Are my impressions about Denver accurate? (live, safe, move to)

[chilicheesefries]

Originally Posted by livecontent

With respect to all the great people who have commented on this thread--The City of Denver, alone, has tremendous amounts of open space, parks, trails than many other cities:

This combined with the tremendous parks, trails and open space that connect to the outlying suburbs, which again connect to the Great Plains, foothills and mountains---make the area a great place for outdoor recreation.

Livecontent

No question that Denver has a good number of parks, bike trails, etc. but I would agree with DenverIan that there isn't a lot of undeveloped open space in the city itself. or even in the suburbs which I think is what DenverIan was refererring to. In my mind at least, the parks are to compensate for this lack of open space and most of the parks are only a square block in size with some exceptions (Washington Park, Cheeseman Park, City Park, etc) and the bike trails are mostly paved. I've always been amazed when I've had the chance to travel a bit that areas that you think are very dense (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Chicago) that there are swashes of heavily forested, non-developed land mixed into the urban environment. A lot of this has to do with Denver's climate and vegetation pattern but to someone new to the area they may see a lot of parks and recreational opportunities but there is less undeveloped open space than most other cities I've been to.

[livecontent]

Originally Posted by chilicheesefries

No question that Denver has a good number of parks, bike trails, etc. but I would agree with DenverIan that there isn't a lot of undeveloped open space in the city itself. or even in the suburbs which I think is what DenverIan was refererring to. In my mind at least, the parks are to compensate for this lack of open space and most of the parks are only a square block in size with some exceptions (Washington Park, Cheeseman Park, City Park, etc) and the bike trails are mostly paved. I've always been amazed when I've had the chance to travel a bit that areas that you think are very dense (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Chicago) that there are swashes of heavily forested, non-developed land mixed into the urban environment. A lot of this has to do with Denver's climate and vegetation pattern but to someone new to the area they may see a lot of parks and recreational opportunities but there is less undeveloped open space than most other cities I've been to.

There is much open undeveloped land all around the metro area. The problem is what you may perceive as open space may not fit your definition if you are looking for "heavily forested land". You have made the point that it has much to do with Denver "climate and vegetation" and that is the main point.

All around where I live, there are swashes of open space but many times it is just the short grass lands. They are labeled open space and they are not developed. I see the same all over Denver and the suburbs. However, because many people do not find undeveloped grass prairies as a inviting place to recreate, they are not enjoyed or even noticed.

I can go and down within 2 miles, Sheridan and Tennyson, where I live in Arvada and find those undeveloped lands. There are even areas of undeveloped waterways for nature preserves very close to my house. Of course, many waterways, which are rare in Denver are treated with care and have developed access points for people to enjoy the limited resources. I live just on the edge of Denver and near many undeveloped open prairie land in Adams County but all counties have these areas, including Denver County.

Again, it must be emphasized that Denver sits on the Semi-Arid Great Plains, not in the mountains. It is what it is and should be appreciated for that topography and vegetation without always trying to change it to a semblance of an lush Eastern City. And we do not have to do that because Denver sits on the edge of the Rocky Mountains which has more vegetation and extensive, remote undeveloped land, including the vast amount of city parks that are part of Denver Mountain Parks.

Over time, I have learned to appreciate the beauty, the serenity, the simplicity of the Grass Lands. Colorado publicity for the tourist spends too much time emphasizing the mountains but not enough attention is shown to the greater asset--the Great Plains; for these areas are where most people live, recreate, work and where the most of the wealth of the State is generated.

Livecontent

[the3Ds]

Originally Posted by lpfan921

I do not like winter

Sorry...but you should not move here. While the other things can be debated, if you truly "do not like Winter", think of this...here in Denver, the snow season is considered "late" if it hasn't snowed at least once by Halloween. Last Halloween, we had to walk through the neighborhood and go around the snowdrifts to get to the houses. It also snows in May (I wiped out on some snow (with ice underneath it) on Mother's Day 2 years ago on the way into a restaurant).

So...if "Winter" means snow and cold, then this is definitely not the place for you. Denver's weather is weird...we are the true definition of "having to layer" because one day in Winter (like today) our high can be 7 degrees then it can be nearly 70 in February.

However, "Winter" to me (which is something I would have said a few years ago I hated too) after growing up in Seattle meant day after day of endless overcast and fog. In Seattle, Winter means seeing some sort of ball of light through the clouds from October until June. Very depressing.

Winter in Colorado is a totally different story. Snow...yes...but more sunny days than cloudy days. Air so clean and crisp that it seems like you can reach out and touch the mountains (which disappear in the summer behind a gross brown haze). Light snow that doesn't make for great snowmen building but does allow you to ski and sled in your backyard. After a few years of getting climatized, having a jacket handy because you will declare your heavy coat as "too hot" for the weather. Having to wear sunglasses when shoveling snow because of "eyeball burn" from the sun reflecting off the snow (I learned the hard way last year). Getting a worse sunburn in the winter than you ever had in the summer. All that being said, however, if you don't like the cold, find somewhere else to live. We get snow here and it has to be cold to snow.

