The Sky is Falling?

About two weeks ago, the New York Times claimed that the housing market was doomed because the ratio of rents vs. buying price was so skewed. As I understood the argument, rents were so low that it made far more sense to rent rather than buy and that meant that the bubble was about to pop. So today the Times ran another article, this time on the front page, stating that rental prices were rising. Their conclusion? “Evidence that housing boom is ebbing.” I realize that no one at the Times actually reads the damn thing and I understand the Times’ fierce determination to bring down the housing market (and anything else they can grab on to) but really, if they think that declining rents and rising rents both mean the end of the world is near (“women, minorities hardest hit”) then perhaps we should interpret their economic reporting for what it is: “all the bad news we can dream up”. Consistency may well be the hobgoblin of little minds but self-contradictory conclusions are evidence of no mind at all.

How to Update an Older Home

Marion Nolan has just listed 23 Meadow Lane (off of Zaccheus Mead). Built in 1930, its present owners have revived it beautifully without losing the features that made this house so appealing in the first place. They replaced the shingles with clapboard painted a light mint and kept, it appears the original trim, painted white. Very nice. Inside, they added a screened porch, new kitchen, and, I think, added an addition to accommodate a master bedroom suite with a huge living room beneath it but that’s about it, so far as my eye could tell. New mechanicals were installed, including central air, and the house is ready for another 75 years. Great big back yard, plus conservation land to the south, and a terrific location close to town. Asking $4,200,000, which seems right in the ballpark.

Record Price in Riverside

I recently wrote about 17 Hendrie Avenue in Riverside, stating how well built and well designed it was. At the time, the house, with an original asking price of $3,500,000 was under contract with buyers who, I was told, “added some extras”. Well I guess they did, because it just hit the land records as selling for $5,300,000. That’s a lot of extras. I am not criticizing the price, or the house – it’s a great one – but if that’s the new price for a half-acre back lot in Riverside, all of us who own teardowns just got richer. And, if builders can now expect to fetch that sort of price, we all own tear downs now. So aberration or new price level? Stay tuned.

Update
Never Mind! The newspaper report as to Hendrie's selling price was, as it so often is, wrong. Actual price was $3,300,000; a very good price for both builder and buyer, but no record.

Why Haven’t You Sold My House?

That’s a common complaint many builders are demanding of their agents these days so in the hope that I can take some of the heat off my friends, here’s the answer: there are too many new houses out there. There are 27 houses currently for sale in the $6 – 7 million range, of which 5 are new construction. That’s not so bad, but when you bump up past $7 million the fun begins: 64 houses for sale in that bracket, 21 of which are new. A total of 31 houses sold last year (August to August) for more than $7 million and only six of those were new. Is that because the huge supply of mega-priced new houses only showed up this year, or because the market tends to prefer older homes? I don’t know, really, and I’m not quite sure how to massage the data to find out but if you’re the sleepless owner of a large spec project, be patient. And see if you can refinance.

On the Other Hand

200 John Street has gone to contract, something several of us wondered if we’d see in our lifetime. Nothing against the house, mind you, it’s just that the market for $12 million houses in the northwest corner of town is pretty slim. The original house at 200 John Street, built in 1790 by one of the Meads, was put on the market in 2000 for $9,840,000.No go. Two years later a new broker priced it as land for $4,000,000 and got rid of it. That house is, of course, long gone, replaced by much more, if you consider 17,000 sq.ft. and a 10-car garage more.

YWCA

Our town is now blessed with several new signs in orange plastic steering folks to the YWCA. And in front of that building the same orange plastic proclaims a new mission statement: Eliminating Racism, Empowering Women. I thought it was all about learning how to swim, but what do I know? More important, did they really have to choose orange plastic as their medium for conveying this message? I realize that the signs are no uglier than the building they identify but that’s about the same as pointing out that, for a fat girl, she doesn’t sweat much.

The Mob in Greenwich

While you all were off in Nantucket, the New York Post reported on the Gambino family’s extortion of the owner of Valbella’s, in Riverside. Sent some Albanian thugs (apparently better at this sort of thing than Italians – how standards have slipped) to hang the poor guy by his heels from his restaurant’s ceiling until he saw the wisdom of paying the Albanians $5,000 a month protection money. The Gambino goons who accompanied the muscle were less demanding, asking merely for a reserved table and free meals. With reasoning like this, how long before the Albanians are running the entire show? In any event, all this explains the long running Saturday night show down there, with huge white stretch limos with NY plates parked in front, drivers waiting, and the (male) gold jewelry crowd in the basement. It might also explain, for those with long memories, the fire that gutted the place way back when it was first scheduled to open. I hope the indictment of 32 of these people will end the restaurant owner’s torment. But not, I hope the Saturday Night visits from Brooklyn – best entertainment in town.

15 Bayberry Lane

This terrific house (Jackie Hammock listing) is pretty far up into the Back Country but not so far that it’s impossibly inconvenient. It’s an elegant home, described on its listing sheet as “Colonial” in style but it looks more European than Colonial American to me. No matter, it’s beautiful. It sits on “only” four acres, but it’s protected by conservation land and then water company property that stretches all the way to Lake Avenue – no one is ever going to build behind you. The actual four acres consist of lots of rolling lawn, with a putting green and a one-hole golf “course” plus gardens – lots and lots of gardens. Raised vegetable beds that I envy beyond words, huge swaths of beautiful flowers and an assortment of fruit trees (including a fig!), ornamentals and big, old, oaks and maples. The yard is entirely fenced so, unlike my property in Riverside, deer aren’t a problem

That’s just the yard. The house itself is truly special. Great spaces for formal entertaining plus a ground floor master suite, four additional bedrooms upstairs and a servant’s or guest wing (it’s nice enough for either use) with a separate entrance. Everything, including the kitchen, six baths and what they call a conservatory (and what I’d call a high class greenhouse) seems brand new and in excellent condition. The place is filled with books, an item from which today’s young buyers will recoil in horror but, like asbestos, these can be removed by trained experts and replaced with your kid’s golf and lacrosse trophies and your own collection of autographed sports memorabilia. I struggle a bit with placing “value” and “$6,800,000” in the same sentence but no other house that I’m aware of offers so much privacy and luxury for anything like this price.

38 Lockwood Lane

Not quite so nice as Bayberry, but asking $1,875,000, is Dee Webber’s and Bari Taylor’s listing in Riverside. Five bedrooms, a huge amount of open space, light, and a great front porch. I liked it.

Green Hornet Alights in Cos Cob!

Well, not quite, but Mr. Isao Kato, Fjord Fisheries’ sushi chef, has opened a ramen stand behind the store. Open only in the evening on Thursdays through Sundays, from 6-9:30 pm, Kato serves up incredibly tasty bowls of soup served over ramen noodles. Shrimp, fish, vegetable, etc., for approximately $7.50 (price depends on ingredients). One bowl will serve one glutton (that would be me) or two people with normal appetites. Fans of Andy’s Hideaway in St. Bart’s can dine outside on tables with a lovely view of the car park and feel as though they’re back in the Caribbean. Or take your meal home; a treat either way.

And Also in Cos Cob

Construction has finally begun on the new Starbucks. I know that many Cos Cob residents objected to this project and I personally have a few qualms about a company that, by inventing a few phony Italian words, managed to convince America (and the world) to part with three bucks for twelve cents of raw materials, but what the heck: it’s a good cup of coffee (especially the “Americano”, which is watered-down expresso and not bitter like the drip) and the idea of relaxing with a drink while looking over the Mill Pond sounds appealing. Even Cos Cob folks might come to appreciate it.

Kayaks in Cos Cob

Hey – it’s Cos Cob’s week, I guess. In any event, the boys at Sportsman’s Den (869-3234) have just begun stocking Heritage kayaks, seaworthy, rotomolded polyethylene craft that scream to be set loose upon the waters. The model I like best is the “fisherman”, with two rod holders built into the hull. This being Greenwich, I’m sure the store would modify one of the holders to accommodate a martini glass but wouldn’t it be better to have your servant nearby on his own craft, ready to pass along drinks as needed? I hope to buy one (kayak, not servant), but I live on Ole’s Creek, so that’s an easy decision. If you aren’t so fortunate, check with Sportsmen’s Den, which is looking into offering storage and water access, or the Old Greenwich Yacht Club (used to be a boat club, before it got snooty), OGYC.com, or the Mianus River Boat Club, 869-4689. Antidisirregardless, you’re sure to find a way to use one of these neat little boats.

One Final Food Item

The Food Mart sells a juicy, crisp Texas watermelon for $3.99. Whole Foods sells the same melon for $9.99. We’re not talking organic - no special coddling for the Whole Food product: soft futons to lie on, Howard Dean rants read at bedtime, and so forth. No, the melons are identical: sown by machine, laced with insecticide and brought foaming from the garden. Same melons, different prices. Someone’s being shucked here, and I don’t think it’s the corn.

The Trouble with Google Ads

Google (at least I assume it's Google) sells ads based on the content of whatever you happen to be reading. But context is everything. If, for instance, you're reading the story in today's Greenwich Time about the shipboard murder of a young Greenwich resident (click on link, below) you probably aren't going to be receptive to an ad for a cruise on the Royal Caribbean.

When they came for my cell phone I was silent

Now that Connecticut has joined New Jersey in uselessly banning hand-held cell phones in cars,I wonder whether it will follow that state in another bit of lunacy: a New Jersey legislator has proposed banning cigarette smoking while driving - a distraction, she claims. Pretty soon we'll have no radios in our cars, no cupholders,and inoperable windows (they let in distracting cool breezes and odors!). It could be worse: the EU has just enacted a law that requires employers of outdoor construction workers to force them to wear shirts and sunblock (click on the link button below if you think I'm kidding). Forget the Nanny State; we're rapidly moving toward a Nanny Universe.

