Tuesday is the second community meeting about the potential to turn the 24th St parking lot between Sanchez and Vicksburg into a plaza or other non-car centric space. To recap, the plan is a public/private partnership to buy the lot from Noe Valley Ministry. To that end, Todd David sent out the following: "I heard from SF Rec and Parks late last week. The Farmers' Market Parking Lot on 24th Street was appraised at a range of $3 million to $4 million." Expect an update of what's been happening since the July 15th meeting as well as information for next steps. And this from the FoNV September Newsletter: "CMG landscape architects will present an overview of comparable spaces and help folks think more deeply about what they’d like to see the Noe Valley Ministry parking lot become."Before the Town Square meeting, Friends of Noe Valley will elect new officers and a new board. Not a member? You can join/pay same-day.
Candidates for Officer positions
President: Todd David
Vice President: Gerda Hurter
Treasurer: Beth Daecher
Secretary: Elizabeth Ungar
Candidates for the Board of Directors
Tom Abbott, Phyllis Ball, John Cuneo, Pierre Hurter, Andrew Keeler (incumbent), Doug Lockyer, Linda Lockyer, Scott Maddux (incumbent), Debbie Meyers, Joel Panzer, Jacqui Sawyer. (You might recognize a couple of those names from one of the last times the community got together to "discuss" public space.) Since the FoNV can have up to 15 Board members consider the vote a formality. Or maybe four more people should consider running...?
What: FoNV Annual Meeting and Town Square Forum
When: Tuesday, September 28th; 7:00pm for elections, town square at 7:30pm.
Where: James Lick Middle School, 1220 Noe St at Clipper
[NVSF: Noe Valley Town Square Community Meeting Notes]
[Noe Valley Town Square]
[Friends Noe Valley]
"appraised at a range of $3 million to $4 million"
ReplyDeleteA range with a 33% bottom to top valuation?
Don't be so quick to judge.
ReplyDeleteIt's going to be very challenging to find comps to compare to this commercial lot. The value may be very hard to pin down.
Nonetheless, we at least have some numbers to begin to work with.
For most real estate transactions I am familiar with, the market decides the price - a buyer makes an offer, a seller accepts said offer, perhaps after levels of negotiation. An appraisal is frequently done solely for approval of financing or if they buyer is concerned that they have made a screwy offer.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, what I heard is this - the City is required to pay the appraised price. Not more, not less. So in the end, there will be an appraised price.
It's entirely possible - and the wide spread might indicate - that it's "not that simple". Looking forward to tomorrow night.
Murphstahoe--As you suggest, it is "not that simple."
ReplyDeleteWe will update everyone tonight!
Todd David
It's "simple" if you focus on the long term goals and not get immersed in the details.
ReplyDeleteObviously, some people already see the price as an obstacle to the success of this plaza. This can be overcome.
The plaza is possible. Stop being so negative.
Negative?
ReplyDeleteIf we can get that appraisal down to $3 Million - or less - it makes it easier to sell this project on the City if we are competing with other projects for money.
Questioning the appraisal is not seeing the price as an obstacle - it is trying to REMOVE the obstacle.
On a lighter note - who is running for Friends of Noe Valley Webmaster? "Noe Valley's own Harvest Festival is coming October 21, 2006." is older than "Dogs, Kids, too many Nail Salons"
Like I said, we need to focus on the long term vision for this plaza..and not the negatives...for I'm sure many people will find lots wrong with this idea.
ReplyDeleteLet's try not to focus on those, ok?
In the interests of saving money and helping people get a sliver of what they wanted all along - some open space around which to feel like a community - why not just buy the Real Foods building and tear it down?
ReplyDeleteThat junky old space must be worth much less than "$3 million to $4 million" of our dollars, and would still serve the purpose of providing a town square without disrupting the Church's gilded parking lot. (What did they buy it for, anyway?!)
On a side note, it is disappointing to see such misogynistic and paleolithic characters running as candidates for the self entitled and aggrandized "Friends" of Noe Valley. May all the anti-change brigade lose, and lose big.
Seems kind of narrow minded to me to be calling those NV residents who were against the plaza on Noe St. the "anti-change brigade".
ReplyDeleteChange is welcome and it's part of the ever changing face of San Francisco.
But change should be well thought out, and developed for long term goals that benefit everyone, not just a few.
I won't comment on narrow minded or not, but suffice to say of the 11 board member names and 4 executive candidates listed, exactly one person was among the 500 people who signed the petition in support of the Noe Street location.
ReplyDeleteApparently this is good because those 500 people don't "think". Except for when they are at work at Google. They also "care" when they are at Google, but they don't care about Noe Valley.
Just sayin...
>>Seems kind of narrow minded to me to be calling those NV residents who were against the plaza on Noe St. the "anti-change brigade".
ReplyDeleteSeems even more narrow minded to me to milk the Noe St. plaza debacle for sympathy points, especially given the lose-lose outcome now apparent.
>>Change is welcome and it's part of the ever changing face of San Francisco.
Then why fight any change of the status quo with the very fiber of your existence? Bulging neck arteries are rarely symptomatic of the kind of open mindedness San Francisco has come to personify.
>>But change should be well thought out, and developed for long term goals that benefit everyone, not just a few.
Great observation! Too bad it's a total misrepresentation of what happened in the Noe St. plaza debacle, where a louder minority drowned out a quieter majority despite their having a better thought out and far more cost effective (1 : 1,000) plan than this divine lot purchase represents.
1 : 100, pardon the previous math
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was a "lose-lose" outcome at all, as you say. No one "lost" anything. But we did prevail in keeping a public street open to traffic, as it is designed.
ReplyDeleteWhat is happening now, and yes, it will take time and money, is the long term solution for a permanent, public open space for all. This future plaza has far more potential to serve the community with such amenities as the Farmers Market, "true" green park space for adults and children, possible community garden, etc. This far exceeds what the poorly developed "plaza on asphalt" ever could offer.
Yes, both sides of the original debate were loud and at times belligerent and bully-like. That is not commendable. But, let's be clear: the final decision was not made by a public "vote"; it was made by city leaders and planners who had the final say. They were able to look to the future for a better long term solution.
"Yes, both sides of the original debate were loud and at times belligerent and bully-like."
ReplyDeleteVideo or it didn't happen.
"But, let's be clear: the final decision was not made by a public "vote"; it was made by city leaders and planners who had the final say. They were able to look to the future for a better long term solution."
I guess the fatal flaw for the NVA in planning this plaza was timing. They should have waited until January
It’s important to listen to and engage with the community to ensure that we have good information about the pro’s and con’s of a particular project. The best policy decision then needs to be made, even if it’s not the most popular decision. I experienced this recently with the proposed Noe Plaza, at 24th and Noe, which would have been part of the City’s Pavement to Parks program. The plaza was extremely controversial and resulted in several contentious meetings in Noe Valley.
I publicly supported the plaza and almost certainly lost votes by doing so. But I believed the idea was a good one – at least for a trial period to see if it worked – and I thought it was important to let the voters know what my thinking was.
- Scott Wiener
Video what?
ReplyDeleteNo one said anything about "live" comments or meetings.
Bullying and being belligerent can take many forms, including written comments on blogs.
I consider someone saying "video or it didn't happen" to be a form of bullying. No one needs to prove a damn thing to YOU.
Unless "someone" expects me to donate money...
ReplyDelete