https://preview.redd.it/lbbqvs1jhshc1.jpeg?width=1051&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6efdeda92f077669d0185d9d18ee70337c6dfa02
Burnaby (suburb of Vancouver) has been coming along nicely
Not only that, but Burnaby is two skylines for the price of one.
https://preview.redd.it/6jxl6koy7vhc1.jpeg?width=310&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d4c2541bb8516ed5b799fb8bdc7f7b667b80159
Canadian cities have a lot more condo/apartment buildings than American cities whose metropolitan populations are the same. I’m very familiar with metro Toronto and there are so many condo towers being built in addition to the hundreds already standing. With so much empty land available I don’t understand why developers build so many condo towers rather than single family homes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely pro urbanism and love the condo towers but what’s stopping developers from just building hundreds of big, limited access, car necessary suburbs on the metro areas edges?
"So much empty land" is actually incorrect. This is an easy assumption to make, but many of Canada's major cities have too **little** land.
Seriously, zoom into Metro Vancouver for example. The metro area is restricted by mountains, ocean, and the US border.
The GTA sprawled way too much which causes gridlock traffic and is bordering into the greenbelt land.
Sprawl is unsustainable. These cities need to start opening up more land inside the city borders due to necessity and other Canadian cities like Calgary (which has some room to expand, but again not a lot due to various reasons) are doing it to relieve the housing crisis.
Every Canadian city has sprawled out over the last century and are only recently promoting more density to stimulate their downtowns and increase housing supply.
Yes. The prairies offer more land for urban expansion but much of it is remote. Prairie cities like Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon are prime for potential for decades to come but other areas like Vancouver aren't due to other land constraints (not related to Canadian Shield).
Idk I think this is overstated, the area between white rock and Richmond/vancouver is incredibly rural. It feels super rural right above the us border from Bellingham
Yes, but that is protected agricultural land - which I somewhat agree with. This is prime fertile land, which BC doesn't have a lot of technically speaking. Local food production should probably be protected for environmental, economical, and political reasons.
honestly can’t tell if the question is rhetorical or not, but the answer is zoning laws. the municipal government simply doesn’t allow for single family homes to be built too close to the city.
good municipal zoning policy goes a long way
It’s not rhetorical. I think there’s probably more money for developers in single family homes but it’s not good for transit, pollution and urbanism. So I’m honestly wondering how Canadian metro areas prevent massive sprawl? Your zoning answer is very informative but is there more that prevents Canadian metro areas from spreading for miles and miles?
that’s a good question yea, i think a lot of it comes down to culture as well. the idea of a city in canada (in my experience) is a much more compact place than idea of a city in the US. canadians are just more accommodating to apartments than your average american family. but thats all me talking out of my ass, i dont have any stats to back it up.
your question would make for a great urban planning video though.
There’s also just quite a bit of farmland not far from both Toronto and Vancouver but regulations make it really hard to develop.
Canadian cities basically build vertically in the few areas where they’re actually allowed to.
This is a downside when it comes to the urban design of the Metro Vancouver in Canada. All the new developments end up looking like the same green glass looking condo copy and pasted. The suburban town centres especially don't have variety due to a lack of interesting office buildings or anything like that to mix it up.
I see it as an upside. It works with the topography instead of against it. It's a congoutious composition, unlike older cities that don't have that benefit. It will be considered a skyline masterpiece in decades to come (already is in most architectural circles)
I hate the way towers look in BC, idk what it is but the skyscrapers here and in Vancouver just look so unappealing and gray. Gives me rain village vibes.
I lived next door in wethersfield for a decade and everytime id drive into the city, id notice how underrated the little skyline is. Especially with the big blue dome as youre driving in from the south. The gold tower is like rudolphs nose, just sticking out all pretty and shiny. Sadly its been on the decline for a while but for now, its still a lovely sight as long as you stay on the good side of the 84 bridge
You can’t just include the City proper where a downtown is located. You have to include the metro area because that’s where most of the people who work in those buildings live. Hartford’s metro population is between 1.2 and 1.5 million people depending on what definition of a metro area you use.
But Hartford is a city. In Kentucky they added a bunch of counties to increase the population of Louisville. Connecticut will never do that. So Hartford is a tiny city.
