San Fernando Valley = optimal considering all factors? (Riverside, Santa Clarita: house, neighborhoods)

[Tex?Il?]

It seems considering all factors, much of the San Fernando Valley seems to be the preferred optimal location for the middle to upper middle class in LA as much of the valley:

is still generally accessible to where the action is in LA, but yet affording a decent house in a decent neighborhood is more possible, (even though still more expensive than in other cities across the country).

It seems to be the best place for those who work in the entertainment in industry since its not too far from the studios in Burbank and not that far from where the action is (Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Hollywood, W. Hollywood, etc.), but are still not necessarily "rich" and would have a difficult time affording a decent place in west LA.

Do much of the complaints about LA being prohibitively expensive come from those who are not willing to live from the west valley/Ventura county border area far from "the action?"

I'm not necessarily looking to move, although I do keep the possibility of moving to southern California open for the future.

I'm sure the fact that it gets hot there in the summer, might turn people away, but thats probably why its more affordable. And you can always escape heat fairly easily by driving over the Santa Monica mtns.

[BRinSM]

the entire valley was once a huge middle class suburb up until 20-30 years ago. it has since urbanized and ghetto-ized in many areas. much of the southern valley is now not much that different than "the other side of the hill", especially around ventura blvd. the central valley area focused around van nuys, pacoima, arleta, panarama city, etc. is now like another east la loaded with central american immigrants. besides that, yeah, it's warmer than the city and still requires a commute over the hill to get to most of the jobs. however, some of the action has followed the residents to the valley since traffic congestion had made it so difficult to get to areas like west hollywood and santa monica. still, the valley has nothing like the sunset strip or venice boardwalk.

[Tex?Il?]

Interesting.

So it sounds like the Valley west of the 405, and north of the 101, still contains some of the qualities that the valley used to be known for:

Generally more affordable/middle class, but also majority American-born (no offense to anyone - love immigrants, but wouldn't want to be the minority).

[BRinSM]

that area also contains some less than desirable neighborhoods like reseda and canoga park. however, woodland hills and west hills are still considered desirable neighborhoods.

[JohnG72]

Nothing to do with the weather. People will put up with the heat.

The reason Woodland Hills is still middle class affordable is even though its not far, its hell driving into the westside(where so many jobs are) or downtown LA(again jobs), and its not new build like Santa Clarita.

[meowkellycat]

Sherman Oaks is nice. Lots of shopping, centrally located, nice neighborhoods. Studio City and Valley Village (technically part of North Hollywood--although I wouldn't recommend the rest of N Hollywood) are cute and still relatively affordable. I used to teach in Valley Village near Riverside and Laurel Canyon Blvd, in a very cute neighborhood.

Traffic is pretty bad during rush hour. I used to commute from Brentwood to Tarzana every morning, which only took 20 minutes, but traffic going the opposite direction on the 405 was always super slow.