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.
I'm almost 'anti-Mtn.' after your post! But don't wanna shout that too loudly. Folks will start moving there in droves and screw it up.
Then I read Jazzlover's post and fell back down to earth. Boo. LOL. The truth is though, jobs are hard to find everywhere. Glad I'm looking to rely on technology to bridge that gap for myself. I'm a freelancer in several different fields that allows me to live anywhere.
Thank you for the comments.
Jazzlover and I have tangled horns over some issues--mainly over the idea that Colorado "natives" are so pure and the most important people of the State. I do agree with his condemnation of the fake, phony, mountain towns. Over the many decades I have been here, I have seen that the real authentic Colorado exist more on the Plains.
I do not agree with his characterization of the large cities of Colorado--I think they add great value and are not all a sprawling mess. I think Denver is great city with good amenities.
Jazzlover and I have tangled horns over some issues--mainly over the idea that Colorado "natives" are so pure and the most important people of the State. I do agree with his condemnation of the fake, phony, mountain towns. Over the many decades I have been here, I have seen that the real authentic Colorado exist more on the Plains.
I do not agree with his characterization of the large cities of Colorado--I think they add great value and are not all a sprawling mess. I think Denver is great city with good amenities.
I'm not a city person at all, but if I had to pick one city I would live in, it would be Denver. It is not the city it was when I was a kid, in my opinion the whole metro area is a bit big for my liking, but if I had to pick now it would still be Denver. And again there is a reason why people cluster on the I-25 corridor and it's where all the wide selection of housing, jobs, amenities and just about everything else is.
Jazzlover and I have tangled horns over some issues--mainly over the idea that Colorado "natives" are so pure and the most important people of the State. I do agree with his condemnation of the fake, phony, mountain towns. Over the many decades I have been here, I have seen that the real authentic Colorado exist more on the Plains.
I do not agree with his characterization of the large cities of Colorado--I think they add great value and are not all a sprawling mess. I think Denver is great city with good amenities.
I respect livecontent's love of Denver. If I was a city person, I might agree with the presence of cultural amenities in Denver. The city has a good music scene for a city of its size. My particular favorite amenity in Denver is the Denver Public Libarary's Western History Collection, which is one of the premier collections of Western history documents and photographs in the United States.
The thing that I loathe about all of the cities of the Front Range, though, is that they all have fervently embraced the failed "California" model of totally automobile-dependent suburban sprawl that is going to be the bane and destruction of metro areas all across the United States. To say that metro Denver is not a sprawled mess ignores what should be readily apparent to anyone who travels about the metro area at all. I think the problem is that so many modern Americans have grown up in those crapholes that they see them as normal and acceptable--they have known nothing else and have no memory or experience with places that were different--and, in many ways, better.
IIRC, the "California Model" of highway design (aka freeways) was designed and tested in Greenbelt, MD, as part of the New Deal effort to make progress in automotive matters, and was the seed for the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. That was quickly followed after WW-II with Eisenhower's Interstate Highway System. The concept of grade-separated interchanges remains the best way to move vehicles without costly, dangerous and speed-throttling signaled intersections.
Auto dependent sprawl is nationwide and IMO not fair to pin any blame on one state. I always loved California's willingness to build their roadways UP to freeway / interstate standards vice the bottlenecks of most city streets.
The issues we face now are massive overloading coupled with underfunding, a perfect storm that is seriously degrading mobility and commerce. We both understand the value of the rails for freight movement, but too little public funding is coming forth to help increase rail capacity, throughput and velocity to an extent that would provide meaningful relief to a straining highway system.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
I respect livecontent's love of Denver. If I was a city person, I might agree with the presence of cultural amenities in Denver. The city has a good music scene for a city of its size. My particular favorite amenity in Denver is the Denver Public Libarary's Western History Collection, which is one of the premier collections of Western history documents and photographs in the United States.
The thing that I loathe about all of the cities of the Front Range, though, is that they all have fervently embraced the failed "California" model of totally automobile-dependent suburban sprawl that is going to be the bane and destruction of metro areas all across the United States. To say that metro Denver is not a sprawled mess ignores what should be readily apparent to anyone who travels about the metro area at all. I think the problem is that so many modern Americans have grown up in those crapholes that they see them as normal and acceptable--they have known nothing else and have no memory or experience with places that were different--and, in many ways, better.
I am certainly in agreement with you over the hatred of an auto dependent culture, as many posts on supporting Public Transit shows. I do think that RTD and Denver metro area has taken more positive moves to increase public transit than many other metro areas.
You would think that New York State would be much better, but it is not. I am not talking about NYC, I am talking about Buffalo, where I grew up. The public transit did not embrace the suburban areas, so there was little or none connection to the nearest suburbs and never were even in times of trolleys.
When I got to Denver, I was shocked that there existed more extensive public transit throughout the region of multiple counties in a Western City. I was even surprised to find that in the early years of Denver, there were many trolleys to the outlying areas--but not in Buffalo and it was much older. I never saw a Park n' Ride in Buffalo. There was no attempt to bring the large suburbs, like Cheektowaga, where I lived into the public transit and it was all in one county.
All that surprised me was about 33 years ago. Now the public transit is much better with many more neighborhoods in Denver and the suburbs where you can live without a car.
Sure there are many and many sprawl suburban developments, that are in the area and continue to be built. However, I do not live there and I will never live in those areas that are totally dependent on cars. It is all about choice and here in the Denver metro area we have those smart choices. We are continuing to develop and redevelop old neighborhoods that are part of smart planning to diminish the use of cars.
