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.
In Sydney we have trains, buses, ferries, light rail and now Metro. Metro is only a very small part of the system at the moment. I live about 25ks from the city and the train frequency is up to ten minutes in peak hour. I have not even been on the new Metro as it is up the other end of the suburban area for me. The state government are spending a fortune to try to develop and integrate public transport. Even my car loving DH had to take the train yesterday.
A key difference between Australia suburbs and North American suburbs is the definition of a suburb.
In Australia, there are only Local Government Areas, no counties, nor any incorporated cities. A "suburb" is basically any neighborhood outside of downtown. Therefore, a "suburb" might very well be a hundred year old area only 5 km or so from downtown that, in the U.S. or Canada, would most likely be an inner city neighborhood within the city proper.
In America and Canada, there are incorporated cities contained within counties (U.S.) or regional municipalities (Canada). Core cities are their own city proper, and generally, "suburbs" refers exclusively to neighborhoods/cities outside of the core city city proper. There are inner ring suburbs immediately next to the city proper that are usually older, denser, and often very similar to the core inner city. Then there are outer ring suburbs that are usually newer, less dense, and much more stereotypically suburban in style.
A "suburb" is basically any neighborhood outside of downtown.
This is true for Canada as well. Scarborough and North York are considered "suburbs" despite being within the City of Toronto. In Calgary, the whole contiguous area is part of the city, including the outlying areas, which are considered as suburbs by many.
This is true for Canada as well. Scarborough and North York are considered "suburbs" despite being within the City of Toronto. In Calgary, the whole contiguous area is part of the city, including the outlying areas, which are considered as suburbs by many.
OK, sure. But I think that too often, when someone refers to the surburbs (even in the U.S.), it's usually some inner-ring, old suburb right next to the city proper that is basically an extension of the city proper it borders.
Let's give a shout out to some newer, outer-ring suburbs, in the U.S., Canada, Australia, etc.
This is true for Canada as well. Scarborough and North York are considered "suburbs" despite being within the City of Toronto. In Calgary, the whole contiguous area is part of the city, including the outlying areas, which are considered as suburbs by many.
Not here in Vancouver. No one refers to neighbourhoods within the city itself as suburbs. If said you were from the burbs and mentioned Kerrisdale, you'd be corrected immediately. This may be because, unlike Calgary, the city square k's is actually quite small. As for Toronto, I'm not really up on the districts, but wasn't Scarborough it's own municipality before it was amalgamated into Toronto itself? Perhaps that's why it's still referred to as a suburb. Similar to North York?
A suburb in my area is a separate municipality or city, that is commuting distance to the city of Vancouver. The lines get a bit blurred when referring to the District of West Vancouver, the city of North Vancouver and the District of North Vancouver. All separate in their own right, but people for some odd reason don't refer to them as suburbs, like Burnaby, Coquitlam etc.
As for Toronto, I'm not really up on the districts, but wasn't Scarborough it's own municipality before it was amalgamated into Toronto itself? Perhaps that's why it's still referred to as a suburb. Similar to North York?
.
This is true. That's why almost the entire city feels like one giant suburb.
I'll use the example of the Los Angeles suburb of Inglewood. Inglewood is approximately 25 km from Downtown LA, with a population of 109,673. On Wikipedia it is called a "city" apart of the LA County but also apart of the LA Metropolitan area. Now, here in Australia, a suburb of a city that is around 20-25 km from the City Centre (I'll use Elizabeth, South Australia as an example), is not a "city" but a suburb. A "city" in Australian terms is used exclusively to denote a major population centre, generally with a population above 50,000 people. Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Gold Coast, Canberra etc. are all cities. Now, back to Elizabeth. Elizabeth is a suburb of Adelaide, roughly 20 km from the Adelaide CBD (like Inglewood), but not a city in its own right. It is located on the outskirts of Adelaide, and 50 years ago it would have been agricultural land, not connected to Adelaide because it wasn't developed. However, as Adelaide's population expanded and spread north and south, Elizabeth became a suburb of Adelaide. In technical, official terms, Australian cities do have an amalgamation of local government areas (LGAs) that might be defined as the "City of Playford" (which Elizabeth is apart of).
So, in the states, does a "city" (as Inglewood is referred to) denote an area in the metropolitan area of a major population centre that is a considerable distance from the CBD? Why isn't it just called a "suburb" of LA? Does a suburb mean something else altogether?
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.
