possible relocation to Denver

Just marking the thread as I may be doing something similar in the future.

OK, Denver? Incredible burgeoning night life, restaurants, great symphony, ballet, huge theater complex with original plays to all the national tours, gorgeous parks, trails, river renovation,(relative) bargain lofts going in all over, easy access to mountains (except on weekends in the winter): what's not to like? Heat in the summer (but very dry), but also golf in the winter (don't tell anyone). Cheyenne? Read posts in this forum. Jackson? Jackson Hole? Whole different part of the world. For quality of life and value of your money, Denver is a no-brainer.

p.s. You might also want to look at Fort Collins (fab college town), a little farther north.

thanks for your posts... these were sort of my thoughts on denver as well... love every visit i have made there; just back from 2 weeks in vail- where i lived for 6 mos. would love to live there and commute for my job; not sure if it would be realistic or not.. maybe small place there and small place in denver.

Vail commute to Denver? Not remotely reasonable, even in good weather--maybe Evergreen?

I know you are looking for input from Denverites, but I looked long and hard at Denver and chose not to live there. It is a great place, but here were my pros and cons. I actually spent a year there on a temporary assignment, so got a good feel for the place:

What I loved: Very sunny. Going to the mountains was fun in the summer. A couple older neighborhoods really caught my eye, especially Wash Park and the DU area (but $$$). Boulder is a great town. People in Denver seemed nice. Good job market. Lots of younger people moving in to the area. Investment in mass transit will pay off over time. Great air service by United, as long as they stay in business.

What I didn't like: Traffic jams every Friday afternoon getting to the mountains to ski in the winter.... that doesn't happen in the movies! The neighborhoods that I liked (mentioned above)were outrageously expensive. That left alot of bland suburbia in my price range, but I wasn't looking for that... you can get that in anywhere, USA for cheap. Growth rate is a little alarming... is it going to be the sprawl of Southern Cal in 20 years? And after I had spent my year there, I realized that I really missed green. That's just me. Denver is in the high desert, and very arid and brown by nature. I found that I need lots of trees and lush plants and grass to feel comfortable.

With all that said, Denver was on a very short list of places I was looking at, so I certainly wouldn't discourage you from looking there. All in all, a town that I would probably move to if my job took me there.

Hazelmm - What's DU?

Denver University. I believe that neighborhood is called University Park. A friend just bought a charming brick home on a nice block there.... 1,350 sq. feet for $450,000.

I second Evergreen as a possible commute to Denver. West of town on the way to Summit County and gorgeous scenery.

Lucky you.
Not sure what you mean by the "geography would be Denver north". Is the job a traveling job? If so, someplace north of Denver would be great. I was thinking of Fort Collins as well. My brother and family moved from Cheyenne and the kids miss the West terribly. Cheyenne is not that appealing though. I'd love Estes Park, but hard to get in and out on a regular (traveling) basis.

I grew up in Fort Collins, moved away for college and worked in Denver, Dallas and the SF Bay Area before DH and I decided to move back and buy a house, start a family. We absolutely LOVE living here. Its a fantastic college town with great restaurants, fun bars, wonderful Old Town (downtown) and an amazing place to raise children.

having lived in downtown boston and recently making almost 200k on a home in sw florida (after only 8 mos of ownership!) the prices in denver are reasonable in comparison. i may find eventually that moving back to new england is my thing; but 3 winters now of sunshine (vail and then 2 seasons in FL) - the darkness in new england is daunting to me- but so much character. appreciate all of your posts- keepm' coming! Thanks-

If you are willing to spend $500,000 - $750,000 on a house, then there are lots of nice neighborhoods in Denver that will appeal to you. Cherry Creek and Washington Park just to name a couple. They provide a bit of character. I ditto the idea of Evergreen, a great alternative.

If you like more of a suburban, planned feel, Littleton is nice.

New England is great, too. There is no place west of the Mississippi where you can re-create that type of character and charm.

wont spend that much on a house.. but could i spend 350 or so on a nice town house in one of those areas?

I would imagine that you could find a nice townhouse for that price range. As with any neighborhood, if you want to give up character, you'll gain size and amenitieis. You could probably do very well in some neighborhoods with $350K, but I prefer the ones that remind me of the east coast.

What I'm contemplating, when I retire in a few years (early 50s) is moving to Denver or 'burbs and become a ski bum of sorts. I figure I'd get a season ticket to Winter Park and make day trips there 3-4 days/week (weekdays only), and perhaps work part-time in or around Denver.

Does it make sense to stay on the west side of I-25, to keep the trip under an hour? If so, are there any sections of the city or 'burbs anyone would recommend? Kids will be in college, so looking to downsize to a condo or townhouse (with pool, tennis courts, etc.) to minimize maintenance hassles. Also would like easy access to bike trails. Wife does not want to be "out in the country" and would like easy access to the city as well as Cherry Creek Mall :.) Current house is worth 700-800K, so would want to spend less than that. Any thoughts appreciated.

I would think that being on the west ring of suburbs would cut down on your commute time to/from mountains. Evergreen is a nice option that is actually in the mountains (would be a long drive to Cherry Creek), Golden is on the west side. And Lakewood is nice with lots of new housing stock.

You wouldn't be getting the old, quaint character and charm in those suburbs, but that isn't as important to everyone.

Being on the west or in the western suburbs is a good idea. Golden is at the entrance to the I70 corridor to the mountains, and has a lot of home building going on right now. It's home to the School of Mines and has a pretty nice downtown that is being preserved well. (Morrison (at Red Rocks) is very close to the mountains and Denver, and is a very funky little town; also probably priced a little high.)

Barry -

When you start talking Morrison or Evergreen, your wife might feel like she is "out in the country".

I-70 is your gateway to the mountains, so plan your location around that. Being a weekday ski-bum would be the life.... now crowds, no traffic, that is what it was meant to be like!

With all the talk on this thread of home prices, I thought you might like to know that you don't have to be in that price range. The neighborhoods mentioned are older neighborhoods in/near downtown - you're going to pay more for those homes. When you get out to the suburbs, you pay less. If you're looking North of Denver, definitely check out Ft. Collins - although you'll be farther away from the skiing. I agree, Evergreen, Indian Hills and the mountain areas of Morrison are nice if you want a mountain feel - but again, you'll start paying more in those areas. If you are curious about real estate, here's a good local site. recolorado.com

I've lived in Denver 19 years now, having grown up in the midwest. I love it! Fort Collins is nice also if you like a smaller town, less traffic, etc. At first I missed the trees and green here, but you get used to it. The temperatures and dryness and sunny days and mountain views more than make up for it. And there are trees here like in the midwest in the older neighborhoods. We love to spend time in Estes Park with the woodsy feeling--all the pine trees. It's green here too (maybe not quite as vibrant), except for winter but that's true most places.

