Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Yea not like NYC where there is like 15 targets now

Huh? I'm talking about Manhattan, where I grew up. We didn't have a car and I never shopped at Target. I like Target, but come on -- you can't paint Manhattan like that and have any credibility.

God, no one has any sense of humor on this gd website. I'm talking about Manhattan too. There's a target near Macys, a target on the UWS, a target on the UES, a target in Tribeca. I love NYC, obviously I think it's great. It was just a little joke.

Are you new here? DCUM doesn't really do those sorts of jokes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Of course it would help if you said where you live.

But no aside from an annual visit to King Farm for a holiday party (coming up next week FWIW) I don't get there much. But what I see when I am there is still a lot of surface parking lots and a lot of roads with a lot of cars on them though to the communities credit the roads are somewhat more urban in design and not high speed traffic gutters.

Yes there are townhouses on walkable streets comfortably within walking distance of retail and that is great.

But I don't see a lot of people walking - I see a lot of cars.

But it is great that it is an option.

As for DC residents having cars well yes they do - no one in this thread said otherwise. But DC is second only to NYC in car free households and also has a very high percentage of car light households. I think only 20% of DC households have more than 1 car. DC is also in the top 2 or 3 in the country in most non-car metrics for getting around - rates of transit use, biking to work, walking to work, car pooling etc.

Hopefully because your suburb planned for things other than people driving it measures favorably compared to the rest of the county - if true that will be a good thing for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Yea not like NYC where there is like 15 targets now

Huh? I'm talking about Manhattan, where I grew up. We didn't have a car and I never shopped at Target. I like Target, but come on -- you can't paint Manhattan like that and have any credibility.

God, no one has any sense of humor on this gd website. I'm talking about Manhattan too. There's a target near Macys, a target on the UWS, a target on the UES, a target in Tribeca. I love NYC, obviously I think it's great. It was just a little joke.

I’ve always considered the boundaries of DC = the city, and outside the boundaries = the suburbs, even if there are suburbs with higher density than parts of DC (eg Rosslyn vs Brookland)

You can’t really define it based on walkability or having a yard, unless you plan to argue that all of LA, Dallas, Atlanta etc are suburbs. It’s about city boundaries vs metro area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Yea not like NYC where there is like 15 targets now

Huh? I'm talking about Manhattan, where I grew up. We didn't have a car and I never shopped at Target. I like Target, but come on -- you can't paint Manhattan like that and have any credibility.

Anonymous wrote:Of course Upper NW, also known as Upper Caucasia, is the suburbs. It's no different than Arlington, where I lived for years before moving to Logan Circle. When my friends have kids, they move to Upper NW. That's the definition of the suburbs.

Its really not the definition of the suburbs though people will argue about what that means.

And I guarantee you that most of Arlington along the Orange line (and even some parts of S Arlington along Columbia Pike) is far denser than any part of Logan Circle which is predominantly made up of rowhouses with some newer multi-unit buildings sprinkled in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Yea not like NYC where there is like 15 targets now

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

If you really think walking is a curiosity in these neighborhoods, then I have to conclude you just haven't spent that much time here. That's a shame.

Also, newsflash: lots of DC residents have cars. I lived there for 10 years and know what the car usage is like. This is a city with a Walmart, for pete's sake. It ain't NYC, where truly no one (except the uber wealthy) have cars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Look you are painting us as foes here when we really aren't.

Faux urbanism is better than no urbanism at all so I'm glad King Farm or wherever you live is at least incorporating some of the good elements of city living. And yes some of these suburbs have the infrastructure to be walkable and have some connections to transit and even have some well designed retail areas that encourage walking and the bundling of trips and all of those things are good. But the truth is that walking in these places is still more of a curiosity than a way of life for most people and the retail areas (and the transit stops) are still mostly visited by people driving and are surrounded by acres of parking.

I'm a 5 minute walk from a Metrorail station that gets me downtown in 13 minutes. That same station is served by 35 bus routes, buses that take me to Georgetown, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Glen Echo etc. I can get one seat rides to locations all over the region including in the suburbs.

My neighborhood, like yours, is imperfect. But they are different. Which is fine.

Of course Upper NW, also known as Upper Caucasia, is the suburbs. It's no different than Arlington, where I lived for years before moving to Logan Circle. When my friends have kids, they move to Upper NW. That's the definition of the suburbs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

So you're saying planned neighborhoods are good, but you criticize "faux urbanism"? How are those 2 things consistent with each other?

