Does it actually matter which school you send your kid to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

Whatevs. You can continue to crawl to bars. My kids (ages 8 and up) walk to school on their own, run up and downs the streets with their friends, and go to diverse schools with kids from all over DC. I can walk anywhere I want to be in 10 minutes, and I can Uber to your hipster neighborhood in 15 if I want to. And no matter what you say, I live within the boundaries of a city.

Whatevs is right. You have again just described the perfect suburban life, all the way down to the 15 minute Uber ride! Describe the two block radius of your home. Anything there besides homes and apartments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

Very few people live within a block of "everything you need," even in a city. My friends live on Capital Hill and aren't within 2 blocks of anything. You don't need to be crawling distance to things to qualify as city living.

I don't consider a lot of Capital Hill to be city living either. When we were looking at where to settle in DC about a decade ago we looked at rowhomes in the area and dubbed it "Capital Hell." All we saw were white professionals and pushing around baby strollers -- and, as you said, not a whole lot of things to walk to. Been there, done that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

The residents of Tokyo would be surprised to hear that they are not experiencing city living. You should let them know...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

The residents of Tokyo would be surprised to hear that they are not experiencing city living. You should let them know...

You call that a rebuttal, really? Lame.

[Anonymous]

This argument about which neighborhoods qualify as city-living is dumb. Who cares whether someone else prefers a more or less dense neighborhood? There is no moral superiority flowing from a particular choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This argument about which neighborhoods qualify as city-living is dumb. Who cares whether someone else prefers a more or less dense neighborhood? There is no moral superiority flowing from a particular choice.

It's only dumb when posters from Upper NW insist that their neighborhoods aren't suburban. They're no different than Arlington or Bethesda.

A couple years ago a friend married a woman from outside the area who had a couple of elementary school-aged kids. They asked for advice on DCPS. We made a number of suggestions. They listened politely. My spouse laughed when we got home and said "who are they trying to kid? They won't be staying downtown -- they're gonna buy something in the Janney district." Which is exactly what they did. And they're the first to admit that they moved to the suburbs.

[Anonymous]

The short answer is, who cares? Most normal people aren't obsessed with this stuff like the neurotic nerds posting on dcum. In fact, most Americans don't have the luxury of picking a school that is perfect for the kiddos. These people are nuts...calculating the percentage of kids that are poor or look differently...super nutso. They got these crazy ideas from other crazies on the net! I went to a 100% white/rural school that lacked resources. I went to a class reunion recently and the smart kids ended up being engineers, professors, lawyers, and even doctors!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

Whatevs. You can continue to crawl to bars. My kids (ages 8 and up) walk to school on their own, run up and downs the streets with their friends, and go to diverse schools with kids from all over DC. I can walk anywhere I want to be in 10 minutes, and I can Uber to your hipster neighborhood in 15 if I want to. And no matter what you say, I live within the boundaries of a city.

Whatevs is right. You have again just described the perfect suburban life, all the way down to the 15 minute Uber ride! Describe the two block radius of your home. Anything there besides homes and apartments?

For one thing, I don't think you understand what the word "within" means. It doesn't mean I walk a mile to everything, it means that I have almost everything that I need on a daily basis, in a mile OR LESS. Some things are 2 blocks away, some are 8 blocks away. In fact, within 3 blocks in either direction I have several restaurants, mt kids doctors, a grocery store, a pharmacy, a coffee shop, and the bar I met my friends at last night.

And just to be clear, you never Uber anywhere? You never leave your little neighborhood? Other than when you have to drive your kids all over the city to get to their charter school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This argument about which neighborhoods qualify as city-living is dumb. Who cares whether someone else prefers a more or less dense neighborhood? There is no moral superiority flowing from a particular choice.

It's only dumb when posters from Upper NW insist that their neighborhoods aren't suburban. They're no different than Arlington or Bethesda.

A couple years ago a friend married a woman from outside the area who had a couple of elementary school-aged kids. They asked for advice on DCPS. We made a number of suggestions. They listened politely. My spouse laughed when we got home and said "who are they trying to kid? They won't be staying downtown -- they're gonna buy something in the Janney district." Which is exactly what they did. And they're the first to admit that they moved to the suburbs.

