Just to be clear here, the average Density for the entire 502 square mile city of Los Angeles is 8,092 people per square mile.  It's the 7th most dense city in america (with a population over 500,000).  It does have traffic problems, for sure, but LA itself is VERY dense with few surface lots.  spend 20 minutes on google maps cruising around Hollywood, Silverlake, Koreatown, Mid City, Rampart Village, etc. and you will see a pretty dense city, and that's not even including Bunker Hill where the major high-rise developments are. 

 

The main issue is alternative transportation- it can't get much more dense until you can stop needing a car and LA has a major plan to change the situation dramatically but it's a 30 year plan... 

 

 

I have to work in LA on a regular basis and have home there.  There aren't many walkable neighborhoods, maybe blocks or small districts, but not neighborhoods.

 

Let me ask what your definition of "pedestrian friendly"?

 

Hollywood? During the day, Hollywood and Highland is pretty busy, but go three, four blocks in any direction and its not really pedestrian friendly walkable neighborhood.  Our office is on Sunset and it's a mess.

 

Koreatown?  Mid City?  :wtf:

 

I completely disagree.

 

 

I wasn't talking about pedestrian friendly necessarily, I was mainly referring to someones statement regarding lots of surface parking that could be turned into prime development.  Mid-City & Koreatown are packed solid, minimal surface lots and they've grown quite a bit over the last 10 years with a trend towards new vertically oriented (5-6 stories) developments.

 

And I think West Hollywood is VERY walkable. 

 

_____________

 

Considering LA wasn't even on the list... I'm not entirely sure how this conversation started... and something tells me it's off topic haha :)

That was my comment about the surface lots in LA and it was mainly addressing what I saw on Sunset Blvd.  I can understand that the lot owners are making a killing charging each car $50 to park there for the night and topography probably plays a role too, but it just isn't what I expected to see on such a world famous strip.

 

I don't think that there is really much to debate about LA's car dependence for a city its size.  I always think back to that scene from LA Story where Steve Martin drives to his next-door-neighbor's house.

Just to be clear here, the average Density for the entire 502 square mile city of Los Angeles is 8,092 people per square mile.  It's the 7th most dense city in america (with a population over 500,000).  It does have traffic problems, for sure, but LA itself is VERY dense with few surface lots.  spend 20 minutes on google maps cruising around Hollywood, Silverlake, Koreatown, Mid City, Rampart Village, etc. and you will see a pretty dense city, and that's not even including Bunker Hill where the major high-rise developments are. 

 

The main issue is alternative transportation- it can't get much more dense until you can stop needing a car and LA has a major plan to change the situation dramatically but it's a 30 year plan... 

 

 

I have to work in LA on a regular basis and have home there.  There aren't many walkable neighborhoods, maybe blocks or small districts, but not neighborhoods.

 

Let me ask what your definition of "pedestrian friendly"?

 

Hollywood? During the day, Hollywood and Highland is pretty busy, but go three, four blocks in any direction and its not really pedestrian friendly walkable neighborhood.  Our office is on Sunset and it's a mess.

 

Koreatown?  Mid City?  :wtf:

 

I completely disagree.

 

 

 

 

MTS, how can you disagree with that?  Have you ever actually left your car and explored various neighborhoods on foot?  LA is car dependent if you need to get from one side of town to another, but much of it is walkable.  Def Koreatown, I live in Windsor Village which is truly a walkable neighborhood, right across the street is Hancock Park, one of the most beautiful neighborhoods anywhere. Hollywood is very walkable, WeHo, Downtown is getting better and better, Los Feliz, Thai Town, little Armenia.  I don't believe anyone is saying that one would want to walk from Hollywood to Koreatown, because LA is spread out, but the idea that it isn't walkable is patently false.  This is a very dense city with relatively few surface lots and those lots that do exist are constantly being built on.  There is always major construction of housing being built here.  I didn't mean to get off topic about Los Angeles, but when someone posted about it being a turd, I had to call out the ignorance.  OCtoCincy is absolutely correct in his last two statements, and I think MTS needs to visit a little more :-D  BTW, MTS what neighborhood is your house in here in LA?

