[Stylo]

Originally Posted by liberal8

ugly north east architecture

lol?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by liberal8

Oh yeah, CA seems boring... until you experience hot and cold humidity, icy driveways and frozen car doors, distressed buildings and ugly north east architecture, long gray winters and fat, poorly dressed and depressed people everywhere.
You will also be surprised that there are almost no walkable downtowns, no bike lanes, many parks with limited or private access!! and when people say towns in CT are "scenic" they just mean there are lot of trees because there is nothing else you can lay your eye on.
What a sad place...

Obviously you have no taste in architecture or understand that just because a building is old does not mean it is distressed. I would take an attractive traditional east coast building any day over a west coast modern monstrosity. And from what I have seen of west coast cities, there is a whole lot of ugly modern buildings and sprawl. Not what I like. Jay

[Hollytree]

Originally Posted by indecisive2012

Hi all! I have been looking to move back east for awhile now - I still haven't been able to! I want to be reasonably close to Boston (less 3 hours maybe?) but now know that I could never afford it there! ;D

So I am looking at Connecticut mainly, due to homeschool laws which limit me to Connecticut, Delaware, or New Jersey pretty much. We have 3 kids, (5, 4, and 1 in my tummy)

The things I am looking for is

1. safety
2. 4 roughly equal seasons, including a hot summer, mild rainy spring and a snowy winter - but most importantly, I would LOVE to see some seriously red, orange, and yellow foliage during a proper fall!!
4. a LOT of sunny days throughout all seasons! I despise cloudy/foggy/overcast conditions!
5. Away from the coast - don't really enjoy beaches and oceans that much - when I get an itch to be near one I'd prefer to drive to it
6. houses with good lot size or acres available for under 250k-300k.
7. many wide open, grassy spaces and rec areas or rivers/lakes would be a lovely bonus! Maybe some farms and orchards around that are open to the public?

Any ideas around these areas?
Thanks guys!!!

Western Rhode Island meets all of your criteria and it is only 45-50 minutes to Boston. Look at houses in Foster, Glocester, Cumberland, Exeter, etc.

[wavehunter007]

Originally Posted by western mass and love it

LOL I wonder if wavehunter knows that CT is part of New England. Most of his posts seem to point towards not. As far as the weather goes I live in Western Mass and work in central CT and really never notice the difference between Middletown's weather and say Springfield's weather.

I will agree that on the coast it is generally cooler in summer and warmer in winter by maybe 5 degrees.
If you really want to get more for your money I would look into Western Mass towns like East Longmeadow , Hamden , Southwick , Agawam , Wilbraham. All close to Springfield/Hartford and housing is less expensive than in CT

You are 100% right….CT is/was one of the original New England states. I’m down in southern CT, and we are just geared much more toward NYC than Boston/New England I guess.

However, in terms of weather/climate …not sure I agree with the 2nd part at all; There is a fairly sizable difference in terms of the climate of interior Massachusetts and coastal and southern CT – and it’s more than 5 F. NWS has no F6 data of Springfield… but they have Amherst (21 miles from Springfield) - and one look at average lows compared to NWS Bridgeport shows on average winter lows are near 10 F warmer than Amherst. Most locations in southern/coastal CT have their first frost a month later than most of interior MA….and their last frost is a month before most of interior MA:




Also, at least in terms of day to day weather in winter –once one gets much north of Connecticut, they get into that very cloudy winter zone (see map on previous page). I would tend to think that alone, regardless of temps, would make winter seem worse up in MA compared to southern CT and the NYC area.

[wavehunter007]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

So, subtropical basically tells you nothing about what a particular location is like; a meaningless term.

That’s not really correct:

In fairness to Newerbuzz…part of the confusion over this is that the first climate classification (Koppen 1895) placed much of the lower middle latitudes (meaning anywhere between 30 and 45 N/S) into a single climate group ( C= Temperate). This temperate climate zone was located between the frostless Tropical climates (A = Tropical)….and the severe winter Continental climates (D= Continental). The isotherm of 27 F in the coldest month was used as the line between temperate and continental climates. So for example, a city like Savannah (USA) or Sydney (Australia) were placed in the same climate group as London or NYC (they all have their coldest month above 27 F/-3 C).

By the 1930’s….everyone just grouped the middle latitudes into two zones, Continental…. and Warm Temperate/subtropical...with the average temp 27 F in the coldest month as the line between the two.

In the 1960’s a more modern climate classification was created = the “Modified Trewartha/Koppen classification”. This new system created a true subtropical zone (C), with mild winters and little if any snow ….and a Temperate zone (D). However, most climatologists (worldwide) still use the -3 C to 0 C (27 to 32 F) as the rough line between the colder continental climates….and the warmer temperate/subtropical climates.

How this all relates to Connecticut….is that rough 27 – 32 F line runs right across the southernmost parts of the Ny/NJ/Ct area. Bridgeport , New London, NYC, Trenton, NJ...etc have have mean temps of 30 - 32 F in their coldest month....while just northward cities like Hartford, Albany, Worchester, MA…etc have mean temps below 27 F in their coldest month.