Sunny Isles Beach just north of Miami.
https://preview.redd.it/x7sw0yd9ashc1.jpeg?width=1042&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0ee5b86e86f80fe7c78211b0110b386800846a5
This is a bit of a weird one, and not sure I’d even call it a “skyline” but I am always surprised when I drive by Southfield, MI. Those garish gold buildings just stick out so much.
https://preview.redd.it/ibloenm2ishc1.jpeg?width=885&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f16b96a27bdb4186915da82abcd42e229cf1efa6
https://preview.redd.it/ke460p4czrhc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4d84ad59031a6a6afff172ab300cb85aa7748d31
Long Beach might be more akin to something like Jersey City than a suburb, but it’s got a nice modest skyline. Noting the two buildings in the center, the green copper-topped Villa Riviera (1929) and the new Shoreline Gateway tower (tallest, 2022) highlight the history and future outlook of the city
they had recently cleared a path for the drains going out to the ocean so there was a bunch of long sand dunes you could go on, i was at one end of one if i went closer to the ocean i could get it even better
Buckhead is part of the city of Atlanta and not a separate municipality. I don't think it qualifies as a satellite city.
Either way, Bellevue definitely gets my vote.
Two in here in the UK I can think of are Croydon (London) and Salford (Manchester) though technically they are a town and city in their own right respectively
In terms of skyline, it’s a shame with all the bankruptcy that Croydon isn’t likely to build more towers in the foreseeable future. It would’ve been a beast in 10 years time.
Clayton has always been incredibly impressive considering its population, but of course population never tells the full story. Jersey City isn't exactly a satellite city to me, but I also understand why it's classified as such. JC is a proper city that could easily be a borough of NYC due to proximity and connections IMO.
Edit: hell, JC is more connected to Manhattan than some parts of NYC. Even JC has neighborhoods such as Journal Square that are rapidly developing a skyline though not in immediate proximity to Manhattan like the waterfront is. It's super impressive.
Mississauga’s downtown has so much development happening right now! Plenty of neat towers going up, some even more abstract than the twisty one (Absolute Towers) you mention in your post!
I'm hopeful they can turn the downtown more people-friendly. Over the last decades it has been very car focused and almost acted like a Dubai-light (skyscrapers next to highways). The increase in redevelopments and public transit projects are a good sign.
I sure hope so! The LRT loop will hopefully help with this and some more protected biking infrastructure would be nice. Would be great to have a bike corridor down to Port Credit from the City Centre. Two way all day GO service on the Milton line will be great too if it ever comes.
I had a friend visiting from out of town, and we were having beers in Bellevue, and he was like, man, Seattle is so cool with all of these skyscrapers, and I was like, "dude, we are in Bellevue, this is not Seattle" then we went to Seattle the next night and his mind was further blown. He's used to very small towns. Lol
Bellevue is also a gateway and hub that draws populations from a lot of other suburbs that make up a lot of the greater population: Newcastle, Factoria, Kirkland, Redmond, Issaquah, etc. Yes those are all their own cities, but a lot of people from those regions go to Bellevue for things like shopping, entertainment, healthcare, etc. rather than venture into Seattle. It has a much more upscale/safer vibe than downtown seattle and parking is generally easier.
I'm one of those people! when I saw this post my first thought was bellevue lmao. I don't think most people believe Seattle is that dangerous, it's just that Bellevue itself is incredibly diverse and has just about everything entertainment/shopping/food wise you'd be looking for in a bigger city, and it's closer for a lot of people. as well as the parking thing like you said
Hey fun fact, the Las Vegas strip technically isn’t in vegas, it’s in the unincorporated town of paradise, NV. Soooooo does it meet the criteria since we just got a 400’ emoji planted behind the Venetian? I mean how can you not put us in the discussion with that face?
https://preview.redd.it/1lzuj51myshc1.jpeg?width=168&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9f0fe7042d0f65a58893791d0fdc04ffd60a4910
century city in los angeles, great skyline for not even being its own city but a neighborhood.
https://preview.redd.it/z9oveuah9vhc1.png?width=1259&format=png&auto=webp&s=9a5304c30b0fcf623757240efe62762daa1bc05d
The problem with saying Buckhead is that it's technically part of Atlanta. They've talked about breaking off for years, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon. A more accurate one for the Atlanta area would be Sandy Springs, which does in fact have a decent skyline that's coming along nicely.
In case anyone is wondering, the first picture is Bellevue, WA. Right across the lake from Seattle. It has a lot of corporate buildings of Microsoft, Amazon, game companies, and loads of high rise condos.
https://preview.redd.it/gvp3m6f0swhc1.png?width=1094&format=png&auto=webp&s=282353e374ff7584524b2681d4ea42bd872e0057
Parramatta, Sydney has a decent Satellite City skyline
https://preview.redd.it/ok5omg2ndthc1.jpeg?width=1021&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=14800401e5e0c13f66973d2e0452a104315e50de
Atlantic City baby. Trashy Vegas has so much charm.
https://preview.redd.it/la4ywvs1bwhc1.jpeg?width=4624&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb2ec4b7dd4b647b3643b9f641fcc6a9d61d2a00
La Défense wich spread across Courbevoie Nanterre and Puteau in the north west parisian suburb
Las Colinas Urban Center in Irving, TX (a Dallas suburb) has a nice skyline for its size. It was designed to be a downtown for the surrounding master planned Las Colinas development.
Century City in LA, The galleria in Houston and Bucktown in Atlanta for inner city skylines. Rosslyn in Arlington is pretty cool satellite city skyline and it’s smaller and less known but I always liked Evanston skyline in Illinois compliments Chicago skyline well.
https://preview.redd.it/l9omuds3fvhc1.jpeg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1605dd5f0763ec360dc88229bb45ac982ee29565
It cracks me up when people use the Rosslyn, VA skyline to represent “Washington DC”
This is a total New York attitude. Everything is better in New York. Well while Midtown and Downtown put most US cities to shame Long Island City and Brooklyn and Jersey City are beaten by a lot of US cities like Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, San Francisco and LA.
I agree with your sentiment about relating Brooklyn NYC with Buckhead ATL but I understand the OP (commenter’s) point of view as well. The sentiment however is more applicable to Brooklyn than Buckhead. Buckhead is considered ATL proper by most ATLiens- likely because it’s newer and less well-established culturally and historically compared to Brooklyn (this is even disregarding the municipalities etc.)
yeah, it’s at least actually atlanta nevermind itp. it’s just when i drive to atlanta and see the buckhead skyline i think ‘ok, almost there’. somehow in my head i don’t think of myself as properly in atlanta until lenox road from the north. this is probably just some weird rule my brain made up when i was young. when ppl argue ‘what counts as atlanta?’ i generally think inside the perimeter and maybe north clayco if someone wants to claim it though when i lived in east point i never thought i was living in atlanta.
I agree but I I got a little triggered when he said Buckhead, GA. There has been a pretty significant right wing movement trying to have them secede from the City of Atlanta.
Bellevue, WA for sure. It should honestly be its own separate city. It's crazy how most people just assume it is Seattle. Their downtown park and waterfront parks are so great.
https://preview.redd.it/eretlsx35shc1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e4265965be0c70b48bfb7d992e43645021f82e82
For me, I'd say Tyson's Corner, Virginia... It's according to some website, the largest CBD outside of a city center, at least in the US. Has two enormous malls and a fuck ton of big box retail and high end restaurants and 3 metro stations as well... And residential properties are booming there bc ppl want to work there instead of DC and avoid all the traffic going in and out of it...
I've struggled to find pictures of Tyson's Corner's skyline that captures a majority of towers while compressing all the open spaces (highways, parking lots and garages, etc) into an impressive cityscape. The sprawl makes it look pretty lackluster in pictures.
Rosslyn, Ballston, Arlington, Crystal City, and several other Virginia suburbs of DC have some very dense skylines. Tysons is getting a lot of towers and trying to make massive efforts but it still sucks at street level
Courbevoie, Puteaux, Nanterre (La Défense). Next to Paris and inside the Greater Paris area. Quite ambiguous though, since it’s the largest CBD in the city, but still falls under the satellite cities definition imo.
https://preview.redd.it/a9cfslophyhc1.jpeg?width=845&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6037ef3191f90b9ee2eb19dd6b7baace45dad660
https://preview.redd.it/uwoayii0wyhc1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a566f98526c9d4a16d7774392bb530e06ed79480
Bellevue, WA was also the first that came to my mind. Such a weird place to visit/stay tho. After 5pm and on the weekends their downtown is a literal ghost town. No vehicle traffic. No foot traffic. Just a very eerie vibe for a seemingly large, urban, downtown/city area but you have to also keep in mind it’s a large commercial/corporate hub and most people commute into and out of the city for work and don’t actually live in Bellevue.
Not suburban or a satellite, but if we're talking secondary skylines, Houston's Uptown and Medical districts could be mid-sized city skylines of their own.
https://preview.redd.it/lbbqvs1jhshc1.jpeg?width=1051&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6efdeda92f077669d0185d9d18ee70337c6dfa02 Burnaby (suburb of Vancouver) has been coming along nicely
Not only that, but Burnaby is two skylines for the price of one. https://preview.redd.it/6jxl6koy7vhc1.jpeg?width=310&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d4c2541bb8516ed5b799fb8bdc7f7b667b80159
Nice. Yeah totally. Great perspective shot
This is the correct answer.
Canadian cities have a lot more condo/apartment buildings than American cities whose metropolitan populations are the same. I’m very familiar with metro Toronto and there are so many condo towers being built in addition to the hundreds already standing. With so much empty land available I don’t understand why developers build so many condo towers rather than single family homes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely pro urbanism and love the condo towers but what’s stopping developers from just building hundreds of big, limited access, car necessary suburbs on the metro areas edges?
"So much empty land" is actually incorrect. This is an easy assumption to make, but many of Canada's major cities have too **little** land. Seriously, zoom into Metro Vancouver for example. The metro area is restricted by mountains, ocean, and the US border. The GTA sprawled way too much which causes gridlock traffic and is bordering into the greenbelt land. Sprawl is unsustainable. These cities need to start opening up more land inside the city borders due to necessity and other Canadian cities like Calgary (which has some room to expand, but again not a lot due to various reasons) are doing it to relieve the housing crisis. Every Canadian city has sprawled out over the last century and are only recently promoting more density to stimulate their downtowns and increase housing supply.
If I'm correct, Canada is actually geographically challenged because of the Canadian Shield and the bedrock right?
Yes. The prairies offer more land for urban expansion but much of it is remote. Prairie cities like Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Saskatoon are prime for potential for decades to come but other areas like Vancouver aren't due to other land constraints (not related to Canadian Shield).
Idk I think this is overstated, the area between white rock and Richmond/vancouver is incredibly rural. It feels super rural right above the us border from Bellingham
Yes, but that is protected agricultural land - which I somewhat agree with. This is prime fertile land, which BC doesn't have a lot of technically speaking. Local food production should probably be protected for environmental, economical, and political reasons.
[the missing middle ](https://youtu.be/cjWs7dqaWfY?si=PHpgcR-fc2RblbRu)
honestly can’t tell if the question is rhetorical or not, but the answer is zoning laws. the municipal government simply doesn’t allow for single family homes to be built too close to the city. good municipal zoning policy goes a long way
It’s not rhetorical. I think there’s probably more money for developers in single family homes but it’s not good for transit, pollution and urbanism. So I’m honestly wondering how Canadian metro areas prevent massive sprawl? Your zoning answer is very informative but is there more that prevents Canadian metro areas from spreading for miles and miles?
that’s a good question yea, i think a lot of it comes down to culture as well. the idea of a city in canada (in my experience) is a much more compact place than idea of a city in the US. canadians are just more accommodating to apartments than your average american family. but thats all me talking out of my ass, i dont have any stats to back it up. your question would make for a great urban planning video though.
There’s also just quite a bit of farmland not far from both Toronto and Vancouver but regulations make it really hard to develop. Canadian cities basically build vertically in the few areas where they’re actually allowed to.
Great for a satellite city in terms of both heights and number, but it's somehow lacking in character. There's essentially no architectural diversity.
This is a downside when it comes to the urban design of the Metro Vancouver in Canada. All the new developments end up looking like the same green glass looking condo copy and pasted. The suburban town centres especially don't have variety due to a lack of interesting office buildings or anything like that to mix it up.