Just to be clear here, the average Density for the entire 502 square mile city of Los Angeles is 8,092 people per square mile.  It's the 7th most dense city in america (with a population over 500,000).  It does have traffic problems, for sure, but LA itself is VERY dense with few surface lots.  spend 20 minutes on google maps cruising around Hollywood, Silverlake, Koreatown, Mid City, Rampart Village, etc. and you will see a pretty dense city, and that's not even including Bunker Hill where the major high-rise developments are. 

 

The main issue is alternative transportation- it can't get much more dense until you can stop needing a car and LA has a major plan to change the situation dramatically but it's a 30 year plan... 

 

 

I have to work in LA on a regular basis and have home there.  There aren't many walkable neighborhoods, maybe blocks or small districts, but not neighborhoods.

 

Let me ask what your definition of "pedestrian friendly"?

 

Hollywood? During the day, Hollywood and Highland is pretty busy, but go three, four blocks in any direction and its not really pedestrian friendly walkable neighborhood.  Our office is on Sunset and it's a mess.

 

Koreatown?  Mid City?  :wtf:

 

I completely disagree.

 

 

 

 

MTS, how can you disagree with that?  Have you ever actually left your car and explored various neighborhoods on foot?  LA is car dependent if you need to get from one side of town to another, but much of it is walkable.  Def Koreatown, I live in Windsor Village which is truly a walkable neighborhood, right across the street is Hancock Park, one of the most beautiful neighborhoods anywhere. Hollywood is very walkable, WeHo, Downtown is getting better and better, Los Feliz, Thai Town, little Armenia.  I don't believe anyone is saying that one would want to walk from Hollywood to Koreatown, because LA is spread out, but the idea that it isn't walkable is patently false.  This is a very dense city with relatively few surface lots and those lots that do exist are constantly being built on.  There is always major construction of housing being built here.  I didn't mean to get off topic about Los Angeles, but when someone posted about it being a turd, I had to call out the ignorance.  OCtoCincy is absolutely correct in his last two statements, and I think MTS needs to visit a little more :-D  BTW, MTS what neighborhood is your house in here in LA?

 

I can spit on UCLA or Century City.  Westwood is truly walkable.

 

You have to drive to one of these "walkable" districts.  I mean you can walk two/three block and its considered "walkable".  WeHo, you only walk on Santa Monica.  I've done the walk of shame.  I disagree that there are lots of walkable areas.

CLEVELAND - Not all neighborhoods are created equal. One of the prettiest communities in the country is right here in Cleveland.

 

Forbes Magazine just released a list of its 10 Most Beautiful Communities in the U.S., and University Circle made the cut.

 

The magazine picked the circle for its wide variety of culture, arts and museums. The area's high-end restaurants and three notable colleges also helped it make the ranking.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/forbes-names-university-circle-one-of-most-beautiful-places-in-us#ixzz1iXcIXqnu

 

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efel45lkj/university-circle-cleveland-ohio/

 

^I live in Los Feliz and work downtown and almost never use my car. I knew I didn't want to be held hostage by my car by living on the Westside, so I found a neighborhood I liked that had transit accessibility and I absolutely love it.  I rarely leave Los Feliz/Silverlake/Echo Park, though.

 

now that I live in S.cal and live close to LA I have been several times. Both my spouse and I think the only way we could survive there is if we could live and work very near by (odds would be slim). Even though the car is king, I do believe the public transportation system is pretty solid. What is stunning is that there can be gridlock at any time! And there are many walkable neighborhoods. W. Hollywood has a great mix of business and residential, and the beach communities are great as far as I am concerned. Orange County is a hot,scary mess of strip malls, stucco, botox and CARS (ok, I admit the beaches are nice). When everyone bags on S. Cal w/o being there or spending time there, they are probably thinking OC.

 

 

CLEVELAND - Not all neighborhoods are created equal. One of the prettiest communities in the country is right here in Cleveland.

