Melbourne’s Fringe Isn’t the Only Growth Area

Melbourne’s Fringe Isn’t the Only Growth Area

The headline “Large population growth in our outer suburbs” attached to the release of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) population estimates for Australia 2007-08 [1] , would not have been music to the ears of those wishing to see a more compact sustainable city. However, digging deeper into the ABS’s numbers reveals that there are some signs for optimism.  

Melbourne 2030 and its update Melbourne @ 5 million aim to direct development and population into growth areas and established areas. Melbourne @ 5 million anticipates that 53% (316,000) of new dwellings will be in established areas and 47% (284,000) in growth areas [2] over the next 20 years [3].

The policy advocates that much of the growth in established areas be directed to six new Central Activities Districts (CADs) located at Box Hill, Broadmeadows, Dandenong, Footscray, Frankston and Ringwood. These centres were already previously denoted as Transit Cities or Principal Activity Centres (PACs).

The ABS population growth figures released provide some insight into the success of the CADs (formerly transit cities or PACs). Using the respective Statistical Local Areas (SLAs) which the CADs are located as proxies [4] changing patterns in population growth can be observed. Between 1996 and 2004 the CADs population increased by around 838 people. Since 2004 the population has increased by almost 13,000.

Table 1    Population Increase

Source: SGS Economics and Planning using data from Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2007-08, (cat. no. 3218.0).

In 2008, 47.1% of population increase was in growth areas and 52.9% was in established areas (Figure 1). 5.7% of Melbourne’s population increase was located in the CADs. The increase in the CADs population represented 10.9% of the population increase in established areas in 2008.

The share of population growth in the CADs has increased steadily since 2004. During this same period the overall share of population growth in established areas has been equal to or greater than the growth area. 

Figure 1 Share of Population Increase (%) 

Source: SGS Economics and Planning using data from Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2007-08, (cat. no. 3218.0).

These figures suggest that policies such as Melbourne 2030  have had some impact on supporting population growth in established areas. As well as policy settings, other factors may also be contributing to the higher share of growth in established areas and CADs. These include;

•    Higher petrol prices influencing greater demand for dwellings near public transport
•    People wanting to live closer to place of employment and other services and recreation offerings
•    Changing demographics leading to greater demand for smaller dwellings such as townhouses and apartments

Given the potential economic cost savings from redirecting residential development from greenfield growth areas to established areas [5], reinforcement and support for these trends (at a minimum) should be encouraged.

Footnotes

[1]  Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2009, Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2007-08. Cat. No. 3218.0, Canberra 23/04/2009
[2]  In this case Growth Areas are defined as Casey, Cardinia, Hume (excluding the Hume (C)– Broadmeadows SLA), Melton, Whittlesea and Wyndam
[3]  Department of Planning and Community Development, 2008, p 5.
[4]  The Statistical Local Area are Maribyrnong (C), Hume (C)– Broadmeadows, Whitehorse (C)– Box Hill, Maroondah (C)- Ringwood, Greater Dandenong (C)- Dandenong and Frankston (C)-West
[5]  Trubka, Newman and Bilsborough, 2008, page 3, estimate that for 1,000 dwellings their actual cost in the inner city is approximately $309 million dollars compared to $653 million on the fringe. These estimates include infrastructure, transport, greenhouse gas emissions and health costs over 50 years.  

References

1. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2009, Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2007-08. Cat. No. 3218.0, Canberra 23/04/2009
2. Department of Planning and Community Development, 2008, Melbourne @ 5 million. Victorian Government, Melbourne
3. Trubka, R., Newman, P. and Bilsborough, D., 2008, Assessing the Costs of Alternative Development Paths in Australian Cities. Curtin University Sustainability Policy Institute and Parsons Brinkerhoff, Fremantle