The median home prices here are about $260,000 with condos being about $100,000 less I think. Of course places like Cherry Creek and Washington Park will be higher. The Highlands neighborhood is a nice one. For a somewhat newer neighborhood I like the KenCaryl Valley, way southwest--it's got a particularly Colorado feel to it.

Sue

We live in historic Montclair, in central East Denver. Just west of us is a little neighborhood called Mayfair, which has nice brick bungalows in the $300,000 range. In fact, there are a LOT of homes now for rent and for sale in Mayfair. I think the market here is finally starting to slow down and favor the buyers over the sellers. It seems to be a good time to be real estate shopping in Denver as sellers might be more negotiable now. Good luck.

We lived in Cherry Creek a number of years ago and loved it. We had great neighbors and lots to do in the Denver Area. We still get back to see old friends and it is still a great area. We also like the Ft. Collins Area - a college town and all the stores and things you need and homes are cheaper than Cherry Creek. Just depends on what you are looking for but both are great. Good Luck.

Jillc and BarryK - just stumbled across this old thread. What did you decide?

Haven't moved yet, but thanks for resurrecting this. I bookmarked it so I won't lose it.

We'll be spending a couple of days in Denver the end of March, then heading to Breckenridge to ski.

I've been to Denver many times, and the mountains are indeed gorgeous.

However, I could never live there, as the topography is very flat and brown most of the year with little vegetation. Also, the extremely dry weather causes my nose to bleed and fingers to crack almost every time I'm there. Maybe that could be overcome with a home furnace humidifier, but when traveling on business, that comfort is never available so I suffer dearly.

When living in Denver you learn to never have your water bottle far away, a lot of lotion, and I suspect my grandchildren have never left their house without sunscreen on.

Hey bkluvsNola- While traveling to dry areas we fill the hotel or condo bathtub each night to alleviate dry nasal passages. Not a perfect solution but we notice a difference.

I agree with some other posters, that the brown environment in Denver would get to me. It has the lowest % tree cover of any major metro in the US, outside of Vegas.

Now, when you get to the mountains, I could certainly handle that.

To Denver's credit, they have done great things recently to improve the air quality and get rid of the smog (caused by the geography, not by industry). Also, they are building a mass transit system that will be the envy of many western cities.

Quick correction to the perceived Denver tree situation: in the last century, residents made a concerted effort to plant trees, which makes Denver quite a foliage-intensive city. Of course, all but the cottonwood tree are imported from other parts of the country, and most of the old, magnificent elm trees have succumbed to Dutch elm disease. Nevertheless, Denver is designated Tree City USA and in the summer, it's a quite a verdant place! The plains surrounding it are barren, and most suburban subdivisions have immature trees - there's an advantage to living in the city!

I agree that Denver is making great strides to make the city more "green". I'd put Denver up there in a category with just a dozen or so other American cities that are progressive when it comes to shaping the local environment.

The disadvantage that Denver has was that they started from such a barron point (similar the the surrounding area you referred to). But I agree the residents have really done alot of great stuff to the city!

I loved seeing the little wooden windbreaks on my brother's property a little further north on the prairie in Cheyenne. I wondered what the neat row of wooden Vs were all about. Plant a tree, plant a windbreak around it

Years later, on a return visit, I was surprised how little the tree had grown.

starsville - that is so funny! I had a similar experience.

In a period of 3 years a long time ago, we were transferred from Denver to Minneapolis to Indiana, and then on from there.

About 10 years later, we had a chance to visit Minneapolis and Denver, and see our old yards. The trees we had planted in Minneapolis had grown about 3 feet / year. The trees we had planted in Denver had grown about 5 inches / year.

It is an uphill battle to plant trees on the high plains, but I hand it to the people who give it a go!

As a long term Denver resident I find many of the prior postings interesting, humorous, and, sometimes, a little inaccurate. Unfortunately the smog is caused by too many autos and trapped by geography.

Not sure what a "brown environment" means or describes. Certainly the rural fields are brown in the summer but it is high desert. I would like to see the original source for the "% of tree cover." While I don't doubt that it could be true, I have never heard that before. Denver, not the newer suburbs, has a lot of trees and some areas complete tree canopy over the road.

With 500 miles of bike trails in the metro area and many miles completely off road, it is pleasure to ride. With the exceptions of this winter, we normally ride year around. With the low summer humidity, summer riding is terrific. When I visit the midwest and the SE in the summer, I don't understand how you people can stand to live with all the humidty and bugs. You have to constantly move from AC cars to AC buildings. Outdoor recreational activity is so limited.

We do have some problems with growth rate and access to water will be an increasing problem Greeley and Ft Collins areas have been rated near the top of several "where to live" surveys. Other areas (Colorado Springs, Boulder) make the list in lower positions.

By our standards, some of the older areas in Denver are expensive but when compared to FL, Chicago, CA or other majority metro areas the prices are pretty raesonable. A new neighbor just moved here from Seattle and thinks we are dirt cheap since he bought a bought a bigger house for about 2/3 of what he sold his house in Seattle. And no one has comment on the tax rate. It is fairly low but that also means that we do not have some on the same services as other areas expect.

Traffic flow in and out of the mountains on the weekends is a major problem and getting worse. Solutions are being proposed but none are cheap or quick. Therefore, it would helpful if some of you decide not to move here.

Going to ride today and ski on Monday. It is a good life.

I remember reading / learning in ecology classes that trees (and other vegatation) in high wind climates spend 80% of their energy just battling the wind. There's little energy left for vertical growth. In some areas, trees that are over a hundred years old still look like saplings. That's why there are tall trees in tundras. I thought I "got it" - but didn't actually "get it" when I saw proof of that on my brother's place on the plains.

fmpden -

I don't want to make this into an arborist posting, as that measure of tree "canopy cover" has many nuances (how do you count brush? what about large vs. small trees?)

However, the study I cited is one that is done periodically by both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Cities range from about 5% canopy cover to 55% (Portland, OR). Denver comes in right around 6-7%, very low. But the good news is that the amount of tree cover is growing (no pun intended).

Here is a link with more info: https://www.americanforests.org/downloads/rea/AF_FrontRange.pdf

I think the main thing is that Denver needs to keep planting trees (will help with the smog) but should not ever strive to be a great tree city... just doesn't have the topography for it. What Denver does have is something that many places don't. Great climate, low humidity, and a view of the mountain just off in the distance....

