U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-28-2011, 05:49 PM
 
248 posts, read 504,467 times
Reputation: 175

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacramento916 View Post
What I never understood is why Sacramento is always derided for being a FLAT city, despite being 30 minutes from the Sierra foothills and 1.5 hours from Lake Tahoe and the thick of the Sierra Nevadas.

But Denver, a city in the exact same relative distance to mountains despite being very flat, has always been considered a "Mountain" city.

In that spirit, Sacramento is both a river city and a mountain city.
Sacramento doesn't have a whole side that is right up against the Metro area like Denver has. Denver is also know as a destination for skiing (although skiing is distant from the city) and that makes it seem like a mountainous city in many peoples eyes (is what i'm guessing).

People don't seem to do their research on Denver before coming here. Thats why somany are surprised when they come here..they expect there to be a huge mountain in the middle of the city (Golden has that though ).

I'd also argue the mountains in Denver are alot prettier than the ones in Sacramento.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-28-2011, 09:10 PM
 
1,017 posts, read 2,132,611 times
Reputation: 729
well lets see Flagstaff, AZ and Missoula, MT are both great picks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-28-2011, 11:14 PM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,685 posts, read 6,389,647 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gfitz1010 View Post
Sacramento doesn't have a whole side that is right up against the Metro area like Denver has. Denver is also know as a destination for skiing (although skiing is distant from the city) and that makes it seem like a mountainous city in many peoples eyes (is what i'm guessing).
Auburn? Rocklin? El Dorado Hills? Placerville? They're all in the Sierra Foothills, and only becoming larger and larger as time moves on (to my dislike, to be honest).




I'd argue that in California, Sacramento is probably the largest metro area that is most attached to the mountains and the snowboarding/skiing/snowsport culture. Everyone that I meet from there seems to be excited about going to Tahoe during winter.

However, Sacramento technically has mountains WITHIN its metro, as Placer and Nevada Counties extend to the Nevada border. Technicalities will be technicalities (thank border drawing)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Colorado
2,561 posts, read 5,043,460 times
Reputation: 2223
Ok now let's finally get this straight here on CD about Denver... while the actual city of Denver proper is basically flat many of it's western most suburbs IE Evergreen Conifer, Golden are located in heavily forested vertical terrain. There are more than just a few people who can almost see the state of Kansas on very clear days from their decks at 9,300 ft. The rapid transit district even has direct line daily commuter busses running peak hours well into very mountainous terrain..Yada Yada Yada..been to Sacramento and it's mountainous suburbs are virtual flat ground by comparison. Denver itself isn't in the mountains...many of it's western suburbs are..more so than ANY other major US city save Salt Lake City.
I Know people who have shot bears in their back yards who commute 30-45 minutes straight into Downtown Denver daily.

Last edited by Scott5280; 11-29-2011 at 08:18 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
1,309 posts, read 2,366,523 times
Reputation: 1196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott5280 View Post
Ok now let's finally get this straight here on CD about Denver... while the actual city of Denver proper is basically flat many of it's western most suburbs IE Evergreen Conifer, Golden are located in heavily forested vertical terrain.
Most definitely. I wouldn't call Denver a "mountain city" but anyone who says all of Denver metro is flat obviously hasn't been to Evergreen or Golden.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacramento916 View Post
What I never understood is why Sacramento is always derided for being a FLAT city, despite being 30 minutes from the Sierra foothills and 1.5 hours from Lake Tahoe and the thick of the Sierra Nevadas.

But Denver, a city in the exact same relative distance to mountains despite being very flat, has always been considered a "Mountain" city.

In that spirit, Sacramento is both a river city and a mountain city.
Lol, if you can get from Sac to Lake Tahoe in 1.5 hours, then I can get from Denver to Vail in an hour

The differences probably lies in the fact that Denver has a pervading mountain CULTURE...as in, Subarus and 4Runners are the vehicles of choice, equipped with ski racks or torpedo boxes. There's an REI flagship store smack in the middle of downtown. People skip pea coats and wear performance North Face soft shells over their work attire...the whole outdoor adventure culture probably contributes to a feeling of being a "mountain city".

