Why do people on the front range hate Aurora so much? (Denver: apartment, homes)

[MattDen]

I am just wondering why so much anti-Aurora bias all along the front range. All the way from Colorado Springs to Fort Collins it seems Aurora has a bad reputation. It seems like people like to use Aurora as a punching bag because Metro Denver has so few economically disadvantaged neighborhoods/suburbs that people associate small older homes and stores that dont have brand new facades and impeccable lawns as blight.

I dont see why people have such a devout disdain for Aurora. Yeah, its spread out and has alot of cookie-cutter devolopment to the south and alot of small, older homes to the north but overall its a fairly clean, pleasent city of 300,000 people.

Even the area along Colfax is getting alot better. With the big hospital expansion around Peoria and Colfax and the improvements along Colfax between Yosemite and Havana it is much improved.

Aurora is in much, much better shape then most medium sized cities and is alot better planned also.

My thoery why people have such a disdain for Aurora is Interstate 225 goes thru the least visually appealing areas of Aurora and alot of people sterotype Aurora based on that.

I am sure alot of those snooty people who live in Greenwood Village and Cherry Hills Village when they take I-225 to get to DIA for their luxury cruises and international vacations especially shutter when they see some gasp commercial buildings and 60s apartment devolopment on the side of the road.

[Dan6200alt]

Matt,

you have a good point. Compared to other similar sized places across the country, its not a bad area. Uproot Aurora and put in Ohio, Alabama, wherever, and it might be considered a nice place. The problem is that its part of Denver metro. And thankfully as you mentioned, Denver metro as a whole doesn't have too many bad areas. So, sorta by default, Aurora has a bad rep.

All the old yucky buildings and billboards certainly doesn't help its rep. Plus the cookie-cutter developments just arent as nice as say Highlands Ranch, Broomfield, etc.

With the possible exception of the newer outdoor mall around the old Aurora mall (is that whats its called?)of I-225 and the very nice new outdoor mall out toward the airport (Southlands I think?), Aurora doesn't have great 'support' areas. For me personally, that place is practically in Kansas so I never have a reason to go out there. Obviously, I dont live there, but I thought I'd give you my 2 cents as a metro-Denverite.

I will admit that I have been in a few areas in Aurora and forget that Im actually in Aurora because they are nice. Cant think specifically where at the moment though.

[tfox]

I agree with you; it's unfair. I personally dislike the sprawl all over the metro area, not just Aurora. But Aurora is certainly no more guilty of sprawl than any other city. It does have some outstanding ethnic restaurants and markets -- that's my favorite thing about Aurora.

I certainly don't "hate" Aurora. There's not really much to hate -- it's just normal people who live there. It's hard to hate normal people -- mostly it's easy to "hate" pretentious people. But maybe that's sour grapes as much as anything.

[vegaspilgrim]

All the Aurora-bashing ignores that Aurora is such a large city/suburb, with a wide range of income levels. Ok, streets like Colfax and Havana are a dump, but that's only one section of Aurora. The Southeastern part of Aurora/ Eastern Centennial (out along Smoky Hill Rd), where I grew up, is just as nice as any other 1990s-present era neighborhoods in the Denver metro area, for the most part. People forget that some of the most attractive new subdivisions being built right now like Saddle Rock, Tallyn's Reach, the area around the new Southlands mall, and the Blackstone Country Club all have an Aurora address. Oh yeah, and southeast Aurora, because it's higher elevation than Denver itself, has the best mountain views in the entire metro area! Ironically, sometimes you have to head east to feel like you're in the West.

[GretchenB]

Originally Posted by Dan6200alt

Matt,

you have a good point. Compared to other similar sized places across the country, its not a bad area. Uproot Aurora and put in Ohio, Alabama, wherever, and it might be considered a nice place. The problem is that its part of Denver metro. And thankfully as you mentioned, Denver metro as a whole doesn't have too many bad areas. So, sorta by default, Aurora has a bad rep.

All the old yucky buildings and billboards certainly doesn't help its rep. Plus the cookie-cutter developments just arent as nice as say Highlands Ranch, Broomfield, etc.

With the possible exception of the newer outdoor mall around the old Aurora mall (is that whats its called?)of I-225 and the very nice new outdoor mall out toward the airport (Southlands I think?), Aurora doesn't have great 'support' areas. For me personally, that place is practically in Kansas so I never have a reason to go out there. Obviously, I dont live there, but I thought I'd give you my 2 cents as a metro-Denverite.

