U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:11 PM
 
284 posts, read 424,812 times
Reputation: 55

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post
But most most of all, the cities' small footprint makes the comparisons tough: Hartford is barely 18 sq miles. In almost every other state that's completely unheard of. So, even though most neighbourhoods in the state's big 5 are very safe, small pocket areas of inter-personal violence spike it. The Urban Areas of these cities which includes the inner ring "suburbs" would be more comparable to cities nationally within other's city limits. They are also among the safest.
That's true, but the sq miles in the city is not the only factor. The inner ring suburbs are just that -- suburbs, so while they may be safe, they don't fulfill the need for a safe real city in CT. So while CT has many miles of safe areas, those areas are, for the most part, very much not cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Coastal Connecticut
14,749 posts, read 17,990,897 times
Reputation: 3336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratford, Ct. Resident View Post
Stamford???
Stamford isn't a major city, and is very reliant on NYC. Stamford also had some less-than-awesome days, its urban renewal just happened much sooner than any other CT city and was much stronger (again, largely due to proximity to Manhattan - which flourished starting in the mid-late 90's).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:14 PM
 
Location: Coastal Connecticut
14,749 posts, read 17,990,897 times
Reputation: 3336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post

But most most of all, the cities' small footprint makes the comparisons tough: Hartford is barely 18 sq miles. In almost every other state that's completely unheard of. So, even though most neighbourhoods in the state's big 5 are very safe, small pocket areas of inter-personal violence spike it. The Urban Areas of these cities which includes the inner ring "suburbs" would be more comparable to cities nationally within other's city limits. They are also among the safest.
This is very true, another reason the crime stats only tell a small part of the story. But unfortunately perception is everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:17 PM
 
284 posts, read 424,812 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylo View Post
This is very true, another reason the crime stats only tell a small part of the story. But unfortunately perception is everything.
But my point is that it's not just perception. Yes, square miles wise, CT has many safe/nice areas. What I'm talking about is the problem with CT's cities and that concern is, unfortunately, very much validated by national crime statistics and is not exclusively based on perception...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Coastal Northeast
15,744 posts, read 22,030,672 times
Reputation: 5289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylo View Post
Stamford isn't a major city, and is very reliant on NYC. Stamford also had some less-than-awesome days, its urban renewal just happened much sooner than any other CT city and was much stronger (again, largely due to proximity to Manhattan - which flourished starting in the mid-late 90's).
I view it as such. It's the 4th largest city in CT by population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:22 PM
 
1,183 posts, read 1,288,179 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by elinyc View Post
That's true, but the sq miles in the city is not the only factor. The inner ring suburbs are just that -- suburbs, so while they may be safe, they don't fulfill the need for a safe real city in CT. So while CT has many miles of safe areas, those areas are, for the most part, very much not cities.
The inner ring suburbs for all intents and purposes are urbanised, even if they don't stylise themselves as "City of." Generally high population density, fairly walkable, and most of all the presence of widespread sewer systems. In almost any other state they would've been annexed instead of allowed to maintain the initial separation. It's not like there are big fences between the core city and the inner ring either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:25 PM
 
284 posts, read 424,812 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post
The inner ring suburbs for all intents and purposes are urbanised, even if they don't stylise themselves as "City of." Generally high population density, fairly walkable, and most of all the presence of widespread sewer systems. In almost any other state they would've been annexed instead of allowed to maintain the initial separation. It's not like there are big fences between the core city and the inner ring either.
I disagree that they are urbanised. They are, for the most part, lacking in public transportation, walkable centers (yes there are a few exceptions to this that have teeny tiny walkable centers), major employment centers, people walking around on the streets, and all the other typical signs of an urban place. Maybe if they were annexed, it would be better since some of those tax dollars could be used to "fix" the actual cities, but that's probably only better in theory and not reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:29 PM
 
1,183 posts, read 1,288,179 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by elinyc View Post
But my point is that it's not just perception. Yes, square miles wise, CT has many safe/nice areas. What I'm talking about is the problem with CT's cities and that concern is, unfortunately, very much validated by national crime statistics and is not exclusively based on perception...
A lot of it is perception. I'm in Fairfield now, and I've had friends from the exurbs (think a Redding-like town) that think the second they step into Bridgeport they are going to get shot, robbed, stabbed, etc. I took one to Black Rock and when I explained that it was in fact BPT they looked stunned... and now they go a few times a month. But even if I brought them to the East End, they wouldn't be a likely candidate to be the victim of a crime as they don't run in the drug game and don't place bets with unscrupulous bookies. Don't do that? Great! You extremely lowered your chances of being hit with a baseball bat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:30 PM
 
284 posts, read 424,812 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post
A lot of it is perception. I'm in Fairfield now, and I've had friends from the exurbs (think a Redding-like town) that think the second they step into Bridgeport they are going to get shot, robbed, stabbed, etc. I took one to Black Rock and when I explained that it was in fact BPT they looked stunned... and now they go a few times a month. But even if I brought them to the East End, they wouldn't be a likely candidate to be the victim of a crime as they don't run in the drug game and don't place bets with unscrupulous bookies. Don't do that? Great! You extremely lowered your chances of being hit with a baseball bat.
But you can't deny that those perceptions (while they may be exaggerated) are based on the reality of a very high crime rate and a high poverty rate. They're not based on nothing, unfortunately..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2013, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Coastal Connecticut
14,749 posts, read 17,990,897 times
Reputation: 3336
Quote:
Originally Posted by elinyc View Post
But my point is that it's not just perception. Yes, square miles wise, CT has many safe/nice areas. What I'm talking about is the problem with CT's cities and that concern is, unfortunately, very much validated by national crime statistics and is not exclusively based on perception...
Right, their point was that other major cities are MUCH larger than our cities. So the crime stats get averaged out on a much larger area. If we had 200 square mile cities like in other parts of the country, our crime stats would be incredibly low.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top