U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Idaho > Boise area
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-18-2013, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Boise, Idaho
592 posts, read 1,320,479 times
Reputation: 387

Advertisements

Boise is not particularly windy. I notice the most wind in the areas out off of Highway 55 in Eagle--Avimor area plus some other subs in that area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-26-2013, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Eagle, ID
61 posts, read 140,074 times
Reputation: 80
Just my .02, but coming from California, having spent my entire life in Southern CA, Boise reminds me of my hometown, San Diego, back when I was a kid 35 years ago. No doubt, California's current tax situation will have people running for the borders, and God forbid Diane Feinstein gets her way with gun control, so I do believe Boise will see an influx of people, but it'll be more measured as I think most Southern Californians don't want to brave the colder weather like me. The most popular Cali destinations right now include Las Vegas, Phoenix, Tucson, and Texas. Idaho and Boise I think only hits the top 10 of migration destinations for Californians.

The entire Treasure Valley is somewhere around 650,000 people I believe and I do agree with some posters that traffic can be interesting, depending on where you live. Given that, I wouldn't trade Boise for somewhere warmer, like Vegas or Phoenix, just because i'd be going from a city like San Diego, or Denver, of about 3 million to another city of millions. No thanks, I can survive Eagle Road.

I think what I appreciate most is that there are so many different parts of town to live depending on your personality or what you decide you need to live. There are some extremely beautiful older sections with vintage homes and quaint atmospheres, then there are places that look and appeal to a more urban lifestyle, then there's the family life with skate parks and box stores. It's what you decide that makes it great. I also like that there really isn't a certain part of town that is considered poor or even "rich" where you can't afford to even live in the zip code. It seems each area has it's nicer, more expensive areas, but are combined with average homes even within the same communities. In people I've spoken to, most could care less if you live in a million dollar home, or a rented apartment, it really doesn't matter and I like that. Here in San Diego (we're moving in 4 months!!), say the name La Jolla and expect to pay at least 1 million for a home. If you have a Rancho Santa Fe zip code, forget it, if your not ultra-wealthy. Some people consider Eagle to be the higher end, yet I can find plenty of homes between 200 - 300k with an Eagle zip code. There are beautiful homes on the west side, north side, in the foothills, Meridian, Nampa just about everywhere, yet there is also a lot of affordability as well mixed in and for my young adult kids, that's a great thing which is one of many reasons we are moving, to give them a chance to reach the American Dream while having some love and support from mom and dad. With a 400k price tag for an average home here in SD, they'll never be more than renters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 12:02 PM
 
1,056 posts, read 2,322,282 times
Reputation: 837
I don't understand how people don't think SLC or Denver wouldn't happen here. It happened in those places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 05:28 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 6,766,604 times
Reputation: 3518
Quote:
Originally Posted by boisefan88 View Post
I don't understand how people don't think SLC or Denver wouldn't happen here. It happened in those places.
Until Boise can create jobs like SLC or Denver it will stay a medium sized metro area for the foreseeable future. I love Boise and really wish I could have stayed there, but the lack of decent middle income jobs sent me packing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 10:03 AM
 
285 posts, read 731,362 times
Reputation: 107
Jobs are a huge part of why it's not likely to happen to Boise, but another huge factor is the way the cities are structured.

We have only one real freeway and a miniature split off. 90% of your driving in the metro is on surface streets. This does not appeal to people who want to live in the suburbs and need to commute for work. The cities here have not properly planned for growth and it is VERY apparent that just between Meridian, Eagle and Boise, our road structure can not handle another 100,000 vehicles.

While many people who currently live here think our restaurants, shopping and attractions are "good enough," my experience has been that most from large metropolitan areas (which are the people who helped SLC and Denver to grow) are not satisfied with what Boise has to offer.

I don't see much change in any of these departments and the general Idaho attitude is to not really be accepting of change (which is not a bad thing) but all of that combined does not create the same formula for growth that SLC and Denver have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 10:28 AM
 
2,726 posts, read 5,124,481 times
Reputation: 1936
I lived in Salt Lake city for quite a few years and visit occasionaly to visit family and I don't think they are any higher up the restaurant ladder then we are, we have a more unique restaurant culture regarding locally owned eateries and locally grown food, SLC not as much. SLC is huge, and I mean huge on chains, more then Boise is. SLC has more shopping options as far as malls are concerned, many of their malls have the same stores, but Boise has a lot of the same retail stores they have, but SLC does have some stores we don't have here (yet) because their metro area is larger. As far as sights/attractions, they have a lot of LDS oriented tourism, but other then that Boise and SLC are pretty equal in the sight/attractions category and we have outdoor pursuits right in the city that they do not have. A city the size of Denver is large enough that it has a lot more of everything then SLC or Boise.

The ironic thing is when friends in SLC come up here to visit me in Boise they often say Boise seems to have more going on and is more quaint and easier to walk around in the central city then SLC is. They also think of of Boise as their quick weekend escape to sanity and away from the insanity of the SL Valley. They love hanging downtown and eating at our restaurants and looking in the boutique shops that downtown SLC lacks since downtown SLC is very corporate and chain oriented.
SLC has had some of the dirtiest air on earth recently because of the horrible inversions they get, ours are nothing compared to what they experience yearly. Why would we want to grow into that. Boise will be Boise, just like SLC is SLC and Denver is Denver. Why would we all want to be alike and why do some people want us to grow as large as either the SLC and Denver metros? Our quality of life would be jeopardized if we did.

I think if someone is not familier with SLC and they visit a few times they might be starry eyed, but that fades fast, I can assure you.

