Daily Archives: June 3, 2013
Everyone who addresses questions to the board members (let’s hope that more than three of them show up this time) should begin with the demand that they answer, yes or no: will the BOE challenge the state law mandating redistricting based solely on race?
Every single one of us. After three hours or so, they may just get tired of evading the question and answer.
That’s what readers are saying. The only mention of the change I can find on the BOE’s calendar notes that the location’s been changed but doesn’t say where. I’d trust regular concerned citizens over our non-elected BOE members any day, so I think it’s safe to assume that the fun will be found at the high school and not Town Hall. Of course, if we all gather in the wrong place, a parade from Hillside to Field Point Road by hundreds of angry taxpayers and parents, replete with pitchforks and torches, would be just as entertaining.
Update: That new site, Greenwichschoolkids.com, also notes the change – does the BOE only communicate with parents of currently enrolled students? That would seem to leave the vast majority of us taxpayers in the dark. Hmmm.
Circus starts at 7:00 PM.
29 Cary asked $549,000, sold for $575,000.
35 Edgewater sold for $1.150 – it wasn’t listed on our MLS but professional realtors represented both buyer and seller so I’m sure the buyer understands that our new FEMA regulations will almost certainly prevent him from adding onto the property or updating it, ever. Which makes me question why he paid so much but of course, a well educated consumer is the best customer, so …
Three morons rescued five miles out on Long Island Sound in an 8′ rubber raft. Not the life raft from a larger boat, mind you, the craft they left shore in.
This document from the town doesn’t answer every question about houses that may be in the new flood zone, but it does address most of the issues.
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT – When do you count back to 1986?
Example One: House has been non-compliant since before 1986 and will still be non-compliant with the map changes effective July 8.
Any improvements to the house since 1986 count towards the 50%
A property owner has a house that has been non-compliant since at least 1986 and will still be non-compliant with the map changes effective July 8. Non-compliant means that the structure does not meet the construction requirements for the flood zone it is in – whether that be the AE or the VE flood zone. In this scenario, any improvements to the house since 1986 count towards the 50%. So the property owner can make interior changes to the house, replace windows etc, or construct additions as long as the additions are elevated so as to comply with the regulations. However, once the cumulative costs of those improvements exceed the 50% threshold, the entire house must be brought into compliance.
Example Two: House was constructed prior to 1986 but it is either raised or reconstructed into compliance with the maps in place in 2005 (arbitrary date), and will become non-conforming in 2013:
Clock starts at $0 July 8, 2013
If you raised your home or re-built your home in 2005 and it was compliant with the maps in place at that time but will become non-conforming on July 8th, you start from $0 in 2013. You do not go back to 1986. When the cumulative costs of improvements post 2013 exceed 50% of the market value of the home, the home must be brought into compliance.
There have been map changes in Greenwich since we entered the NFIP in 1977. A map change was made in 1999 that is similar to what is happening now. The change in 2010 was only to the datum and did not impact base flood elevations. Any compliant house that was made non-compliant with the 1999 Flood Insurance Rate Maps would count all cumulative improvement costs dating back to when it became non-compliant. So if a house was in compliance in 1992 and became non-compliant in 1999, the clock starts at $0 in 1999.
Example Three: House was not in a flood zone before but will be, effective July 8, 2013, and will be non-conforming
Clock starts at $0 July 8, 2013
29 Hunting Ridge, $1.825 million. Nothing wrong with this house, but if this is now the new comp for the area,
7 Stag Lane, just around the corner and asking $2.150, is a screaming steal. 5 beautiful acres of meadows and a copse, a very decent house that would be perfect for living in while building a new one further back on a far better building location, with pool. Just as the owner of 29 Hunting Ridge bought her house for $2.5 million in 2004 and took a hit, 7 Stag sold for $2.5 million that same year for $2.5 and the owner put $250,000 into bringing the house up to date. It’s a great deal.
15 Stanwich Road, $1.150. Took 254 days to move this property, but this doesn’t seem like a crazy price at all.
9 Bonwit Road asked $799,000, sold for $730,000, so the inventory shortage in the lower end continues.
Same comment applies to 44 Dandy Drive, which sold for $785,000 in mere days.
48 Sinawoy, asking $769,000, has found a buyer in just 12 days, not withstanding that it looks ready to topple over. If it passes its building inspection we can expect a sale in 30 days or so.
32 Grahampton also reports a an accepted offer, asking price $3.5 million. Two-and–half acres on a good street, with a 1949 Coggins home. I like the man’s homes, more or less pseudo-colonial reproductions, but most buyers no longer want them, so this may be a pure land sale.
Pundits claim rejection of immigration bill will sink Republican’s future – it’s going to take a lot of spin to pin the blame on the GOP
I’m sure our mainstream media is up to the task, but it will be interesting to watch them do it.
23 Red Coat Lane is back, after expiring unsold two weeks ago at $1.590 million. Today’s price is a dollar less, $1.589 (did the math for you, Walt), but unless they move the Merritt Parkway out of its backyard, a more substantial cut may have to be taken before it attracts a buyer.
Or that’s my guess.
NYC, which has had the strictest gun laws in the nation for literally decades, sees 25 people shot in 48 hours. “Hell, they didn’t get me”, said Mike Blumberg, at a press conference held to reassure constituents worried for his safety, “I got myself armed bodyguards”. The puzzle here, of course, is that with an unarmed citizenry, why do criminals still insist on shooting them?
Similarly, New York lawmakers are baffled by continuing acts of violence against gays, 13 years after passing a law prohibiting hate crimes. “Next they’ll tell us our designation of subway tunnels as ‘flood-free zones ‘ won’t work,” complained Sen. Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan), “but I refuse to give in to pessimists. In fact, next week we’ll be moving against lust, gluttony,greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride. Get those licked and we’ll have heaven on earth.”