We’re all neighbors here on Capitol Hill. Let’s get to know each other. Presenting the CHS Capitol Hill Seattle Census 2009 — 29 questions about you and your life on the Hill.
The goal of this survey is to learn a bit more about the CHS community and Capitol Hill. Some of the questions will be asked again next year so we can analyze continuity. Some of the questions are one-of-a-kind for 2009. Anybody can participate. The results will be shared and the anonymous data will be made available to everybody. There are 29 questions. You do not need to answer every question and may come back to the survey at any time to change your answers or add new ones until the census closes on Sunday, Jan. 11 at 11:45PM.
I’ll share results starting the following week and make the anonymous data available at that time. If you have any suggestions for next year’s survey, leave a comment.
Thanks to my Twitter beta testers for feedback. I did what I could to keep what people liked and drop what people didn’t.
iPhone or no phone? C’mon.
Also, the “residential trajectory” question is total BS. You make it sound like a large house is the uber evolution of a CH resident. That’s bullshit. I’m in a condo. It’s my third home purchase, and I don’t ever intend to live in low-density, environment-killing single-family homes. The way that question is written, you make it sound like the only reason anybody would ever want to live in a condo is because they can’t afford to live in a single family home east of 15th. This sort of bias pisses me off and undermines the validity of any survey that attempts to be census-like.
*
Sorry to disappoint you anon. The residential trajectory thing stems from a post that ran on the site a few months ago. I should have (and will now) added a link to the question for context. Here’s the link:
http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2008/10/23/phases-of-capitol-hill-residency-chr
I was attempting to incorporate some ideas from the site and stay true to the posts’s concept. Sorry to piss you off so much.
Yikes, I didn’t pick up on that at all. Houses aren’t for everyone, just like condo’s aren’t for everyone. It’s tongue in cheek.
On the other hand, your note about the environment is off-mark. I chose to live in the city, not Issaquah. I also wish you best of luck trying to find a condo large enough that you can afford when and if you ever decide to live with someone or add a child to your life. Kids are bad for the environment, though, so careful with that.
I liked that a lot of questions weren’t totally rigid, yes/no kinds of questions. I thought The NY or Portland question was a great way to find out what our ideal urban form would look like. But yeah… iphone or no phone? i dont get that one.
I get the point of the residential trajectory question, but I do think it should have been more open ended.
Oh man, I totally thought that was the toughest question! I switched my answer like ten times.
I loved the iPhone or no phone question. Its a basic sentiment toward technology. Do you get all giddy when a revolutionary piece of technology comes out or do you miss the simpler days, when your mom couldn’t get a hold of you every moment of the day…sigh…
“I also wish you best of luck trying to find a condo large enough that you can afford when and if you ever decide to live with someone or add a child to your life.”
Are you freaking kidding me? What planet are you from? How do so many families live in condos/coops in Manhattan (my home town), then?
The average American home was about 1250 SF in the 1950s. Now it’s double that, but average family sizes have fallen since then. On average, square footage per family member has skyrocketed.
I am certain that my wife and I will be able to comfortably (and environmentally responsibly) raise 2-3 children in our ~1350SF condo. A house is NOT a requirement for people who want to have children.
And yes, kids are bad for the environment. Why make it worse, though, by choosing to raise them in low-density housing?
My problem with the iPhone question was that it seems to play into Apple marketing. “Either you’re using THE JESUS PHONE or you may as well have no phone.” I’m sick of the hype.
Here’s how the residential trajectory question should have been written (in order not to impose crappy value judgments on condo dwellers):
Where do you live now?
(list types of housing available in caphill)
Where do you want to live next?
(list types of housing available in caphill)
You’d have actually learned something from this question. You’d be able to say interesting things, like, “looks like people are downsizing from homes to condos after years of excess space and consumption” or “there’s a migratory trend away from condos to single family homes” or whatever.
The way the question is asked now is thoughtless and insensitive. It’s also got no analysis value for the census overall.
I’m not sure, but a) iPhone hype? Still? Isn’t J’s point rather that the iPhone is now just a stand-in for luxe phones? Like Kleenex or whatever?
and b) “thoughtless and insensitive”? I wish the survey was thoughtless and insensitive! On the subject of sensitivity, though, what about a sense of humor?
But most importantly c) why is no one complaining about the pets question? Smelly, hairy, environmentally unsound: down with cats and dogs both, I say!
here, here! My only pets are the red worms in my compost bucket!
Anon, I’m going to ignore your overly combative tone, and say that I agree with a lot of the points you’re making here, especially about average square footage per person going way up. A lot of my friends say that they can’t afford to live in the city, but what they really mean is they can’t afford a huge apartment/condo with a fenced yard and unlimited free parking in the city.
I also think that your suggestion for how the question should have been worded would’ve been a lot more insightful. It really didn’t bother me that much because I happened to fit into one of the categories listed, but my ideal trajectory is not reflected in the question either. The question could have been used as a way to find out what our residential trajectories really are on the hill, instead of finding out what stage we’re in in that hypothetical trajectory.
The problem with the iphone question is that the underlying question (what is your basic sentiment toward technology) is not probably not clear to a lot of people, it wasn’t to me. So some people might answer ‘no’ because they don’t like the iphone for whatever reason, even though their answer to the underlying question might be yes. If people don’t understand the question, their answer is going to be worthless.
You also sound like you are imposing crappy value judgments on people. They are your values though, so I guess that makes them okay.
