U.S. Cities  

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Register Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads.

Get a detailed profile
Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply


 
Old 06-16-2009, 08:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
10,453 posts, read 4,969,769 times
Reputation: 1901
nmnita has a brilliant future
nmnita has a brilliant futurenmnita has a brilliant futurenmnita has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by drshang View Post
I think you are correct, but I think the main reason people consider the schools bad is because, for the income required to live in Pasadena (aside from the NW part) the schools are pretty poor on a relative scale. I mean all the schools around Pasadena like Arcadia, South Pasadena, San Gabriel, Temple City, etc., are all much better and the cost of living is similar in all of those places (with Arcadia/South Pas being slightly more expensive and San Gabriel and Temple City being slightly cheaper).
yep, we moved out of the Pasadena School district into Arcadia for that very reason. Of course that was 30 some years ago, but I don't think things have changed that much.

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-16-2009, 09:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,663 posts, read 1,238,310 times
Reputation: 507
timelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of lighttimelesschild is a glorious beacon of light
Quote:
Originally Posted by roosevelt View Post
I lived on Colorado Blvd. right across from Brothertons' in the 60's; I was looking at big homes around the Rose Bowl and couldn't believe that even then these beautiful homes had more than one family living in them and the yards looked terrible. I bought in Arcadia instead. In 1990 I visited Pasadena and could see north of Colorado was not nice anymore. I can only guess at what it is like now.
Pasadena has been improved significantly since 1990. If the last time you saw it was 19 years ago, probably you should see it again, before thinking you know what it looks like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2009, 09:49 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
2,982 posts, read 1,218,635 times
Reputation: 1267
uptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud ofuptown_urbanist has much to be proud of
The difference between Pasadena in 1990 and in 2009 is literally night and day, at least in some areas. There's even a difference between 2000 and 2009 in some areas.

To the original poster, much of this is pretty subjective. Someone said around Washington was iffy, for example; that depends on where along Washington you're looking, as well as your personal tastes and comfort levels. That could be said of many, many areas of Pasadena. There are the obviously nice, no-doubts-about it areas, but those are mostly very expensive. Then there are some locations with a lot of problems and crime, and I'd be wary of those areas especially if you're new to the area and don't want to get in over your head. Then there are many areas that some people on this board would find to be perfectly nice and acceptable, while others would look at it with horror.

The schools in PUSD don't have a great reputation overall, but some of that is perception. There are the problems that come along with an urban school district in a city where almost all wealthy and many middle class parents send their kids to private schools, but there are still decent schools and some great teachers within the PUSD system. (as background, Pasadena had some very rough times during the late '60s and early '70s, with Pasadena serving as a battleground for school integration. A lot of white flight to private schools took place then, establishing a racially and economically segregated school situation that still lingers) People with kids often do choose neighboring cities like Arcadia or South Pasadena for the school systems, but the housing prices are also higher. I would suggest investigating PUSD more closely if you are planning on the public school route, but don't necessarily depend on the opinions of those of us posting on this forum on that count, especially those without a current connection (through work or kids) in the system. (on the other hand, knowing perception is important if you're worried about resale value - people do think less of PUSD)

I wouldn't automatically discount the place on Los Robles. Lake is often used as the divider between "good" and "bad" north of the 210, but depending on exact location it could be fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2009, 05:56 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
10,453 posts, read 4,969,769 times
Reputation: 1901
nmnita has a brilliant future
nmnita has a brilliant futurenmnita has a brilliant futurenmnita has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist View Post
The difference between Pasadena in 1990 and in 2009 is literally night and day, at least in some areas. There's even a difference between 2000 and 2009 in some areas.

To the original poster, much of this is pretty subjective. Someone said around Washington was iffy, for example; that depends on where along Washington you're looking, as well as your personal tastes and comfort levels. That could be said of many, many areas of Pasadena. There are the obviously nice, no-doubts-about it areas, but those are mostly very expensive. Then there are some locations with a lot of problems and crime, and I'd be wary of those areas especially if you're new to the area and don't want to get in over your head. Then there are many areas that some people on this board would find to be perfectly nice and acceptable, while others would look at it with horror.

The schools in PUSD don't have a great reputation overall, but some of that is perception. There are the problems that come along with an urban school district in a city where almost all wealthy and many middle class parents send their kids to private schools, but there are still decent schools and some great teachers within the PUSD system. (as background, Pasadena had some very rough times during the late '60s and early '70s, with Pasadena serving as a battleground for school integration. A lot of white flight to private schools took place then, establishing a racially and economically segregated school situation that still lingers) People with kids often do choose neighboring cities like Arcadia or South Pasadena for the school systems, but the housing prices are also higher. I would suggest investigating PUSD more closely if you are planning on the public school route, but don't necessarily depend on the opinions of those of us posting on this forum on that count, especially those without a current connection (through work or kids) in the system. (on the other hand, knowing perception is important if you're worried about resale value - people do think less of PUSD)

I wouldn't automatically discount the place on Los Robles. Lake is often used as the divider between "good" and "bad" north of the 210, but depending on exact location it could be fine.
Great points and I don't think I have been through Pasadena for about 10 years. No, not that long, the last time we were actually in Pasadena was 2002, but that is a long time. Areas do change, the bad often perk back up and the good can go down hill. I think of my years on earth and all the changes that have occurred in the Los Angeles area.

Nita
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.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



Reply


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads


Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:16 AM.

Copyright © 2005-2009, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 - Top