Denver's future growth Eastward (Aurora, Lakewood: apartment, condos, home)

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by vegaspilgrim

Instead of building new development outward, we could have bulldozed Capitol Hill, Highland, Washington Park, Cheeseman Park, and City Park to the ground, got rid of all those historic single family homes and replaced them with hundreds and thousands blocks of 15-20 story concrete high rise buildings. That way we'd have a million new people living right in the core of the city. That's what they do in third world developing countries around the world. Sounds like Smart Growth to me!

Me, too. But then I couldn't have my garden!

[zenkonami]

I don't think anyone was taking a personal shot at Kat. Besides, anyone that's lived in the same place for nearly two decades is not really exacerbating the problem. I mean I would fit that category of someone who would love the ameneties of the city with the openness of the country. I think the key to dealing with a growing population is to grow in and up, but in a carefully designed fashion. There are ways to make density feel a ok less dense if they are managed properly...using architecture, zoning, color, shape and design. If we can successfully manage growing in and up (without sacrificing health, sanity or security) then I think those open spaces will be a lot closer for everyone to enjoy.

I agree that us against them isn't going to help solve the problem. My hope is that we can all learn to understand our personal desires while protecting the social fabric of our culture, environment and region.

[Katiana]

No, it wasn't personal. It was just "this is going to happen; in five years you'll want to move farther out, you need to make choices", etc. I'm also getting weary of the term cookie-cutter houses. As has been discussed on this and other forums on CD, the houses in the older parts of Denver all look very similar as well. It's just that over the years, they take on a certain patina, from the landscaping, additions, changes in exterior siding, colors and so on.

No matter how much you dress it up, density is still density. That's what some of us don't like. I will give you an anecdote. My daughter lives near DU, in a building that has a little courtyard where you can sit outside. It has some big maple trees that turn colors in the fall, including one right in the center. She is the envy of some of her friends who live in high rises and have no yard at all. BTW, by the looks of the polls on the suburbanites, most of us don't drive 10 miles to the grocery store in our over-sized SUV, and 30 miles to work. Go take a look.

[Triste_en_Tampa]

Originally Posted by Katiana

I"ll try to be civil here, but it's getting harder by the minute. Triste_en_Tampa, you have been a member of CD for exactly three days. This is the first I've seen you on this forum. Unless you've been reading all my old posts, you don't know much about me, and your post indicates that. I have not "move(d) to the "new" fringe, five miles further out." In fact, I haven't moved anywhere for 19 years, and before I lived in this house, I lived in one 1/2 mile away, just across the road. I suspect I am old enough to be your mother, and I don't need a little lecture about choices people have to make. I could give that lecture, and have given it to my grown children from time to time. I doubt you even know which suburban city I live in. I live a grand total of 4 1/2 miles from my work, perhaps closer than you do to yours. My spouse's job is 6 miles away. We are not raping the landscape. We are trying to earn a lving and we have raised a family. Yes, the suburbs have grown. The population of metro Denver has grown from 1.4 million people in 1980, when we came here, to 2.4 million today. Where would you put an extra million people?

I'm sorry Katiana, my post was in no way directed at you specifically. I wasn't lecturing anyone, only expressing an opinion. My use of the word "you" was meant to be universal; just speaking in generalities. I have been lurking in this forum for a few weeks, considering Denver as a city to move to after graduation. The subject of this thread is something that interests me and pertains to my studies. That is the reason why I replied without an extensive posting history.

Originally Posted by vegaspilgrim

Instead of building new development outward, we could have bulldozed Capitol Hill, Highland, Washington Park, Cheeseman Park, and City Park to the ground, got rid of all those historic single family homes and replaced them with hundreds and thousands blocks of 15-20 story concrete high rise buildings. That way we'd have a million new people living right in the core of the city. That's what they do in third world developing countries around the world. Sounds like Smart Growth to me!

That's what the French architect Le Courbusier proposed doing to the Left Bank of Paris in the 1930s. Of course he was ridiculed and his idea considered absurd. Interestingly, his ideas for "towers in a park" were adopted in America instead: showing up in mid-century public housing projects and even today as suburban office parks.

[Katiana]

Apology accepted. I think vegaspilgrim was being facetious. Most of us like the old Denver neighborhoods. We'd hate to see them go. They're what makes Denver "Denver" and not just anywhere.

[Katiana]

Here is an interesting map I found on the Minneapolis forum. As you can see, there has been significant growth east of Denver since 1993. I guess that's b/c it's hard to go west.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ng...20010701.3.pdf

[steveco.]

The west side of Denver specifically along the ridge called the hog back (I hate that term) is mostly Open space and has been for some time. C-470 was built in a way to limit the amount of growth that would occur on the west side so as not to interfere with the natural setting. As anyone could tell on a drive there has not been to much success in that attempt. In the past 10 years development has bunny hopped the open space and now you have hodge podge areas of development. Ken Caryl, Genesee and the 285 corridor are a few that come to mind.

