U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-12-2011, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,706,387 times
Reputation: 1778

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
My vote goes for Salt Lake! Denver is on boring plains, SL has dramatic views of the mountains right up against the city! The Great Salt Lake adds a feature that makes SL's geography more interesting than Denver's!

Salt Lake also has extensive light rail and commuter rail, while Denver has no commuter rail at all and light rail lines that only serve people who live south of the city!
Wait, wait, wait! You've got to be kidding me. I can understand all your other reasons (the ones that I snipped) for voting on SLC on this one, but Salt Lake's light and commuter rail systems are not "extensive." They are in a slightly more advanced state than Denver's (and the Free Fare Zone on UTATrax is pretty nice), but the systems are relatively comparable on number of stations and assuming Denver can secure the funds, we should have a pretty complete system within the next 5 years.

In addition, that south Denver corridor was chosen for good ridership reasons, and there is no reason to believe the new lines won't be equally successful, but the system had to start somewhere, and it started with the SE and SW corridors.

I consider them to comparable systems, but I do not think judging our rail systems against one another is going to finger a "winner"
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-12-2011, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,706,387 times
Reputation: 1778
You fight dirty

Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
I disagree that Denver's light rail is more extensive than SL's. SL's light rail services a larger portion of that city than Denver's light rail serves within Denver. SL has expansion plans for its system as well. Also, SL has a separate commuter rail that services a good portion of the Wasatch Front, while there is absolutely nothing comparable on the Front Range.
I'll give you this. A Front Range Standard Commuter Rail service would be a nice thing to have.

Quote:
SL has something called the Gateway, which is like a condensed version of the 16th Street Mall, without all the thugs and homeless people loitering around. City Creek Center is a new mixed-use mall that is opening in downtown SL in just over a year that will feature department stores that Denver does not have in its downtown. I have a feeling City Creek will serve as SL's version of Cherry Creek. SL also has Trolley Square downtown with even more shopping.
But the Gateway District is ostensible just a downtown, outdoor "mall" in the sense of the suburban shopping mall. I sincerely hope it does well, but I'm not sure how it could compare to the european style axis street that is 16th St. in Denver. 16th neatly connects Lower Highlands (by way of pedestrian bridges), Confluence Park, the Central Platte Valley, Union Station (OUR rail hub in progress) to most of downtown life, all the way down to our Civic Center area which includes our Art Museum, Main Public Library, City and County Offices and our State Capitol (and another transit hub.)

Quote:
SL has a smaller airport, true, but you could also argue that it is less of hassle to fly in/out of than DIA.
Always found DIA to be quite an easy and pleasant airport to fly in and out of. Haven't been through SLC's.

I'd just like to add as an honorable mention is this fine discussion we are having that the Nuggets, Avs, Broncos and Rockies all play in or adjacent downtown Denver, all within walking distance of 16th Street (though the walk from Mile High is a bit of a pain, I will confess.) What's that? No MLB team in Salt Lake? Ouch. No NFL either? Oof. Well, you have NBA and at least you have MLS...and we're coming for that cup this year
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 11:08 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
5,608 posts, read 20,650,002 times
Reputation: 5338
I think Salt Lake does have better scenery than Denver, being in the Great Basin and surrounded by mountains on all four sides, not just one side. And yes, I think it's location is pretty good, having great mountains really close, only a few hours away from the red rock country of southern Utah, only about 6-7 hours from Vegas. But as a city, SLC is so frickin boring you could practically die of boredom there. Unless if you're LDS or if your family is there there's really no reason to live there.

Not to mention, SLC has an absolutely atrocious winter air pollution problem that makes Denver's brown cloud look like a joke.

CO_Transplant, I've been getting tired of reading your posts about the "agricultural" smell in Denver, because quite frankly, I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. I can see maybe if you lived in Greeley, but Denver has no **** smell whatsoever 98% of the time.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 05:17 PM
 
152 posts, read 341,962 times
Reputation: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
Wait, wait, wait! You've got to be kidding me. I can understand all your other reasons (the ones that I snipped) for voting on SLC on this one, but Salt Lake's light and commuter rail systems are not "extensive." They are in a slightly more advanced state than Denver's (and the Free Fare Zone on UTATrax is pretty nice), but the systems are relatively comparable on number of stations and assuming Denver can secure the funds, we should have a pretty complete system within the next 5 years.