This is the more modern map of the USA climate zones. It shows the true subtropical zone as “C”…both the wet winter type (Cs) like California…and the wet summer type (Cf) like the Gulf and far south Atlantic states, and the Temperate zone climates (Dca) like CT. The Dca/Dcb line seperates hot summers/cool winters..... from cool summers/severe cold winters. The line is 72 F for the warmest month:




and close up of USA:

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by wavehunter007

How this all relates to Connecticut….is that rough 27 – 32 F line runs right across the southernmost parts of the Ny/NJ/Ct area. Bridgeport , New London, NYC, Trenton, NJ...etc have have mean temps of 30 - 32 F in their coldest month....while just northward cities like Hartford, Albany, Worchester, MA…etc have mean temps below 27 F in their coldest month.

This is the more modern map of the USA climate zones. It shows the true subtropical zone as “C”…both the wet winter type (Cs) like California…and the wet summer type (Cf) like the Gulf and far south Atlantic states, and the Temperate zone climates (Dca) like CT. The Dca/Dcb line seperates hot summers/cool winters..... from cool summers/severe cold winters.

Okay, the subtropical boundary on that map is well south of CT. That makes sense.

[newerabuzz]

not really

you tend to think of the term 'subtropical' in layman's terms- not as ascribed by those knowing climate.

As I said earlier San Francisco CA is a subtropical station (dry) while Washington DC also is known as a subtropical station (humid) both are near the same latitude- their positions are different- with SF having its weather come from the west- which is the moderating Pacific, and Washington seeing most of its weather coming from a continental interior which cools faster in the winter then an ocean. Washington summers can be most unpleasant- with tropical maritime highs moving north giving endless days of hot humid conditions in July- while in SF the Dry subtropical high along the cool water coast brings temperatures in the city proper to around 70-- though north into the wine country- it can be far warmer- though not humid.

Also because of climate change- none of these current patterns will stay 'put' as I alluded to earlier the zone 7 line is shifting north from the shoreline at the rate of about 1.5 miles per year- so then in about 20 years- Hartford will be edging closer to the zone 7. Temperatures in the Holocene epoch have at least reached their previous maximum 8,000 years ago, or now surpassed them. Meaning we are now at the warmest part of this interglacial due to greenhouse gases. C02 passed 400ppm in June this year-- and is rising 2.5-3ppm a year. CO2 in previous interglacial periods over the last 800,000 years has never passed 280ppm. The last time C02 measured near 400ppm was in the Pliocene epoch- 3.5 million years ago, when the climate was warmer and sea levels far higher.
http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/

Greater NYC now lies at least temperature wise in the sub tropical zone- the old Dca and Dcb- warmer humid continental and colder humid continental will soon become obsolete - globally.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by newerabuzz

not really

you tend to think of the term 'subtropical' in layman's terms- not as ascribed by those knowing climate.

As I said earlier San Francisco CA is a subtropical station (dry) while Washington DC also is known as a subtropical station (humid)

Fine; it's insider jargon. Not intended to mean anything to most people.

[indecisive2012]

Thanks all - more interesting conversation that I've really enjoyed reading!

For those suggesting other states such as Mass or RI, I would be interested but I am limited to Connecticut due to homeschooling laws that make it more difficult for homeschoolers in states other than Delaware, NJ, or Connecticut in that area. The first two I just listed are a bit far from the more specific area I want to be in (Boston within a few hours drive), so that leaves Connecticut - which looks to be beautiful and have many perks.

As for the poster who suggested that Connecticut was full of ugly architecture and other dreary things, I gotta say (although I appreciate your input) that for me, I'm looking forward to older architecture rather than a sprawl of modern mobile-home type buildings that were all built last week it seems. I think the age of the buildings give character to a place and ambiance. But that's just me - it's not for everyone I guess. And I know a lot of people hate the inconveniences and hardships that snowy/freezing winters bring, but again, to each their own and some people really love snow (like me). So, I am glad that you listed the rough and ugly so I know exactly what I'm getting into, but at the same time, it really didn't put me off at all.

And yes, I realize there may be quite a bit more traffic there than Monterey, but I used to live in Los Angeles and the traffic didn't bother me so I doubt it will be an issue for me in CT. Traffic has never really bothered me, as I'm a homebody and don't spend enough time on the roads to be frustrated by it.

And the comments a couple of you made about the difference in weather between there and here in Northern California were spot on and really encouraging for me!! Especially the poster who said that summer in SF is like Spring there! What an exciting thought!! Mainly because I always thought it stunk as a summer but no one ever understood what I was talking about - I really do think the climate in CT will really fit what I personally like.

Again thanks guys!!! Another question for you (I know you guys already listed great towns) but: what are the most scenic/charming/well-designed town centers there? Which towns would you pick for being really well planned (perhaps around a central green) with a great main street feel?

Thanks!

[indecisive2012]

Originally Posted by liberal8

Oh yeah, CA seems boring... until you experience hot and cold humidity, icy driveways and frozen car doors, distressed buildings and ugly north east architecture, long gray winters and fat, poorly dressed and depressed people everywhere.
You will also be surprised that there are almost no walkable downtowns, no bike lanes, many parks with limited or private access!! and when people say towns in CT are "scenic" they just mean there are lot of trees because there is nothing else you can lay your eye on.
What a sad place...

So the only thing that scares me about this is the statement that there "are almost no walkable downtowns". Is this true? Because that is very important to me.....