[zenkonami]

Originally Posted by Katiana

No, it wasn't personal. It was just "this is going to happen; in five years you'll want to move farther out, you need to make choices", etc. I'm also getting weary of the term cookie-cutter houses. As has been discussed on this and other forums on CD, the houses in the older parts of Denver all look very similar as well. It's just that over the years, they take on a certain patina, from the landscaping, additions, changes in exterior siding, colors and so on.

I can't speak for Denver regarding the term "cookie-cutter houses", so maybe what I hear about Denver cookie-cutters is a bit exaggerated (or at least relative to people's individual experiences.)

In Phoenix, however, developers will provide three or four styles of home in a development and call it "variety." They are typically flimsy houses build of timber and stucco but dressed up in such a way that they look pleasant. The problem is, despite landscaping and even the occasional (but rare) paint job, they really are all cut from the same cloth, and never take on that patina. What's worse, those developments often instead down a mile block until they hit an significant enough intersection to build a strip mall / grocery store / Wal-Mart on...and then continue down to the next block.

As I said, I can't speak for the term's applicability to Denver, but in Phoenix it becomes dull and depressing very quickly...particularly since the same basic style can be seen whether you're in Scottsdale, Chandler, Avondale or Peoria (relatively four corners of the metro area.)

No matter how much you dress it up, density is still density. That's what some of us don't like. I will give you an anecdote. My daughter lives near DU, in a building that has a little courtyard where you can sit outside. It has some big maple trees that turn colors in the fall, including one right in the center. She is the envy of some of her friends who live in high rises and have no yard at all. BTW, by the looks of the polls on the suburbanites, most of us don't drive 10 miles to the grocery store in our over-sized SUV, and 30 miles to work. Go take a look.

I'm not quite sure I understand what that's saying about density, as there is nothing wrong with courtyards, parks and open spaces in dense areas...dense areas need those kinds of spaces, I agree, and Denver is very good at providing them. Community gardens are great ideas, and the idea of houses themselves are not necessarily bad. I'm certainly not advocating the eradication of nice neighborhoods in Denver proper, but there is a lot of space that can still be in-filled, particularly parking lots and such (and that's exactly what's happening.)...though even replacing them with Parks is an improvement.

Also, I don't know if it's pertinent or not, but the majority of the Denver workforce (PDF) live in a different community than they work in, though I didn't look for statistics on what kind of distance people traveled to get to work (could be a mile, or could be thirty.) Though I think it's better to have people living close to their job (and I think most people agree), I understand why people don't...schools, environment, amenities, housing costs and availability, etc...I think a solid public transit system is a powerful tool in that regard, and Denver has and is continuing to grow the RTD, which is great.

Alas...I have (yet again) strayed off topic. I will say that I hope Aurora gets it's act together on growth instead of trying to outcompete Denver on population and relevance. Aurora could be Minneapolis to Denver's St. Paul (or vice-versa...not sure how that works), but need to deal with how they want to grow or else they aren't going to be able to manage money, infrastructure and potentially blight in the next couple decades.

[steveco.]

Not gona happen. For one the entire city of Aurora would not even exist if it wasn't for the city of denver. It lacks all of the criteria for it to be a core city including a city "core" in that there is not one central area that could be called downtown aurora. Of course it does have a fair chunk of the employment but the same can be said of any of the other metro cities. If you look at Minn. and St. Paul, each city was its own entity long before they grew into each other. Same with the dallas fort worth area (as bad as an example as it is). Aurora is in the middle of an identity crisis and the only comparison to it that I can see is some of the larger suburbs of Phoenix

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by zenkonami

I'm not quite sure I understand what that's saying about density, as there is nothing wrong with courtyards, parks and open spaces in dense areas...dense areas need those kinds of spaces, I agree, and Denver is very good at providing them. Community gardens are great ideas, and the idea of houses themselves are not necessarily bad. I'm certainly not advocating the eradication of nice neighborhoods in Denver proper, but there is a lot of space that can still be in-filled, particularly parking lots and such (and that's exactly what's happening.)...though even replacing them with Parks is an improvement.

Well, I was responding to this: There are ways to make density feel a ok less dense if they are managed properly..., when really, higher density is just that, higher density. Some of us aren't crazy about it. A high density enviroment is high density, no matter how you cut it. The courtyards, parks, etc, have to be shared by more people. Some of us (me) like to have a garden in the back yard, not down the street or down the road. When we lived in an apt in Champaign, Ill we did have a communal garden for a couple years, but then you had to drive to the garden! I guess the point is, I've done these things. I prefer a single family house with a yard. I don't need an acre, but you know, a 1/4 acre would be nice (we have less than that here). There is plenty of research that shows when you increase density, people become less, rather than more, social. That was certainly my experience living in the city. We didn't know any of our neighbors. Here, we know lots of them. There have been threads about this before, and most people agree. I agree that in neighborhoods like Stapleton and Bradburn, people are very social. I think that is in part b/c the social types moved there for that environment, rather than the environment eoncouraging it. (JMO)