Last edited by Syringaloid; 01-28-2013 at 10:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 11:05 AM
 
285 posts, read 731,362 times
Reputation: 107
As far as Restaurants, SLC doesn't really have much (if anything) on Boise, I will give you that. As for the rest, I still believe SLC has more. It at least has a miniature theme park and more family-oriented activities spread throughout the metro. The shopping, while still full of chains and not wonderful is a cut or two above Boise's. Boise's core does feel more vibrant and urban which is very nice.

The main reason that SLC grew in a way that Boise has not, is city planning, relative ease of getting around the metro and jobs are abundant.

It doesn't matter to me if Boise grows or not, if I need something larger I will simply move to a larger area. It is what it is...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 11:15 AM
 
2,726 posts, read 5,124,481 times
Reputation: 1936
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILI.EB View Post
As far as Restaurants, SLC doesn't really have much (if anything) on Boise, I will give you that. As for the rest, I still believe SLC has more. It at least has a miniature theme park and more family-oriented activities spread throughout the metro. The shopping, while still full of chains and not wonderful is a cut or two above Boise's. Boise's core does feel more vibrant and urban which is very nice.

The main reason that SLC grew in a way that Boise has not, is city planning, relative ease of getting around the metro and jobs are abundant.


It doesn't matter to me if Boise grows or not, if I need something larger I will simply move to a larger area. It is what it is...

actually, SLC and that valley has been critized many times for poor planning and sprawl, big time sprawl too. They are currently learning to be more dense just like the Boise area is. A big reason that SLC grew the way it did is because it is in a very narrow valley and most of Utah's population is centered around SLC from Ogden to Provo. If most of Idaho's population was centered around Boise and not spread out all over the state, Boise would probably me a lot more dense and obviously larger. The family activities especially centered around Meridian reminds me of the SL area minus the larger amusement park. During the warm months there seems to me to be a lot more activities spread out in parks and downtown and such around the Boise area then what I remembered in the SLC area. The SL Valley is very suburban, lots of suburban towns connected to each other, and all of those suburbs have the activities for the kiddies, spurred mainly by the dominant Religion and its lifestyle down there, so I can see where you are coming from regarding the family activities.

My humble opinion is that if Boise is to become similar to another city it will be Portland. I hope Boise stays Boise and keeps it's own identity which I think it will as we continue to grow.

Last edited by Syringaloid; 01-28-2013 at 11:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 12:12 PM
 
674 posts, read 1,251,806 times
Reputation: 531
Why do you think it would be like Portland? Besides being built along a river, the two cities share almost nothing in common, especially regarding climate, terrain, and especially planning/growth philosophies.

Boise's growth has been and will be similar to SLCs, albeit on a much lesser scale. The SLC metro connects three significant cities - Ogden, SLC, and Provo - amongst a smattering of suburban communities built along the Wasatch front. Similarly, the Boise metro connects Nampa and Boise along the foothills. I wouldn't call Meridian a city, but rather, a suburban community.

I agree the infrastructure and job market will keep Boise from growing like Denver, but keep in mind the growth during the 2000's - it was an artificial economy based entirely on growth. People who could afford to relocate here without a job or by taking a pay cut (or telecommuting) moved here in droves, driving up the real estate market and pricing local people out. The economy that followed was built entirely on construction and real estate - and people flipping commercial and residential properties. This is proved by the fallout from 2008 on, the slaughter of realtors and the secondary mortgage industry, and the number of criminal activity now being exposed.

However, there's nothing to think that couldn't happen here again... once people in other pricier areas begin recovering.

The sprawl here will also be much worse than Portland or SLC precisely because of the lack of infrastructure, planning, and traffic options. I've noticed an uptick even in the past few years. I live in SE Boise off Broadway, and my "commute" from downtown, where I work, is absurd if I hit it at 4:00 or 5:00 on the nose. Traffic is backed up from Front/Broadway to the interstate. It's faster for me to bike downtown in the warmer months, which I do anyway. But what other options do people have? Vista or the Connector aren't any better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 12:23 PM
 
674 posts, read 1,251,806 times
Reputation: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syringaloid View Post
actually, SLC and that valley has been critized many times for poor planning and sprawl, big time sprawl too. They are currently learning to be more dense just like the Boise area is. A big reason that SLC grew the way it did is because it is in a very narrow valley and most of Utah's population is centered around SLC from Ogden to Provo. If most of Idaho's population was centered around Boise and not spread out all over the state, Boise would probably me a lot more dense and obviously larger.
Also, I don't quite understand this quote.

I actually study planning and have my MA in community and regional planning, though I don't currently practice. I studied the northwest during my education and have a pretty good feel for planning in Oregon, Washington, Utah and Idaho, and how they differ.

You're right that SLC has been criticized for its poor planning and it has taken major steps and initiatives to repair that, considering the dominant political philosophy of the state. Portland, of course, is held as a positive example of planning almost always, though I think sometimes that reputation disregards the facts. Boise is not generally an example of positive planning or growth, but again it is a different level than both Portland and SLC in many ways... and generally has a more attractive downtown than both (again, with regard to planning). Mostly, planners seem bored with Boise both because it doesn't suffer major problems (yet) and because they are few innovations or trendy projects here.

But about the density comment... both the SLC and Provo metro areas are, and have been, far more dense than Boise and Nampa (SLC - 3,675 per square mile; Provo 2,857; Boise 2,613; Nampa 2,183). The SLC metro is both more suburban and sprawl AND more dense than the Boise/Nampa area. They've certainly been dealing with growth issues longer than we have here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Idaho > Boise area
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top