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.