 

Forbes Magazine just released a list of its 10 Most Beautiful Communities in the U.S., and University Circle made the cut.

 

The magazine picked the circle for its wide variety of culture, arts and museums. The area's high-end restaurants and three notable colleges also helped it make the ranking.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/forbes-names-university-circle-one-of-most-beautiful-places-in-us#ixzz1iXcIXqnu

 

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efel45lkj/university-circle-cleveland-ohio/

 

 

More evidence of bipolar disorder from Forbes.

Do Rankings Affect Our Opinions of Cities?

 

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/arts-and-lifestyle/2012/01/do-rankings-affect-our-opinions-cities/883/

 

Haven't gotten to do more than skim it yet, but seems interesting thus far.

CLEVELAND - Not all neighborhoods are created equal. One of the prettiest communities in the country is right here in Cleveland.

 

Forbes Magazine just released a list of its 10 Most Beautiful Communities in the U.S., and University Circle made the cut.

 

The magazine picked the circle for its wide variety of culture, arts and museums. The area's high-end restaurants and three notable colleges also helped it make the ranking.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/forbes-names-university-circle-one-of-most-beautiful-places-in-us#ixzz1iXcIXqnu

 

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efel45lkj/university-circle-cleveland-ohio/

 

 

I know these lists are bunk anyway, but Google Street Viewing around North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, the houses look very similar to Fairmount Boulevard in Cleveland Heights, except I think Fairmount is nicer (more of an unkept feeling in parts of North Meridian Street).

North Meridian north of 38th Street is very similar to Fairmount, but perhaps more extensive in scale.  Meridian south of 38th is, well to be nice, Euclid Avenue between University Circle and Cleveland State...with more "stuff."

CLEVELAND - Not all neighborhoods are created equal. One of the prettiest communities in the country is right here in Cleveland.

 

Forbes Magazine just released a list of its 10 Most Beautiful Communities in the U.S., and University Circle made the cut.

 

The magazine picked the circle for its wide variety of culture, arts and museums. The area's high-end restaurants and three notable colleges also helped it make the ranking.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/forbes-names-university-circle-one-of-most-beautiful-places-in-us#ixzz1iXcIXqnu

 

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efel45lkj/university-circle-cleveland-ohio/

 

 

I know these lists are bunk anyway, but Google Street Viewing around North Meridian Street in Indianapolis, the houses look very similar to Fairmount Boulevard in Cleveland Heights, except I think Fairmount is nicer (more of an unkept feeling in parts of North Meridian Street).

 

So you're saying they should have just looked up the hill a bit for a more worthy Cleveland entry?

Meridian north of the canal is also like a mini Interstate.  Wide road with small or no sidewalks and traffic typically moving 50 mph or faster.  South of the canal, from around 56th to 40th, the road narrows and traffic is slower, so it's a better pedestrian environment.  For the most part, though, they aren't kidding when they say you view the houses from your car.

North Meridian north of 38th Street is very similar to Fairmount, but perhaps more extensive in scale.  Meridian south of 38th is, well to be nice, Euclid Avenue between University Circle and Cleveland State...with more "stuff."

 

What do you mean by "more extensive in scale"?  I actually think the houses on Fairmount are a little nicer (size, variety, landscaping, trees, sidewalks, etc.).  If you mean size of the nice neighborhood, I think Fairmount is a little more extensive, actually.  The nice houses on N. Meridian seem to stretch from 40th to 56th, which is 1.79 miles, and Fairmount from the top of the hill (so excluding the shops and things going up the hill) to Lee Rd. is 1.83 miles.  However, there are also many nice side streets right off of and parallel to Fairmount (such as N. and S. Park, and all of the perpendicular streets, and even more if you include Ambler Heights).

So you're saying they should have just looked up the hill a bit for a more worthy Cleveland entry?

 

I wasn't comparing UC to Fairmount.  I think they're both great neighborhoods in different ways.  I was just comparing N. Meridian to Fairmount.

