|Another reason Colorado is awesome ...||sacheson|
Apr 23, 2003 11:52 AM
|I woke up this morning with sun, rode for an hour (since I don't have a job right now), came home and got some yard work done, took the dogs for a walk and had to come back early because of the weather. Check it out ...|
|re: Another reason California is awesome ...||DougSloan|
Apr 23, 2003 1:14 PM
|doesn't do that here :-) (although you can look up in the moutains and see it -- 70 degrees here, and "chains required" 50 miles away)
|Hey I like the weather here||ColnagoFE|
Apr 23, 2003 1:54 PM
|It would get boring at 75 and no rain all the time.|
Apr 23, 2003 1:56 PM
|I hate riding the the rain and cold. I'll take "perfect" weather every day. Got 26 miles in at noon today in perfect weather.
|re: Another reason Colorado is awesome ...||Sintesi|
Apr 23, 2003 1:16 PM
|And all that snow will be gone tomorrow. I love Colorado. 70-80 degree days in January, freak storms in May (hell, sometimes June). I miss it bad.|
|re: Another reason Colorado is awesome ...||McAndrus|
Apr 23, 2003 1:42 PM
|I remember a foot-and-a-half of snow on May 9. Denver was my home for seven years and I always enjoyed the weather: hot, cold, or whatever.|
|Weather variations keep things interesting, but...||RhodyRider|
Apr 24, 2003 6:24 AM
|...how do you cope with the population density?!? Man, could those houses get any closer together! No disrespect intended, just something that jumped out at me from your pic.|
|Looks like a typical Metro Denver burbs scene to me||ColnagoFE|
Apr 24, 2003 6:58 AM
|Aurora? Rock creek? Broomfield? Just guessing. Then you have Boulder where they have strict growth control, enforced open space/greenbelt areas and nazi zoning laws. It prevents the kind of thing you see here for the most part, but makes housing prices skyrocket because there is nowhere to build.|
|similar to California, too||DougSloan|
Apr 24, 2003 7:13 AM
|Even large expensive houses here are spaced 15 feet apart on postage stamp sized lots; I'm pretty sure the footprint of my house, a 2 story, even, is larger than the remaining yard. They squeeze a lot of lots in a small area, which is good for preserving the precious ag land. You do have less privacy, though, particularly with another 2 story house right behind you. Having grown up in small town Midwest, it's a little claustrophobic, but you get used to it.
|Yep, metro-anywhere USA, I guess. Part of the reason why||RhodyRider|
Apr 24, 2003 7:30 AM
|it was so easy to leave the Chicago-area behind. Ironically, I now live in the state with the second highest population density (NJ is first), but everyone is clustered in Providence and the collar suburbs. Down south where my humble abode is, developement is very tightly controlled by the towns and a majority portion of my county retains a spacious rolling woodlands/coastal wetlands character. Hopefully forever.|
|building restrictions stop sprawl - myth ...||sacheson|
Apr 24, 2003 9:26 AM
|Boulder was in a density hurt itself before the zero-growth initiative passed (and since has been repealed for a limited growth intiative, I think). But look at the surrounding communities - as soon as Boulder curbed growth, the regions bordering it grew obnoxiously fast and dense. There's arguably more of a negative impact to Boulder's decision (mind you, not what they had in mind) than if they had taken a more conservative route on their ideas.
Regardless, at least we don't live in the Midwest or any other boring place where we'd plan two week vacations to get what you and I have at our disposal every day ... ;-)
|Colorado development ...||sacheson|
Apr 24, 2003 9:20 AM
|I think it's safe to assume anywhere that is desireable to live is going to have a higher cost of living, and have more conjestion. No disrespect intended back, but do you live in a place everyone wants to move, and in an economy that can still support it? I'd gladly give up a little breathing room at home for the mountains any day. And, for what it's worth, if you get closer to the mountains, the houses get even closer together.
My wife and I bought into this neighborhood in our twenties (I just turned 31 last week and we've been here for a few years). It's definitely a development catering more to the first or second time home buyers ... i.e. a little more house, but not a lot of property). To the development's (and planning board's) credit, it is a neighborhood built with a "controlled density" mindset. The homes are a little closer together, but we are wrapped in over 100 acres of open space that lies a block in two directions of our place (plus two large parks in the 'hood). The thought is concentrating the number of homes allows for more non-developed land, and more biodiversity.
For those Coloradoans, it's unincorporated Douglas County ... just outside Parker.
|Good analysis, you are spot-on. Around here, it is||RhodyRider|
Apr 24, 2003 11:25 AM
|the ocean that has the pull: the closer you are to Narragansett Bay or Block Island Sound or the open Atlantic, the higher (exponentially) the housing prices climb. The mitigating factor here in New England is that it is so "old" (meaning settled so long ago), there aren't many true undeveloped areas left. What happens is, you get this fierce competition for prime real estate when it becomes available, and bidding wars ensue, and prices hit the moon. No room to build new places, but a lot of wealth has been dumped into razing old shacks and erecting trophy houses on the water. Conversely, up in the rural wooded towns away from the coast (Foster, Scituate, etc.) there are rules in place that dictate the minimum land purchase for SFH development. In Foster, for instance, you have to buy 5 acres. That keeps folks real nice & spread out.|| |