I live in an older part of Arvada in a first ring suburbs of Denver. My home is in an infilled development, that is land that was available between already established older homes. I bought here new, 25 years ago. It was not considered a sprawl outward but building closer to what already exist. So public transit, shopping, parks and roads were in place. It is a walkable neighborhood. I live about 1 and 1/2 mile from the Denver City Boundary. Today, there are many such infilled developments because more people want to live close to public transit and available amenities. That is the smart way to develop. Redeveloping the old and built in what already exist, instead of sprawling out, is smart planning and does exist in the Denver area.
There are plenty of older parts of the Denver area that are walkable or have public transport.
Personally I don't like public transport and never will. As a car person, I like my freedom a car gives me and I don't like operating on other peoples time table. As I saw yesterday during another miserable flight, public transport is for the birds. Give me a car any day.
Denver Metro is spacious, but I am glad it is. Some places back east are too damn cramped for me. The USA has plenty of land, lets use it. I don't want to live on top of people.
I've met few buses I've liked, although the Summit County Stage a possible exception. So if doing without private transport, the most livable places might more usually be in Europe, where in density and design one could often walk to that wanted. Rather than in schlepping all over town on public transit. I've tried that, with the experience that one had better leave home with a good deal of time and patience.
For the record, with perhaps some vague similarities to Denver, many people report living outside of London, England CBD and commuting in to work via commuter trains.
But the OP was rather firm on wishing a home with the nearest neighbor at least a mile distant. That pretty much rules out any type of public transit. Moreover more easily achieved if existing towns were more densely populated, and the overall population and consequent demand on space less.
Maybe that is an elitist view, in thinking everyone else should live in densely packed cities because you yourself want some real elbow room. But it can be countenanced in part due most people (at basis) wanting neighbors, if in moderation. And, in practical real terms, that anyone actually realizing that much space for a home will likely have deserved it -- due a long walk in.
There are plenty of older parts of the Denver area that are walkable or have public transport.
Personally I don't like public transport and never will. As a car person, I like my freedom a car gives me and I don't like operating on other peoples time table. As I saw yesterday during another miserable flight, public transport is for the birds. Give me a car any day.
Denver Metro is spacious, but I am glad it is. Some places back east are too damn cramped for me. The USA has plenty of land, lets use it. I don't want to live on top of people.
You have a flying car--wow, I am impressed!
Plenty of land does not mean that it can be easily and inexpensively be improved for you and your car. Your car needs roads, highways, bridges and utilities to support its movement. You need electricity, water and sewage control for your abundant body's waste. You need other necessities for your life of freedom, like fuel for your car and TV for your butt. Ah, but you have a flying car, so you do not need a road, you need a runway.
You do benefit from public transit, even though you never use it:
If there was no public transit, roads would be more crowded and your freedom to move would slow down.
If there was not public transit, we would be building more of those expensive roads and highways on all that land of plenty. You would have more freedom to use and abuse and of course pay more taxes.
If there was no public transit, then places that were very popular that you needed would have less or no parking space and it would cost much more. Your freedom would be driving around the block, again and again and again, looking furtively for a parking space.
If there was no public transit, there would be a greater demand for gas, prices would rise and there would not be enough for your freedom.
If there was no public transit, there would be more older and senile drivers, slowly driving in the left lane, with the foot on the brake and their turn signal always on. Your freedom would be raging frustration.
If there was no public transit, there would be much more of a problem with clean air but you would have the freedom to hack and cough your way to an early death.
If there was no public transit, there would be no HOV lanes, as they are funded by public transit. You would not have the opportunity to purchase access so you could gloat over the poor slobs in the heavy traffic lanes. But get a lexus, that would give you more bragging impact for that freedom.
If there was no public transit, when you get old and senile, you will become the annoying driver but you will still have your freedom to kill others or yourself, and drive other impatient young drivers to rage.
Gee, I forgot--you have a flying car and you will freely soar over all these problems, because your argument against public transit is "for the birds".
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 09-29-2011 at 10:17 PM..
[quote=Idunn;21090595]I've met few buses I've liked, although the Summit County Stage a possible exception. So if doing without private transport, the most livable places might more usually be in Europe, where in density and design one could often walk to that wanted...QUOTE]
European cities are very large and have extensive public transportation because there is a need. There are neighborhood with essentials that one can get in walking but there are some that do not; but not everything can be obtain by walking down the street. I have lived in a large European City and public transit was and is a necessity.
I have also lived in NYC and there are many neighborhoods where one can walk for some essential but again just like Europe, public transit is extensively provided and needed to reach other needs.
Denver and the suburbs have neighborhoods that one can get many essentials by walking down the street but for all necessity one can easily choose to live in a neighborhood that is well served by public transit. Yes, many neighborhoods are walkable for many essentials but going beyond without adequate public transit, one must drive.
It does not have to be a fancy, yuppified neighborhood with overpriced fluffy shops selling status products, overpriced and overhyped food. You can easily live in walkable distance to a local King Soopers and have many essentials that were provided by separate stores, years in the past. You have, the green grocer, the grocer, the florist, the fish market, the druggist, the delicatessan, the butcher, the baker and the candestick maker (I could not resist). Living near a super Walmart or Target gives you many more "small" stores into one. Where there is a supermarket, there is also other stores, restaurants and shops that cluster together.
So, a busy intersection is a walkable neighborhood can very much mimics or exceeds many shopping areas of the past and even some idolized European neighborhoods, . Unfortunately many of these areas do not have good public transit. That is why I live near the Central Core of the Denver Metro area because I made a choice to have smart public transit.
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 09-29-2011 at 11:41 PM..
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.
Market around the corner - or way off
