Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which one? Choose wisely.
Los Angeles 11 40.74%
Valley City 5 18.52%
San Diego 11 40.74%
Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-15-2010, 01:50 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles
635 posts, read 1,540,695 times
Reputation: 245

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OmShahi View Post
So technically Valley City is apart of Los Angeles city limits?
For now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-15-2010, 04:58 AM
 
14,256 posts, read 26,937,981 times
Reputation: 4565
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC90 View Post
All crappy areas.

The Westside is the best side. Never forget.

The Valley is the Staten Island of LA, IMO.

It's also excessively muggy, ugly, boring. It is the boonies.
Baldwin Hills, Leimert Park, and Ladera Heights are crappy? How is the Valley like Staten? The Valley is bigger, and it's one of the most famous areas of LA, whereas Staten is always the "forgotten borough" of NYC. I think the Valley might have a tad bit wealthier residents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 05:01 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,043,145 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by polo89 View Post
Baldwin Hills, Leimert Park, and Ladera Heights are crappy?
Ignore his post. Judging based off his location- he probably measures how great a neighborhood is by "density". Typical (just assuming)

There are a lot of great areas in Los Angeles outside of what he has named.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,684 posts, read 7,382,338 times
Reputation: 2411
Quote:
Originally Posted by polo89 View Post
Baldwin Hills, Leimert Park, and Ladera Heights are crappy? How is the Valley like Staten? The Valley is bigger, and it's one of the most famous areas of LA, whereas Staten is always the "forgotten borough" of NYC. I think the Valley might have a tad bit wealthier residents.
None of those areas are part of the San Fernando Valley. Just had to correct you.

Here's a map of the city of LA:http://losangelesvendingmachineservices.com/images/map_los_angeles.jpg (broken link)

It includes: Woodland Hills, Tarzana, Encino, West Hills, Chatsworth, Porter Ranch, Granada Hills, Northridge (where I live now), Canoga Park, Winnetka, Reseda, Lake Balboa, North Hills, Sylmar, Pacoima, Lakeview Terrace (where Rodney King got beaten along the 210), Mission Hills, Arleta, Sun Valley, Van Nuys, Valley Glen, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Valley Glen, Valley Village, North Hollywood (where I grew up), Toluca Lake.

It MAY include, but not all the time: Shadow Hills, Sunland, and Tujunga (technically in its own valley, but only connected to the rest of LA contiguously through the SFV).

Here are some stats:
https://www.city-data.com/forum/14498173-post15.html

Quote:
Here's the 2009 Economic and Demographic report on the San Fernando Valley, in comparison to the rest of the City of Los Angeles

http://www.csun.edu/sfverc/2009EconSumitReport.pdf

If LA were to split, its not like a whole lot of Angelenos would miss the Valley anyways. I've kind of noticed a subtle elitism from those over the hill about how the Valley really isn't LA anyways. I always retort with "you can enjoy the real taxpaying parts of LA, you know like Watts, Southeast Los Angeles, South LA"

It's pretty annoying being told how the Valley isn't LA (ironically by those who don't even live in the City of LA). So, in some ways, let it happen and see what would happen to the rest of the city.

San Fernando Valley: 1,766,570
City of Los Angeles: 3,806,003
City of LA's San Fernando Valley (without Burbank, Glendale, San Fernando, or Calabasas): 1,399,749
City of LA without SFV: 2,406,524
(Page 22 of the report)

Without the SFV, LA would be the 3rd most populated city in the country after New York and Chicago. The San Fernando Valley parts of LA alone would be ranked 7th, after NY, Chicago, LA, Houston, Phoenix, and Philadelphia.

Not bad!
Anyways, as a SFV local, I'll give my opinion.

To begin, how can LA still have 3.8 million people, if 1.4 million live in the Valley? It wouldn't be the 2nd largest city in the US anymore (it would be 3rd after Chicago, and "Valley City". I've already started a thread in the LA forum expressing my thoughts on the whole situation, and I would totally support a split from LA.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...t-up-city.html
https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...sider-san.html

To be frank, most people "over the hill" don't consider us part of LA. We don't really consider ourselves part of LA either. That's the truth, whether we like it or not. If we're so "crappy", let us the f*ck go. When the next vote for secession comes out, vote "YES" instead of "NO" to make it truly fair.

