|THIRD OF SIX|
A 76% positive upkeep score for ON, of course, prompts the question: What does that mean?
Is that “good” or “bad?”
Well, I guess it depends upon the context in which you compare it.
From among comparison contexts, I think it is reasonable use three well-known neighborhoods near ON.
These are College Park, Elmwood, and Reed Drive. For reference, a map of each of these showing the parcels coded is reproduced here.
With critical and cynical commentary provided by my spouse, Lyn Lofland, I coded the respective 42, 56, and 25 residences comprising these neighborhoods.
Together with ON, the results are presented in Table 3.
We see that these other areas have decidedly higher positive upkeep scores than ON, namely 76% for ON compared to 95%, 100% and 100% for the other three.
(These results are so strong that the five levels of upkeep results shown in Table 4 hardly matter.)
I hasten to say that anyone who doubts these numbers is welcome to use the maps I provide in this post and do their own coding. (This is science in the best sense. Anyone who makes a competent try should be able to replicate or refute the findings of other observers.)
I conclude that ON is, in this comparative perspective, a relatively downscale area.
Obviously, of course, we need to score positive upkeep levels for many additional areas in order to have a fuller understanding.