A very good buy on North Street

876 North Street is a beautiful contemporary on 5+ acres abutting the Stanwich golf course. I really liked it when I saw it back in 2009, even at its price of $3.390 because of its excellent design, condition and private location. But what I like tends not to sell quickly and that proved to be the case on this one.

It has finally sold, however, for $2.450 million, a discount from its $2.629 assessment. Someone got themselves a great house for what, in Greenwich, passes as a good price.


Filed under Uncategorized

17 responses to “A very good buy on North Street

  1. I like that stretch of North Street, especially the side of the street that in on the golf course. Is there a photo anywhere of the house? I don’t know it and can’t find a listing for it.

    I figured you’d be in DC today, rallying with Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert to Bring Back the Sanity.

  2. No hurry, I’m in DC too. Did you see LLS dancing on the stage with Sheryl Crow? And he told us he was a professor!

  3. On the outside looking in...

    I thought that house was lovely too but it was surrounded by wetlands and a bug pit.

    • If you’re going to be picky … : ) . I just warned a client off an otherwise-perfect (for him) house when I learned that the town snowplows won’t go down the steep hill it’s located on – no place to turn around. That’s why you want a buyer’s rep. I’m hopeful that Zillow won’t be capable of such local knowledge until after I retire.

  4. The High School is about to offer GIS courses, so that this time next year, if you’re wondering about slopes, wetlands, golf course views, or 100 other aspects of 3-D features affecting a homesite, well you’ll just have to ask the kid next door.

    Planning early retirement, CF? We hope not.

    Here’s the scoop on the wetlands-challenged homes between North St and the Stanwich Club.


  5. curious

    Dumb question, I fear…. but typically, does one’s agent act as a buyer’s rep? Suppose I am working with a broker from, say, Sotheby’s/Raveis/etc…. Will he/she do this due diligence for me? Or do I then need to hire someone to do this for me? Otherwise, who’s going to tell me about snowplows/bug pits/problematic wetlands, noise, etc etc (and obviously dozens of other things I’ve never considered)….

    • Yeah, curious, that’s what a buyer’s rep is supposed to do – and why you should have one – otherwise, you’re dealing with the agent for the seller, who not only owes you no loyalty but is actually barred from revealing any information that could harm her principal, the seller. Buyers’ reps can give you the information they have dug up; how much the seller owes on the mortgage, any pending foreclosures or divorces, local gossip, etc.
      But we’re not building inspectors, so you’ll want one of those. Nor are we zoning experts – not anymore, not since FAR went nuts. We can, and should, spot “issues” but if you want to know whether you can add a five-bedroom septic system, all we can do is steer you to some reliable septic experts.

  6. And just to add a wee self-serving remark (speaking of wee, I mean we), our vice-chair of the wetlands agency made the point at the Oct. Town Hall seminar on low-impact development, that the complexities of future development demand a well-rounded team of experts and professionals.

    Engineers will be required to perform expensive dynamic soil-drainage testing. No mere perc test will do for your roof water storage. You actually have to dig down and construct a mini-system in the ground at the same location and depth you propose to use, after you complete the tests. (Yes, you have to know the outcome before making the selection, or repeat. Like lather, rinse and repeat, the way an engineer would follow those instructions.)

    Is that the end of it? Oh no. If you ever want to build or add or modify (even change a door), then you will need the full FAR build-out study. This will require a number of hours of land surveyor time, and a full redo of the architectural as-built plan, with minute checking of rules and changes in rules since the CO was issued. (IF there is a land surveyor that can do his side of this project in less than 5 billable hours, let him come forward now and explain how. That’s a challenge.)

    We still have future well water yields (after your neighbor deepens his well.) There is the usual radon/mold testing and remediation.

    Then we have the regulatory issues: future caps on daily limits of pollution loading for impaired drinking water reservoirs. Are you in a drinking water setback zone? How would you know? Will your realtor assume full liability for the correctness of the answer?

    This doesn’t mean setbacks from drinking water. This means a full set of interior setbacks for the whole watershed of the drinking water district.

    I could go on, but I have to re-start my servers to get that great photo back up.

    When FF is done campaigning, we all would appreciate his explanation, offered by his chairman at last Tuesday’s P&Z debacle, on how the 1954 Zone Map represents planning for the future in 2010.

  7. JoeKnows

    You may be one of the few who has any clue about some of these details, or actually does the work to support due diligence. I’ve found most “buyers” agents – agents in general in G’wich, don’t have a clue about wetlands, zoning, topography, GIS, septic, or town snow plowing routes! Mostly they provide local gossip on divorce, who’s famous next door, murders or other negative events etc.) and have often given misleading (or misinformed) information. They are more interested in making the sale than steering or guiding the buyer (me) in the right direction.

    Unfortunately I have found the only way to ensure proper due diligence before making a large purchase is to do it myself (or have my smarter-than the-average-agent kid do the leg work on research).


  8. The serious subject of “buyers agents” is worthy of its own thread here. JoeKnows isn’t the only one who has been led down a path of misinformation with a buyers rep.

  9. Server up. Tech tip. Don’t plug space heater into server power-strip.

    What a difference a little comma, makes, to meaning. 🙂

    In the above rant on dynamic absorption testing, I said “…plan to use, after you complete the test.”

    Truth be, dynamic testing must be performed in situ, as they say in the trade, meaning you must know where to build your mini-working model before you know the test result, or better phrased, the site (situ) you plan to use after you complete the test, before you perform the test.

    This is by far not the worst of the regulatory Catch-22’s. But first we need to get our land use regulatory people talking, first to each other, then to the public, then to their adjacent community counterparts, so that we can begin to “restore the sanity” to the regulatory scheme.

    To their credits, our Director of Wetlands, Deputy Director of Planning and our Conservation Director were all at Thursday meeting of the Flood and Erosion Control Board. Even our First Selectman dropped in to check the flavor of the water, so to speak. RTM Land Use and Finance Committees were represented too.

    Blog on, CF, you’re getting to them.

  10. Corvino Salary Fundraiser


    When is this $1.2 million/year salaried Mr. Corvino going to hold a fundraiser to raise the salaries of all the hard working employees of Greenwich Hospital.

    Can anyone stand up to get rid of this free-loader?

    He has been in that office for way too long! As our hospital faces another round of lay-offs, this Mr. Corvino faces another round of holiday parties and free drinks.

    End the Corvino era this year. Stop donating to this guy’s salary fund.

  11. Georgie in Greenwich

    Please don’t say you were at the Jon Stewart rally?…wasn’t it in D.C. this weekend?

  12. Georgie in Greenwich

    I’d luv to see that 🙂

    Tomorrow is election day—-and you have no coverage….c’mon its game changing day!