You can’t get there from here! I looked at Google Earth. S. Cole Road ends about 2 miles north of Kuna Mora Road. I guess they could drive their Hummers across the desert to get home from work at the convenience store.

Swell, really #@&K^%G swell. Another 3000 houses on top of the already huge glut will reduce the value of my existing house, and therefore my net worth, by another couple of notches.

And worse, because these turkeys don’t pay for themselves, my taxes will go up even further.

It’s time to throw out all three commissioners. We can replace Yzaguirre and Woods with Ullman and Langhorst in November. We can start a recall drive against Tilman in the morning.

Nice headline. Sounds much better than Growth for Growth’s sake.

My (admittedly limited) understanding of this is that there was not a legal basis for denying the development. So, as with P&Z and the City, members have personally opposed projects but found no statutory basis for denial of permits.

In order to control growth, county ordinances must be changed overall, rather than dealing with each project on an individual basis. It seems unlikely that the State legislature will move towards allowing local communities to control growth, so a local approach is required. A change in the outlook of a majority of the County Commissioners would allow ordinances to be changed and subsequent developments legally and equitably managed.

Sounds reasonable to me. We have to have a legal mechanism and a plan to control growth. The current situation is a result of 20 years or so of development proponents and beneficiaries controlling the rules and the process. There has to be a change in the makeup of the commission to make the changes required to deny approval for inappropriate developments.
Comments?

EDITOR NOTE–We are not aware of any law mandating that zoning be upgraded and changed on a parcel of property. i.e. open or ag land doesn’t HAVE to be upgraded to residential. Seems that one house per 40 acres is the rule.

With approximately 7,000 homes on the market in Ada County, one wonders what the commissioners are thinking. We all know where the buck stops when development schemes go south. The fact that we the taxpayers will be paying for the Freddie and Fannie bailout should be reason enough to put this deal under the microscope.

Using Idagreen’s comment as a segue, the commissioners typically rely on one of two justifications when they approve subdivisions.

One, they approve a subdivision request on the excuse that, “There is no legal basis for denying the application.”

Second, when the application violates one or more ordinances, and the legal basis of the preceding paragraph seemingly requires the commissioners to withhold approval, they approve it anyway on the grounds that, “The comp plan and planned community codes are “advisory” in nature and therefor are not binding!

Sort of like: Heads they approve the subdivision, Tails, they don’t deny the subdivision.

Bear in mind that the same two excuses could alternately be used to deny everything. They could even be used, heaven forbid, in a responsible manner to approve good applications and deny poor ones. But, they don’t.

To approve the guaranteed sprawl associated with a development like Vista, barely three months after Ada County was found to be out of compliance with the Clean Air Act, is reckless and inexcusable.

November isn’t coming fast enough. I can’t wait to throw out the incumbents.

I agree that ag land or other does not HAVE to be re-zoned as residential. I just don’t know the legal aspects. Have there been cases where a developer or land owner has sued and won to develop over planning guidelines, advisory or otherwise, or cases where the municipalities prevailed? There are communities that have been aggressive in limiting boom and bust development, but they have been successful only by creating and supporting the political will to do so. If we value the property owners rights to a profit over sensible community planning, then we get what we ask for.

Folks in Idaho foam at the mouth over “private property rights”, so it’s hard to have it both ways. If state law does not protect communities, then local ordinances must be established that have teeth and are enforceable. Can’t do that without a majority on the Commission.

There is no way that Sharon Ullman will provide leadership in creating a new model for controlling development. As a Liberepublican, Sharon is more concerned about pinching pennies (not necessarily a bad thing) and less about establishing limitations on growth and development. Sharon is definitely not a shy woman, but she does not have the vision and temperament that we need now. Paul Woods is far more deserving of another term as Commissioner than is Sharon.

I can’t believe Yzaguire was re-elected last time! Let’s keep Paul and trade “tax & borrow” Rick for David Langhorst.

Sorry, but anti-incumbency is a one trick political pony. One size does not always fit all, so don’t throw the baby out with the bath water just because of a fit of righteous indignation (no matter how justified it may seem).