Also, you're wrong about walkability; I have sidewalks throughout my entire neighborhood. Getting to the metro requires a 10 minute bus ride from the bus stop, which is a 5 minute walk from my house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:would you call Brentwood LA or most of Toronto the suburbs? If you count SFS as suburbs, probably. But does it really matter? Some people want houses and space and some want apartments and walkability. Different strokes.

None of this matters. This thread is so dcum.

Seriously. I love driving and love a yard. Some people hate the upkeep and love to walk to everything. Good thing we're not all the same...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in Upper NW and it is definitely not the suburbs.

All of upper NW was built around street car lines and most neighborhoods are very walkable to both transit and retail.

And several of the commercial corridors in Upper NW (really all of them except Wisconsin Avenue) have some fairly dense residential areas though the residential side streets are obviously mostly single family homes but even there the houses are mostly on lots that are a fraction the size of suburban lots including the lots just across the line in MD.

BTW there are many similar neighborhoods across all 4 quadrants of DC (ok not really SW DC) with single family homes immediately adjacent to higher density corridors with commercial and multi-unit buildings so NW isn't really that different from much of DC except it only has some small pockets of blocks with rowhouses which are more common in other DC neighborhoods.

Cool. We have all of that and live in MoCo, outside the Beltway.

Really - which neighborhoods in MoCo outside the beltway have all of that? The faux urbanism of King Farm doesn't count because the transit there sucks and there really isn't that much density there either though it may feel like it because the traffic is still awful.

I really don't feel like naming where I live so that you can mock it. Thanks.

Because it doesn't exist.

I know Montgomery County pretty well. The only two places that sort of come close would be close in to old town Rockville and if you count MARC service old town Gaithersburg.

If it exists then name it and it won't be mocked but as I pointed out faux urbanism doesn't count.

What you call "faux urbanism" actually encompasses some really wonderful neighborhoods. You realize DC was planned as well, right? That's why there are so many similarities in terms of the type of architecture you see in particular neighborhoods; much of the city was done as part of subdivisions.

So stop acting like DC is this organic city. It's the product of urban planning, just like the "faux urbanism" neighborhoods you look down your nose at.

You make think they are fine and we'd probably agree whatever neighborhood you are defending but strangely won't name is probably much better than most of what is found in Montgomery County.

But to re-iterate I bet your well planned suburban neighborhood still doesn't check several of the boxes that my DC neighborhood does, particularly around transit use and walk and bikeability.

And I don't understand the gripe about planning. Your suburban neighborhood probably was much more a product of planning than just about any DC neighborhood but that's really neither a good nor a bad thing but on balance it is better that neighborhoods are planned than unplanned.

Anonymous wrote:would you call Brentwood LA or most of Toronto the suburbs? If you count SFS as suburbs, probably. But does it really matter? Some people want houses and space and some want apartments and walkability. Different strokes.

None of this matters. This thread is so dcum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you live in a SFH with a yard? Yeah, that’s suburban.

Sure but idk why that's seen like a bad thing. A home with a yard in a major city? Where you can walk to some restaurants and the metro? Count me in.

Most of Chevy Chase isn't particularly walkable to the metro.

I guess if you are lazy - geographically about half of Chevy Chase DC is west of Connecticut and all of those homes are comfortably within walking distance of a Metro station. And technically some of the neighborhoods east of Connecticut are not even Chevy Chase.

What's your definition of comfortable walking distance?

Well we can't walk to the metro but we do walk 3 minutes to a gourmet grocery store and 15 minutes to a movie theater, several bars and restaurants, the library, the toy store, several coffee shops, and the supermarket. I don't care about the semantics but I don't think people in most of America's suburbs can do that (not to mention the fact that a 15 minute drive gets you to downtown DC).

I live in the suburbs and have sidewalks on every single street in my neighborhood. My house is a 5 minute walk from:

- a movie theatre
- a bar
- a dozen restaurants
- a farmer's market
- a grocery store
- hair salons
- 2 dance studios
- the post office
- a coffee shop

We are a 5 minute drive from the library. We are a 30 minute metro ride to Woodley Park.

Cool! We're all lucky to live in the DMV area