Bad Construction

A year or so ago I toured a bit of new construction that was so badly built I sought out the name of its builder, in order to ensure that I never steered a customer his way. The house sold in a heartbeat, of course, to a young family that will probably be regretting it any day now. In the meantime, our builder moved on to other projects and just last week offered his latest creation to the buying public. Same poor quality, including improper framing, cheap finishes and the like, and the same result: it received multiple offers, all over the asking price. I find this discouraging.

Neighborhood is very important in choosing a house, but it’s not the only element to consider (despite what I implied in a column a few weeks ago). A cheaply built new house ages much faster than a well built one and, three or four years after its purchase, it will begin showing its age. I won’t name specific houses, but there are a number of houses in town which were built in the past six years and which now are in need of renovation. They don’t command anything like the resale value of a better-built house and that hurts you if you’re trying to sell it. So don’t be blinded by flashy details; look instead for the substance that ought be behind those new cabinet doors and whirlpool tubs and, if there’s no there there, skip along to another house.


Speaking of Great Construction

I drove way up North Street the other day to see Brad Hvolbeck’s new $12,750,000 listing house and was impressed. This house is beautifully designed (by Hilton & Vanderhorn) and impressively made. Hand-made bricks that look antique, laid in a Flemish bond (thanks to Mat Matthews for teaching me the proper term), a convex mahogany front door that is easily the best looking door I’ve seen and, inside, a lay out that is perfectly proportioned for human beings. The trim work is amazing, including a room whose measurements were taken from an Italian palace and recreated here in American Walnut. The third floor is entirely devoted to a children’s’ play area, including a small stage and a “bed”, perhaps twenty feet wide, for sleep over parties. Cool. Finished just this year, its owner enjoyed the project so much that he’s already started another one.

New Listings

Some great houses continue to show up on the market, even though everyone’s supposed to be out of town. Jackie Chamandy listed 1 Ford Lane for $2,380,000, which is a very smart price. Great location on a dead end lane, nicely renovated four bedroom house with a decent yard and a front porch that demands an Adirondack chair, an iced tea and a late summer afternoon. My guess is, to do that, you’ll have to become friends with the new owner because I think this will be gone in days.

Amanda Miller has listed 9 Stanwich Road for $2,395,000 and it, too is a very good buy. The current owners had intended to enjoy this renovation for themselves before their plans changed, and it shows. Unlike certain builder/spec renovations currently on the market, this one has no short cuts, no dubious compromises between quality and cost. There are certain builders out there who think that, as long as a property has a Greenwich address, buyers will pay any amount for any piece of junk. It’s not true, and when I see, for instance, a poorly designed renovation offering bad hardware, cheap plastic doors and Home Depot plumbing fixtures for the princely sum of $2,600,000, I’m insulted on behalf of myself and my buyers. We aren’t that dumb. So avoid that problem and go see 9 Stanwich.

Our First Selectman

Greenwich Time reports that First Selectman Jim Lash was out of town for 13 weeks last year. “First Selectman’s Many Travels Under Scrutiny”, the headline blared and I wondered, by whom? So far as I’m concerned, if the town is being well run, either directly by the man or by persons he’s delegated responsibilities to, he can go attend to his private business dealings to his heart’s content. Lash’s Democrat opponent claims that accessibility is an issue, but here’s my experience with that: my brother’s request for a zoning fee refund had been mired in the town’s bureaucracy for over a year before I wrote a polite note to Lash, someone I’ve never met, asking that he look into the problem and, if appropriate, sending a refund on its way. The check arrived five days later. That works for me.

Correction!
Two weeks ago I mentioned a "tiger" appearing with Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant in "Bringing Up Baby". Baby was a leopard, of course - I can't believe no reader spotted this.

Taxes

There’s a dispute going on in town over who’s property values have increased less – something like the Monty Python routine where the boys argue over who had the worst childhood (“We used to have to live in a corridor!” “Ohhhh we used to DREAM of livin' in a corridor! Woulda' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woken up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us!”).

It seems the residents in our Back Country have hired an expert to study their houses’ worth and he’s concluded that they’re being overcharged on their taxes while Chickahominy residents are getting a free (well, reduced, anyway) ride. Needless to say the Chickahominy residents cry foul, and on it goes.

I hate to side with the Back Country folks when it’s coming out of my hide, but the data support them. Year to date, the N.W. corner’s “Assessment Factor” – assessed value compared to sales price, stands at 2.16, lowest of all areas of town except for the N.E. corner, at 2.02. Chickahominy, on the other hand, has a 2.86 factor, second highest in town. Only downtown Greenwich is higher, at 2.88.

All of which is not to say that Chickahominy should pay higher taxes and our wealthiest residents should pay less but any discussion of the issue should at least begin with the agreement that the tax assessor may have been a bit too zealous when valuing the four acre zone in the past.

On the Other Hand

Our town’s tax department has always gone easy on commercial property for some reason. 55 Railroad Avenue, appraised at $40,927,000 just two years ago, sold this year for $97,750,000. 33 Benedict Place, appraised at $30,870,000 in 2001, sold this month for $87,500,000. I’d prefer to see taxes reduced for everyone, but I can’t help pointing out to our appraisers that a building even bigger than and right next door to Unilever, U.S.T.’s headquarters, is currently valued at only $42,100,000. It might be worth dropping by for another look.

New Listings of Note

Laurie Smith has listed 119 Oneida Drive for $3,850,000, which seems just about right for this house and this location. I can’t guarantee that you’ll fall in love with this house but I did, and so did several other Realtors who saw it with me. Built in 1914, renovated in 2003, it’s on an acre of land near the water. And, although I consider Greenwich interior designers to be the group most responsible for the ruination of civilization, this owner, Jane Ellsworth, is herself a decorator and has done a fantastic job to her own house. I wouldn’t change a thing about it and when I’m ready to refurbish my cardboard box, I know who I’ll call. It (this house, not my box) comes with a pool, five bedrooms and a pretty neat carriage house/garage.

Lower down on the price scale is Liz Dagnino’s listing at 21 Bramble Lane, asking $1,695,000. I was stunned when a Bramble Lane house sold for $1,500,000 two years ago; now it seems cheap. This is a raised ranch, which is usually a tough sell but it’s very, very nice inside and, unlike some houses of similar design, this one works really well. Good street, nice house.

Diane Dutcher held an open house at 17 Hendrie Avenue to showcase the work of her client, Nick Barile of York Builders. I’ve admired this builder’s recent projects and this one is just as well made as the others. Nice attention to detail, a judicious use of antique mantles and newell posts to blend a bit of old with the new, all to great effect. Asking price was originally $3,500,000 but the buyers added some extras, like a pool, so I don’t know what the final price will be. Regardless, I think Mr. Barile will have some happy customers.

And Speaking of Interior Designers

It’s astonishing how much money is spent in this town converting otherwise comfortable houses into frigid mansions that no one would dare relax in. I feel sorry for the poor schnook who, having turned over his Platinum Card to the Little Woman, returns home to discover that his house has been festooned with hideously expensive (and just plain hideous) floor-to-ceiling drapes, bad antiques and every gimcrack and geegaw the decorator could unload on him. I remember one “Gentleman’s Study” like this, crammed with old English hunting prints and paintings of dogs who never lifted a leg in the Brooklyn neighborhood the Master of the House grew up in, antique shotguns, and the like. Turns out, the guy didn’t even like being outdoors, let alone traipse over fields behind beaters and gun dogs. Sheesh.

Good Buys

Of the four hundred fifty-three single-family houses currently listed for sale in town, one hundred two of them have been on the market for at least six months. It is these older listings that often offer the best buys because, having been over-priced originally (I don’t say that to be mean, it’s just that the market place has disagreed with the owners’ estimate of their value) they’ve often lowered their asking price below what I would consider a comparable, but newer listing. Here, in no particular order, are some houses I like; I’m not necessarily vouching for their current asking prices, but these are all good houses. Twenty-six Spruce Street, a five bedroom house asking $1,895.00. Great location, nice yard. Fourteen Dorchester, also is Riverside, at $2,125,000. Ten Copper Beech, off of North Street, $2,950,000. I do not understand why this great house didn’t sell long ago. It’s in excellent condition and has a fantastic yard. Perfect for a downsizing couple, entirely adequate as is for a family or add a second floor and have yourself a MacMansion. 160 Bedford Road, $3,950,000. I realize that this far northwestern corner of Greenwich poses difficulties for those who must be close to town, but for a family with kids at any of the schools on King Street, it’s quite convenient. Eight acres of rolling lawn, terrific older house which I originally described as looking exactly like what Katharine Hepburn and Carey Grant would pull up to when leaving New York with Baby the tiger and heading for New England. Still looks that way. And, finally, there is Twenty Interlaken Road, the contemporary on a pond that I recently wrote about. $4,300,000, six acres of land. Excellent buy.

All of the houses listed are well worth your attention, so if you’re a buyer who stepped away from the market last spring, discouraged, perhaps, by the frenzied atmosphere, give your agent a call and go looking; everything’s calmed down and its safe get back in the water.

Not All Good Buys are Old Listings

Even in the dog days of summer, people list houses and a very nice one came on recently. Barbara Cioffari has brought on 47 Owenoke Way in Riverside for $3,295,000, which I think is a very good price for a house as nice as this (disclosure: my family is friends with the owners’ family, but that’s not the basis for my opinion – now if they’d listed it with me ….). A center hall colonial that has been completely renovated and recently expanded, with a nice yard of almost half an acre and within easy walking distance, if anyone does that anymore, to Riverside School, Eastern and the train. I’d be surprised if it’s still available by today’s publication date but hey – it’s summer, and a lot of potential buyers are out of town. You might get lucky.

And in Middle Age Listings

Alaimo Dechantal’s listing at 52 Fairfield Road was priced at $2,800,000 when it was first listed in May. Two months later it’s dropped to $2,495,000, which seems appropriate. A brick center hall colonial, again, also renovated and also on a nice yard of an acre. I didn’t necessarily disagree with its original asking price and I especially like this house at its current one.

