of the existing townships.
Mount Barker is set to at least triple its urban footprint to an area roughly the size of the Adelaide CBD / North Adelaide including the parklands. For comparision's sake. Same goes for Murray Bridge expanding south of the SE Freeway.
The southern suburbs sees very little change to the existing urban footprint now. Only Seaford Heights and a small bit of Aldinga set to expand.
The overwhelming bulk of the new greenfields growth in the next 100 years will be in the northern suburbs.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests