With all the sea change that's been going on over the past decade or more across Australia, I was wondering what people thought might be next big urban conglomeration areas might be, outside of capital cities though. So for example Mandurah and Perth couldn't be counted as the former is essentially considered part of the latter these days, but Bubury and Busselton in WA or Geelong, Queenscliffe and along to Anglsea in Victoria might be identified as future non capital urban areas.

Does anyone have any other ideas where this might occur, remember though, it can't be connected to a capital city.

They say that Townsville,and Cairns will be cities worthy of Metropolitian status by 2019.

bunbury is pretty much part of perth. just divided by national park

That sounds Crap, A city part of a Metro, just divided by National Park.

bunbury is pretty much part of perth. just divided by national park

180kms away.....

They say that Townsville,and Cairns will be cities worthy of Metropolitian status by 2019.

but hardly conglomerations. they are just urban centers in their own right.

There's one that already exists that is located in two states if I'm not wrong. Albury-Wodonga.

the gold coast is swallowing everything up south of the border. tweed, mirwullimbah, cabirita etc

the gold coast is swallowing everything up south of the border. tweed, mirwullimbah, cabirita etc

Yeah, but it's basically part of Brisbane - or the SEQ urban agglomeration if you prefer, which includes a capital city.

I did a seachange last year to Central Coast. the main township of gosford is about to boom with lots of highrise and retail bdgs. the nearby Erina was chosen for the masive 100,000sqm retail complex-Erina Fair, thus killing the CBD of Gosford, but now Gosford will rise again. Council and state gov have finally adopted a town planning draft whichy will allow tall bldgs, which inturn is woooing developers.Gosford is exactly half way between Sydney & Newcastle and also halve way between bush and beach and often refered to as a sleeping giant.The Central Coast has many growing expanding areas and is fasting growing area in NSW.places like Woy woy, Ettalong,terrigal,the Entrance are boming atm with total pop of 300,000 people!

Cul or anybody else - do you know if Central Coast included in the Sydney metro population?
The reason I ask is that the current Syd metro pop is listed as 4.23 mill (ABS) which looks a few hundred thousand short of what I thought it was. Not sure.

^^Yes, it is included.

Maryborough-Hervey Bay is over 50k I think and growing faster than just about anywhere. And 100km to the north is Bundaberg which is going ok as well.

Maryborough-Hervey Bay is over 50k I think and growing faster than just about anywhere. And 100km to the north is Bundaberg which is going ok as well.

Yes - Hervey Bay is one of the fastest growing urban areas in Australia, outside the main capitals. Its funny - there is no Hervey Bay, like the Gold Coast its made up of many towns which have become fused together. Pialba, Scarness, Torquay, Urangan and Point Vernon.

Drive from Sunshine Coast to Northern NSW and see urban areas 90% of the time :P

I imagine that there must be some cities in northern NSW that must be growing at fair clip such as Pt Macquarie or Coffs Harbor, they must surely be destined to become bigger cities in the future and swallow up the smaller towns around them.

Definately the northern rivers area of NSW is absolutely booming. Lets not forget that the Gold Coast itself is a conglomeration(Coomera, Nerang, Southport, Burleigh, Coolangatta) which has then taken Tweed Heads, Murwillumbah, Kingscliffe, Cabarita, right down towards Byron Bay.

I wouldn't consider either the Gold or Sunshine Coasts as part of Brisbane as there is very large areas of land inbetween.

The Mackay area is booming because of the minerals boom. You know the Mackay HSV dealership had the best sales in the last year in the country. And Mackay is a city of at least 80,000 now having sprawled out towards its northern beaches and Sarina to the south.

Lake Macquarie/Newcastle/Maitland/Cessnock/Raymond Terrace/Port Stephens is already pretty much a conglomerate. So is Woolgoolga/Coffs Harbour/Sawtell/Urunga.

what about geelong, bendigo, or ballarat? Too small?

^too distant from Melbourne

Yeah, but it's basically part of Brisbane - or the SEQ urban agglomeration if you prefer, which includes a capital city.



Saying The Gold Coast is part of Brissy is like saying Geelong is part of Melbourne and Newcastle part of Sydney. Plus, Its insulting too. Ha Ha

Saying The Gold Coast is part of Brissy is like saying Geelong is part of Melbourne and Newcastle part of Sydney. Plus, Its insulting too. Ha Ha

No. Newcastle is more than twice as far from Sydney than Melbourne-Geelong and Brisbane-GC. Syd-Wollongong would be a slightly better comparison.

I would say that Newcastle is currently the only one, and arguably the Gold Coast (arguably as to whether you say it is connected to Brisbane or not, even though that may be insulting ;))

I'd expect a coastal conurbation of Bunbury/Busselton/Australind, and Hervey Bay/Maryborough would be the next, possibly along with Albury/Wodonga. When do you say that an urban centre is a metropolitan conglomerate anyway??

Oops, forgot to mention Geelong, it is also now a significant urban area, but will soon be totally connected to Melbourne considering the rapid growth of Werribee and areas. (edit...)

^^ Agree

Saying The Gold Coast is part of Brissy is like saying Geelong is part of Melbourne and Newcastle part of Sydney. Plus, Its insulting too. Ha Ha

Yes but there are large tracts of empty country side, and farm land between Mel & Geelong and much of the area between Newcastle and Sydney is national park - though the Central Coast is very heavily populated. When landing at Sydney, Wollongong looks like its just a 'spit' down the coast.

Below is the Brisbane / GC urban area.
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9906/brissprawl4hg.png (http://imageshack.us)

Geelong is set to basically become part of Melbourne by 2050, thanks to Wyndham City Council wanting the urban growth boundary extended towards Little River.

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxmedia/2005/11/16/bound_gfx.jpg

Melbourne is predicted to join geelong in the next 30 years(as Werribee's border in only 15kms for Lara...being Geelong), and will join ballarat in the next 50 years through the Baccus Marsh growth corridor.

Jay T, even though Bris - GC is more heavily populated than Melb to Geelong, I hate to break it to you, but when I was there a month ago, on my drive from GC to Bris, there is a shit load of open land still there.....it isn't that heavily populated! I was actually expecting it to more populated than what it was on account of all the hype.

No. Newcastle is more than twice as far from Sydney than Melbourne-Geelong and Brisbane-GC. Syd-Wollongong would be a slightly better comparison.

Syd and the Gong and Sydney and the C/Coast will NEVER EVER get closer together than what they are until the silly Government re-zones the stupid national park to residential.....those stupid short sighted planners of 100+ years ago decided to stick stupid trees and shit there and fence it off so only flora, fauna and bushwalkers can enjoy it. Bastards. ;)

My god, Christarrant, can you imagine the selfishness of it, not to mention the bucks some erstwhile benefactor could have made out of all those unproductive hectares!?! Flora and fauna are strictly for the birds!

Nitpickers Corner: when two or more urban centres grow into one, they are not an 'urban conglomeration' but a 'conurbation'.

These will be the future Aglomerations IMO...

Devonport, Ulverstone and Burnie/Somerset will all grow together and become known as the Bass Coast.

The Latrobe Cities will all sprawl closer together

Geelong will take forever to join with Werribee (trust me) but it will spread west (after WestConnect is built) to areas like Bannockburn, Inverleigh and the Surf Coast.

Albury and Wodonga are already an aglomeration and will sprawl more

Wollongong currently includes it's namesake, Shellharbour and Kiama but in 2 decades you will count Nowra within that urban area and the entire population around 400 - 500K

Newcastle/Maitland/Port Stephens is already considered a metro but this could spread to Singleton and Musswellbrook.

ABS already considers Bathurst and Orange as one city but there's about half an hour of highway between the two - I guess this could be a growth corridor.

The towns to the west of Ipswich (Gatton, Laidley) well get swallowed up. In addition Pine Rivers may eventually stretch to Dayboro.

The Gold Coast may eventually spread west to Jimboomba/Beaudesert

Jay T, even though Bris - GC is more heavily populated than Melb to Geelong, I hate to break it to you, but when I was there a month ago, on my drive from GC to Bris, there is a shit load of open land still there.....it isn't that heavily populated! I was actually expecting it to more populated than what it was on account of all the hype.

Yeah - its good how they are keeping the trees near the freeway as a barrier. Go just behind the trees and its houses, houses, houses!!!!

Newcastle and Gosford doesn't belong to Sydney, it takes like an hour to the Central Coast, another one to newcastle and that's just for the people in the hornsby area.

in the faraway future maybe Gosford/Wyong and the Entrance could be something big but I'm sure the seachangers won't be liking that, maybe except for cul. though it will be inevitable once Sydney decides that the hills area aroudn kellyville is full, so they'll look even up north and perhaps Kuringai NP will be history really it's just in our way from Gos

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxmedia/2005/11/16/bound_gfx.jpg

^^ I hope public transport keeps us with any further growth and not just construction of massive freeways that we are seeing at the moment.

Do many people know about the City Of Latrobe? It is a city of 75'000 people although split into 4 major towns all with in 5 - 10 minutes of each other linked by Freeway.

TRARALGON is the main office and commercial centre. MORWELL with a medium sized shopping mall with 8 Cinema complex, Big W, Target, Bunnings, Safeway, BiLo, Foodcourts etc and a downtown 3km away housing the Cities main corporate headquaters next to a new Judicial complex. CHURCHILL with it's own small shopping mall and home to Monash University. MOE with major TAFE College in a suburb known as Newborough whom share the same postcoad and it has it's own CBD with some major stores also.

Morwell - Traralgon are expected to grow to the point there will be no separation between the two already fairly large towns of over 20'000 people each? This city is worth taking a look at! Highly unknown on a map because of it being split into 4 town although all very close and is regarded as 1 city. The 4th largest city outside Melbourne but unknown to many.

^^ AFAIK, it's actually called Latrobe City. In the next 30 years or so it's basically going to become another Geelong - a bunch of suburbs sprawling endlessly into each other - with its own satellite towns too (in this case, Churchill, Trafalgar, etc.). I reckon it could easily support 150 thousand people, but then the train line might need to be upgraded and/or duplicated (currently the double track ends at somewhere near Moe).

^^According to the ABS, the La Trobe Valley area had a population of 74,695 at June 30, 2004, a 0.3% increase over the past year. Despite this, the area experienced an average population decline of -0.2% per annum in the 1999-2004 period, so unless there is a dramatic turnaround (which is always possible), the area is unlikely to reach a population of 150,000 anytime soon.

^^ I'd say once Melbourne hits the urban growth boundary (which based on the current boundary will happen in a little over ten years), we can expect a MASSIVE change in satellite cities within about 150km or so of Melbourne - Geelong/Surf Coast/Bellarine, Ballarat/Ballan/Bacchus Marsh, Bendigo/Castlemaine, Seymour/Broadford, Latrobe. (new town somewhere between Sunbury and Gisborne? :D)

The Gold Coast may eventually spread west to Jimboomba/Beaudesert

That won't happen. There's the Army Base at Canungra that will stop it. We'll grow into Mt Nathan and its surrounding valleys, which will then continue up through Maudsland and Guanaba to connect with Upper Coomera, but we won't end up actually crossing over into Beaudesert Shire.

The gap between Brisbane and the Gold Coast actually occurs a fair way into the Gold Coast, as it's the Gold Coast itself that contains the 'gap' as the gap was originally between Albert Shire and the Gold Coast. (Driving up the Pacific highway you used to get Gold Coast - Albert Shire - Logan City - Brisbane.)

It actually only appears to be so sparsely populated in this gap due to the fact that the Higway was built through this area well before it became 'the affordable place for people to live who still commute to Brisbane for work'. And as such it's had a good amount of planning with buffer zones from the highway etc.

You cannot any longer travel from Brisbane to the Gold Coast without being 2minutes from where someone lives, but the area is still under development, and not, as many parts of Brisbane have been for 100 years, and Logan for 15 years, 'fully developed'.

The Gold Coast is still a city in its own right, as it's really a patient person who commutes from there to Brisbane to work (some do, but they're very few and far between). The Gold Coast itself however is merged with the Tweed etc, and many many people commute across the border etc to work.

(You have to remember that the Gold Coast is Australia's 6th Largest city, and Queensland's 2nd largest, but it still has Logan in between it and Brisbane, which is Queensland's 3rd largest city, though it is considered part of Brisbane's greater metro. (and is completely attached - some people live on the same street as people in the other city etc).

The G.C / Brisbane is interesting as the same thing is happening south of Perth with Rockingham and Mandurah. Both are cities in their own right, G.C does not seem to be considered a part of Brisbane, and Rockingham and Mandurah are also not a part of Perth. In fact Mandurah is almost the same distance from Perth that G.C is from Brisbane, about 80k's, with Rockingham in the middle at 40k's from Perth, but it is getting harder to distinguish where one city ends and the next begins as all the gaps are being slowly plugged in. Rockingham now has 90,000 people, with greater Mandurah I think about 70,000. So if this was added to the Perth metro population, the total number of people would be closer to 1.6mil. If the same greater metro or conurbination calculation was applied to the Brisbane / G.C corridor I guess the population would be about 2.2mil, maybe closer to 2.3 if you threw in just over the border in Tweed Heads.

See now I always thought that Rockingham was a part of Perth!!! Then again when I was a kid I thought Geelong was a suburb of Melbourne, I had no concept of the "Gold Coast" but I knew about Southport and Labrador and I thought Launceston was bigger than Hobart! True Story!

:)

Rockingham is part of Perth.

Yeah - its good how they are keeping the trees near the freeway as a barrier. Go just behind the trees and its houses, houses, houses!!!!


Well those houses must be pretty far back from the freeway....behind the trees, behind the paddocks, behind the cows.......whhoooo must be the new urban planning policy of SEQ!

Well those houses must be pretty far back from the freeway....behind the trees, behind the paddocks, behind the cows.......whhoooo must be the new urban planning policy of SEQ!

Just looking at Google earth shots between the cities there doesn't seem heaps of space - though they're unlikley to be particularly recent. But if you're convinced there is, why don't you print screen some of it to show us?

Just looking at Google earth shots between the cities there doesn't seem heaps of space - though they're unlikley to be particularly recent. But if you're convinced there is, why don't you print screen some of it to show us?

Orfeo....don't take offence to my post.....i ain't denying that SEQ is developing at an amazing rate. A couple of months ago was the first time I was in GC for 10 years.....I thought that this place has grown immensly.... and will continue to do so. Simply I just call how it is! Everyone here knows what Jayt is like...talks everything up in SEQ more than what it really is. But when I was there, there is still alot of open land up there, even in GC city there is still alot of gaps at the moment! In the next 10 years they will fill up, as will the open land between Bris and GC will in the next 10- 20 years.

Seriously my posts are not dissin the GC, just a reality check for Jay T...thats all!

^
I'm not insulted - I just don't agree with your statement that there is lots of space (padocks, fields, etc) close to the freeway. Certainly away from it, there is heaps of space.

The houses are set back from the pacific fwy - but that's a good thing - kinda like the way Canberra sets their suburbs back from the main road - you could literally drive all around Canberra and not see a single house if you took the right route - it's called good low density planning.

:)

Rockingham is part of Perth.

Unless it's changed from when I lived there, Rockingham was not cosidered part of the metro area because it was 40km away. Have the boundaries been redifined then of what consitutes the metro Perth area?

Unless it's changed from when I lived there, Rockingham was not cosidered part of the metro area because it was 40km away. Have the boundaries been redifined then of what consitutes the metro Perth area?

Rockingham is definitely part of Perth - I think the official metropolitan scheme boundary falls just south of Secret Harbour or Singleton or something? It's in the Streetsmart directory if anyone has that. I think that with the new train line to Mandurah and the strong suburban development occurring, Mandurah will have to be officially considered part of the Perth metro sometime in the next 10-15 years.

Here's an image from the street directory showing the Metropolitan Area Scheme Boundary, just south of Singleton:

http://img306.imageshack.us/img306/6474/perthmetro8jp.gif

In this image you can see that the gaps in suburban development between the northern suburbs of Mandurah and the southern suburbs of Rockingham are not very big. You can also see the proposed new suburban streets just south of Madora Bay and the new proposed development in the suburb of Lakelands, east of Fremantle Rd (Lake Valley Dr etc.). Considering that Mandurah is currently the fastest growing city in Australia (grew by 7.0% in the 2003-2004 period), these gaps are sure to be filled fairly quickly.

http://img474.imageshack.us/img474/8364/northernmandurah7jv.gif

By 2010 it should be appart of the Perth Metro. Consider the rail corridor running straight through down it, it wont take developers to long to fill the gap.

i reckon the best wayt to determine whether your city/town is in the metro area is to see what TV channels you receive. For example If Mandurah received 7, 9 and 10 then they are part of Perth. If they only receive GWN and WIN then they are a separate city.

I use the same logic on Geelong. It get the same media as Melbourne and is therefore right to be considered a part of Melbourne.

i reckon the best wayt to determine whether your city/town is in the metro area is to see what TV channels you receive. For example If Mandurah received 7, 9 and 10 then they are part of Perth. If they only receive GWN and WIN then they are a separate city.

I use the same logic on Geelong. It get the same media as Melbourne and is therefore right to be considered a part of Melbourne.

But what happens if you receive both the city and regional tv signals?

Devonport, Ulverstone and Burnie/Somerset will all grow together and become known as the Bass Coast.



Interesting.. I've heard this one informally called "Braddon" before (the name of the federal electorate in that area). Bass Coast sounds better though!

But those cities really need to join up... there are a lot of people up the northwest (comparatively) but because they are split into so many towns/small cities (Port Sorell, Devonport, Ulverstone, Latrobe, Burnie, Pengiun, Wynyard, Stanley) they don't really have much bargaining power (so far as urban areas do).

What a silly discussion thread!

Why would we be in any way happy to see more land cleared and built upon? Why would we be happy to see Woolongong or Townsville spread any further? Townsville's public transport system (Hermit Park Bus Sevice) is either non-existant in many parts of the city or by Southern standards is just plain crap. It is a city where you absolutely have to have a car or it costs you at least $10-$15 everytime thatyou climb into a cab.

I totally support decentralisation of population away from the Capital Cities, though with this we should be more European and develop more semi detached housing, medium density flats and smaller suburban blocks. The sign of a truly developed and maturing city is a city that increases it's population without expanding its urban boundaries.

Two cases in Victoria would be Geelong which has 200,000 people and yet only covers 40% more area than Bendigo a city that doesn't efficiently use land with a population of 85,000. A quick look at a map of Victoria clearly shows this. Ballarat on the other hand has a bigger population than Bendigo, but still occupies 5,000 hectares compared to Bendigo's 7,800 hectares (And Ballarat has a bloody big lake in the middle of it, work that one out?).

What a silly discussion thread!

Why would we be in any way happy to see more land cleared and built upon? Why would we be happy to see Woolongong or Townsville spread any further? Townsville's public transport system (Hermit Park Bus Sevice) is either non-existant in many parts of the city or by Southern standards is just plain crap. It is a city where you absolutely have to have a car or it costs you at least $10-$15 everytime thatyou climb into a cab.

I totally support decentralisation of population away from the Capital Cities, though with this we should be more European and develop more semi detached housing, medium density flats and smaller suburban blocks. The sign of a truly developed and maturing city is a city that increases it's population without expanding its urban boundaries.

Two cases in Victoria would be Geelong which has 200,000 people and yet only covers 40% more area than Bendigo a city that doesn't efficiently use land with a population of 85,000. A quick look at a map of Victoria clearly shows this. Ballarat on the other hand has a bigger population than Bendigo, but still occupies 5,000 hectares compared to Bendigo's 7,800 hectares (And Ballarat has a bloody big lake in the middle of it, work that one out?).


So your telling people how they should have their homes? If this is such a silly thread, why did you go on to write a three paragraph case representing your point of view?

If you don't care, then don't contribute, if you want to contribute then don't moan about it before hand! Prat!

in reference to the argument over SEQ, there is massive patches of farm land and the like through out the whole area. Its a side effect of the rapid development that has happened, you get some old people that arent ready to retire from their farm just yet and its still making a profit so they keep there farm while suburbs are built right up against there homes.

I mean i have cow paddocks 5 min from my house, my suburb has been established for 20yrs but only in the past 5 has the suburbs around mine taken off. By the way i dont think many of those paddocks and sugarcane fields between brissie and the GC will ever be developed, as part of the SEQ regional plan it said green space like that wouldnt be developed, and those in question were made a special point of.

So your telling people how they should have their homes? If this is such a silly thread, why did you go on to write a three paragraph case representing your point of view?

If you don't care, then don't contribute, if you want to contribute then don't moan about it before hand! Prat!

Yes it is a silly thread because I don't see that sprawling cities eating up productive land is a source for celebration. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. Why shouldn't planning authorities be limiting the metropolitan sprawl? What's wrong with building up? This is a skyscraper forum is it not? If I choose to write three paragraphs is that not better than simply writing a smart alec comment or a one liner? No, I provide an alternative thought process that gives people food for thought.

As for calling somebody whom you've never met in your life time a 'PRAT', yes you're a real hero from the annonymity of your keyboard - It makes me and probably other forumers wonder who's the PRAT in this discussion?

Cheers Mate. :cheers:

Yes it is a silly thread because I don't see that sprawling cities eating up productive land is a source for celebration. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion, no one said that it was anything of a cause for celebration, your making assumptions of other peoples opinions now!

Why shouldn't planning authorities be limiting the metropolitan sprawl? What's wrong with building up? This is a skyscraper forum is it not? If I choose to write three paragraphs is that not better than simply writing a smart alec comment or a one liner? No, I provide an alternative thought process that gives people food for thought.

You don't see the contradiction in your original post????



As for calling somebody whom you've never met in your life time a 'PRAT', yes you're a real hero from the annonymity of your keyboard - It makes me and probably other forumers wonder who's the PRAT in this discussion?

Hey, I got no problem giving you a call and calling you a prat if you like:)

Maryborough-Hervey Bay is over 50k I think and growing faster than just about anywhere. And 100km to the north is Bundaberg which is going ok as well.

Hervey Bay has about 55,000 people and has at least 6 projects on the cards worth more than 10million and is growing rapidly. They have also just scored direct Virgin and Jetstar flights to Sydney with connections to Melbourne and Adelaide.
Maryborough is nudging 30,000 and is not growing quite as quickly as Hervey Bay but is still growing.

At the moment there is about 20 kilometres distance between the two built up areas. Hervey Bay still has a six storey height limit so really the only way to go is out, and chances are it would follow the Highway (if you could call it that) to Maryborough.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion, no one said that it was anything of a cause for celebration, your making assumptions of other peoples opinions now!
Well, when I see maps celebrating urban sprawl and posts about future Melbourne development eating up thousands of hectares of land I don't have much faith in our planning authorities who paradoxically whinge about the fact that we can't expand the public transport system to keep pace. There are a good many forumers from Melbourne who complain that the city's roads and infrastructure aren't keeping pace with the city's expansion. Have you been reading these posts, look at the tone of them. It's a mine's bigger yours thread. Few people are actually using their common sense and pondering the idea of building more high rise as an alternative to expansion and conglomeration.
You don't see the contradiction in your original post???? NO

Hey, I got no problem giving you a call and calling you a prat if you like:)
I gather from your tone that you're probably just a kid so I am not going to be rude to you. Further I am not even going to dignify your immature name calling with a response. I've sent you a private message and I hope that you realise that you are behaving in a beligerant, gutless and rude manner. As far as I'm concerned that's the end of you, you're on my ignore list which effectively blocks out anything further that you have to say in the future.

Cheerio Mate.

^ maybe not everyone wants to live in a cramped apartment. I like having a backyard, a pool and a yard for my dogs to run around in.

I know apartment living has improved massively but it still cant beat having your own backyard and own house.

I did live in a aparment for a year as well so its not like im being a hypocrit

I gather from your tone that you're probably just a kid so I am not going to be rude to you. Further I am not even going to dignify your immature name calling with a response. I've sent you a private message and I hope that you realise that you are behaving in a beligerant, gutless and rude manner. As far as I'm concerned that's the end of you, you're on my ignore list which effectively blocks out anything further that you have to say in the future.

Cheerio Mate.


Just reeling 'em in, just reeling 'em in!

BTW - Adam, thanks for proving my point!
Oh also BTW - the smile at the end implies a joke, or a wind up.
Finally don't worry about dignifying yourself, think you've represented yourself quite nicely!:)

^ maybe not everyone wants to live in a cramped apartment. I like having a backyard, a pool and a yard for my dogs to run around in.

I know apartment living has improved massively but it still cant beat having your own backyard and own house.

I did live in a aparment for a year as well so its not like im being a hypocrit

I appreciate your sentiments, and in a country like Australia where wee have become so accustomed to just being able to buy what we want and generally not want for anything it's a difficult issue to sell to Australians.

It would be nice if we could all have a big yard and our own 4 bedroom house with ensuites, rumpass room and double lock up garage. It would also be nice for everybody to own a V8 car and a four wheel drive. We'd all like to have the best in life, but the reality is that as the planet's population is growing, so too is it's demand for resources. Whilst Australia has abundant minerals, it lacks good land. Land is a finite resource too. Unlike 30 years ago when Aussie cities used to sprawl out and accordingly cost vast amounts of money to provide extension to storm water systems, water supply, electricity grids, public transport routes, not to mention the inconvenience of increased travel times to get from one place to another. The fact is that our cities per-capita are now among the least densly populated in the world.

In 2006, we need to reappraise our priorities. If we continue to allow companies like Delfin (for example - because I'm not just picking on them) to dig a hole in the ground and create an artificial lake and stick a 1000 McMansions (Big two story houses made out out of cheap building materials, stuck on small on small blocks of land) and flog these off for $300,000 then we are creating a social nightmare that future generations (not mine, I'll be long gone in 30 years time) will have to deal with. Today's Caroline Springs, Craigieburn and Roxburgh Park are Melbourne's slums of tomorrow. They are exactly what Noble Park, Springvale and St Albans were thirty years ago.

It's a fact that we live on a continent that is drying out, warming up, and getting less rainfall than we can recall in our history. Australia's arable land has only a few inches of top soil, mostly below that it's useless. Bad farming practicies and land clearing has already seen Victoria lose 15% of it's farm land to dry soil salinification over the last 25 years. Should we be wasting the arable land that we will need in the future on housing estates or perhaps should we be developing the land inside the urban belts? That's the question that I put to all forumers. Not everybody has to go into a flat. Most Aussie urban blocks can easily accommodate two units. Many of the older areas in our regional cities are doing just that. An entire suburb of Ballarat (Wendouree West) is being gradually bulldozed over the next ten years to be completely built over with units. 1000 older commission houses will be demolished and replaced with up to 2000 2-3 bedroom units and single room sitters.

As I see it, for future genrations it won't be a matter of choice, future generations are going to have to consider whether they wish to live in duplexes, semi-detached housing, units, terrace housing, and flats. We need to start considering these things now because it's the future genrations who are going carry these issues.

ha, ^ i understand where your coming from i studied enviromental planning at Uni, but some of what you said is massively exagerated.

Its true urban areas are expanding and taking up arable land, but thats the least of farmers problems today, its the drought and subsidies that drive them off there land. Also not all new dwellings need to be apartments, town houses etc, these things can be counter effected in various ways, decentralisation wont solve the sprawling suburbs but it means we can have more businesses in the suburbs meaning less travel time and the rest.

Also such dense living is not all that its cracked up to be either, you may not need to extend infastructure as far out to the suburbs but you definetly need a higher level of infastructure in that area. Moving everyone into the CBD will bring problems of its own, new water mains, new sewerage lines, new power lines, new roads, new walkways will all need to be built. It is cheaper then funding infastructure for new suburbs but it also deprives people of many things as well.

Basically what im saying is that you cant just ban suburban living, its always going to be there. i cant speak for other cities so much on this topic but in brisbane a sustainable level is trying to be reached, apartment living is increasing massively but so is suburban living. New suburbs are allocated are now set maximum block sizes but this too is being counter effected. With people having smaller blocks theres massive tracts of parkland being built around them to trick them into thinking that is there backyard and not the bird bath out back. But this still doesnt address the problem of sprawl.

Some things are never going to change, in Australia we have so much space and so very little a population that things like sprawl are always going to happen, its one of the reasons many people moved to australia, and theres nothing you can do about that.

A lot of people live out in the suburbs cause they choose to, they like having a backyard and a lack to ride around. They choose to be so far from where they work, its not a decision that has been forced upon them. If it was a financial decision and its all they could afford then i dont see how denser living is going to solve that. I chose a house about 20km from the Brisbane CBD, and i have no dramas with it, i rarely drive to the other side of town and if i go to the city its only to go out clubbing.

Urban sprawl is a side effect of Australia having such a great lifestyle, its the new age of living, apartments may be for some of the yuppis and single people, but for familiys and people who like there space then the suburbs cant be beaten.

Shit can you imagine letting your kids out of the apartment to go play hide and seek in the dark alley beside your building. I think not.

Shit can you imagine letting your kids out of the apartment to go play hide and seek in the dark alley beside your building. I think not.

People from the burbs have a funny idea about apt living sometimes. No, those kids are more likely to be found playing in parks and interacting with other children.

Hervey Bay has about 55,000 people and has at least 6 projects on the cards worth more than 10million and is growing rapidly. They have also just scored direct Virgin and Jetstar flights to Sydney with connections to Melbourne and Adelaide.
Maryborough is nudging 30,000 and is not growing quite as quickly as Hervey Bay but is still growing.

At the moment there is about 20 kilometres distance between the two built up areas. Hervey Bay still has a six storey height limit so really the only way to go is out, and chances are it would follow the Highway (if you could call it that) to Maryborough.

You sound like you know that region well. I once dated a guy who owned half of Maryborough and Harvey Bay - or at least his father did. Had a big fancy house up on Ghost Hill, or was that Swiss Hill? Anyway I see your point, Harvey Bay is the ultimate in urban sprawl and according to recent studies its about to get a hell of a lot worse becuase people who now are finding SEQ too expensive are beginning to set their eyes on the next region up - Harvey Bay!!

People from the burbs have a funny idea about apt living sometimes. No, those kids are more likely to be found playing in parks and interacting with other children.

Too true.

Adamonline great posts too.

Tocc, I think your looking too much at extremes when referring to apartment living. You need to look at European examples. Where I used to live (Graz in Austria) most of the people lived in low rise flats, town houses or other forms of semi detached. There was MORE land and open space around most of these buildings than in your average aussie suburb and because of this rise in density, they could provide proper public transport (trams and buses every 5-10 minutes every day for around 18 hours) AND they kept large tracts of farm land, forest and other nature right into near the centre of the city. So in a city of around 250k people you could ride your bike 5 minutes and be in countryside or forest, or 10 minutes and be in the centre of a dense city centre.

The current problem with Australian suburbs is that unlike suburbs of the mid 20th century, people are (IMO greedily) building houses which are far too large. This means you are looking straight into your neighbour's windows, once you have your pool in the backyard, there is no backyard, thus few large trees outside of parks, yet you still have the negative side of distance, no services and isolation.

So the lifestyle you talk about is actually negated, because you loose so much time commuting in ever growing cities with constantly increasing congestion. When compared to European counterparts, they're living the Aussie lifestyle much more than many Australians are, because they don't spend all their time driving around, they have much better access to open space and they aren't depending on "dark alleyways" for outdoor recreation.

People from the burbs have a funny idea about apt living sometimes. No, those kids are more likely to be found playing in parks and interacting with other children.
like i already said i did live in a apartment for a year so i know what there about. Though it did suit me it did not suit the family of a co-worker in downstairs.

You just gotta admit it, unless your rich and buy a sky home then 99% of apartments are not practical to raise a family in.

^
i lived in an apartment from when I was 5 until 7. It suited my family fine since there were parks, other kids and shops. We could have lived in a house, and originally that is what my parents looked for, but the facilities that could be found close by were supperior to that in the suburbs, with the added benefit that communting to work was pretty much nil.

it was certainly not a skyhome....
http://img459.imageshack.us/img459/3448/tre7uo.jpg

I know a few families that live in apartments in Brisbane, and some are not happy and would rather live in a house, but a similar number like it the way they're living. I have a friend who lives in the southbank apartments on Grey Street, and their are a load of families in there as well.

I don't believe in the slightest that appartment living is impracticle for families.

like i already said i did live in a apartment for a year so i know what there about. Though it did suit me it did not suit the family of a co-worker in downstairs.

You just gotta admit it, unless your rich and buy a sky home then 99% of apartments are not practical to raise a family in.

I dunno, look at countries in European countries where 80% of people live in apartments, it's not like their kids are unsocialised zombies running wild in the streets. Except in France. I lived in an apartment when I was 2-4 years old so for young families apts are really fine as long as the area has plenty of recreational facilities.

ok all im saying is that apartments arent practical for the majority of families, and this is why a heap of people dont want to live in them. You cant argue with the figures that are alrerady there, why there isnt more demand for families to live in apartments. There are good points to live in apartments, but theres just as many if not more why not to live in a apartment.

What im saying is for a bachelor or a couple, or even a familiy with one child apartments are quite suitable, but for families with two kids and teenagers, been raised in a apartment isnt such a great idea.

Just have a look around, dont try and argue me into believing youk, the figures speak for themselves.

Devonport, Ulverstone and Burnie/Somerset will all grow together and become known as the Bass Coast.

At current growth rates, this will happen in about 300 years, if at all.

Interesting.. I've heard this one informally called "Braddon" before (the name of the federal electorate in that area). Bass Coast sounds better though!
Historically known in Tasmania as the North West Coast, it is more likely to be known in future as the Cradle (http://www.cradlecoast.com/Files/00935_CradleCoastAuthorityPortal.asp) Coast (http://www.utas.edu.au/cradlecoast/) (as in Cradle Mountain, nearby)

But those cities really need to join up... there are a lot of people up the northwest (comparatively) but because they are split into so many towns/small cities (Port Sorell, Devonport, Ulverstone, Latrobe, Burnie, Pengiun, Wynyard, Stanley) they don't really have much bargaining power (so far as urban areas do).
Personally, I like all the little towns and cities close together yet separated by some pretty coastal + rural landscapes. That's why I moved here. I'm not sure what you mean by not much bargaining power. Perhaps you could clarify. IMHO, I think the NW Coast does pretty well compared to other places I have lived. Perhaps it's status as a marginal federal electorate (Braddon) has helped with this.

In another sense, in high growth areas on the mainland, authorities have to build infrastructure and services to provide for a burgeoning population. I think in NW tassie, authorities have had to build infrastructure and services to try to stop people moving away!

Hey when will newcastle,gosford and wollongong become mega outlaying cbd's for sydney? And i hear up byron bay down to port macquarie could become like florida like all the resorts and theme park crap.

Hey when will newcastle,gosford and wollongong become mega outlaying cbd's for sydney? And i hear up byron bay down to port macquarie could become like florida like all the resorts and theme park crap.

I think there's a big military area between these two towns (Byron and Port Macquarie).

i reckon the best wayt to determine whether your city/town is in the metro area is to see what TV channels you receive. For example If Mandurah received 7, 9 and 10 then they are part of Perth. If they only receive GWN and WIN then they are a separate city.

I use the same logic on Geelong. It get the same media as Melbourne and is therefore right to be considered a part of Melbourne.If you used that logic then Bunbury would be part of perth too

Does anyone have a list of all the metro populations of Australian cities?
Went to ABS but could only find city populations not metros.
Metro, I mean 100k+.
Thanks

Hi ssiguy, trying to extract useful stats from the ABS is like trying to desex your cat with your teeth. But here's what I found. The capital cities are Statistical Division pops and the other cities are Statistical Districts, but they are both roughly equivalent to metropolitan areas. The Sydney figure includes the Central Coast, which otherwise would have 304 605 people in 9th place.

1. Sydney, NSW: 4 232 078
2. Melbourne, VIC: 3 600 080
3. Brisbane, QLD: 1 774 890
4. Perth, WA: 1 457 639
5. Adelaide, SA: 1 124 315
6. Newcastle, NSW: 505 369
7. Gold Coast-Tweed, QLD/NSW: 469 832
8. Canberra-Queanbeyan, ACT/NSW: 369 365
9. Wollongong, NSW: 274 072
10. Sunshine Coast, QLD: 207 229
11. Hobart, TAS: 202 138
12. Geelong, VIC: 164 458
13. Townsville, QLD: 144 193
14. Cairns, QLD: 120 296
15. Toowoomba, QLD: 116 085
16. Darwin, NT: 109 478
17. Launceston, TAS: 101 984
18. Albury-Wodonga, NSW/VIC: 101 782

These figures are from here (http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/subscriber.nsf/Lookup/D9378143AA1E34FFCA256FCC0073A308/$File/32180_2003-04.pdf) (.pdf), whihc is the most recent I could find. They may have released the 2005 estimates and hidden them, I don't know. I'd like to see the Canadian figures if you have them, thanks.

Cue 36 pages of interstate slap-fights!

Well thanks for that randwicked! I always thought townsville was alot bigger...

They may have released the 2005 estimates and hidden them, I don't know.


There is a thread on the 2005 population estimates in the "News..." section, but you have to be willing to reorder the cities from the way their listed (largest in each state) -

1. Sydney, NSW: 4 254 894
2. Melbourne, VIC: 3 634 233
3. Brisbane, QLD: 1 810 943
4. Perth, WA: 1 477 815
5. Adelaide, SA: 1 129 269
6. Newcastle, NSW: 510 885
7. Gold Coast-Tweed, QLD/NSW: 482 037
8. Canberra-Queanbeyan, ACT/NSW: 371 441
9. Wollongong, NSW: 275 883
10. Sunshine Coast, QLD: 215 864
11. Hobart, TAS: 203 638
12. Geelong, VIC: 165 761
13. Townsville, QLD: 148 767
14. Mackay QLD: 147 347 *
15. Cairns, QLD: 123 408
16. Toowoomba, QLD: 119 133
17. Darwin, NT: 111 300
18. Launceston, TAS: 103 200
19. Albury-Wodonga, NSW/VIC: 100 278

* Mackay isn't in your list.

Thats a great list.Its good to Tassie having two cities in there

Definately the northern rivers area of NSW is absolutely booming. Lets not forget that the Gold Coast itself is a conglomeration(Coomera, Nerang, Southport, Burleigh, Coolangatta) which has then taken Tweed Heads, Murwillumbah, Kingscliffe, Cabarita, right down towards Byron Bay.

I wouldn't consider either the Gold or Sunshine Coasts as part of Brisbane as there is very large areas of land inbetween.

The Mackay area is booming because of the minerals boom. You know the Mackay HSV dealership had the best sales in the last year in the country. And Mackay is a city of at least 80,000 now having sprawled out towards its northern beaches and Sarina to the south.


I'm going to have to disagree with you there, Murwillumbah, Kingscliffe and Byron Bay are all very detached from SEQLD.

Thanks Orfeo, those look right. I found the latest document here (http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/50A9687C793C52E4CA25711D000DF7C9/$File/32180_2004-05.pdf). I don't know about Mackay, though, I thought it had about 80,000? That figure's probably for the whole Statistical Division. Mackay's definitely not bigger than Cairns.

If you include the Central Coast in Sydneys metro, the population would be much closer to 4.5 million.

The 4.2 million figure includes Gosford and Wyong. Lake Macquarie is part of Newcastle SD.

There is no way Mackay has 150,000 people.

And as for a few pages ago, it's fair enough to include Kiama in Wollongong. But it's really pushing it to include Nowra.

There is no way Mackay has 150,000 people.

And as for a few pages ago, it's fair enough to include Kiama in Wollongong. But it's really pushing it to include Nowra.

Mackay City itself has about 78,000 but the region has about 147,000 people.

The City is Booming - lots of buildings under construction and planned.

Mackay City itself has about 78,000 but the region has about 147,000 people.

The City is Booming - lots of buildings under construction and planned.

But that's what we are talking about - city areas.

Check the most recent estimated resident population figures (as of June 30,2005) at the link below:

Regional Population Growth, Australia (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3218.02004-05?OpenDocument)

Page 11 of the pdf document has the capital city and state populations and Page 48 has the Statistical District cities (non capital city urban areas) with population over 30,000 (roughly). This data was only released last Thursday.

There is no way Mackay has 150,000 people.

And as for a few pages ago, it's fair enough to include Kiama in Wollongong. But it's really pushing it to include Nowra.

You're correct on both counts Neo.

Mackay has 70,686 people in its statistical district and grew by 3.2 per cent in 2004-2005, which is much faster than its five-year (2000-2005) average annual population growth rate of 2.1 per cent.

As for the Wollongong statistical district and its inclusions, the LGAs of Wollongong, Shellharbour and Kiama are included giving a population of 275,883.

Nowra-Bomaderry is not included in Wollongong's population and is listed as its own statistical district with a population of 32,887, growing at the cracking pace of 2.7 per cent last year. :)

Cue 36 pages of interstate slap-fights!

:lol: It's funny because it's true!

I've found it funny that some statistical areas count several LGAs wheras others only count proportions of one LGA (Geelong for example)

Great link finn! It seems that Albury-Wodonga has just joined the 100 club!

I think Kadina, Wallaroo & Moonta in South Australia (140km north of Adelaide) will join up in the future

That area only has about 50,000 people at the moment, and with slow growth rates in SA, i cant see that happening.

Great link finn! It seems that Albury-Wodonga has just joined the 100 club!

Yeah, it seems that way, but in previous versions of this publication it had actually crossed the 100,000 mark in about 2003. The ABS did some revisions of previous years though, so now it has just joined the club. They must have been including an area in the population previously that they've decided shouldn't be included as part of the Albury-Wodonga metro?

That area only has about 50,000 people at the moment, and with slow growth rates in SA, i cant see that happening.

Whuh ? I thought Kadina had about 5,000 and half that in the other two towns = maybe 15,000 in the region if you're lucky.

In the next five years bendigo and ballarat should be in the 100 club for sure, and maybe mildura too.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there, Murwillumbah, Kingscliffe and Byron Bay are all very detached from SEQLD.

I'd agree in the case of Mur'bah and Byron, but have you been up there recently? it certainly feels quite connected these days. Kingscliffe is quite built up these days.

In the next five years bendigo and ballarat should be in the 100 club for sure, and maybe mildura too.

Mildura? Doubt that very much - it only has 28,000 people and the entire municipality only has 51,000 people.
Next cities to watch move into the 100,000 club are the ones I have bolded below.

Rank ____ Statistical Division/District _______ Preliminary Estimated Resident Population, 2005
(Aust. Bureau of Statistics)
1 ____ Sydney, New South Wales _______ 4,254,894
2 ____ Melbourne, Victoria _______ 3,634,233
3 ____ Brisbane, Queensland _______ 1,810,943
4 ____ Perth, Western Australia _______ 1,477,815
5 ____ Adelaide, South Australia _______ 1,129,269
6 ____ Newcastle, New South Wales _______ 510,885
7 ____ Gold Coast-Tweed, Queensland/New South Wales _______ 482,037
8 ____ Canberra-Queanbeyan, Australian Capital Territory/New South Wales (see note) _______ 371,441
9 ____ Canberra, Australian Capital Territory _______ 324,786
10 ____ Wollongong, New South Wales _______ 275,883
11 ____ Sunshine Coast, Queensland _______ 212,864
12 ____ Greater Hobart, Tasmania _______ 165,761
13 ____ Geelong, Victoria _______ 165,761
14 ____ Townsville, Queensland _______ 148,767
15 ____ Cairns, Queensland _______ 123,408
16 ____ Toowoomba, Queensland _______ 119,133
17 ____ Darwin, Northern Territory _______ 111,300
18 ____ Launceston, Tasmania _______ 103,200
19 ____ Albury-Wodonga, New South Wales/Victoria _______ 100,278
20 ____ Ballarat, Victoria _______ 88,777
21 ____ Bendigo, Victoria _______ 84,355
22 ____ Burnie-Devonport, Tasmania _______ 79,254
23 ____ Bathurst-Orange, New South Wales _______ 78,223
24 ____ La Trobe Valley, Victoria (incl. Moe, Morwell, Traralgon) _______ 74,924
25 ____ Mandurah, Western Australia _______ 74,010
26 ____ Mackay, Queensland _______ 70,686
27 ____ Rockhampton, Queensland _______ 69,126
28 ____ Bundaberg, Queensland _______ 60,936
29 ____ Bunbury, Western Australia _______ 56,180
30 ____ Wagga Wagga, New South Wales _______ 53,488
31 ____ Coffs Harbour, New South Wales _______ 49,678
32 ____ Hervey Bay, Queensland _______ 47,806
33 ____ Mildura, Victoria _______ 47,605
34 ____ Shepparton, Victoria _______ 47,218
35 ____ Tamworth, New South Wales _______ 43,261
36 ____ Gladstone, Queensland _______ 42,489
37 ____ Port Macquarie, New South Wales _______ 41,141
38 ____ Dubbo, New South Wales _______ 35,753
39 ____ Nowra-Bomaderry, New South Wales _______ 32,887
40 ____ Lismore, New South Wales _______ 31,311
41 ____ Geraldton, Western Australia _______ 31,199
42 ____ Warrnambool, Victoria _______ 31,083
43 ____ Kalgoorlie/Boulder, Western Australia _______ 28,850

Wow jesus, Mildura feels alot bigger when you're there. And are the towns of bathurst and orange joined?!

