Where to live in CO

curt86iroc wrote: yes, when you leave denver at 7:30 and expect to be at keystone in an hour.

I lived in the Denver area for a time a few years ago(Boulder and Stapleton) and the traffic drove me nuts. I should say that I am an Idaho native, so I am not used to traffic! I can go climbing for a week in the Sawtooth range, say, and see a handful of people during that time at best.
I liked Boulder and loved Estes Park and RMNP, but I don't miss the hordes of people.

To the OP:best to you on your search!

reboot wrote: Yep, I would say the I-25 stretch between Thornton and Centennial is one of the worst in the country. That's after spending time in Silicon Valley, Seattle, and even Boston. The thing people on the east coast don't realize is Denver is so spread out that it takes a lot of driving to get anywhere, and with pathetic public transportation options. I'm so glad I don't work in Denver anymore. On the other hand, your options for a skilled white collar job is way better than GJ or the small towns in CO so there is that.

I have a very, very different view. Probably because I live in Denver (and not the burbs, which I think is where most of these complaints are coming from). I find Denver to be an incredibly compact city which is easily walkable/bikeable. The only time I use a car is to get to the mountains.....but you really dont need one for city living.

But yes, if you dont plan well and/or dont live near transit, of course life will be a nightmare.....I think that is relevant for any big city.

Of note, the light rail runs pretty much the whole stretch of I25 that you are complaining about. Did you ever see a train zoom by and ask yourself why you were waiting in traffic on I25?

reboot wrote: Yep, I would say the I-25 stretch between Thornton and Centennial is one of the worst in the country. That's after spending time in Silicon Valley, Seattle, and even Boston. The thing people on the east coast don't realize is Denver is so spread out that it takes a lot of driving to get anywhere, and with pathetic public transportation options. I'm so glad I don't work in Denver anymore. On the other hand, your options for a skilled white collar job is way better than GJ or the small towns in CO so there is that.

Public transportation in Denver is great. My car died two months ago and, while much less convenient than a car, the light rail and bus system connects every single part of the greater Denver area. Trains run very frequently and buses aren't more than 30 mins apart (usually closer). Perhaps if all you goobers on the highways would take the damn light rail or bus to work there wouldn't be so much complaining.

I hear Trinidad is nice.

jason.cre wrote: I find Denver to be an incredibly compact city which is easily walkable/bikeable. The only time I use a car is to get to the mountains.....but you really dont need one for city living.

Hunter McPherson wrote: Perhaps if all you goobers on the highways would take the damn light rail or bus to work there wouldn't be so much complaining.

I had co-workers that used light rails & it still took them better part of an hour to get to/from work. Yes they can nap or read on their commute, I can't. The problem is jobs in Denver aren't just in the downtown vicinity (if you happen to work in downtown Denver, good for you). It's spread out in a lot of places & none of them are close to where you want to play.

As far as the city living thing, I thought we are talking about outdoor living; this means being able to do stuff before/after work (which is casual in the Boulder or Golden vicinity), which breaks the whole taking public transportation system down: none of it gets anywhere close to the climbing crags or biking trails. If we are strictly talking about weekend warrioring, even San Francisco is doable: Yosemite or Bishop is better than anything doable from Denver on weekends.

-mn wrote:I hear Trinidad is nice.

How about Aurora??

:0

J/K of course!

reboot wrote: I had co-workers that used light rails & it still took them better part of an hour to get to/from work. Yes they can nap or read on their commute, I can't. The problem is jobs in Denver aren't just in the downtown vicinity (if you happen to work in downtown Denver, good for you). It's spread out in a lot of places & none of them are close to where you want to play. As far as the city living thing, I thought we are talking about outdoor living; this means being able to do stuff before/after work (which is casual in the Boulder or Golden vicinity), which breaks the whole taking public transportation system down: none of it gets anywhere close to the climbing crags or biking trails. If we are strictly talking about weekend warrioring, even San Francisco is doable: Yosemite or Bishop is better than anything doable from Denver on weekends.