Wow! I was never aware that Denver had such a dire tree situation until today. When fmpden mentioned the tree canopy over the road, I immediately thought of the Montclair neighborhood and the bike paths along the Highline Canal.

I agree that Denver and Colorado do not have the gorgeous tree-lined highways that you find back east, but the above postings make it sound like the area is treeless. Completely untrue!

The mountains have more of a tree problem with the pine beetle wiping out many of the beautiful forests.

HonestAbe, as I stated I didn't doubt the statistic but don't know what it means. Does it mean that it is desirable to have a high percentage of tree canopy? And exactly what is being measured? Total coverage or number of trees? When I have been in areas with dense canopy, nothing grows beneath it. Not sure that is desirable. To me, it is the type of stat that gets thrown on the table with a negative connotation. It's bad !!!!! Why ??

Forty years ago I worked in the Charlotte NC area with dense tree growth, high humidity, lots of bugs, and I hated it. I need to see the sky once in a while.

Denver was born in a plains environment. There were practically no trees here, before early city planners designed the beautiful boulevards of historic Denver, like 17th St., 6th Ave., Monaco Parkway, Richthofen Parkway, etc. Denver's dry environment can be tough on trees and other landscaping, so it's not a fair comparison to other cities with humidity and lush greenery.

There are still nice homes for sale in historic neighborhoods like Montclair, Mayfair and Park Hill, in the $350,000 range. For that price, you'll find a nice little brick bungalow, or a larger home that's a fixer-upper.

fmpden -

Excellent question. The reasons that a higher tree cover % is desired has everything to do with soil and environmental health. It actually has little to do with aesthetics.

Higher tree cover is an indicator of better soil structure, balanced soil moisture levels, cleaner soil and air, cleanear water, etc. More often than not, an area where trees can grow can sustain most other types of vegetation, and the opposite is also true.

The other reason you want a higher cover number is that it improves air quality and, much more importantly actually, improves the water quality by cleansing storm and other runoff.

So, to we conservation types, the higher the better on the number. However, I know many people like you who love the front range for the exact reason that you can see the "big sky".

Honest Abe, I was kind of baiting you because I figure your response was going to be that more tress are better. I am not sure you can sustain that premise. I would agree that more trees are better if it is appropriate. They didn't call this the great prarie from nothing. I grew up in the sandhills of Nebraska where great environmental thinkers of the late 1800s believed that the only thing wrong with the sandhills was the lack of trees. The results was a disastrous program call, "Timber Claim." You could obtain a section of ground if you agreed to plant a quarter to timber. The sandhills were never designed to grow trees. Nor was it designed for the plow but that is another whole discussion.

Just to say more trees are better and Denver needs more trees is not supportable. Given our current water situation we could use a few more brown lawns and fewer water soaking cottonwoods or Russian Olives. Denver does just find with the trees they have. If you want tree cover, move to Charlotte --- IMO !

Personal preference on having a green, lush landscape vs. a drier brown, more dramatic landscape is purely subjective. We'll agree to disagree.

But how could it be a bad thing to have cleaner air and water? Seems like a universally accepted "good thing" to me.

""Colorado is a dryland ecology, nd with the rapid growth of population and urban areas here, it's vitally important to recognize the full environmental and economic value of urban trees. When impervious surfaces expand, tree cover needs to expand to compensate" - Gary Moll, vice president of urban forestry at American Forests.

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that Denver needs to get up to 30, 40, of 50% canopy cover like some other metros. But I do think focusing on growing the tree cover with species that can thrive there (like you guys have already been doing a great job of) is an effort worth continuing.

Did that mean - "More concrete added, more trees needed?" - or something like that?

Pretty much. As you add concrete, you take away grass and brush, add cars, furnaces, etc. to the mix.

The only way to negate the negative effects is to make a concerted effort to keep the tree population stable (or increasing).

Easier to do in Minneapolis or Seattle than in Denver or Las Vegas.

I honestly don't see the appeal of Denver. It would seem that if you were a mountain type person that had to go skiing all the time, then living in Seattle would fit the bill. A great, green environment yet access to the mountains.

I don't agree that the climate in Denver is mild. I was in Denver in early January after one of those snowstorms, and the high for the day was 1F with windchill probably -20. There was no sun that day and it was bitter cold. It can also get up to 100 degrees in the summer, and because of the altitude, the sun feels stronger up there.

Denver is a Great Plains city with access to mountains (Front Range is just tilted high portion of the sloping Great Plains). The Great Plains are known for being an extreme environment characterized by lots of wind and variable weather.

Once you cross into the mountains, however, everything changes.

While it was 1 degree in Denver when I was there, it was actually 20 in Aspen. The Rocky Mountains actually blocked the extreme arctic air from penetrating into cities like Aspen.

bk - people who have lived here 40+ years (i.e., all their lives) agree that this has been a horrible AND unusual winter. This is my 17th winter here and I've never seen anything as cold and snow-covered. Sure, if you were here on a day it barely got to zero, I can see where you might think every day of every winter is like that. Generally, many winters days are like they were today: sunny and in the 50s-60s. That's a lot warmer than where I grew up in Boston! I have never needed winter boots, for instance, for going to work. I abandoned my long winter coat from Boston many years ago. I'll take a Denver winter any time over one in an east coast or mid-west city!

I am willing to take the conversation off-line since it really has nothing to do with relcating to Denver. I enjoy the discussion because it is one that is on-going in this area. I assume, HonestAbe is not a resident of the area or have a lot of experience with the Denver environment.

<<<<Personal preference on having a green, lush landscape vs. a drier brown, more dramatic landscape is purely subjective.>>>>

I am not sure that should be personal preference. Along the front range, a lush landscape with KY blue grass and lot of plantings mean that you are pumping a lot of processed water. The focus should be living within the environment of a high desert plain. The application of xeroscape should have a high priority. It doesn't surprise me that someone in the foresty business think we should be planting urban trees. And we probably should to a limited degree. There are no "native species" that thrive on the front range. If it thrives in the city is because we planted it and we water it.

We have many of the trees that we have because Mayor Speer traveled to Paris a hundred years ago and decided that is how we should look. Since they had no idea which tress would grow, they literally planted block after block with the same trees. And then shift to another species for a few more blocks. Makes for an interesting neighborhood of trees until Dutch Elm showed up. Then whole blocks of Elm trees were lost.

The trees we have are fine and we replace what we loss but am not sure we have programs to plant more.

But none of this answers the original question. And I don't think having a 5% tree cover is a negative.

Lived in Denver for a year. So, while not a long-term resident, I did see 4 seasons.

