North West Corridor: Land
Use Impacts
Final report
Ernst & Young
September 2013
130301 Final Report
This report has been prepared for Ernst & Young. SGS Economics and
Planning has taken all due care in the preparation of this report.
However, SGS and its associated consultants are not liable to any
person or entity for any damage or loss that has occurred, or may
occur, in relation to that person or entity taking or not taking action in
respect of any representation, statement, opinion or advice referred to
herein.
SGS Economics and Planning Pty Ltd
ACN 007 437 729
www.sgsep.com.au
Offices in Brisbane, Canberra, Hobart, Melbourne, Sydney
130301 Final Report
CONTENTS
1
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION
Project background
Project objective
Project options
2
5
5
5
5
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
LAND USE OBJECTIVES
Strategic land use plans
Distillation of challenges, goals and objectives
Strategic assessment of options against goals & objectives
Overall strategic alignment
8
8
15
15
16
4
FUTURE LAND USE
4.1 Scenario Modelling
4.2 Urban Consolidation Benefits
17
24
28
EJD APPENDIX
30
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 1
1
OVERVIEW
This report has examined a range of possible transport investments for the North West Corridor in
Adelaide. These possible transport investments include both heavy rail and light rail, with combinations
of both. From a strategic assessment the various options contribute to the land use objectives set out in
the various relevant planning documents (structure plans and the 30 Year Plan).
Changes in accessibility, that is the ease by which jobs and services can be accessed, has a significant
impact on the location of housing and employment growth. This relationship is well established in the
urban economics literature and has been observed in Adelaide between 2006 and 2011 using regression
analysis. The impact on the urban form from the various project cases has been modelled for 2036.
The input used to understand the impact on the urban form has been the results of MASTEM modelling
of the various options. All of these options have been compared to the 2036 Base Case. The Base Case
reflects the “do nothing” or “do minimum” which the project case is compared with.
The North West Corridor itself is expecting significant development with the current transport network
and successful implementation of the planning vision outlined within the 30 Year Plan. The successful
implementation of the 30 Year Plan will require key catalysts projects and investments. The most
powerful of which are transport investments. To isolate the impact of the transport scenarios on the
urban form a revised Base Case which removed the assumed success of the 30 Year Plan has been
developed.
TABL E 1. DWEL L IN G PRO JE CT IO N S & PUBL IC T RAN S PORT
2011
2036
Growth
Revised Base
Case (No 30
Year Plan)
North Haven
6,447
7,417
15%
7,000
1.8%
Public
Transport
Mode Share
Origin
3.7%
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert
Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
7,499
5,326
6,690
3,481
10,658
7,260
11,663
5,320
42%
36%
74%
53%
2.0%
2.5%
2.7%
1.7%
4.6%
3.2%
3.5%
3.1%
2,708
3,226
19%
9,500
6,800
9,000
4,600
3,100
1.6%
2.9%
6,897
7,694
8,084
8,841
9,940
14,146
28%
29%
75%
8,700
9,100
12,900
0.9%
1.0%
3.2%
2.3%
3.7%
3.4%
SA2
Public Transport
Mode Share
Destination
Source: MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
Examining recent development along existing light rail corridors both in Adelaide and elsewhere has
shown that light rail can unlock roughly a 1 per cent year higher increase in dwelling densities than other
forms of transport. So over a twenty five year period light rail can yield 10 per cent more dwellings than
other transport modes. That is assuming that the transport outcomes are not significantly different.
The MASTEM modelling suggests that public transport usage travel along the North West Corridor will
play a very minimum role. Most locations along the corridor have on average less than 5 per cent of
journeys by public transport. Public transport will have a much greater role in trips to the Adelaide CBD
(36.9 per cent).
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 2
Accessing opportunities under the Base Case will be predominately be provided by car travel. The
modelling suggests that changes to public transport offer in the North West Corridor will influence the
locational decisions of a small segment of the population.
The various project cases are summarised below:

Project Case 1 Electrified Heavy Rail from Outer Harbor to Adelaide Railway Station, with a light rail
extension from AEC along Port Road median to Woodville, then linking to West Lakes and Grange
(post 2021).

Project Case 1A In addition to Project Case 1 there is an underground rail link under the Adelaide
CBD post 2021

Project Case 1B In addition to Project Case 1 there is a light rail link from AEC along an alternative
corridor to Woodville/West Lakes and Grange via Grange Road/Crittendon Road/Findon
Road/Woodville Road and thence along the Grange rail corridor. This alignment has been proposed
as an alternative corridor.

Project Case 1C Is an extension of PC1. It includes a new tram service between South Terrace and
Port Wharf (10min frequency). This service runs along Port Road, and has new stops at Old Port
Road, Queenstown, Commercial Road and Port Wharf.

Project Case 2 Light rail along the existing OH rail corridor between Outer Harbor and the AEC, with
on-street running into the CBD. Light rail services link to Port Adelaide/Grange and to West Lakes
(post 2021). The light rail would operate on-street through Port Adelaide, and services would link
from Woodville to Grange and West Lakes.

Project Case 2B In additional to the Project Case 2 there would be light rail city loop around the
Adelaide CBD area, linking North Terrace west through the western, southern and eastern sectors of
the CBD