What do you mean by "more extensive in scale"?  I actually think the houses on Fairmount are a little nicer (size, variety, landscaping, trees, sidewalks, etc.).  If you mean size of the nice neighborhood, I think Fairmount is a little more extensive, actually.  The nice houses on N. Meridian seem to stretch from 40th to 56th, which is 1.79 miles, and Fairmount from the top of the hill (so excluding the shops and things going up the hill) to Lee Rd. is 1.83 miles.  However, there are also many nice side streets right off of and parallel to Fairmount (such as N. and S. Park, and all of the perpendicular streets, and even more if you include Ambler Heights).

 

Extensive meaning a larger area.  Some of the stretches go (east-west) from the canal to Keystone.  It's like a triangle, starting the tip at 40th.  Fairmount is more linear, stretching from Cedar to Lee (heh, Cedar-Lee), with curvilinear points focusing off the Fairmount.  Not as "wide" as the North Meridian corridor, though still quite impressive (visually, certainly due to the sweeping roads and hills, which Indianapolis mostly lacks).  Now if we were going to compare the entire North-Central Indy corridor to, say, Shaker Heights + Cleveland Heights' "nice homes" combined, it's no contest, both Heights' together win. 

 

Both have equal size, variety, landscaping, etc IMO.

 

But whatever.  Another dumb list but hey, at least they give recognition to University Circle (which blows away both North Meridian and Fairmount).

What is technically the boundary of the 'historic district' for definitiion purposes at the national register of historic places is not synonymous with what most locals would consider to be the Fairmount Blvd neighborhood in Cleveland Heights.  The register's area is smaller.    The 'neighborhood' has several historic districts, including the newly nominated Shaker Farm District, among others, and would extend beyond Lee to the border just past Taylor. 

The 'neighborhood' has several historic districts, including the newly nominated Shaker Farm District, among others, and would extend beyond Lee to the border just past Taylor. 

 

Yes, and that part of Fairmount is very nice (I really like the shops at Taylor) but the houses aren't of the same grandeur as the part of Fairmount west of Lee or N. Meridian.

 

Also, Ambler Heights is very similar to Fairmount Blvd., but is technically slightly disconnected from it by the Roxboro and Cedar/Fairmount areas.

The Shaker Farm District stretches all the way to Roxboro, north of Fairmount.  From the map I saw, it even has some overlap with the Fairmount Historic District.  The point was that the 'Fairmount Historic District' is really just a small strip at the center of a larger 'neighborhood,'

In the latest Fabulous Forbes list/story, southern Ohio apparently just sucks to work in (Dayton is at No. 2, and Cincinnati, at No. 10). 

 

The Happiest And Unhappiest Cities To Work In

If you happen to work in Cincinnati, Buffalo, or Austin and you’re constantly down in the dumps—don’t worry. You’re not alone.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2012/01/17/the-happiest-and-unhappiest-cities-to-work-in/

 

 

 

^ (ZZZ-ZZ-ZZZ-Z-ZZ-ZZZ-Z-Z...)

What? Forbes didn't include Cleveland? Maybe they thought Cleveland had collapsed into Lake Erie by now and didn't even bother asking...

Maybe we're number 0

Not sure why they talk about Cincinnati (10), Buffalo (7), and Austin (9) at the start of the article...they're not even in the "top 5 unhappiest". (Dayton is #2.) I guess because they are more recognizable cities? Milwaukee is #3, so maybe it's a compliment they think Cincy is more important to mention? I thought everything was supposed to be peachy in Austin.

 

Cleveland is 22, Springfield is 20.

 

Columbus (32) and Akron (46) make the happiest list.

 

http://www.careerbliss.com/happiest-and-unhappiest-cities-16/

I guess because they are more recognizable cities? Milwaukee is #3, so maybe it's a compliment they think Cincy is more important to mention?

