https://padlet.com/janeduro/au4qmbprxr1f4wh8 en-us 2020-09-09 01:10:37 UTC 2020-09-09 03:55:00 UTC hello@padlet.com janeduro https://padlet.com/janeduro/au4qmbprxr1f4wh8/wish/729807826 The majority of early migrants to Australia were duos.  For me, this was the statement that kicked off a long reflection on the composition and social context of Australian suburbs.  When thinking of suburban Brisbane, what strikes me the most is that nuclear families dominate.    Census data shows that inner city Brisbane residents average 1.4 children per household which is significantly less than in Carindale - a much more 'suburban' community where the average household contains 1.9 children. These figures show  that large backyards are favoured by families with children.  The historical context of this social phenomena was surprising but I believe it is ultimately the basis for Australia's modern idea of Suburbanity.  Australian cities were created on the back of an already modern society and as a result, our suburbs are extremely car-reliant. 

I spent a few  years living in London - a city with a completely different spatial and social configuration from Australian cities.  Localities in London are compact and walkable.  Almost everything one needs for daily life can be accessed quickly and easily.  I found while living there that the concept of walking to what you need created clusters of communities that were focused around the specific attractions of the area.  The area I lived in was affectionately called 'Little Istanbul' because of the wide array of Turkish restaurants, shops and food markets.  In turn, the majority of my neighbours were of Turkish (or nearby) decent.  This concept of Turkish families moving to an area for easy access to Turkish services has created a sub-community within the greater London context.  The community was full of large extended families who settle together and share in household chores, family business and therefore in the wider community - something that is lacking in Australia's nuclear family-centric society.  

I feel that the lack of a pre-existing familial community and a lack of walkability to required services within the Brisbane area has resulted in a lack of community in the suburbs.  Whereas in London people are drawn together by shared interests or backgrounds, in Australia we are largely grouped by socio-economic conditions as gentrification of inner city areas forces less wealthy residents to the middle, and then outer suburbs.  While I agree that a socio-economic profile is a defining social element in itself, the result is that Australian suburbs lack the diversity and creativity created by a community building the urban space according to their needs. 

The Great Australian Dream is still alive and well in the minds of Australians but  it's shape has changed since earlier times when people reached for large backyards and a sense of 'home'.  My opinion is that the modern Australian suburb lacks vibrancy and a sense of community and that Australians are barreling towards the idea of home ownership as the Australian Dream when the reality is they are catching themselves in soulless communities lacking social cohesion and individuality.  

As home ownership becomes harder to obtain, communities are being created further from the city  where spatial configurations are forced upon residents.  The design and services of these outer suburbs such as Flagstone or Yarrabilba are largely prescribed by Council, the State Government and the developer.  Residents have little input into the types of facilities and services available to them and even have little chance for individuality as house design is largely dictated by developer's covenants and planning requirements.  The idea of establishing a non-residential use within a residential area is essentially impossible and we are left with large blocks of uniform housing with restricted access to more cosmopolitan services and facilities that are necessary to create a sense of 'home' within a community.  

This is reinforced by the fact that commercialism and increased wealth in Australian society has lead to the demand for bigger dwellings, (Troy, 2004).  Bigger homes has lead to a reduction of  private backyard space – the one aspect previously mentioned to be valued by families.  Valuation principles and Australia’s housing market as an economy means that people want a bigger bang for their buck – more bedrooms means more money and this drive for money overtakes the usefulness of the house as a ‘home'.  This means modern-day Australian suburbs represent the 'worst of both worlds' discussed in the lecture.  These new communities represent neither a sense of home, nor do they provide residents with the cosmopolitan aspects that can facilitate community through vibrant, engaged spaces.  

Interestingly, although the country's higher powers insist on separation between residential and non-residential uses in modern Australian suburbs, house prices have been seen to increase within close proximity to more cosmopolitan services such as cafes, corner stores and bars (Hockingstuart, 2020).  To me, this shows that integrating more traditionally inner-city facilities to our suburban areas would likely improve the sense of community in Australian suburbs.  This could save the Australian Dream from becoming a synonym of home ownership, and instead reinstate it's meaning as having a sense of home, within both the home itself and the greater community.   It is no coincidence that Londoners stay in their homes an average of 20.5 years -  15 years longer than the average Australian (Lewis, 2019)]]> 2020-09-09 02:55:14 UTC https://padlet.com/janeduro/au4qmbprxr1f4wh8/wish/729807826