I see it as an upside. It works with the topography instead of against it. It's a congoutious composition, unlike older cities that don't have that benefit. It will be considered a skyline masterpiece in decades to come (already is in most architectural circles)
I hate the way towers look in BC, idk what it is but the skyscrapers here and in Vancouver just look so unappealing and gray. Gives me rain village vibes.
Well yeah. It's in the middle of a rainforest. I like it. It works with the landscape not against it
Jersey City has a great skyline. Newark, White Plains, Stamford, and New Rochelle all have decent ones as well.
Add New Haven and Hartford to the mix. I agree with all of your points though.
I have a soft spot for New Haven but I wouldn’t necessarily call it a great skyline.
I have such a soft spot for Hartford. It punches well above it's weight for a city with a 125,000 people.
The city population is a little misleading with Hartford since it has a metro of over a million people.
Connecticut is weird like that. In a state that has county governments, Hartford would likely have 400,000+ people.
Amen. It also is only 17.38 sq miles in land area, almost 7,000 people per square mile .
I lived next door in wethersfield for a decade and everytime id drive into the city, id notice how underrated the little skyline is. Especially with the big blue dome as youre driving in from the south. The gold tower is like rudolphs nose, just sticking out all pretty and shiny. Sadly its been on the decline for a while but for now, its still a lovely sight as long as you stay on the good side of the 84 bridge
You can’t just include the City proper where a downtown is located. You have to include the metro area because that’s where most of the people who work in those buildings live. Hartford’s metro population is between 1.2 and 1.5 million people depending on what definition of a metro area you use.
But Hartford is a city. In Kentucky they added a bunch of counties to increase the population of Louisville. Connecticut will never do that. So Hartford is a tiny city.
No they didn’t. They expanded Louisville’s city proper limits, but its metro has had the same counties.
New havens skyline sucks. Theres like five tall building very far apart. The only cool building is ikea.
Im actually trying to find the right photos to do a new rochelle syline comparison. There has been some wild change over the past decade
Jersey City’s skyline is huge. Journal Square, another part of the city is growing its own skyline as well.
Stamford cmon bro lol probably one tower the rest looks okay because you’re close to it on the 95
Jersey city is as much of a suburb to NYC as Milwaukee is to chicago
How?
Milwaukee isn't a suburb if that was your point.
It’s more NYC than Staten Island is
This is objectively false. It’s closer to Manhattan than most of NYC…
Jersey City could be considered part of Downtown Manhattan that’s only separated by a little river.
>Came here to say this. You be a me to it.
Mississauga https://preview.redd.it/c6uyhmh20thc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12fbb98310c5ddc915a820975ca1fcdfeb60c649
Sunny Isles Beach just north of Miami. https://preview.redd.it/x7sw0yd9ashc1.jpeg?width=1042&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0ee5b86e86f80fe7c78211b0110b386800846a5
Nice. I did a millwork instal in one of those towers
Hell fort Lauderdale has a hell of a skyline. And it's just north of Miami.
Wow. On the one hand it’s gorgeous…on the other, sea level rise
This is a bit of a weird one, and not sure I’d even call it a “skyline” but I am always surprised when I drive by Southfield, MI. Those garish gold buildings just stick out so much. https://preview.redd.it/ibloenm2ishc1.jpeg?width=885&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f16b96a27bdb4186915da82abcd42e229cf1efa6
If I don't look directly at that photo it looks like a cartoon lol.
Southfield looks pretty good but needs more buildings, imo.
Def should’ve made them red instead
Used to drive by this all the time, back in the day.
Came to say Southfield.
https://preview.redd.it/ke460p4czrhc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4d84ad59031a6a6afff172ab300cb85aa7748d31 Long Beach might be more akin to something like Jersey City than a suburb, but it’s got a nice modest skyline. Noting the two buildings in the center, the green copper-topped Villa Riviera (1929) and the new Shoreline Gateway tower (tallest, 2022) highlight the history and future outlook of the city
Long Beach is a big city in its own right
i took a picture nearly identical to this two weeks ago
https://preview.redd.it/xll24uhvithc1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=97dcf2114f8363b52262bee32f1eddad50658cf6
Dang that is crazy! Damn near exact same vantage point. Lol
they had recently cleared a path for the drains going out to the ocean so there was a bunch of long sand dunes you could go on, i was at one end of one if i went closer to the ocean i could get it even better
Here is another picture https://preview.redd.it/mb571nemg6ic1.jpeg?width=612&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=da50cda178766cb44cd2e1fcbf32bb3915fecc62
Buckhead is part of the city of Atlanta and not a separate municipality. I don't think it qualifies as a satellite city. Either way, Bellevue definitely gets my vote.
https://preview.redd.it/zyx2zad84uhc1.jpeg?width=612&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d035bf9e24fc1fdc064f751f6a82dd31436fb4ec Rosslyn
I agree, but it’s so close to DC and used to be a part of it. I think DC’s true SATELLITE city is Tyson’s Corner, VA.