 

That is the best 'half glass full' approach to one of these lists that I can recall

not surprised by that list, Cincinnati does seem to fit the bill IMO

^To each their own; my good friends in Cincy are happy and living the good life. :-)

I guess live music, bbq, warm weather and a wildly popular music/film/tech festival just doesn't do it for everyone.

This isn't really a dumb list, but I wasn't sure where to post it. Mods- feel free to move to appropriate thread if necessary

 

AAA released it's annual list of 4 Diamond restaurants for 2012.  Here is how Ohio did:

 

Aurora: 1

Beachwood: 1

Cincinnati: 6

Cleveland: 1

Columbus: 2

 

http://www.aaaaz.com/news/documents/4D_Restaurants_011411.pdf

 

And for hotels earning the 4 diamond rating:

 

Burton: 1

Cincinnati: 3 (Covington, KY also has one 4 diamond hotel)

Cleveland: 2

Columbus: 4

Hubbard: 1

Norwalk: 1

 

http://www.aaa.biz/Travel_Information/Diamonds/Awards/2011/4D_Lodgings_011411.pdf

*There are no 5 Diamond hotels or restaurants in Ohio any more since Jean Robert at Pigalls closed in Downtown Cincinnati a few years back.

This isn't really a dumb list, but I wasn't sure where to post it. Mods- feel free to move to appropriate thread if necessary

 

AAA released it's annual list of 4 Diamond restaurants for 2012.  Here is how Ohio did:

 

Aurora: 1

Beachwood: 1

Cincinnati: 6

Cleveland: 1

Columbus: 2

 

http://www.aaaaz.com/news/documents/4D_Restaurants_011411.pdf

 

And for hotels earning the 4 diamond rating:

 

Burton: 1

Cincinnati: 3 (Covington, KY also has one 4 diamond hotel)

Cleveland: 2

Columbus: 4

Hubbard: 1

Norwalk: 1

 

http://www.aaa.biz/Travel_Information/Diamonds/Awards/2011/4D_Lodgings_011411.pdf

 

These are 2011 ratings, not 2012.

I looked up the 2012 4 diamond ratings:

 

Restaurants in the 3C's:

Cincinnati  -  6

Columbus  -  2

Cleveland  -  1

 

Hotels in the 3C's

Cincinnati  -  3 (4th on KY side of river facing downtown Cincy)

Columbus  -  5

Cleveland  - 2

MTS must get tired of eating at that same restaurant every time he goes out.

I've never heard of that restaraunt in Aurora.

^It's been there for a while; it's located in the Bertram Inn.

I've never heard of that restaraunt in Aurora.

 

Not many people have.  Rumor has it that it specializes in Svenborgese cuisine.

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=svenborgia

Akron one of the top five promising real estate markets, according to report Featured

Written by  Eric Anthony Johnson, Ph.D.

 

The news site MSN Real Estate recently cited Akron, Ohio, as one of the five “most promising” real estate markets in the nation, defined by those markets expected to suffer the smallest slides. The forecasting firm Local Market Monitor made the picks.

 

The MSN report notes that Akron’s average home price of $148,508 fell by 4 percent in the last year, and that the local market should hit bottom this year followed by a modest 2 percent gain in 2013. “Jobs — especially manufacturing jobs — are coming back to Akron,’’ the report said. “Like many Midwest cities, there was no housing boom here to speak of. Values are down just 13 percent from the peak, about a third of the hit the U.S. as a whole suffered.”

 

http://www.akronist.com/News/Akron-one-of-the-top-five-promising-real-estate-markets-according-to-report.html

MTS must get tired of eating at that same restaurant every time he goes out.

 

Cleveland has a lot of nice restaurants and dining options that transcend the stuffy four diamonds designation.  :roll:

The people here just aren't much into the fancy-schmancy, white table cloth fine dining.  Even Lola, the only one listed from the City proper, is nowhere near as 'stiff upper lip' as Giovani's

Weird how Cincy seems to support the fine dining scene pretty well but Ctown supports its airport better (assuming UO's omniscient god of the airlines uses legit stats).

 

I'd rather have a solid airport.

