Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One
If you wanna get technical Denver doesn't have mountains since they're not in the city itself and don't really offer any views for neighborhoods but people will always gush about the mountains when speaking of the city and they'll say they moved there because of the mountains when they're actually out of the way and don't make a difference in daily life. The PNW is similar, in this aspect but at least Portland and Seattle have hills in their actual neighborhoods, but the fact that they're near mountains is still an overrated aspect that people will credit as some sort of a huge advantage. LA is also a similar example to Denver, most LA neighborhoods are on flat land that look no different than a Chicago suburb, yet there's this elitist attitude when people talk about Chicago being flat.
|
What in the world are you talking about? Definitely a few unpopular and inaccurate opinions with your post.
Have you been to Denver? The entire western side of the metro is in the foothills.
You can see snow capped mountains from anywhere in Metro Denver even from the airport which is located to the far east in the prairie.
"LA is also a similar example to Denver that looks mostly like Chicago suburbs"? That's a stretch in every imaginable way.
LA neighborhoods look nothing like Chicago suburbs, like at all.
From topography to climate, to flora, to fauna, to built environment, to population density etc etc etc. Los Angeles is not similar to the Chicago suburbs.
The residents of Denver recreate in the Rocky Mountains and yes many people are lured to Denver due to the great outdoors within close reach of the city and the citizens of LA recreate in their hills and mountains (and beaches) all within the actual city limits. Runyon, Mandeville, Temescal Canyons within the city limits of LA, or the stairs in the Baldwin Hills are heavily used. These trails are always packed full of Angelenos.