ghost-angel Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Re: The cranky thread The city and county of Denver are one and the same. According to the same page I linked above' date=' the 2005 estimate is 557,917. Denver's web page estimates it at 579,744. As a note, most of the formerly open space out by DIA isn't in Denver. Denver just annexed the land DIA was built on, and a corridor out to it. All that out there would be Adams county I believe. And as far as the people moving to houses out by DIA, you forgot to mention how loudly they are complaining that the airport is too loud. You know, the one that they knew was already there when they bought their house, and is the reason they got such a good deal... The area they just filled out is City Of Denver, between 56th and 30something on the north/south and Pena on the west side going until it ends in fields, I forget the name of the eastern most street. It added a couple thousand residents at least. This was in the last 3 1/2 years or so. Houses are pretty expensive actually. Especially for being so flipping far away. In fact to get to them from where I leave (basically downtownish) to them I have to go through Aurora . . . to get to another part of Denver City. The whole metro area's roads are so screwed in the head it makes me spin sometimes. It's far enough away from the Airport itself that you only see planes taking off and landing without any actual noise. Denver annexed a lot more of the corridor than just the airport zone for themselves. Although, it makes me happy to know I got bad info and the pop is only a bit over half a million. Sort of. I'd like to see more building up, and less out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Mmmmm. Lots of black on the traffic monitor. Yuck. It'd be fun if I could hack in there and splice in Godzilla (or some flying saucers) tearing stuff up in the traffic cam shot, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Re: The cranky thread The area they just filled out is City Of Denver, between 56th and 30something on the north/south and Pena on the west side going until it ends in fields, I forget the name of the eastern most street. It added a couple thousand residents at least. This was in the last 3 1/2 years or so. Houses are pretty expensive actually. Especially for being so flipping far away. In fact to get to them from where I leave (basically downtownish) to them I have to go through Aurora . . . to get to another part of Denver City. The whole metro area's roads are so screwed in the head it makes me spin sometimes. It's far enough away from the Airport itself that you only see planes taking off and landing without any actual noise. Denver annexed a lot more of the corridor than just the airport zone for themselves. Although, it makes me happy to know I got bad info and the pop is only a bit over half a million. Sort of. I'd like to see more building up, and less out. Ah, okay. I misunderstood where you meant. I know that area, and actually looked at buying out there at one point when I still lived in Colorado. Ended up buying on Stapleton instead. And I'll certainly second the whole "Denver Metro's roads suck donkey privates" sentiment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Re: The cranky thread The area they just filled out is City Of Denver, between 56th and 30something on the north/south and Pena on the west side going until it ends in fields, I forget the name of the eastern most street. It added a couple thousand residents at least. This was in the last 3 1/2 years or so. Houses are pretty expensive actually. Especially for being so flipping far away. In fact to get to them from where I leave (basically downtownish) to them I have to go through Aurora . . . to get to another part of Denver City. The whole metro area's roads are so screwed in the head it makes me spin sometimes. It's far enough away from the Airport itself that you only see planes taking off and landing without any actual noise. Denver annexed a lot more of the corridor than just the airport zone for themselves. Although, it makes me happy to know I got bad info and the pop is only a bit over half a million. Sort of. I'd like to see more building up, and less out. That seems to be a common feature of towns built in the middle of mountainous regions. Our roads NEVER lead where you think they will, and the most direct path is always around the dratted mountain. Very frustrating, trying to find one's way around that way . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread That seems to be a common feature of towns built in the middle of mountainous regions. Our roads NEVER lead where you think they will, and the most direct path is always around the dratted mountain. Very frustrating, trying to find one's way around that way . . . But Denver doesn't have the excuse that there are mountians in the city, as they are a short distance to the west. Denver's streets were just layed out by a pack of drunken monkeys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Yeah, Denver is about the flattest city I've ever been to that isn't L.A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Denver's happy little secret: it may be the "mile high city" but it sits in a FLOOD BASIN on the plains, not in the foothills or mountains. It's the lowest point in the metro area. Our streets were just laid out and are maintained by morons. And there is the issue of 15th/Colfax/I-70BusinessLoop in that it was only kinda planned. Mostly they made it up as they paved it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread So here's the breakdown: Her Parkinson's has reached the point where she can't stand, or feed herself, or speak very clearly. The medication they can give her for the Parkinson's causes hallucinations, in a bad way. The antipsychotic they can give her for the hallucinations causes depression. I suppose they could give her an antidepressant, but I have yet to hear of an antidepressant that doesn't cause its own side effects, and just how many mind-altering drugs can you give before it starts doing really bad things? Does anyone remember the Potion Miscibility Table in the back of the DMG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SatinKitty Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread For the past 3 days I've been having a sore tummy. I have been thoroughly checked out by the stomach Dr. and he found NOTHING, so having ruled out everything he said maybe irritable bowel syndrome. He gave me tummy pain pills but they don't seem to help too much and they dry out my mouth. I asked what foods to avoid and all they told me was well, it's different for everyone. Maybe fried foods. That doesn't help much. But still the scale won't budge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread But Denver doesn't have the excuse that there are mountians in the city' date=' as they are a short distance to the west. Denver's streets were just layed out by a pack of drunken monkeys. [/quote'] Ah. So like Boston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Denver's happy little secret: it may be the "mile high city" but it sits in a FLOOD BASIN on the plains, not in the foothills or mountains. It's the lowest point in the metro area. Our streets were just laid out and are maintained by morons. And there is the issue of 15th/Colfax/I-70BusinessLoop in that it was only kinda planned. Mostly they made it up as they paved it. And to make it worse some happy idiot decided that having the drainage in the middle of the intersections was a much better idea than having it at the edges. So in heavy rains the streets all flood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Ah. So like Boston. No, I said drunken monkeys, not psychotic monkeys on meth. Not that I've ever been to Boston, but I've heard stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Seattle's streets are laid out blockwise rectilinear, but the street numbering system has a gratuitous number of discontinuities. 