I like alot about Denver, don't get me wrong. It is one of the few cities I would consider moving to someday, although I'm not actively trying to to relocate there or anything.

To me, the dull barren high plains are more than offset by what lies just a couple hours to the west

Funny all this talk about trees.... to me, the dry high plains without alot of trees is part of Denver's character. Agree that you don't just want to assume that growing trees is necessary everywhere.

You don't have to get far west and you start getting into forests.

And I'm not an authority on this, but I would suspect trees would help the smog issue. However, if they don't want to grow there, why force it? Focus on what you have.

Trees will not have much of an impact. Our smog is caused primarily by three factors. Our problems starts with car since we don't much heavy industry, then Denver sits in a river basin area which traps the snog, and then the altitude lets the sun work better on the O3 which increases the smog. BUT it is not very bad. A few days in the winter is the extent. We do not have prolonger periods of smog. We let our LA cousins worry about that.

bkluvsNola said, "I honestly don't see the appeal of Denver. It would seem that if you were a mountain type person that had to go skiing all the time, then living in Seattle would fit the bill. A great, green environment yet access to the mountains. "


bk - Seattle would NOT fit the bill for me. A couple of things important to me, which you are overlooking, are abundant sunshine and a decent (i.e., warm) summer.

I've lived in a couple of always-cloudy, frequently-drizzly locations (Pittsburgh and Syracuse,) so Seattle would not fit the bill for me.

BarryK,

Then what about living in a city like Sacramento or Reno? Greener than Denver with plenty of sunshine yet close to Lake Tahoe (one on the west side of the Sierras and the other on the east). Definitely a warm summer too...

Although Dutch Elms may not be native to the high plains, neither are parking lots or shopping centers.

Where those shopping centers were built was once open fields, and now there is little absorption into the soil. Trees help with that.

bkluvsNola, I got it, you don't like Denver. I don't have a problem with that - to each his own. But I can't believe anyone would recommend Reno over Denver. I was there once and I couldn't wait to get out of the place. I also remember seeing parking lots and shopping centers in Reno. I'll take a wild guess here, but I don't think those features are unique to Denver.

Seattle and Reno over Denver?! Time to put this thread to bed.

huh? I get the absurdity of Reno, but I think there are quite a few people who would take Seattle over Denver.

And they are probably living in Seattle. Good.

Car...I understand your appreciation of trees. I grew up in Ohio and my heart is still there. However, I never realized that I never saw much when living in the midwest- until I moved to Denver. Now I can see forever and I love it! We'd not see the mountains if we had trees. It comes with the territory. I prefer it.

There are some reasons I can think of moving to Reno instead of Denver, including no state income tax, cheap cost of living, closer proximity to mountains than Denver (no traffic getting there either), and little possibility of weather getting in the way of activities, whereas Denver can get a blizzard that stalls everything.

Also, Sacramento offers even more than both, greenery in the winter (nowhere to be had in Denver), proximity to mountains, close to California attractions such as Yosemite, Wine Country, San Francisco, and the coast.

That being, said I personally don't like Reno that much, but if I were a skiing fanatic, it might make sense.

Sacramento seemed to me to be a place I could actually live, whereas I would never consider Denver.

Maybe I just don't understand the lure of Denver. People tell me it's the mountains and sunshine, but to me there are far better places that have mountains nearby and plenty of sun.

I just found out one of my best friends is moving to Denver...
They have 6 kids and will be working in Aurora.
What's a good affordable area for a large family.
Great public schools, commuting distance and a 3500 SF newer house w/big yard? I would imagine they want to stay within a 400,000.00 range.

Aurora is very large. Lots of new housing developments there, probably many that are good for a large family. You can get more square footage for your money in Aurora, than in old Denver, usually. Some very nice homes off Parker Road, heading southeast. If that's not technically Aurora, it's still commuting distance.

Not sure where they are coming from but $114/sq ft is not a realistic figure for new housing in the Denver area. Obviously the further out on the eastern plain that you go will be cheaper. And large yards are not a common characteristic of new housing the area. Large yards are expensive to maintain because of the climate. They need to spend some time in the area so that they have a realistic understanding of the area.

TxTravelPro - you might have them look in Parker,too, just for more options.
Betsy

I had to laugh at some posts. I grew up in Denver and lived also in Aurora, Englewood, Gunnison, Colorado Springs and Englewood again. Unfortunately I now live in the Seattle area. I miss the views and drier air and the 4 seasons. I don't like the grey skies for 10 months and too many trees (they block the views)and no skiing--awfull snow!! What they call a resort here is a joke!!
I would love to move back to Denver or anywhere in Colorado. I consider the weather great because after it snows the sun comes out! With the summer breezes we didn't even need air conditioning.
I would only consider the south or southeast part of Denver. Littleton is all shopping centers and traffic. I love Cherry Creek shopping area but it is not as nice as it was years ago due to congestion. I also lived in Wyoming (tooo backwards) and MN (too hot and humid).

It appears they have settled on Castle Rock.

Littleton is all shopping centers and traffic -- ????

You have to be think of somewhere else. Outside of Aspen Grove and some off of Federal, I don't think there is another shopping center in Littleton. And you have been on main street in downtown Littleton is some time.

I was thinking the same thing fmpden!

I live near Littleton and have no idea what is meant by traffic and shopping centers, My comment should have been that she has NOT been in downtown Littleton. In fact I think the congestions towards the SE -- Parker, Highlands Ranch, Castle Rock -- is worse but since I avoid that area my assessment may not be completely accurate.

I can't agree with these statements, either:
"With the summer breezes we didn't even need air conditioning. I would only consider the south or southeast part of Denver. Littleton is all shopping centers and traffic. I love Cherry Creek shopping area but it is not as nice as it was years ago due to congestion."

Our summers nowadays are much hotter, so we do have to turn on our A/C, although we resist it as much as possible. Our ceiling fans do a great job at night, but some afternoons I relent and turn on the A/C when the sun is really beating down. I know it wasn't this warm when we moved here in the early 70s. (Can you say global warming??)

Also, we live near Cherry Creek. It's not especially congested, and is still my primary shopping center. But it's expensive housing around there.

Only to consider the south and southeast part of Denver is the biggest misstatement IMHO. I don't think the poster knows Denver today, to say that. There's Stapleton, Lowry, lots of new neighborhoods North. In fact, if the OPs territory includes Cheyenne and Jackson, maybe they should be looking primarily north. There are some nice towns north of Denver, like Niwot and Hygiene, too.

And yes, Parker road going southeast is a bear. My son does it twice a day from our house to school, so we know it well.

Other than that, her praise of Denver is well made!

