Monday, February 8, 2010

Shamrock and other items

Kind of a round up today.

* The ACHD Commission will be discussing the Shamrock/Ustick issue twice this month. Remember that ACHD wanted to punch Shamrock through to Ustick over the objections of both the neighborhood and the Boise City Council.

We will be "reviewing" the staff report, for lack of a better description, on February 17, 2010 at 10:30am. Then we'll be holding a public hearing on the issue February 24, 2010 at 6pm. Both meetings are open to the public so anyone can come and listen and speak.

The staff and the website boldly indicate that if you can't attend the meeting on the 24th, then please have your written comments in by February 15, 2010 so that they can be included in the staff report. You have to read further in regular type that if you wish to submit comments after that, well, that's still allowable. Personally, I thought this was wrong and I said so. Anyone should be able to submit written comments to the Commission even up to the day of the hearing. In my now 17 years of elected officialdom, I've never had a problem reading a letter on the day of a hearing. I can't imagine any of the other Commissioners wouldn't be able to do that as well.

If someone wants to submit comments to me on this or any other item, here's my e-mail.

* If you live on or use the dirt road part of Dry Creek, there will most likely be a public hearing in your future on how to continue to maintain this section, continue graveling, chipsealing or paving/rebuilding.

* The fund balance (loaned from the general fund/property tax) for impact fee projects improved a whole $200,000 from the last quarter of 2009 to the first quarter of 2010. I think there's going to be a major discussion on this issue in the near future. Have impact fees lived up to their hype? Doesn't appear so.

* There may be a glimmer of hope on the horizon for ACHD and the Cities and Ada County having a Memorandum of Understanding for the Growth Management Alliance. You may remember the expense ACHD went to many years ago having the Urban Land Institute come in and present some suggestions for playing better together. Well, at long last that might happen. We'll see.

* Obviously, there's a lot of "future" stuff going to happen. You know the old government adage, never do today what you can put off til tomorrow.


At February 9, 2010 at 3:26 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes...connectivity is bad. I'm sure Dr. Ustick (a dentist) opposed straight streets, efficient, and promoting of multi-modalism.

At February 10, 2010 at 8:12 AM , Blogger Sara said...

When people are told in response to a specific question, say in 2005, that a street will not go through, and then a few short years later, voila, the street is going to go through, they understandably get upset by what is seen as a flat out lie by government. When they submit petitions and letters in opposition and are told, "it's a done deal" they understandably get upset. When decisions are made and then a public hearing is held, people understandably get upset.

At February 14, 2010 at 6:32 PM , Anonymous SGS said...

This issue has already been made clear by public, not once, nor twice but thrice, and yet, ACHD dares to bring this issue in front of the board. We, who live on Shamrock and in the neighborhood of Big Sky and Froniter, as well as our peers from the West Boise Neighborhood Association, already made it clear -- WE DON'T WANT THE PUNCH-THROUGH!

And besides, I was unable to attend the last public hearing (last Aug or thereabout). I want to challenge the claim that there would be an increase of 5,000 cars going through. First, for the increase to occur, there must be a growth. What growth? There is no vacate lot anywhere nearby that would see new homes. There is no good route between main streets (like Chinden and Fairview). McMillan is not even busy enough to warrant more main roads. Please do put this to rest forever, if you could! Thank you, Sara.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home