SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   City Discussions (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Do smaller central cities in metropolitan areas still have their "own" suburbs? (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=231433)

Docere Jan 1, 2018 9:32 PM

Do smaller central cities in metropolitan areas still have their "own" suburbs?
 
Can one still speak of suburbs of Newark, Paterson, Gary etc.? Or for that matter separate suburbs of St. Paul as opposed to Minneapolis?

To what extent for example do Short Hills or North Caldwell function as suburbs of Newark specifically? Are those with roots in Newark still more common than in NYC?

Capsicum Jan 1, 2018 9:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Docere (Post 8033351)
Can one still speak of suburbs of Newark, Paterson, Gary etc.? Or for that matter separate suburbs of St. Paul as opposed to Minneapolis?

To what extent for example do Short Hills or North Caldwell function as suburbs of Newark specifically? Are those with roots in Newark still more common than in NYC?

What about the West coast? Does something like "suburbs of Oakland" within the Bay Area count?

mhays Jan 1, 2018 10:49 PM

It's never black and white. Every location is pulled by multiple influences. Albany, CA, for example will be influenced by Oakland, SF, Berkeley, and other places to varying degrees. The influence will be different if you're referring to commuting or shopping or various cultural aspects or local media.

Easy Jan 1, 2018 11:09 PM

Long Beach, CA has its own suburbs. Lakewood and Bellflower for sure. To a lesser extent paramount and Cerritos.

Capsicum Jan 1, 2018 11:13 PM

Seems more common on the west coast than the east coast (or at least the explicit label of a "suburb" around a smaller city in a metro area as if it belongs to it, and not to the largest city the metro area is centered around as a whole).

ThePhun1 Jan 1, 2018 11:38 PM

I'm in a suburb of Galveston currently and it very much is in an area not totally culturally connected to Houston, so yeah, it does exists.

tech12 Jan 2, 2018 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capsicum (Post 8033357)
What about the West coast? Does something like "suburbs of Oakland" within the Bay Area count?

I think of the big Bay Area cities as sharing the same suburbs, rather than having suburbs that are exclusively their own, though of course those suburbs that are closer to certain cities send more commuters to those cities.

Emeryville, San Rafael, and Berkeley for example, are suburbs of SF and Oakland, though you could also call them suburbs of SJ and not really be wrong. San Mateo is a suburb of SF, but also of Oakland and SJ technically (and in turn acts as kind of a regional center for San Mateo County). Morgan Hill and Campbell are suburbs of SJ, but just like the others you could call them suburbs of SF/Oakland and technically be correct.

The Bay Area is polycentric area, and I guess you could say it has tiered CBDs. You have SF at the top, with Oakland and SJ also at the top but still lower down the chain in overall importance/influence (you could rank SF as 1a and SJ/Oak as 1b or something). Then you have the secondary suburban centers like San Mateo, Berkeley, Redwood City, Palo Alto, etc. And then you have all of the 100% suburban areas that are sending commuters all over the place to these different CBDs.

iheartthed Jan 2, 2018 12:12 AM

I'm guessing you mean Metro area that is not defined as MSA (since SF/San Jose was mentioned). If so, yes, I can think of a few examples in the east and midwest. DC/Baltimore, obviously. Another example is Detroit/Ann Arbor. The suburbs in Washtenaw County are strongly aligned to Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, while the suburbs just across the county line in Wayne County are strongly aligned to Detroit. Ann Arbor and Detroit are separate MSAs but part of the same CSA.

Flint is also like this to an extent and is also part of the Detroit CSA. But Flint is more loosely connected to Metro Detroit than is Ann Arbor.

Docere Jan 2, 2018 12:17 AM

Burlington is a sort of "shared suburb" of Toronto and Hamilton and Hamilton itself is increasingly integrated into the GTA. To the east, Oshawa has pretty much been integrated into the GTA, but to the extent Oshawa is still a city Whitby is sort of a suburb of both Toronto and Oshawa.

Capsicum Jan 2, 2018 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Docere (Post 8033459)
Burlington is a sort of "shared suburb" of Toronto and Hamilton and Hamilton itself is increasingly integrated into the GTA. To the east, Oshawa has pretty much been integrated into the GTA, but to the extent Oshawa is still a city Whitby is sort of a suburb of both Toronto and Oshawa.

How about Oakville and Milton? Still much more within Toronto's sphere of influence or spillover from Mississsauga than influenced by movement from Hamilton and Burlington?

drummer Jan 2, 2018 12:36 AM

My dad lives in a town outside of Austin, Texas. His town is about 45 minutes from Austin - eventually it will be connected, but not yet, but the county that he's in is part of CAMPO. There are, however, about 8 smaller towns that are entirely dependent on his town for jobs, shopping, schools, entertainment, etc. It is largely independent of Austin at this point, but a lot of folks who live there still think of themselves as "not quite an Austin suburb"...so it's sort of suburbs of a not-quite-suburb (albeit on a smaller scale).