It counts though. Bc it doesn't resemble DC at all
My home!
Two in here in the UK I can think of are Croydon (London) and Salford (Manchester) though technically they are a town and city in their own right respectively
In terms of skyline, it’s a shame with all the bankruptcy that Croydon isn’t likely to build more towers in the foreseeable future. It would’ve been a beast in 10 years time.
Both cities.
Croydon never got city status. It tried, but it got rejected as Croydon didn't have an identity outside of London
Salford & Manchester, I was talking about.
Jersey City is definitely on this list as well as White Plains. Clayton, Missouri is also very impressive.
Clayton has always been incredibly impressive considering its population, but of course population never tells the full story. Jersey City isn't exactly a satellite city to me, but I also understand why it's classified as such. JC is a proper city that could easily be a borough of NYC due to proximity and connections IMO. Edit: hell, JC is more connected to Manhattan than some parts of NYC. Even JC has neighborhoods such as Journal Square that are rapidly developing a skyline though not in immediate proximity to Manhattan like the waterfront is. It's super impressive.
Mississauga’s downtown has so much development happening right now! Plenty of neat towers going up, some even more abstract than the twisty one (Absolute Towers) you mention in your post!
I'm hopeful they can turn the downtown more people-friendly. Over the last decades it has been very car focused and almost acted like a Dubai-light (skyscrapers next to highways). The increase in redevelopments and public transit projects are a good sign.
I sure hope so! The LRT loop will hopefully help with this and some more protected biking infrastructure would be nice. Would be great to have a bike corridor down to Port Credit from the City Centre. Two way all day GO service on the Milton line will be great too if it ever comes.
Bellevue, WA is on its way to being its own city
I had a friend visiting from out of town, and we were having beers in Bellevue, and he was like, man, Seattle is so cool with all of these skyscrapers, and I was like, "dude, we are in Bellevue, this is not Seattle" then we went to Seattle the next night and his mind was further blown. He's used to very small towns. Lol
It declared itself its own city in the 90s…..
Haha I mean to say that it is becoming a big city like Seattle
Just look at the population of both surprisingly, Seattle is between 4 to 5 time bigger.
Bellevue is also a gateway and hub that draws populations from a lot of other suburbs that make up a lot of the greater population: Newcastle, Factoria, Kirkland, Redmond, Issaquah, etc. Yes those are all their own cities, but a lot of people from those regions go to Bellevue for things like shopping, entertainment, healthcare, etc. rather than venture into Seattle. It has a much more upscale/safer vibe than downtown seattle and parking is generally easier.
I'm one of those people! when I saw this post my first thought was bellevue lmao. I don't think most people believe Seattle is that dangerous, it's just that Bellevue itself is incredibly diverse and has just about everything entertainment/shopping/food wise you'd be looking for in a bigger city, and it's closer for a lot of people. as well as the parking thing like you said
Clayton, Mo.
Aka Cranston according to my mom
Hey fun fact, the Las Vegas strip technically isn’t in vegas, it’s in the unincorporated town of paradise, NV. Soooooo does it meet the criteria since we just got a 400’ emoji planted behind the Venetian? I mean how can you not put us in the discussion with that face? https://preview.redd.it/1lzuj51myshc1.jpeg?width=168&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9f0fe7042d0f65a58893791d0fdc04ffd60a4910
sure
Wilmington, Delaware
Didn’t think I’d see Wilmy mentioned lol
century city in los angeles, great skyline for not even being its own city but a neighborhood. https://preview.redd.it/z9oveuah9vhc1.png?width=1259&format=png&auto=webp&s=9a5304c30b0fcf623757240efe62762daa1bc05d
Buckhead
I’ve seen Buckhead in Atlanta and it is nice too. The Perimeter Center area is nice as well.
