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.
But I do know that Baltimore and Detroit would be better without the central cities. Metro Detroit actually isn't that impoverished and has a relatively healthy economy, and Baltimore has some very wealthy suburbs and pleasant areas outside the city.
If you remove the city of Las Vegas, the Strip would still be there. Without Denver, the Colorado Front Range would still be nice. Without Reno itself, the metro area still includes part of the Lake Tahoe shoreline.
But I do know that Baltimore and Detroit would be better without the central cities. Metro Detroit actually isn't that impoverished and has a relatively healthy economy, and Baltimore has some very wealthy suburbs and pleasant areas outside the city.
If you remove the city of Las Vegas, the Strip would still be there. Without Denver, the Colorado Front Range would still be nice. Without Reno itself, the metro area still includes part of the Lake Tahoe shoreline.
Yeah but almost all of the cultural offerings those cities have are located in their center cities. Metro Detroit at least has a couple of interesting spots around the metro, especially if you include Ann Arbor, but does Baltimore really have anything outside of the city proper that would be considered a draw?
It’s the same way for most cities. I think someone earlier in this thread also made the same statement about St. Louis. But St. Louis still has some of the most wealthy areas in the entire metro on its west end. Even with Clayton and St. Charles, it’d still be severely downgraded, even more so than Detroit I think.
Hamtramck is like Evanston and Oak Park? Are you kidding? Have you ever been there? I had work there ( I stayed in downtown Detroit thank goodness) and thought it was the most interesting, depressing place I had ever been to. Formerly Polish and now Muslim, they had a call to prayer over a speaker, and I couldn't wait to get back to Chicago after my depositions were over.
Royal Oak and Ferndale are the closest things to Evanston and Oak Park, and it is not even close. There are 6.5 million people in Chicago's suburbs, and without Chicago they would survive just fine.
You may have forgotten about Ann Arbor and Birmingham. Also, there's Windsor, Ontario right next door. With Oakland's county's lakes, rolling hills, trees, and upscale developments coupled with downtown Royal Oak, Ferndale, Berkley, Northville, Plymouth, Dearborn, Rochester, Wyandotte, Mt. Clemens, etc., Detroit's metropolitan area offers just as much as most other metro areas. If you have another deposition, don't go to Hamtramck if the Azan freaked you out. Grosse Pointe is up the street. lol
1. Houston -i feel like Houston doesn't offer a ton its suburbs dont
2. Miami- Miami Beach, Coaral Gables and lots of other more desirable areas than 90% of Miami.
3. LA- Ill take Santa Monica any day.
4.Dallas - Same thing as Houston but it has some ritzier suburbs I hear
5. Boston - Without Boston, you lose a lot of diversity and history. Still have Cambridge/Somerville/Brookline/etc.
6. DC - Losing a ton fo nightlife and cultural events and urbanity- but the Cambridge alternatives arent as strong.
7. New York - As much as I like NNJ and SWCT-most people don't like them. Theyre either exclusive or pretty gritty/grungy areas. And you're losing the most important/famous cty in the universe.
8. Chicago- Same as Boston/DC but even more bland suburbs. Chicago IS the midwest to many people.
I wouldn't call all suburbs outside of Chicago, bland. I'd say some of the communities outside Chicago have underrated walkability. Like say Elgin, La Grange, Elmhurst, and Geneva, just to name a few examples. And there are other old feel suburbs too that'd I think I'M remind someone from Boston of the feel of their nicer suburbs, i.e. Lake Forest. Not all Chicago suburbs are Schaumburg, Orland Park, or Glenview-like in their suburb feel, if that's what you were alleging. And you must be forgetting Metra does connect communities and suburbs outside Chicago, pretty well.
Speaking of the Boston metro(not saying all of Boston's suburbs sick mind you), some of those north suburbs near US 1 had that suburban feel I didn't care for much, when I street viewed that area.
Moving away from Chicago and Boston, ANY city with very big city limits (often due to a city and county government merger) would be hurt, if the primary city was removed. I'm thinking of like Indianapolis, and Jacksonville for what I mean. Louisville would be hurt too, since IIRC that city and Jefferson County have a merged city county government. Though Indy's metro does have Carmel, which is nicer than your average suburb. And is a RARE suburb, where most major intersections were redone into roundabouts.
I wouldn't call all suburbs outside of Chicago, bland. I'd say some of the communities outside Chicago have underrated walkability. Like say Elgin, La Grange, Elmhurst, and Geneva, just to name a few examples. And there are other old feel suburbs too that'd I think I'M remind someone from Boston of the feel of their nicer suburbs, i.e. Lake Forest. Not all Chicago suburbs are Schaumburg, Orland Park, or Glenview-like in their suburb feel, if that's what you were alleging. And you must be forgetting Metra does connect communities and suburbs outside Chicago, pretty well.
Speaking of the Boston metro(not saying all of Boston's suburbs sick mind you), some of those north suburbs near US 1 had that suburban feel I didn't care for much, when I street viewed that area.
Moving away from Chicago and Boston, ANY city with very big city limits (often due to a city and county government merger) would be hurt, if the primary city was removed. I'm thinking of like Indianapolis, and Jacksonville for what I mean. Louisville would be hurt too, since IIRC that city and Jefferson County have a merged city county government. Though Indy's metro does have Carmel, which is nicer than your average suburb. And is a RARE suburb, where most major intersections were redone into roundabouts.
Chicago's suburbs are nice for living and pleasant to walk around, but they really don't offer much to the average tourist. You have the Indiana Dunes, Northwestern, the Frank Lloyd Wright houses in Oak Park, maybe the Brookfield Zoo, and I'm struggling to think of many other significant attractions. Fermilab exists although IDK how often it offers tours. Maybe Woodstock if you're a hardcore Groundhog Day fan, or Joliet for the Blues Brothers... But it's much less than what the suburbs of a lot of other big metros offer.
Yeah Chicago city is where 90% of tourism is. No Disneyland or Miami Beach or Vegas Strip. Larger city proper limits and even of interest border suburbs. Means city is tourist central and core by far. Even the older burbs of interest for most are those with transit from the core.
It is LA and Miami regions for me for this thread's answer.
South Florida centered around Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood, with West Palm playing #2, is still a pretty significant metro area of 3 million!!! It'd still be a fun place without Miami-Dade.
South Florida centered around Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood, with West Palm playing #2, is still a pretty significant metro area of 3 million!!! It'd still be a fun place without Miami-Dade.
You can take Miami proper out of MiamiDade County and it's still a county of nearly 2.3 million people. Similarly with Broward and Palm Beach Counties, you can lose Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm, and both counties would still be substantial.
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.