Should Part of Van Nuys Defect to Sherman Oaks?

The "Part of Sherman Oaks" efforts to change their Van Nuys address to Sherman Oaks has been marked all along by a disingenuous, Orwellian campaign. They seek to convince both insiders and outsiders that somehow there is something illogical about calling an area that abuts downtown Van Nuys," Van Nuys".

"We shop in Sherman Oaks, our kids attend school in Sherman Oaks, etc." sound like positive reasons, but simply leave out the major motivating factor in the secession: the negative conditions of some, not all, areas of Van Nuys.

In this divorce, one never hears about why there is a break-up. One might guess at racial, economic, or social causes, but the slick and phony p.r. campaign to raise property values in one small area, by rebranding it "Sherman Oaks" stands as one of the more cynical and divisive neighborhood causes of recent years.

Yes, Van Nuys will certainly be hurt by this. It will lose a decent neighborhood, of clean, well kept, modest homes.

But Van Nuys, and its problems are not insurmountable. They simply require money, imagination and the political willpower to bring some healthy development and redesign to a long-neglected area.

Civic participation by the residents of Van Nuys, who care about the future of Van Nuys is the first step. But instead, the quitters are stepping in front of the line to jump off the ship first. Their actions are disgraceful and self-centered.

What Andy fails to address in his post above is that our small, isolated community has virtually no connection to Van Nuys except a name. Nor do we abut downtown Van Nuys. To our West we have the 405, to our East, Valley Glen, to our South just across Burbank Blvd in Sherman Oaks, a virtually identical, single family-home neighborhood of quiet, tree-lined streets and children whom our children go to public school with - by LAUSD designation. Lastly - to our North in Van Nuys, there are no homes, instead there is a wide industrial belt of gravel yards, construction shops, a strip club, an adult book store, cabinet shops, industrial warehouses, heavy equipment rentals, auto body shops, etc and a mammoth DWP facility. The Orange line also cuts through the area parallel to Oxnard Blvd creating a natural divide.

Beyond those several industrial blocks are several additional blocks of large, multi-unit dwellings. One need travel at least 1/2 mile and more through those areas to find another single-family home neighborhood. Because of this difference in zoning and urban landscape, there is twice the pedestrian and driving access between our neighborhood and Sherman Oaks to the South, as there is between our neighborhood and Van Nuys to the North.

Even the L.A. City Council boundaries recognize us as more a part of Sherman Oaks than Van Nuys as we are the only sliver of Van Nuys that is in the C2 district which includes Sherman Oaks, and much of our voting is done in Sherman Oaks.

I agree with Andy that Van Nuys' problems are not insurmountable. But they will neither be solved by us staying, nor made worse by us leaving. What the area requires is a motivated group of individuals, residents, business owners, stakeholders, politicians, etc who live, work and do business in the heart of the city and at the heart of the problem that are willing to do the work to revitalize and restore the area. Without motivated, active, civic-minded individuals in the specific areas that need help, it won't matter what the areas on the perimeter do.

Lastly, we were Sherman Oaks until 1961, we are merely requesting our community name be returned to its original status.

Amy, I think the only fair argument is that your part of Van Nuys had once been Sherman Oaks. (Although I suspect that many of the residents bought when it was Van Nuys and knew they were buying in Van Nuys.)

All the other points are merely smoke and mirrors. I'd have much more respect for the campaign if the petitioners were honest and made it about property values - which we all know is the only motivating factor. (Plus, you're embarrassed that your mail says "Van Nuys.")

The fact that these VN residents shop and school in Sherman Oaks is ludicrous and laughable. I live in Sherman Oaks on the cusp of Studio City (one block away). Most of my time is spent in Studio City. I even work there. Should I rally to change the name of my neighborhood to Studio City? Couldn't hundreds of neighborhoods across the city use the same argument? Why not rezone everything?

I don't care one way or another what happens, but I'm bothered by spoiled attitudes that this city fosters. "Oh, you don't like your property value because of the negative connotations of your city? Let's change the name for you."

The worst part of this is that we'll be getting new residents who allowed Van Nuys to crumble. And instead of fighting back to maintain the dignity of their community, they simply flee. No motivation to to save their city but plenty of motivation to run from it. Just the kind of people we want in Sherman Oaks.

Chaos over logic, that's what Andy and Chris portend, I say.

Andy says "The "Part of Sherman Oaks" efforts to change their Van Nuys address to Sherman Oaks has been marked all along by a disingenuous, Orwellian campaign."

Really? Is this how he interprets when residents follow the prescribed, legal procedure to rename their community back to what is was once, especially now that it is even more integrated with the neighborhoods to its south? Perhaps he thinks, for the same "Orwellian" reasons, we should invalidate our legal election process for Mayor, Governor and President since a minority disagrees. Who would rule then? Is the opposite of "Orwellian" therefore chaos, a destruction of freedom and a suppression of self-determination?