No, it's only dumb when you insist on judging people for their housing choices. And telling people who objectively live in a city that they live in a suburb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just bite the bullet and move to the Wilson catchment area (mostly WOTP). Honestly, some of the MD/VA school might be better, but the difference seems to me mostly marginal and driven by socio-economics. The schools are safe and pretty average with little crime and violence.

In our schools (Stoddert -> Hardy); things seem fine. Most importantly, we don't sit down and worry about the school and our kids' life trajectory. (I.e. no TJ worries like some of our VA friends; or Middle/HS worries like our Cap Hill friends) The kids can walk to school, their friends are in the neighborhood, and there is racial diversity. Life is pretty relaxing (other than the younger one throwing tantrums about food preference).

This is bad advice. You don't need to do this. Skip the bullet and stay urban until you need to. You'll know when that is, if it comes up. I really don't think WOTP people understand that the don't actually live in a city whatsoever, they live in a fancy suburb. If that's not your cup of tea, wait and see but you can (gasp!) move twice within the next 13 years if you need to. The worrying doesn't set in for a while, for most. We enjoy our lives.

I am not sure how you define "fancy suburb." To me, the difference between urban and suburban is walkability and proximity to commerce. I live in a dreaded WOTP neighborhood and here is an incomplete list of things I can walk to in a mile or less: all 3 of my kids' schools, my kids' dentist and doctor, 2 libraries, 2 post offices, 2 great wine stores, an awesome bakery, 2 local coffee shops and 2 Starbucks, 3 large grocery stores and 2 smaller ones (plus the new Wegman's), one the best independent book stores, a historic movie theater, several fast casual restaurants, a few nicer restaurants, 2 metro stops, multiple bus stops, and now 2 Targets. If you define suburb by size of houses, I can assure you that my duplex is smaller than many of the houses in MtP, ColHi, Shaw, etc.

What exactly is it that makes my neighborhood not a "city"?

Another WOTP poster. Upper NW is not Capital Hill or Dupont Circle, not even close. I was down on Capital Hill last week for a doctor's appt with my daughter. I LOVE tha neighborhood, it is so vibrant. We may even move there after our kids get out of high school, but upper NW is not city livng in a real sense. Neither is much of EOTP further north of Capial Hill.

We made a decision to move from the Kalorama/Adam's Morgan neighborhood for schools 16 years ago when pregnant and we do not regret it. Latin and Basis did not exist at that time, there were many fewer options. I do not regret the move itn the least, but I do not pretend it is urban. It is very convenient, we have short commutes by metro and our kids have had great educational options. We call our neighborhood the burbs within DC and I have all (or comparable) walkability to the NW poster above.

I'm not comparing Upper NW to Capital Hill or Dupont, but I still don't agree that it is not city living. I walk to everything and I'm 3 stops away from my office on the metro. My neighborhood has smaller house and lots of apartment buildings. I guess if you are only defining urban as those few areas like Capital Hill or Dupont I'd accept it, but then there are few other areas EOTP that should be considered urban either.

LOL at your definition of "city living" and the paltry amount of places you can walk to "within a mile." I live in the U Street/Logan area, and absolutely everything you need to live is within a block or two. Dozens of bars and restaurants, several grocery stores, doctors for both humans and pets, pharmacies, dry cleaners, banks, fast food, coffee shops, post office, etc. -- I can crawl to all of it on my hands and knees. On top of that, we actually have people of color and people from all economic and professional/non-professional walks of life around here. THAT'S what city living is. If you have to define walkability in terms of what's available within a mile, you're in the suburbs.

Whatevs. You can continue to crawl to bars. My kids (ages 8 and up) walk to school on their own, run up and downs the streets with their friends, and go to diverse schools with kids from all over DC. I can walk anywhere I want to be in 10 minutes, and I can Uber to your hipster neighborhood in 15 if I want to. And no matter what you say, I live within the boundaries of a city.

Whatevs is right. You have again just described the perfect suburban life, all the way down to the 15 minute Uber ride! Describe the two block radius of your home. Anything there besides homes and apartments?