In addition, that south Denver corridor was chosen for good ridership reasons, and there is no reason to believe the new lines won't be equally successful, but the system had to start somewhere, and it started with the SE and SW corridors.

I consider them to comparable systems, but I do not think judging our rail systems against one another is going to finger a "winner"
I'm not kidding at all! TRAX serves the eastern, western, northern, and southern parts of SL. Denver's light rail serves southern Denver. That's it! There's really no argument to be had there. TRAX serves a much greater percentage of SL's population than the Denver system does with Denver.

I know that Denver is expanding its system, but please explain to me why a city with about 1/3 of Denver's population in the most conservative state in the country has more extensive rail than Denver? It makes no sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
You fight dirty
I'm just showering this board with reality! Denver is really behind in a lot of areas but a lot of posters don't really want to see the facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
I'll give you this. A Front Range Standard Commuter Rail service would be a nice thing to have.
It would! Along with modern freeways! The Wasatch Front already has the FrontRunner, why the Front Range doesn't even have plans for a commuter rail from FTC to Colorado Springs just baffles me!

If I'm in SL and want to get to Ogden, I can hop on a train or ride on a four lane freeway the entire way. In Denver, if I want to get to FTC, I have to sit on a mostly two lane freeway in stop and go traffic! Denver again has three times the population of SL. Why is the area so behind? I'm just so confused.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
But the Gateway District is ostensible just a downtown, outdoor "mall" in the sense of the suburban shopping mall. I sincerely hope it does well, but I'm not sure how it could compare to the european style axis street that is 16th St. in Denver. 16th neatly connects Lower Highlands (by way of pedestrian bridges), Confluence Park, the Central Platte Valley, Union Station (OUR rail hub in progress) to most of downtown life, all the way down to our Civic Center area which includes our Art Museum, Main Public Library, City and County Offices and our State Capitol (and another transit hub.)
Regardless of whether it looks suburban does not negate that it is downtown and it is a walkable area! Plus SL is adding another outdoor shopping center downtown! 16th Street has good intentions, but it could be vastly improved. Homeless people occupy every bench possible, loud groups of thugs with their pants around their knees walk side by side so no one can pass them, and there are tons of people trying to solicit you for ridiculous causes. I don't find 16th Street to be remotely European. It is Denver's sad attempt at trying to emulate east coast cities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
Always found DIA to be quite an easy and pleasant airport to fly in and out of. Haven't been through SLC's.
SL's airport is easy! Plus it takes less than a hour to get from the airport to the best ski resorts in Utah. DIA is practically in Kansas (at least that's what it feels like). You then have to drive through the entire metro area and then deal with more bad drivers and narrow freeways for a couple of hours before you even reach ski resorts. It's nice that CDOT is now talking about adding an extra lane on the 70 for the low cost of $20 billion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
I'd just like to add as an honorable mention is this fine discussion we are having that the Nuggets, Avs, Broncos and Rockies all play in or adjacent downtown Denver, all within walking distance of 16th Street (though the walk from Mile High is a bit of a pain, I will confess.) What's that? No MLB team in Salt Lake? Ouch. No NFL either? Oof. Well, you have NBA and at least you have MLS...and we're coming for that cup this year
Well, again, Denver has three times the population of SL, so I would expect it to have more professional sports choices! I would be very interested in knowing what professional sports franchises were in Denver when the city had fewer than 200,000 people like SL currently has!

Also, I would like to be reminded of when Denver hosted the Olympics. Oh, that's right, it hasn't.

SL all the way. There really is no argument.

Last edited by CO_Transplant; 03-13-2011 at 05:32 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,435 posts, read 8,088,321 times
Reputation: 4477
Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
I know of Denver's suburbs are in the foothills, but none that are in the mountains. Some neighborhoods within SL proper are smack up against huge, snowcapped mountains. I know the SL airport is just east of the GSL, so I would imagine that SL city limits extend out to the lake. Maybe some SL posters know for sure.

I disagree that Denver's light rail is more extensive than SL's. SL's light rail services a larger portion of that city than Denver's light rail serves within Denver. SL has expansion plans for its system as well. Also, SL has a separate commuter rail that services a good portion of the Wasatch Front, while there is absolutely nothing comparable on the Front Range.

SL does have some stop and go traffic, but overall freeways in SL are newer and wider. SL has HOV lanes on many freeways that Denver lacks except on the 25. Also, SL widened a good portion of the 15 freeway when the Olympics came in back in 1996.

Denver's climate is not really neutral at all. One day it's 45 degrees the next day it's 70! SL has a much more temperate climate with fewer extremes. It seems to get windy here pretty often compared to other places I've lived.

I have smelled pretty terrible odors, especially east of Denver. The massive cattle facilities come with really offensive smells.

SL has something called the Gateway, which is like a condensed version of the 16th Street Mall, without all the thugs and homeless people loitering around. City Creek Center is a new mixed-use mall that is opening in downtown SL in just over a year that will feature department stores that Denver does not have in its downtown. I have a feeling City Creek will serve as SL's version of Cherry Creek. SL also has Trolley Square downtown with even more shopping.

SL has a smaller airport, true, but you could also argue that it is less of hassle to fly in/out of than DIA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
I'm not kidding at all! TRAX serves the eastern, western, northern, and southern parts of SL. Denver's light rail serves southern Denver. That's it! There's really no argument to be had there. TRAX serves a much greater percentage of SL's population than the Denver system does with Denver.

I know that Denver is expanding its system, but please explain to me why a city with about 1/3 of Denver's population in the most conservative state in the country has more extensive rail than Denver? It makes no sense.



I'm just showering this board with reality! Denver is really behind in a lot of areas but a lot of posters don't really want to see the facts.



It would! Along with modern freeways! The Wasatch Front already has the FrontRunner, why the Front Range doesn't even have plans for a commuter rail from FTC to Colorado Springs just baffles me!

If I'm in SL and want to get to Ogden, I can hop on a train or ride on a four lane freeway the entire way. In Denver, if I want to get to FTC, I have to sit on a mostly two lane freeway in stop and go traffic! Denver again has three times the population of SL. Why is the area so behind? I'm just so confused.



Regardless of whether it looks suburban does not negate that it is downtown and it is a walkable area! Plus SL is adding another outdoor shopping center downtown! 16th Street has good intentions, but it could be vastly improved. Homeless people occupy every bench possible, loud groups of thugs with their pants around their knees walk side by side so no one can pass them, and there are tons of people trying to solicit you for ridiculous causes. I don't find 16th Street to be remotely European. It is Denver's sad attempt at trying to emulate east coast cities.



SL's airport is easy! Plus it takes less than a hour to get from the airport to the best ski resorts in Utah. DIA is practically in Kansas (at least that's what it feels like). You then have to drive through the entire metro area and then deal with more bad drivers and narrow freeways for a couple of hours before you even reach ski resorts. It's nice that CDOT is now talking about adding an extra lane on the 70 for the low cost of $20 billion.



Well, again, Denver has three times the population of SL, so I would expect it to have more professional sports choices! I would be very interested in knowing what professional sports franchises were in Denver when the city had fewer than 200,000 people like SL currently has!

Also, I would like to be reminded of when Denver hosted the Olympics. Oh, that's right, it hasn't.

SL all the way. There really is no argument.
Have you been to the western suburbs? I have a summer house in Ken Caryl, colorado...which is IN the mountains.And The reason that SLCs TRAX is more expansive than Denvers is because Denver is much wider,and theres much more to cover than SLC. How is Denver Behind? Its no exactly behind. The city just didnt need a transit system until now. Umm, and Denver is planning a commuter rail to Pueblo (it may take a while). But I personally think we dont need one if We are able to get around perfectly fine. Are you seriously going to say that Denvers shopping isnt as good as SLCs?? I laugh..again. Denver is also addig many new shopping centers throughout the Metro (DTC shopping center,Englewood Shopping center,Broomfield..etc.) Also...so what if you have to drive through the metro area to get to skii resorts? there are highways that make the trip less far, and the point is that you can get to a skii resort in under 2 hours. Right?
The Metro area is actually whats counts when talking sports. SLC has 200k people in the city limits,but has 1milion + people in the entire metro. I actually think they should atleast have a hockey or Baseball team. id most definaintly love the city more if it was more sports oriented.
Have you forgotten that Denver had the honor to host the Olympics? In 1976? The olympics came to Denver first. unfortunantly people voted it down. The point is that Denver was a canidate BEFORE SLC was one.
I think there is an argument here...and Denver wins IMO.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:11 PM
 
Location: CO
2,591 posts, read 5,980,275 times
Reputation: 3407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezter View Post
Have you been to the western suburbs? I have a summer house in Ken Caryl, colorado...which is IN the mountains. . .
Sorry, I'm a 100% Denver metro supporter, but if you think Ken Caryl is IN the mountains, you've never been to the Coloado mountains.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:20 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,750,761 times
Reputation: 9129
I hope that I never have to live in a metro area again in my lifetime (got that out my system going on 40 years ago and have never looked back), but if I did, I would pick SLC over Denver--and I am a Colorado native! Unlike Denver and the Front Range, Utah's Wasatch Front is committed to commuter rail and is really doing something big about it. I think that alone puts it ahead of most any other metro area in the Rocky Mountain region in working toward some sort of sustainable future. Also, the physical setting of the Wasatch Front is much nicer than the Front Range--excepting the admittedly bad smog problem along the Wasatch Front in winter.

Another positive factor for Utah these days is that the state and local governments in Utah are far better managed and far more fiscally sound and responsible than most of the counterparts in Colorado are. Whatever one's opinion of the LDS-dominated politics in Utah are, the fact is that government there is--for the most part--very well-run, efficient, and responsive.

Finally, though I am not LDS, I strongly suspect that the LDS-dominated culture in Utah may be far more able to survive the coming economic and social turmoil that is about to engulf this country. Whatever that faith's flaws are--and there are many tenets of the LDS religion with which I personally do not agree--the fact is that there a social cohesiveness among the LDS folks that is pretty much absent in most other socio-religious groups in the US. The Mormons do have a long history of being able to endure persecution and hardship--they know how to "circle the wagons" and survive. The Front Range has no such social cohesiveness and may very well "Balkanize" when things get really tough.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:26 PM
 
152 posts, read 341,962 times
Reputation: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegaspilgrim View Post
CO_Transplant, I've been getting tired of reading your posts about the "agricultural" smell in Denver, because quite frankly, I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. I can see maybe if you lived in Greeley, but Denver has no **** smell whatsoever 98% of the time.
You are a Denver native, I wouldn't expect you to recognize what smell I'm talking about. As someone who has spent the majority of their life around absolutely no agricultural operations at all, it is extremely noticeable to me. I have been to Greeley once and my eyes literally started watering due to the smell!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezter View Post
Have you been to the western suburbs? I have a summer house in Ken Caryl, colorado...which is IN the mountains.And The reason that SLCs TRAX is more expansive than Denvers is because Denver is much wider,and theres much more to cover than SLC. How is Denver Behind? Its no exactly behind. The city just didnt need a transit system until now. Umm, and Denver is planning a commuter rail to Pueblo (it may take a while). But I personally think we dont need one if We are able to get around perfectly fine. Are you seriously going to say that Denvers shopping isnt as good as SLCs?? I laugh..again. Denver is also addig many new shopping centers throughout the Metro (DTC shopping center,Englewood Shopping center,Broomfield..etc.) Also...so what if you have to drive through the metro area to get to skii resorts? there are highways that make the trip less far, and the point is that you can get to a skii resort in under 2 hours. Right?
The Metro area is actually whats counts when talking sports. SLC has 200k people in the city limits,but has 1milion + people in the entire metro. I actually think they should atleast have a hockey or Baseball team. id most definaintly love the city more if it was more sports oriented.
Have you forgotten that Denver had the honor to host the Olympics? In 1976? The olympics came to Denver first. unfortunantly people voted it down. The point is that Denver was a canidate BEFORE SLC was one.
I think there is an argument here...and Denver wins IMO.
Ken Caryl is not in the mountains. It is against some foothills. I would think that Coloradans would realize what I'm talking about when I say mountains!

Denver's shopping is poor, the drive to the ski resorts takes triple to quadruple the time that it takes people in the SL metro to get to Alta or Park City, the traffic is terrible, the infrastructure is poor, etc. If you want to count entire metro areas, Denver still has 3 times as many people as SL. Like you would expect a city with a metro of 1 million to have multiple professional sports team, I would expect a city with a metro of almost 3 million that touts itself as being close to world class mountains to have hosted the Olympics. I guess that's just me.