Boom Goes Bust!

The New York Times is at it again, with yet another front page story about trouble in the housing market, this time in Denver. I have no doubt that the facts of the story are accurate – at least, they make no mention of Dan Rather’s having been involved in writing the story - but if you look at those facts, you’ll see that they aren’t all that scary. They tell tales of woe of people who didn’t earn as much on their house as they expected, such as a man who purchased a townhouse as a speculative investment and earned only $10,000,000 for his efforts. The basic conclusion of the article is that the market has slowed down, which is hardly surprising; no one I know thinks we’ll see twenty percent increases forever. Despite its headline, the article itself did include one calm observation: “Optimists point to Denver as a model of an adjusting real estate market. ‘I think it's a good example of when a market softens, what happens,’ said David Lereah, the chief economist of the National Association of Realtors, a trade association. "You see double-digit price appreciation go down to 4 percent or even 1 percent, and then it starts coming back to a historical norm of between 4 and 6 percent. That's very healthy. That's wonderful. It beats inflation.’
Mr. Lereah might be a flack the Realtors, I suppose, but I agree with his opinion.

An Imperfect World

I don’t lecture my clients; it’s both patronizing and ineffective. And, as Oscar
Wilde observed,"I learned long ago never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." The rest of you aren’t so lucky, however, so if you happen to be one of my clients who just blew a great house deal in Old Greenwich, stop reading here and come back next week.

For those still with me, know that in real estate, as in the rest of life, finding a suitable outcome is founded upon compromise. There is no perfect house out there, waiting to be discovered (go back and read Plato for similar sentiments- nothing’s changed in the past 2,300 years). Field Point Circle, considered by many to be the best address in Greenwich, is approached via the Grass Island sewer plant and, when the wind’s from the north, afflicted with the roar of trucks on I-95. Conyer’s Farm will seem ideal until you discover that you forgot the cream and you face either a drive of ten miles or a breakfast of black coffee.

And so it goes, through all price ranges. The house you want will always have something wrong with it: price, layout, yard, neighborhood. The best advice I can give is to lay out your priorities and go for the house that meets most of them. For families with young children, I think neighborhood trumps everything else. Get that right, and whatever else may be wrong with the house itself becomes insignificant. Those who are older and who no longer need to cart their children around to play dates might well prefer no neighborhood at all and instead choose to live in a small cottage down a long, long road away from everyone else. It’s all personal, and you shouldn’t let your agent pressure you into something that doesn’t feel right. But don’t pass up a house just because it doesn’t meet every single one of your criteria to perfection – nothing ever will.

Malpractice

We agents in town often felt we were getting a raw deal on or malpractice insurance. Rates are based on state-wide incidents while in Greenwich we don’t write contracts or engage in much of anything that could even approach what might be the practice of law. We dump all that on the lawyers and let their errors and omissions policies cover things. Accordingly, Greenwich sees very, very few claims for malpractice.

But two recent incidents make me think we may be soon catch up to our peers in the rest of the state, thanks to our FAR regulations. Twice now, I’ve had agents tell me that their two acre listing could accommodate a house of some 7,500 sq. feet. Nice, but inaccurate, because each lot was on a two acre lot in the four acre zone. As I’ve written here before, while logic suggests that one would apply the two acre FAR formula to such a lot, in fact the P&Z insists that the house be smaller than even a one acre lot allows. There’s a big difference in value between a 7,500 sq.ft. house and a 5,400 sq.ft. one; a difference that any expert will happily testify to in a malpractice suit. Personally, I think the FAR is so convoluted-what percentage of the basement is included, how about the garage with half walls, the attic, etc. – that I would never consider stating with certainty what the FAR allows on any particular house. Rough guidelines, sure; but for anything more precise you’ll want an architect to come over with an accurate measuring tape and an up-to-date knowledge of all the FAR rules. Just another expense for our town’s happy homeowners, courtesy of the P&Z.

Time for Price Reductions

I do enjoy representing buyers this time of year, because bargains start appearing, in all price ranges. Lisa Gabriele has knocked $1.2 million (from $9,695,000 to $8,495,000) from her listing at 99 Richmond Hill and, while I don’t have anyone in that price range, it looks pretty attractive at its new price. Nancy Healy’s listing at 2 Sylvan Lane was a very nice house at $2,650,000; it’s now a screaming bargain at $2,300,000.

Of course, this being the silly season, there’s always someone out there who concludes that his house isn’t selling because it’s priced too low, so he jacks it up. A house in Old Greenwich, for instance, just bulked up to $4,295,000 from $3,995,000 and its owner is presumably awaiting a flood of renewed interest. Somehow, I don’t think so. Price cures everything in this market but I have never known a higher price to be part of that process. But good luck, fella, and see you in September.

Hands Free Cell Phones, Revisited

Several readers (politely) chastised me recently for my statement that banning hands-free cell phones would have no positive effect on highway safety. I referred those readers to a Consumer Report's article that analyzed other studies and conducted its own and concluded that it was the distraction of talking on the phone, not holding the thing, that caused accidents. If those readers weren't convinced by that, perhaps they should check out today's report (link, below) from Australia. New, much bigger study, same result. Ban cell phones entirely (unlikely) or repeal Connecticut's new law barring handhelds, but please don't pass meaningless, ineffective laws and pretend that we're doing something useful.

The Bubble, Again

As is its want, the New York Times buried a rather encouraging story about real estate bubbles in its business section. Fear and speculation about housing bubbles receives front page placement; actual facts debunking the original speculation go elsewhere. In any event, the article looks at what’s happening in Australia, which has been enjoying its own real estate boom. Turns out, prices are leveling off. No bursting bubble, no panic, except in the disappointment experienced by the Times editors. There has been a ten percent reduction in the prices of investment (non-owner-occupied) houses but otherwise, they’re seeing a correction down under and not a disaster. As I’ve noted before in this column, Greenwich is not South Florida; we don’t have seventy thousand new condominium units under construction nor do we have speculators standing in line all night to buy, and flip, new units. Greenwich simply doesn’t have the land to support huge new projects that would appeal to speculators and has always been, and will continue to be, a solid place in which to buy a home and house your family. And, as I have also noted, we have market discipline: over-priced houses refuse to sell, and that’s good. My advice: ignore the Time’s front page hysteria (this goes for its articles on all subjects) and prowl the back pages for more substantive, useful news.

Speaking of All the News That’s Fit to Print

The NYT’s Styles section ran this note last week: "An article on May 29 about the latest sex manuals from mainstream publishers included a topic erroneously among the covered subjects. They do not include bestiality."--correction, New York Times, June 26. Isn’t that a relief!

549 North Street

Shelly Tretter just listed this house for $12,500,000 and I toured it last week. Very impressive. I’m pretty sure it was designed by Alex Kaali-Nagy, one of the few architects working in town who somehow combines the huge size his customers want (15,000 square feet, in this instance) with a sense of proportion and even charm. I don’t know how he does it but a Kaali-Nagy house is never boring and predictable, something that very much cannot be said about most of the big-box monsters afflicting Greenwich. Top of the line finishes throughout, including blue (!) and silver granite in the kitchen- it works, really – and very nice grounds. 549 North is set way off the street down what is in effect is a private lane, so noise isn’t an issue. Worth its price? I’m not (particularly) ashamed to say, who knows? At this price level a buyer expects to get just about exactly what he or she wants so if this house works for them, they’ll buy it. If not, not. But Tretter doesn’t usually stick silly prices on her listings and, when I ran some comparisons on recent sales in the $10,000,000 - $15,000,000 range, I concluded that this house is their equal or better. Not quite in my budget but then, that kind of negative thinking is what keeps me living in my pup tent.

And on Tomac

Joyce Somm has held the listing for 28 Tomac since late April but her previous open houses coincided with one of my own and I only got to see it last week. What a nice house. Built in 1891 and set far back from Tomac on a huge front yard, the house has been renovated over the years without destroying the features that make this house so special. Four bedrooms, three baths and three working fireplaces on a half-acre, asking $3,250,000. My only quibble, and it’s entirely personal, is the pool in the back yard. It seems to have built in the 60’s and, together with its dowdy concrete apron, consumes more of the yard (okay, all of the yard) than I like. T’were me, I’d either scrap the thing entirely or redesign it to free up more lawn. But again, that’s just my taste. A family with lots of kids will probably like the pool exactly the way it is.

Shhsh – Buyers Sleeping!

Only eighteen listings – single family, condos and rentals- went to contract last week, while sixty-seven listings came on and forty-four lowered their prices. Some of that lack of activity is probably attributable to the Fourth of July holiday but, clearly, summer is here. On the other hand, well-priced houses are still being snapped up. Of the seventy-one houses that sold last week, fifteen went to contract within three weeks of being listed.

Moving On

Callers looking for me at Round Hill Partners won’t find me; I have moved up the street to William Raveis’s Milbank Avenue location (869-7800). As for those multiple-office Realtors who so often complained when I described their offices as “chain-store Realtors”, I can only concede that those who laugh last ….

Don't Assume

Was at an open house today - a two acre parcel in the four acre zone - and was assured by the listing agent that a new owner could build a 7,500 sq. ft. house on the site. Wrong. Our P&Z punishes under-sized lots severely and in fact you can only build a 5,400 sq.ft. house on this two acre lot - smaller than you'd be permitted in the one acre zone. You can (almost) forgive a real estate agent from making the mistake of applying the 2 acre FAR formula to her listing because logic would suggest that's exactly what you should do. But logic and FAR are mutually exclusive. Moral is, don't assume that your agent knows what she's talking about. The training in this field is, to put it mildly, not particularly rigorous.