I've been to Sacramento several times and have never noticed an inkling of that, so my guess is few are going to think of it as a "mountain city" even though it may also be close to mountains & skiing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 10:06 PM
 
605 posts, read 1,243,667 times
Reputation: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by wag more bark less View Post
Most definitely. I wouldn't call Denver a "mountain city" but anyone who says all of Denver metro is flat obviously hasn't been to Evergreen or Golden.



Lol, if you can get from Sac to Lake Tahoe in 1.5 hours, then I can get from Denver to Vail in an hour

The differences probably lies in the fact that Denver has a pervading mountain CULTURE...as in, Subarus and 4Runners are the vehicles of choice, equipped with ski racks or torpedo boxes. There's an REI flagship store smack in the middle of downtown. People skip pea coats and wear performance North Face soft shells over their work attire...the whole outdoor adventure culture probably contributes to a feeling of being a "mountain city".

I've been to Sacramento several times and have never noticed an inkling of that, so my guess is few are going to think of it as a "mountain city" even though it may also be close to mountains & skiing.

Ya I sorta agree with you. In this regard Seattle and Vancouver B.C. have alot in common with Denver. There is a definite mountain culture that exists all three of these cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 11:43 AM
 
Location: The Springs
1,770 posts, read 2,162,375 times
Reputation: 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Colorado Springs is an amazingly beautiful and pleasant city, much nicer than Denver which itself is cool but too big and crowded. CS was the msot beautiful large city on my cross country road trip two summers ago, very clean air, lovely mountain backdrop (Pikes Peak, just outside of town, inspired the words to America the Beautiful) and from the top you can see into the mountains as well as the plains to the east. Traffic was managable and people were friendly, not as friendly as the South but still nice enough, and low crime.

Roanoke, Virginia is a nice city in the Blue Ridge Mountains with a stunning location too. Not the rugged beauty of the Rockies but rolling green mountains that change color in the fall!!
Thank you! COS is a wonderful place to live
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Silverthorne, Colorado
884 posts, read 1,533,179 times
Reputation: 737
Agreed about the culture of Denver (and Colorado Springs too, or the entire Front Range for that matter). The way the people live here (way we dress, vehicles we drive, what we do on the weekends [mountain stuff]) makes the Front Range cities total mountain cities in my opinion, even though the mountains are only on one side and they technically sit on the plains.

Sacramento could be one, too. I could easily see myself living there and going skiing and hiking on the weekends the same way I do in Denver. But that's a mountain city for me and apparently a few others. It's not so much part of the general culture over there as it is here in Denver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 05:48 PM
 
9,966 posts, read 14,706,666 times
Reputation: 9193
Denver has a drier, high elevation location--so even though the mountains are only slightly closer than say Seattle or Portland or Sacramento--it feels more like a mountain city in some ways than the sea-level cities on the edge of the Cascades or Sierra. The mountains feel a little more present than Sacramento, since there's a layer of forested foothills in the Sierra on the west side before you get to Donner Pass and reach the real alpine area of the Tahoe Sierra. The population is very athletic/outdoorsy in Denver as well. When I've walked around areas of LoDo it's funny how many young people who live in that area I see who look like they just got back from skiing/boarding or hiking.

Although Seattle is pretty good in this department as well--it's the city where REI was started along with being very close to the Central Cascades along with Mt. Rainier to the south. You've got the Olympics a ferry ride way as well. Though the feeling of the city---like Vancouver--is kind of a mix of port city on the edge of the mountains.

There's a lot of stuff to explore in the Sierras between Tahoe, Yosemite, the John Muir Trail, Mammoth Lakes, Kings Canyon and so on--yet it's sort spread over a good chunk of the state and gets visitors from almost all the major metros(although LA tourists usually go up the east side of the range). No one really thinks of Fresno as a mountain city, yet it's the closest sizable city to some of the best spots in the Southern Sierra. The only city that feels like it's right on the edge of the Sierra though is Reno--you basically have commuters living or working in Tahoe going back in forth from Reno only about 45 minutes away. Lots of skiers or boarders from Tahoe ended up moving to Reno for a job and house to remain close to the mountains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2011, 04:48 AM
 
Location: Austin
1,795 posts, read 2,586,162 times
Reputation: 1203
El Paso, Texas sitting on the edge of the Franklin Mountains.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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:

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 > General U.S.
Similar Threads
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 · Bug Bounty

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