Australian equivalents to US cities? (townhouses, neighborhood, universities)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thinking Sydney would be like Boston (streetscape and layout) with SF (coastal vibe), Melbourne a Chicago (layout and skyline) with Portland (streetscape). Miami is obviously the Gold Coast.
If you're talking about NYC then Sydney in the sense that it's the country's business hub, just not to the same scale as NY. Sydney is more corporate than Melbourne (which Mel would counter by saying they're more cultured).
With LA Sydney is also the largest media hub in Australia though it doesn't dominate the Western world maybe even within Australia the way LA does.
d yes, inner Sydney and Melbourne has a lot of 19th century in them.
Last edited by ciTydude123; 09-30-2022 at 01:36 AM..
I don't think the terrace/row houses you can find in some Australian big cities are "mediterranean", they're a variation of British architecture. The USA has a lot more in the way of Spanish and Mediterranean colonial and revival architecture, Churrigueresque and Mission style churches, Italianate buildings, and Second French Empire and Beaux Arts architecture.
Definitely more Southern European than anything British. The terrace housing and architecture in some areas such as Fremantle make you feel like you are in Southern France or Italy
In terms of Architecture especially housing here in Perth would perhaps be similar to cities in California or New Mexico where a large number of buildings are limestone and the Spanish villa look is quite common
You can't really compare Australia to the U.S. or Britain for that matter in terms of their cities.
There's no American equivalent to the rivalry and dichotomy of Melbourne/Victoria and Sydney/NSW with both vying for primacy as the only truly big cities in Australia. As much maybe it makes more sense to compare them to Toronto/Ontario and Montreal/Quebec i.e. the two dominant spheres in Canada which have a strong rivalry. Of course minus the language factor which is very important in the Canadian context.
It wasn't until the 1960s and early 70s that Perth, Brisbane and Adelaide emerged as major urban centers in their own right. One could perhaps compare those to the emergence of Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton as significant urban centers in Canada in the last 5-6 decades.
America's urban system is of course much more polycentric and has become so even more over the last few decades with the rapid growth of urban centers in the Sun Belt. Consider that something like 40% of the Australian population to this day lives in greater Melbourne or Sydney. L.A. and NYC combined barely get to 10% of the U.S. population. I believe the GTA and Montreal metros combine for about 27% (showing that even Canada has a little more spread than Australia).
Interesting in that all three countries have a capital city that isn't one of those metropolises. Of those three Washington D.C. has grown the most and has reached major metropolis status on its own - perhaps reflecting the sheer amount of funding generated by the American government complex incl. military and intelligence. But even Ottawa has grown to be - within the Canadian context - significant city. In contrast Canberra is really lagging behind. I wonder if this is simply due to the lack of coastal access. Ottawa has access to the St.Lawrence waterway and Washington has Atlantic access, both of which are important for economic growth.
Interesting in that all three countries have a capital city that isn't one of those metropolises. Of those three Washington D.C. has grown the most and has reached major metropolis status on its own - perhaps reflecting the sheer amount of funding generated by the American government complex incl. military and intelligence. But even Ottawa has grown to be - within the Canadian context - significant city. In contrast Canberra is really lagging behind. I wonder if this is simply due to the lack of coastal access. Ottawa has access to the St.Lawrence waterway and Washington has Atlantic access, both of which are important for economic growth.
Canberra was built as a compromise between Victoria and NSW. New South Wales believed that Sydney should be the capital Victoria thought Melbourne should be. New South Wales would not have joined the federation had the capital been Melbourne. The Australian Constitution has a section that deals with the compromise.
Quote:
125. Seat of Government
The seat of Government of the Commonwealth shall be determined by the Parliament, and shall be within territory which shall have been granted to or acquired by the Commonwealth, and shall be vested in and belong to the Commonwealth, and shall be in the State of New South Wales, and be distant not less than one hundred miles from Sydney.
It wasn't built because it was on a major trade route or waterway it just happened to fit the bill as being in NSW but over 100 miles from Sydney. Also unlike Washington or Ottowa, Canberra is relatively new. Growing up we had family who lived there and would often go down on school holidays. Compared to when I was a kid in the 90s, Canberra has come a long way. It used to be awful. Nothing open after 6pm etc.
Thinking Sydney would be like Boston (streetscape and layout) with SF (coastal vibe), Melbourne a Chicago (layout and skyline) with Portland (streetscape). Miami is obviously the Gold Coast.
If you're talking about NYC then Sydney in the sense that it's the country's business hub, just not to the same scale as NY. Sydney is more corporate than Melbourne (which Mel would counter by saying they're more cultured).
With LA Sydney is also the largest media hub in Australia though it doesn't dominate the Western world maybe even within Australia the way LA does.
d yes, inner Sydney and Melbourne has a lot of 19th century in them.
1) You can't compare one city to two large cities, especially if they're as culturally significant as Boston and SF. Please stick to one.
2) Sydney is nothing like Boston in streetscape and layout. Nothing. Zero. Also, the "vibe" of SF, coastal or not, is completely different from Sydney. Sydney is a flashy business city. SF is hippy, bohemian and boutique.
3) How is the Melbourne layout like Chicago? Most modern cities have "skylines", I'm looking for actual comparisons.
4) Inner city Sydney and Melbourne have some mid-to-late 19th century statement buildings with a lot of contemporary modernism. The neighborhoods outside of the CBD have some Victorian buildings. There will occasionally be the odd fixtures dating back to settlement, or near that period. I would not say they have "a lot" of 19th century in them in the way NYC or Philadelphia does.
Last edited by Jefferson Airplane; 10-03-2022 at 07:49 PM..
The terrace housing and architecture in some areas such as Fremantle make you feel like you are in Southern France or Italy
They don't feel like French or Italian architecture. The terrace housing in Australia looks like a Creolized variant of English Victorian architecture. It looks somewhat Caribbean.
When I think of French or Italianate architecture, I think of the rowhouses depicted here:
1) You can't compare one city to two large cities, especially if they're as culturally significant as Boston and SF. Please stick to one.
Your opinions about Aussie cities are very strong for a non Australian who don't know how they compare after a "quick research". City comparisons are only superficial no 2 are completely alike. Briefly Boston and Syd in that they're ungridded and narrower winding streets (Sydney CBD is kinda gridded but everywhere outside is not), colours and scale of buildings around some areas like around Potts point kinda reminiscent, Downtown Crossing - Pitt St Mall, Boston Common - Hyde Park eg. Melbourne flat landscape with large skyline dominating like Chicago more than LA or Cleveland, gridded, centralised, Yarra river - Chicago River, eg. Combine that with Portland style streets and streetcars but much, much busier and more intense.
Likewise for SF I'm not sure if you can still call it that as much as it used to be 20+ years ago. The tech and other say, less "desirable" developments there are changing the character, but unlike some here I'll disclaim this is only an AFAIK.
Sydney has its own cultural spots outside the CBD. It's got its own Mission District kinda area with Newtown. Otherwise for someone who's only done "quick research" I'll take a brief look around SF's financial district around the Embarcadero and call it a flashy business city.
A large part Syd and Mel's inner buildings in terms of total numbers date from the 19th century. You've had some notable Victorian buildings within the CBDs from both razed to make for new towers like in Philly or NYC but large parts of inner Syd and Mel remain predominantly 19th.
If you keep insisting what you do after your "research" I'm not gonna stop you since city comparisons are superficial interpret them however you want. Just be mindful if you say for eg Syd = LA or Darwin = Miami there'll be other people who disagree completely, and that's fine.
Last edited by ciTydude123; 10-03-2022 at 09:17 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