City of Los Angeles Secession Votes 2002

Citywide Vote
66.9% No
33.1% Yes

San Fernando Valley only
50.7% Yes
49.3% No

Citywide Vote outisde of the San Fernando Valley
Yes: 58,138 (18.7%)
No: 253,281 (81.3%)

We don't have many sites, but its where the bulk of the LA workforce and LA's tax dollars come from. I'm pretty sure the city doesn't want to see us leave. I'd rather give MY tax dollars to someone who'd spend it in the SFV rather than it see it shipped off to never-ever land that is the LA bureaucracy. Hell, I'd even support having a borough system, but not keep whatever hell it is right now.

If you don't like the SFV, fine. I don't care. That's your prerogative. Just remember that without us, LA would seriously be a boiling pot of "haves" and "have-nots"

Keep your elitism away from me. Sick of having all these status symbols around anyways. It's sure as hell not helping my city get out of its financial straits either.

Last edited by Lifeshadower; 07-15-2010 at 08:15 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,411 posts, read 10,386,687 times
Reputation: 1802
I've never heard of "Valley City" but recall the effort to separate the San Fernando Valley from Los Angeles which failed badly. The Valley is the middle-class family-oriented boring part of LA. It is a vast combination of nondescript neighborhoods, strip malls, extremely hot [105F today] suburbia within the city limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 09:30 AM
 
Location: yeah
5,717 posts, read 16,347,216 times
Reputation: 2975
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur View Post
I've never heard of "Valley City" but recall the effort to separate the San Fernando Valley from Los Angeles which failed badly. The Valley is the middle-class family-oriented boring part of LA. It is a vast combination of nondescript neighborhoods, strip malls, extremely hot [105F today] suburbia within the city limits.
...and porn...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,411 posts, read 10,386,687 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by krudmonk View Post
...and porn...
right. The valley must have plenty of cheap movie studios but the porn industry has to be a major revenue source for Los Angeles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,510 posts, read 33,305,373 times
Reputation: 7622
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur View Post
I've never heard of "Valley City" but recall the effort to separate the San Fernando Valley from Los Angeles which failed badly. The Valley is the middle-class family-oriented boring part of LA. It is a vast combination of nondescript neighborhoods, strip malls, extremely hot [105F today] suburbia within the city limits.
Well, the average July maximum is low-to-mid 90s. Hot but not extremely hot.
Extremely hot would be Palm Springs (currently 112 degrees).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 04:33 PM
 
14,256 posts, read 26,937,981 times
Reputation: 4565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
None of those areas are part of the San Fernando Valley. Just had to correct you.

Here's a map of the city of LA:

It includes: Woodland Hills, Tarzana, Encino, West Hills, Chatsworth, Porter Ranch, Granada Hills, Northridge (where I live now), Canoga Park, Winnetka, Reseda, Lake Balboa, North Hills, Sylmar, Pacoima, Lakeview Terrace (where Rodney King got beaten along the 210), Mission Hills, Arleta, Sun Valley, Van Nuys, Valley Glen, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Valley Glen, Valley Village, North Hollywood (where I grew up), Toluca Lake.

It MAY include, but not all the time: Shadow Hills, Sunland, and Tujunga (technically in its own valley, but only connected to the rest of LA contiguously through the SFV).

Here are some stats:
https://www.city-data.com/forum/14498173-post15.html



Anyways, as a SFV local, I'll give my opinion.

To begin, how can LA still have 3.8 million people, if 1.4 million live in the Valley? It wouldn't be the 2nd largest city in the US anymore (it would be 3rd after Chicago, and "Valley City". I've already started a thread in the LA forum expressing my thoughts on the whole situation, and I would totally support a split from LA.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...t-up-city.html
https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...sider-san.html

To be frank, most people "over the hill" don't consider us part of LA. We don't really consider ourselves part of LA either. That's the truth, whether we like it or not. If we're so "crappy", let us the f*ck go. When the next vote for secession comes out, vote "YES" instead of "NO" to make it truly fair.

