Snowed In? Here Are 10 Awesome Broadway & Theater Movies to Binge-Watch on Netflix Tonight

first_imgGoing outside is for losers. It’s the coldest night in 10 years, and if you try to leave the house, you just might step in an icy puddle that goes up to your knees. Doesn’t that sound horrible? Instead, we propose you stay inside, cuddle up under a snuggly blanket (maybe this one) and watch movies with Broadway.com! Here’s what’s on tonight’s playlist. Fame High When we were kids, we always dreamed of running away and joining a performing arts school (OK, we still kinda do). Live vicariously through the real lives of the toe-tapping teens from Fame High, a.k.a. the Los Angeles County High School for the Arts. A five-six-seven-eight! Company: A Musical Comedy Even if you’re spending the night alone with a bottle of wine (…fine, a box of wine), Raul Esparza is always here to keep you Company. Celebrate Bobby bubi’s 35th birthday all over again with the 2010 revival of the Stephen Sondheim masterpiece. Camp OK, so this is technically a summer movie, but if you haven’t seen baby Anna Kendrick, Sasha Allen and Robin de Jesus wail their hearts out at Stagedoor Manor—uh, we mean Camp Ovation—you’ve really never lived. You just haven’t. Also, there’s a Sondheim cameo, soooo… West Side Story There are a ton of classic movie musicals on Netflix, but West Side Story is the only one we can watch 200 billion times and never get sick of. Plus, we know you know all the lines. “How many bullets are left, Chino? Enough for you? Or you? ALL OF YOU!” You’ll totally freak out your dog. C.O.G. OK, so this isn’t exactly theater related, but we thought you guys should know that the 2013 flick C.O.G., starring Spring Awakening stud Jonathan Groff, is now streaming on Netflix. You’re welcome! The Phantom of the Opera at Royal Albert Hall Sierra Boggess and Ramin Karimloo (soon to make his Broadway debut in Les Miserables) will heat up your freezing living room in no time in the passionate and sensual 25th anniversary production of Phantom at Royal Albert Hall. We dare you to watch the final lair scene without bawling.center_img View Comments Shrek the Musical Celebrate the Broadway return of the great Sutton Foster (who will star in Violet beginning March 28) with the lighthearted live broadcast of Broadway’s Shrek. The 2010 Tony-winning tuner also stars Christopher Sieber, Daniel Breaker and Brian d’Arcy James as the grumpy green ogre. Into the Woods Wait, did someone say Sondheim? Brush up on your fairy tales before the release of the new Into the Woods film with this 1991 classic (we still have a dusty VHS of this in a closet somewhere), starring Bernadette Peters, Joanna Gleason, Chip Zien and more stars of the original Broadway production. Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog In less than three months, Neil Patrick Harris will get glittery (like, really glittery) in Hedwig and the Angry Inch on Broadway. Until then, watch all three installments of Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog, starring NPH as an adorable wannabe supervillain with a giant crush. First Position Take a break from Broadway and check out First Position, an inspiring doc about teens competing at the prestigious Youth America Grand Prix, one of the most famous ballet competitions in the world. It’s really fun to eat a giant ice cream sundae while watching this, then not offer any of the ballerinas any.last_img read more

Otter Creek’s new product offers opportunity and growth

first_imgKaren Kunz has joined Otter Creek Awnings & Patio Rooms as a marketing and customer service representative. Most recently, Kunz was a marketing representative for Total Care, a health insurance company in Syracuse, New York. Kunz will be responsible for assisting with the companys marketing and providing service for customers throughout Vermont and sections of New York and New Hampshire. Kunz earned her bachelors degree from Plymouth State University.Laura Bent of Otter Creek Awnings & Patio Rooms has been promoted to oversee the sales and design of Otter Creeks new product, custom closets. In addition to custom closet sales and design, Bent is responsible for solar screen and residential awning sales. Bent has been with Otter Creek for four years and earned her bachelors degree from Iowa State University. Otter Creek designs and installs custom awnings, sunrooms and closets for homes and businesses throughout Vermont.last_img read more

