I’m concerned about the plans to build 13 four-unit apartment buildings on Forest Service land at the Putt Putt Trailhead in far east Jackson – a total of 52 units. This would set a terrible precedent by paving over wildland and expanding the urban growth boundary of Town. The proposed development is much more dense than the adjacent Forest Service housing, and would encroach on an important recreational access point. The decision by the Forest 13 years ago that this project with its high density would be appropriate seems arbitrary and vague. Creating a dense node on the periphery of Town next to wilderness, embedded within quieter neighborhoods without access to arterial roads is not good planning.
We are making the same planning mistakes over and over again. We continue to spread density to the periphery of Town, imposing development that is neighborhood altering, car-centric and traffic aggravating. The appropriate place for dense development is in the core of Jackson in the commercial corridor along the highway where residents can be less reliant on cars because there is walkable access to jobs, services, shopping, entertainment, and transit.
It is reasonable to look for housing opportunities for public sector employees but the Putt Putt Trailhead is not suitable for dense housing development, and the planning/funding process that has been grinding on behind the scenes for this project has been extremely opaque. It appears that several federal government agencies are involved along with the Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust. The involvement of the Housing Trust raises the specter of trading precious wild land in order to house private sector employees. Permanently transferring public land for private benefit is not proper stewardship of the resource, especially in a valley that is a world class environmental treasure already suffering from over development and over-commercialization. The Putt Putt Trailhead should not be developed, and, if the relentless forces of development push this project through, densities should match that of the existing forest service housing next door, and all units should be reserved for public employees only. This controversial project deserves a transparent planning process rather than backroom machinations that are then presented to the public as a fait accompli. We must protect our public lands.