The Dog Days of Summer

Very little is going on these days as the town slips into its summer somnolence. Fourteen single family homes went to contract last week, twenty-seven new listings appeared and twenty-one houses dropped their prices. There's no sense of urgency among buyers right now. Nor should there be, much as I hate to admit it (I like to eat all year round); summertime is the perfect season for a leisurely inspection of what's for sale and careful decision making. If you like a house, it will probably still be available a week or two from now and probably longer.

Which is not to say that you shouldn't be out there looking and, if the price is right, buying. There are a lot of very nice houses currently in inventory and many of them have reduced their prices to near-bargain prices. They will sell, and if you wait until the fall to make offers on them you'll be disappointed to discover that they're gone or the sellers, emboldened by the return of the selling season, reject your lowball offer. The market is not collapsing so far as I can see, so if you think that prices will be still lower in September, think again.

And Speaking of Bargains

Martha Jeffrey has listed a six-unit condominium project on William Street that offers some very good value the best of which, I think, is unit 45-B, a brand new townhouse with three bedrooms, attached garage and a huge back yard, all for $1,750,000. Smaller, newly renovated units are asking $1,095,000 and $875,000, respectively. I like their in-town location and I especially like their new, lower prices. Check them out.

Private Property Rights, Diminished

The U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in the Kelo case, permitting the City of New London to seize private property from homeowners and hand it over to another group of private individuals in order to generate greater tax income has people on both the left and the right concerned (not the New York Times of course, which welcomed this extension of state power both out its usual desire to see an ever-expanding government and because its own land-grab for new headquarters in New York depends on exactly the Kelso outcome). But for non-knee-jerk thinkers of all political persuasions, the decision is disturbing. The result is a victory for Wal-Mart and other big-box stores; what politician wouldn't drool at the prospect of replacing tax revenues from a motley collection of, say, car repair joints and run-down houses (or brand new houses-nothing in the majority opinion prevents it) with that of a Wal-Mart? For those of us concerned over the ever-expanding trampling of individual rights by municipal, state and the federal government, these words of Justice Story, writing in 1833 (Commentaries on the Constitution, sec. 1393), still ring true:

"[S] ince the American revolution no state government can be presumed to possess the transcendental sovereignty, to take away vested rights of property; to take the property of A. and transfer it to B. by a mere legislative act. That government can scarcely be deemed to be free, where the rights of property are left solely dependent upon a legislative body, without any restraint."

The only "restraint" left after the Kelso case is that some eager town-planner must draft a development plan that offers a "better" use of property than its present owner is employing and that, of course, is no restraint at all. Will the Republicans put their flag desecration bill on a back burner and draft a bill repealing this decision? Will the Democrats do anything? Since both parties depend on contributions from large corporations and neither wants to offend municipal and labor unions, don't hold your breath.

Discrimination at the Beach?

A friend of mine was one of several Black women recently denied permission to conduct an exercise program at Tod's. She, rightly, took offense and wondered if the denial was based on her skin color. Town officials insist that they prohibit all such groups regardless of the race of the participants and I guess I believe them – we have more stupid rules governing beach behavior than anyone other than a bureaucrat could possibly believe. No swim fins, no unapproved personal floatation jackets, no sunblock under 40 SPF, etc. I fought a similar battle in 1976 when I and a handful of other windsurfers decided to use the western shore of Tod's as a launching site for our craft. Drove the town crazy. They'd never seen windsurfers and didn't have any rules governing their use but we were obviously having fun so there had to be something wrong - they harassed us mercilessly. But today, if you drive by that location, you'll see an officially sanctioned sign, "Windsurfer crossing". So I hope the exercise folks persevere and get their class; I'd much prefer to think that my town is engaging in its usual stupidity rather than engaging in racist behavior.

Beware of Bidding Wars!

Not long ago, at the height of the spring market, the owner of 20 Partridge Hollow Road conducted a bidding war for his property. Several buyers bid, one won, the others lost. But one of the losers, frustrated at not getting what he wanted (a situation buyers in this price range rarely encounter) contacted the seller directly and offered to top the winning bid. The seller reneged on the first deal and accepted the loser’s offer. Not nice, perhaps, but certainly entirely legal – in real estate, no deal is final until both parties have signed a contract. But now the property has been returned to the market so I presume something went wrong. I wish no ill to the seller or his buyer (who is rumored to have forfeited a $700,000 deposit) but the original wining bidder could surely be excused some small measure of shadenfreude here at other’s discomfort. Morals of the story are one, curb your enthusiasm and, two, if you’re dealing with people who don’t like playing by the rules, don’t be too surprised if they walk. Good faith goes a long way in this business.

Market Conditions

I just reviewed this May 1- June 14th’s sales activities with the comparable period from last year and, all in all, I think sellers should be reassured. We’re not in any sort of boom but neither are we slumping. In essence, sales activity is just about where it was last year. A couple of exceptions: thirty-three houses went to contract for under a million dollars compared to twenty-five last year; sixteen went in the $1-$1.5 this year, thirty-three last; and ten went for $2-2.5 vs. only five last year. Other than that, there is not much difference. A total of one hundred ten houses went to contract in the past six weeks compared to one hundred nineteen last. Top price this year was $18.750 (asking – originally priced at $44,900,000!). Last year, $15,000,000 (from an original price of $25,000,000). Neither a bubble nor a bust, in my opinion. And as always, well-priced houses move quickly, pie-in-the-sky houses linger.

Case in Point

510 North Street was originally placed on the market September 30, 2002 for $11,500,000. After a long series of price reductions and a change in brokers it was finally marked down to $6,850,000 and was sold (by Diddle McCalister of Round Hill Partners – yeah, Diddle!) for $6,550,000. September ’02 to June ’05 is a long time to keep your house in showing condition, in my opinion.

Beechcroft Road

A friend of mine who lives on Beechcroft Road recently showed me three neighbors’ houses all of which are scheduled for or in the process of being replaced with larger homes. At least two of the projects are being done by the owners themselves, who have rented elsewhere for the duration. I think these are smart people. Beechcroft is a very nice street with a great location: far enough off North Street to escape the noise, close enough to town to be really convenient. In effect, the street’s value has grown past the houses originally placed there in the 1950s.

Where’s Herbie?

The retirement of Herbie Salamon from our police force removed the last traffic cop who was willing to yell at errant pedestrians. This is too bad, for a number of reasons. One is that I miss the street theatre – nothing more fun than watching Herb bark at breezy jaywalkers. Another reason is more serious – when I’m in a car and am directed to proceed across the Avenue by a cop, I don’t (or didn’t) expect to encounter any obstacles in my way, like mothers pushing their kids in strollers right into my path. But they do so now, without so much as a harsh word from the cop controlling the intersection. I really don’t want to run over a small child and I wish we’d get back to enforcing street crossing rules.

Do It Yourself

I see in the paper that the owner of a small house in Riverside sold it himself for $665,000.00. That move saved him from paying a real estate commission, but I wonder how pleased he’d be if he knew that his house was worth, at least in my opinion, somewhere close to $750,000? We’re hardly geniuses in this profession but what we can bring to the game is experience and knowledge. If you’re tempted to sell your house yourself, at least make a diligent effort to learn what comparable houses are selling for. Owners can over-price their property just like Realtors, and then the house will sit, unsold. But if you under-price the place, then, unlike what happens to a house exposed to the market on the Multiple Listing Service, someone will snatch it for a bargain price. And you’ll never know it.

Summer Market

69 new listings came on the market last week, 57 houses dropped their asking price and 26 listings went to contract. That's pretty slow, compared with earlier in the year. But the market's not quite dead - I hear that 272 Riverside Avenue, property that can be split into two lots, is going to sealed bids on Monday noon. Asking price was $3,000,000 and presumably it's going to sell for more than that.

For Sale By Owner
I saw in the paper yesterday that 21 Thornhill Road, in Riverside, sold for $665,000. The seller did it himself, by God, and saved paying a commission. That's nice, but his property was probably worth $750,000 for its land value alone. If so, then our seller saved $37,500, but lost the $47,500 extra a competent broker would have netted him. His choice, of course, but I think it was a bad one.

For What It's Worth - June 17th


Caution: Geniuses at Work!

Our Legislature racked up a surplus of $700,000,000 this past year due to a recovering economy. Some people would interpret that as a sign that the tax rate was too high, and would advocate adjusting taxes so as to return the surplus to those who over-paid. “Some people” are not the folks in Hartford. They didn't return any money. They didn't hold spending at its current. Instead, they committed the entire surplus to brand new spending in the coming year and, not content with such small potatoes, whooped through another $700,000,000 in new taxes. Besides prolonging the "temporary" business profit surcharge, they reinstated the inheritance tax which had finally expired this past January and, while they were at it, jumped it to a whopping 16%. Sound scary? Does it seem that the lunatics have taken over the asylum? Well don't worry, this is all aimed at those people Howard Dean's labeled "Fat Cats" - rich, white Republicans who all look alike, to Dean and the yahoos in Hartford. Own a house in Greenwich? Have a life insurance policy? Then welcome to the ranks of Fat Cats. Next year, the “millionaire’s tax” – you’re one of them, too.

In a news story concerning the new business taxes a Verizon executive was quoted as saying that Connecticut is already one of the most expensive states in which to do business. If people can't afford to run businesses here and can't afford to die here, I wonder where the Legislature will find the wherewithal to fund all its magnificent new spending? Connecticut is rapidly becoming a kleptocracy, an oligarchy of thieves that preys on Fairfield County and treats it with contempt. I'd say that we deserved better but, since we keep returning these pirates to office, I suppose we don't.

And Yet Another Einstein

Finished with ripping off citizens, our leaders turned their attention to another serious matter and banned the use of hand-held cell phones. Our own representative, Bill Nickerson, pressed to distinguish between the distraction caused by eating a Big Mac and speaking on a cell phone, pointed out that when you press a hamburger against your ear it is really messy, so the distraction won’t last as long. I have absolutely no doubt that Mr. Nickerson made this observation from personal experience but I do wish that he and his colleagues would at least occasionally depart from enacting laws based on anecdotal evidence and try using informed fact, instead.

