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.
Lol don't question where I saw. I drove all the way up through Wyoming, across Medicine Bow, through Rocky Mountain Natl Park (Grand Lake etc) .. then out to Georgetown and Idaho Springs, and down to Salida. So I went through a lot. North, Southwest and West.
I know that drive, and it is pretty dry, but there are way more trees in Denver proper and some of the suburbs.
Almost the entire west is pretty dry, even more so if you perspective is from the east. Most of the mountain west cities (Denver, SLC, Boise) are pretty green due to the dominate from of urban neighborhoods being streetcar suburbs with lots of trees. Dallas is the same way honestly.
Dallas tends to be greener, part of that is it gets way more rain, and the other part is live oaks are a dominate tree here. My magnolia tree in the front yard is as green as ever and it is November.
That isn't very good for most people. Having everything in one location would just cause more traffic heading to the core. Besides the outdoors, I can't imagine Denver having anything DFW doesn't have. Or even the similarly sized cities of Philadelphia or Houston (I'm not sure if Boston and DC are comparable because of their CSAs and Boston's much larger urban area).*
Also, the "more people are moving in this direction" doesn't hold much weight on these forums. I think domestic migration is a good indicator of desirability (and, yeah, good incomes and practicality are very desirable for most people-to those who disagree) but most people here will just shrug it off.
*I know you are saying Dallas and Denver but I'm assuming you mean metros since Denver doesn't exactly have those pretty mountains in the city.
I disagree. I would rather have a thriving city center then a dead one. The Denver suburbs are gradually coming in with density and more entertainment.
I disagree. I would rather have a thriving city center then a dead one. The Denver suburbs are gradually coming in with density and more entertainment.
I’d rather have thriving centers throughout the metro and it wouldn’t matter or Meir the city center is one of them. Plus, if a central location is more important, then it should either be somewhere in Arlington/Irving or northern Dallas, not downtown. Though, what we prefer is just that. I’m more interested in knowing how you feel DFW punches below its weight. Perhaps when it comes to its downtown and walk ability (but then nearly all US cities do on a global scale and Dallas isn’t bad compared to its Texan peers) but your wording makes it sound like like DFW punches below its weight in everything besides diversity and shopping, not just those two which I feel are strongly related anyway.
You really said Denver is overrated and then went on to list Aspen and Boulder...two even more expensive cities with way less to offer...
I prefer small cities or suburbs to living in a big city and the vibe of those two cities is better. Both are still close enough to visit Denver whenever you want as well so you can get your "big city" fix if you can call it that in Denver.
I disagree. I would rather have a thriving city center then a dead one. The Denver suburbs are gradually coming in with density and more entertainment.
Dallas doesn't have a dead city center. That's simply not true anymore, especially around Main St. which is active after 5 PM. During the day on weekends, the Arts District/Klyde Warren Park, West End, and Farmers Market are usually busy. There's dead pockets in between, but no not all of Downtown is dead.
Neighboring Uptown & Deep Ellum make up for anything that Downtown lacks, including nightlife, retail, outdoor trails, and pedestrian traffic. You can literally fit most of Uptown, Deep Ellum, Design District, Cedars, Victory Park, parts of Old East Dallas, and Downtown all within the confines of DTLA. The growth and success of Uptown has been spilling back into Downtown, which is merging into one large urban area. Thanks to Uptown, no one really complains about a lacking city center here.
I don't agree with Football stadiums in the middle of Downtown though as you mentioned before. They're only X number of games per year and most have acres upon acres of surface parking lots. It's not good for the surrounding businesses; however, I having it closer to Downtown would be more beneficial than out in Arlington. That's not Dallas's fault though. You can thank soulless Jerry Jones for that. The baseball and soccer stadiums should be in a more urban area because they don't tend to require so much surface parking and they have way more games than in football. The Mavs/Stars currently play in an urban environment.
Dallas doesn't have a dead city center. That's simply not true anymore, especially around Main St. which is active after 5 PM. During the day on weekends, the Arts District/Klyde Warren Park, West End, and Farmers Market are usually busy. There's dead pockets in between, but no not all of Downtown is dead.
Neighboring Uptown & Deep Ellum make up for anything that Downtown lacks, including nightlife, retail, outdoor trails, and pedestrian traffic. You can literally fit most of Uptown, Deep Ellum, Design District, Cedars, Victory Park, parts of Old East Dallas, and Downtown all within the confines of DTLA. The growth and success of Uptown has been spilling back into Downtown, which is merging into one large urban area. Thanks to Uptown, no one really complains about a lacking city center here.
I don't agree with Football stadiums in the middle of Downtown though as you mentioned before. They're only X number of games per year and most have acres upon acres of surface parking lots. It's not good for the surrounding businesses; however, I having it closer to Downtown would be more beneficial than out in Arlington. That's not Dallas's fault though. You can thank soulless Jerry Jones for that. The baseball and soccer stadiums should be in a more urban area because they don't tend to require so much surface parking and they have way more games than in football. The Mavs/Stars currently play in an urban environment.
And that's perfectly fine but I think a lot of people love having al the attractions downtown especially for people that live downtown as it gives them a reason to live and stay downtown which in turn makes our city center more vibrant and attractive then other cities..but that is my opinion.
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.