" With the summer breezes we didn't even need air conditioning"

I've been to Denver in the summer and you need air conditioning. There's a reason air conditioning is standard in new homes there.

I think that statement applies to Seattle more than Denver. Seattle is definitely a city where you don't need air conditioning.

I don't like the rain in Seattle, but I can't stand the dryness of Denver, so if I was forced to choose (and thankfully I haven't had to make such a choice), I'd pick Seattle.

I also can't understand who would not like to look at beautiful tall trees. They also help for shading, which helps keep homes cool in summer.

There should be no debate that Seattle and environs are far prettier than Denver and environs. Giant trees and greenery or a flat brown landscape....

bkluvsnda, I glad you been here in the summer so you can share your expectise with us old farts who have lived here for the past 30 to 40 years. Stay in Seattle, What you have stated is pretty superficial observation that the majority of Denver/Colorado residents would disagree with. If look to the east, pretty flat and brown especially in late summer. Look to the west, it is a magnificent view -- rugged snow capped mountains, green forests, unsurpassed skiing, great hiking. and sun shine most of the time and not the gray overcast of Seattle. And yes, you can avoid air conditioning in the summer but does require careful management of your house. Sometimes we get lazy and run it for a couple of hours in the late afternoon. Not like the midwest where turn your AC on in May and off in October. So let us that live here make the recommendations for moving even if the posting is about 18 months old.

AND you would think that Denver had no trees!!
AC is a necessity--dry or not. And 300+ days of sunshine doesn't hurt. Just as well he/she is in Seattle. Probably drives 35MPH in the left lane on I25 too. ;o)

<<...or a flat brown landscape....>>

Not exactly the Denver I know. Monday was what I consider a typical, fall day in Denver. Sunshine with a crystal clear blue sky, trees in red & gold & the mountains in the background covered with fresh snow. It was stunning. It was a pleasure driving to work with that view right in front of me.

Sorry Gretchen, I have to disagree with AC being a necessity. It is nice to have, but I only use it sparingly, mainly in July, and I turn it off at night, open the windows and enjoy the cool night air.

I'm glad I found this "Denver" post. I live in North Carolina, the Raleigh area. My husband and I will be moving to Denver in later 2008 because we want to. We're in our 50's. We don't ski but we want some kind of "view". It was between the ocean and the mountains for us. We visited Florida and hated all the sunshine and heat. We'd like a little more "mix" of seasons. Couple of comments...........(although I really hate to bring up trees again), trees aren't what they are cracked up to be. I was raised in Texas with only mesquite trees so didn't get much exposure there, but have lived in NC for 20 years now and yeeeegads I get so tired of not being able to SEE, for goodness sake. Each to his own, really. But for me, I'm ready to ditch these trees and head somewhere you can actually SEE something off in the distance. Thanks for all your comments here but I'm really having problems finding places where I can read good valuable advice for people moving to the area, other than house prices and trees. For instance, a move across country holds some challenges. I'd be interested to know how many of you just picked up and went because you'd studied Denver and wanted to be there and if so, were there pitfalls along the way you could caution about? Also, I'd love to maybe meet a "penpal" of sorts in that area who could make themselves available to answer questions as they arise. Does anyone know of any good Internet sites (safe Internet sites) where we could perhaps meet people online from Denver??

nhinson: You can email me if you would like at happy-to-travel@hotmail.com

OMG... Denver is awesome. We feel the residents of Denver are darned lucky to live there!
My whole family lives in NE Texas so I am stuck here for some years to come. I may never be able to live there, but Denver (IMO) has it all. Beauty, perfect climate, nice people, flat land, mountains, water, good weather, trees, excellent restaurants, good shopping, good airport... I could go on and on.

TxTravelPro: Denver is nice, but it's not perfect.
Somethings that are really nice are: 1.Lots and lots of sunshine 2. excellent views, you can see for miles 3. very few bugs, you can leave your doors open all summer.4. although there can be a lot of snow, the next day is usually a beautiful sunny day. 5. Even in winter you usually only need your heavy jacket in the morning.

nhinson - I moved to Colorado to work at a ski area the winter after college(1975). Moved away for grad school but eventually moved back (1980). I think the biggest thing I miss is the ocean so many of our vacations head in that direction. By the way, we have no a/c but live on 5 acres at the top of a hill. It does get hot in the summer(July), late afternoon. Why don't you start a new thread if you have more questions.

Happy, your response just confirms itis the perfect place
Remember, I live near Dallas!

nhinson, We are in our mid 60s and lived in the Denver metro area since 80. Came here from the Chicago area - NW Indiana. We been here long enough to qualify as semi-native. I know of no web site for meeting other Denver folks. But feel free to contact me off line if you like. We have decide that this is a good place to die. We are not leaving.

nhinson, DH and I moved to Denver in 1978 from southern Illinois. We love it here. We are approaching retirement and intend to spend it here--with maybe a month or two in either Arizona or Hawaii in the winter. Feel free to contact me off line if you would like--stanmarty@aol.com.

nhinson, I am one of those folks who love Denver and get to go a lot because our children and grands live there. And I live in charlotte. I don't know what your experience with Denver and CO is, but you might want to go stay a while before just sticking a pin in the map!! Have you considered the NC mountains? Is employment a consideration?

However, there is one major drawback to Denver. In the Fall and Spring we can have some pretty dramatic weather swings. Yesterday it was 80 but woke up to 4" of snow and 32 degree weather. But it is bright and sunny now and it will all be gone tomorrow.

Let's not encourage any more people to move to Denver!

That is true. According to the news we actually had 7.5 inches.

Thank you to all who posted. In response to not having any more people move there, I promise not to take up a lot of room Remember, for those moving in, at least someone is moving out. I know because Raleigh is growing by leaps and bounds to, so someone is moving in here from somewhere.
Thanks to all who posted. And thanks especially to those few who gave me the option of writing to you by email. I have written notes. Response to the pushpin in the map.........no way. We picked out many cities and have studied each one carefully for going on five years now while we were getting the last one out of the nest. That is the reason I'm posting and asking question, so that we DON'T use the "throw a dart at the map" reasoning. By the way, if anyone DOES want to move this way, you are very welcome to come and I'll certainly avail myself to answering questions. To Charlotte area, yes, we've actually considered Ashville to, by our work is specialized and we could find any work at all in our careers in that area. Again, thanks to all.

,,,,,,,, I'd be interested to know how many of you just picked up and went because you'd studied Denver and wanted to be there .......

I just went back and reread your original posting. Except for retirement I am guessing that most people follow the job and hope for some choice. My first job out of college was in Charlotte --- too many trees !!!! And that was before Charlotte became the financial centerand was smaller. Was on business in Charlotte a few years ago when Hugo visited --- again, way too many trees.