We've all been annoyed at some idiot on a cell phone cutting us off or wandering across traffic lanes but every study that has looked at the matter has concluded that it is the distraction itself that causes accidents and not the source of that distraction. That is, arguing with your kids in the back seat, tuning your radio, even stuffing hamburger patties in your ear a la Nickerson are all equally likely to cause an accident as a hand-held phone. This is known. But knowledge and the Connecticut Legislature rarely intersect.

And Finally

Did you see that our friends in Hartford passed a law exempting their email from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act? Did it in the dead of night, tacking it onto another bill. They claim it’s a service to their constituents who will now feel free to communicate personal problems to their representatives. Right.

Rant Over, Back to Real Estate

So much for the legislative summary (it’s been a slow week in this business). You ask (I do, anyway), what’s the best value on the market? Perhaps it’s Joan Epand's listing at 20 Interlaken, off of Taconic Road. This is a 9,000 square foot contemporary on six acres of land that includes a separate lot of three acres, a pond with canoes racked and waiting on the shore, a guest/bath house with a huge fireplace (I'd be content living in just this structure alone) and a great pool. The house itself is of beautiful design and in very good condition so I'm a bit irked that it hasn't sold - the Greenwich market just whacks contemporaries. Its price has been reduced from $5,999,999 to $4,300,000 – that’s the value of the two lots. You could sell off one lot and get yourself a terrific, huge house for just the price of the land it sits on. Free house - an unusual opportunity in this town.

Also On the Market

I liked Jim Foote’s listing at 24 St. Claire Avenue in Old Greenwich. It’s a six bedroom 1950’s house renovated ten years ago. Not the quality level you’d find in, say, Conyer’s Farm, but decent enough, and the resulting house is bright, airy and roomy. $2,695,000 – which I think is in the ballpark for this area and this house.

I-95

44 Riverside Avenue sold yesterday for $890,000, down from its original price of $1,290,000. Why? Because, although this was a very nice house, you could practically reach out your window and pat the tops of trucks rushing by on I-95. What I find impressive is not the low price but rather this demonstration that, at some price, anything in Riverside will sell, regardless of its location.

Price that puppy right!

510 North Street finally sold yesterday for $6,550,000. I'm sure the owners are relieved. They originally listed it, way back in September 2002, for $11,500,000. When they dumped their broker and priced it better (last asking price was $6,850,000), it sold. Quell surprise.

Revenge of the Buyers!
A few weeks back the owner of 20 Partidge Hollow Road conducted a bidding war for his property. One buyer won, others lost, but one of the losers called the owner directly and offered to top the winning bid. The owner accepted that offer and reneged on his deal with the winning bidder. Well, something must have gone wrong because the house has been returned to the market today. I don't wish ill on the owner but the people who engaged in that bidding war in good faith surely must be feeling a certain smug satisfaction. And who can blame them if they hope that the house lingers all summer, now that the spring market has ebbed?

Market Conditions

I've just finished toting up the number of houses that went to contract between May 1 and June 14th of this year and comparing the result with last year's sales activity during the same period. We're about even. 110 went to contract this year vs. 119 last year. 33 under $1,000,000 in 05, 25 in '04. 16 between 1 and 1.5 this year, 33 in '04. All the other price ranges are just about equal for both years - 3 houses in the $6.0 - $7.0 range this year, 5 in '04, 2 in the 8's this year, 0 last year. Top price this year: $18.75 (last asking price-originally priced at $44,900,000). In '04, $15,000, again down from an original asking price, in 2002, of $25,000,000.

So, if we're not booming, we don't seem to be cratering, either.

From a recent listing "FINE QLTY FINISHES ADDS TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS RESIDENCE THAT MUST BE SEEN TO BE APPRECIATED". I have no idea how the quality of finishes adds to the "importance" of a house nor am I sure I want an important house but someone did - the house sold very quickly for more than $4,000,000.

Another sale that surprised me was 15 Rockland Place in Old Greenwich. Came on asking $1,075,000 which, given its location next to the Old Greenwich Gables, its limited space (1670 sq.ft., 3 bedrooms) seemed a bit high to me. Wrong! Sold in a bidding war for $1,260,000. Go figure.

More Follies
I found an interesting article on the web (click on "Link", below) detailing what our legislature's been doing with all our money. Not surprisingly, they've been busy spending it. When then Governor Weicker rammed through an income tax in 1991 (a flat 1.5%, in those days) the promise was that it would make for better financial planning. I guess it did. The budget that year (1992) was $7 billion. This year it's $15.86 billion and counting, an increase that's 2 1/2 X inflation. We have the highest paid state workers in the Union, and the most per capita. Yet our leaders "had no choice" but to raise taxes again. Sort of depressing.

Mischief Making

I've just heard on the radio that our "representatives" in Hartford have enacted a bill that will shield all of their email communications from the Freedom of Information Act. The purported basis for this is that it will free constituents from worrying about the public release of private information and allow them to write to their reps with less caution. Uh huh.

Fellow Writers

It's probably bad form to attack fellow writers on the same paper, but Patricia McCormack is an editorial writer posing as a reporter, and I dislike it. I refer specifically to her latest article that claims that "oil company greed" is to blame for high gasoline prices in Greenwich. There are a number of alternatives which would explain the price discrepancy between Greenwich and, say, Stratford - higher real estate values come to mind, for instance - but the main point is that the word "greed" has no place in what purports to be a piece of objective reporting. If I denounce builder Steven Hatch as an unwashed vandal who tears down historical houses like a boy pulling wings off flies, fine; it's an opinion piece. When McCormack writes, she does so as a reporter - that's quite another thing, and she should curb her enthusiasm.

June 10th, 2005

For What It's Worth

Rockfields

Sally Maloney of Greenwich Fine Properties has just listed the Stillman Rockefeller estate on Indian Spring Road, and it's pretty neat. The house was built in 1929 and if it was ever updated I didn't notice, but here's your chance. Fourteen thousand square feet, seventeen bedrooms (including all the servants' rooms), the place is practically a museum of Rockefeller family memorabilia. The oar used by Rockefeller to win the gold medal in the 1924 Olympics is mounted next to other winning blades, and there are photographs, paintings and other depictions of this family's life spanning all of the last century and longer. The house itself seems to have been built by a high-rise construction company, with concrete between each floor and a steel endo-structure that should hold the place up for another five hundred years.

Which is what I hope is what happens. While the house is sorely in need of a massive renovation (a builder who is familiar with such projects estimated a total cost of $5,000,000) it is well worth the effort. All rooms but the servants' quarters are beautifully scaled, with twelve-foot ceilings and large, but not daunting dimensions. The bedrooms all have fireplaces and three have sleeping porches to make up for the lack of air conditioning (and who needed that when you had summer places scattered about the country?). Interesting (to me, at least) the family bedrooms all connect to each other: in an era that saw the Lindberg kidnappings, the Rockefellers would make certain all the children were in bed and then set a security alarm to seal off the sleeping quarters. I suppose that the recent kidnapping of Eddie Lampert demonstrates that the world hasn't gotten any safer. There are eleven acres (from an original fifty) of lawns and a series of secret gardens, a pool and adjoining bathhouse. It's priced at $26,000,000, which gave me pause but at some price (high teens?) this place will make a magnificent home base for the next tycoon of this era. Of course if that's you and you really have that kind of money at your disposal you're probably also one of those people who doesn't like to wait, so why not jump on it now?

Marking to Market

Julie Church's listing at 47 Alpine Road was originally listed (in April, 2002) with another agent at $8,750,000. As construction progressed its price was increased, first to $9,250,000 and then to $9,750,000. With no sale, the builder dropped its price back to $8,750,000 again and then in a fit of pique increased it to $11,000,000. Even this strategy failed, surprisingly and 2004 saw, besides Julie as the new agent, a series of price reductions: $9,300,000; $8,500,000 and finally, $7,995,000. It sold last week for $7,250,000, a little more than three years after it was first offered for sale. That's a pretty tortuous course just to determine the market price for a building project.

Selling It By The Pound

Or in this case, by the square foot. Using 47 Alpine as a model, let's break down its costs and profits. Sales price was $7,250,000, of which approximately $5,000,000 reimbursed hard costs (land, $900,000 in 1999, construction costs of, say, $400 sq.ft. X 9,000, or $3,600,000, commissions of $362,500, state and local conveyance taxes, $82,625). Our builder is left with about $2,250,000 to pay for site development, carrying costs, architectural fees and profit. But did he earn much profit? I hope so - the point of this exercise is not to wish ill on a builder but rather to demonstrate the perils confronting builders of big houses. At $11,000,000, the builder would have received $1,200 for each of his house's 9,000 square feet; when he sold it last week he got $800. Out of curiosity, I researched the selling price, per square foot, of twenty-six houses built in 2003 and later with a minimum size of 8,500 square feet. The average was $609, with only three houses fetching more than $800 (and none, excluding a house in Conyer's Farm - different animal) reaching $900. For the sake of argument, if you pay $2,000,000 for land and incur $400 per square feet in construction costs, you'll have to sell your project for $622 per foot just to get back where you started and, after adding site development costs etc. - figure a third more-you need $809 to stay in business. The averages say that you won't get it. All of which, if I were a big box builder, would make me nervous.

Grade Inflation

I notice that those little yellow plastic caution signs parents place in their driveways now read "Alert, Children!" I used to threaten my own kids that I was going to put up the then-current sign, "Slow Children at Play" whenever they brought home a bad report card but I guess that no longer happens in Greenwich.

Summer Doldrums

Only nine new houses were added to the inventory yesterday, balanced by nine price reductions. The hot weather is upon us and the market is settling down for the summer. If you're a buyer, this is a good time to shop for bargains. If you're a seller, you have a choice: wit until September or be open to low offers.

