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.
SW/West burbs of Minneapolis. Major employment center (Bloomington, Edina, EP, Minnetonka, SLP), 3 upscale malls, every retailer inanigable. Many people live, work, shop in these areas and go in to Minneapolis only for entertainment.
Chicago - 2 main areas. North burbs centered around Glenbrook, Northbrook and Deerfield. Again, lots of employment, retail and lifestyle shopping. The other area is west burbs (Oak Brook, Naperville, Wheaton etc).
When I moved to Eden Prairie MN I remember reading about 'edge cities'
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_city
"term for a concentration of business, shopping, and entertainment outside a traditional downtown (or central business district) in what had previously been a residential or rural area."
People in this thread are just listing suburbs with "downtowns" or those that are large commercial centers. Neither of which are anything special, and suburbs still rely on the core city.
Not sure when you left Phoenix, but the city proper has made a resurgence since light rail came in
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
None. None of them. These burbs exist solely because of the anchor cities' infrastructure and resources.
Not necessary, places like Andover, MA, Tewksbury, MA, Hingham, MA etc have only about Tripled/quadrupled since 1900, which is roughly in line with US growth.
Newburyport, Plymouth, Lowell, Lawrence, Brockton, Haverhill, Lynn, Salem, Gloucester, Weymouth, Etc really haven't changed all that much since about 1900, And all are pretty independent of Boston.
Heck there are people from Gloucester who brag about how they have never been over the bridge onto the mainland.
People in this thread are just listing suburbs with "downtowns" or those that are large commercial centers. Neither of which are anything special, and suburbs still rely on the core city.
Read the edge city wiki link I provided. It's kind of fascinating IMO. Some of these super suburbs have as many corporate jobs as their downtown counterparts.
Not necessary, places like Andover, MA, Tewksbury, MA, Hingham, MA etc have only about Tripled/quadrupled since 1900, which is roughly in line with US growth.
Newburyport, Plymouth, Lowell, Lawrence, Brockton, Haverhill, Lynn, Salem, Gloucester, Weymouth, Etc really haven't changed all that much since about 1900, And all are pretty independent of Boston.
Heck there are people from Gloucester who brag about how they have never been over the bridge onto the mainland.
No one is arguing that all suburbs occupy the same tear, but rather that they exist because of the poor city. Those suburban office parks exist because the big city with its airports, rail, highways, and population make them possible.
None. None of them. These burbs exist solely because of the anchor cities' infrastructure and resources.
Not true regarding cities like Boston, New York City and Philadelphia where many of the suburbs have independent functioning governments since the colonial era. Cities like Patterson, Newark, Camden etc. were already growing before they became suburbs. And there are many communities around Boston and New York City that were either working seaports or resort areas.
I would say the same thing with a later date for cities like Chicago, Richmond and Atlanta. There are probably many more.
Not true regarding cities like Boston, New York City and Philadelphia where many of the suburbs have independent functioning governments since the colonial era. Cities like Patterson, Newark, Camden etc. were already growing before they became suburbs. And there are many communities around Boston and New York City that were either working seaports or resort areas.
I would say the same thing with a later date for cities like Chicago, Richmond and Atlanta. There are probably many more.
Patterson, Newark , and Camden are not suburbs. They're satellite cities.
No one is arguing that all suburbs occupy the same tear, but rather that they exist because of the poor city. Those suburban office parks exist because the big city with its airports, rail, highways, and population make them possible.
If you believe Lowell, Lawrence, or Salem Massachusetts (or even Waltham) exists because of Boston then you need a history lesson
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.
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.