I will admit that I have been in a few areas in Aurora and forget that Im actually in Aurora because they are nice. Cant think specifically where at the moment though.

No, Aurora would not be considered a "nice place" if you put it in Ohio or Alabama. How ignorant are you? Have you even been to Ohio or Alabama? Maybe if they uprooted you and put you in West Virginia you would be considered "intelligent." (Sorry W. Virginians)

Maybe you need to open your eyes and drive down Colfax, which runs all the way through Denver. Or take a drive by the trailer parks in Thornton, the industrial plants in Commerce City, and the neighborhoods of Montbello and Federal Heights. These aren't bad areas?

[tfox]

Originally Posted by GretchenB

Or take a drive by the trailer parks in Thornton, the industrial plants in Commerce City, and the neighborhoods of Montbello and Federal Heights. These aren't bad areas?

Last time I checked, none of these places are in Aurora.

There's nothing wrong with Aurora. That was the poster's point. Not everyone can afford to live in Cherry Hills Village, Greenwood Village, Hilltop, or Cherry Creek. Even many people that could afford to live there wouldn't necessarily want to. Aurora is where normal, working class Americans live. Nothing wrong with that.

[McGowdog]

I also don't understand hating a place where people are just trying live. It does bring up feelings of sprawl, however.

300,000 and counting has me wondering where they are going to get their water. Well, it looks like some of it will come from Pueblo Reservoir.

Maybe someday, all of the Ark Valley will be returned to natural grassland and the next generation would-be farmers can move to the city.

It's not a matter of hatred. It's a complex problem that affects more than just Aurora.

[jazzlover]

Why do people bash Aurora?

1. Aurora is nothing but a textbook example of pure sprawl. It has never tried to be anything else. It is absolutely pedestrian-unfriendly.

2. It is the most water-hungry city in Colorado. Aurora has done more to drain irreplacable mountain wetlands and prime irrigated farmland than any other Colorado city. And, how ever much water it has already diverted, Aurora apparently still does not think that it's enough.

3. For all of its supposed "progress," much of the city is unsafe. When it's possible to see gun-toting teenagers being busted INSIDE one of the city's supposedly "nice" shopping malls and a major gang fight in the parking lot outside on the same day (I did!), it's hard to think of the city as "safe." I also had a friend who had the misfortune of living in Aurora for a couple of years who had his brand new pickup truck stolen OUT OF HIS GARAGE while he was eating lunch in the house. He moved shortly thereafter--gee, I wonder why.

I don't buy the argument that places that aren't upper-middle class and affluent can't be relatively safe and pleasant places. There are plenty of those across the United States--Aurora just isn't one of them.

PS--I used to have to go Aurora for regular business meetings. Thank God, I don't have to anymore. It's a place that I avoid if at all possible.

[tfox]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

1. Aurora is nothing but a textbook example of pure sprawl. It has never tried to be anything else. It is absolutely pedestrian-unfriendly.

Aurora is certainly all those things you say -- myopic, environmentally reckless, poorly planned, greedy, in the pocket of developers. So what else is new? So is every other suburb in the metro, and most much worse and more so than Aurora?

[canontiger]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Why do people bash Aurora?

1. Aurora is nothing but a textbook example of pure sprawl. It has never tried to be anything else. It is absolutely pedestrian-unfriendly.

2. It is the most water-hungry city in Colorado. Aurora has done more to drain irreplacable mountain wetlands and prime irrigated farmland than any other Colorado city. And, how ever much water it has already diverted, Aurora apparently still does not think that it's enough.

3. For all of its supposed "progress," much of the city is unsafe. When it's possible to see gun-toting teenagers being busted INSIDE one of the city's supposedly "nice" shopping malls and a major gang fight in the parking lot outside on the same day (I did!), it's hard to think of the city as "safe." I also had a friend who had the misfortune of living in Aurora for a couple of years who had his brand new pickup truck stolen OUT OF HIS GARAGE while he was eating lunch in the house. He moved shortly thereafter--gee, I wonder why.

I don't buy the argument that places that aren't upper-middle class and affluent can't be relatively safe and pleasant places. There are plenty of those across the United States--Aurora just isn't one of them.

PS--I used to have to go Aurora for regular business meetings. Thank God, I don't have to anymore. It's a place that I avoid if at all possible.

The water hogging continues.