Before coming to Denver we were in the Chicago area and had a choice of GA, near Savannah, New Orleans, or Denver. After visiting all three sites, we decided that Denver was a better place for a Yankee. In hindsight, a terrific decision. IMO, there is no perfect place so the final decision will always be a series of trade offs. Let us know what you decide !!

Glad you picked Seattle, nhinson:

Author: nhinson
Date: 10/24/2007, 03:15 pm
I'm sold. I live in Raleigh, NC. If you want trees, trees, and more trees, to the point of not being able to see a darn thing, Raleigh is your town. Trees and concrete. I'm done. I'm in my 50's and I want mountains and water and I want to SEE something when I get to where I'm going. For me it was between Denver and Seattle. I've been researching for 2 years. Fifteen minutes ago I just made up my mind. Seattle won. I love gray, overcast skies. I flourish in "gray". Sunshine is way over-rated if you ask me and I have a son who flies for US Air so I can visit Hawaii or Florida when I need a yearly dose of sun. I can't wait to move. I'm not buying, I'm renting. I'm a closing coordinator for a commercial real estate firm and my husband is in the hospitality industry. If we can find jobs, we're coming. Well, we're coming anyhow and we'll worry about jobs when we get there. Thanks to all of you who posted and helped me make up my mind. Life is too short to be living somewhere you hate.

I'm glad you've made up your mind. It's funny how different we all are. You thrive in gray!? I enjoy a gray day now and then, for variety, but to have everyday gray would work a number on my psyche. My son just chose a college, and one of his top priorities was to avoid grayness because it bums him out. Viva la difference, non?

I am with MaureenB, but am very pleased that we all do not have the same likes and dislakes. I hated the winter grayness in Chicago and Indiana. Three gray days in Denver and everyone stays complaining. Sunlight is NOT over rated. And there is medical support for that position. Enjoy Seattle.

Denver's a wonderful place to live. But, it's getting more crowded. Right now is a great time to move to Denver and/or buy a home here.

We live in Aurora and are toying with whether now is an awful time to sell or not.

What an interesting thread this is and yes I'm gonna try to resurrect it. I never knew there was such a battle between tree people and the 'untree' people and the sunshine people and the 'gray' people.

I am originally from Metro Detroit and moved to Metro Washington DC. When I moved here I saw all the beautiful trees and said 'how beautiful'. And then..... well come mid-June, forget about using the yard (mosquitos galore). And the allergies, yuck. And the crowds, oh no. And the expense, my god. And the rude, rude people, I can't believe them.

Now I'm thinking about Seattle and Denver. Leaning towards Denver cause I am a 'sunshine person', but would really like the some trees. Any suggestions for nice neighborhoods with trees? I don't require new construction. I just need a little space between me and my next door neighbor. At least 50 feet or so. Prefer the suburbs, but would consider outer limits of city. A nice older neighborhood with brick ranches would be perfect. 1500 to 2000 sq ft. Under 300K.

I've only been to Denver once, so I don't know a lot about it, but I'm originally from Detroit so I think I can only go up from there. LOL. I don't know where I would be working so thats not a factor right now, I just want some ideas for neighborhoods.

katolb90, there are several established neighborhoods in Denver with little brick ranches in your price range. Try Mayfair, Montclair, Park Hill, Bonnie Brae (may be more expensive because of D.U. rentals there), City Park, Capitol Hill, etc. There are nice trees in these neighborhoods, too, and gorgeous tree-lined parkways.

It is a bit of a stretch to include Bronnie Brae as part of the DU area. And the pricing is well outside your range of $150/200 sq foot. Not sure about the pricing of the other neighborhoods but it will push the $200/ft. Even with the recent decline, suburban houses are above 150 except for a couple of areas on the edge of Denver city limits.

I included Bonnie Brae, because I believe a lot of DU students live there in rentals, don't they? Maybe times have changed.

I live in Montclair, own a rental in Mayfair, and I look at For Sale brochures. They are eclectic neighborhoods, where you can find tiny bungalows, more like 1400 square feet. For your price range, you might not get a garage, but I believe the properties are there.

You must be confusing Bonnie Brae with Observatory Park as DU students do not rent in the Bonnie Brae area. It is across I-70 and several miles from DU. Bonnie Brae is pretty pricy and has had some issues with lot scraping.

I know, I know, Bonnie Brae is north of I-25. Typing too fast and not proof reading.

What about outside Denver, thats what I'd really prefer. I didn't mean to imply I was only interested in city neighborhoods. Also I'm mid-fourties so I wouldn't want to live near younger people.

Define outside of Denver. Do you mean outside the city limits, outside the Denver metro area, or areas physically separate from Denver? I am in my sixties and I don't want younger people live near me either so I hope you pick another neighborhood, maybe another town.

I mean outside the city limits, but within the metropolitan area. Are you trying to say that most people in Denver are younger? When I mentioned I didn't want to live near a lot of young people, I guess that means people under 35 or so. Areas with moderate to liberal people over 40 would be ideal.

I think you do not understand the geography of Denver. Have you ever been there? "Outside the city limits" is just about colorado Springs.
Denver is a huge city with many contiguous areas--Aurora, Lakewood,Littleton,LoDo, Ballpark neighborhood, etc. etc. There isn't a place that is "young people". DU is an urban university surrounded by houses and apartment buildings. You would benefit from living in that neighborhood if you can afford it. Very attractive.

All of the neighborhoods I mention above are very diverse, including in the age of their residents: Mayfair, Montclair, Park Hill, City Park, Capitol Hill. These neighborhoods which I believe could have brick bungalows in your price range.

The twenty-somethings I know are wanting to move into the up-and-coming Highlands area (not sure of the boundaries-- includes 32nd and Tennyson), and into condos just west of LoDo.

Gretchen. Aurora is a city. Littleton is a city. They are just small cities. They are outside Denver proper. Right? When you address a letter and the person lives in Littleton, you use Littleton, CO on the city/state line. An area that is part of Denver, but has a nickname of its own would be something like Park Hill right? Park Hill is still Denver, CO. Just to be clear I am interested in towns (suburbs) outside the city of Denver.

katolb90, I'm confused. Why do you want to be outside the city of Denver? In my experience, the city folks are more what you're looking for-- not conservative, diverse. . .

If you want a city/town that is separate and distinct from Denver, then you need to look at Longmont, Louisville, Boulder, Colorado Springs, Ft. Collins.

I wouldn't call a suburb a 'town' necessarily. The Denver metro area, including Aurora and Littleton, is one giant mish-mash, like any other city. It's not like you notice a big difference when your drive from Denver into Littleton.

Perhaps I would consider living in the city. I'll be sure to check out those areas that were suggested. Its just that when I think of the 'city', I think of close together houses and with a 'grid like' layout. I want some space (1/4 acre or so) and a large yard for my dogs.

Yes, do check out all areas of Denver. The Denver city boundaries are quite expansive. We live 'in the city', but are four miles from downtown.

When we had friends visit from New York City, they were puzzled, because we live 'in' Denver, but our neighborhood is a cool historic area with lots of trees. Not what they expected.

In fact, some of the older homes sit on multiple lots, so the yards are quite large. A good realtor can steer you correctly. Good luck.

Katolb90 -- you just changed the whole discuss when you asked for a large lot. Most of the housing in Denver and even the newer outlying subdivisions sit on small to very small lots. There are some exceptions but not many and none in your price range. Large lots in the city are expensive and large lots with small houses are in very high demand. We call them "scrapeables". A small house is scraped off and big one built. Also, large lots with lots of grass are expensive to maintain -- most of the areas have water rationing -- some mandatory, some voluntary and water usage pricing is design to discourage high volume of usage. The busing issue 30 years ago frozen Denver's city limit to a relatively small area when compared to the metro area. Most of the small surrounding true town - Littleton, Englewood, Aurora, Lakewood, etc. have been overrun by the metro area so that it is impossible to know where the boundaries of each are other than a little sign sometimes.

Since I live on the south side (Centennial) so I am more familiar with the neighborhoods of Littleton, Englewood, Aurora. The original core of Littleton, Englewood would have some small houses with decent size lots but not a quarter acre and somewhat closer to your price range. How you judge if you neighbors are old and liberal, I have no idea.

You should probably spent some time in the Denver before you make any decision. It may not be a good fit for you. Denver metro area is recognized as having a high educational level and one of the youngest cities in the US.

Yes, Katol, my kids live in Greenwood Village (Littleton) and Lakewood, but I say they live in Denver, as most people who live in Aurora, etc. would also. They have both lived in what I guess you want to call "Denver"--Wash Park, Park Hill, Ballpark neighborhood. You really do need to visit and find out what you are talking about. My kids live in neighborhoods that have 70 year olds, and 30 year olds. It just works that way in a big city. As for a city on a grid==that is the definition of Denver. It is definitely on the grid.
As for Highlands Ranch--south south, off I470.

"As for a city on a grid==that is the definition of Denver. It is definitely on the grid."

Gretchen, I am not sure what you mean by that. I don't think of Denver as being on a grid per se. Even newer areas like Highlands Ranch aren't laid out on straight-lined streets.

I don't think Gretchen has very good knowledge of the Denver area. She may visit frequently but does not live here. She has made prior references to Greenwood Village ( Littleton) and implies that they are same. They are not. Two completely separated and very different cities. Littleton is an 100+ year old town and Greenwood Village is created urban town of recent vintage. The older parts of Denver is definitely laid out on the city block system as is typical of must older cities. However, there are sections of Denver that are not. I believe Bonnie Brae has the distinction of being the first subdivision ever plotted with non straight streets. Crestmoor Park is another. The off grid layout of downtown Denver will drive you nuts. All of the subdivision built around Denver in the past 40/50 years are of the curvy street style. But it is interesting that some of the redevelopment of Lowry and Stapleton is returning to the city block grid. Each has its purpose and advantage/

fmpden, you are right on, as per usual.

We've lived in Denver since the late 60s, and I've found that most visitors are pleasantly surprised at what Denver actually is, once they get here and experience it. They expect it to be a much different city, in many ways.

You make a good point that there are great and definitely distinct neighborhoods throughout the metro area. We live in an historic neighborhood that is quirky and wonderful. Very similar to our small town Missouri backgrounds. Littleton, as you say, has its old town charm, too. And Greenwood Village is a completely different environment.

I hesitate to boast too much about Denver, though, because I definitely do not care for the sprawl era we've been through. But Denver seems to be vigorously re-building its 'inner city' neighborhoods. It has done a good job, in my opinion, of restoring its vintage architecture, creating lofts, dining, etc. LoDo case in point.


Love it here. Just between you and me. LOL.

The other thing that is overlooked when compared to other cities is now vibrant the downtown area is. Had some business that kept me downtown last night and continued to be amazed by the number of people on the Mall at 9:30 at night. And the Rockies were out of town. When do these people go home? Of course, the drawback is that it is snowing like crazy today.

Haen't read this thread, but just wanted to let you know that I was talking to a client in Denver this morning and it was snowing there. On May 1st.

fmpden, did you notice the ages of the people out late last night, in LoDo?

I've seen predominantly twenty- and thirty-somethings down there. Wasn't Denver listed as a top city for singles? It sure looks like it when you're in LoDo at night.

I worked downtown for Mountain Bell, starting in 1979 as an intern. Back then, Denver only had Larimer Square, and no one was in downtown Denver at night. It was a ghost town after 5:00 p.m.

So --- it has officially snowed as late as June 8. The first year we lived here the only snow day for the local school system was May 9, But it is also really more than 100 degrees in the summer.

Mambo, you are absolutely correct. We came here in 80 just as the Mall was being completed. For a number of years you could have fired a shot gun on Mall after 7pm and no one would have been hit or heard it. The timing of baseball made the difference. The Mall catching on and baseball pushed it over the top. I was near the south end last night and it was mix of everyone -- it was a mixture of everyone from young to old. Same of the restaurant in LoDo. Caught the Dline south at 9:30 and it was more than half full of all types of people. The whole downtown area has undergone a major transformation in the past 15 years. Very positive.

My earlier "So...." was directed to missypie who hadn't read the thread but was complied to response anyway. I will take the snow over the recent tornados.

I do realize that Greenwood is different from Littleton--it is just that the mail people always say "Littleton". And it is true that I visit often. And it is true that our children have lived in various and diverse parts of Denver.
and Denver to me--being "old"--is one of the most vibrant fun cities I know. I partcicularly love that the old buildings downtown have been preserved.
So, I'll leave it to you experts.

Gretchen, without an exact address I am guessing they didn't live in Greenwood Village either. Close but technically not in GW. Until just recently most of the area south of the Denver city limits (Hamden) was unincorporated Arapahoe County served by various postal offices. If they had Littleton mailing address they mostly likely living in Arapahoe Cty serviced by the Littleton post office. We had a Littleton mailing address although we were ten miles outside of the Littleton city limits. Then a lot of unincorporated Arapahoe Cty was incorporated into Centennial. So now we have a Centennial mailing address BUT the zip code didn't charge.