Excuses. The Jeffco station is a 5-10 downhill bike ride from the Canal Zone lot. If a light rail trip takes up to an hour, they are traveling very long distances that would take much longer via car. Moreover, one could also (mind-blowing here) be proactive and actually work during your commute rather than sleep or zone out.
I know, public transportation isn't very popular and it's not necessarily and option for everyone. People are quick to make an excuse for avoiding it.But eventually people should start realizing traffic and congestion is waaaaaayyy lamer than a bus or train...

reboot wrote: I had co-workers that used light rails & it still took them better part of an hour to get to/from work. Yes they can nap or read on their commute, I can't. The problem is jobs in Denver aren't just in the downtown vicinity (if you happen to work in downtown Denver, good for you). It's spread out in a lot of places & none of them are close to where you want to play. As far as the city living thing, I thought we are talking about outdoor living; this means being able to do stuff before/after work (which is casual in the Boulder or Golden vicinity), which breaks the whole taking public transportation system down: none of it gets anywhere close to the climbing crags or biking trails. If we are strictly talking about weekend warrioring, even San Francisco is doable: Yosemite or Bishop is better than anything doable from Denver on weekends.

Sure, if climbing is your priority in life then Denver isnt what you are looking for. I'm just trying to say that people complaining about traffic are complaining about poor choices they decided to make. There are affordable places to live near transit in Denver and there are plenty of jobs to go around in this economy. The vast majority of jobs are concentrated near that public transit. If you decide to take a job that is far from your house and not near public transit, that’s your choice. Remember you aren’t ever stuck in traffic……you ARE traffic.
Overall Denver is FULL though. So I guess I agree with everyone else…..DONT CONSIDER THE FRONT RANGE.

Hunter McPherson wrote: Canal Zone

I'll take Movement or ET any day over Canal Zone.

jason.cre wrote: Sure, if climbing is your priority in life then Denver isnt what you are looking for.

This is MP.com, not hipster.com, right? I get it. Denver (& Boulder) is attractive to a lot of (younger) people in a lot of ways besides the outdoor. But if those (instead of your outdoor pursuits) are the overriding concerns, then we're talking difference things.

reboot wrote: The problem is jobs in Denver aren't just in the downtown vicinity (if you happen to work in downtown Denver, good for you). It's spread out in a lot of places & none of them are close to where you want to play. As far as the city living thing, I thought we are talking about outdoor living; this means being able to do stuff before/after work (which is casual in the Boulder or Golden vicinity.

This is a key point. I think that you can't generalize the entire Front Range area. It really matters where you live and work within the metro area. In Golden/Boulder/etc, with crags and trails out your back door, is a drastically different experience than living on the east side of Denver, with climbing a traffic-choked hour away. Even an extra 20 minutes of driving to get to/from outdoor recreation makes a massive difference in how much you will get out, and how much effort/stress it takes to do so. That is the difference between an outdoor lifestyle (in Golden) and a city lifestyle with weekend climbing access (in Denver). If you can find an arrangement where your job, your residence, and your recreation are close together, the Front Range can be a great place to live, and the traffic issues will not affect you. If you have to drive any significant distance along one of the trafficked corridors to connects any of those things (i.e. to commute to work or to crags), traffic congestion may become a significant source of frustration.

Skiing is a totally different story, though. While it is possible to live in Golden/Boulder and have easy access to climbing, this is not possible for skiing (Eldora excepted). Getting to the I-70 resorts is a huge pain, no matter what. Yes, you can avoid traffic by leaving at 6 am, but I would consider having to schedule your day around traffic to qualify as a huge pain. If skiing is important to you, Denver is not a good choice. One the other hand, SLC/Ogden/Logan would be a fantastically good choice for a skier.

Also, since Seattle has been mentioned... The access to skiing from Seattle proper is actually quite a nuisance. People talk about Seattle being a good home base for skiing, but that is only true if you have a high tolerance for driving. Denver actually has easier ski access than Seattle. From Seattle, it is at least an hour to skiing, and much farther to the good stuff. Traffic is always an issue. The cost of living is high. It would not be a good choice for the OP. On the other hand, living near Bellingham could be a much better choice. Smaller town, much less traffic, less expensive closer access to skiing, better options for outdoor lifestyle. Bellingham is probably the best place to have access to big, glaciated terrain without having to go all the way to Alaska.