Project Case 2C is a cross between PC1C and PC2. All tram services are realigned to run along Port
Road, instead of the rail corridor. The Outer Harbor service is changed to operate along Port Road to
Port Adelaide (as in PC1C), and then follows PC2 route from Port Adelaide to Outer Harbor.
TABL E 2. S CE NARIO DW EL LI NG I M PAC T
SA2
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert
Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
Northwest Corridor - Subtotal
Rest of Adelaide
Total Adelaide
Project
Case 1
Project
Case 1a
Project
Case 1b
Project Case
1c
Project
Case 2
Project
Case 2b
Project Case
2c
30
25
20
35
185
255
220
45
80
30
15
45
75
30
10
30
75
15
10
55
145
55
15
270
325
200
85
350
250
320
135
10
10
10
10
110
90
265
475
220
80
95
50
50
330
45
45
95
70
10
45
70
75
370
340
240
325
290
330
435
415
280
520
640
100
380
2,385
285
1,200
830
120
2,080
960
2,455
1,685
2,570
740
2,765
1,485
950
3,040
4,140
Source: SGS Economics & Planning
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 3
1,985
4,555
In summary the Project Case 2s appear to provide the greatest opportunities for urban consolidation
than the Project Case 2s. While these scenarios have poorer travel time outcomes, the impact of light
rail will tended to offset this from an urban renewal point of view.
TABL E 3. S CE NARIO EM PLOYM EN T IM PACT
SA2
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert
Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
Northwest Corridor - Subtotal
Rest of Adelaide
Total Adelaide
Project
Case 1
Project
Case 1a
Project
Case 1b
Project Case
1c
Project
Case 2
Project
Case 2b
Project Case
2c
65
60
55
95
200
265
230
115
310
55
20
115
305
55
15
100
305
40
15
100
105
200
85
305
370
195
75
385
460
315
125
290
875
215
75
15
15
15
55
55
85
90
150
150
155
145
145
15
170
110
5
55
415
450
310
310
155
360
395
265
515
335
315
1,035
45
1,080
870
2,330
3,200
815
535
1,350
1,560
85
1,645
1,975
1,110
3,085
2,655
1,560
4,215
2,940
1,840
4,780
Source: SGS Economics & Planning
However, unlocking increased uplifts (in both dwellings and employment) is an interaction between
transport accessibility, land use controls / incentives and commercial feasibility. There is a feedback loop
between these various aspects. The analysis of various options suggests that a PC1 transport option
could unlock 740 additional dwellings. However, modelling of other scenarios shows that land use /
transport changes along the corridor could unlock up to 4,555 dwellings (PC2C). Investigating the policy
interventions which can achieve help to achieve the higher dwelling uplift can be used to refine and
optimise the various options.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 4
2
2.1
INTRODUCTION
Project background
SGS Economics and Planning Pty Ltd (SGS), as part of a team led by Ernest & Young (EY) has previously
reviewed the strategic merit of the public transport options for the North West Corridor of Adelaide. This
review identified that a Light Rail only option offers a number of important strategic advantages, which
render it a promising alternative to a mix of Heavy Rail and Light Rail in the long term.
However, the initial review found that additional or more detailed analysis was required to reach an
investment decision or to justify the inclusion of a particular option within the State’s focus on
integrating transport and land use.
2.2
Project objective
The consulting team has subsequently been commissioned by the Department for Planning, Transport
and Infrastructure (DPTI) to undertake this additional work.
SGS’s role within this context was as follows:





Document the key land use challenges for the NW Corridor
Define land use goals and objectives for the NW Corridor
At a strategic level, assess how the public transport options for the corridor contribute to these
goals and objectives, and
Determine and agree the scope of analysis for assessing the land use uplifts associated with each
public transport option.
Undertake the analysis to estimate the land use uplift, in terms of population, dwellings and
employment (by major industry group) suitable for MASTEM modelling over the long term.
This report documents the high level assessment of each public transport option with respect to the land
use goals and objectives for the Corridor. It also described the results from the land use forecasts.
2.3
Project options
There are a range of public transport options under consideration. A brief summary of each option and
some implications which will be considered are presented in Figure 1.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 5
F I GU RE 1 S U MM ARY O F PRO JEC T O PT IO N S
Project Case 1
Electrified Heavy Rail from Outer Harbor to Adelaide Railway Station, with a light rail extension from AEC along Port
Road median to Woodville, then linking to West Lakes and Grange (post 2021).
Project Case 1A
In addition to Project Case 1 there is an underground rail link under the Adelaide CBD post 2021
Project Case 1B
In addition to Project Case 1 there is a light rail link from AEC along an alternative corridor to Woodville/West Lakes
and Grange via Grange Road/Crittendon Road/Findon Road/Woodville Road and thence along the Grange rail
corridor. This alignment has been proposed as an alternative corridor.
Project Case 1C
Is an extension of PC1. It includes a new tram service between South Terrace and Port Wharf (10min frequency).
This service runs along Port Road, and has new stops at Old Port Road, Queenstown, Commercial Road and Port
Wharf.
Project Case 2
Light rail along the existing OH rail corridor between Outer Harbor and the AEC, with on-street running into the CBD.
Light rail services link to Port Adelaide/Grange and to West Lakes (post 2021). The light rail would operate on-street
through Port Adelaide, and services would link from Woodville to Grange and West Lakes.
Project Case 2B
In additional to the Project Case 2 there would be light rail city loop around the Adelaide CBD area, linking North
Terrace west through the western, southern and eastern sectors of the CBD.
Project Case 2C
This is a cross between PC1C and PC2. All tram services are realigned to run along Port Road, instead of the rail
corridor. The Outer Harbor service is changed to operate along Port Road to Port Adelaide (as in PC1C), and then
follows PC2 route from Port Adelaide to Outer Harbor.
Factors to be considered

Avoid the need for Torrens Junction grade separation and reduces cost for South Road overpass

Removes service extensions from Grange (or Port) Roads

Enables flexibility with station locations

Frequency of services

Is capacity at Adelaide Rail Station increased, enabling enhanced servicing on other rail corridors?

Removes mode transfer requirements in CBD

Costs less to deliver and therefore may be delivered earlier.

Includes no express services.

Has longer in-vehicle travel times to CBD (but similar door to door travel times).

Forces more patrons to stand vs. sit (reduced comfort).

May have adverse road traffic implications, potentially requiring Kilkenney Rd and Woodville Road grade.
separations, and increased capacity on tram city loop.