^^
I didn't realise they were so close either - I guess in the future there will be lots of surprise groupings like that as cities expand.

Mildura? Doubt that very much - it only has 28,000 people and the entire municipality only has 51,000 people.
Next cities to watch move into the 100,000 club are the ones I have bolded below.

Rank ____ Statistical Division/District _______ Preliminary Estimated Resident Population, 2005
(Aust. Bureau of Statistics)
1 ____ Sydney, New South Wales _______ 4,254,894
2 ____ Melbourne, Victoria _______ 3,634,233
3 ____ Brisbane, Queensland _______ 1,810,943
4 ____ Perth, Western Australia _______ 1,477,815
5 ____ Adelaide, South Australia _______ 1,129,269
6 ____ Newcastle, New South Wales _______ 510,885
7 ____ Gold Coast-Tweed, Queensland/New South Wales _______ 482,037
8 ____ Canberra-Queanbeyan, Australian Capital Territory/New South Wales (see note) _______ 371,441
9 ____ Canberra, Australian Capital Territory _______ 324,786
10 ____ Wollongong, New South Wales _______ 275,883
11 ____ Sunshine Coast, Queensland _______ 212,864
12 ____ Greater Hobart, Tasmania _______ 165,761
13 ____ Geelong, Victoria _______ 165,761
14 ____ Townsville, Queensland _______ 148,767
15 ____ Cairns, Queensland _______ 123,408
16 ____ Toowoomba, Queensland _______ 119,133
17 ____ Darwin, Northern Territory _______ 111,300
18 ____ Launceston, Tasmania _______ 103,200
19 ____ Albury-Wodonga, New South Wales/Victoria _______ 100,278
20 ____ Ballarat, Victoria _______ 88,777
21 ____ Bendigo, Victoria _______ 84,355
22 ____ Burnie-Devonport, Tasmania _______ 79,254
23 ____ Bathurst-Orange, New South Wales _______ 78,223
24 ____ La Trobe Valley, Victoria (incl. Moe, Morwell, Traralgon) _______ 74,924
25 ____ Mandurah, Western Australia _______ 74,010
26 ____ Mackay, Queensland _______ 70,686
27 ____ Rockhampton, Queensland _______ 69,126
28 ____ Bundaberg, Queensland _______ 60,936
29 ____ Bunbury, Western Australia _______ 56,180
30 ____ Wagga Wagga, New South Wales _______ 53,488
31 ____ Coffs Harbour, New South Wales _______ 49,678
32 ____ Hervey Bay, Queensland _______ 47,806
33 ____ Mildura, Victoria _______ 47,605
34 ____ Shepparton, Victoria _______ 47,218
35 ____ Tamworth, New South Wales _______ 43,261
36 ____ Gladstone, Queensland _______ 42,489
37 ____ Port Macquarie, New South Wales _______ 41,141
38 ____ Dubbo, New South Wales _______ 35,753
39 ____ Nowra-Bomaderry, New South Wales _______ 32,887
40 ____ Lismore, New South Wales _______ 31,311
41 ____ Geraldton, Western Australia _______ 31,199
42 ____ Warrnambool, Victoria _______ 31,083
43 ____ Kalgoorlie/Boulder, Western Australia _______ 28,850

^^ I'd add the Latrobe Valley to that list in about 50 years. But I definitely think Mandurah and Bunbury can be added to it soon...lol

Mildura's population has been projected to be around 50,000 in less than 50 years time

also in less than 40 years time Id add Victor Harbor & Mt Barker in SA to that list, there rapidly growing, btw Mt Barker is Australia's fastest non-coastal region!!!!!!!

currently Victor's population sways from around 11,000 to 40,000 (in summer)
and Mt Barker pop is around 15 or 20,000 (but its more like an outer suburb of Adelaide these days)

Some of the criteria on that population list just seems weird - think about it this way Geelong according to that is 165K but according to the City Council is 200K There are gaps between some suburbs but in my experience they're still too close together to be considered seperate towns.

Nowra-Bomaderry is rated as only 38,000 people but it's council Shoalhaven City has a population of over 90K - this takes in some other south coast areas.

From these examples above you can infer that the ABS doesn't count populated areas seperated by any significant distance

If that is the case then why are Bathurst & Orange considered the same area - now I've never been to either so I can't say for sure - but look at a map, or even better, Google Earth - they seem to be a good distance apart with no development in between. How is this considered a Metro yet Greater Geelong is seperate towns.

I call it bizarre.

Also look at the figure for Canberra/Queanbeyan vs ACT only - I remember when Queanbeyan used to only have 20,000 people, last time I checked there was 40,000 over the border now according to this it's up around 50,000! That's some exponential growth - yet Canberra (even witht he expansion of Gunghalin) has remained around 320,000 for quite a while.

Some of the criteria on that population list just seems weird - think about it this way Geelong according to that is 165K but according to the City Council is 200K There are gaps between some suburbs but in my experience they're still too close together to be considered seperate towns.

Nowra-Bomaderry is rated as only 38,000 people but it's council Shoalhaven City has a population of over 90K - this takes in some other south coast areas.

From these examples above you can infer that the ABS doesn't count populated areas seperated by any significant distance

If that is the case then why are Bathurst & Orange considered the same area - now I've never been to either so I can't say for sure - but look at a map, or even better, Google Earth - they seem to be a good distance apart with no development in between. How is this considered a Metro yet Greater Geelong is seperate towns.

I call it bizarre.

LOL - the ABS has only just recognised that Toowoomba has 24,000 people living immediately outside the city limits - but who are connected with no gaps to the urban area. For ages they were saying that Toowoomba had 95,000 and now its suddenly 119,000.