design begins for Wilson riverside park

By Jim Stanford on April 26, 2012

Tags: , ,

Rendezvous Lands Conservancy park is outlined roughly in green. The 40-acre property abuts the 11-acre BLM parcel to the south that is slated to be transferred to Teton County. Click to enlarge.

Around Christmas, as parties negotiated the final terms of a deal, I apprised venerable outdoors columnist and cult fishing legend Paul Bruun of efforts to create a park along the Snake River near Wilson.

“This is the biggest thing to happen for the river since …” I said, struggling to put the deal in perspective.

“Since forever,” Bruun finished the sentence for me.

The 40-acre property acquired by Rendezvous Lands Conservancy — located upstream of the Wilson bridge, on the northwest bank — will be a jewel for recreation, a place where the community can interact with the river in a setting likely nicer than the old Wilson Beach.

A partnership between the LOR Foundation and Jackson Hole Land Trust, RLC is moving swiftly to bring this dream to life.

The first step is to seek public input on what sorts of uses the park will accommodate. RLC has set up an online survey and will host an open house May 2 and 3 at Center for the Arts.

RLC envisions a “natural, passive” recreation site. Pierson Land Works is heading the design team. The land is adjacent to the 11-acre BLM parcel where the boat ramp is located, and the Highway 22 pathway bridge also will cross at this location. The survey only takes a few minutes to complete.

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendlyShare

Posted under County Government, Environment, Politics, Sports, Town Government

24 Comments so far

  1. ps April 26, 2012 3:51 pm

    Fence it, plant willows and put all the moose that live along TVR in it for the winter.;)

  2. steve ashley April 26, 2012 6:56 pm

    I have this picture in my head of a bridge opening celebration where everyone (more than a thousand kids, elders, everyone!) with a bike rides from Jackson to the park for picnic & celebration. A great community celebration of the park and the pathways

  3. jt April 26, 2012 9:53 pm

    if you build it…irresponsible dog owners will come and fill it with dog poop, just like everywhere else in the valley.please pick up after your dogs.

  4. Woolly April 26, 2012 9:54 pm

    I think that the proponents of this park are well intentioned but this is a terrible idea. Wilson Bridge is a critical river access point. It is the only public boat launch between Moose and South Park, a distance of 25-30 miles. There is already a limited amount of parking, and building a park that will attract non-boaters will create a serious problem. The survey that this article links to states that it may be necessary to limit parking during peak season. This will effect boaters more than anyone else because you can’t transport you boat to the river without a vehicle. Like I said, I think the individuals and organizations behind this park have good intentions, but this is a serious threat to the public’s ability to access the Snake River in a practical manner.

  5. murph April 27, 2012 9:08 am

    if you build it will they come? prolly,and when they do i’ll find another beach .besides parking will be a bitch..stop the disneyfication of the hole

  6. D April 30, 2012 8:56 am

    What is the status of the EIS for this?

  7. Brad April 30, 2012 1:49 pm

    Sorry, I’m with the naysayers here. We’re going to love it, vehicle-ize it, and dog-poop it to death. Traffic alone will be a nightmare.

  8. Jon April 30, 2012 5:09 pm

    Isn’t there an ENORMOUS parking lot right across the street that is empty from the first weekend of April until the first of December? I would be more than willing to park there and walk a quarter mile through dog shit and cranky boaters to enjoy this park and its bikini-clad patrons!

  9. Cody McInnes May 1, 2012 8:08 am

    Woolly actually there is another boat launch on BLM land down fall creek road north of red top! Also there is a huge parking lot just west of the Wilson bridge access! There are non-boaters here in Jackson hole who have the same rights to access public lands! This park will be a great addition to Wilson and I see no problems with the plan!

  10. Tater May 1, 2012 8:23 am

    I’m with Jon…The valley could benifit from this park…and bikini’ r nice. If you want solitude you can easily find it if you leave the beaten path.

  11. js May 1, 2012 8:56 am

    This site was a gravel pit and crushing operation for as long as I can remember. A private developer bought the land and planned 2 or 3 homesites for it. I can’t see how restoring wetlands and providing public access is somehow a worse outcome.
    The park will be thoughtfully done. Take the survey, be part of the process and help make it great.

  12. Corey Milligan May 1, 2012 8:57 am

    Cool pedestrian bridge to ride from Wilson to Town or just stroll across the Snake and take in the views. Improved boat ramp with easier access and a permanent eddy to launch and take out boats without getting in a fist fight or running over a small child. Improved habitat for wildlife. Over 100 acres of public access. A huge parking lot across the street. Terraced dikes so you can swim or sit by the Snake without breaking an ankle. Enhancements to stream flow so you can swim or wade without being washed to South Park. Enhancements to create safe kiddy access and sweet sandcastle building opportunities….Yeah it’s probably going to suck.