The reality is that city or town names have no meaning. Only the zip code counts. I deal with a legal firm in Lakewood -- far west side of Denver metro area. But their letterhead uses Denver as a mailing address with a Lakewood zip code. Suppose it means that they can charge higher fees as a Denver law firm.

But it really doesn't make much difference -- most of it is urban sprawl -- and it all looks pretty much the same.

Wow! There's a wealth of information here! As I may be relocating to Denver, I'd love to know any info on traffic patterns that split the difference between Denver and Boulder.

I probably will wind up wanting to live in Denver proper as my job will be just NE of it, but am curious to hear from the experts!

Thanks!
Chris

Chris

Need more info. Where are you coming from?

Don't understand what you are asking --- any info on traffic patterns that split the difference between Denver and Boulder ------ ??????

Denver is the typical metro area with rush hour problems. The south end is slightly better because of the I=25 rehab that was just completed. Light rail is being developed and, right now, only serves the south side. Boulder is a college town with some really bad traffic patterns. Anymore it is nearly a suburb of Denver being only 25 minutes apart,

Traffic problems are always relative. Compared to Chicago and other large metro areas, our problems are nothing. So --- refine your question a bit.

Thanks! Be happy to- I'm coming from LA so Denver will be infinitely more civilized...I'm wondering if commuting from Boulder to Denver is nightmarish/if many folks do that and how long a drive it may be from the various northern suburbs of Denver towards the 70/Havana st exit area?
Any info you can supply is greatly appreciated!

I am always reluctant to give this type of information as it is a mostly perception. The Hwy 36 corridor is one of the worst because there are a lot of people including students who make that run daily. And it is not just Boulder, it is Louisville, Broomfield, etc. along that route. And when something goes wrong there are no good alternatives. But if you can time it a little -- early or late -- much easier than anything in the LA area. Between I-25 and Havana it would be easier so only 2/3 of the route would be a problem. Of course, snow and ice are miserable no matter which road you are on and that will be shock to your system. . Boulder to that area on a good day is 30 minutes and an hour on bad days.

Northern corridor of I-25 till about I-70 or a little south of that is probably our 2nd worse area. But the side streets options are better in that area. Depending on how far north, times would be about the same. You can contact me off line if you like

I am whimpering reading this thread b/c I would love to move to Denver. It's not in the cards - my family is here, my kids are happy here (in Phila) and my husband reminds me that he has a job here and not in Denver. (although, lucky dog, his company just acquired a company in Denver. Funny how he only visits Denver in the winter and both times he has had a "business" meeting that took place on the ski slopes. Hmmm).

We've been to Colorado 4x and love the mountains. I think Denver would be great b/c you have a lot of urban amenities that you dont' hve in smaller western towns (i.e. professional sports, major airport, etc).

I do wonder if Denver would seem small to me. I am used to the larger cities of the east coast: Phila, NYC, DC, Boston. Denver seemed sort of small (and more homogeneous) in comparision.

Anyone make the move to Denver from the east coast?

Sure it feels smaller!!!! It is smaller -- about a million plus in the metro. We can here from the Chicago area 28 year. But it is all to scale. We have 20 blocks of high rises instead of a 100 or more in Chicago. The first thing we missed was the traffic and especially the truck traffic on I 80/90. Then we missed the humidity of the midwest, and then the bugs. Of course the drawback to no bugs is no birds -- nothing to eat. Five years later I was offered a substantial position in Des Moines, IA. After three days of a site visit in Iowa, in August, we decided that Denver was very good place to die and we will.

I've been in LA much longer than I thought I'd be and think Denver looks great! It has so much going on and b/c of the scale seems incredibly liveable- I'm through with people trying to kill me w/ their cars every day on the 405!
Plenty of museums, restaurants, outdoor activities AND some breathing room- sign me up!

Bring your bike -- we have over 500 miles of bike trails, paths, etc., i the metro area with a high percentage separated from vehicular traffic.

Liking Denver would depend alot on where you are moving from. My husband works 4 days a week in Denver & commutes each week to our home in Salt Lake. I looked long & hard at moving to Denver last summer, but as much time as i spent researching & spending time there in general, i never have grown to like the city. mostly because we have two high schoolers & that totally dictated the areas we could live. i found the real estate way over priced, way too much traffic & for sure the mountains are a long way away. heading to the ski areas on a week-end takes 2 hours each way. bumper to bumper traffic coming home on a sunday.

the upside of Denver is it does have good pro sports, nice selection of restaurants & shopping, all of which is missing here in Salt Lake, with the exception of our great basketball team.

but i thought the commute into downtown every day for DH job looked really tedious, and if it snowed, would be a nightmare. so if you can live downtown or near your work, your experience may be great.

Colorado is awesome, If you have the opportunity definitely go for it. So much awesome stuff going on in colorado and the rockies are absolutely breathtaking...I'm pretty jealous

Truthfully I am kind of glad not everyone likes Denver. It is all a matter of your comfort level and what you like. I spend a far amount of time in Salt Lake City and could have posted many of Ranknew comments -- only in reverse. Don't know about real estate since I have not priced SLC real estate but Utah is probably cheaper. But I do know that SLC has really odd liquor laws and restrictions. A throw back to the days of prohibition. And you can ski within an hour of Denver -- I did two weeks ago. Any skiing still available around SLC at this time? And I don't think the mountains compare but don't take it too serious. We are happy here but I would not mind shipping a couple of my neighbors to Utah, or LA, or ,,,,,,

I say ,"move on out!" We moved to the Denver area 9 months ago from the northern suburbs of Chicago and we love it ! You get a lot for your money as far as real estate goes. The taxes are WAYYYY lower and the people are SOOO nice !! It must be the 300 plus days of sunshine and no humidity !

Trust me- I'm definitely there if the offer comes through as it's supposed to at the end of the month. I really hope it happens!!
Thanks for all of the input everyone!!
Christine

Commuting downtown? There is the good light rail system all the way to County Line.
Someone mentioned no birds. Not true. Nice birds to wake up to.
300 days of sunshine/year. I was talking to a mother of a college bound child, and apparently "some" kids who opt for the northeast, for example, REALLY miss the sunny weather. Who knows. I thought it was interesting.

I think I started the post... I ended up moving to Portland, ME- but I ALWAYS think about Vail/ Denver--- it aint over yet!

Dear heavens. About as different as it can be, except for also being in a gorgeous part of the country!! Enjoy!!

The winters are much colder AND DARKER!!! Not looking forward to this one!!

I made the second post to bookmark it for future reference and I DID move to Denver.