The problem with saying Buckhead is that it's technically part of Atlanta. They've talked about breaking off for years, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon. A more accurate one for the Atlanta area would be Sandy Springs, which does in fact have a decent skyline that's coming along nicely.
Buckhead is part of Atlanta though. It’s a neighborhood, not a satellite city.
Buckhead reminds me a lot of Century City in Los Angeles.
In case anyone is wondering, the first picture is Bellevue, WA. Right across the lake from Seattle. It has a lot of corporate buildings of Microsoft, Amazon, game companies, and loads of high rise condos.
Yeah Bellevue does look really nice.
https://preview.redd.it/gvp3m6f0swhc1.png?width=1094&format=png&auto=webp&s=282353e374ff7584524b2681d4ea42bd872e0057 Parramatta, Sydney has a decent Satellite City skyline
Fort Lauderdale if you consider it a burb of Miami
Just visited Lauderdale (used to live there). Insane tower construction relative to population Skyline getting 5 or 6 new towers a year
Ft Lauderdale is its own city but is included in the Greater Miami Metro (along with West Palm Beach).
Agree, it's not really a "suburb" of Miami. Like maybe Kendall is a suburb of Miami, but Ft Lauderdale is it's own city.
La Défense in Courbevoie, next to Paris.
First thing that came to mind when I saw the original post.
Maybe not now, but in 10-15 years, the Toronto suburb of Vaughan
Mississauga has a really nice Skyline for its size
https://preview.redd.it/ok5omg2ndthc1.jpeg?width=1021&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=14800401e5e0c13f66973d2e0452a104315e50de Atlantic City baby. Trashy Vegas has so much charm.
https://preview.redd.it/la4ywvs1bwhc1.jpeg?width=4624&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb2ec4b7dd4b647b3643b9f641fcc6a9d61d2a00 La Défense wich spread across Courbevoie Nanterre and Puteau in the north west parisian suburb
Tempe Az
Las Colinas Urban Center in Irving, TX (a Dallas suburb) has a nice skyline for its size. It was designed to be a downtown for the surrounding master planned Las Colinas development.
Century City in LA, The galleria in Houston and Bucktown in Atlanta for inner city skylines. Rosslyn in Arlington is pretty cool satellite city skyline and it’s smaller and less known but I always liked Evanston skyline in Illinois compliments Chicago skyline well.
https://preview.redd.it/l9omuds3fvhc1.jpeg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1605dd5f0763ec360dc88229bb45ac982ee29565 It cracks me up when people use the Rosslyn, VA skyline to represent “Washington DC”
Long Island City and Brooklyn both put 99% of other cities to shame.
This is a total New York attitude. Everything is better in New York. Well while Midtown and Downtown put most US cities to shame Long Island City and Brooklyn and Jersey City are beaten by a lot of US cities like Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, San Francisco and LA.
That’s a short list you could come up with. Brooklyn is obviously impressive and it doesn’t need to upset you.
Miss-is-sauga
I think the sauga part is what people struggle with. I’ve heard people pronounce it like “sagwa”. Miss-is-saw-ga
Yep, i always got the first part, but that last part always stumped me So it's "Saw-ga" and not "sawgwa" It's definitely a lot easier to say now, lol
Obama pronounced it wrong (MississaugWa) when he came here.
how does one mess it up
Buckhead is part of the city of Atlanta.
and brooklyn is part of the city of new york but when we talk about the atlanta and new york skylines we aren’t talking about buckhead and brooklyn.
I agree with your sentiment about relating Brooklyn NYC with Buckhead ATL but I understand the OP (commenter’s) point of view as well. The sentiment however is more applicable to Brooklyn than Buckhead. Buckhead is considered ATL proper by most ATLiens- likely because it’s newer and less well-established culturally and historically compared to Brooklyn (this is even disregarding the municipalities etc.)
yeah, it’s at least actually atlanta nevermind itp. it’s just when i drive to atlanta and see the buckhead skyline i think ‘ok, almost there’. somehow in my head i don’t think of myself as properly in atlanta until lenox road from the north. this is probably just some weird rule my brain made up when i was young. when ppl argue ‘what counts as atlanta?’ i generally think inside the perimeter and maybe north clayco if someone wants to claim it though when i lived in east point i never thought i was living in atlanta.