[the3Ds]

Originally Posted by livecontent

There is much open undeveloped land all around the metro area. The problem is what you may perceive as open space may not fit your definition if you are looking for "heavily forested land".
Over time, I have learned to appreciate the beauty, the serenity, the simplicity of the Grass Lands. Colorado publicity for the tourist spends too much time emphasizing the mountains but not enough attention is shown to the greater asset--the Great Plains; for these areas are where most people live, recreate, work and where the most of the wealth of the State is generated.

Excellent point. Perhaps my perspective is different after living in so many other places, but whenever I drive around the metro area, I am always amazed at how many parks and open spaces there are. Where I live ("way out here" in SE Aurora), there is nothing to the east but prairie. Driving out to DIA means seeing miles and miles of undeveloped land. Yes, the mountains get all of the PR but unlike so many other cities around the country, Denver has a lot of great parks, trails, reservoirs and open spaces.

[formercalifornian]

Originally Posted by the3Ds

Light snow that doesn't make for great snowmen building but does allow you to ski and sled in your backyard.

I agree that the high winter snows are very dry and light, which doesn't make for good packing, but if you wait until March, when snowfall is more frequent and wetter, you can make a fine snowman. Won't last long, though, because the melt off is very quick at that time of year.

[livecontent]

chilicheesefries wrote:..

"there isn't a lot of undeveloped open space in the city itself. or even in the suburbs..."

I want to address this comment just with one little example by showing the Parks and Open Space of Arvada, which is one of the oldest suburbs of Denver

http://www.arvadarecords.org/maps/cu...Open_Space.pdf

I want you to notice the west side of this city and the amount of open space that has been preserved. There is even parcels within the denser parts of the city which are designated wildlife preserves. This is my stomping ground and I know that many of these spaces are not really identified as open space and you would not realize it, because most people do not associate barren grass land as a natural open space.

This is really not that unique among the Denver suburbs as all have set asides for open space, through different foundations, trusts, and government agencies. Again you will never realize it as you drive up and down the interstate but many parcels of lands are open space, with the same characteristics of centuries ago.

Livecontent

[vegaspilgrim]

Check out this photo tour: Cherry Creek State Park -- PHOTO TOUR. This is a good example of what the natural setting of the Denver metro area is like. Ask yourself if that appeals to you.

[livecontent]

Originally Posted by vegaspilgrim

Check out this photo tour: Cherry Creek State Park -- PHOTO TOUR. This is a good example of what the natural setting of the Denver metro area is like. Ask yourself if that appeals to you.

Great! This shows, clearly, that characteristics of the land and vegetation of the Colorado Plains, near Denver. If it was wooded you would say "wow". However, when many transplants see scrub bushes and grass, they cannot grasp that this is the natural look of the area--and this is how it should be preserved. If you cannot accept this type of land, then Denver is not the place for you.

Livecontent

[Katarina Witt]

I interpreted what chilecheesefries said to mean there is little just plain vacant land in Denver. It is true that in Pittsburgh, in addition to the parks, there is land that is simply undeveloped. Parks are a form of development. Maybe it's more obvious there b/c such land is wooded.

[livecontent]

Originally Posted by Katiana

I interpreted what chilecheesefries said to mean there is little just plain vacant land in Denver. It is true that in Pittsburgh, in addition to the parks, there is land that is simply undeveloped. Parks are a form of development. Maybe it's more obvious there b/c such land is wooded.

I grew up in the east, as you did. Those undeveloped patches forest in the cities and the towns are second, third etc/ growth forest that appeared after clearing the land of virgin growth. Most are not natural undeveloped land. They appear after farming, grazing and the land is abandoned and acquired for "open space" and park lands.I grew up adjacent to one of these types of forest and the original maps showed homestead farms that were abandoned. Just because it is forested does not make it natural undeveloped land.

The tree canopy we see in Denver is artificial. It is nice to plant trees but it does change the micro-climate. In addition, we have the insanity of over watering to get green lawns and that affects the humidity and we loose the benefits of a semi-arid climate. At the same time we are sucking up our precious water resources to satisfy the selfish desires of people who cannot accept our land in Colorado.

There is much more land, near Denver, that is indeed natural undeveloped land because it some of it was unsuited for other purposed because of lack of water. Yes, there are some lands that were grazing and farms that have been returned to the natural conservatory, just as some lands in the east.

There are actually more vacant undeveloped land in Denver than meets the eyes of many people. For example, some of the land was not developed because irrigation did not reach those areas and there are many gulches that precluded any development. Denver was wise enough to maintain these natural gulches as they provide water runoffs and flooding abatement. Yea, they are ugly to some, but they are still natural.


Livecontent