Comments on: Boise Group Opposes NW Development https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/ A different slant on the news. Wed, 24 Jul 2019 16:39:51 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: They'll stall https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106654 Wed, 24 Jul 2019 16:39:51 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106654 They did stall. I wonder this. Is it appropriate for council, in their discussions, to speculate about this and that, what could be, what should be, what might develop? There is an issue before them. There seems to be a proposal that does not meet the standards in the comprehensive plan, and does not have the support of the public for that reason. The proposal misses on many “shalls”. But the council, in particular Councilors Woodings and Clegg, count other wrongs as their reasoning, and ignore the “issue before them”. Is there a parliamentarian who can speak to this for us? I have also heard some interchangeability in the use of rezone and conditional use, which is inappropriate. Responses requested.

]]> By: They'll stall https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106626 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 16:05:59 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106626 And send or for comprehensive review with lax guidelines and instructions. Vote them out.

]]> By: Safety Over Profit? https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106625 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 05:09:15 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106625 This will be interesting to see if the City’s strategic goal of a Safe & Secure Community – one of the 8 goals to make Boise the Most Livable City in the Country – actually means something. If it does, the answer is clearly to uphold the denial. That is acting in the best interest of the publics safety.

And if safety REALLY means something, this land should serve as a defensible/survivable space buffer from wildfire. There are “Open Space” levy funds that all Boise taxpayers have paid, so spend some on lowland natural space so that all ages and abilities can enjoy such areas. Not just the foothills, and not mostly in one section of the City.

]]> By: Missing the point https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106624 Mon, 15 Jul 2019 23:42:02 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106624 P&Z said no, as they do sometimes because they look at the facts and the guidelines etc. However the City Council will approve as they always do because they like good buddy friends. I’ve even seen them apologize to developers when the project gets delayed.

]]> By: Rob Jones https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106623 Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:19:14 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106623 Great article! Boise CAN do better!

]]> By: Michael Anthony https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106622 Mon, 15 Jul 2019 15:19:14 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106622 It’s about time the city council, P&Z and the mayor started listening to their constituents, the ones who pay their salaries, not the developers who build and destroy the land then run with the money leaving all of the neighborhoods to deal with their greedy intentions with no regard to safety and the well being of the citizens that have to live in these areas.. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever….

]]> By: TFBoy https://boiseguardian.com/2019/07/14/boise-group-opposes-nw-development/#comment-106620 Sun, 14 Jul 2019 21:55:08 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/?p=15830#comment-106620 Sounds like a no-brainier. CBH is not a good developer and the density is high.

]]>