Vermont continues to have by far the lowest foreclosure rate in US

first_img          U.S.                    889,829       144    10.75     20.29      —  —-                    ——-       —    —–     —–       27  Alabama                   6,404       334    74.54   250.14*      —  ——-                   —–       —    —–   ——-      34  Alaska                      588       480     6.72     16.21      —  ——                      —       —     —-     —–       4  Arizona                  47,914        56    -2.45     28.70       –  ——-                  ——        —    —–     —–      23  Arkansas                  4,640       277     1.29     33.56      —  ——–                  —–       —     —-     —–       2  California              253,905        52     9.96     25.32       –  ———-              ——-        —     —-     —–       9  Colorado                 14,597       146    15.80    -10.08       –  ——–                 ——       —    —–    ——      33  Connecticut               3,028       475   -48.47    -38.77      —  ———–               —–       —   ——    ——      32  Delaware                    853       456     3.02     40.99      —  ——–                    —       —     —-     —–          District           of           Columbia                   991       287    18.40    -15.66          ———–                 —       —    —–    ——       3  Florida                 158,043        55    32.56     44.42       –  ——-                 ——-        —    —–     —–       7  Georgia                  31,292       127     9.38     12.75       –  ——-                  ——       —     —-     —–      15  Hawaii                    2,126       238    36.81    328.63      —  ——                    —–       —    —–    ——       6  Idaho                     5,100       124    18.80    144.49       –  —–                     —–       —    —–    ——      10  Illinois                 32,786       160   -15.86     21.93      —  ——–                 ——       —   ——     —–      13  Indiana                  13,869       200    11.33     -0.15      —  ——-                  ——       —    —–     —–      41  Iowa                      1,656       803     5.34     19.83      —  —-                      —–       —     —-     —–      35  Kansas                    2,435       501    -4.55     24.17      —  ——                    —–       —    —–     —–      40  Kentucky                  2,844       670   63.92*    55.07*      —  ——–                  —–       —    —–     —–      38  Louisiana                 3,286       566   66.72*    73.68*      —  ———                 —–       —    —–     —–      42  Maine                       829       840     6.83      0.48      —  —–                       —       —     —-      —-      17  Maryland                  9,320       249     0.33     -1.40      —  ——–                  —–       —     —-     —–      19  Massachusetts            10,778       253    31.55    -33.36      —  ————-            ——       —    —–    ——       8  Michigan                 33,813       134     1.90      2.88       –  ——–                 ——       —     —-      —-      18  Minnesota                 9,134       252    27.34     61.01      —  ———                 —–       —    —–     —–      43  Mississippi               1,475       851    92.06    117.23      —  ————-             —–       —    —–    ——      29  Missouri                  7,290       363    -0.01   -24.66+      —  ——–                  —–       —    —–   ——-      48  Montana                     151     2,884    -1.31    -55.06      —  ——-                     —     —–    —–    ——      45  Nebraska                    418     1,868    88.29    -67.19      —  ——–                    —     —–    —–    ——       1  Nevada                   43,695        25     5.81     77.21       –  ——                   ——        —     —-     —–      25  New Hampshire             2,048       290    -7.96     17.84      —  ————-             —–       —    —–     —–      24  New Jersey               12,524       279     6.96    -27.56      —  ————-            ——       —     —-    ——      31  New Mexico                1,999       431  144.68*    73.83*      —  ————-             —–       —  ——-   ——-      39  New York                 13,664       581    24.03    -14.73      —  ——–                 ——       —    —–    ——      37  North Carolina            7,619       541    27.24    -27.51      —  ————-             —–       —    —–    ——      49  North Dakota                 88     3,529   -27.27    72.55*      —  ————-                —     —–   ——   ——-      11  Ohio                     31,117       163    -1.51    -17.44      —  —-                     ——       —    —–    ——      36  Oklahoma                  3,056       531     4.95    -21.36      —  ——–                  —–       —     —-    ——      12  Oregon                    9,635       167    -8.65    109.05      —  ——                    —–       —    —–    ——      30  Pennsylvania             13,220       414    12.06    27.03*      —  ————-            ——       —    —–   ——-      22  Rhode Island              1,659       272    -3.04     -0.06      —  ————-             —–       —    —–     —–      26  South Carolina            6,799       297    -3.09   113.87*      —  ————-             —–       —    —–   ——-      46  South Dakota                160     2,233    66.67     72.04      —  ————-               —     —–    —–     —–      21  Tennessee                10,477       260     1.11  -12.75++      —  ————-            ——       —     —-  ——–      28  Texas                    26,816       352     6.16     -7.88      —  —–                    ——       —     —-     —–       5  Utah                      8,436       110    37.33    111.91       –  —-                      —–       —    —–    ——      50  Vermont                      14    22,245   -33.33    -62.16      —  ——-                      —    ——   ——    ——      14  Virginia                 15,417       212     4.70     8.75+      —  ——–                 ——       —     —-      —-      16  Washington               11,194       245    15.25     45.00      —  ————-            ——       —    —–     —–      47  West Virginia               341     2,589     1.79     74.87      —  ————-               —     —–     —-     —–      20  Wisconsin                10,058       255    12.88    61.83*      —  ———                ——       —    —–     —–      44  Wyoming                     228     1,063     5.07     43.40      —  ——-                     —     —–     —-     —–                      Properties with Foreclosure Filings                    ———————————–                                                  % Change % Change    Rate     State                      1/every       from    from    Rank     Name               Total  X HU (rate)   May 09  Jun 08    —-     —–              —–    ——–  ——-  ——-     *  Actual increase may not be as high due to data collection changes or       improvements    +  Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state       was discontinued starting in January 2009    ++ Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state       was discontinued starting in September 2008 U.S. Foreclosure Market Data by State – Q2 2009                            Properties with Foreclosure Filings                            ———————————–     Rate  State     Rank  Name            NOD      LIS      NTS     NFS      REO     —- ——-          —      —      —     —      —       24  Alabama                 2,716       787    38.08  250.90*      —  ——-                 —–       —    —–  ——-      36  Alaska                    210     1,344     9.95     9.38      —  ——                    —     —–     —-     —-       3  Arizona                16,834       158    -0.18    29.99       –  ——-                ——       —    —–    —–      22  Arkansas                1,667       772    -0.24    48.05      —  ——–                —–       —    —–    —–       2  California            101,045       132     9.54    47.15       –  ———-            ——-       —     —-    —–       9  Colorado                5,724       372    17.39    17.34       –  ——–                —–       —    —–    —–      46  Connecticut               227     6,337   -79.48   -86.01      —  ———–               —     —–   ——   ——      29  Delaware                  341     1,140   -11.66    59.35      —  ——–                  —     —–   ——    —–          District           of           Columbia                 417       682    39.46   -19.65          ———–               —       —    —–   ——       4  Florida                52,899       165   -10.24    31.10       –  ——-                ——       —   ——    —–       6  Georgia                14,024       282    33.36    60.94       –  ——-                ——       —    —–    —–      19  Hawaii                    706       718   -13.48   426.87      —  ——                    —       —   ——   ——       8  Idaho                   1,881       335    30.26   182.43       –  —–                   —–       —    —–   ——      11  Illinois               10,796       486    -1.33    32.35      —  ——–               ——       —    —–    —–      13  Indiana                 5,568       499    12.30    14.78      —  ——-                 —–       —    —–    —–      41  Iowa                      560     2,374   -11.81    31.76      —  —-                      —     —–   ——    —–      33  Kansas                    958     1,273     6.56    59.93      —  ——                    —     —–     —-    —–      40  Kentucky                1,129     1,688     4.73   54.45*      —  ——–                —–     —–     —-    —–      34  Louisiana               1,452     1,280   54.30*  148.63*      —  ———               —–     —–    —–  ——-      42  Maine                     292     2,386   -10.15     5.80      —  —–                     —     —–   ——     —-      21  Maryland                3,100       748   -12.40    71.84      —  ——–                —–       —   ——    —–      26  Massachusetts           3,221       845   -11.05     6.27      —  ————-           —–       —   ——     —-       7  Michigan               13,607       333    -2.04    13.16       –  ——–               ——       —    —–    —–      18  Minnesota               3,332       692    12.99    96.69      —  ———               —–       —    —–    —–      39  Mississippi               755     1,662    73.96   122.71      —  ————-             —     —–    —–   ——      27  Missouri                3,112       851    11.30   -9.85+      —  ——–                —–       —    —–    —–      47  Montana                    62     7,025    67.57   -34.04      —  ——-                   —     —–    —–   ——      45  Nebraska                  149     5,240   -11.83   -65.75      —  ——–                  —     —–   ——   ——       1  Nevada                 18,764        59     9.37   115.36       –  ——                 ——        —     —-   ——      37  New Hampshire             438     1,356   -39.75   -12.92      —  ————-             —     —–   ——   ——      25  New Jersey              4,333       808    -1.70   -13.34      —  ————-           —–       —    —–   ——      31  New Mexico                710     1,214   -10.80   89.33*      —  ————-             —     —–   ——  ——-      38  New York                4,850     1,637     0.52    -9.63      —  ——–                —–     —–     —-    —–      35  North Carolina          3,175     1,299    22.73    -8.37      —  ————-           —–     —–    —–    —–      49  North Dakota               32     9,705    39.13   190.91      —  ————-             —     —–    —–   ——      10  Ohio                   11,252       450    -0.95   -14.72      —  —-                   ——       —    —–   ——      32  Oklahoma                1,295     1,253    47.66    10.40      —  ——–                —–     —–    —–    —–      14  Oregon                  3,113       517     1.50    52.08      —  ——                  —–       —     —-    —–      28  Pennsylvania            4,941     1,109    12.91   21.70*      —  ————-           —–     —–    —–  ——-      12  Rhode Island              912       494   128.57    53.79      —  ————-             —       —   ——    —–      30  South Carolina          1,686     1,199   -45.47   58.61*      —  ————-           —–     —–   ——  ——-      44  South Dakota              113     3,161  197.37*  289.66*      —  ————-             —     —–  ——-  ——-      15  Tennessee               4,675       583    30.99   7.27++      —  ———               —–       —    —–    —–      23  Texas                  12,023       785    22.52     8.79      —  —–                  ——       —    —–     —-       5  Utah                    3,471       267    18.59   131.25       –  —-                    —–       —    —–   ——      50  Vermont                    11    28,312    83.33   -66.67      —  ——-                   —    ——    —–   ——      17  Virginia                5,188       631    -3.66   -1.27+      —  ——–                —–       —    —–    —–      16  Washington              4,678       587    22.05   70.61*      —  ————-           —–       —    —–  ——-      48  West Virginia             114     7,743    12.87    35.71      —  ————-             —     —–    —–    —–      20  Wisconsin               3,531       725     0.83   49.43*      —  ———               —–       —     —-    —–      43  Wyoming                    84     2,885     3.70     7.69      —  ——-                   —     —–     —-     —-       24  Alabama             0       0    1,966       0     750      —  ——-           —     —    —–     —     —      36  Alaska              0       0      165       0      45      —  ——            —     —      —     —     —       3  Arizona            12       0   11,263       0   5,559       –  ——-           —     —   ——     —   —–      22  Arkansas          143       0    1,062       0     462      —  ——–          —     —    —–     —     —       2  California     44,258       0   36,145       0  20,642       –  ———-     ——     —   ——     —  ——       9  Colorado            6       0    4,004       0   1,714       –  ——–          —     —    —–     —   —–      46  Connecticut         0      56        0     115      56      —  ———–       —     —      —     —     —      29  Delaware            0       0        0     235     106      —  ——–          —     —      —     —     —          District           of           Columbia         186       0      155       0      76          ———–       —     —      —     —     —       4  Florida             0  32,220        0  13,312   7,367       –  ——-           —  ——      —  ——   —–       6  Georgia             1       0   11,050       0   2,973       –  ——-           —     —   ——     —   —–      19  Hawaii            155       0      460       0      91      —  ——            —     —      —     —     —       8  Idaho           1,098       0      745       0      38       –  —–           —–     —      —     —     —      11  Illinois            0   3,648        0   3,998   3,150      —  ——–          —   —–      —   —–   —–      13  Indiana             0   1,776        0   2,282   1,510      —  ——-           —   —–      —   —–   —–      41  Iowa                0       0      266       0     294      —  —-              —     —      —     —     —      33  Kansas              0     215        0     491     252      —  ——            —     —      —     —     —      40  Kentucky            0     415        0     414     300      —  ——–          —     —      —     —     —      34  Louisiana           0     131        0   1,046     275      —  ———         —     —      —   —–     —      42  Maine               0      99        0     157      36      —  —–             —     —      —     —     —      21  Maryland            0   2,251        0     246     603      —  ——–          —   —–      —     —     —      26  Massachusetts       0   2,048        0     771     402      —  ————-     —   —–      —     —     —       7  Michigan            0       0    7,965       0   5,642       –  ——–          —     —    —–     —   —–      18  Minnesota           7       0    1,736       0   1,589      —  ———         —     —    —–     —   —–      39  Mississippi         0       0      441       0     314      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      27  Missouri            1       0    1,567       0   1,544      —  ——–          —     —    —–     —   —–      47  Montana             0       0        2       0      60      —  ——-           —     —      —     —     —      45  Nebraska            0     128        0       3      18      —  ——–          —     —      —     —     —       1  Nevada          8,726       0    6,252       0   3,786       –  ——          —–     —    —–     —   —–      37  New Hampshire       0       0      417       0      21      —  ————-     —     —      —     —      —      25  New Jersey          0   2,405        0   1,325     603      —  ————-     —   —–      —   —–     —      31  New Mexico          0     303        0     273     134      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      38  New York            0   3,614        0     756     480      —  ——–          —   —–      —     —     —      35  North Carolina    767       0    1,184       0   1,224      —  ————-     —     —    —–     —   —–      49  North Dakota        0       0        0      19      13      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      10  Ohio                0   4,121        0   3,981   3,150      —  —-              —   —–      —   —–   —–      32  Oklahoma          445       0      532       0     318      —  ——–          —     —      —     —     —      14  Oregon             36       0    2,125       0     952      —  ——            —     —    —–     —     —      28  Pennsylvania        0   1,945        0   2,020     976      —  ————-     —   —–      —   —–     —      12  Rhode Island        0       0       30       0     882      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      30  South Carolina      0     996        0     214     476      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      44  South Dakota        0      81        0      30       2      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      15  Tennessee           0       0    2,782       0   1,893      —  ———         —     —    —–     —   —–      23  Texas              13       0    7,668       0   4,342      —  —–             —     —    —–     —   —–       5  Utah            1,170       0    1,571       0     730       –  —-            —–     —    —–     —     —      50  Vermont             0       0        0       0      11      —  ——-           —     —      —     —     —      17  Virginia            7       0    3,531       0   1,650      —  ——–          —     —    —–     —   —–      16  Washington          0       0    3,642       0   1,036      —  ————-     —     —    —–     —   —–      48  West Virginia       0       0      101       0      13      —  ————-     —     —      —     —     —      20  Wisconsin           0   1,719        0     934     878      —  ———         —   —–      —     —     —      43  Wyoming             0       0       48       0      36      —  ——-           —     —      —     —     —     *  Actual increase may not be as high due to data collection changes or       improvements    +  Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state       was discontinued starting in January 2009    ++ Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state       was discontinued starting in September 2008 U.S. Foreclosure Market Data by State – June 2009                        Properties with Foreclosure Filings                        ———————————–    Rate  State    Rank  Name             NOD     LIS     NTS      NFS    REO    —- ——-           —     —     —      —    — A national rating firm has once again ranked Vermont as having the lowest home foreclosure rate in the nation, based on second quarter and year-to-date numbers. Vermont has both the fewest foreclosures over the first half of the year and the lowest rate as a percentage of housing units. Vermont’s rate of foreclosure has actually improved this quarter against both the first quarter of this year and compared to the first six months of last year. For the first six months, Vermont’s rate was one foreclosure for every 8,898 housing units. The worst states continue to be the Nevada (one in 16) , Arizona ( one in 30) and Florida (one in 33), as far as having the highest rate of foreclosure and Nevada, Arizona and Florida have the highest number of foreclosures. Vermont’s rate