Zoning by Litigation

An Old Greenwich couple, Sarah and Michael McNulty, have finally received approval from our P&Z to build their new house in Shorelands. This approval came not because the P&Z saw the error of its ways when they turned the couple down, repeatedly, over the years, but because the McNultys sued the town and then settled. I attended one of the P&Z hearings on the matter about a year ago and, as a former land-use lawyer, was appalled. The McNultys were fully within their rights to build the house they wanted but our commission turned them down based solely, it seemed, on neighborhood opposition. No one likes change and we all react badly when change is thrust upon us but the P&Z simply cannot base its decisions on who is for, and against a project - the law won't permit it. Yet again and again our zoning decisions are founded on the commission's personal predilictions or neighbor's challenges. This results in law suits by aggrieved property owners - law suits which they win. Examples include the Starbucks in Cos Cob, the Whaba brother's marina/condominium project in Byram and now, the McNultys. This is a stupid, and expensive way to manage land use. We as a town deserve better.

June 3rd, 2005
The Sky is Falling! Or is it?

Mainstream media is having a great time these days predicting the collapse of the housing “bubble”. The New York Times has run at least four stories on the subject,“Good Morning, America” has started off its day with that lede and even Mr. Greenspan has admitted to “a bit of froth” in the housing market. It certainly makes sense, from a news view, to play this story. A huge number of Americans own homes and, typically, it’s their most valuable asset, so a story that describes that asset as threatened is bound to make readers sit up and take notice.

But for another view, you might want to check out the Wall Street Journal’s article of May 27th which describes the plight of several home owners who tried to “time the market” by selling their house and renting a replacement until the prices dropped. They are now priced out of their home towns. Market timing is a great way to lose money on Wall Street; it’s an even more hopeless strategy when applied to residential properties in part because a house, while it can be a great investment, is primarily a place for you to shelter your family. You need one, rented or owned. If you don’t like the price of Home Depot’s stock don’t buy it and your life will remain unchanged. If you don’t like the price of housing you’re choice is limited to which street corner on which to place your cardboard box.

Which brings us back to the question, “is the sky really falling?” I think not, at least in this area. As I’ve noted before, one of the hallmarks, I think, of a bubble is the lack of market discipline. Do you remember when Palm Pilot was valued, for six long months, for more than its parent company? Thirty percent of something was worth more than sixty percent of the same thing. That’s “irrational exuberance” and that’s a bubble. And you could see it coming, if you looked. I don’t see that kind of blind euphoria in Greenwich, yet. Over-priced houses aren’t selling. Heck, even some well priced houses aren’t selling, and that’s because buyers are remaining cautious. They won’t over-pay for a muffler, or a house, because they aren’t counting on its price increasing wildly in the next year to bail them out.

Lucy Krasnor of Strategic Mortgage has culled average sales prices from our MLS data and her work should prove reassuring. Beginning in 1986, when the average house price was $650,000, that average has risen steadily and, mostly in a restrained fashion: 7.1% one year, 10.8% another, 4.2% another, and so forth. There are some notable exceptions, including 20000, the height of the tech boom, when prices gained 22.8%, 2001, which saw a drop of 10% and 2004, which witnessed a gain of 23.6%. The latter would, if continued, certainly give rise to the bubble theory but it is not continuing – prices seem to be flattening, which is good, long term. Greenwich has always seen its prices jump in certain periods — if memory serves, the same house on Bramble Lane that sold for $75,000 in 1972 sold two years later for $150,000—but then normalcy returns.

Another point to consider is how many houses are being bought at one price, torn down or renovated and then returned to market a few years later. The average price in Riverside, for instance, may have doubled recently, but a good number of those houses are brand new, much larger replacements for the buildings that preceded them. That skews the average. Would I want to be a spec-house builder of a $6,000,000 house right now? Absolutely not (and I especially wouldn’t want to be the guy who’s putting up, on spec, a 15,000 sq.ft. house on Langhorne Lane). But neither do I think that the market for well built, well priced houses is in danger of collapsing. It is especially important now to position your house intelligently and not saddle it with an “in my dreams” price. If you do that, you’ll shine out from your competition and sell your house quickly and easily. There are still buyers out there, and there will be, I hope, for the foreseeable future. Don’t let Good Morning America tell you otherwise.

But Price it Right

I have now spent three consecutive Tuesdays looking at houses that are, in my opinion, wildly over-priced. What a waste of time. Over-pricing your house in this thin market borders on stupidity (okay, it crosses that border). You don’t need to set a fire-sale price, but be aware of what’s out there and don’t delude yourself that your house is unique. For all its charms, there are other houses out there just as nice, and many of them are less expensive.

13 new listings today, balanced by 19 price reductions. If you needed evidence that the spring rush is over, that should do it.

May 27

Wrong (again!)

I received a thoughtful communication from Natalie Jarnstadt regarding my
support of killing geese. Ms. Jarnstadt, correctly assuming that my
objection to the fowl was based on my disgust at wading through their
droppings, suggested that the answer lies in a "pooper sweeper" (check my
web site for a link to description and picture). She and her husband have
volunteered to give one to the town. For some reason, that offer has been
rejected, and I’m not sure why. The geese themselves aren’t the problem,
it’s what they leave behind. If the park crews who mow the lawns can also
keep those lawns reasonably clean, everybody, including the geese, could
win.

Hot Hot Hot?

Another newspaper’s real estate writer keeps saying the Greenwich real
estate market is booming. I disagree, especially when you compare spring
market to spring market, rather than twelve months to twelve months. I have
analyzed the sales and contracts for the period January 1-May 18th in 2004
and 2005, respectively. While what passes for the lower end of the market:
$2,000,000-$4,000,000 is perking along at about last year’s pace (one
hundred this year, ninety-seven last) things fall apart after that.

In the 2004 spring market, twenty-eight houses between $5,000,000 and
$7,500,000 found buyers. Only sixteen did so this year – a mere 57% of last
year’s activity. There are sixty-seven houses currently for sale in that
price range and I expect many of the new homes still under construction will
further bloat the inventory.

The high end of the market (above $7,500,000) is faring a bit better this
year than last (eleven vs. eight) but there are sixty-nine such houses still
for sale. If we’re selling off eleven houses each quarter it will take at
least a year and a half to move all these and longer if more come to market.

So if your house is not selling, don’t blame your agent for not performing
in such a "hot" market. There is a lot of competing inventory out there and
not a whole lot of activity. On the other hand, it’s a good time to be a
buyer.

Americana

Do not miss the last vestige of small-town-America in Greenwich, the
Memorial Day parade down Sound Beach Avenue. Little League marchers, Cub
Scouts and Brownies and war veterans, all to the accompaniment of bands. I
hear that our WWII vets are getting a bit long in the tooth for the march
and that this year they’ll ride in classic cars donated for the occasion by
Malcolm Pray. The perfect time to catch up with all those acquaintances for
whom a once-a-year conversation is just about right.

Time Capsule

Speaking of WWII, my daughter Sarah recently unearthed a cache of newspapers
from 1933. Fascinating. Roosevelt had just reopened the banks after the
seven day "Bank Holiday" and depositors were returning with their cash. Beer
(but not yet hard liquor) was returning. My grandfather, John Gilbert, was
appearing with Mae Clark in a movie I never heard of, "Fast Workers". Of
more interest to adolescents, perhaps, was another film, "King of the
Jungle" that promised " a naked giant of the jungle loose in New York! He
takes love where he finds it!" I’ll look for that one on video.

Overseas, the Nazis had just won power and banned the old flag of republican
Germany in favor of the pre-war, Imperial flag and the swastika. President
Paul von Hindenburg appointed Dr. Joseph Goebels Minister of Public
Enlightenment and Propaganda. Babe Ruth was "considering" a salary offer of
$55,000 (for perspective, a top of the line Chevrolet is advertised for
$485), Westchester County was being threatened with a barrage of lawsuits if
it persisted in barring "colored people" from Playland and a nine-room brick
colonial with a slate roof and a half-acre yard in White Plains was being
offered by its owner for $26,000. I hope he got it; the classifieds are
mostly advertisements for court-ordered foreclosure sales.

All of which makes me sound like Bernie Yudain (heck he probably wrote half
the stories) but I found it an interesting snapshot of history.

Not in White Plains

And for a bit more than $26,000, even adjusting for inflation, Heather Platt
(Cleveland, Duble & Arnold) has a pretty nifty listing at 535 North Street
for the rather impressive price of $16,500,000. A grand old 1908 mansion set
of five-and-a-half acres (in the two acre zone) of gorgeous lawns and
gardens, the place was completely renovated in 2000. Absolutely top quality
throughout, it would be a fun place to live. It won’t be shown without a
buyer’s pre-qualification, alas, so I’m unlikely to be invited back.

I received a thoughtful communication from Natalie Jarnstadt regarding my support of killing geese. Ms. Jarnstadt, correctly assuming that my objection to the fowl was based on my disgust at wading through their droppings, suggested that the answer lay in a "poop sweeper" (follow "link", below, for a picture of same). She and her husband have volunteered to donate one to the town. For some reason, that offer has not been accepted. Seems to me that the town's off base on this one, as was I - the geese themselves aren't the problem, and if the park crews who mow the lawns can also keep those lawns reasonably clean, everybody, including the geese, could win.

May 20, 2005

Fun and Frolics on the Open House Tour

So there we are, three highly trained, professional Realtors, wandering through a spectacular mansion in the Back Country. We enter the library and one of us who is familiar with the house’s construction says, “hey, did you know that there used to be a secret passage behind one of these bookshelves? I wonder if it’s still here?” Well, he poked and prodded and sure enough, there it was: a small deadbolt hidden on the underside of one of the shelves. The bolt is retracted, the panel pushed slightly ajar and “Whoop! Whoop! Whoop!” an alarm begins shrieking like mad. Almost simultaneously we hear the telephone ringing—security checking in. We shrank to about 5’3” and slunk out of there as quickly as we could: “who, us?” Moral of the story; two, actually, is don’t go pushing open secret panels and, if you’re the listing agent, make certain that you know all the security codes for your clients’ house, especially those they forget to tell you about!