Denver is the only city in the history of the Olympics to vote down the games! Most cities consider it an honor, as it helps modernize infrastructure and the downtown area to provide a pleasant global image of the city. Why in the world would Denverites vote the Olympics down? Afraid it might remove the city's cowtown image?

You have yet to prove how Denver wins this debate. Your statement about how Ken Caryl is in the mountains is not true! Your statement about Denver has better shopping than SL is one-sided. You even acknowledge that it takes hours to get from Denver to ski resorts, despite the fact that it takes a little over a half hour to get from DT SL to world class skiing!

The fact that Denver even has to compete with a small city like SL shows just how behind Denver is!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:28 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,435 posts, read 8,088,321 times
Reputation: 4477
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzco View Post
Sorry, I'm a 100% Denver metro supporter, but if you think Ken Caryl is IN the mountains, you've never been to the Coloado mountains.
Excuse me? I live in Ken Caryl. Im not talking about the Eastern part of Ken Caryl wereas i see where your coming from, but i live in the part that inbetween the hills. So what i really meant to say is, Ken Caryl Valley is right on the Montains...Not inside them. Im sorry i cant always pease people with my awnser.

Last edited by Mezter; 03-13-2011 at 06:50 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,435 posts, read 8,088,321 times
Reputation: 4477
Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
You are a Denver native, I wouldn't expect you to recognize what smell I'm talking about. As someone who has spent the majority of their life around absolutely no agricultural operations at all, it is extremely noticeable to me. I have been to Greeley once and my eyes literally started watering due to the smell!



Ken Caryl is not in the mountains. It is against some foothills. I would think that Coloradans would realize what I'm talking about when I say mountains!

Denver's shopping is poor, the drive to the ski resorts takes triple to quadruple the time that it takes people in the SL metro to get to Alta or Park City, the traffic is terrible, the infrastructure is poor, etc. If you want to count entire metro areas, Denver still has 3 times as many people as SL. Like you would expect a city with a metro of 1 million to have multiple professional sports team, I would expect a city with a metro of almost 3 million that touts itself as being close to world class mountains to have hosted the Olympics. I guess that's just me.

Denver is the only city in the history of the Olympics to vote down the games! Most cities consider it an honor, as it helps modernize infrastructure and the downtown area to provide a pleasant global image of the city. Why in the world would Denverites vote the Olympics down? Afraid it might remove the city's cowtown image?

You have yet to prove how Denver wins this debate. Your statement about how Ken Caryl is in the mountains is not true! Your statement about Denver has better shopping than SL is one-sided. You even acknowledge that it takes hours to get from Denver to ski resorts, despite the fact that it takes a little over a half hour to get from DT SL to world class skiing!

The fact that Denver even has to compete with a small city like SL shows just how behind Denver is!
Listen Okay, So Ken Caryl isnt IN the mountains,its right beside them,and im sorry i didnt make myself more clear. Who cares if Denver didnt host the olymipc? Atleast Denver has more to it than hosting the olympics. Is there anything else you can put to the forefront that makes SLC better? I said denver was better IN MY OPINION. I Didnt state that it was better to anyone else. And no, SLC is not as small as you are trying to make it sound. It is a large and growing city as well as denver,therfore,it is easily comparable. They are both mountainside cities,and that is why this thread was concieved. It had NOTHING to do with population. And You also have yet to prove that SLC is A better city, because so far I have not even Came to see what is so good about SLC other than the ski resorts being in close proximity (I dot even ski,so it doesnt really matter to me). Explain to me how Denver is a cowtown just because its more western oriented? Please, i would like to know. Thats like saying SLC is a Mormon town, just because it has people who are LDS. And thats like saying that SLC brought in the Olympics because it would take away the LDS image ( Although i know thats not true) Ive also never had an expirence in denver where the shopping was "poor". I think denver has good shopping areas ( I also think SLCs are good,just not as good. And that MY opinion. I give SLC this...
It is more naturally beautiful,has a nice vibe,good food,and i like the mountains. To bad i don't think its better than denver. Thats just my preference.
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top