Cities with no trendy, hip, or "cool" suburbs/bordering cities. Cities without? (credit, shop)

[aries4118]

Atlanta: Decatur

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by tarheel84

For Atlanta I think Decatur is the closest thing in the region.

Yes.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

Misread title last post.

NYC--> Hoboken
LA--> Hollywood/Santa Monica
Chicago--> ?
Houston--> ?
Dallas--> Arlington, Ft. Worth
Boston--> Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline
Atlanta--> Decatur
DC--> Arlington
San Francisco--> The whole damn Bay Area
Phoenix--> Scottsdale
Miami--> Miami Beach
Orlando--> Winter Park

Like, duh.

[whereiend]

None of the Texas cities have a hip suburb IMO. I can't stop laughing at the idea of the Woodlands qualifying. The closest is Denton I guess? That's still a big stretch, though. (Denton is an artsy college town but not really a hip area to live at >=22.) Generally the hip places are all in Austin, Dallas, and Houston proper.

[annie_himself]

Houston's closest thing to that is Galveston but not a traditional bedroom community. For New Orleans is Metairie. And Denvers would be Boulder, or Aurora for an actual suburb.

[range extender]

Originally Posted by frimpter928

There are a lot of cities in the US that have a lot of trendy suburbs or bordering cities. By that I mean suburbs where people go to hang out for nightlife, that have cool art scenes, are that are a destination for citizens and visitors. For example some cities that DO have them:

LA - Santa Monica, West Hollywood.

Miami - Miami Beach

San Francisco - Oakland

Phoenix - Scottsdale


However, when you look at a city like Chicago, it really has no trendy or hip suburbs or neighboring cities. The closest would be Evanston or Oak Park, and they are very nice suburbs with things to do, but most people would not consider them hip, trendy or cool.

...Oakland is more of a ghetto..I think you mean Berkely or Palo Alto..

[Space_League]

Originally Posted by range extender

...Oakland is more of a ghetto..I think you mean Berkely or Palo Alto..

they call it west coast Brooklyn . It's legit the epitome of what we're talking about imo.Most cities don't really have them. NYC doesn't have one (hoboken isn't hip lol. theres no place hip in north jersey)

[Citykid3785]

Twin Cities: none

Atlanta:
Marietta
Alpharetta
Sandy Springs

While they have suburban parts, they also have CDB's with trendy restaurants, breweries, indie coffee shops, play houses, etc. I know many that go to these places on date nights.

[ram2]

Originally Posted by jessemh431

I don't personally find any of Cincinnati's suburbs to be cool. Covington and Newport have some nice urban areas, but I wouldn't say they're trendy or cool. They are nice though.

What about Mt. Adams?

[mstnghu2]

Originally Posted by range extender

...Oakland is more of a ghetto..I think you mean Berkely or Palo Alto..

Oakland stands on its own as a city and is definitely not a suburb of San Francisco. Only non-locals would think otherwise. It also has plenty of "hip, trendy or cool" neighborhoods within its city limits.



As far as the rest of the Bay Area goes, there are many "hip, trendy or cool" places in the cities/towns surrounding the Bay Area's big cities of San Jose, SF and Oakland.