High End Blues?

As of this writing, there are ninety-six houses for sale in town priced at $6,000,000 and above—thirty-seven of which are asking over $10,000,000. By neat coincidence, forty-eight houses in the $6,000,000+ range sold in the past twelve months, indicating a two year supply of mega-mansions. Worse news for the $10,000,000 crowd is that only twelve such houses sold last year, so if you’ve got a whopper on the market, you might want to hold off on calling the movers, for now.

Well, …

I incurred the wrath of a local builder a few weeks back by stating that his $25,000,000 creation didn’t look as appealing as some other mansions I’d seen priced for half as much. I’ve been banned—for life, I assume—from any open houses ever again conducted by that builder and, while that is a sorrow from which I am still struggling to recover, I see that the builder has just whacked $10,000,000 from the building’s price. I’m not great with math, but $15,000,000 seems to be much closer to $12,500,000 than to $25,000,000. Don’t shoot the messenger, fella. By the way, your limestone facing was improperly installed and is now discoloring, badly.

And While We’re Angering People

I was in a newish house in Old Greenwich last week and noticed that its builder had turned it away from what could have been a spectacular view of the water and exposed instead an unnervingly-close view of the neighboring house ten feet away. The odd thing is, I am familiar with seven houses this same builder has erected in the past few years and every single one of them suffers from the same defect. It’s either a form of color blindness or the architect this builder employs must never visit the building sites before setting pen to paper. Truly bizarre.

To Market to Market to Buy a Fat Pig

Seventy-seven new listings came on the market last week, balanced by fifty-two price reductions (one of which promises in its open house listing for next week, “new rice-great food”). The spring market is turning away from sellers and in favor of buyers, as it usually does this time of year.

On and On and On

Paul Larson (Coldwell banker) has just listed 62 Wesskum Wood Road for $2,450,000. I liked this house very much, but it clearly won’t appeal to everyone. The owners have converted what must have been a raised ranch into 4,840 sq. feet of very interesting house. Lots of stairs, leading to four (I think) different levels, all decorated in a very modern, So-Ho industrial look that works beautifully, to my eye. Again; it’s not a conventional cape, but after touring so many nearly-identical houses, it presented a refreshing change. Nice yard, easy walk to Binney Park and the train. Go for it.

Parky Poopers

Speaking of Binney Park, did you know that we close the town’s clamming beds at Tod’s whenever it rains more than half-an-inch? That’s because that much water washes the goose poop off Binney’s lawns and into the pond, where it makes its way downstream to Old Greenwich Harbor and raises the coliform count to unhealthy levels. If it’s a health threat to clammers, why isn’t it a health threat that justifies killing these winged rats? We have been afflicted with a population of permanent resident geese who have made using our parks a disgusting, intolerable proposition. As I suggested a few months back, if a group of feathered hippies were camped at Binney making this kind of mess we’d have shooed them gone long ago. Sauce for the hippies should be sauce for the ganders.

Market Troubles

I have analyzed the sales and contracts for the period of Januay1, 2004 – May 18, 2004 and January 1, 2005-May 18, 2005. While what passes for the lower end of the Greenwich Market, $2,000,000-$4,000,000 is perking along at about last year’s pace (100 contracts 2005 vs 93 in 2004), there has been a considerable falloff in the high end market.

In the 2004 spring market, 28 houses priced between $5,000,000 and $7,500,000 found buyers. Only 16 did this year. Sales activity is 57% of last year’s market. There are presently 67 houses being offered to the market at this range. I expect many of the new houses currently under construction and not yet on the market will add to this price range’s inventory, bloating it still further.

The highest end of the market (above $7,500,000) is faring a bit better this year than last (11 vs.8) but there are presently 69 houses on the market asking $7,500,000 and above. If we’re selling off 11 every quarter, it will take at least a year and a half to move all these and longer if more come to market.

For What It's Worth

New Houses of Note

Three new houses caught my eye last week. Louise Marasso's listing at 23 Bote Road (off of lower Stanwich) is a completely renovated/expanded house with an asking price of $2,649,000. I think it's worth it. Built by Mladen Sango of D.M. Home Improvements here in Greenwich it's a beautiful house with great curb appeal and careful, finely detailed construction. I hadn't met Mr. Sango before the broker open house but if this is typical of his work, you couldn't go wrong using him for your own project. His cell phone # is (203) 570-0193. A very nice house.

Dancy Cassell's listing at 15 Stillman Lane in Glenville is phenomenal. I toured it with Matt Matthews of this office and Matt, who has built an almost infinite number of top end houses in Conyer's Farm and around town, thought it was the best new construction he'd seen in years. Good enough for me. $5,525,000 – a price, by the way, that had Matt wondering how Gardner, the builder, could deliver so much quality.

The other new construction I liked was Mark O'Brien's (Greenwich Land Co.) house at 16 Grant Street in Old Greenwich. Mark has built a number of good houses in town and he's continued that here. Again, top-finishes, rock solid construction and an intelligent use of space. The walk-out basement is huge, with hardwood flooring and all that sort of thing. $3,300,000, which will astonish long time residents of Grant Street and its adjoining neighbors but there you have it: Old Greenwich is changing.

And Speaking of Which

The Grant Street house has 5,700 sq. ft. of living space. That number includes the enormous basement which doesn't count against FAR allotage (yet – the P&Z's trying,though) but, by my calculations, you couldn't build anything close to its size today, now that the FAR regulations have been reinstated. I'm no fan of huge houses but, to my eye, this house is appropriately sized and sits just fine on its lot. Admittedly, my eye has been reconditioned by all the new, large houses that have been erected in town, but drive by and decide for yourself whether the agony and infliction of economic havoc on Greenwich property owners by our P&Z is worth the pain. I think not.

Where Did You Go? Out. What Did You Do? Nothing.

The New York Times recently ran an article about a phenomenon a number of us Realtors have already observed ("us" being Martha Jeffrey and John Horton of my office – I didn't believe them): kids don't play outdoors much anymore. Oh, they're limoed off to their Travel Soccer and semi-professional lacross teams but once practice is over they retreat inside to play videogames or prepare that essay that's supposed to get them into Harvard. No pick-up games of baseball in the backyard for these kids-it would ruin their form, or something. In any event, the result is that houses are getting larger to accommodate all this indoor activity and yards are getting smaller. It's a market-driven trend, not some evil conspiracy of builders and real estate agents; buyers don't want large yards and do want more interior room.

Obviously, all this is a gross generalization and a tad exaggerated but not by all that much. For every buyer I represent who insists on a yard large enough to toss a ball around with his kids there must be five who shrug off a postage stamp sized yard with a comment like, "less yard work to worry about". So, while I may not personally cheer the movement towards more house at the expense of yard, that's what's selling, and that's why builders do it.

Contrarians

A newly-constructed house in Riverside finally sold last week after more than a year on the market. It was on a challenging street (highway roar) but, in my opinion, it would have sold much sooner and at a much higher price had its builder not departed from the traditional Colonial look in favor of – well, I don't know what style he was after – Eastern European? It was a great house inside, and seemed well built, but its exterior looked like something that belonged on the Jersey Shore; most buyers who come to Greenwich aren't interested in that. My advice here: unless you plan to stay in your house for the rest of your life and don't care what your heirs get for the place, don't personalize so much that it appeals only to you. How boring, I know, but if you want eclectic, head for Venice, California and buy a houseboat.

Fowl, Not Swine

That was Pintail Lane I referred to last week, not Pigtail. I have it correct on my computer, so I'm not taking the heat on this one. The house on Swan Terrace, by the way, never made it to open house and was gone within days. Builder or homeowner? Don't know, yet.[update, 5/13 - home owner]

For What It's Worth - Friday, May 6
A Turning Tide?

No guaranteed wisdom here (readers will have long since discovered that for themselves) but I was doing some calculations recently regarding a new listing and concluded that end-users may be beginning to gain an advantage over builders. 9 Swan Terrace, the house in question, is a terrific-looking house sitting high on a site at the end of a dead end. It’s an over-sized lot which would permit something like 6,900 square feet of house. But it makes no commercial sense to build that sized house. At, say $300 a sq.foot, a builder would have $2,070,000 just in construction costs. Add the asking price of $1,299,000 and you’re up to $3,370,000 before you’ve even begun looking for your profit. You’d have to get well over $4,000,000 for the finished product to make the project worth your time and Swan terrace, for all it’s charm, is almost certainly not ready to support that kind of price.

18 Pintail, a very nice house (6,568 sq.ft.) just one street over, sold instantly last fall for its full asking price of $2,850,000, and, adjusting for inflation in the housing market, I’d place a new house on Swan Terrace at around $3,100,000, today – a tad higher six months from now, when construction would be finished. Now, a builder can probably cut his costs down from $300 a square foot but at some point the loss in quality will affect the sales price, so there’s a bottom here.
So what will happen with Swan? I haven’t been inside it as of this writing but if it’s in decent shape (and it looks to be, from the outside) I think a young family will snap it up at its asking price. If it isn’t, then the builders will have an opportunity at a lower price. But for the first time in a long time, I think land values have climbed higher than the existing market for new homes can justify; good news for families looking for homes, bad news for the trades.

And To Make that Point

I just reviewed what’s currently for sale in the new construction market. There are Sixty-one new houses for sale. Nine are priced from $1,100,000 (Byram) to $3,000,000. Twenty-four are between $3,000,000—$4,999,999 and twenty-eight range from $5,000,000 - $22,500,000 (asking, anyway). New construction in Riverside and Old Greenwich seems to be in the $3,500,000 area, while the higher end properties are mostly in the mid and back country. That’s a lot of inventory. And, with the average house in Riverside and Old Greenwich now selling for $2,000,000, either new construction in those neighborhoods is going to slow or we’ll soon be seeing new houses there with asking prices of $5,500,000. I don’t think there’s a market for those.