May limit very long term rail capacity.
The background information also suggests that, from a land use perspective, the light rail options would
better enables transit oriented development (TOD) at Bowden and Port Adelaide, and acts as a broader
development catalyst along the corridor. However, to some extent the light rail land use development
superiority may be offset by heavy rail enhanced activation of Port Road.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 6
The background information also highlights that both options have a broadly similar network footprint
and service catchments, with the MASTEM derived population catchment for heavy rail being 38,000 in
2036, and light rail catchment being 34,850. The extent to which station location drives this difference is
unclear. The growth forecast along Port Road enabled by heavy rail might explain some of this difference.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 7
3
3.1
LAND USE OBJECTIVES
Strategic land use plans
30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide
The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide (the Plan) released in 2009 anticipates a population increase of
560,000, approximately 258,000 additional dwellings and the creation of at least 282,000 jobs over a
thirty year period.
In accommodating that growth the plan identifies a new urban form. Characteristics of this new urban
form include:






Concentrating new housing in existing areas
Locating new housing and new jobs in transport corridors
Establishing new transit-oriented development
Increasing densities around stations and transport interchanges
Creating vibrant mixed-use precincts
Revitalising the Adelaide City centre and other higher-order activity centres.
To achieve the new urban form requires the transition from the current urban development pattern of
50 per cent of new development in infill locations and 50 per cent in greenfield areas to 70 per cent infill
development and 30 per cent greenfield over 30 years. This will result in more than 50 per cent of the
region’s new housing growth being concentrated in transit corridors that have, or are planned to have
mass transit.
The various heavy and light rail options being assessed in this report are located in the western region of
Greater Adelaide. Figure 1 shows a map of the western region.
The Western Region has a target of an additional 83,000 people over 30 years. Approximately 75% of
this new population, or 62,100 people, are to be located within transport corridors including Transit
Oriented Development sites (TODs). 42,560 new dwellings are to be developed in the western region
with 33,060 to be located in corridors (including TODs) and 9,500 outside corridors. The region has a
target of 40,500 additional jobs over 30 years.
The Plan identifies four TODs in the western region:




Woodville
Bowden
West Lakes
Port Adelaide.
Corridors for increased densities in the region are:





Adelaide – Outer Harbour rail corridor
Woodville – Grange rail corridor
Grange line – West Lakes planned mass transit corridor
Grange Road potential mass transit corridor
Major road corridors including Port Road.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 8
F I GU RE 2 . W EST ERN ADE L AI DE DI RE CT IO NS M AP
Source: Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (SA), 2010
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 9
Capital City Development Plan Amendment
The Capital City Development Plan Amendment (DPA) was approved by the Minister for Planning by
notice in the South Australian Government Gazette on 25 October 2012. The policies will provide a
sound platform for development, attract investment and stimulate more activity and vibrancy in the
heart of the city and around the Adelaide Park Lands. The DPA also allow for changes in building heights,
a greater mix of uses and more vibrant main streets. This should allow better defined boulevards and
activation of the city squares. The DPA also allows for innovative developments on large ‘catalyst sites’
that will stimulate more vibrant neighbourhoods around them.
Inner Metro Rim Structure Plan
Broadly defined, the Inner Metropolitan Rim is the part of inner metropolitan Adelaide adjacent to the
parklands and roughly within one km from the outer edge of Adelaide’s Central Business District. Given
the existing concentration of infrastructure, employment opportunities, mixed-use infill corridors
identified in The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide, access to public transport, and proximity to the CBD,
it is considered to be an important area for future development.
To help guide future development in these locations, the State Government released the Inner Metro
Rim Structure Plan to further refine the directions set out in The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.
The inner rim has been divided into 14 sectors (see Figure 3).
F I GU RE 3 . S EC TO R PL AN BO UN DARIE S
Source: Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (SA), 2012
Most relevant to this discussion is Sector 13 (River Torrens (West) – Sixth Street). Sector 13 is centred on
Port Road between the northern edge of the parklands and South Road (see Figure 4).
Key built form elements identified for this sector include:
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 10



A ‘Port Road gateway’ at the corner of Port Road and Park Terrace with a vision for 6-14 storey
buildings with commercial and office uses on the ground level with office and residential above.
Higher density mixed use development for the majority of the sector including:
 4-6 storey development along Port Road
 3-8 storey buildings along Gibson Street, Bowden’s proposed high street
 3-14 storeys in the immediate surrounds of Gibson Street.
Commercial infill development of 3-5 storeys along Adam Street and South Road with 4-5 storey
building heights at the intersection of Manton and Holden Streets.
F I GU RE 4 . S EC TO R PL AN 13
Source: Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (SA), 2012
Key corridor master plans for Transit Oriented Developments
In the western region four sites for Transit Oriented Developments were identified in The 30 Year Plan
for Greater Adelaide: Bowden, Woodville, Port Adelaide and West Lakes. To date, Master Plans have
been developed for Bowden and Woodville. The Master Plan for Port Adelaide is currently being
updated, however, a review of background documents has been undertaken to inform the development
of the Master Plan, which discusses the key priorities and challenges for the area. This background
report is reviewed in this section.
Bowden Urban Village Revised Master Plan
The site covers approximately 40 hectares predominantly located north of the Outer Harbour Rail Line
and approximately three kilometres north-west of the Adelaide CBD. The site includes the Bowden
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 11
Urban Village (approximately 20 hectares), a small strip of land between the train line and Port Road and
two former industrial sites: the former Clipsal factory site and the Origin Energy site.
F I GU RE 5 . BOW DE N CON TEX T M AP
Source: Annand Alcock Urban Design and LFA Pacific, 2011
The site has been divided into six precincts (see Figure 6). Development of these precincts is anticipated
to include areas of low to mid rise residential development (the Urban Village component of the site is
anticipated to yield 2,400 new dwellings at a site density of 145 dwellings per hectare); a retail and
mixed use core; a Port Road Gateway with significant commercial based mixed use development and
commercial and mixed use development along Port Road. The railway line is to be undergrounded to
enable the development of Bowden Station Square which is to be the focus of the village where the rail
interacts with the commercial, retail and community heart.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 12
F I GU RE 6 . PRE CI N CT M AP
Source: Annand Alcock Urban Design and LFA Pacific, 2011
Woodville Village Masterplan
The study area is located approximately 7.5 kilometres north-west of the Adelaide CBD. It is centred on
Woodville Road between Torrens Road and Port Road and consists of land covered by the Woodville
District Centre Zone. The Woodville Railway Station is located centrally in the study area and is the
junction of the Outer Harbour and Grange train lines.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 13
F I GU RE 7 . S TU DY ARE A
Source: Jensen Planning + Design, 2010
Key elements of the master plan include:

A gateway to the study area with increased densities of 4-6 storeys and mixed uses at the Port Road/
Torrens Road junction but with a particular focus on health services.