was nearly six times lower than the next best state, North Dakota (one in 1,553).RealtyTrac((R)) (www.realtytrac.com(link is external)), the leading online marketplace for foreclosure properties, today released its Midyear 2009 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report, which shows a total of 1,905,723 foreclosure filings — default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions — were reported on 1,528,364 U.S. properties in the first six months of 2009, a 9 percent increase in total properties from the previous six months and a nearly 15 percent increase in total properties from the first six months of 2008. The report also shows that 1.19 percent of all U.S. housing units (one in 84) received at least one foreclosure filing in the first half of the year.Foreclosure filings were reported on 336,173 U.S. properties in June, the fourth straight monthly total exceeding 300,000 and helping to boost the second quarter total to the highest quarterly total since RealtyTrac began issuing its report in the first quarter of 2005. Foreclosure filings were reported on 889,829 U.S. properties in the second quarter, an increase of nearly 11 percent from the previous quarter and a 20 percent increase from the second quarter of 2008.”In spite of the industry-wide moratorium earlier this year, along with local, state and national legislative action and increased levels of loan modification activity, foreclosure activity continues to increase to record levels,” noted James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac. “Unemployment-related foreclosures account for much of this increased activity, and the high number of borrowers who find themselves owing more on their mortgages than their homes’ are now worth represent a potentially significant future risk. Stemming the tide of foreclosures is a critical component to stabilizing the housing market, so it is imperative that the lending industry and the government work in tandem to find new approaches to address this issue.”Nevada, Arizona, Florida post top state foreclosure ratesMore than 6 percent of Nevada housing units (one in 16) received at least one foreclosure filing in the first half of 2009, giving it the nation’s highest foreclosure rate during the six-month period. A total of 68,708 Nevada properties received a foreclosure filing from January to June, an increase of 23 percent from the previous six months and an increase of 61 percent from the first half of 2008.Arizona registered the nation’s second highest state foreclosure rate in the first half of 2009, with 3.37 percent of its housing units (one in 30) receiving at least one foreclosure filing, and Florida registered the nation’s third highest state foreclosure rate, with 3.08 percent of its housing units (one in 33) receiving at least one foreclosure filing.Other states with foreclosure rates ranking among the nation’s 10 highest were California (2.94 percent), Utah (1.46 percent), Georgia (1.42 percent), Michigan (1.34 percent), Illinois (1.31 percent), Idaho (1.26 percent) and Colorado (1.25 percent).California, Florida, Arizona post highest foreclosure totalsA total of 391,611 California properties received a foreclosure filing in the first half of 2009, the nation’s highest total and 2.94 percent of the state’s housing units (one in 34) — the nation’s fourth highest state foreclosure rate. California foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased nearly 14 percent from the previous six months and increased nearly 15 percent from the first half of 2008.With 268,064 properties receiving a foreclosure filing in the first six months of 2009, Florida documented the second highest state total. Florida foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased 7 percent from the previous six months and was up nearly 42 percent from the first half of 2008.Arizona’s 89,799 properties receiving a foreclosure filing in the first six months of 2009 was the third highest state total. Arizona foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased 13 percent from the previous six months and was up nearly 55 percent from the first half of 2008.Other states with totals among the 10 highest in the country were Illinois (68,932), Nevada (68,708), Michigan (60,786), Ohio (58,937), Georgia (56,391), Texas (49,144) and Virginia (28,368).Report methodologyThe RealtyTrac U.S. Foreclosure Market Report provides a count of the total number of properties with at least one foreclosure filing reported during the first half of the year at the state and national level. Data is also available at the individual county level. Data is collected from more than 2,200 counties nationwide, and those counties account for more than 90 percent of the U.S. population. RealtyTrac’s report incorporates documents filed in all three phases of foreclosure: Default — Notice of Default (NOD) and Lis Pendens (LIS); Auction — Notice of Trustee Sale and Notice of Foreclosure Sale (NTS and NFS); and Real Estate Owned, or REO properties (that have been foreclosed on and repurchased by a bank). If more than one foreclosure document is filed against a property during six-month period, only the most recent filing is counted in the report.U.S. Foreclosure Market Data by State – Jan to Jun 2009                                                        % Change  % Change                          Total                           from      from    Rate              Properties     %Housing 1/every X  Jul-Dec   Jan-Jun    Rank   State Name with Filings      Units     HU        08        08    —-   ———- ————    ——-  ——— ——– ———-center_img           U.S.           57,031  58,171  108,875  32,622  79,474      —  —-           ——  ——  ——-  ——  ——     *   Actual increase may not be as high due to data collection changes or        improvements    +   Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state        was discontinued starting in January 2009    ++  Collection of some records previously classified as NOD in this state        was discontinued starting in September 2008 U.S. Foreclosure Rates Heat Map – June 2009(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20090716/LA47428(link is external))About RealtyTrac Inc.Ranked as the third largest real estate site by MediaMetrix and No. 53 on Inc. magazine’s 2006 Inc. 500 list of the nation’s fastest-growing private companies, RealtyTrac Inc. (www.realtytrac.com(link is external)), is the leading online marketplace for foreclosure properties, providing all the resources that home seekers, investors and real estate agents need to locate, evaluate and buy properties below market value.Founded in 1996, RealtyTrac publishes the largest and most comprehensive national database of pre-foreclosure, foreclosure, For Sale By Owner, resale and new homes, with more than 1 million properties across the country, property reports, productivity tools and extensive professional resources. RealtyTrac hosts nearly 3 million unique visitors monthly and has been chosen to supply foreclosure data to MSN Real Estate, Yahoo! Real Estate and The Wall Street Journal’s Real Estate Journal. For current news and information regarding foreclosure-related issues and trends, visit our blog at www.ForeclosurePulse.com(link is external).Source: RealtyTrac.  IRVINE, Calif., July 16 /PRNewswire/       —      U.S.        1,528,364      1.19      84      9.46     14.66              —-        ———      —-      —      —-     —–       30 Alabama             9,657      0.45     221   125.47*   179.75*       — ——-             —–      —-     —    ——    ——       34 Alaska              1,072      0.38     263     -8.22     18.45       — ——              —–      —-     —     —–     —–        2 Arizona            89,799      3.37      30     13.28     54.51        – ——-            ——      —-      —     —–     —–       25 Arkansas            8,646      0.67     149      8.75     25.69       — ——–            —–      —-     —      —-     —–        4 California        391,611      2.94      34     13.69     14.52        – ———-        ——-      —-      —     —–     —–       10 Colorado           26,565      1.25      80     -0.70    -18.62       — ——–           ——      —-      —     —–    ——       27 Connecticut         8,801      0.61     163    -16.56    -31.18       — ———–         —–      —-     —    ——    ——       32 Delaware            1,559      0.40     249      0.26     32.01       — ——–            —–      —-     —      —-     —–          District           of           Columbia           1,776      0.62     160    -11.90    -31.06          ———–         —–      —-     —    ——    ——        3 Florida           268,064      3.07      33      7.16     41.95        – ——-           ——-      —-      —      —-     —–        6 Georgia            56,391      1.42      70     17.79     16.06        – ——-            ——      —-      —     —–     —–       18 Hawaii              3,603      0.71     141     53.19    296.81       — ——              —–      —-     —     —–    ——        9 Idaho               7,952      1.26      79     46.20   112.90*        – —–               —–      —-      —     —–    ——        8 Illinois           68,932      1.31      76     19.23     29.46        – ——–           ——      —-      —     —–     —–       13 Indiana            24,665      0.89     113     -2.89    -10.77       — ——-            ——      —-     —     —–    ——       41 Iowa                2,996      0.23     444      1.32      3.67       — —-                —–      —-     —      —-      —-       33 Kansas              4,660      0.38     262     17.71     43.61       — ——              —–      —-     —     —–     —–       40 Kentucky            4,356      0.23     438     -4.68    28.95*       — ——–            —–      —-     —     —–     —–       39 Louisiana           5,160      0.28     360    40.95*    34.38*       — ———           —–      —-     —     —–     —–       42 Maine               1,540      0.22     452     -6.95     10.63       — —–               —–      —-     —     —–     —–       15 Maryland           18,112      0.78     128      3.38      2.76       — ——–           ——      —-     —      —-      —-       23 Mass.              18,458      0.68     147      