Growth
Change the Law Just For ME
February 27, 2006 
Residents of the two story “Square at Strawberry Lane” condo complex off Walnut and Park Blvd. have lived within the law for many years and are unhappy about a planned development which would be outside the law.
Quarsar Development wants to build a 119-foot-high complex which is illegal. The land is zoned to allow buildings of only 45 feet in height. To get around that law, the developer is asking the planning and zoning commission for an exception to the law–just for their property–which would make the plan legal.
We find it ironic that cities and counties spend countless hours and dollars formulating master plans and passing ordinances which set forth the rules–only to make “variances” on a routine basis. It makes a mockery of the process.
Imagine if the speed limit was 35 mph, but if you had enough money and influence you could go to the council and get a “variance” which would allow you to drive 50 mph. Traffic enforcement would be impossible with each motorist bound by different limits.
That is what happens with land use laws when one party must obey the law, but the neighbor is allowed to build a tower. Do we sense another Depot Bench fight with a developer which will end in a “compromise” of an 80 foot tower which is still outside the law?
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Feb 27, 2006, 10:55 am
Expect this to be passed regardless of public outcry or testimony – like the bench fight. It fits the inside agenda of the Council and the Planning Department. The agenda is infill, row houses, big condos and high rises any cost – regardless of neighborhood impacts, traffic impacts or public input.
Your comment on being able to influence the Council might most clearly be seen by looking at the “connections” (both personal and professional) of those on the Council to the those in the developer community and their common agenda. The Planning Dept is not without agenda either.
Feb 27, 2006, 1:44 pm
If only we would have elected Brandi this would not happen!
Feb 27, 2006, 3:44 pm
I drive by this postage stamp sized vacant lot every day. It is way too small for the size of development proposed and shown on the front page of Sunday’s Statesman. It appears they haven’t allowed any space for parking.
Just another example of how out of touch our “leadership” is at the federal, state and local levels, in this instance at the local level.
Our Boise “leaders” offer us a choice between infill development and sprawl and expect us to accept one of those options, when neither is acceptable. What are they thinking?
ED NOTE–We did notice the proposal claimed to have underground parking
Feb 28, 2006, 12:07 am
Porcupine, you are a real ding bat and probably a close relative….keep it up.
Feb 28, 2006, 10:16 am
Show Brandi an architect’s rendering of a building with a big steeple and cross on top, and it probably wouldn’t even need plumbing.
Feb 28, 2006, 4:00 pm
TJ–
A close relative? One that is sick and has money I hope.
Mar 1, 2006, 10:07 am
As long as the Strawberry Lane complex is allowed to “keep up with the Joneses”, it’s fair. In fact, if one devil-oper gets a variance to build to say, 100ft, the neighbors should be allowed to go another story or two higher. That would encourage competition, which as we all know, benefits the consewmer.
Mar 9, 2006, 10:07 am
SURPRISE! SURPRISE! The Statesman editorial of March 9 calls for the neighbors and Quasar to work it out and they note Quasar has already “compromised” at 119 feet–they had asked for 28 more feet. Whatever happened to just following the existing plan (law)?
“I don’t deserve a speeding ticket. I wanted to go 100 mph, but I COMPROMISED and only went 90.”