Are there any Denver burbs with older homes and tree lined streets? (Arvada: crime rate, house)

[Katarina Witt]

^^Well, anyone can cherry pick pictures to make a point.

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by Katiana

^^Well, anyone can cherry pick pictures to make a point.

Um, you said you didn't want to give me a location. So I picked one. I was planing to use yours. If I was cherry picking I would have used East 6th/7th, East 17th or Monaco Parkway as an example. There is nothing like those streets on the West side, anywhere. East Denver is where the trees are.

[sbelvedere]

Wow, this is a weirdly heated debate about which streets have more trees. I'm in Applewood (Lakewood/Golden/Wheat Ridge intersection) and I'm satisfied with the amount of trees and grew up in the northeast. The east side of Denver is older, so you'll find more mature trees there, no question. Plus, higher density (smaller lots and houses) means even if everyone has only one tree on their lot, there will be a higher density of trees. Ours here were planted in the 50s and 60s at earliest except for the cottonwoods that line the old irrigation ditches, gulches, etc. The real dividing line is how much land you want for the money you have. If you're looking for tree-lined streets but overall smaller houses and lots, then go with Denver proper. But if you want to get a 1/4-1/3-acre lot and don't mind owning a ranch house but also want the older trees, then I'd go to the western suburbs (Wheat Ridge, Lakewood, Arvada, Applewood, etc.) or old-town Littleton, etc. where the tree-density is not quite Denver proper but you get much more for your money.

[Count David]

Originally Posted by KaaBoom

Um, you said you didn't want to give me a location. So I picked one. I was planing to use yours. If I was cherry picking I would have used East 6th/7th, East 17th or Monaco Parkway as an example. There is nothing like those streets on the West side, anywhere. East Denver is where the trees are.

I'm not going to dispute your statement, but IMO a lot of the west side feels more established, or at least more settled organically, as opposed to settled in a planned fashion. Lots of laissez-faire settlement.

There's plenty of parts of the western suburbs where you'll see old farmhouses with trees or stands of trees just as old as the homes are.

Cherry pick the street view south of 62nd/Pierce St in Arvada. That would be plenty enough trees for me.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by KaaBoom

OK fair enough.

Here is West 23rd at Sloan's Lake vs East 23rd in Park Hill. Big difference IMHO. Though it looks like the trees around Sloan's Lake have grown nicely since the last time I was there. I still don't think it can compare to the east side, and probably never will.

A few blocks east of the picture of 23rd and Stuart 23rd turns into a commercial street. Take a look around here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7521...dNaMDLTK9w!2e0

Not as heavily treed as your picture of Park Hill, but still plenty of trees.

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by Katiana

A few blocks east of the picture of 23rd and Stuart 23rd turns into a commercial street. Take a look around here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7521...dNaMDLTK9w!2e0

Not as heavily treed as your picture of Park Hill, but still plenty of trees.

That is my point. West Denver is not as heavily treed as East Denver.

[gfrancis7185]

Originally Posted by KaaBoom

For tree lined streets with character, I suggest sticking with East Denver. From Broadway on the west to Quebec St. on the east and from 38th Ave. (or Colfax Ave. for safety reasons) on the north to Hampden Ave. on the south.

Yes, you can find trees in many of the suburbs. But I think you will find the right combination of old city neighborhood and lots of trees, only on the east side of Denver. I'm a fan of old neighborhoods with trees.

South of Colfax for safety reasons? Don't know where people keep coming up with this. South and North Park Hill are safer than many areas south of Colfax. Even NE Park Hill is getting much beter.

[livecontent]

Originally Posted by sbelvedere

Wow, this is a weirdly heated debate about which streets have more trees. I'm in Applewood (Lakewood/Golden/Wheat Ridge intersection) and I'm satisfied with the amount of trees and grew up in the northeast. The east side of Denver is older, so you'll find more mature trees there, no question. Plus, higher density (smaller lots and houses) means even if everyone has only one tree on their lot, there will be a higher density of trees. Ours here were planted in the 50s and 60s at earliest except for the cottonwoods that line the old irrigation ditches, gulches, etc. The real dividing line is how much land you want for the money you have. If you're looking for tree-lined streets but overall smaller houses and lots, then go with Denver proper. But if you want to get a 1/4-1/3-acre lot and don't mind owning a ranch house but also want the older trees, then I'd go to the western suburbs (Wheat Ridge, Lakewood, Arvada, Applewood, etc.) or old-town Littleton, etc. where the tree-density is not quite Denver proper but you get much more for your money.

I agree that areas of Wheat Ridge, older parts of Lakewood and Arvada have many areas of heavy growth of old trees. I think Wheat Ridge has many more older homes because the population grew out fast into the western suburbs not too long after populations moving east toward Aurora. Consequently there are many old treed areas around these homes.

Just to point out that Wheat Ridge has clear creek running through the city and it is heavily treed in parts and the surrounding older homes have many more old trees. I spend much time in these older areas and I constantly find areas that are well hidden in heavy tree growth. The western suburbs have more natural water resources and consequently support more vegetation.

"Long portions of the Clear Creek Trail hug the creek margin and lend the feeling of passing through an eastern forest"

https://www.americantrails.org/natio...heatRg-CO.html

[Mezter]

The older parts of Aurora

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by gfrancis7185

South of Colfax for safety reasons? Don't know where people keep coming up with this. South and North Park Hill are safer than many areas south of Colfax. Even NE Park Hill is getting much beter.

And which areas south of Colfax would that be, that are less safe then Park Hill?

Also see this thread.

//www.city-data.com/forum/denve...st-denver.html