A civic and retail heart with a mix of retail, residential and commercial uses in 4-6 storey buildings
lining Woodville Road.

New residential development with a mix of medium and higher density housing options in medium
to high rise buildings.
Port Adelaide Master Plan Review of Background Documents
Planning for the revitalisation of Port Adelaide has been the subject of a number of plans over the past
twenty year. Renewal SA is currently working with the community to create a ‘living port’. The aim is to
have more people living, working, investing and spending time in Port Adelaide.
Together with City of Port Adelaide Enfield, Renewal SA has commenced promoting a series of events
and infrastructure works to increase public open space areas, restore historic building and activate Port
Adelaide for both locals and visitors.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 14
These projects are intended to revitalise the use of land and space at Port Adelaide, providing access to
the waterfront of the Inner Harbour. With these investments and initiatives over time Port Adelaide will
attract more private sector investment which will aid in the revitalisation of the centre.
West Lakes (AAMI Stadium Precinct)
West Lakes is the site of the current AAMI Stadium home to the SANFL. From 2015, AFL games will move
to the redeveloped Adelaide Oval. This has presented the opportunity for a significant urban renewal.
The Development Plan Amendment (DPA) to allow this renewal to take place was on was on public
consultation during February and April 2013. The DPA proposes a mix of uses and higher density housing
for the area affected. It introduces:
 an Urban Core Zone to support compact, medium to high density development around public
transport improvements
 a Main Street Policy Area to support a hub for community activities, residents and businesses
3.2
Distillation of challenges, goals and objectives
From the above review of The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide and of completed master plan for TODs
within Western Adelaide (which cover the NW Corridor), the following distillation of land use challenges,
goals and objectives can be conceived:






Increased residential and commercial density (in the TODs and along corridors)
Higher densities at key intersections / gateways (at the edge of relevant TODs)
Mixed uses (within TODs and along corridors)
Integration of train stations (with surrounding land uses)
Improved public realm (in TODs and corridors specifically, and more generally)
Revitalising the Adelaide City centre and other higher-order activity centres.
3.3
Strategic assessment of options against goals & objectives
Land use characteristic
Heavy Rail Options
Increased residential and
commercial density (in the
TODs and along corridors)
Heavy rail is likely to intensify density
around stations but with more limited
development along the corridor. This may
be dependent to some extent on the
spacing of stations.
Light Rail Options
Light rail is likely to have a greater benefit
for development along the rail corridor, as
well as in the TODs (outside of the
immediate catchment of the station).
However, the intensity of development
that eventuates may be less around
railway stations than with heavy rail. This
may be dependent to some extent on the
spacing of stations/ the number of light
rail stops.
Given the larger footprint of development
opportunities enabled by light rail, i.e.
along the corridor, the actual delivery of
increased residential and commercial
density might be better facilitated under
Option 2.
Higher densities at key
intersections / gateways
(at the edge of relevant
Heavy rail could contribute to higher
density development at these locations if
they are close to a train station. However,
Light rail could contribute to higher
density development at these locations if
they are close to a train station/ stop.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 15
Land use characteristic
Heavy Rail Options
Light Rail Options
TODs)
the intensity of development in these
locations will be heavily impacted by other
factors including the commercial viability
of higher density development.
However, intensity of development in
these locations will be heavily impacted by
other factors including the commercial
viability of higher density development.
Mixed uses (within TODs
and along corridors)
Would promote mixed uses but would be
focussed around railway stations.
Would promote mixed uses at stations
and also along corridors.
Integration of train stations
(with surrounding land
uses)
Heavy rail corridors have limited
permeability and restrict movement
across the corridor. However, this can be
overcome by undergrounding the railway
station, as proposed in Bowden.
Light rail corridors and stations are more
open and permeable than heavy rail and
therefore better enable land use
integration.
Improved public realm (in
TODs and corridors
specifically, and more
generally)
Public realm improvements are possible
along a heavy rail corridor and at stations.
However, the scale and permeability of
heavy rail can impact the quality of public
realm improvements. Undergrounding the
station can ameliorate some of those
impacts and potentially provide more
public space in centres.
The permeability and scale of light rail
lines and stations makes it more
amenable, enabling better quality public
space both along the corridor and at
stations/ stops.
Revitalising the Adelaide
City centre and other
higher-order activity
centres
The termination of the line at the Adelaide
Railway Station, located on the northern
edge of the CBD, would have benefits for
the development of the northern end of
the CBD (which is already the centre of
commercial employment) but with more
limited impact for the CBD as it extends
south.
The flexibility of light rail means it could
travel down King William Street
terminating centrally in the CBD at
Victoria Square or even further south. This
would contribute to the revitalisation of a
greater area of the CBD.
3.4
Overall strategic alignment
While both options contribute to the land use objectives distilled from available policy documents and
plans, the light rail options appears to provide greater support. Light rail supports intensification of
development in both TODs and along transit corridors, is better able to be integrated with surrounding
land uses, better supports improvements to the public realm both at stations and along the corridor, and
is more flexible enabling the line to extend into the CBD.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 16
4
FUTURE LAND USE
Well established economic theory indicates that over time, firms will tend to locate closer to areas that
improve their land use efficiency. Locating in areas with superior accessibility reduces transaction costs
through ease of contact with suppliers and customers. Crucially, this also increases access to a skilled
labour force. The theoretical underpinnings of the relationship between land price and accessibility can
be seen graphically in Figure 8.
F I GU RE 8 . DE M AN D F O R DI FF ERE NT L AN D U SE AS A F U NC TI ON O F AC CES S I BI L ITY
Source: SGS Economics & Planning
Whilst all firms prefer locations with high levels of accessibility, their ability to pay for locational
advantages will differ, as do their aggregate land use demands. Land use demands between industries
and the collar of the workers (blue and white) generally differ based on the functioning of their
industries.
Land use demands by service industries are small relative to other industries, such as manufacturing and
wholesale trade. Those industries require large amounts of land, relative to service firms. Furthermore,
land rents can be shared across multiple firms as office towers use the relatively cheaper option of
expanding vertically, rather than having large parcels of land. This contributes to the ability of service
firms to locate within the confines of a heavily dense area of employment and population such as the
CBD, whereas Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade tend to locate further away from highly dense areas
for their larger land requirements.
Ways to improve accessibility of firms differ across industries based on their customer and supplier base.
Generally, Manufacturing requires quality road infrastructure and as a consequence tend to locate closer
to areas where they have access to major road networks. Both their suppliers and customers tend to
have a similar accessibility requirement. Therefore efficiencies can be gained for those industries when
they locate closer to points of road infrastructure. However, this is not necessarily the case for service
industries. Whilst all firms require timely access to their suppliers, employees and customers, their
strategic ability to access those people differ based on the function of their business models.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 17
Opportunities for access to employment apply in a similar way to households as they do for industries.
People, over time, will adjust their residential location due to a wide range of factors, some of which are
access to employment, education, essential services and recreation. Literature indicates that these
choices tend to be constrained due to factors such as family and historical ties to a region or corridor. For
these reasons many people and families may tend to locate ‘within corridors’, rather than moving ‘across
town’. However, when moves are made within this context the relative accessibility of the two areas is a
key consideration.
Measuring accessibility through Effective Job Density
SGS has developed a measure of accessibility within a specified geographical region and the ability of an
area to access overall economic activity across the whole of Adelaide, known as Effective Job Density
(EJD).
The change in EJD associated with an infrastructure or land use initiative is estimated via the same
method used to calculate the base EJD. The difference between the base case EJD and a project case EJD
will depend on the project inputs and data availability. Both projected travel times and the share of
public transport use could be affected by a project. Additionally, the level of future employment in a
particular location could change. A project case EJD can then be estimated using these altered inputs
and compared to a base EJD estimated for the corresponding year.
Each of the changes to EJD inputs will have a differing impact on EJD. Increasing employment in a
particular location will impact on EJD. A reduction in travel times (both public and private transport) has
an impact of increasing EJD. Increasing the share of public transport use can have adverse impacts on
EJD depending on the project. If a greater share of commuters are travelling on public transport which
still has a longer average travel time than private vehicle, EJD will fall.
Quantifying changes to relative accessibility is achieved by translating the absolute EJD values into a
relative EJD index (which takes values between 0 and 1). The index is based on the SA2 that has the
highest EJD across the base case and the various project cases. The relative EJDs of selected SA2s are
shown below for the base case. The highest EJD was observed in Adelaide, giving it a relative EJD value
of 1. Conversely, the lowest relative EJD occurs in Light.
TABL E 4. REL AT IV E E J DS – EX AM PL E S A2S
SA2
Base Case EJD Index
Adelaide
0.998
Port Adelaide
0.425
Beverley
0.517
Paradise – Newton
0.367
West Beach
0.387
Woodville - Cheltenham
0.533
Light
0.001
Source: SGS Economics & Planning
The regression equation used to estimate the relationship between industry movements, accessibility
and households is shown below. For employment there is a secondary effect resulting from the
estimated shifts in households. That is, many industries depend on a local population as either
customers or skilled workers. Therefore, an increase in population in an area often results in a further
increase in population servicing employment.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 18
𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑦 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 + 𝛽2 𝐻𝐻 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 + 𝜀
and
𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 + 𝛽3 𝐶𝐵𝐷𝑖 + 𝜀
Where:
𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 = Relative Effective Job Density for SA2 i
𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑦 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 = The share of an industry’s metropolitan employment within SA2 i
𝐻𝐻 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖 = The share of metropolitan Households within SA2 i
𝛽0 = Constant term
𝐶𝐵𝐷𝑖 = Indicator variable identifying whether SA2 i forms part of the CBD
𝜀= Error term
Housing growth is often focused on two broad regions, fringe growth areas or inner city. Greenfield
growth is predominately a result of large amounts of land supply from significant areas of land being
rezoned as urban residential. Strong growth within the inner city can be attributed to a preference to be
close to jobs, services and the city’s core (i.e. accessibility). As a result households have been estimated
to have a strong propensity to relocate due to changes in accessibility. The estimated relationship is
shown below.
𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑖
0.0055 0.0099 ∗ 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 0.0006𝐶𝐵𝐷𝑖
=
+
+
(0)
(𝑝 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑠)
(0)
(0.9)
This statistical relationship and the travel time data from the various options are used to determine the
future location of households and jobs relative to the base case. If an area becomes more accessible it
will draw in households and jobs from across Adelaide. The model is static in that new jobs and
households are not created. The total number of households and jobs remains fixed to the base case
totals. They can only be redistributed across Adelaide.
Light Rail Vs Heavy Rail
Urban amenity enhancements undoubtedly have an impact on land development potential. When
comparing electric trains and light rail vehicles, the question of relative amenity is largely determined by:
 Noise and emissions levels
 The need for corridor fencing and in some places grading (recessed or elevated tracks) and the
severance this causes, and
 The aesthetics of suppoting rail infrastructure requirements, along the corridor and around station
locations.
It is for these types of reasons that light rail is becoming increasingly common investment. New light rail
lines have been recently constructed in internationally including in France, United Kingdom and there
are a range of projects in Australia at various stages of development. The introduction of light rail into an
urban renewal site is not a guarantee of increase activity and investment attraction. There are some key
points which must be considered:






Would the light rail provide better accessibility than other forms of transport?
Is land use planning aligned with the introduction of the light rail?
Are the economic fundamentals of the city robust?
Can the light rail provide branding opportunities for investment attraction?
How does the public view light rail as a form of transport?
Will the light rail link together existing commercial hubs or provide business with access to a potential
labour force?
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 19
Examining recent development along Adelaide’s current light rail corridor and other light rail corridors in
Australia (particular Melbourne) has shown that light rail can unlock roughly a 1 per cent year higher
increase in dwelling densities than other forms of transport. So over a twenty five year period light rail
can yield 10 per cent more dwellings than other transport modes. That is assuming that the transport
outcomes are not significantly different. This light rail effect has been included in the modelling
approach.
2036 Base Case
The Base Case reflects the “do nothing” or “do minimum” which the project case is compared with. The
Base Case small area land use projections are those currently used in MASTEM. Figure 9 and Figure 10
present the travel zone household and employment growth expected under this Base Case between
2011 and 2036.
The North West Corridor itself is expecting significant development with the current transport network
and planning vision outlined within the 30 Year Plan. The MASTEM modelling suggests that public
transport usage to travel to and from the North West Corridor will play a very minimum role. Most
locations along the corridor have on average less than 5 per cent of journeys by public transport. Public
transport will play a much greater role in trips to the Adelaide CBD (36.9 per cent).
TABL E 5. 2036 BASE C AS E DWE LL I NG PROJE CT IO NS
SA2
15%
Public Transport
Mode Share
Destination
1.8%
Public Transport
Mode Share
Origin
3.7%
10,658
7,260
11,663
5,320
3,226
8,841
9,940
14,146
42%
36%
74%
53%
19%
28%
29%
75%
2.0%
2.5%
2.7%
1.7%
1.6%
0.9%
1.0%
3.2%
4.6%
3.2%
3.5%
3.1%
2.9%
2.3%
3.7%
3.4%
20,484
5,749
133%
22%
36.9%
20.5%
7.9%
3.7%
2011
2036
Growth
North Haven
6,447
7,417
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
7,499
5,326
6,690
3,481
2,708
6,897
7,694
8,084
Adelaide
North Adelaide
8,809
4,717
Source: MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
Accessing opportunities under the Base Case will be predominately provided by car travel. The modelling
suggests that public transport in the North West Corridor will only service a small segment of the
population. As a result of changes of to the public transport offer in the North West Corridor will
influence the locational decisions of a small segment of the population.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 20
F I GU RE 9 BASE C AS E HO USE HOL D G ROW T H (2011 – 2 0 3 6 )
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 21
F I GU RE 1 0 B ASE C AS E E M PLOY ME NT GROW T H (2011 – 2 0 3 6)
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 22
TABL E 6. 2036 BASE C AS E E M PLOY ME NT PROJE CT IO N S
SA2
2011
2036
Growth
Public Transport Mode
Share
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
3,166
2,830
9,193
7,211
5,696
3,014
4,001
1,743
10,425
3,335
3,463
10,644
7,966
6,104
2,670
5,531
1,886
11,881
15%
42%
36%
74%
53%
19%
28%
29%
75%
1.8%
2.0%
2.5%
2.7%
1.7%
1.6%
0.9%
1.0%
3.2%
Adelaide
North Adelaide
98,562
9,138
132,115
12,031
133%
22%
36.9%
20.5%
Source: MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
Have Transport Improvements already built into the Base Case?
The Base Case has a significant amount of developments along the corridor over the next 25 years when
compare to the past twenty five years. Much of this growth is based on the assumed successful
implementation of the 30 Year Plan. The 30 Year Plan has a strong transport corridor focus which implies
transport improvements.
Recent trends and the growth anticipated with the successful implementation of the 30 Year Plan is
somewhat misaligned.
The table below presents population growth as an example. While there are a range of factors (including
average person per household and residential development) which influence the population growth the
past trends are at odds with the 30 Year Plan Base Case.
TABL E 7. PO PU L AT IO N GRO WT H AN D PRO JE CT IO NS
SA2
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert
Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
1991
14,409
2011
14,426
Growth
17
2031
14,946
Growth
520
14,240
10,688
14,395
7,957
14,966
11,114
15,785
7,452
726
426
1,390
-505
20,601
13,792
22,042
10,475
5,635
2,678
6,257
3,023
5,811
5,858
47
6,710
852
16,279
15,188
14,786
14,521
16,285
17,210
-1,758
1,097
2,424
17,111
20,052
27,344
2,590
3,767
10,134
Source: ABS Regional Population Growth, Australia (cat. no. 3218.0) and MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
To understand what impact the transport investments may have on urban development a new Base Case
has been developed which uses a more trend based approach to understand future growth. Major
redevelopment sites such as Bowden and West Lakes which can be easily developed are assumed to
continue to proceed. This revised Base Case has been used to isolate the impact of the various transport
scenarios on urban development.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 23
TABL E 8. DWEL L IN G PRO JE CT ION S
SA2
2011
2036
Revised Base Case (No 30
Year Plan)
North Haven
6,447
7,417
7,000
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
Hindmarsh - Brompton
7,499
5,326
6,690
3,481
2,708
6,897
7,694
8,084
10,658
7,260
11,663
5,320
3,226
8,841
9,940
14,146
9,500
6,800
9,000
4,600
3,100
8,700
9,100
12,900
Source: MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
4.1
Scenario Modelling
This section provides an overview of the impact of each scenario. Table 9 presents the employment and
dwelling impact for each scenario and the Table 11 shows the public transport. The North West Corridor
is the focus of the analysis but other parts of the Adelaide (including the CBD) are impacted by a lesser
degree by the transport options.
Project Case 1
This scenario has the introduction of electrified heavy rail from Outer Harbour to Adelaide Rail Station
and light rail to Grange and West Lakes via Port Road. The modelling of this scenario by PB indicates that
there is a very small mode shift towards public transport (Table 11).
From a land use point of view, this modelling outcome suggests that residents view the new transport
option more favourable and hence would place a greater value on them. Although in some cases this
