Sensational-Adelaide.com

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..

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.

This is going by Wikipedia, and goes by the entire urban area.

can you show me how you got this? I would love to post it on SSc but i would like some more proof please

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

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.

I edited Wikipedia to make sure I'm right!

Seriously, though, the numbers quoted had no reference.

Compate this to Stuttgart (my old home town), which has a density of 2,847 /km²

Stats from Wikipedia:
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...

Düsseldorfer wrote:

Compate this to Stuttgart (my old home town), which has a density of 2,847 /km²

Stats from Wikipedia:
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...

AtD wrote:I edited Wikipedia to make sure I'm right!

Seriously, though, the numbers quoted had no reference.

lol.....

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.

This seemed to loosely fit in with this topic.
From today's Advertiser at page 4

Planning Minister John Rau releases map of environment and food protection areas forming boundary around greater Adelaide

Full article and map here

Good to see Adelaide, at least in the city increasing density a bit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can't read the article but I assume the salt pans are in the development area.

Waewick wrote:I can't read the article but I assume the salt pans are in the development area.

Everything west of Port Wakefield road up to Gawler River is marked for zoning changes

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.