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.
Small towns with public transit are, sadly, almost non-existent in Colorado. Many of the small towns, in addition to lacking mass transit, have adopted the "big box/strip mall in the cow pasture" mentality that has killed the Main Streets and put the shopping district where people have to have a car to access it. And, not only the shopping is going that way--soo, too, with the schools, hospitals, medical clinics, churches, etc. So, driving is just about a necessity just about everywhere in the state. Unfortunate that it has become that, but that's the way it is. Just another example of the "dumbing down" of America.
Yes that is unfortunately very true. I wish it was not because many of these towns do offer a quality of life with good people and good values. It is just not ideal for seniors and those who cannot or do not drive. The mountains are worse because driving is difficult and the population does not support extensive medical resources in many areas.
I know you do not like the Denver Metro area and the front range. You call it a "mess" but it is the only an area that provides the extensive public transit system and health care options that are necessary for seniors and the disabled. I am both and I find the area just right for me.
Remember I am comparing Denver with the Buffalo area, where I grew up. Now that is a mess. It is a dying decaying city that never providing good public transit through the whole metro area. In addition Buffalo never built parks and open space as extensively as Denver. Denver is growing, clean and safe. Many people are moving there and are attracted to the nice urban walkable neighborhoods. Also, Denver has always had a commitment to try to implement good public transit to the whole metro area.
I am a heavy user of public transit in the Denver area. You can live in many places in the Denver Metro area and and live without a car.
If you want a small city with good public transportation--then create your own city. It does not have to be an defined city; It could be any area where you can get all the services you need and not have to drive. The area of your city does not have to be contiguous--only as long as you can get to the services you need by public transit.
The City of Denver and the suburbs are composed of many neighborhoods that can be your small city. You can choose to live in many of those areas and have excellent service of public transit as long as you are near a major bus route with frequent service or a rail station. For, wherever you live, any other areas that are accessible by your local bus or train, becomes your local walkable neighborhood.
If you need a formal defined small city then there are many smaller incorporated cities in the metro area that have excellent public transit, by virtue of the fact that they are in the RTD district and they connect with many services by public transit. That would be Englewood, Edgewater, for example.
Boulder is a great choice but it certainly is not small. However, following my advice of creation of your own city, there are many small neighborhoods in Boulder that can serve as a walkable area with great public transit ...
Livecontent
I appreciate your perspective livecontent, but I don't think that an urban neighborhood surrounded by a large metroplex is what this poster is looking for (even though I can understand the appeal of those types of environments). When I moved from Seattle to Boulder I was looking for more then a walkable neighborhood within a big city. If I had wanted that, there would have been plenty of choices in Seattle proper. I specifically wanted to live in a small (under 100K) city with well defined boundaries that was walkable and from which I could be outside of the city and up in the mountains quickly. I also wanted to maintain access to some urban amenities, which is why I wasn't interested in a small town.
I appreciate your perspective livecontent, but I don't think that an urban neighborhood surrounded by a large metroplex is what this poster is looking for (even though I can understand the appeal of those types of environments). When I moved from Seattle to Boulder I was looking for more then a walkable neighborhood within a big city. If I had wanted that, there would have been plenty of choices in Seattle proper. I specifically wanted to live in a small (under 100K) city with well defined boundaries that was walkable and from which I could be outside of the city and up in the mountains quickly. I also wanted to maintain access to some urban amenities, which is why I wasn't interested in a small town.
Said tongue in cheek, but Boulder no longer qualifies as a small city by your definition (under 100,000). There are many reports out there, here's one, from the Boulder Daily Camera:
U.S. census: Boulder surpasses 100,000 in population
Quote:
. . . City officials -- who say Boulder now has 102,800 residents, 2,640 more than the census estimate -- have argued for years that the Census Bureau has underestimated Boulder's population, leaving it ineligible for some grants. In 2008, the city formally disputed the census estimate, resulting in the figure being raised by about 5,000, said city planner Chris Meschuk.
City officials still believe the federal government's estimate is low, but they don't plan to dispute the count until after the 2010 census is released in May 2011. . .
Question for the OP, what do you mean when you say "SMALL city"?
When I first moved to Colorado over 31 years ago, the city I found as the most appealing was Fort Collins. I understand completely why you live in the Fort. Well, I got a job in Boulder and settled in Niwot, initially because there was a shortage of housing in Boulder.
I then became familiar with Longmont and that also appealed to me. But I move to Boulder. It was nice in Boulder but I thought there was more opportunity for me in Denver so during during my work in Boulder I moved to Arvada, where I can easily commute and have the opportunities in Denver when they became available. Eventually I stayed in Arvada.
I do agree that many people are looking for the idealistic small town in the likes of a Andy Hardy movie or Mayberry. I have found that those types of towns are more prevalent in the midwest and the east. Colorado small towns just do not have the same ambiance.
As I got older and ill, I had to have good public transit and medical care. Since, I am a Veteran, being near a VA hospital gives me some advantages. So, the Denver metro area meets all those requirements.
Yet, I still think of Fort Collins, Loveland and Longmont. I read constantly the high praise that it is given in the media. I could live in those towns. I find them much more appealing than Boulder. I would pick Loveland over Fort Collins, mainly for the reason I do not want to live near too many students and at the same time I would easy access to the amenities of Fort Collins.
Longmont is not bad and does have that small towns feel with that old main street. It would work for me because it does have good public transit with RTD and to Denver. But I am here where I am and sometimes that is how it works. It actually has worked out good because, a King Soopers was built in front of my development and a commuter rail station is planned, 1/3 mile down the road--that is pretty good luck. So, I have what I deem important.
Do not get me wrong, Boulder is a great small city but not a small town. Too me it is too intense, dense and a frantic environment. I find areas of Denver much more relaxing. It has great public transit. However, again, I am just do not want to live in a college town. I just do not think it is worth the expense to live in that city.
When I first moved to Colorado over 31 years ago, the city I found as the most appealing was Fort Collins. I understand completely why you live in the Fort. Well, I got a job in Boulder and settled in Niwot, initially because there was a shortage of housing in Boulder.
I then became familiar with Longmont and that also appealed to me. But I move to Boulder. It was nice in Boulder but I thought there was more opportunity for me in Denver so during during my work in Boulder I moved to Arvada, where I can easily commute and have the opportunities in Denver when they became available. Eventually I stayed in Arvada.
I do agree that many people are looking for the idealistic small town in the likes of a Andy Hardy movie or Mayberry. I have found that those types of towns are more prevalent in the midwest and the east. Colorado small towns just do not have the same ambiance.
As I got older and ill, I had to have good public transit and medical care. Since, I am a Veteran, being near a VA hospital gives me some advantages. So, the Denver metro area meets all those requirements.
Yet, I still think of Fort Collins, Loveland and Longmont. I read constantly the high praise that it is given in the media. I could live in those towns. I find them much more appealing than Boulder. I would pick Loveland over Fort Collins, mainly for the reason I do not want to live near too many students and at the same time I would easy access to the amenities of Fort Collins.
Longmont is not bad and does have that small towns feel with that old main street. It would work for me because it does have good public transit with RTD and to Denver. But I am here where I am and sometimes that is how it works. It actually has worked out good because, a King Soopers was built in front of my development and a commuter rail station is planned, 1/3 mile down the road--that is pretty good luck. So, I have what I deem important.
Do not get me wrong, Boulder is a great small city but not a small town. Too me it is too intense, dense and a frantic environment. I find areas of Denver much more relaxing. It has great public transit. However, again, I am just do not want to live in a college town. I just do not think it is worth the expense to live in that city.
Livecontent
Sounds like you've found the place that's right for you. And I was never looking for Mayberry. In fact, as nice as the Fort is, I do have a bit of a bone to pick with it because there is something of that ambiance (and or aspiration) about the place.
Generally, I like all of the Front Range cities. But when it comes to a car-free lifestyle, there are very few cities in the West that match Boulder. Fort Collins doesn't (it's larger, more spread out, and it's attractions are more dispersed).
I am a heavy user of public transit in the Denver area. You can live in many places in the Denver Metro area and and live without a car.
If you want a small city with good public transportation--then create your own city. It does not have to be an defined city; It could be any area where you can get all the services you need and not have to drive. The area of your city does not have to be contiguous--only as long as you can get to the services you need by public transit.
The City of Denver and the suburbs are composed of many neighborhoods that can be your small city. You can choose to live in many of those areas and have excellent service of public transit as long as you are near a major bus route with frequent service or a rail station. For, wherever you live, any other areas that are accessible by your local bus or train, becomes your local walkable neighborhood.
If you need a formal defined small city then there are many smaller incorporated cities in the metro area that have excellent public transit, by virtue of the fact that they are in the RTD district and they connect with many services by public transit. That would be Englewood, Edgewater, for example.
Boulder is a great choice but it certainly is not small. However, following my advice of creation of your own city, there are many small neighborhoods in Boulder that can serve as a walkable area with great public transit.
I have said before that if you want a walkable neighborhood with good public transit; overlay the RTD map over a map of where there are major supermarkets in shopping centers. Look for major bus routes, transfer points and train stations with good walkable shopping, especially a large supermarket because that is a big definer of a neighborhood. Live near these areas and you will have a good walkable neighborhood and do not need a car.
One amenity you can find all over the Denver Metro area is extensive parks, trails and open near public transit and walkable neighborhoods. So, really do not have to live out in the country, and not have good public transit, to have access to the outdoors. It is all nearby in this great large area composed of smaller parts which can be your "city".
I lived in NYC and in Europe. I have learned that a big city is composed of small neighborhoods. You spend most of your time in your neighborhood and if you choose wisely you will also work in the same area. Many people do not believe that NYC is just a group of smaller areas, all glued together. I have met people in New York City who never leave their borough and some never leave their neighborhood--for all they need is close by. Most big metro areas have excellent public transit in most locations. You just have to choose one of those locations.
I am a senior disabled citizen. I have found out as you age, your area of roaming becomes less and less. You enclose yourself in the comfortable familiarity of your neighborhood. You drive less; you stay home more and you learn to live with the availability of what is in your "city". It is especially true for me because it is difficult for me to move around and I now drive under 2500 miles a year and that is becoming less, every year. Soon, I will not be able to drive. However, I have an extended walkable neighborhood with the access I have with public transit.
Livecontent
Great info as usual. Is it true that the one way price is over $6 in the Denver metro (light rail)??
Last edited by dundermifflin; 06-28-2010 at 10:51 PM..
In my opinion the best small city in Colorado to live in without a car is also the most expensive city, Aspen. If you have a house or condo in the city you can walk everywhere and it has great restaurants and entertainment and of course great skiing is right there.
When I first moved to Colorado over 31 years ago, the city I found as the most appealing was Fort Collins. I understand completely why you live in the Fort. Well, I got a job in Boulder and settled in Niwot, initially because there was a shortage of housing in Boulder.
I then became familiar with Longmont and that also appealed to me. But I move to Boulder. It was nice in Boulder but I thought there was more opportunity for me in Denver so during during my work in Boulder I moved to Arvada, where I can easily commute and have the opportunities in Denver when they became available. Eventually I stayed in Arvada.
I do agree that many people are looking for the idealistic small town in the likes of a Andy Hardy movie or Mayberry. I have found that those types of towns are more prevalent in the midwest and the east. Colorado small towns just do not have the same ambiance.
As I got older and ill, I had to have good public transit and medical care. Since, I am a Veteran, being near a VA hospital gives me some advantages. So, the Denver metro area meets all those requirements.
Yet, I still think of Fort Collins, Loveland and Longmont. I read constantly the high praise that it is given in the media. I could live in those towns. I find them much more appealing than Boulder. I would pick Loveland over Fort Collins, mainly for the reason I do not want to live near too many students and at the same time I would easy access to the amenities of Fort Collins.
Longmont is not bad and does have that small towns feel with that old main street. It would work for me because it does have good public transit with RTD and to Denver. But I am here where I am and sometimes that is how it works. It actually has worked out good because, a King Soopers was built in front of my development and a commuter rail station is planned, 1/3 mile down the road--that is pretty good luck. So, I have what I deem important.
Do not get me wrong, Boulder is a great small city but not a small town. Too me it is too intense, dense and a frantic environment. I find areas of Denver much more relaxing. It has great public transit. However, again, I am just do not want to live in a college town. I just do not think it is worth the expense to live in that city.
Livecontent
I was in northern Colorado last weekend and was surprised at how much sprawl they have from Longmont north to Fort Collins. Not only is it sprawl but its very unorganized and seems be defiantly a extended suburb of Denver. In fact I would say that in the future it will be another Colorado Springs without the dense downtown and of course the Springs does not have much of a dense downtown so that says a lot, and not in a good way.
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.