preference for the public transport options creates slightly longer travel times. The modelling also
suggests some small adverse impacts on private car travel times.
This increased preference / value on public transport is very small. Based on the observed historical
relationships very few additional dwellings would be drawn to locate into the North West Corridor as a
result of the change in accessibility.
Project Case 1a
This scenario has the introduction of electrified heavy rail from Outer Harbour to Adelaide Rail Station
with the addition of an underground rail link and light rail to Grange and West Lakes via Port Road.
The introduction of the underground rail link is the only difference between this scenario and the
previous scenario. The outcome is broadly consistent along the corridor with the expectation of the CBD
which has a significant change in mode share towards public transport. The CBD improved accessibility
acts to draw in some additional dwellings from along the North West Corridor.
The increased public transport trips to the CBD has a flow on effect on congestion and travel times
surrounding the CBD.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 24
TABL E 9. S CE NARIO S DWE LL I NG IM PACT S
Project Case 1
Project Case 1a
Project Case 1b
Project Case 1c
Project Case 2
Project Case 2b
Hindmarsh - Brompton
30
45
80
30
15
10
50
50
330
25
45
75
30
10
10
45
45
95
20
30
75
15
10
10
70
10
45
35
55
145
55
15
10
70
75
370
185
270
325
200
85
110
340
240
325
255
350
250
320
135
90
290
330
435
Northwest Corridor - Subtotal
640
380
285
830
2,080
2,455
Rest of Adelaide
100
2,385
1,200
120
960
1,685
Total Adelaide
740
2,765
1,485
950
3,040
4,140
SA2
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
Port Adelaide
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert Park
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 25
TABL E 10 . SC EN ARIO S E M PLOY ME NT IM PACT S
SA2
Project Case
1
Project Case
1a
Project Case
1b
Project Case
1c
Project Case
2
Project Case
2b
Project Case
2c
North Haven
Largs Bay - Semaphore
65
115
60
115
55
100
35
55
200
305
265
385
230
290
Port Adelaide
310
305
305
145
370
460
875
Woodville - Cheltenham
Beverley
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert Park
55
20
15
55
15
15
40
15
15
55
15
10
195
75
55
315
125
85
215
75
90
West Lakes
Seaton - Grange
150
150
145
145
170
110
70
75
310
310
360
395
515
335
Hindmarsh - Brompton
155
15
5
370
155
265
315
Northwest Corridor - Subtotal
1,035
870
815
830
1,975
2,655
2,940
Rest of Adelaide
45
2,330
535
120
1,110
1,560
1,840
Total Adelaide
1,080
3,200
1,350
950
3,085
4,215
4,780
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 26
TABL E 11 . SC EN ARIO S PU BL IC T RANS PORT MO DE S HARE – T Z UN WE IG HTED AVE RAG E
SA2
Project Case 1
Project Case 1a
Project Case 1b
Project Case 2
Project Case 2b
North Haven
4.7%
4.6%
4.7%
3.2%
3.3%
Largs Bay – Semaphore
5.6%
5.7%
5.7%
4.0%
4.0%
Port Adelaide
3.7%
3.8%
3.7%
2.9%
2.9%
Woodville – Cheltenham
3.8%
4.0%
3.9%
3.3%
3.3%
Beverley
3.8%
3.9%
4.0%
3.0%
3.0%
Royal Park - Hendon - Albert
Park
3.5%
3.5%
3.3%
3.3%
3.3%
West Lakes
3.0%
3.0%
2.9%
2.5%
2.4%
Seaton – Grange
3.4%
3.4%
3.3%
3.5%
3.5%
Hindmarsh – Brompton
3.7%
3.8%
3.8%
3.5%
3.6%
Source: Travel Zones averages of MASTEM modelling outputs
Project Case 1b
This scenario has the introduction of electrified heavy rail from Outer Harbour to Adelaide Rail Station
and light rail to Grange and West Lakes via Grange Road.
The light rail travelling down Grange Road rather than Port Road is the only difference between this
scenario and the Project Case 1. Without the light rail travelling down Port Road, car travel times
improve to and from Port Adelaide. The improved accessibility acts to draw in some additional dwellings
from along the North West Corridor. The results of transport models also suggest that West Lakes gains
an accessibility benefit.
Project Case 1c
Is an extension of PC1. It includes a new tram service between South Terrace and Port Wharf (10min
frequency). This service runs along Port Road, and has new stops at Old Port Road, Queenstown,
Commercial Road and Port Wharf.
It produces broadly the same impact as PC1. There are some changes in the distribution along the
corridor.
Project Case 2
This scenario has the introduction of light rail along the existing Outer Harbour rail corridor with an onstreet section through Port Adelaide. Light rail will travel from Woodville to Grange and West Lakes.
However, it has been observed that in various studies light rail can have a positive impact on urban
densities. These tend to vary depending on the location and the design of the project. The Glenelg
Corridor (and other light rail corridor analysis) has been used to assess what impact light rail can have in
Adelaide.
The key outcome from the MASTEM modelling of this scenario was the adverse impact on public
transport and private car travel times along the North West Corridor when compared to the Base Case.
That is, the accessibility along the whole corridor is adversely impacted. Future households would be
less inclined to locate in the corridor based on the accessibility provided.
This light rail effect has offset the decreased travel time performance of this scenario and draws
additional dwellings into the North West Corridor.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 27
Project Case 2B
This scenario has the introduction of light rail along the existing Outer Harbour rail corridor with an onstreet section through Port Adelaide. Light rail will travel from Woodville to Grange and West Lakes. In
addition there will be a light rail loop within the CBD. The CBD loop is the only difference between this
scenario and the previous scenario.
The addition of the CBD loop does have impact on the overall accessibility along the corridor and the
CBD. The modelling suggests that the corridor becomes more attractive for development due to
improved access to different parts of the CBD when compared to Project Case 2.
Project Case 2C
This is a cross between PC1C and PC2. All tram services are realigned to run along Port Road, instead of
the rail corridor. The Outer Harbor service is changed to operate along Port Road to Port Adelaide (as in
PC1C), and then follows PC2 route from Port Adelaide to Outer Harbor.
The increase frequencies along Port Road and having only a single transport line along which to cluster
(which acts to improves commercial feasibility) increases the dwelling uplifts.
4.2
Urban Consolidation Benefits
Trubka et al (2009) drew from the Future Perth work for the WAPC (2001) to identify the infrastructure
servicing cost differences in developments in inner, middle and fringe areas of cities. This included