6.24    -43.73       — —–              ——      —-     —      —-    ——        7 Michigan           60,786      1.34      74      1.29     -1.28        – ——–           ——      —-      —      —-     —–       24 Minnesota          15,537      0.67     148     36.41     52.74       — ———          ——      —-     —     —–     —–       43 Mississippi         2,175      0.17     577     89.46    94.37*       — ———–         —–      —-     —     —– ———       28 Missouri           13,880      0.52     191   -17.13+   -21.11+       — ——–           ——      —-     —    ——    ——       48 Montana               290      0.07   1,502    -49.03    -59.61       — ——-               —      —-   —–    ——    ——       45 Nebraska              638      0.08   1,224    -48.92    -69.65       — ——–              —      —-   —–    ——    ——        1 Nevada             68,708      6.23      16     23.26     61.33        – ——             ——      —-      —     —–     —–       22 New Hampshire       4,044      0.68     147      5.23     24.16       — ———–         —–      —-     —      —-     —–       21 New Jersey         23,889      0.68     146    -29.28    -30.25       — ———-         ——      —-     —    ——    ——       37 New Mexico          2,631      0.31     328    43.69*    11.11*       — ———-          —–      —-     —     —–     —–       38 New York           24,210      0.30     328     10.67    -18.87       — ——–           ——      —-     —     —–    ——       36 North Carolina     12,642      0.31     326    -25.88    -37.91       — ———–        ——      —-     —    ——    ——       49 North Dakota          200      0.06   1,553    -24.24    85.19*       — ———–           —      —-   —–    —— ———       12 Ohio               58,937      1.16      86     -5.81    -14.76       — —-               ——      —-      —     —–    ——       35 Oklahoma            5,609      0.35     289    -13.49    -27.03       — ——–            —–      —-     —    ——    ——       11 Oregon             19,053      1.18      84     56.20    122.43       — ——             ——      —-      —     —–    ——       31 Pennsylvania       23,864      0.44     230      3.27    24.61*       — ————       ——      —-     —      —- ———       19 Rhode Island        3,172      0.70     142    -11.52     -7.95       — ————        —–      —-     —    ——     —–       26 South Carolina     13,145      0.65     154     33.32   125.12*       — ————       ——      —-     —     —– ———       47 South Dakota          256      0.07   1,395      4.92     59.01       — ————          —      —-   —–      —-     —–       16 Tennessee          20,365      0.75     134     -4.05  -20.96++       — ———          ——      —-     —     —–   ——-       29 Texas              49,144      0.52     192      6.25    -14.38       — —–              ——      —-     —      —-    ——        5 Utah               13,496      1.46      69     37.43     87.65        – —-               ——      —-      —     —–     —–       50 Vermont                35      0.01   8,898    -55.70    -42.62       — ——-                —      —-   —–    ——    ——       14 Virginia           28,368      0.87     115    -3.05+     3.76+       — ——–           ——      —-     —     —–      —-       17 Washington         19,855      0.72     138     23.17     43.01       — ———-         ——      —-     —     —–     —–       46 West Virginia         663      0.08   1,331    111.82     73.56       — ————          —      —-   —–    ——     —–       20 Wisconsin          17,984      0.70     142     70.92    49.69*       — ———          ——      —-     —     —–     —–       44 Wyoming               413      0.17     587    -10.22     43.40       — ——-               —      —-     —    ——     —–       —  U.S.           155,400  181,722  266,833  89,617  196,257          —-           ——-  ——-  ——-  ——  ——-      27  Alabama              1        0    4,847       0    1,556      —  ——-            —      —    —–     —    —–      34  Alaska               7        0      449       0      132      —  ——             —      —      —     —      —       4  Arizona             23        0   34,872       0   13,019       –  ——-             —      —   ——     —   ——      23  Arkansas           418        0    3,106       0    1,116      —  ——–           —      —    —–     —    —–       2  California     124,275        0   84,211       0   45,419       –  ———-     ——-      —   ——     —   ——       9  Colorado            41        0   10,938       0    3,618       –  ——–           —      —   ——     —    —–      33  Connecticut          0    2,100        0     312      616      —  ———–        —    —–      —     —      —      32  Delaware             0        0        0     609      244      —  ——–           —      —      —     —      —          District           of           Columbia          365        0      452       0      174          ———–        —      —      —     —      —       3  Florida              0  101,602        0  37,664   18,777       –  ——-            —  ——-      —  ——   ——       7  Georgia              2        0   22,057       0    9,233       –  ——-            —      —   ——     —    —–      15  Hawaii             535        0    1,380       0      211      —  ——             —      —    —–     —      —       6  Idaho            2,433        0    2,552       0      115       –  —–            —–      —    —–     —      —      10  Illinois             0   11,807        0  12,130    8,849      —  ——–           —   ——      —  ——    —–      13  Indiana              0    4,767        1   5,697    3,404      —  ——-            —    —–      —   —–    —–      41  Iowa                 0        0      701       0      955      —  —-               —      —      —     —      —      35  Kansas               0      480        0   1,238      717      —  ——             —      —      —   —–      —      40  Kentucky             0      976        0   1,179      689      —  ——–           —      —      —   —–      —      38  Louisiana            0      134        0   2,498      654      —  ———          —      —      —   —–      —      42  Maine                0      263        0     500       66      —  —–              —      —      —     —       —      17  Maryland             0    6,543        0   1,101    1,676      —  ——–           —    —–      —   —–    —–      19  Massachusetts        0    7,178        0   1,994    1,606      —  ————-      —    —–      —   —–    —–       8  Michigan             0        0   19,444       0   14,369       –  ——–           —      —   ——     —   ——      18  Minnesota           63        0    5,342       0    3,729      —  ———          —      —    —–     —    —–      43  Mississippi          0        0    1,131       0      344      —  ————-      —      —    —–     —      —      29  Missouri             3        0    4,107       0    3,180      —  ——–           —      —    —–     —    —–      48  Montana              0        0       15       0      136      —  ——-            —      —      —     —      —      45  Nebraska             0      376        0       7       35      —  ——–           —      —      —     —       —       1  Nevada          21,713        0   12,963       0    9,019       –  ——          ——      —   ——     —    —–      25  New Hampshire        0        0    1,607       0      441      —  ————-      —      —    —–     —      —      24  New Jersey           0    7,660        0   3,202    1,662      —  ————-      —    —–      —   —–    —–      31  New Mexico           0    1,038        0     670      291      —  ————-      —    —–      —     —      —      39  New York             0   10,082        0   2,181    1,401      —  ——–           —   ——      —   —–    —–      37  North Carolina   1,257        0    3,263       0    3,099      —  ————-    —–      —    —–     —    —–      49  North Dakota         0        1        0      48       39      —  ————-      —      —      —     —      —      11  Ohio                 0   12,000        0  10,163    8,954      —  —-               —   ——      —  ——    —–      36  Oklahoma           936        0    1,487       0      633      —  ——–           —      —    —–     —      —      12  Oregon             221        0    7,225       0    2,189      —  ——             —      —    —–     —    —–      30  Pennsylvania         0    5,341        0   4,900    2,979      —  ————-      —    —–      —   —–    —–      22  Rhode Island        13        0      420       0    1,226      —  ————-      —      —      —     —    —–      26  South Carolina       0    3,970        0     999    1,830      —  ————-      —    —–      —     —    —–      46  South Dakota         0       81        0      74        5      —  ————-      —      —      —     —      —      21  Tennessee            0        0    6,090       0    4,387      —  ———          —      —    —–     —    —–      28  Texas               39        0   15,541       0   11,236      —  —–              —      —   ——     —   ——       5  Utah             3,041        0    3,252       0    2,143       –  —-             —–      —    —–     —    —–      50  Vermont              0        0        1       0       13      —  ——-            —      —     —      —      —      14  Virginia            13        0   10,917       0    4,487      —  ——–           —      —   ——     —    —–      16  Washington           0        0    8,013       0    3,181      —  ————-      —      —    —–     —    —–      47  West Virginia        0        0      311       0       30      —  ————-      —      —      —     —      —      20  Wisconsin            0    5,323        0   2,451    2,284      —  ———          —    —–      —   —–    —–      44  Wyoming              1        0      138       0       89      —  ——-            —      —      —     —      —           U.S.                  336,173       380     4.57    33.21      —  —-                  ——-       —     —-    —–                           Properties with Foreclosure Filings                           ———————————–                                                     % Change  % Change    Rate     State                           1/every    from     from    Rank     Name                 Total   X HU (rate)  Q1 09     Q2 08    —-     —–                —–   ———– ——-   ——-last_img read more