  13. Jon May 1, 2012 9:33 am

    Right now all of the boat ramps in the Jackson area have crowd problems because there are no other access points to the snake river that are not boat ramps. Non-boaters also want to be able to enjoy the river. Developing terraced banks to replace the nasty rip rap dikes upstream and downstream of boat ramps, will spread out the access to the river and alleviate pressure put on the boat ramps. Parking is already a problem at Wilson, lets try to fix it with easy access to the Stilson lot, and drop off boat access only to the river at peak season? If done correctly this project will make the access more user friendly and less hectic for all users on a busy day, even with more people!

  14. Len May 1, 2012 11:51 am

    Please resist the temptation to emulate National Park limitations on activity; we already have 300,000 acres for that. This enormous gift is not a wilderness resource. It is a ~40-acre park, a place of activity and movement. Improvements should be low-key, respectful of wildlife habitat, but plentiful and varied. Make it for kids, a safe and healthy place for them to be out goofing off, having fun, being challenged, building skills and athletic abilities. The energy of this site is kinetic. Hide a small sanctuary somewhere on it for repose, for memorial services for those who prefer doing that outside, but don’t develop the whole site for passive reflection and communing with nature – that misses the golden opportunity that this site presents. And last, thank you, thank you, thank you. Can never say it enough to you who are making this happen.

  15. Rebecca Reimers May 1, 2012 11:54 am

    The people who are planning this park are thoughtful and smart. And they want your input. Rather than writing pointlessly negative speculation about a plan that is in the formative stages, why not come to the open house and be a constructive part of the project? This park will result in IMPROVED access and will enrich our community for many types of river lovers. It may take a little effort to get involved, but at the very least you will be well informed.

  16. Jim May 1, 2012 12:20 pm

    This will be a tremendous benefit to the people in our county! Reclaim the gravel pit, restore the wetlands, create a great public space, with access the bike paths and the river. Parking will be part of the plan, and as others have pointed out there is a HUGE parking lot across the street. Yes people need to be more responsible about their dogs (both on-leash and pick up the poop) but don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Would you rather have the gravel pit and/or private McMansions that were planned for this land??? “Disnification” it ain’t!

  17. joe May 1, 2012 2:11 pm

    don’t forget moms getting the kids, chairs, and coolers to the beach from the HUGE parking lot. that challange could get real kinectic in a hurry, with some screaming thrown in. Will they be able to leave them with the commercial boatmen or Jay, while they park the car. hopefully this question is thoughtful and smart enough. don.t throw out young moms with the group-think bathwater. Rebecca, your in charge, can,t make the meeting

  18. Scottyd May 1, 2012 2:19 pm

    I think Thant all the negative Nancy’s should get involved and help find solutions to their complaints, and quit fearing progress. This is a great idea and can benefit so many people. If planned well and responsibly I see no reason not to move forward with this. Go team!!!

  19. Jon Wiedie May 1, 2012 10:27 pm

    If you take a broad look at how the community has already benefited from the Wilson and South Park areas of the Snake River…both of which have been incredible access points over the years due to the continued work of multiple organizations and generous landowners, it seems that any improvement would only enhance our enjoyment of this fantastic resource within a stones throw of where many of us have chosen to set our roots. AND perhaps return these areas to a more natural state. This is an opportunity that will be a benefit to our community as a whole, and to those who come here as visitors alike.

  20. ScottyM May 1, 2012 11:22 pm

    Great to see planning, thoughtful input, and community involvement in creating more access and recreation space. Can boater concerns be alleviated with a northern entrance to the Park, and upstream bank/beach improvements, leaving the existing boat ramp relatively unaffected? Thanks for leading!

  21. Brad May 2, 2012 10:37 am

    All well and good, folks and may all your dreams here come true. Heck, I may just use the new park and enjoy it. Just remember, though, that in the end this may well be stage one in the widening of Highway 22.

  22. js May 3, 2012 12:19 pm

    @D re: EIS, dunno what level of regulatory review is needed. Any river work requires Army Corps oversight, so at that point their process would kick in. Getting public input is only a first step. The team headed by Pierson Land Works likely will have to navigate county and federal approval for whatever plan they come up with.

  23. D May 3, 2012 2:28 pm

    Cool thanks. Interested to see how that goes.

  24. KB May 3, 2012 10:59 pm

    I know this is about the park, but the bridge is also in its design phase. Are there any agreements on the pathway to that bridge? Or is it just taken for granted that landowners along the highway will agree? How about starting in the right end?

Leave a Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Comments

More Blog Posts

Previous Post: