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.
I am familiar only with Melbourne and Hobart, where single detached family homes are mostly bricks or partly bricks. Whereas detached houses in the Pacific Northwest are constructed nearly all of wood chipboards and wood roof shingles.
A childhood friend moved from central London to Barnet, from a detached to a semi-detached, both are concrete and both have lovely gardens.
I had to look up chipboard as it's a term I never heard before. It appears is similar or the same as particle board.
Particle board is not used in the construction of a house. It has a tendency to swell, and won't be a good frame for a wooden house. All the houses I've seen here in Vancouver that aren't built with cement, use solid wood for framing. After all we have an abundance of forest products here.
For walls in a wooden house, gypsum or drywall is used.
Wood roof shingles, exist of course, but asphalt shingles are the most common.
That's the correct vocabulary of construction.
I noticed that Australian homes are well insulated during the winter, and cool during the hot months.
Where are you?
I have never heard of chipboard, and a quick Google search at lumber stores bring up nothing for chipboard in Canadian stores. Strand board, particle board and plywood come up.
Canadian suburbs tend to more dense than both Australian and US ones. This is particularly true in high rises. In Aus/US, high rises tend to be located almost exclusively in the downtowns/inner cities. While Canadian cities have many in their cores, they also have a large amount in the suburban areas. This, in part, helps to explain why Canadians have higher transit numbers than Australia and MUCH higher than the US.
Canadian suburbs tend to more dense than both Australian and US ones. This is particularly true in high rises. In Aus/US, high rises tend to be located almost exclusively in the downtowns/inner cities. While Canadian cities have many in their cores, they also have a large amount in the suburban areas. This, in part, helps to explain why Canadians have higher transit numbers than Australia and MUCH higher than the US.
Thats true, they are really only just stating to do that in Australia, except sydney which has had multiple cores for years.
These are some areas of Brisbane where multiple story apartments are been constructed 10-15 km from the central core.
Canadian suburbs tend to more dense than both Australian and US ones. This is particularly true in high rises. In Aus/US, high rises tend to be located almost exclusively in the downtowns/inner cities. While Canadian cities have many in their cores, they also have a large amount in the suburban areas. This, in part, helps to explain why Canadians have higher transit numbers than Australia and MUCH higher than the US.
Sydney's an exception in Aus in that there's apartments everywhere around the suburbs, particularly around the railway stations. It's got a mix between walkups, mid and high rises. Right now there's a few 200m+ towers going up in Parramatta, which is 20kms from the CBD, one of which is office. Melbourne's working on it too with places like Box Hill or South Yarra etc, where they've had apartments and towers popping up pretty rapidly over the last few years.
That's based on 2016 figures, by the time the 2021 census comes around I won't be surprised if it sits close or at 30% based on current growth. The other Aus cities trail behind a bit.
Last edited by ciTydude123; 01-31-2020 at 03:44 AM..
Apartment proximity to train/railway stations will only increase in Sydney once the metro has expanded. The North West line opened early last year, and the city has one line under construction (City & Southwest). When this network gets off the ground I can imagine the demand for real estate outside the CBD will only increase as well as housing prices/construction of high-density apartment living as it becomes easier to navigate the city via rapid transit...outer suburbs will not feel as isolated or disconnected. It's a "game changer" and will probably help dispel or erode the suburban/car-centric feel of Sydney, outside the city centre.
Canadian suburbs tend to more dense than both Australian and US ones. This is particularly true in high rises. In Aus/US, high rises tend to be located almost exclusively in the downtowns/inner cities. While Canadian cities have many in their cores, they also have a large amount in the suburban areas. This, in part, helps to explain why Canadians have higher transit numbers than Australia and MUCH higher than the US.
Not entirely true. Google up "Rosslyn-Ballston skyline." Or "Tysons Corner." Or "Perimeter Center skyline." Or "Bellevue, Washington skyline." All have large high rise skylines--and growing, too.
I haven't been to Australia, but if I'm not mistaken, the vast majority of suburban Sydneysiders are NOT living in a high-rises or even mid rise apartments; they're still living in sprawling subdivisions. Paramatta and Chattswood are simply small pockets of density surrounded by a sea of single family homes. And these single family home subdivisions are often even more sprawling and spread out than single family home subdivisions in the Los Angeles suburbs. Which means that the high rise developments of Paramatta, Chattswood, and other pockets of density are a tiny drop in the bucket when it comes to boosting suburban Sydney density. Which means that the Los Angeles suburbs come out just as, if not more dense, than the Sydney suburbs.
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.