Considering the Cincy airport is in Kentucky, I don't think Cincy has much power over that... hence, it sucks.

Columbus' airport is more easily accessible and we basically have a highway built that leads you directly to it (although the signage - or lack-thereof, is likely to make you get off on the wrong exit and ultimately miss your flight).

 

In Cincinnati, for the interest of time, you're better off loading your car onto a ferry just to get across a puny river that we already have bridges built to get across...which is just...weird.

What do you mean about the ferry?

Sorry, didn't mean to derail the thread again.

Sorry, didn't mean to derail the thread again.

Suuuuuuuuure!  LOL

Let's get the thread back on topic: CLEVELAND, America's least insecure city!

 

 

http://livingsocial.com/deals/system/press/Vanity_Survey_Fact_Sheet_CLE.pdf

 

the top (most superficial) five:

 

(1) Miami

(2) Chicago

(3) Atlanta

(4) Philadelphia

(5) Phoenix

 

You could maybe convince me to live in Chicago, but the rest make me feel  a bit like throwing up.

Let's get the thread back on topic: CLEVELAND, America's least insecure city!

 

 

http://livingsocial.com/deals/system/press/Vanity_Survey_Fact_Sheet_CLE.pdf

 

the top (most superficial) five:

 

(1) Miami

(2) Chicago

(3) Atlanta

(4) Philadelphia

(5) Phoenix

 

You could maybe convince me to live in Chicago, but the rest make me feel  a bit like throwing up.

 

I don't really understand that ranking, or more accurately, how they came up with the title/description.  Wouldn't the cities whose residents are going out and getting tons of work (teeth whitening, breast implants, etc.) done actually the "insecure" ones?

Let's get the thread back on topic: CLEVELAND, America's least insecure city!

 

 

http://livingsocial.com/deals/system/press/Vanity_Survey_Fact_Sheet_CLE.pdf

 

the top (most superficial) five:

 

(1) Miami

(2) Chicago

(3) Atlanta

(4) Philadelphia

(5) Phoenix

 

You could maybe convince me to live in Chicago, but the rest make me feel  a bit like throwing up.

 

I don't really understand that ranking, or more accurately, how they came up with the title/description.  Wouldn't the cities whose residents are going out and getting tons of work (teeth whitening, breast implants, etc.) done actually the "insecure" ones?

 

Agree that doesnt make any sense... 

 

Also I dont understand "CLEVELAND, America's least insecure city"!  Dont you mean (according to the article) "most insecure" or "least secure"

 

But now to really why I came here, I present to you the 2012 edition of the Granddaddy of all dumb-a$$ rankings lists, the Forbes Most Miserable Cities Rankings:

 

1. Miami, FL

2. Detroit, MI

3. Flint, MI

4. West Palm Beach, FL

5. Sacramento, CA

6. Chicago, IL

7. Fort Lauderdale, FL

8. Toledo, OH

9. Rockford, IL

10. Warren, MI

11. Stockton, CA

12. Cleveland, OH

13. Lansing, MI

14. Akron, OH

15. Merced, CA

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2012/02/02/americas-most-miserable-cities/

Looks like LBJ didn't just take his talents to South Beach..... a good chunk the 'misery' went with him too.

Let's get the thread back on topic: CLEVELAND, America's least insecure city!

 

 

http://livingsocial.com/deals/system/press/Vanity_Survey_Fact_Sheet_CLE.pdf

 

the top (most superficial) five:

 

(1) Miami

(2) Chicago

(3) Atlanta

(4) Philadelphia

(5) Phoenix

 

You could maybe convince me to live in Chicago, but the rest make me feel  a bit like throwing up.

 

I don't really understand that ranking, or more accurately, how they came up with the title/description.  Wouldn't the cities whose residents are going out and getting tons of work (teeth whitening, breast implants, etc.) done actually the "insecure" ones?

 

Right, your first though is a place like L.A. where that industry is huge. But, a ton of people live in L.A. -- many different types. So even L.A. is the epicenter of that, there's still tons of people that don't do it.