[skytrekker]

To be fair no;
Poor schools, high crime rate; horrible traffic; housing costs that are stratospheric, air pollution, not enough water, too competitive, shallow culture, low quality of life , immigration problems- I lived there, I know-CT and New England are far superior.

CT rates near the top of the list for quality of life- California ranks below the middle. Its a great place to live if you can live in a gated community, and make allot of money.

I used to love the state- go over to the California forum and read about the people who want OUT.

[atlmburns]

Originally Posted by skytrekker

To be fair no;
Poor schools, high crime rate; horrible traffic; housing costs that are stratospheric, air pollution, not enough water, too competitive, shallow culture, low quality of life , immigration problems- I lived there, I know-CT and New England are far superior.

CT rates near the top of the list for quality of life- California ranks below the middle. Its a great place to live if you can live in a gated community, and make allot of money.

I used to love the state- go over to the California forum and read about the people who want OUT.

Well said! I am in the process for moving from CA to CT for those exact reasons, I couldn't have put it better myself.

[glxyman21]

Originally Posted by skytrekker

To be fair no;
Poor schools, high crime rate; horrible traffic; housing costs that are stratospheric, air pollution, not enough water, too competitive, shallow culture, low quality of life , immigration problems- I lived there, I know-CT and New England are far superior.

CT rates near the top of the list for quality of life- California ranks below the middle. Its a great place to live if you can live in a gated community, and make allot of money.

I used to love the state- go over to the California forum and read about the people who want OUT.

California is not as bad as you make it seem. It is unfair to paint California with such a broad brush. Not everyone lives in LA and there are many affordable, quiet, middle class, pollution-less, non shallow towns/areas

[skytrekker]

Originally Posted by glxyman21

California is not as bad as you make it seem. It is unfair to paint California with such a broad brush. Not everyone lives in LA and there are many affordable, quiet, middle class, pollution-less, non shallow towns/areas

I would like you to name those towns in California, that are pollution free, 'affordable' 'quiet' and are within access to employment?

Perhaps Truckee- or Eureka, or Yreka- nice places, but remote and no jobs except logging or skiing!

The central coast is beautiful, but with an average home over 600K- not affordable- and the employment base along the central coast is not strong. I sure would love to live in Santa Barbara (900K for a tiny house is too much) Santa Maria, Morro Bay, Cambria, and San Luis Obispo are all beautiful- but the costs for housing is higher then most of Fairfield county CT!

The Inland Empire has some severe air pollution problems (Modesto, Merced, Bakersfield) and even the State Capital at Sacramento has air quality problems. Housing costs are far higher then most of CT- and the employment base is mostly agricultural. Except for the state capital- which is government. Wine country in Sonoma and Napa valley are beautiful, but there are super high housing costs, no money for highway or education improvements. I lived in Santa Rosa- nice area- but housing costs are higher then the richest towns in Southwestern CT- and incomes are far lower. Plus there is an increasing gang problem in all but the most toney areas of the state.

I do not tend to paint broad strokes- but I know the state well- and your idea of finding middle class, affordable, and pollution free areas are few and far between, sorry to say. In fact they do not exist any more- and thats the real problem in California.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by skytrekker

Perhaps Truckee- or Eureka, or Yreka- nice places, but remote and no jobs except logging or skiing!

LOL Well said.

[mj55]

Is there any information on this Front Street development?

[brri]

BUT to be fair as an example, Charlotte NC is far worse. It's ghost town after 5pm and there is no history, decent non chain restaurants, theater companies, movie theaters, neighborhoods etc

Same for JAX, Orlando, Richmond etc and many other cities their size.

