A Multivariate Study of Medium Density Housing Development and Neighbourhood Change Within Australian Cities

Kupke, Valerie; Rossini, Peter; McGreal, Stanley

doi:10.1080/14445921.2011.11104315

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As suggested by Bunker et al (2005), the social substructure as represented by the constructs goes towards explaining the demand side of the housing market. Similar results have also been confirmed by Reed (2001Reed ( , 2013, Kupke et al (2011Kupke et al ( , 2012 and Jackson et al (2007). There is consistency in the results and, as might be expected, wealth is a significant explanatory variable in determining median house price in every city (p Ͼ 0.000).…”

Section: Multiple Regression Analysissupporting

confidence: 81%

“…The implications of this spatial mismatch are listed as detrimental changes in cost of living, employment, poverty, traffic congestion and commuting costs. Kupke et al (2011Kupke et al ( , 2012 successfully used factor analysis to identify the impact of medium density development on housing investment and population structure across a number of capital cities in Australia.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The socio spatial substructure of the Australian city: how well does it explain house price?

Rossini

Kupke

2015

International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – This paper aims to show how social and economic differentiation that has become a feature of Australian cities and the urban housing literature emphasises the value in understanding such differentiation as an explanation of housing demand. Design/methodology/approach – Using a consistent set of variables from the 2011 ABS Census of Housing and Population, this paper uses factor analysis to identify the socio spatial substructure of housing markets at suburb level for five mainland Australian cities. Findings – The relative importance of this socio substructure in explaining median house price is determined for each city. The paper also identifies where the socio spatial structure is mismatched against expected house price and an explanation is offered for these anomalies. Originality/value – The study is innovative in that it reveals, at suburb level, districts in each city where there is a marked divergence between the prices being paid for property and the socioeconomic makeup of the local community.

show abstract

Section: Multiple Regression Analysissupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The socio spatial substructure of the Australian city: how well does it explain house price?

Rossini

Kupke

2015

International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From North America to Europe and Australia one of the pre-eminent obstacles to mediumdensity infill development is community opposition (Wheeler 2001;Kupke, Rossini, andStanley 2011, Arvola andPennanen 2014;Farris 2001;Newton 2010). The literature reasons that community members are repelling medium-density infill in their neighbourhoods for several reasons.…”

Section: Community Barriersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delivering medium-density infill development through promoting the benefits and limiting background infill

Bolleter

Myers

Hooper

2020

Journal of Urban Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australian cities rarely meet their targets for infill development and experience a 'missing middle' in terms of urban density. This paper surveys the barriers to medium-density projects on infill sites in the Western Australian city of Perth and subsequently ventures strategies to alleviate these impediments. The findings indicate that the principal barriers to medium-density infill derive from poor quality low-density infill development, which alienates communities and dissipates the impetus developers require to deliver medium-density projects. The paper concludes that spatial planners should improve strategies for promoting the benefits of density, as well as set minimum residential densities, and site areas, for infill development. Figure 2. Background infill comprises small scale projects yielding fewer than five group dwellings. Aerial photo courtesy of Nearmaps.

show abstract

“…In Australia, typical single-family residential lots decreased from 11,000 sq ft (1020m 2 ) in the 1930s, to 8,000 sq ft (740m 2 ) in the 1950s, 6,000 sq ft (560m 2 ) in the 1970s, and down to 4,500 sq ft (420m 2 ) in the 2000s, with some single family residential 'cottage' lots below 2,500 sq ft (230m 2 ) (Kupke et al 2011). In the US, lot shrinkage has not been as dramatic, but has nonetheless been decreasing since reaching a maximum average of 14,000 sq ft (1,300m 2 ) in the 1990s (Sarkar 2011).…”

Section: Shrinkage Of Building Lot Sizesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards topographically sensitive urbanism: re-envisioning earthwork terracing in suburban development

Kullmann

2014

Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Multivariate Study of Medium Density Housing Development and Neighbourhood Change Within Australian Cities

Cited by 6 publications

References 1 publication

The socio spatial substructure of the Australian city: how well does it explain house price?

The socio spatial substructure of the Australian city: how well does it explain house price?

Delivering medium-density infill development through promoting the benefits and limiting background infill

Towards topographically sensitive urbanism: re-envisioning earthwork terracing in suburban development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About