43rd NE and NE 43rd both exist, and they are perpendicular to each other. I would have to look at a map to see if they actually intersect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread No, I said drunken monkeys, not psychotic monkeys on meth. Not that I've ever been to Boston, but I've heard stories. Heehee. A pretty apt description, actually, except that meth didn't exist in the 1700s. The roads in Boston follow the old cow pastures that used to be around the city, mostly. But don't think for a second that makes them grids. Oh, no. They just slap down new roads as they need them, criss-crossing and turning around . . . Every time I go to Boston, I just take the T. It saves me a lot of frustration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Heehee. A pretty apt description, actually, except that meth didn't exist in the 1700s. The roads in Boston follow the old cow pastures that used to be around the city, mostly. But don't think for a second that makes them grids. Oh, no. They just slap down new roads as they need them, criss-crossing and turning around . . . Every time I go to Boston, I just take the T. It saves me a lot of frustration. I'm enough of a wuss that I don't drive in San Fran, which isn't really laid out all that poorly. BART and MUNI are my friends... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread I'm mystified as to why anyone would drive in a city with a good public transportation system, sometimes. Though I suppose "good transportation system" is subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread I'm mystified as to why anyone would drive in a city with a good public transportation system, sometimes. Though I suppose "good transportation system" is subjective. They don't always run close enough to where you want to go, they don't run all hours, they are inconvenient for shopping and buying lots of stuff, etc. Cost is another one. I could get a parking spot for less than I'm paying to take BART and MUNI to work. But then I'd have to deal with traffic on the Bay Bridge. Though the fact that I'd be able to use the HOV lanes would help some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread The first thing I did when I got to the office was take a dump. The second thing I did was check my voicemail, wherein one of my best engineers gave his two weeks' notice. At least I got one thing done before my day was ruined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread They don't always run close enough to where you want to go' date=' they don't run all hours, they are inconvenient for shopping and buying lots of stuff, etc. Cost is another one. I could get a parking spot for less than I'm paying to take BART and MUNI to work. But then I'd have to deal with traffic on the Bay Bridge. Though the fact that I'd be able to use the HOV lanes would help some.[/quote'] Ah, but there are other costs involved. The cost of gas, wear and tear on your car, peace of mind in knowing your car is safely tucked away in your driveway at home (or the parking lot of the transportation system), and the toll it takes to not walk anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Ah' date=' but there are other costs involved. The cost of gas, wear and tear on your car, peace of mind in knowing your car is safely tucked away in your driveway at home (or the parking lot of the transportation system), and the toll it takes to not walk anywhere.[/quote'] Well, my car gets about 48 MPG (I drive a Prius), and if anything my peace of mind would be better if it were in the parking garage here at work instead of a surface lot at the BART station. And I'd have about the same walking involved either way. Granted, I'd be putting more miles on the car, but I wouldn't be paying $9.40 per day for BART, plus the monthly MUNI pass. Well, I actually save a bit on the MUNI pass by doing a BART+ ticket ($21/half month instead of $45/month). All that being said, I'll probably stick with public transport. And the main reason for that being I'd rather be able to sleep, read, or whatever during my 1 hour commute rather than have to drive it myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Wow. That's a LOT of money for public transport. Around here, it's $1 per way. But then, our transportation system is just awful. I'd have to walk more distance than the bus would carry me if I wanted to take it to work. It doesn't come out this far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread Wow. That's a LOT of money for public transport. Around here' date=' it's $1 per way. But then, our transportation system is just awful. I'd have to walk more distance than the bus would carry me if I wanted to take it to work. It doesn't come out this far.[/quote'] Well, keep in mind that I'm going 35 miles each way. The buses (in SF) are $1.50, but I get a monthly pass for that. The lion's share is the BART ride, and the BART (light rail) doesn't do passes. All charges are by how far you go. From Concord to SF is $4.70 each way. So assuming 21 work days per month, that's $197.40 for BART, and $22 for MUNI. I could get a parking space for less than $219.40/month probably, but I'd probably have to get on a waiting list. And adding in increased gas costs would make it cost more than public transport. Driving wouldn't save any time, and in fact could possibly even be slower. I just need to get signed up for the program that lets me pay for $105 of that per month with pre-tax dollars... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread I see. So it's a lot more worth it, too. Even the other side of Asheville isn't far enough (or snarled with traffic enough) to justify taking a bus. If they increased bus traffic to South Asheville to acknowledge that area's growth and spread the route out a little more, it might be worth it, but right now, it isn't even worth the fare and all the time to take it to the mall (which I hate driving to, so I just don't go there). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archermoo Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread I see. So it's a lot more worth it, too. Even the other side of Asheville isn't far enough (or snarled with traffic enough) to justify taking a bus. If they increased bus traffic to South Asheville to acknowledge that area's growth and spread the route out a little more, it might be worth it, but right now, it isn't even worth the fare and all the time to take it to the mall (which I hate driving to, so I just don't go there). The problem with taking a bus to a mall is that tranporting your purchased back home on the bus generally sucks. And yea, it is worth it. I'm driving about 1.5-2 miles per day rather than 70-75. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliceTheOwl Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Re: The cranky thread My friend the reporter will tell you all about the toll mileage can take on a car if you ask her about hers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.