The “Ad”

The rather parochial world of real estate agents was abuzz last week over a brokerage firm’s ad praising itself at the expense of all others. Personally, I think that a quiet advertisement in the classifieds seeking a copy editor would have been more judicious than spreading a deep, desperate need for such help across two pages of print.

Whatever. The real point is this: as everyone in this financially-sophisticated town already knows, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Our real estate firms tend to limit themselves to use of statistics. But statistics are not always what they appear. For instance, and to quote Bishop Berkeley’s famous conundrum, if a woodsman fells a tree in a forest and receives no pay, has he made a sound? Put another way, if a $12,000,000 house is purchased by a relocation company and the listing agency receives nothing, has it really “sold’ anything? Or if an agent sells her $7,000,000 home directly and neither charges nor collects a commission, has the brokerage firm where she parks her license received anything of value? Should these selling prices be added to the firm’s “sold” statistic? Twice? (the listing firm is also shown as the selling firm so as to be credited with both sides of the non-paying transaction).

What about time on market? If a house is initially priced at $8,500,000 and lingers on the market for years before finally selling for $4,000,000, should its time on market be described as four years, or the mere thirty-nine days from its last re-listing? Or how about statistics of "asking to selling price" ratios, which are often cited by firms when pitching their services. Typically, these show a great ratio of around 95%, but that's because they're using the last asking price, not the original. If they did, there are a lot of houses out there that would show a ratio of less than 50%.

I am not singling out one particular firm here. There’s a lot of funny stuff submitted to our MLS board by a lot of individuals, all in name of gaming the statistics. It’s a very competitive market down here in the trenches and people do what they think they have to do to gain an edge. I merely mean to suggest that you take all these numbers with a large helping of salt.

Hang'em High!

GHS graduate and criminal defense attorney Mickey Sherman has been deemed unfit to address school children because, gasp, he dares to defend under-aged drinkers. I understand the desire to bring children directly from the back of the police car to the execution ground; lots of people feel this way, especially when it's not their own children involved or when it's a Taliban meting out justice. And certainly anyone is entitled to be ignorant of our Constitution and history. But that doesn't mean that educators ought necessarily to agree with such sentiments nor display such a lack of basic knowledge of who this country was founded by (lawyers) and why they felt it important to protect the rights of the accused. The worst part of this sad tale is that my daughter is graduating this spring and I will now have to sit through yet another rendition of "Strive Ever Onward" instead of being entertained by the very funny Mr. Sherman.

As of noon today exactly one new listing (a rental) has been posted on the Greenwich MLS and eight price reductions. That's a slow market.

New Listings of note:
22 Crescent Road in Riverside is a 1936, updated house built in the mission style, sort of (at least, it has a lot of light oak trim and such). Very nice house, but it backs up to Exit 5 of I-95's. That never helps a home's value but 5 bedrooms, huge back yard, great street. At $1.8ish, I think it offers a lot.

15 Stillman Lane, in Glenville is still under construction but I toured it yesterday with Matt Matthews, who has probably built more fine houses in town than anyone else. Matt thought that it was "the best new house I've seen in a long time" and spent a lot of time pointing out the many (expensive) details the builder (Gardner)included. Which is good enough for me. $5,525,000 and worth it.

18 Dingletown Road (picture below-scroll down) has an accepted offer, not surprisingly. It, and the other houses on its little spur off Dingletown, always sell quickly. Not a great house but entirely adequate and it's in the right location with a decent yard. Buy it and move on in a couple of years. Always works.

51 Church Street, an antique house on a large lot (maximum FAR 5900 sq. ft.) also disappeared in a puff of smoke. Came on last week and went to highest and best offer at noon, Thursday.

Historic Houses
The Historical Society of the Town of Greenwich and the Greenwich Association of Realtors will hold a workshop for Realtors, "Enhancing the Value of Older Homes" at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday May 18th at the Bush Holly house. It's a fine idea and I intend to attend but I wonder why participation is limited to real estate agents. It's home owners and builders, after all, who are tearing down so many houses, not us. I've added the Historical Society's website to my link section. The site is informative but I wish they'd update their "houses in the dustbin" list. Last year was 2003.

Finally!
That odd-looking house at 39 Lockwood Lane, originally listed in January,2004 at $2,895,000, has been sold for $2,250,000. It was a very nice house inside, and a real bargain at its final price, but the builder departed from the conventional and built what one unkind critic [Ed. Wasn't that you?] described as a mushroom on steroids. Word to the wise for spec builders: don't experiment.

Lot splits. Because the P&Z has yet to enact its new rules governing lot splits a lot of savvy real estate types have made sure they received theirs before the deadline. The D'Andrea family carved out another piece of their Lockwood property, Bruce Cohen, the prominant land-use lawyer, split his lot on Perkley Lane. and so on. I don't know whether there's still time to emulate these people but if there is, and you you can do it, you probably should.

Greenwich Time, which does a decent job covering our P&Z Commission's frolics, has an editorial today on the subject (link below). There are some serious changes to our FAR regs on the horizon and the P&Z, if past history is a guide, intends to implement them as soon as the dust settles. One, for instance, would deduct from a lot's FAR calculations any land underwater - a pond, for instance. So let's say you own six acres in the Back Country, two acres of which are high and dry, the rest of which is a pond. If the pond doesn't count, you will be restricted to a house size smaller than that allowed in the one acre zone. If the point of FAR was/is to limit houses to an "appropriate" size,then how does this result accomplish that goal? The P&Z won't (can't) say - but they're going to do it nonetheless. Stop them before they sqeeze again.

For What It’s Worth
April 29, 2005
Bidding Wars
Not everyone likes bidding wars. I usually do when I’m representing sellers because it ensures that they receive the best price. But sometimes these wars are counter-productive and here’s why: houses aren’t stocks, they come with all sorts of emotions attached. A family buying a house is seeking a particular neighborhood, a certain school, the right-sized yard, bedrooms and so forth. When they find a house that meets all their criteria they become attached to it and if they see it slipping away from them they can become bitter and resentful. Even if they win the house by paying more than they wanted to or can afford, the bitterness can linger and if, between the time of the successful bid and the closing difficulties crop up, there is no reservoir of good will to draw from to smooth things over. So sometimes it makes sense to just accept a good offer and not reach for the very last dollar. That depends on your own financial needs, of course, but the combination of a happy seller and happy buyer is not only a gratifying sight to behold, it can be a strong glue that holds the deal together. My advice, then, is to determine beforehand exactly what you want from the sale: maximum value, certainty or a specific closing date, for instance, and conduct the sale accordingly. Whatever you do, don’t change your mind halfway through. Nothing is guaranteed to stir up hard feelings more than accepting an offer, letting the buyer spend money on a house inspection, lawyer, and so forth and then accepting a higher bid. Decide beforehand how you will treat bids and stick to it.
Market Conditions
Of course, all of the above applies only in a strong sellers’ market, which seems to have disappeared for the moment. There are still bidding wars breaking out in perennially hot Old Greenwich and Riverside but not many, and certainly nothing like was seen in January. A combination of low inventory, high prices and stock market uncertainties has slowed the market considerably. Four houses priced over $7,000,000 went to contract this year and although three of those four entered contract this month, I think we’re seeing the end of the spring market and not its beginning. Of course, if I’m so smart, how come I sell real estate instead of own it?
New York vs. Connecticut
Lucy Krasnor, of Strategy Mortgage Corp (618-4444) has provided me with some interesting data. We’ll deal with average increase in house values next week (it’s all very reassuring) but for now, I thought I’d pass on the results of her comparison of closing costs in Westchester and Fairfield Counties. If you’re buying across the border, be prepared to take out you wallet and dump its contents on the desk—you’ll need a second mortgage just to cover closing expenses. On average, a modest little $1.3 million house will run you $51,656 in costs in New York, compared to $17,813 in Connecticut. The biggest contributor to this whopping discrepancy is, naturally, taxes: mortgage tax, “mansion tax”, school tax, county tax, etc. Of course, our legislature is busy working its mischief, all of it directed at Fairfield County residents, up in Hartford, so this advantage seems doomed. But for now, we’re a relative bargain.
Stop!
In my cruises up and down the Post Road I have noticed that an increasing number of drivers zoom by school buses stopped and signaling on the opposite side of the road. The offending drivers do so so cooly, with such breezy insouciance that I recently asked a police officer whether the law regarding school buses had changed since I got my license. Nope – the only exception to not honoring a bus’s signals is when the highway lanes are separated by a barrier as, for instance, on I-95. The Post Road is not I-95 regardless of how some people drive on it. The fine for passing a stopped bus is horrendous but I think the life-long burden of having a crushed school child on one’s conscience would be far, far worse. So don’t do that, eh?
Boycott
As you may know, the town Realtors conduct broker open houses twice a week. Tuesdays are for properties west of North Street, Thursdays for the east. On busy days, it’s a tough chore to get to everything on the list and some days, impossible. So I resent homeowners who, for their own scheduling convenience, insist that their house be shown on the wrong day. I do more than resent, in fact: I boycott the damn things. I refuse to drive way up Taconic Road, for instance, when the rest of the properties I’m trying to see are way to the west. I don’t believe I’m alone in this practice so, while it is perfectly understandable that some days just don’t work for you, you’re better off postponing your open house than holding a party to which nobody comes.

9 Swan Terrace was just listed this morning for $1,299,000. I think that's a good buy. Swan is in that duck heaven development between the Post Road and Milbrook. Mallard Drive is a busy cut-through, yet houses there have been selling quickly in the 9's. Swan is removed from all that and should command a premium. A very large house (snuck in during the FAR hiatus) sold last fall there for a price, if I recall, in the high 2s. There's an opportunity here.