City of Los Angeles Secession Votes 2002

Citywide Vote
66.9% No
33.1% Yes

San Fernando Valley only
50.7% Yes
49.3% No

Citywide Vote outisde of the San Fernando Valley
Yes: 58,138 (18.7%)
No: 253,281 (81.3%)

We don't have many sites, but its where the bulk of the LA workforce and LA's tax dollars come from. I'm pretty sure the city doesn't want to see us leave. I'd rather give MY tax dollars to someone who'd spend it in the SFV rather than it see it shipped off to never-ever land that is the LA bureaucracy. Hell, I'd even support having a borough system, but not keep whatever hell it is right now.

If you don't like the SFV, fine. I don't care. That's your prerogative. Just remember that without us, LA would seriously be a boiling pot of "haves" and "have-nots"

Keep your elitism away from me. Sick of having all these status symbols around anyways. It's sure as hell not helping my city get out of its financial straits either.
I know those areas aren't part of the Valley, in my post before that, I said "What about Northern South Central, in communities like Baldwin Hills, Ladera Heights, and Leimert Park" and he said those areas were crappy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2010, 04:47 PM
 
14,256 posts, read 26,937,981 times
Reputation: 4565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
None of those areas are part of the San Fernando Valley. Just had to correct you.

Here's a map of the city of LA:

It includes: Woodland Hills, Tarzana, Encino, West Hills, Chatsworth, Porter Ranch, Granada Hills, Northridge (where I live now), Canoga Park, Winnetka, Reseda, Lake Balboa, North Hills, Sylmar, Pacoima, Lakeview Terrace (where Rodney King got beaten along the 210), Mission Hills, Arleta, Sun Valley, Van Nuys, Valley Glen, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Valley Glen, Valley Village, North Hollywood (where I grew up), Toluca Lake.

It MAY include, but not all the time: Shadow Hills, Sunland, and Tujunga (technically in its own valley, but only connected to the rest of LA contiguously through the SFV).

Here are some stats:
https://www.city-data.com/forum/14498173-post15.html



Anyways, as a SFV local, I'll give my opinion.

To begin, how can LA still have 3.8 million people, if 1.4 million live in the Valley? It wouldn't be the 2nd largest city in the US anymore (it would be 3rd after Chicago, and "Valley City". I've already started a thread in the LA forum expressing my thoughts on the whole situation, and I would totally support a split from LA.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...t-up-city.html
https://www.city-data.com/forum/los-a...sider-san.html

To be frank, most people "over the hill" don't consider us part of LA. We don't really consider ourselves part of LA either. That's the truth, whether we like it or not. If we're so "crappy", let us the f*ck go. When the next vote for secession comes out, vote "YES" instead of "NO" to make it truly fair.

City of Los Angeles Secession Votes 2002

Citywide Vote
66.9% No
33.1% Yes

San Fernando Valley only
50.7% Yes
49.3% No

Citywide Vote outisde of the San Fernando Valley
Yes: 58,138 (18.7%)
No: 253,281 (81.3%)

We don't have many sites, but its where the bulk of the LA workforce and LA's tax dollars come from. I'm pretty sure the city doesn't want to see us leave. I'd rather give MY tax dollars to someone who'd spend it in the SFV rather than it see it shipped off to never-ever land that is the LA bureaucracy. Hell, I'd even support having a borough system, but not keep whatever hell it is right now.

If you don't like the SFV, fine. I don't care. That's your prerogative. Just remember that without us, LA would seriously be a boiling pot of "haves" and "have-nots"

Keep your elitism away from me. Sick of having all these status symbols around anyways. It's sure as hell not helping my city get out of its financial straits either.
It's funny how they separated South Los Angeles, and South East Los Angeles, don't they both make up ONE South Central Los Angeles? I heard The Harbor Freeway(110 Freeway) separates East South Central, and West South Central.
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. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

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


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top