Hi, if I dislike Denver do you think think SLC would be any different? (Salt Lake City: transplants)

[patrickmich]

I do not find Denver attractive. I don't know why exactly, but it just doesn't do it for me. There are very few parts of the city where I actually want to live. In many areas the houses are small and old and beat up. I want to buy a house, but I'm not inspired to buy one here. I'm not inspired to live and work here. I know it's a tough question, but please give me the best advice you can. Thank you very much. Overall it is my impression that SLC is a cleaner, much more attractive city.

[11thHour]

I'm not certain what it is that makes you not like Denver. Is it because of the scenery or the housing?

I've spent only a limited time in the Denver area, so my opinion may not be the best. Denver is much bigger, and more urban. It did impress me as being 'dirtier' than SLC in general, but like I said my time there was limited so that may not be an accurate assessment. Hey, SLC isn't far from denver, take a weekend and drive out there and do some exploring. See what you find and maybe you'll like it.

[SLCPUNK]

Other than weather, I do not find the two cities comparable at all. SLC is very clean and right up against the Rockies.

[jazzlover]

I am familiar with both SLC and Denver, though I currently live in neither. Here's my take:

Weather:

Denver has wetter summers (though not much), winter Chinooks that frequently warm things up and melt fallen snow, more wind (can be good or bad), a little bit more humidity in summer and a little lower summer daytime temperatures. Denver gets fairly frequent thunderstorms in summer, which can be severe.

SLC has drier summers, slightly more snow in winter that stays around longer, less wind, and less frequent thunderstorms in summer. It also has severe air inversions in winter that lead to bad smog conditions.

Both cities are going to face serious water supply problems in their future that will likely strangle their population growth at some point in the future--probably sooner than most people think.

Economy:

Both rely heavily on the current high-tech service economy model that I believe will be very vulnerable in the coming economic debacle. Both are also over-reliant on recreation and real estate speculation, which will also tank. Both rely a fair amount on federal government and military employment in their economies. Both have significant energy and mineral enterprises with a presence in their economies. Denver is a much larger metro area than SLC, but both are regional trade centers for wholesaling, health care, and retail trade. As a percentage of its local economy, I think SLC actually has more "heavy" industry (manufacturing, refining, smelting, etc.) than does Denver, which I consider a positive.

Geography:

Denver sits at the foot of the Eastern Slope of the Rocky Mountains, but is basically located on the Plains. The mountains are west of Denver, eastward are plains that extend all the way to the Missouri River. SLC sits in a basin, with mountains of varying size and topography in virtually all directions. It, of course, has the Great Salt Lake nearby, of which Denver has nothing that compares. SLC literally abuts against the nearly vertical Wasatch Front, making it much closer to high mountain country than is Denver.

Sociology:

SLC is still under significant influence of the Mormon Church, and still has a large percentage of LDS members as residents. Denver is a quite secular city, and its entertainment, and eating/drinking establishments reflect that. Denver's population is a mix of some native-born residents (less and less all the time); in-migrants from rural areas of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Nebraska, etc.; a large (some would say out-of-control) influx from California, Texas, the Midwest, and East Coast states; and a growing population of immigrants, legal or otherwise, mostly Latino. SLC still has a significant percentage of Utah natives in its population. SLC's growth is mostly from its high birth rate, along with substantial in-migration from rural areas of Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, etc. In-migration from other areas seems biased toward California transplants, with lesser amounts from other states. Immigrants, again legal or otherwise, from outside the US are a growing population, again dominated by Latinos--but nowhere near the numbers seen in Denver.

If I had to choose in which city to live, I would probably pick Salt Lake City, mainly because it is the smaller of the two metro areas, is in immediate proximity to outstanding mountain country, and is--in my opinion--better equipped socially and politically to weather a severe economic breakdown in this country--an event that I consider not only very likely, but probably unavoidable.

[Bayzing]

I agree and disagree with JAZZLOVER...

Agree.... Salt Lake is a better size... Salt Lake is located closer to mountains and IMO is more beautiful, Salt Lake has a more homogenous population. Denver has slightly cooler and more humid summers.

Disagree... both face serious water supply problems.... bogus... 12,000ft mountains will produce plenty of water for millenia... regardless of whether or not you believe in Global warming.

Disagree... there is a coming economic debacle.... NO.. that's just economic pessimism.... there hasn't been an economic debable in Salt Lake or Denver since the great depression... and neither economy has seen a deep recession in nearly 30 years. Both economies feature a very educated population base, strong tourism (that isn't going to stop... people will continue to ski the slopes)... and an entrepreneurial structured economy with very low unenemployment.... entrepreneurism and small business is the best defense against economic downturn.... and both economies are quite self reliant. Yes... every 10 years you may see a recession... but I'd rather be stuck in Salt Lake or Denver than just about anywhere else.