House of the Day: 915 Sterling Place
The four-story house at 915 Sterling Place is a little on the narrow side (17 feet) but makes up for it with an extra-deep lot (120 feet). The listing claims that the house is “loaded with original details” but the one interior photo included isn’t too convincing; the fact that it’s divided up into four…
The four-story house at 915 Sterling Place is a little on the narrow side (17 feet) but makes up for it with an extra-deep lot (120 feet). The listing claims that the house is “loaded with original details” but the one interior photo included isn’t too convincing; the fact that it’s divided up into four units also doesn’t bode particularly well for the preservation of interior details, but this part of town does have some great woodwork so maybe there’s something to it. And what about the asking price of $895,000? We suspect it’ll go for a little less, especially since the seller is already being touted as “motivated.” Anyone been inside?
915 Sterling Place [Elliman] GMAP P*Shark
This isn’t currently in the historic district, right? Where can i get specific information on the subsequent phases of the landmarking for Crown Heights? Will this house be in either phase?
11:05: you too are mixing up “mean” and “median” in your statistical example. Mean = “A number that typifies a set of numbers, such as a geometric mean or an arithmetic mean. The average value of a set of numbers.”; Median (Statistics) = “the middle number in a given sequence of numbers, taken as the average of the two middle numbers when the sequence has an even number of numbers: 4 is the median of 1, 3, 4, 8, 9.”
For your example, the median income would be $30,000, not $151,250.00. So the original poster, using the median to say “half the people earn less than x” is correct. They would be incorrect if they used the mean, but they did not. Phew. Hope this settles the statistical terminology debate here.
“3:27, hi neighbor. I too love Crown Heights, own a house there and go to Brower park all the time (I probably see you on a regular basis LOL).”
3:27 here – Thanks! See you soon, neighbor!
I beg to differ, 9:07. Simplistic example: you are polling the incomes of 400 people. 350 of them make $30,000. a year. Fifty make $1,000,000. The median income of this group is $151,250.00. It would be misleading and utterly wrong to then say that half of the people are above and below that amount. The smaller number of people making vastly more, skews the numbers upwards. This is why the median income of the entire population of Manhattan is always higher than the rest of the city. There are more enormously rich people living there.
Conversely, a larger number of people on the lower end of the spectrum could conceivably pull numbers down. This may be true in Crown Heights, maybe not. There just isn’t enough information given to explain the methodology used in the poster’s statistic. Certainly not enough information to gleefully exclaim that half the people in Crown Heights are abysmally poor.
Statistics are useful tools, but most should be quoted only with huge sidebars explaining their data, as the face value is often quite misleading. That is why they can be used to say almost whatever you want them to say.
Montrose – be careful when you criticize someone about how s/he reads statistics when your own knowledge is lacking. Median means middle as you say, but the middle in that half are above and half are below. It is a precise term and means exactly the thing you don’t think it means. You are probably thinking more of mean or average. 3:33 does not cite the source, but assuming the numbers are correct, the conclusion that half of the households have income below that level is also correct.
Thanks, Montrose, and good night. See you soon on Brownstoner.
NOP
For what it’s worth, this past House of the Day is technically a Kinko house.
http://bstoner.wpengine.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/08/house_of_the_da_359.php#comments
I don’t know, Mr. N.
When the very efficient researchers at Landmarks wrote their original report for a larger landmarking area encompassing more of Crown Heights North than the current district (hence the Phases 2 thru 4), they found the name “Kinko’s Houses” in a broad reference to these 2 family double duplexes. No one has been able to come up with an explanation. Obviously, it predates the printer/copy company of the same name. They are very cool – most in a neo Medieval/Tudor/Olde English style, some in a more classic Renaissance Revival limestone. The upper duplexes all originally had roof gardens, and they all have separate entrances, side by side, or on each end of the building, one labeled with the house number, the other one, the house number plus “A”. The A is always the upper duplex.
I’ve only been in two of them, but they are very spacious, precisely because they were designed as two family homes, not altered, like a one family traditional brownstone. It really makes a big difference in the flow of space.
You’re right, Montrose. The finishes helped make the “Kinkos” light, airy, and spacious-feeling, even though they were smaller than the big brown- and limestone houses nearby.
I’m convinced that the choice of housing-types helps assures Crown Heights’ future. From Art-Deco swag to patrician neo-Classical, the neighborhood’s styles will also attract buyers.
But why call the duplex numbers Kinkos? That’s a new one on me.
Nostalgic on Park Avenue