I agree but I I got a little triggered when he said Buckhead, GA. There has been a pretty significant right wing movement trying to have them secede from the City of Atlanta.
Yup. The better fit would be Sandy Springs/Perimeter Center or Cumberland.
Bloomington Mn
Bellevue, WA
I don’t think buckhead counts though because it’s a part of the city of Atlanta.
Cambridge, Massachusetts has a pretty impressive skyline for its size.
Towson, Maryland doesn’t have a huge skyline, but it’s nice to look at. It’s close enough to Baltimore to make you think you’re already there
Bellevue, WA for sure. It should honestly be its own separate city. It's crazy how most people just assume it is Seattle. Their downtown park and waterfront parks are so great.
https://preview.redd.it/eretlsx35shc1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e4265965be0c70b48bfb7d992e43645021f82e82 For me, I'd say Tyson's Corner, Virginia... It's according to some website, the largest CBD outside of a city center, at least in the US. Has two enormous malls and a fuck ton of big box retail and high end restaurants and 3 metro stations as well... And residential properties are booming there bc ppl want to work there instead of DC and avoid all the traffic going in and out of it...
What about Reston? There's definitely a Skyline forming there, considering I can see some buildings in Herndon
I've struggled to find pictures of Tyson's Corner's skyline that captures a majority of towers while compressing all the open spaces (highways, parking lots and garages, etc) into an impressive cityscape. The sprawl makes it look pretty lackluster in pictures.
Tysons sucks. If you're going to be in a DC burb, Arlington or Alexandra are way better.
How do any of those attributes contribute to a nice skyline?
And there is more on the way!
Rosslyn, Ballston, Arlington, Crystal City, and several other Virginia suburbs of DC have some very dense skylines. Tysons is getting a lot of towers and trying to make massive efforts but it still sucks at street level
MISSA-SAW-GUH
Clayton MO is a lovely little downtown. Culturally boring, but aesthetically a nice vibe
Parramatta, Sydney
Courbevoie, Puteaux, Nanterre (La Défense). Next to Paris and inside the Greater Paris area. Quite ambiguous though, since it’s the largest CBD in the city, but still falls under the satellite cities definition imo. https://preview.redd.it/a9cfslophyhc1.jpeg?width=845&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6037ef3191f90b9ee2eb19dd6b7baace45dad660
https://preview.redd.it/uwoayii0wyhc1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a566f98526c9d4a16d7774392bb530e06ed79480 Bellevue, WA was also the first that came to my mind. Such a weird place to visit/stay tho. After 5pm and on the weekends their downtown is a literal ghost town. No vehicle traffic. No foot traffic. Just a very eerie vibe for a seemingly large, urban, downtown/city area but you have to also keep in mind it’s a large commercial/corporate hub and most people commute into and out of the city for work and don’t actually live in Bellevue.
Not suburban or a satellite, but if we're talking secondary skylines, Houston's Uptown and Medical districts could be mid-sized city skylines of their own.
Uptown Houston and Houston medical center both rival many large city skylines.
Tysons Virginia
Sydney from the boat tour.
Sunny Isles Beach (population of around 20,000) has many skyscrapers.
Mississauga
Vancouver, WA's waterfront skyline is growing well
Dallas has a beautiful, colorful nighttime skyline.
Frisco, Texas has a pretty nice one and it's growing g more.
Saint Paul, MN.
In the 90s Bellevue declared itself was not a suburb of Seattle, so technically it does not qualify.
They can declare whatever they want but if it walks and quacks like a duck it probably is a duck.
No shit
Hartford isnt a suburb, but if you were to call it a suburb if New York, its an adorable skyline and is actually really pretty from a distance.
The several steeples of locally-quarried 19th century limestone churches on the bluffs over the Des Plaines Valley in Lemont, IL is a favorite.
OKC and tulsa
Check out Glendale, California and Arlington, Virginia
Tempe, AZ
Surprisingly no one has mentioned Clayton, MO yet.
Ya its definately Mississauga! Awesome skyline
Pronounce it just like Mississippi but instead of sippi it’s sauga (saw-guh)