And while Chris grants quickly the historical rationale, he completely rejects the explanations for the name change based on the geographical, industrial and social factors. He makes a comparison to his area of the Sherman Oaks and Studio City "border." How dishonest! Is Sherman Oaks and Studio City separated by a half-mile wide swath industrial belt? Are the residences on either side of completely different construction and age? Are the two areas zoned completely differently? Are they in different council districts? Who is really working the "smoke and mirrors" here?

So, I ask, at what point does logic kick in?

By the way, Chris, I too live in Sherman Oaks too, and, unlike you, I openly welcome our “new” residents to the north. I which we had as much community dedication and passion in the rest of Sherman Oaks! Just the kind of people we want, I say.

Logic points out that NOTHING changes as a result of this part of Van Nuys being renamed. The quality of life doesn't change for these residents. They'll continue to send their kids ot the same school and frequent the same shops. Nothing changes. Except real estate values.

Are you so sure that it is a minority that is against this movement to have part of Van Nuys annexed into Sherman Oaks?

It seems that there are an awful lot of people that do not like this idea at all from both Van Nuys and Sherman Oaks, especially those from south of Ventura.

What does "identify" with Sherman Oaks mean exactly?

If the name "Sherman Oaks" brings affluence to mind, then what does "Van Nuys" make one think of? This sounds like a bias of wealth, class and possibly race.

What other city has been forced to contend with the potential loss of three large areas? When is it time to say enough is enough?

I think that time is now.

Chris--

--Really, nothing else changes? It's such a silly "argument" that I leave other readers to decide that based on the arguments already made.

tbb-- your attempt to race bait won't work. First, my residence is outside of the area in question. Second, that community is already represented multiethnically, and that you don't know that means you are making assumptions that are, well, incorrect. And, third, if there are so many residents in the area against the name change, then why don't they post?

Best regards

Harry, instead of the cryptic response, explain to your readers how the quality of life for these residents changes by switching Van Nuys to Sherman Oaks. It's a given that the real estate values change, but enlighten me on all the other concretized changes that will occur in the lives of these denizens.

Harry,

no attempt at race bait necessary. I said possible race issue based on comments that have been made by those who claim to represent this movement.

What about wealth and class? It seems that biases of this sort are playing a part.

The more exposure that this issue seems to get, the more people voice their opinions to say they are opposed. Do you really want a mass movement of people to gather together and oppose this in the same fashion? If that happens this whole "part of Sherman Oaks" thing is completely dead.

I cannot imagine that people that paid millions for their home in Sherman Oaks south of Ventura blvd would be happy about this.

tbb-- I think you need to learn a bit more about what's been happening. The name change movement has been underway for nearly two years culminating in a final vote probably this week by the LA City Council. If they vote approvingly, then the issue is over.

In today's Daily News in the Opinionated Section is a response with some statistics for you, hundreds and hundreds of signatures on petitions and letters supporting the name change and as compared to what, exactly? An organized movement against? Nope, even though there was plenty of notice and time. Was there any attempt at a petition against the name change? No, nothing. How many residents from either the proposed area or from the existing Sherman Oaks got up in front of the City Council subcommittee three weeks ago to voice their concern over the name change? Not a one. Shall I continue? I think you get the idea.

The residents of the area clearly want the name change back to Sherman Oaks, and they have something like twelve significant reasons for it (see http://www.partofshermanoaks.org). There will be detractors with suspicions, but, in the end, these good people had passion, found their voice, made it heard, followed the rules, and now they stand poised to follow-through on making their community a better place. Don't you think they serve as a shining example to others of what a group of citizens can do together? I do!

I was unaware of this movement until a few short months ago and I live right up the street. Had I been aware of it sooner, I would have voiced my opposition then. Had I known when the city council meeting was, I would have been there.

You call it a shining example of what a group of citizens can do. I say the same amount of effort could have been applied to something that would improve the area as a whole instead of something that is so self serving.

This is going to cost money. This group will want signs moved and maps redrawn. The cost of this could be in the many thousands of dollars at a time when Los Angeles needs to be counting every penny. This money could be spent instead on something that helps the community as a whole as opposed to just one neighborhood that allows it's selfish wants to divide a city.

If you would like me to give you twelve reasons I am opposed, I would be more than happy to oblige you.

Just because you have a list, it does not make you right.

tbb-

Sorry, I think I must have given you the wrong impression that I live in the proposed name change area since you keep using "you" in response to my post, as in "your list." Just like you, I live outside the area, and, to me, this movement appears more than sufficiently valid. Perhaps you have sour grapes because your area wasn’t included in the name change and will remain Van Nuys?

