Too bad that one was spared…..
hopelessly ugly, a blot on the hills.
When will the P&Z ever learn?????

For years as I have watched people building homes on islands on the Boise River (which have flooded with great regularity), in the foothills, in the dry areas around this desert town we call Boise I have watched the news of California homes sliding off of hills, being consumed by fire and other natural occurrences and wonder why “planning and zoning” of any area would ok the building of homes in such areas. I understand the greed of the developers and the idiocy of the home buyers… but really folks – if you choose to live in these areas then admit that you are willing to pay the price of loosing everything you have and let the people who are paid to take care of nature do that. Don’t ask them to put your stuff above what they are suppose to do.

” The Ada County Commissioners who approved all of this development ought to be made to take a field trip to the Eagle BBQ so they have a hint of the inevitable.”

They know very well what the risks are, but they don’t give d–n. Why? Because they have connections to the developers, one way or the other.

I agree with the first two comments. That thing is hideous. Hell, Idaho has towns that aren’t that big.

I live in a fairly sparsely populated area. When a wildfire came close to our house, I soaked the side toward the blaze as good as I could while my wife and a couple of people who stopped by to help loaded a few possessions into a vehicle and moved it and a few other things away from the house.
While we sure hoped some firefighters or a retardant-dropper plane would show up and be able to save the house, we were prepared to drive away quickly if it caught fire.
Would sure hate to lose our home and all those years of possessions, but we were aware when we bought the place that it could be endangered someday, and if the firefighters didn’t save it, I wouldn’t fault them.
Eventually, though, some did show up, and told me they were going to try to stop the blaze before it got to the house, but that if it got so close the house was going to go, “We’re out of here.” They were not going to stay and endanger themselves by fighting the house fire.
Made sense to me.
But eventually by fighting the fire itself (which they need to do anyway to keep it from spreading on across the county and destroying numerous homes, businesses, etc.), they did keep it from getting to my house, for which I an very grateful.

the home in the photo is obscene. Lynn Rogers, planning director, warned about residential expansion in Ada County in the 60s. His prophecy is coming true. Very sad situation. We have so much rain here in Minnesota fires aren’t a threat.

Ok guardian and guardian readers. Check this out. Using the Ada County Assessor’s website I took a look at 2 homes in the Skyline Subdivision area of the Eagle foothills.

One on N Elaina Pl is a modest house(relatively speaking). Lot size = 10.11 acres. Total assessment = $504,000. Estimated 2010 taxes = $4613. That gives a annual property tax revenue of approximately 1 cent per square foot of land per year.

Another on N Skyline is more of a luxury home. Land area = 10.015 acres. Total assessment = $1,206,600. Estimated 2010 taxes = $13,799. Approximate annual property tax revenue per square foot of land = 3 cents!

Now, my average home near downtown pays 17 cents per square foot of land.

What the heck? How can I pay 17 times more per square foot than an average property in the Eagle foothills and more than 5 times per square foot than a luxury property?

If this isn’t an argument for a temporary secession that an Urban Renewal District affords, then I don’t know what is.

EDITOR NOTE–Cynic, we have been over this in the past. Those Eagle properties you cite are yielding $13,000 in taxes. Your Boise lot is roughly 1/4 acre and yields something like $1200 in taxes if it is worth $100,000.

Now here comes the kicker: In your neighborhood there are 40 lots on the 10 acres!
Tax yield is $48,000, but DEMAND for services is 40 times that of the McMansion…sewer, police, fire, parks, schools, etc.

With an average of just 3 people per residence your 40 city lots create a population of 120 folks who send kids to school, poop in the sewer, drive cars, crowd the parks, etc. Your urban renewal-Eagle comparison creates 40 times the demand for services with only 3.6 times the revenue. And then you want to take those lots–presumably more valuable after rehab etc.–off the tax tolls!

This is WHY people build foothills McMansions and places like Eagle encourage it.

As I look at the spared hilltop palace, the recurring thought: “What happens in Vegas-on-the-hill, stays in Vegas-on-the-hill…”

I was blessed to grow up in one of the first foothills developments – Aldape Heights, just up Reserve Street from St. Luke’s. I guess maybe we just got lucky – our house was never threatened by a wildfire. I can certainly understand the appeal of living in those wide-open spaces; the feeling was that my yard went all the way to the Boise Ridge! (For me, it was Kid Heaven.)

But on the other hand, what is the city/county responsibility, in allowing continued growth? Should it be severely restricted, or should it be a matter of “buyer beware”? You buys youze house, you pay for youze fire insurance, and you takes youze chances? I don’t know the answer.

Re:Guardian’s response to cynic,

Yes higher demand but lower operating/maintenance cost/parcel. What happens when sewer lines need major upgrading at the McMansion on 10 acres? It will be subsidized by the higher density areas. No right or wrong, it just shows Peter gets robbed to pay Paul and Paul gets robbed to pay Peter.

EDITOR NOTE–Clancy, you well understand. On KBOI radio this morning a caller advocated building foothills homes to help the economy while another said if there were more houses there would be less chance for fire!

I fail to see why wildfires in the foothills should prevent the building of homes there as suggested by the title. Like we do for flood plains, let insurance companies know about wild fire zones, so they can charge more for insurance, and put the home owners on notice that fire protection will seek to save lives from structures, but fighting the fire will be more of a BLM-like response not city fire dept issue and their home may be lost.

JJ: You said well in a few words what I was getting at with a whole lot of words.
When I bought this place, I knew what the possibilities were: wildfire, mudslides, animals tearing things up, etc. I accepted those risks to be able to live on a site i love (near a hill, not on it, though).

Guardian: What is your source for the 40 times the services? Sure, there may be 30 to 40 times the density but are you saying costs rise proportionately? I’m pretty sure it’s not a linear equation.

Yes there will be greater demand for schools but suburban development has placed a greater demand for roads. I would like to see the costs of fighting foothills fires compared to valley fires.

EDITOR NOTE–Cynic, of course it is not a “tit for tat” comparison, but there are more cars, sewer, water, electric hookups. More crime calls (both victim and criminal), more ambulance etc. We agree with you about disproportionate costs for fires in foothills…same when it comes to protecting homes on Eagle Island and riverside areas from flood.

GR8 T8R: Lynn Hightower is a grossly overpaid employee of the Boise Police Department. Not sure why she designated herself the PIO of the Eagle fire. Perhaps it is the same as when Nampa Fire PIO Doug Strosnider made himself the designated speaker of the Middleton High school fire.

EDITOR NOTE–Hightower helps with PR at BFD just like the Navy helps the Army for no additional wage or fee. When former Deputy Chief Dave Hanneman left there was a void at the FD. Fire does its own PIO except on these biggies. Cops also direct traffic at fires and this is no different.