A reader, saying "Here's some diverse vibrancy for you" points me to a Washington Post article:
By Allison Klein and Dan Keating
Some of Washington's most vibrant neighborhoods, destinations for suburbanites, barhoppers and urban professionals, share a lesser-known distinction: They have the highest concentrations of holdups in the city. ...
Doug Bryant, 35, a technical recruiter, and his wife moved to Columbia Heights almost three years ago because it was vibrant and diverse. But after being around so much crime -- and getting attacked on the street by a young man last year -- they plan to move. "I don't like walking around here at night," he said. "And I don't mean midnight. I'm talking after 8."
Oddly enough, this is actually one case where the word "vibrant" isn't total hooey. Usually, they use "vibrant" as a code word when they can't think of anything else to say about poor black neighborhoods, because words like "bleak" and "ominous" aren't allowed, or poor Mexican neighborhoods, because they can't say "tacky" and "low-brow."
In this case, however, the area north of the White House actually is gentrifying as Matt Yglesias-types move in and is becoming more "vibrant" in the actual sense that people want to believe is true about a neighborhood. What people hope when they hear that a city neighborhood is "vibrant" (or any other cool sounding adjective) is that it means that pretty girls are out at night. That, when you get down to it, is the ultimate attribute of an urban neighborhood: attractive women. (For suburban neighborhoods, the ultimate feature is smart public schoolchildren.)