Wow, your condo is bigger than my house.
yah seriously. if i wanted the quiet suburban life i would move to the suburbs. that shit is nowhere in my trajectory. and the iphone one is wtf too. some of us view that thing as a low tech fashion accessory compared to other options that currently exist.
Thanks, cheescake, for voicing exactly why I couldn’t answer the iPhone question. I do not own one and it does not symbolize “tech” to me, for many reasons. Given your explanation, and the fact I love technology and am an early adopter, I should have checked iPhone on that question. But even knowing that now, I still can’t bring myself to do it.
The survey is a great idea – thanks for posting it up, J. It should give us some interesting and useful information which I will be delighted to read about when the survey’s over.
Along with giving us insight into the Hill, I think the survey gives us insight into the survey writer himself. God vs. Luck – interesting dichotomy. iPhone vs. no phone – controversial with the board, but makes sense if you’re a technophile writing in shorthand. But cats vs. coyotes? Is that a wild vs. tame/civilized question, or is there a cat and coyote deathmatch going on that I don’t know about?
Search “cat coyote” for the back story. :)
Fun survey! Like JoshMahar, the NYC vs. PDX question was the toughest for me!
And geez, I’m surprised about the reaction to the trajectory question since the original post had such a positive response. One of the reasons that Capitol Hill is unique is because of its spectrum of housing options. And like it or not, there does seem to be (at least anecdotally) a common path that hillsters take. Obviously, it doesn’t apply to everyone, nor does it mean that we all aspire to live in a 6-bedroom mansion on 16th with 0.5 kids (plus nanny).
I take pride in my 3.0 existence, even if it includes a smelly, hairy, environmentally unsound cat!
The original post was about one person’s trajectory and the tone of the post was non prescriptionist. The survey question, however, was written in such a way that every housing option other than single family home east of 15th was inferior. Here’s the question, since it has yet to be repeated in the comments:
Which point of the Capitol Hill Residential Trajectory best describes your status?
Which point of the Capitol Hill Residential Trajectory best describes your status? CHR 1.0: Basic apartment, west of BroadwayCHR 2.0: Nicer apartment, between Broadway and 15th, possible co-habCHR 3.0a: Similar nice apartment, east of 15th, can’t afford to buy but want something “quiet”CHR 3.0b: Condo or small house, east of 15th, first home purchase and want something “quiet”CHR 3.0c: Larger house, east of 15th, 2nd home purchase and want something “quiet”
Other (please specify)
Note how the order (and ordination or numbering) of the options indicates evolution and progress.
Note that the ONLY option for living west of broadway is “basic.” There are very nice condos AND apartments west of broadway.
Note how the only condo options are for people who are making their first purchase and who can’t afford something “nicer” or “larger.”
Note how “quiet” seems to be the most desired end-state for living on Capitol Hill. There’s a fair amount of kvetching on this blog and elsewhere about gentrification. People who view “quiet” as the ultimate luxury in housing are exactly the sorts who don’t appreciate the active Pike-Pine nightlife and bar/restaurant scene.
The question is flawed in many, many ways. What’s more galling is that it assumes a set of values that I *know* people who choose to live in the active and vibrant parts of Capitol Hill specifically reject. It also astounds me that this particular survey question is so out of touch with the slow home / small home movements that I’d have expected denizens of a neighborhood like capitol hill to be somewhat keen on supporting.
I’d love to see a more carefully worded survey conducted for 2010.
Some links: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/garden/11tiny.html
http://www.theslowhome.com/blog/index/
PS: I’m “anon” in all (as of this post) of the above anon comments. Just didn’t want to log in for the initial conversation.
I was going to wait to try to better explain this question in a write-up about the census but, Vlad, your righteousness on this is becoming painful for me so I have to say something now. Have you read the post yet that the trajectory question is inspired by? Here’s a link:
http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2008/10/23/phases-of-capit
I was very interested in making a question that was an outgrowth of a topic we had discussed previously on the blog. That interest — as much as anything — was the driver behind this question. I agree with you that there is a better, probably more useful version of this question lurking out there. But achieving that was not my point. My point, as usual, was a balance of many things. Making connections between the census and the greater body of discussion and content on CHS was one of those things.
Read that post when it first appeared. I’ve been reading CHS religiously for two+ years (before the current format). I’ll continue to read it. It’s a much better blog now that you’re getting opinions from all over capitol hill!
There’s a big difference between a couple of folks sharing a laugh during a bus ride then posting about it. Your multiple-choice question was confining and — unlike the post that inspired it in which people were invited to share their own trajectories — your question asked people to place themselves on a single trajectory. It was far more confining and prescriptivist. It perverted the idea and in doing so made it annoying.
And in the end, that’s all this is: an annoyance that didn’t need to exist. It’s silly that this was ever an issue, but it only became one because of the insensitivity behind the so-called “census.”
Next time you want to speak for all of capitol hill (any time you call a survey a census, you’re purporting to do just that), consider Pike-Pine residents who are quite happy in our non-quiet, multi-family, dense urban housing. Many of us are here by choice, not because we find homes in the so-called “fancy pants” neighborhood unaffordable. How offensive to suggest that we’re only living here because we’ve got no choice!
The average American home was about 1250 SF in the 1950s. … my wife and I will be able to comfortably (and environmentally responsibly) raise 2-3 children in our ~1350SF condo.
how are you going to offset the negative environmental impact of that extra 100 sq feet? I don’t know if a ficus or two will be enough…