possible relocation to Denver
 

I am considering a move to the Denver area- have spent just over a year in S Florida and its just way to hot for me in the summer- i love the outdoors and skiing in the rocky mountains. the geography would be denver north- including cheyenne and jackson. sounds like a lot of drive time but from a quality of life stand point any denverites that could elaborate would like to hear from you, thanks

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/down...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.
:)>-