I will say this gets really confusing when you think of places like Dallas-Fort Worth that has 12 cities with over 100,000 people, not including Dallas and Fort Worth. Arlington is a suburb with a population pushing 380,000, I think (check me on that). After that there are tons of cities with smaller populations that are true suburbs. Many of these larger cities are still bedroom communities, but a lot of them have significant employment centers and industries in their own right. Of course, a lot is connected to Dallas and Fort Worth - and those two will always be the main hubs - but it seems that a lot of cities are suburbs in some respects and hubs in others, depending on what part of the metroplex you're in. It's a big confusing mess to me when I try to consider what qualifies as a suburb in those cases.

Capsicum Jan 2, 2018 12:40 AM

Suburbs themselves having smaller suburbs. How far can it go?

Reminds me of this poem.

"Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so, ad infinitum.
And the great fleas, themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on."

Docere Jan 2, 2018 1:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capsicum (Post 8033460)
How about Oakville and Milton? Still much more within Toronto's sphere of influence or spillover from Mississsauga than influenced by movement from Hamilton and Burlington?

Mississauga is a full-fledged suburb, not a city that later got incorporated into the Toronto metropolitan area.

Chef Jan 2, 2018 2:01 AM

All of the eastern suburbs in the Twin Cities are suburbs of St Paul.

Cirrus Jan 2, 2018 5:23 AM

Yes, absolutely. There are at least two categories that are present in most if not all metro areas:

1. Direct suburbs of satellite cities.
This is pretty self explanatory. Most large US cities have other smaller cities on their fringe, which are gradually becoming suburbs of the main city, but which have suburbs of their own. For example, Frederick, MD is a satellite city of Washington, DC. It was once independent, but is now effectively a suburb. Frederick has its own suburbs, such as Walkersville, MD. With mayyybe one or two exceptions, you can find places like this surrounding all large US cities. Denver > Boulder > Gunbarrel. Dallas > Denton > Sandy Shores. Atlanta > Marietta > West Hampton.

2. Residential suburbs of mixed-use activity centers.
All metro areas have things called "activity centers." You might also call them "edge cities" or "suburban downtowns." These are suburban places that are clearly within the main metro area, but which have a lot of jobs, with office towers, shopping, etc. Picture a shopping mall with a cluster of high rises in the same area. These places often have residential areas nearby that are clearly all part of the same overall metropolis, but which rely on the more local activity center/edge city for most of their services, and could be called suburbs of the activity center. Think DC > Tysons Corner > Great Falls, or Denver > DTC > Greenwood Village, or Dallas > Las Colinas > Valley Ranch, or Atlanta > Perimeter Center > Dunwoody.

ThePhun1 Jan 2, 2018 8:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer (Post 8033475)
My dad lives in a town outside of Austin, Texas. His town is about 45 minutes from Austin - eventually it will be connected, but not yet, but the county that he's in is part of CAMPO. There are, however, about 8 smaller towns that are entirely dependent on his town for jobs, shopping, schools, entertainment, etc. It is largely independent of Austin at this point, but a lot of folks who live there still think of themselves as "not quite an Austin suburb"...so it's sort of suburbs of a not-quite-suburb (albeit on a smaller scale).

I will say this gets really confusing when you think of places like Dallas-Fort Worth that has 12 cities with over 100,000 people, not including Dallas and Fort Worth. Arlington is a suburb with a population pushing 380,000, I think (check me on that). After that there are tons of cities with smaller populations that are true suburbs. Many of these larger cities are still bedroom communities, but a lot of them have significant employment centers and industries in their own right. Of course, a lot is connected to Dallas and Fort Worth - and those two will always be the main hubs - but it seems that a lot of cities are suburbs in some respects and hubs in others, depending on what part of the metroplex you're in. It's a big confusing mess to me when I try to consider what qualifies as a suburb in those cases.

Round Rock or San Marcos?

ThePhun1 Jan 2, 2018 8:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capsicum (Post 8033479)
Suburbs themselves having smaller suburbs. How far can it go?

Reminds me of this poem.

"Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so, ad infinitum.
And the great fleas, themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on."

It's no different than the stars and planets. The planets revolve around the sun, moons revolve around the planets.

saybanana Jan 2, 2018 9:29 AM

Pasadena, CA (pop. 142,000) where they had the Rose Bowl/Parade today is a small city about 10 miles Northeast of Downtown LA. There are major industries like JPL and schools like Cal Tech, PCC, Art College. Major museums and a decentnumber of mid rise office buildings and major shopping and dining options.
I think the suburbs for this city are Sierra Madre, Arcadia, La Canada Flintridge, South Pasadena, San Marino which are primarily residential cities.

LA21st Jan 2, 2018 1:11 PM

Agreed on Pasadena.

It feels like Long Beach has it's own suburbs. Anaheim/Santa Ana probably too.

hauntedheadnc Jan 2, 2018 1:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capsicum (Post 8033479)
Reminds me of this poem.

"Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so, ad infinitum.
And the great fleas, themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on."

Considering that a great many suburbs function basically as parasites, what a wonderful way to describe them!


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.