If you think this is bad you should see what the city coucil approved last night… a 6 story apartment complex over the parking garage (61 units) where Hal Davis is downtown.

One elevator for 61 units. You have to wonder how those low income folks are going to move in…And I guess that they will all ride bikes, because the parking garage is full already,

Oh if only Brandi was running this year. She would have my vote!

I still cna’t shake eh feeling that if this was such a slam-dunk venture, then public wouldn’t be necessary at all. GBAD could submit their proposal to lenders, who would advance them the money if it was a safe investment. Or, a private developer would approach the city with a proposal to buy the land from GBAD or who ever owns it. The fact that neither of these free-market solutions have happened despite years of talk and maneuvering makes me think that something about this idea isn’t as slam dunk as some people believe.

Mr Logic–I work downtown (as you may too…I don’t know) and while some of the roads are not in good shape, I would hardly characterize downtown as congested or hard to navigate. Once people are parked downtown they are usually on foot. Eagle and Fairview on the other hand (among other areas) is congested.

Great point on the taxes. Then again, I guess we don’t have much direct say in how those tax $’s get spent either

I cannot believe how you that support this website groan and complain about everything that is proposed for Boise. If you do not want Boise to grow then move to Nyssa.

There is nothing wrong about a new convention center no matter how it is built. The argument your lame souls always use that voter turned it down is pathetic. 2/3 majority is wrong, and most cities and states don’t even require 2/3 majority. Over Half of Boise’s citizens wanted the convention center–the rest were mislead by your scare tactics.

EDITOR NOTE–You are in error. Half of the voters turned it down, even though G-BAD openly and agressively missused publy funds to advertise. THE SUPREME COURT flat out said they BROKE THE LAW. The second go around was a massive “privte” effort on the part of G-BAD to influence voters. These stupid voters are the same ones who elected the board.

Boisean said, ” If you do not want Boise to grow then move to Nyssa.”

Wow, one person moving to Nyssa would stop Boise from growing? Amazing. Or did he mean lots of Boiseans should move to Nyssa and destroy that town, too; then maybe Boise won’t look so bad by comparison?

Also, “There is nothing wrong about a new convention center no matter how it is built. ” — does that mean that even if illegal menthods are used, Boise residents’ desires are ignored, or the whole thing is paid for with taxpayers’s money, it’s still OK because another convention center is needed so badly that the end justfies the means? Wow!

I have to wonder where “Boisean” actually lives, that he doesn’t care at all about Boise, its streets, its traffic, its residents, laws, taxpayers’ dollars, etc.

Ah, well, I guess he can call himself whatever he wants to, and I hope he continues to enjoy his job with whatever developer he works for. I’m just glad not all real Boiseans are so uncaring about their neighbors, their city and themselves.

God forbid if you are for growth..I agree with The Boisean. Is there ANYTHING the city, county or state can do that is right?

I’m with Jon. Indebteddness without a public vote is wrong — unless they use one of the legal work arounds that are in Idaho Code. Underground parking? Good idea. Maybe even some tunnels under the roads for the pedestrians. Burying a section of road as Shealey suggests ought to be looked at too. It works in Seattle. The congestion and density in the area can be managed; Guardian’s complaints about the Grove, while grumpy, should be used as a “lessen learned” and better design can mitigate for those impacts.

I still say the best argument against this convention center proposal is that the convention market is a mature industry and the projections used by the boosters to promote the idea are always inflated. If Oppenheimer can make it work with a partnership with GBAD and CCDC then bring it on.

EDITOR NOTE–GRUMPY! Hrrrrmph.

When questions regarding the appropriateness of Boise as a convention center site is brought up, I’m reminded of what a rather forward-thinking mayor of a middling-sized town in France (Nantes) thought about his own town.

He realized what his town had to offer: cultural events, historical sites, great scenery, was rather sparse (compared to other European towns). But he saw something special that others didn’t – his town’s location. His town was one of the most centrally located cities in Europe – especially so after the, then proposed, TGV train would be opened for business.

Nantes was transformed into Les Citi Internationale Des Congres, and the rest is history – sort of speak. The majority of the city’s economy now rests on convention bookings.

Why should this matter? Well, Boise is one of the the most centrally located towns in the Intermountain and Pacific Northwest. It is ideally suited for corporate conventions, since most everyone in this part of the country would need to travel equal distances to convene. Boise is also a convenient base from which to take in a number of outstanding outdoor recreational activities – exactly what a weary business conventionier wants to induldge in after a week of meetings (or to take in while playing hooky, not that anyone does that at conventions).

I recall George Bernard Shaw’s statement regarding how progress occurs, “Reasonable men adapt themselves to their environment; unreasonable men try to adapt their environment to themselves. Thus all progress is the result of the efforts of unreasonable men.” I think Nantes is thankful for at least one unreasonable man, and if an expanded convention center capacity is handled correctly Boise will be thankful for its own group of unreasonable men.

As for those who are opposed to a larger convention hosting capacity in Boise (regardless of how it is funded), I think they would still hope they could be proven wrong.

I don’t work for a developer, and I certainly don’t work for Team Dave – though I did vote for him, I’ve been a little disappointed. Me and mine have lived in the same Northend home for the past 14 years – and have been Boise residents for 17 years.

I’m trained in architecture (but I don’t regularly practice the trade), and to relax I sculpt. I’m very keen on transit and sound urban planning. I’ve also participated in over twenty urban design charrettes (most, but not all, for downtown Boise – focusing on identifying and fixing problems). Nine of these I wrote, directed, and facilitated for the University of Idaho’s Architecture Department as part of its urban planning practicum. I’ve also been a university guest lecturer on architecture. I help create, and for a number of years I ran, an all volunteer, award winning, organization that provided pro bono architectural and design services for non-profit & community-based organizations.

My favorite color is red, I like walks on the beach at sunset, and one of my best friends is my dog. My (currently) favorite movie is An American in Paris, and the three books on my nightstand are a book of Pablo Neruda’s poetry, Manuel De Landa’s A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History, and McDonough & Braungart’s Cradle to Cradle.

I’m a little shy, but I imagine a number of people who read the G know who I am – and I like the anonymity of this electronic confessional 😉

Logic,

http://www.charretteinstitute.org/charrette.html

Not a consultant either, gave that up in the mid-90’s. I feel like Kirk talking to Kahn in Star Trek II, “… but like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target.” Letting my sci-fi geekiness show through 😉

Fourty-three words (counting this)?

EDITOR NOTE–CG, nice work! If you can keep all your posts this clear we will end up with the most intellectual site in Idaho! (For the non library types: (common Idaho definition) “CHARRETTE: is a collaborative planning process that harnesses the talents and energies of all interested parties to create and support a feasible plan that represents transformative community change.”

Gosh when does this type of thinking stop !
Take that land and put part of it into a park and use the rest for a place to put all the non-bus stop bench`s that they are crying about.

At least then the homeless folks will a place to sit and watch the traffic go by.

We do not need another convention center, even our city officials go elsewhere for the BIG meetings. (Like Sun Valley to meet with the Chamber of Commerce to plan how to get people to come to Boise)

Here we go again. A Guardian blogger wants us to be like France! I would venture to say that more people (Idahoans) would go to a Wal-Mart than a Convention centre. We could ask that Wal-Mart design the building to look like Chinatown and it would look historic, replacing the Chinatown that used to be there. What a shopping experience for the people. Imagine buying Chinese stuff in a Chinatown in Boise! Build Wal-Mart for the glorious working people! Let them vote on that idea.