I like Gordon’s push for honesty in advertising, but think it faces tough going, particularly in the Kuna area. Just down the road from the piece of tripe in question is a subdivision called Denali Heights. Denali, you may recall is the native name for Mt. McKinley, the highest peak in north america.

But, come to think of it, the name Denali Heights may not be so misleading. The pile of lies that is the Vista application surely rivals the largest of mountains.

Idagreen,

I disagree in your assessment of Sharon Ullman. Fiscal responsibility has everything to do with controlling growth as the chief criticism of these planned communities is their failure to pay for themselves and the subsequent burden they will place on the taxpaying public — this is the whole notion behind adequate public facilities and, ironically, Ordinance 621 which requires planned communities to pay for themselves. Despite this ordinance, the economic shortfalls in these PC applications are glossed over by the sitting AC Commissioners, including Paul Woods. The glossing over is done by encumbering a developer’s new entitlement with ‘Conditions of Approval.’ These ‘Conditions’ then beg the issue of enforcement, which is often woefully lacking due to time and effort. Don’t you think it makes far better sense to have a clean application in the first place?! If only the Commissioners would make this the standard, there’s no doubt in my mind that we would see worthy applications, a compliant development community and an unburdened taxpaying community.

I’m sorry, but despite the talk, Paul Woods has fallen short. How has he distinguished himself in the past 2 years? He’s voted right along with Fred and Rick… I realize that it takes a majority on the Commission to affect change, but he doesn’t need another Commissioner holding has hand to do the right thing. I’m not so sure that the voting public should reward that lack of leadership and courage.

Now that the Republicans have Communized their holy grail, the “free market economy” by bailing out the huge investment banks and soon the insurance industry with tax dollars, throw the gates open. It might even be a twin development to the eyesore growing west of Mountain Home.
To heck with roads,and sidewalks, those folks will all have personal ATV’s.
Editor, you forgot to mention the impact a development out there will have on all the “Idaho sportsman” who shoot at old refrigerators, TV’s and other garbage they drag out there. Where are we going to shoot now?

Clippityclop, I agree that fiscal accountability is an important component of government oversight, in any expenditure of tax money and application of public policy. I just don’t think that Sharon has a community oriented philosophy, or the ability to work with others and actually make progress, not just generate conflict (though I feel that she has an exaggerated bum rap in that regard). It’s just that we need more than a fiscal watchdog, we need leadership and a vision for what we want our communities to look like 20 and 50 years from now.

As I said, I don’t know the details of this project, but will certainly find out more. And for Paul, I think he’s done quite a bit in two short years, especially with the Open Space Task Force and working towards improved detox and mental health services in the county. I may not agree with all of his votes, but I know from working with him that Paul is the kind of person I want looking out for me on the County Commission, and he certainly needs no hand holding,(except maybe from his wife and kids). Now, I’d take Sharon over Tillman, but not Paul.

Indeed, conditional use exceptions to comp plans are a joke, with little or no follow up enforcement. And, unfortunately, that seems to be a major part of approvals from both the County and the City.

Boise Picayune, I don’t think everyone is apathetic, but rather just overwhelmed. Civic life has taken a back seat to so many other pursuits, many of us are simply out of practice. It’s hard to keep all the fires on the radar at times, and easy to become discouraged and despondent. Lots of folks are active and engaged though, check out one of these county campaigns and you’ll meet some active, positive citizens.

Clancy, you make some good points. I guess the drawback is that working for “compromises and concessions” can be viewed as weakness in leadership, as it’s usually not dramatic or sexy.

Thank you all for your civil and interesting comments. Cheers!

Sal, et al,

With the curve of the Earth, I’m not certain South America IS further.

Especially since Barbados sits in the Atlantic off of Venezuela.

But, hey – Six of One, Half Dozen of The Other.

What’s that? HP laying off more people? Micron telling tall tales? Rampant sprawl and rising crime?

If you listen closely, you can hear the sucking sound…

Besides, Brooklyn has no hurricanes and there is any, and I mean any, type food you desire 24/7.