Anonymous wrote:

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.)

Shaw and Logan do NOT have income diversity. There are a couple of subsidized buildings left but for the most part the "diversity" is being pushed out by gentrification. Only rich people can afford to buy there now.

You obviously don't live here.

Maybe it only matters where your kid goes to school if your kid has/is:
learning disability (i.e. dyslexia)
attention issues
sensory processing issues
anxiety
dysgraphia
dyscalculia
on the autism spectrum
is an English language learner
comes from a racially mixed family
too much of a 'follower' of others
won't pay attention to the request of others
highly athletic
unathletic, uncoordinated
socially adept
socially inept
gifted
2e
right-brained
highly sensitive
academically advanced
academically behind

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Seriously, pin this map and the stale discussion that always derails whatever info the OP is seeking can die.

The point is that it's not a given that a DC mailing address means urban. The map isn't the definitive guide. That's for sure.

Much of upper NW is like Arlington along the Orange Line. Hardly urban.

Yes it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Seriously, pin this map and the stale discussion that always derails whatever info the OP is seeking can die.

The point is that it's not a given that a DC mailing address means urban. The map isn't the definitive guide. That's for sure.

Much of upper NW is like Arlington along the Orange Line. Hardly urban.

Nope. The map is the definitive guide. Discussion over.

Nope exactly. Courthouse to Ballston is more urban. Period.

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.)

Shaw and Logan do NOT have income diversity. There are a couple of subsidized buildings left but for the most part the "diversity" is being pushed out by gentrification. Only rich people can afford to buy there now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Seriously, pin this map and the stale discussion that always derails whatever info the OP is seeking can die.

The point is that it's not a given that a DC mailing address means urban. The map isn't the definitive guide. That's for sure.

Much of upper NW is like Arlington along the Orange Line. Hardly urban.

Nope. The map is the definitive guide. Discussion over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Seriously, pin this map and the stale discussion that always derails whatever info the OP is seeking can die.

The point is that it's not a given that a DC mailing address means urban. The map isn't the definitive guide. That's for sure.

Much of upper NW is like Arlington along the Orange Line. Hardly urban.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Seriously, pin this map and the stale discussion that always derails whatever info the OP is seeking can die.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.

Yep. Both the Connecticut Ave. and Wisconsin Ave. corridors are shown as urban. The only parts shown as suburban are along upper Rock Creek Park and then Spring Valley and some of Palisades.

Anonymous wrote:more fodder for the debate: GGW considers large portions of Upper NW to be suburban.

https://ggwash.org/view/38807/this-map-shows-which-parts-of-the-dc-area-are-really-urban-and-suburban

LMAO because the map shows that the Upper NW of the areas being discussed here is considered urban by GGW.