To the OP I lived in the Front range for years been all over the place and It is a wonderful area. If you want to be close to Colorado you have two choices one insane..one sane... For the insane live in Denver or Fort Collins. The healthcare market is competitive but it is possible to land a job. Everyone else in this thread has pointed out the traffic and other errors for living/commuting in this larger community. Now onto the sane choice... Just across the Colorado border in a mystery filled lonely land is the College town of Laramie Wyoming excellent living...Vedauwoo is an excellent crag and Snowy Range Ski Area is fairly decent..Its not Arapahoe Basin or Jackson Hole but they get more than their fair share of fresh pow... The Wasatch Range in Utah is awesome but stay the fuck out of Salt Lake City...terrible place! Go with Provo, Lehigh Orem or Ogden UT hope this helps

reboot wrote: I'll take Movement or ET any day over Canal Zone. This is MP.com, not hipster.com, right? I get it. Denver (& Boulder) is attractive to a lot of (younger) people in a lot of ways besides the outdoor. But if those (instead of your outdoor pursuits) are the overriding concerns, then we're talking difference things.

Canal Zone is great for after work. First crag in CCC and a quick 10 min approach. Obviously sucks on the weekend with dog fights and screaming kids though. You could always try and make a friend to give you a ride up the canyon. At any rate, I'd rather have a beer at a brewery than waste my time going to Movement or ET after work. I suppose that's something else the OP should consider as well. Danomcq, if you like your climbing gyms at 98% capacity, move to the Front Range!!

Bottom Line: Have a regular, 9-5 job?
No: Denver is awesome, move here!
Yes: Look anywhere else

Hunter McPherson wrote: Bottom Line: Have a regular, 9-5 job? No: Denver is awesome, move here! Yes: Look anywhere else

haha not absolute, but very very spot on!

Boulder, and you know it. All these people's responses are just trying to keep you out of the cool place.

Hunter McPherson wrote: At any rate, I'd rather have a beer at a brewery than waste my time going to Movement or ET after work.

I'd rather have a beer at a brewery than waste my time going to Canal Zone after work.

Jeremy Kasmann wrote: I'd rather have a beer at a brewery than waste my time going to Canal Zone after work.

The point is to carpool up the canyon from Canal Zone...

Chad Miller wrote: Boulder may have plenty of climbing areas within a 30 min drive (without traffic) but with traffic and the huge number of climbers at the popular areas and it's going to be 90 minutes before you're at the base ready to climb. Sure if you live in Boulder you may get that down to 45 minutes but someone that can afford to live in Boulder probably has enough money to travel to way better climbing areas. ;)

90 minutes?

Well, I guess that is true, but only if you completely eliminate all the climbing in Boulder, such as Eldo (10 min w/o traffic, 15 min with traffic), Bocan (10/15 min), The Flatirons(10/15 min), the Saint Vrain (30/40), and Table (25/??)...

It does take that long for Lumpy & Clear Creek I suppose.
And I still think it is kinda weird that you'd count approach & racking time into distance to a climb... but even then, you are really slow, or really exaggerating.

BTW - I work just North of Boulder and climb at these places regularly just before or after work. I live in Erie (20 min to get to Boulder) and can reach all of the Boulder crags within 30 min, and ANY of the above mentioned crags on a weekend in ~ 1 hour, including CCC/Lumpy.

I'm not saying people aught to move to Boulder, but I am the sort of person who wants to know the truth and figure others do too.

Sorry for the confusion. As stated later in the thread those times where for :

Weekend use
Living outside Boulder but in the metro area (I was in the Westminster area)
Climbing a good route ( say two star minimum )
Included the time it took to park, hike in and find an open route (not including racking time)

I'm quite aware that if you live in Boulder and are willing to climb lesser quality routes your time can be way less.

Chad Miller wrote:Sorry for the confusion. As stated later in the thread those times where for : Weekend use Living outside Boulder but in the metro area (I was in the Westminster area) Climbing a good route ( say two star minimum ) Included the time it took to park, hike in and find an open route (not including racking time) I'm quite aware that if you live in Boulder and are willing to climb lesser quality routes your time can be way less.

Thats still completely bogus. From Denver I could be parked in Eldo 40 minutes from now, and on a 2 star or better route easily within 10 minutes from parking.

Your experience and mine differed. Who knows, maybe the times I was there I simply ran into bad traffic, went to popular spots where all the uninitiated go? Maybe you're just used the traffic so it feels shorter? Maybe you know better routes to get to the rock?