You sound... crazy. I live in NYC (I really do believe we'd qualify that as city living, yes?) and within two blocks of my apartment is... more apartments. I would also say everything I need is within a mile or less but even I can't "crawl" to all of the things you've listed above.

[Anonymous]

In DCs early days, Ledroit Park and Kalorama (and everything outside outside "boundary road" aka Florida avenue) was a suburb. A legit suburb that was advertised as such and was tauted for being away from the hustle bustle.

This argument is not going to have the clear answer that both sides seem to want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In DCs early days, Ledroit Park and Kalorama (and everything outside outside "boundary road" aka Florida avenue) was a suburb. A legit suburb that was advertised as such and was tauted for being away from the hustle bustle.

This argument is not going to have the clear answer that both sides seem to want.

(fwiw I live in Shaw and certainly enjoy the density and never drive or get in an Uber. Density also means that there is a larger variety of housing types all overlapping each other, so we see more income diversity. Not saying this doesn't exist in upper NW but it is different. I also feel like Brookland/Michigan Park etc are suburban.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In DCs early days, Ledroit Park and Kalorama (and everything outside outside "boundary road" aka Florida avenue) was a suburb. A legit suburb that was advertised as such and was tauted for being away from the hustle bustle.

This argument is not going to have the clear answer that both sides seem to want.

(fwiw I live in Shaw and certainly enjoy the density and never drive or get in an Uber. Density also means that there is a larger variety of housing types all overlapping each other, so we see more income diversity. Not saying this doesn't exist in upper NW but it is different. I also feel like Brookland/Michigan Park etc are suburban.)

Indeed, Eckington may have been the first "streetcar suburb".

To be fair, my home in Eckington is a model marketed by Wardman as a "semi-suburban". There are many homes south of Boundary Road that are equal square footage as mine. The wider footprint (only 2 stories) does feel a bit more like a SFH. Slightly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our daughter is 1 year old. We currently live downtown, and we're thinking we'll need to move in the next year or two to get a little more space. As we think about the parts of the city we'd love to live in, though, we keep coming back to the school conversation. A desirable (and affordable!) neighborhood to live in does not necessary have schools known for being great.

Does that matter? What is the lifelong impact of sending your kid to an amazing school? An okay one? A kind of crappy one? And then how are we defining amazing/okay/crappy.. is it just test scores?

I'm curious how you chose the school you chose (or how you chose to wing it with the lottery). And I'm curious your philosophy on the importance--or lack thereof--of K-12 education.

And then to get into practical advice.. any feeder patterns you love or would avoid?

I think it depends on the child. A white UMC kid will probably be okay academically anywhere. Socially, it may vary.

For black or Latino kids--even if from middle class/UMC families--there are additional peer pressure-related risks at poorly performing schools. As one such family, we would not send our AA child to such a school, and don't know many other UMC AA families who would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our daughter is 1 year old. We currently live downtown, and we're thinking we'll need to move in the next year or two to get a little more space. As we think about the parts of the city we'd love to live in, though, we keep coming back to the school conversation. A desirable (and affordable!) neighborhood to live in does not necessary have schools known for being great.

Does that matter? What is the lifelong impact of sending your kid to an amazing school? An okay one? A kind of crappy one? And then how are we defining amazing/okay/crappy.. is it just test scores?

I'm curious how you chose the school you chose (or how you chose to wing it with the lottery). And I'm curious your philosophy on the importance--or lack thereof--of K-12 education.

And then to get into practical advice.. any feeder patterns you love or would avoid?

I think it depends on the child. A white UMC kid will probably be okay academically anywhere. Socially, it may vary.

For black or Latino kids--even if from middle class/UMC families--there are additional peer pressure-related risks at poorly performing schools. As one such family, we would not send our AA child to such a school, and don't know many other UMC AA families who would.

PP again. One other concern with AA kids at schools with mostly disadvantaged families is that your child is lumped with the other "poor kids" due to sharing the same skin color. For example, one UMC AA family I know had a child at a Hill school with mostly very poor AA families. During one incident, their son was lumped with other AA kids and falsely accused of fighting. And yes, they moved and bought elsewhere in the city (IB for Deal/Wilson).