Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't understand why St. Louis is even a part of this topic...it is the outlier here from the other three, which are all Sunbelt cities. St. Louis has all 4 of the seasons as well...we get each season at its fullest...but yes...like the rest of the Midwest St. Louis can get very hot and humid in the summers.
Also, as much as there is to do, I seem to get bored a lot.
Are you talking about the city itself, or the surroundings? I can definitely see how you can get bored in the city/sururbs, but surely you cannot be getting bored outside the city (in the mountains)? Right? I guess even the mountains can get boring if you are not into outdoor recreation.
Quote:
As much as I love Denver in general, as a whole, I can't seem to find one particular part of town that really clicks with me where I can see myself happy.
Except for a few specific areas/neighborhoods, Denver and the surrounding suburbs seem mind-numbingly same to me. Yes, they may be nice, family friendly, with all the amenities, but they just seem kind of...soulless to me (that may be too harsh of a word, but it's the only one I can find right now). However, please keep in mind that my previous frame of reference is the city of Chicago (Lakeview).
why these three. I see Poenix, Dallas, and Denver, nice cities, diversity..etc. but St. Louis is just a dangerous, crime ridden city. not to mention it's population doesn't even compare to the others.
Hooey.
If you compare the ENTIRE metro areas to one another, St Louis comes out favorably to Phoenix and probably Dallas also. The city of St Louis (the north side, at least) is crime-ridden, but where it differs from the other cities is that its boundaries have been unchanged since 1876. The other cities include newer, wealthier areas that dont have much crime in them.
Phoenix is the most crime-ridden of the four metro areas, ranking in the bottom 25 of all metro areas in the data that I saw.
And the St Louis metro area has a larger population than the Denver metro area.
Perception is everything, and oftentimes wrong. Try and get your facts straight next time.
Phoenix is too hot and much more crime (my brother used to live there). Dallas is too hot, humid and too big and not a fan of Texas even though I have relatives there. St. Louis has too much crime and I just can't see this life long Colorado girl living without the view of mountains either.
Did a stint in Louisiana and went bonkers without the mountains. (Only a month and a half and came back home...couldn't handle it.)
Are you talking about the city itself, or the surroundings? I can definitely see how you can get bored in the city/sururbs, but surely you cannot be getting bored outside the city (in the mountains)? Right? I guess even the mountains can get boring if you are not into outdoor recreation.
Of course, I'm talking about the city. I live in the SE suburbs, which is BOR-ing, but even when I go into "the city," the architecture is a lot more interesting, but I still get bored pretty quick. Other than the Capitol Hill and Golden Triangle areas-- if only because of the interesting characters on the street. I like hiking, skiing in the mountains, although I think the mountain resort towns, especially Breckenridge, get boring fast. There's only so many t-shirt shops and real estate stores I can take on one main drag.
Quote:
Except for a few specific areas/neighborhoods, Denver and the surrounding suburbs seem mind-numbingly same to me. Yes, they may be nice, family friendly, with all the amenities, but they just seem kind of...soulless to me (that may be too harsh of a word, but it's the only one I can find right now). However, please keep in mind that my previous frame of reference is the city of Chicago (Lakeview).
I agree-- even with all the new condo construction going on all over central Denver, it still is pretty boring. It seems like if you want a city with true character, you have to go to a declining rust-belt city, with all the dirt, grime, and declining economy that brings. That's why I threw in St Louis in the poll-- just to check people's opinions. Nothing against the city, though-- it's probably more authentic than Denver. And Chicago, of course, is a whole different ballgame.
One question-- I know on my last poll you suggested moving to the westernmost Denver suburbs to have the quickest access to the mountains. Do you think the type of people who live in western Lakewood, Golden, etc, are any different? Is the character of that part of the town unique?
If you like very hot, dry weather and dont mind having monotonous weather and living in an area that is newer with little historical significance, which is also somewhat crime-ridden, then pick Phoenix.
If you like living next to the mountains in a city that is generally sunny but often gets very cold and snowy, then pick Denver
If you like a hot and humid city that happens to be in the state of Texas, then pick Dallas.
If you want a city with the most variety of weather of the four, one that is considered "rust-belt" but with many preserved historic areas and nice older architecture in the city and the suburbs, then pick St Louis.
If you want cheaper housing prices and cost of living, pick St Louis or Dallas
If you dont want to live in the middle of nowhere, isolated from other cities, then dont live in Phoenix or Denver.
One question-- I know on my last poll you suggested moving to the westernmost Denver suburbs to have the quickest access to the mountains. Do you think the type of people who live in western Lakewood, Golden, etc, are any different? Is the character of that part of the town unique?
IMHO, Golden and Morrison definitely have more character than the typical suburbia. Lakewood is still suburbia, but we were willing to put up with it to have quick access to the foothills and mountains. In general, people on the west side seem pretty outdoorsy, perhaps simply because you don't have to drive a long way to do outdoor stuff. With all the open space parks in the foothills, trails are practically in your backyard. Whether they are more or less outdoorsy than those living in other eastern/northern/southern suburbs, I couldn't tell. Although, Golden seems to be a hotspot for a lot of hardcore bikers, hikers, and skiers.
It seems like if you want a city with true character, you have to go to a declining rust-belt city, with all the dirt, grime, and declining economy that brings.
Thats probably correct. Older cities have more character than newer ones do, and oftentimes are more affordable to live in. Pittsburgh is another city that is like that. I am going on a road trip in a week and Pittsburgh will be one of the cities we drive through. Its definitely rust belt, but their skyline is underrated and was actually ranked very high in the world on one website that I saw.
If you like older cities with a lot of charming areas and neighborhoods with character above and beyond anything else, then I'd pick St Louis out of those four cities in the poll. Missouri has a lot of outdoor type stuff to do also. It doesnt have the mountains and snow-skiiing of Colorado, but it does have most everything else (except oceanfront beaches of course).
Here is my order
#1-St. Louis
#2-Dallas
#3-Phoenix
#4-Denver
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.