Hi. The statement about Charlotte is totally untrue. Downtown Charlotte is in no way, no form "far worse" than Hartford, Ct. I am from Providence and New England (39 years), so I know. I was just in hartford last month on my way back to NC from RI. Charlotte has a very nice and very active downtown (uptown). My wife asks me constantly to take her downtown Charlotte for a stroll, dinner, ect. There are almost always people out and about from Wednesday night through the weekend. They also have light rail about to open next moth that will have a staion stop at the new Epicentre entertainment center that will open in December with numerous options for entertainment including a multi-screen movie theatre and bowling alley and many restaurants. There are already over 135 restaurants down there. They also have two pro sport franchises with areans/stadiums downtown.
Charlotte, like any other city has it's downsides. It is a little too suburban for my taste outside of center city for a city it's size. I have no real reason to defend Charlotte but what you said about it in comparing it to Hartfrod is not true at all. When I lived in Providence I thought that Hartford was a better city and had much more potential (and still do think so as far as potential), however, I don't think that Hartford compares very well at all with Charlotte, with the exception of older architecture. Charlotte is newish and that is what I prefer and I am well aware that not everyone will have the same preferences.

Btw, Charlotte also has a decent amount of live theatre downtown and Museums. Here are some:

1. Children's Theatre of Charlotte
2. Discovery Place Science Museum
3. African-American Museum (New building in progress)
4. Mint Museum of Craft and design
5. Levine Museum of the New South
6. Blumenthal Performing Arts Center
7. Belk Theatre
8. North Carolina Dance Theatre
9. Imaginon Children's Library

[misueno]

Mj55,
When do you arrive in Ct? Let me know, maybe we should get together and discuss the relative merits of various cities (or just find a good excuse to drink a few glasses of wine). I'm giggling because I spent six months in Chicago last year and decided it wasn't for me for the same reasons you like it! I don't find Chicago to be the kind of town that you can live in without a car... in fact I think you really need a car in Chicago more than most cities but it costs so much to park, you just can't afford it.

And let's face it. We romanticize the cities that don't require a car because it is "walkable" and realistically, New York and Boston are among the few that truly meet this criteria. I lived in New York for several years, and I would move back in a heartbeat (if a won a really big lottery because that's what it take to afford New York), but is it easier because you don't need a car? Absolutely not. You need to want New York in a really bad way to put up with the hassles of not having a car. Ask my hubby how easy it was to run downstairs from our four story walk-up to the local bodega because I ran out of an ingredient for dinner (isn't he sweet?) or how easy it is to haul 3 pounds of butternut squash from Union Square Market to the subway and then walk for six blocks home in a blizzard. Or the time we rolled a sheet of plywood on a cart 25 blocks to our apartment or ran onto a subway train with a Christmas tree. Good memories? Yes. Easy? No. Sometimes driving to the grocery store is a good thing.

Seriously, PM me (although I don't have a clue how you do that) and we'll get together when you get to Hartford -- could be good for a couple of laughs.

[sliver203]

In response to:

Originally Posted by salatheel

Hartford,New Haven,and Bridgeport are dead,dull,and boring.

This is an unfair statement. I'm in no way a 'cheerleader' for any of these cities, as I probably won't move to any of them soon, but they do have plenty of potential.

Bridgeport is currently one of the best markets (if not, THE best) in the nation to purchase a home. New Haven is bustling with Yale, many hospitals, urban professionals and many other colleges and universities. New Haven is very intellectual and thriving. I don't know Hartford all that well, but I have seen many beautiful parts. The city really is "CT's Rising Star" - give it 10 years and you'll see what I mean. All have good parts and bad parts. Doesn't Charlotte, Santa Fe and Phoenix? Just because things are newer there and older here doesn't mean they're "vibrant," it means they lack history.

To say CT's largest cities are 'dull and boring' is misleading to info-seekers on this board. Sure, they aren't Greenwich, Avon or Madison, but they're the place people go for important things needed to survive - jobs, hospitals and shopping. Without them, the majority of CT would surely be "dead, dull and boring."

[sun]

When I initially read the OP, I agreed with it.
I also agree that Hartford has a lot of potential, but IMO it will never be a normal livable city. Maybe this is being a bit pessimistic, but how many of us would actually want to live there?