If you must know, I am one of those "millionaires" who lives up in the hills of Sherman Oaks. In spite of your wanting to put words in my mouth and those of my neighbors, I have to respectfully disagree with you on most of your points.

For example, you say this is going to cost money, e.g. maps will need to be redrawn. Since both Sherman Oaks and Van Nuys are both in the incorporated City of Los Angeles, maps do not need to show community boundaries. Since the council districts and zip codes remain the same, what exactly is this expense of thousands of dollars to which you refer? To my mind, if there is any expense, it will actually be borne by the residents who are petitioning for the name change since they are the ones who will have to update their addresses and order new return address labels. (Somehow, I think they won't mind doing that.)

I refer you to the fact that the area under discussion is immediately adjacent to Sherman Oaks yet isolated from the rest of Van Nuys by more than 1/2 mile of industrial activity including the Orange Line. This same area was actually originally Sherman Oaks. So, you might see why I have trouble understanding your point of how this renaming request "divides the city." Actually, I see it more as an act of reunification.

I stand by my comment that this group has shown initiative, passion and follow-through. This rare and admirable community grassroots behaviour strongly foretells, like you said and with which you might now agree, of future acts for “improving the area as a whole.” In summary, I welcome with open arms my virtuous and energetic neighbors to the north.

I understand that you do not live in the area in question, thus your moniker of SO Harry. I offered to give you twelve reasons I am opposed since you are the one who brought up the twelve reasons why this group wishes to rename their area.

Great. So you live in the hills and you support this change. I imagine that you are in the minority. Those with whom I have spoken to that live in that area are either opposed or joke that it does not matter to them because they will just petition to be a part of Beverly Hills or Bel Air.

This group has shown passion and initiative but as a means to an end that will help only their property values.

The southernmost tip of my neighborhood is 1/4 of a mile from the northernmost tip of theirs. Quite a difference between a 1/2 and 1/4. My neighborhood is a whole neighborhood, similar in many ways to theirs. They are a mere few streets from Downtown Van Nuys. They are immediately adjacent to that area and yet, somehow feel no need to attempt to improve that area. Why should they when they can just rename their neighborhood. Then the perception can be that it is truly not their problem, regardless as to proximity, because they are in a different "city."

It is unfortunate that all of this "initiative" could not have gone towards an effort to truly help to improve the area instead of this solely self-serving effort.

They are not physically moving anywhere. They will continue to face the same issues with the area that they have now, regardless as to what address they write on their mail.

I have no issue with being in Van Nuys. I love it here and think that trying to call it something else is silly. I purchased a home here out of my own free will, as did the members of this movement. No one forced them to buy a home here. If they wanted a home in Sherman Oaks, they should have bought one there.

tbb writes "If they wanted a home in Sherman Oaks, they should have bought one there." Well, I did, and then they changed the name to Van Nuys! I simply want it changed back. What do you say to that, tbb?

Also, SO Harry said for you to check out partofshermanoaks.org. The reasons you look for are there. Why do you need him to give them to you?

Just to add to the tally, I'm another Sherman Oaks resident who lives south of the Boulevard, and I agree with Harry. I don't mind the idea of adding these neighborhoods to Sherman Oaks, nor do any of my neighbors that I have spoken to. I have been through their area many times, and it's charming. I don't think they'll take anything away from the rest of Sherman Oaks at all. By the way, I have never heard anyone suggest that we rename my area Bel-Air (Beverly Hills is an independent city over which LA City has no jurisdiction) nor do I expect it.

Harry makes a good point: by having these neighborhoods renamed Sherman Oaks, their residents will be invigorated and may very well take up other community positive campaigns, including that one brought up by commentator tbb for improving the area. If their petition is denied, they will probably be demoralized and not do anything else. Which result would you rather see?

I do not need Harry to tell me what the twelve reasons are for their leaving Van Nuys, I said if he wants me to provide twelve reasons as to why not. I have seen the "Part of Sherman Oaks" website and am familiar with their argument.

Possibly they could take up community campaigns or possibly not. Whether or not they will want to help the area north and immediately adjacent to them is not clear. That is all up to conjecture.

Up until this point, their argument has been that they are not near downtown Van Nuys, which is a few short blocks away, and that their area does not have the problems that Van Nuys has. I take issue with that. I believe that if this is allowed to happen it will give the residents in this area one more reason not to do anything about Van Nuys since they will be called something different.

This is the third area to potentially be taken from Van Nuys. What other city has been forced to deal with such circumstances? How can anyone expect that Van Nuys will be able to improve if it does not have enough single family homes to pull for necessary changes?