reviewing information from 22 studies across Australia, America and Canada over the 1972 to 2000
period. They found significant savings with respect to road, water and sewer, electricity, gas, health and
education infrastructure. Less significant savings were found with respect to telecommunications and
emergency services. This work suggests that overall infrastructure servicing costs are much less in innercity redevelopment locales than in urban fringe areas, i.e. about $60,000 and $160,000 respectively.
SGS has applied a conservative figure of $60,000 per dwelling. The conservative figure has been used as
the capacity for infill development in Adelaide has significant potential and it could be argued that the
not all additional dwellings located in the North West Corridor would be directly from the fringe.
The urban consolidation benefit has been allocated between 2021 (some development would take place
before some of the transport operations become fully operation) and 2036 so it can be used in the cost
benefit analysis.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 28
TABL E 12 . U RBAN CO N SOL I DATIO N BE N EF IT S
Project Case 1
Project Case 1a
Project Case 1b
Project Case
1c
Project Case 2
Project Case 2b
2013
-
-
-
-
-
-
2014
-
-
-
-
-
-
2015
-
-
-
-
-
-
2016
-
-
-
-
-
-
2017
-
-
-
-
-
-
2018
-
-
-
-
-
-
2019
-
-
-
-
-
-
Year
2020
-
-
-
-
-
-
2021
417,000
1,659,000
846,000
570,000
1,620,000
2,298,000
2022
834,000
3,318,000
1,692,000
1,140,000
3,240,000
4,596,000
2023
1,251,000
4,977,000
2,538,000
1,710,000
4,860,000
6,894,000
2024
1,668,000
6,636,000
3,384,000
2,280,000
6,480,000
9,192,000
2025
2,043,300
8,129,100
4,145,400
2,793,000
7,938,000
11,260,200
2026
2,085,000
8,295,000
4,230,000
2,850,000
8,100,000
11,490,000
2027
2,085,000
8,295,000
4,230,000
2,850,000
8,100,000
11,490,000
2028
2,085,000
8,295,000
4,230,000
2,850,000
8,100,000
11,490,000
2029
2,085,000
8,295,000
4,230,000
2,850,000
8,100,000
11,490,000
2030
2,126,700
8,460,900
4,314,600
2,907,000
8,262,000
11,719,800
2031
4,086,600
16,258,200
8,290,800
5,586,000
15,876,000
22,520,400
2032
4,128,300
16,424,100
8,375,400
5,643,000
16,038,000
22,750,200
2033
4,170,000
16,590,000
8,460,000
5,700,000
16,200,000
22,980,000
2034
4,170,000
16,590,000
8,460,000
5,700,000
16,200,000
22,980,000
2035
4,211,700
16,755,900
8,544,600
5,757,000
16,362,000
23,209,800
2036
4,253,400
16,921,800
8,629,200
5,814,000
16,524,000
23,439,600
Total
41,700,000
165,900,000
84,600,000
57,000,000
162,000,000
229,800,000
Source: SGS Economics & Planning and MASTEM Base Case Land Use Projections
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 29
EJD APPENDIX
A travel time matrix shows how long it takes to travel from one zone in the city to all other zones by car
and public transport separately. Travel time matrices can are also produced for a specific time period,
such as morning or afternoon peak and off-peak. For the purposes of EJD calculation, SGS has used
morning peak matrices from MASTEM.
Also required with the travel time matrix is an estimate of the share of public transport use by workers
travelling to their place of work. Including this share into the measure of effective job density enables a
more ‘real life’ representation of the proximity (in terms of travel time) component of accessibility
Throughout the estimation process, a small area has been defined as an SA2. However, the MASTEM
travel time matrix is produced at a smaller geography due to the detailed nature of transport modelling.
SGS has developed a methodology to convert these matrices. This method could be applied to any
travel time matrix given a concordance between the travel zones and the relevant small area. The steps
involved in this method1 are outlined below:
Step 1:
Convert the travel zone by travel zone travel time matrix (or generalised cost matrix) into an area unit by
travel zone travel time matrix.
𝑇𝑇𝑋𝑗 = ∑ 𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑗 × (𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖 ÷ ∑ 𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖 )
𝑖𝜖𝑋
𝑖𝜖𝑋
Step 2:
Convert the area unit by travel zone travel time matrix into a area unit by area unit travel time (or
generalised cost) matrix.
𝑇𝑇𝑋𝑌 = ∑ 𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑗 × (𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑗 ÷ ∑ 𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑗 )
𝑗𝜖𝑌
𝑗𝜖𝑌
Where:
𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑗 = Travel Time from travel zone i to travel zone j
𝑇𝑇𝑋𝑌 = Travel Time from area unit X to area unit Y
𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖 = Population in Travel Zone i
𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑗 = Employment in Travel Zone j
Calculate Effective Job Density (Small Area Level)
In calculating EJD SGS uses the level of employment relative to the time taken to gain access to that
employment and the mode split that is currently experienced by those workers in their travel to
employment. The formula used to calculate EJD at an area unit level is presented below.
𝑃𝑇 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑗 × 𝐸𝑚𝑝𝑗 (1 − 𝑃𝑇 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑗 ) × 𝐸𝑚𝑝𝑗
𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 = ∑ (
+
)
𝑃𝑇 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑗
𝑃𝑉 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑗
𝑗
1
It is possible the aggregation calculation from travel zone to small area could be conducted in a number of ways. However, a ll
methods should produce broadly the same result.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 30
Where:
𝐸𝐽𝐷𝑖 = Effective Job Density for area unit i
𝑃𝑇 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑗 = per cent of work trips which involve public transport for area unit j
𝐸𝑚𝑝𝑗 = number of jobs/employment within area unit j
𝑃𝑇 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑗 = time it takes to travel on public transport from area unit i to area unit j
𝑃𝑉 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑗 = time it takes to travel by private vehicle from area unit i to area unit j
The public transport mode share and public transport and private vehicle travel times will comes from
MASTEM.
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 31
Contact us
CANBERRA
Level 1, 55 Woolley Street
Dickson ACT 2602
+61 2 6262 7603
[email protected]
HOBART
Unit 2, 5 King Street
Bellerive TAS 7018
+61 (0)439 941 934
[email protected]
MELBOURNE
Level 5, 171 La Trobe Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
+61 3 8616 0331
[email protected]
SYDNEY
Suite 12, 50 Reservoir Street
Surry Hills NSW 2010
+61 2 8307 0121
[email protected]
North West Corridor: Land Use Impacts 32