Jump to content

Melbourne suburbs ranked by liveability


Bobths

Recommended Posts

This has got to be a joke. For instance no one in their right mind would choose to live in Frankston North with its poverty, unemployment, crime and drug problems yet it is ranked much higher than Frankston and Frankston South which are vastly nicer areas. Frankston North has low property prices for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankston South is further away from amenities, public transport, shops etc.

 

Frankston North is much better serviced than South.

 

I noticed Mount Eliza wasn't even on the list which was odd.

 

 

And commiserations to anyone living in Skye - the worst suburb in Melbourne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The quiz on a related Age article was good - answer the questions on what is important to you in a suburb (proximity to trains, trams, parks, cafés, shops etc) and your house buying budget and it gives you the top 5 suburbs that fit your requirements. Happily, the suburb I live in is one of the 5 it picked out :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The quiz on a related Age article was good - answer the questions on what is important to you in a suburb (proximity to trains, trams, parks, cafés, shops etc) and your house buying budget and it gives you the top 5 suburbs that fit your requirements. Happily, the suburb I live in is one of the 5 it picked out :-)

 

Have you got a link to this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankston South is further away from amenities, public transport, shops etc.

 

Frankston North is much better serviced than South.

 

I noticed Mount Eliza wasn't even on the list which was odd.

 

 

And commiserations to anyone living in Skye - the worst suburb in Melbourne.

 

Thanks for pointing that out. I do live in Skye and have done for the last 30 years. I always thought I was lucky living on 8 acres of peaceful paradise. Now I find I have been living in the worst place in Melbourne!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for pointing that out. I do live in Skye and have done for the last 30 years. I always thought I was lucky living on 8 acres of peaceful paradise. Now I find I have been living in the worst place in Melbourne!

 

That would be nice. If you are happy that is all that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really comes down to where we work how much land we want to live on. I would be dreadfully unhappy if I had to live on the postage stamp my daughter lives on in Brunswick with no car parking. Also my health would suffer too. I have just spent a weekend in the city and came home to asthma attack, the trees and the pollution does not agree with me at all. As far as I am concerned living on acreage close to a small community is heaven. I hate Domain and its ilk telling everyone where they should live. We live where we want to live and I do not want to live in a high density place and I am not alone. Of course they do not do that survey as it would turn out different to what they want to achieve, higher prices in inner Melbourne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which suburbs are you referring to?

 

From the south east suburbs lowest on the list the majority have a median house price that is still out of reach for a lot of first home buyers wanting to live in 'Melbourne' I suppose this is why people are being forced further out past what is classed as Melbourne. Not saying that these suburbs are overpriced or that they shouldn't be where they are on the list based on the criteria that was set. Just an observation.

 

292 Lynbrook $481,500

293 Narre Warren North $848,000

294 Langwarrin $442,000

300 Berwick $515,000

306 Lyndhurst $520,000

316 Narren Warren South $470,000

320 Sandhurst $571,000

321 Skye $420,000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have given weighting to proximity to CBD and/or beaches. But you can tell that by looking at a map. They then give points for lots of public transport, restaurants and shops. This will also advantage densely populated urban areas. And that's great if that's what you want. But if you have kids, want space and safety then some of the low scoring outer suburbs do well.

 

My own suburb (Diamond Creek) ranks very low. We can see kangaroos from our windows. We are told we have no open spaces - but we have a river, two ovals, extensive open parkland, woodland, every area of housing has a reserve in the middle of it. We are told we don't have shops of restaurants - but we have plenty of shops including a large Coles, a smaller IGA, we are one suburb away from a large Woolworths in one direction, one suburb away from a large shopping centre in another direction. Nearby, Eltham North ranks higher than both Diamond Creek and Eltham - being praised for its buses. But the buses go to Eltham and Diamond Creek. Eltham North lacks shops, restaurants etc. as people go to Eltham. Eltham North has no station, no secondary school, no amenities. So how does it beat Eltham and Diamond Creek?

 

Then, Diamond Creek is criticised for lack of schools. But it has a school, and nearby suburbs also have schools. If you live in a suburb that is not densely populated, how many schools do you need?

 

Personally, I find living in a spacious house with a large-ish garden, walking distance to station and supermarket, local wineries, kids have space and independence, low crime makes for a pretty liveable area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...