Where does it stop? If this happens, my neighborhood will be Sherman Oaks adjacent. Maybe I should keep my mouth shut and hope this goes through since I may gain some property value by that logic. Do you think that there won't be others in Van Nuys that will want to join up and keep Sherman Oaks going further north? It seems that most behave as if Van Nuys deserves this to happen to it because of it's reputation.

The majority of the people who purchased in this neighborhood purchased when it was Van Nuys. If there was such an issue with it being changed in 1961, why was it not until the last couple of years that this was raised? Van Nuys did not have the reputation then that it does now. Should everything go back to what it was in 1961 by that logic? Valley Glen and Lake Balboa did not exist. Maybe we should lose these designations all together and just be called Los Angeles, the city that we are all technically in.

Wow, tbb, you'd rather eliminate all these community designations just because this one groups wants to go back to being Sherman Oaks? So no more NoHo, Larchmont Village, Hollywood, Venice, Century City? Well, nothing like stripping away community identities to motivate people, right?! Your "logic" seems kinda backwards.

And FYI we did raise the issue at many points in the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. Only with this concerted community effort and the power of the Internet have we been able to get downtown to listen to us. Thank you, good residents of Part of Sherman Oaks!! You rock!!!

Neighborhood identification is nothing new in the city of Los Angeles. One need only look at the variety of neighborhoods from Playa del Rey, Westchester, Inglewood and Baldwin Hills through Mar Vista, Palms, West.L.A., Westwood, Century City, Culver City, Cheviot Hills, etc to West Hollywood, Hancock Park, Hollywood, Los Feliz, Silverlake, Eagle Rock, etc. In all there are more than 113 unique neighborhood distinctions in the city. Some have their mail delivered by that name, some don't. I live in the proposed name change area and have received mail at my address that says "Sherman Oaks", "Van Nuys" and "Los Angeles".

It is true, the name change will not change where we live. But it will allow us to officially identify ourselves with the community with whom we are already connected via LAUSD school assignments, voting district, C2 City Council district, commerce, proximity to grocery stores, post office, hospital, etc. There are many connections to Sherman Oaks that absolutely, positively no other Van Nuys neighborhood can claim.

Bottom line - The precedent has already been set. We followed the rules and met the criteria that is in place for a neighborhood name change. That barn door is open and the horse is out. If you wish to change policy, than lobby your politicians to change the criteria to prevent future neighborhoods from changing their name. But we've done the work, under the current system and we rightly deserve the approval from the L.A. City Council.

The argument that changing our neighborhood name will harm Van Nuys is preposterous. If it had any validity than by the same argument, us being a part of Van Nuys this far would have improved the declining areas which it has not.

tbb - not sure what two measuring points you are referring to - but our perimeter is primarily commercial not residential. If you measure from single family home neighborhood in our area, to single family home neighborhood in Van Nuys it is indeed 1/2 mile at its closest.

For those that have not adequately researched our criteria and are opposing us based on knee-jerk reaction alone, I implore you to check out the www.partofshermanoaks.org website. There are interactive maps, land use maps, zoning maps, etc.

Lastly there are several nice neighborhoods in Van Nuys who remain nice by their residents being actively involved in their community - bravo to them. It is up to the business owners, stakeholders and homeowners in the declining areas to be as actively involved in their own communities. Everyone has to do their part. Our neighborhood is not equipped to clean up or improve another. Each neighborhood must do so on its own.

That's right, the citizens of Sherman Oaks are good,

therefore, those in Van Nuys are ?

I guess that's because my logic is backwards. Maybe that's why I belong in Van Nuys.

How dare I defend it. It is obviously not worthy.

tbb, you are playing off my last comment where I call the residents pushing for the name change good. I sure you understand that, from my perspective, they are helping right what I consider to be a personal wrong I have been wanting fixed for nearly 5 decades! So, yes, in my opinion, they are good (and rockin').

Now does that mean that the residents of Van Nuys, or you, are bad? Is bad logic localized to Van Nuys? No, of course not!

By how much will your property values increase anyway?

To vnvance: the difference in prices between our homes, and comparable homes (size, lot size, year built, condition, etc)on the same streets in the same zip code as us 91411 in Sherman Oaks South of Burbank Blvd is around 5% sometimes less, sometimes slightly more but not much.

It is not about and has never been about real estate values, it's about community identity.

AstuteBob said "Harry makes a good point: by having these neighborhoods renamed Sherman Oaks, their residents will be invigorated and may very well take up other community positive campaigns, including that one brought up by commentator tbb for improving the area. If their petition is denied, they will probably be demoralized and not do anything else. Which result would you rather see?"

Well, it turns out this exact sentiment was echoed by council members Alarcon, Rosendhal and Hahn just before today's affirming vote (10-2).