A GIS based planning support system for assessing financial feasibility of urban redevelopment

Urban densification trends combined with redevelopment increasingly moving away from large former industrial and transport sites toward existing town centres and corridors indicate redevelopment is becoming increasingly complex, difficult to plan for and undertake. The interplay between land and property markets and planning frameworks suggest city planners and urban researchers need new tools and methodologies to gain insights into ways to deliver effective responses. Despite the need, there is a limited availability of comprehensive models to fulfil the task. This paper describes a GIS-based tool to assess parcel-level financial feasibility and housing supply associated with urban redevelopment within a precinct. The tool incorporates existing and potential built form and parameters associated with the planning framework and land and property markets. Using a real case study in a workshop, tool performance was evaluated by professional urban planners in terms of its capacity to produce metrics and visualisations of potential scenarios of redevelopment. Results indicate the usefulness of the tool for emulating land market conditions and testing scenarios of planning regulation and market changes for strategic planning purposes.

[1]  Paul Cheshire,et al.  The welfare economics of land use planning , 2002 .

[2]  Ron Janssen,et al.  Spatial decision support for collaborative land use planning workshops , 2012 .

[3]  K. Ihlanfeldt.  The effect of land use regulation on housing and land prices , 2007 .

[4]  Simon Pinnegar,et al.  Delivering affordable housing through the planning system in urban renewal contexts: converging government roles in Queensland, South Australia and New South Wales , 2015 .

[5]  N. Huynh,et al.  Evolution of a Synthetic Population and Its Daily Mobility Patterns Under Spatial Strategies for Urban Growth , 2017 .

[6]  Bill Randolph,et al.  Delivering the Compact City in Australia: Current Trends and Future Implications , 2006 .

[7]  Un-Habitat.  Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Mobility: Global Report on Human Settlements 2013 , 2015 .

[8]  Billie Giles-Corti,et al.  The walkability planning support system: An evidence-based tool to design healthy communities , 2017 .

[9]  S. Lieske,et al.  Infrastructure Development, Residential Growth and Impacts on Public Service Expenditure , 2015 .

[10]  Simon Pinnegar,et al.  ‘It depends what you mean by the term rights’: strata termination and housing rights , 2017 .

[11]  Francesco Tajani,et al.  An evaluation model of the financial feasibility of social housing in urban redevelopment , 2015 .

[12]  J. Stillwell,et al.  Planning Support Science for Smarter Urban Futures , 2017 .

[13]  Christopher Pettit,et al.  Introduction to ‘Planning Support Science for Smarter Urban Futures’ , 2017 .

[14]  Simon Pinnegar,et al.  Planning the end of the compact city , 2015 .

[15]  J. Desalvo,et al.  The Effect of Land‐Use Controls on the Spatial Size of U.S. Urbanized Areas , 2012 .

[16]  Robert Freestone,et al.  Incremental urbanism: characteristics and implications of residential renewal through owner-driven demolition and rebuilding , 2015 .

[17]  J. Brueckner,et al.  Measuring welfare gains from relaxation of land-use restrictions: The case of India's building-height limits ☆ , 2012 .

[18]  C. Forster,et al.  The Challenge of Change: Australian Cities and Urban Planning in the New Millennium , 2006 .

[19]  K. Ruming.  Urban consolidation, strategic planning and community opposition in Sydney, Australia: Unpacking policy knowledge and public perceptions , 2014 .

[20]  Timothy Havard.  Financial feasibility studies for property development : theory and practice , 2013 .