By Jim Stanford on February 20, 2008
Tonight the Teton County Planning Commission resumes its hearing on the proposed Teton Meadows Ranch development south of town.
Public comment begins at 5:45 p.m. in the Snow King Grand Room.
What can I write about this project that won’t amount to throwing gasoline on the fire of a simmering class war?
I sat through three and a half hours of last week’s meeting and listened, when public comment began, to a filibuster by South Park “Neighbors” opposed to the proposal. Without a hint of irony, they listed a litany of reasons why their suburban neighborhood is unsuited for human habitation besides their own.
A common thread in many of the comments: “my property values.”
I am caught in the middle of this debate. I have friends on both sides. I am an owner of an affordable home. I am a conservationist and proponent of smart planning.
Is this an ideal location for a big housing development? No. The size is tough to swallow. But I’ve been trying to keep an open mind, given the severity of the housing problem in Jackson Hole and concurrent erosion of community. I’ve grilled one of the principals, and after hearing the explanations, I think the proposal could have merit, assuming it fits into the broader planning effort underway with rewriting of the Comprehensive Plan.
The cries of Not In My BackYard have been so shrill that I feel compelled to push back.
Since my last post, Teton Meadows has doubled the number of deed-restricted affordable homes it would build, from 125 to 250. Another 150 would be deed restricted for people who don’t qualify for affordable housing but still can’t buy into the free market. One hundred free-market lots would subsidize the deal, making for 500 homes in all.
The TMR web site has details of the proposal and the partnership between developer James Reinert and the Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust.
There will be an open house from 4 to 5:30 p.m. today at Jedediah’s, 135 East Broadway, for people who are interested. Pizza will be served.
It’s saddening to see the discourse devolve into a battle between the housing haves and have-nots, many of whom are on the same side of the divide between luxury and working class.
As I steel myself for several more hours of venting tonight, all I can wish for — besides brevity in their remarks — is that people set aside their self-interests in favor of the best interest of the community.
Posted under county government, economy, politics
I just got home from the meeting and a follow-up rap session at the Brew Pub.
Sitting through one of these meetings is like having a part of your stomach cut out. It’s painful to watch the generational gap between opponents and proponents play out, especially when you know people on both sides.
Aside from a few off-key remarks from those with distorted views of affordable housing (the “stigmatization” of the “low-income ghetto”), the tenor of the comments was better than the first go-round. Concern for wildlife, the Comp Plan, better transit were among the issues raised. Kristy Bruner of the Alliance laid down a pretty open-and-shut case for resolving the Comp Plan first.
While at times excruciating, there is a certain beauty to these public hearings. Citizens who do not have blogs or other means of broadcasting their opinions step up to the mike and give their two cents. Some have all sorts of axes to grind and will share downright bizarre information, but that’s part of the beauty. Everybody gets their say. (Although in some cases, I wish the more long-winded speakers did in fact have blogs.)
You can’t help but come away with an appreciation for the tediousness of democracy. People care, and that’s encouraging.
Finding an appropriate balance between impact and community benefit is so difficult to acheive. Of course if these were all market units it would never be approved. Is this significant density increase and associated impact in this location worth the additional affordable housing? I don’t live in the area, but if I did I would be very concerned about this project. Where is a project like this appropriate? The Porter Estate. Next to schools, stores, recreation, transit… a logical extension of town. This community should work proactively w/ the land owner now in an unprecedented way.
I don’t live in the area but oppose this project b/c 500 homes = 1000 more cars in the valley. And the design of this project does nothing to mitigate the transportation impacts, or foster a sense of community, etc…. It’s just a typical conglomeration of cul-de-sacs that will require everone to get in the car to get a newspaper or cup of coffee. Stupid. At least if you value the air quality here.
Naa naa nan na naa naah! I’m a middle class white American who is Heterosexual and proud of it. Heterosexual Pride, ya damn right. I suppose, to some of you, that makes me a queer hater, a homophobe. Prove it.
I also enjoy small towns with character and pride, with clean air and low crime, with honest cops and local politicians, with little traffic and virtually no rush hour, with fun summer fairs and friendly competitions, yard sales and friendly neighborhood dogs. I suppose, to some of you, that makes me a NIMBY. Prove it.
Think through this stuff, college boys and girls. Who is the largest employer in Teton co.? Who’s on the airport board, the board of realtors, the board of examiners, the planning and zoning commissions, the county commission, the county planning board, former commissioners, former mayors, former councilmen? Who is a realtor or developer with this gig? How many of you can truly afford $750K? Who is and was your mayor, your sole supplier of pizza at Snow King concerts, your recipient of Four Seasons upgrades on tax paid travel, the recipient of free land given away by the town which thereby prohibits the mandate of PUD for creative development? Who are the golfers, the pilots, the China sis city travellers? Define “affordable,” “habitat,” “economy,” “wilderness,” “home.”
Do your homework - now. Dig deeper. Be able to prove it.
Oh, but give me a hat and a piece of pizza first.