Union Bankshares reports growth in annual, quarterly net income

first_imgUnion Bank,Union Bankshares, Inc. (NASDAQ ‘ UNB) has announced Net Income for the fourth quarter 2010 of $1.38 million or $0.31 per share compared to $1.28 million or $0.29 per share for 2009. Net Income for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $5.59 million or $1.25 per share compared to $5.23 million or $1.17 per share for the same period in 2009. Results for 2010 reflect a year-to-year increase in net interest income of $868 thousand or 4.84% and in net income of $360 thousand or 6.9%. The increase in net interest income was mainly driven by the reduction in interest expense despite the 8.4% growth in average core deposits, including noninterest bearing demand deposit accounts during 2010, while interest rates paid on renewing time deposits continued to decrease and volume dropped 5.6% on average for 2010. The absence of the 2009 special FDIC assessment of $191 thousand and the reduction in costs on impaired assets from $415 thousand to $241 thousand from 2009 to 2010 were major factors in noninterest expenses rising only 3.2% from 2009 to 2010 despite the addition of a Loan Center and strong loan growth. These positive factors were partially offset by an increase in the loan loss provision from $400 thousand to $520 thousand due mainly to the growth and composition of the loan portfolio.Total Loans grew to $382.1 million, or 6.6%, as of December 31, 2010 from $358.2 million as of December 31, 2009 despite the Company selling $51 million of residential mortgage loans to the secondary market during 2010 to manage long-term interest rate risk. Total deposits reached $376.7 million compared to $368.8 million at the prior year end. The Company’s net loan-to-deposit ratio was 100.0% atDecember 31, 2010 versus 96.2% at December 31, 2009. The Company had capital of $42.1 million with a book value per share of $9.46 as of December 31, 2010, compared to a total of $41.2 million and $9.23 per share at December 31, 2009.A quarterly cash dividend of $.25 per share was declared on January 19, 2011 to shareholders of record January 29, 2011, payable February 10, 2011. Total dividends paid per share for 2010 and 2009 were $1.00.Union Bankshares, Inc., with headquarters in Morrisville, Vermont, is the bank holding company parent of Union Bank, which offers deposit, loan, trust and commercial banking services throughout northernVermont and northwestern New Hampshire. As of December 31, 2010, the Company had approximately $454 million in consolidated assets compared to $448 million at the end of the prior year. The Company operates 13 banking offices, a loan center and 29 ATM facilities in Vermont, a branch and ATM in Littleton, New Hampshire. Union Bank has been helping people buy homes and local businesses create jobs in area communities since 1891. Union Bank has earned an outstanding reputation for residential lending programs, is an SBA Preferred lender and has an outstanding Community Reinvestment Act rating. Union is proud to be one of the few community banks serving Vermont and New Hampshire and maintains a strong commitment to traditional values. Union is dedicated to providing genuine customer service and community support, donating tens of thousands of dollars to local nonprofits annually. These values’combined with financial expertise, quality products and the latest technology’make Union Bank the premier choice for your banking services, both personal and commercial.. Member FDIC. Equal Housing Lender.Statements made in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements.  Investors are cautioned that all forward-looking statements necessarily involve risks and uncertainties, and many factors could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements. When we use any of the words ‘believes,’ ‘expects,’ ‘anticipates’ or similar expressions, we are making forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and events to differ from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements:  uncertainties associated with general economic conditions; changes in the interest rate environment; inflation; political, legislative or regulatory developments; acts of war or terrorism; the markets’ acceptance of and demand for the Company’s products and services; technological changes, including the impact of the internet on the Company’s business and on the financial services market place generally; the impact of competitive products and pricing; and dependence on third party suppliers.  For further information, please refer to the Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission at www.sec.gov(link is external). Morrisville, VT January 19, 2011 ‘last_img read more

Analysis shows Trans Mountain Pipeline losing money

first_imgAnalysis shows Trans Mountain Pipeline losing money FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Business in Vancouver:The Trans Mountain pipeline generated a massive loss in the first four months that it was owned by the Canadian public – or a small profit, depending on which economist or accountant you talk to, and which financial report you read.Annual financial statements by the Canada Development Investment Corp. (CDEV), the Crown corporation now responsible for Trans Mountain Corp., report that in the first four months that the pipeline was owned by the Canadian government (September to December 2018), it generated $129 million in revenue and $48 million in earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation.When interest on debt is deducted, the pipeline had a net loss of $26 million in that time period, according to CDEV financials.Robyn Allan, an independent economist who has questioned the economics of an expanded Trans Mountain pipeline, says CDEV’s financial statements show the existing pipeline suffered a $58 million loss in the first four months that the government owned it.That’s based on her calculation that Trans Mountain’s interest payments over four months would amount to $83 million, which, if extrapolated, would total $249 million for a full year. “Trans Mountain is on track to book a loss of $175 million in 2019,” she wrote in an email to Business in Vancouver.Analysts for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) agree with Allan that the pipeline is losing money. “The amount payable on the loan during the period covered by the audit is $82.4 million,” said IEEFA analyst Tom Sanzillo. “I would conclude that the operating income did not cover the interest payable on the loan.”More: Multibillion-dollar questions cloud Trans Mountain’s futurelast_img read more

Europe Explores Efforts to Combat Crime Jointly with Latin America

first_imgBy Dialogo April 19, 2013 Between 2007 and 2013, the European Union spent 2.6 billion dollars in assistance to Latin America, according to the European diplomatic mission in Tegucigalpa. Prior to a meeting in Panama this week with European Union ambassadors that were accredited to Latin America, Schäfer met with Vice President María Antonieta Guillén de Bográn, Security Minister Pompeyo Bonilla, and Minister of Human Rights Ana Pineda, in addition to members of the civil society. “I chose this country to start a journey in this region, for the insecurity issue; to listen to analysts and to investigate the possibility of working together. A single country is not enough to combat this transnational threat,” the German diplomat said. center_img Schäfer regretted that crime is knocking on old continent’s doors because “the drugs are departing from Bolivia, Colombia, passing through Central America and West Africa into Europe,” but it is not only drug trafficking; crime is wider and more diversified in criminal activity: it also brings weapons and prostitution.” The European Union is exploring joint methods to combat organized crime with Latin America, a scourge that is also affecting the “old continent”, Roland Schäfer, European External Action Service director for Latin America, said during his visit to Honduras. last_img read more

An inside view of the CFPB review process on the new payday lending rule

first_imgIt was in late 2014 that the email came in from a member who works for a consumer protection group in DC – “Would North Side like to participate in the CFPB rulemaking process on the new payday lending regulations they plan to introduce?” The answer was a resounding ‘yes!’ North Side Community Federal Credit Union was founded in the 70s to combat redlining in its community, and has remained committed to its mission of serving underserved groups throughout its history. In 1994, we developed a small dollar loan to help combat predatory lending, and went through many iterations of the product before we landed on the current $500-$1000 loan product that we offer today, with very low charge-off rates. Since product inception, we have underwritten over 14,000 small dollar loans, and on an annual basis write about 1,000 non-credit based, small dollar loans. Members repeatedly have expressed their appreciation to our credit union for providing a viable alternative to payday lenders who trap borrowers in egregious cycles of debt. The CFPB agreed that North Side Community FCU was a strong contributor to the rulemaking process.  I was invited to fly to DC to contribute to the CFPB Small Business Review Panel on Payday, Vehicle Title, and Similar Loans.There were several interim phone calls between the invitation and the convening. It was on April 29th, 2015 that the panel was convened at the US Treasury Building. We were each invited to bring one guest, and a member of a credit union trade association attended with me. Approximately thirty small businesses were invited to this process, and the panel consisted largely of payday lenders, a handful of community banks, and two other community development credit unions. We were seated at tables in a U-formation, with representatives from the CFPB, the US Small Business Administration, and the Office of Management and Budget in the center.  During the eight-hour process, participants were given cards to raise when they wished to comment on a particular part of the rule. Perhaps the most eye-opening part of the process personally was listening to comments made by payday lenders; concerns were very similar to the ones raised by the credit union industry. The payday lenders claimed to meet a market need for a particular segment of consumers. While it is true that there is a market demand for very small amounts of capital, particularly by borrowers with poor credit, there are fair and reasonable ways to meet the market demand. Credit unions in particular play a significant role, and can to live up to their mission of people helping people by meeting this need in underserved communities.Our credit union’s small-loan borrowers also have low credit scores and incomes, like payday loan borrowers. But because our loans have affordable payments, reasonable terms, and usually have electronic repayment from a checking account, our delinquency rate has historically been very low over the 20+ years we have been originating these loans. At the same time, individuals have the ability to improve and increase their credit score while repaying the loan (and many do). We also make sure every borrower has the option to access free, individualized credit counseling that may include budget preparation.If we could not issue these loans quickly, using simple underwriting standards, our borrowers would be very likely to instead turn to payday lenders, who get them money fast with few questions asked. If we had to check borrowers’ credit score or spend additional time underwriting these loans, our already-slim margins would disappear entirely, and we would have to raise prices or discontinue the loans.So having weighed on in on the CFPB’s initial framework, what do I think of the new rules published on June 2? On the one hand, the CFPB made some important accommodations for credit unions offering loans under NCUA’s PAL program, like not imposing a new real-time payday loan database on them, and allowing up to three loans per six months instead of two. On the other hand, the CFPB removed the 5%-payment standard from its framework (allowing loans where the monthly installment payment is no more than 5% of monthly income). Without that standard, it will be difficult for credit unions operating outside the PAL program, and frankly for banks, to offer small-dollar loans. That’s bad news for consumers, because the PAL program is probably not in a position to replace the 100 million payday loans issued annually.More credit unions are needed to enter the small dollar loan market to fill the current need and collectively save borrowers billions of dollars annually. Borrowers who are treated well are often loyal customers, and if the industry can re-appropriate those interest savings from high-cost payday lenders and back into the local economy, we all win.  If regulators make it too difficult for credit unions to offer these loans, borrowers would only have high-cost payday and auto title loans as an option, with their accompanying interest rates of more than 200 percent. The comment period for the rule ends September 14th. Please consider adding your voice. 59SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr,Sarah Marshall Sarah Marshall is a consultant in the credit union industry, and can be reached for partnership and speaking opportunities through Your Credit Union Partner. Her background in community development includes … Web: https://yourcupartner.org Detailslast_img read more

Humpback Whale Upends California Kayakers

first_imgOn Monday morning, Julie McSorley invited Liz Cottriel, her friend of 27 years, to go kayaking off Avila Beach, Calif., in San Luis Obispo County, where they both live. The idea was simply to spend a pleasant day whale watching off California’s Central Coast.They set off in a yellow kayak, soaking in the views of humpback whales feeding and breaching in the distance, a sight that Ms. McSorley had enjoyed the day before with her husband.- Advertisement – – Advertisement – The friends were about a half-mile from shore when they noticed schools of silver fish around their kayak, making a sound that Ms. Cottriel, 63, an office manager for an orthodontist, likened to “crackling glass.”“We knew something was about to happen, but we didn’t know where the whale was exactly,” said Ms. McSorley, 55, a physical therapist. “She popped up and I popped up right after her,” Ms. Cottriel said.An off-duty firefighter who was paddle-boarding nearby helped them right the kayak. “He checked to see if we had our arms and legs and everything,” Ms. McSorley said.Another kayaker found their paddles and returned them to the women, who were not injured except for some bruises to Ms. Cottriel’s arms and hip. “I am fine,” she said.But they had a scare that they will remember for the rest of their lives.“It has been a whirlwind of adrenaline,” Ms. McSorley said.“The more I reflect on it, the more I think, ‘This could have been it,’” Ms. Cottriel said.Humpback whales are typically found along the West Coast and off the coasts of Alaska, New England, the Mid-Atlantic and the Southeast, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.The mammals, which can weigh up to 40 tons, feed on krill and small fish by filtering large volumes of ocean water through their baleen plates, according to NOAA. Humpbacks are a favorite of whale watchers, who thrill at the sight of them jumping out of the water and slapping the surface with their pectoral fins or tails.Back on shore on Monday, Ms. Cottriel found that she had a small souvenir of the experience.As she shook her wet shirt, “out came five or six silver fish,” she said with a laugh. “I am dumping fish out of my shirt. We found humor in it.” A humpback whale then suddenly surfaced underneath their kayak, lifting them about six feet above the water, they said.- Advertisement – “I kind of went blank,” Ms. McSorley said. “It was a matter of a second or two.”“All I saw was white and I pushed my hand out and I thought, ‘I am getting crushed,’ because I thought it was either going to land on me or I was going to drown,” Ms. Cottriel said. “I am literally looking inside the whale’s mouth.”A nearby kayaker captured video of the wild encounter on a cellphone. In it, witnesses scream as the whale breaches, capsizing the kayak and tossing the women into the water.- Advertisement –last_img read more

Gold Coast property: soak up the view from Burleigh Heads penthouse

first_imgVideo Player is loading.Play VideoPlayNext playlist itemMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration 3:08Loaded: 0%Stream Type LIVESeek to live, currently playing liveLIVERemaining Time -3:08 Playback Rate1xChaptersChaptersDescriptionsdescriptions off, selectedCaptionscaptions settings, opens captions settings dialogcaptions off, selectedQuality Levels720p720pHD540p540p360p360p270p270pAutoA, selectedAudio Tracken (Main), selectedFullscreenThis is a modal window.Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaqueFont Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall CapsReset restore all settings to the default valuesDoneClose Modal DialogEnd of dialog window.This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.Close Modal DialogThis is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.PlayMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration 0:00Loaded: 0%Stream Type LIVESeek to live, currently playing liveLIVERemaining Time -0:00 Playback Rate1xFullscreenHow will COVID-19 compare to other market downturns03:08IT’S bigger than your average house, features multimillion-dollar views and is in one of the hottest suburbs on the Gold Coast.Welcome to the Ivory penthouse – an impressive 610sq m of ocean frontage on Ivory’s ninth and tenth floors. Dining and lounge. One of the bedrooms. Entertain in style. The rooftop pool. Luxury appointments, an extensive rooftop terrace and picturesque 360 degree vista defines the two-level residence.Floor-to-ceiling windows allow the breathtaking views of the ocean, skyline and Hinterland to be appreciated from almost every room of the residence.“You honestly can’t beat walking out on the balcony, looking right and seeing straight up to Burleigh Headland,” Ms Walsh said.A wraparound balcony forms the focal point of the open-plan living and dining space serviced by a kitchen with Italian granite surfaces, Miele appliances and an alfresco servery. MORE NEWS: Could this be the best position in Varsity Lakes? 901/200 The Esplanade, Burleigh Heads. Check out that view! Luxury awaits. Floor to ceiling windows allow the view to be appreciated from almost anywhere in the apartment. Gold Coast real estate leaders call for stamp duty reform The rooftop entertaining area. Another area to unwind in.Ivory is a residential-only tower and includes 13 apartments. “You can walk to everything Burleigh has on offer but you’re out on the fringe so you’re not in the hustle and bustle,” Ms Walsh said. “It is a very well maintained and well managed building. “There have been a lot of high network individuals who bought off the plan who still remain in the building and who will never move out. “If you love Burleigh, you love Ivory.” Agent: Katrina Walsh, Harcourts Coastal Features: Two -level penthouse, beachfront, rooftop deck with private pool and spa, media room, wine cellar, four side-by-side car parks Area: 610sq m Online auction: April 22, 11am Inspections: By appointment The location itself might go some way to explaining why marketing agent Katrina Walsh of Harcourts Coastal has had interest from potential buyers across the world.“Developers just can’t build a property of this size with whole floor apartments in Burleigh anymore,” she said.“Try finding a 610sq m floor plan with four car parks in Burleigh Heads on the beachfront – you can’t. “I’ve had interstate and international interested parties who are impressed with the size, views and location.” Standout features include a media room, office, wine cellar, multiple sitting rooms, two powder rooms and three bedrooms with ensuites. The main bedroom includes a dressing room, spa bath and balcony access.Internal stairs take you to the 261sq m rooftop – perfect for entertaining or unwinding with a pool, spa, outdoor shower, covered dining terrace with bar, built-in television and integrated barbecue.“It’s a usable space with protection from the elements,” Ms Walsh said.More from news02:37International architect Desmond Brooks selling luxury beach villa8 hours ago02:37Gold Coast property: Sovereign Islands mega mansion hits market with $16m price tag1 day agolast_img read more

Denbighshire County Council: East Rhyl Plans on the Table

first_imgImage source: Denbighshire County CouncilDenbighshire County Council, supported by the Welsh Government’s Coastal Risk Management Program, has drawn up plans to install rock armoring and increase the height of the sea wall along the promenade between Splash Point and the slipway adjacent to Rhyl Golf Club.Construction is expected to take 18 months and start during 2019, subject to planning permission, other necessary consents being granted and funding agreement.“Residents will have the chance to view the plans and comment on them at a drop-in session on October 11 between 10am to 8pm at the Elwy Room, Rhyl Community Fire Station,” said the council.A further event is planned for November 8 at the same venue.Cllr Brian Jones, Denbighshire County Council’s lead member for Highways, Planning and Sustainable Travel, said: “Due to the low-lying nature of East Rhyl, wave overtopping remains the most serious coastal flood risk.”“Short-term resilience measures were undertaken by Denbighshire County Council following the 2013 storms and this project will provide substantial and durable protection in the long term.”Denbighshire County Council commissioned civil engineers Balfour Beatty and flood risk and environmental specialists JBA Consulting to undertake a detailed analysis of the situation to come up with the plans.last_img read more