<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Question:  Is the 1994 Vision for the community still valid?  If not, what would you change or add?</title>
	<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Tammy Christel</title>
		<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-826</link>
		<author>Tammy Christel</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:46:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-826</guid>
		<description>July 21, 2008
 
If we incorporate more feasible, definitive planning steps, a greater chance exists for true public ownership of our comprehensive planning process.  If our public and private leaders clearly identify any self-interest, we’ll move closer to a productive partnership.   

Adapt a plan with a continuously flexible center, set inside countywide standards and law.     Without clear first steps we’re all standing in quicksand.  

Ideal #1, as written, is the correct planning ‘umbrella.’  Under that heading, a more specific agenda might include:   

Step 2

First, specifically determine by community consensus distinct natural resources to be preserved.   These include open space, water resources and wetlands, species and their habitats.  

Secondly, determine what standing structures, centers, and neighborhoods should be preserved in order to maintain historic identity. 

Identify areas for public spaces and parks; call for the highest landscaping, massing and architectural standards.   Create pride in our plan by insisting upon family-friendly designs.   

Determine plans to execute preservation of the above via easements, zoning, and ordinances.  

Plan infrastructures to ensure residents will receive all services the community deems appropriate, delivered at the right time and without waste, in a safe atmosphere.

Growth plans will continuously recognize and prioritize the region’s special qualities through continued nurturing of its arts, educational, and cultural initiatives. 

Step 3
Greater public and alternative transit opportunities aid in preservation of scenic vistas and wildlife.   

Establish whether current traffic patterns, congestion and emissions should be the highest levels allowed.  Plan additional public transportation and expand accessibility around the densest shopping, civic and residential cores to encourage use.   Establish public and alternative transit modes and pathways to a variety of economic income populations, and in this way provide access to a larger population percentage.

Step 4
Call on elected officials to present their specific vision to the community.  

In order to preserve and develop the town of Jackson as Teton County’s business, cultural and retail center, and to assure its economic viability and resources for subsequent generations, we will ascertain new market realities, research and ideally attract a variety of sustainable economic sectors.  

Step 5
Ascertain size, cost and number of workforce housing units required in Teton County, Wyoming by tabulating the number and salary levels of filled and unfilled service jobs and projected needs as determined by growth. 

Step 6
Subsequent steps towards balanced and sustainable commercial, resort and housing plans may be taken.   


Tammy Christel
Jackson, Wyoming

307-690-1983
tammy@jacksonholearttours.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>July 21, 2008</p>
<p>If we incorporate more feasible, definitive planning steps, a greater chance exists for true public ownership of our comprehensive planning process.  If our public and private leaders clearly identify any self-interest, we’ll move closer to a productive partnership.   </p>
<p>Adapt a plan with a continuously flexible center, set inside countywide standards and law.     Without clear first steps we’re all standing in quicksand.  </p>
<p>Ideal #1, as written, is the correct planning ‘umbrella.’  Under that heading, a more specific agenda might include:   </p>
<p>Step 2</p>
<p>First, specifically determine by community consensus distinct natural resources to be preserved.   These include open space, water resources and wetlands, species and their habitats.  </p>
<p>Secondly, determine what standing structures, centers, and neighborhoods should be preserved in order to maintain historic identity. </p>
<p>Identify areas for public spaces and parks; call for the highest landscaping, massing and architectural standards.   Create pride in our plan by insisting upon family-friendly designs.   </p>
<p>Determine plans to execute preservation of the above via easements, zoning, and ordinances.  </p>
<p>Plan infrastructures to ensure residents will receive all services the community deems appropriate, delivered at the right time and without waste, in a safe atmosphere.</p>
<p>Growth plans will continuously recognize and prioritize the region’s special qualities through continued nurturing of its arts, educational, and cultural initiatives. </p>
<p>Step 3<br />
Greater public and alternative transit opportunities aid in preservation of scenic vistas and wildlife.   </p>
<p>Establish whether current traffic patterns, congestion and emissions should be the highest levels allowed.  Plan additional public transportation and expand accessibility around the densest shopping, civic and residential cores to encourage use.   Establish public and alternative transit modes and pathways to a variety of economic income populations, and in this way provide access to a larger population percentage.</p>
<p>Step 4<br />
Call on elected officials to present their specific vision to the community.  </p>
<p>In order to preserve and develop the town of Jackson as Teton County’s business, cultural and retail center, and to assure its economic viability and resources for subsequent generations, we will ascertain new market realities, research and ideally attract a variety of sustainable economic sectors.  </p>
<p>Step 5<br />
Ascertain size, cost and number of workforce housing units required in Teton County, Wyoming by tabulating the number and salary levels of filled and unfilled service jobs and projected needs as determined by growth. </p>
<p>Step 6<br />
Subsequent steps towards balanced and sustainable commercial, resort and housing plans may be taken.   </p>
<p>Tammy Christel<br />
Jackson, Wyoming</p>
<p>307-690-1983<br />
<a href="mailto:tammy@jacksonholearttours.com">tammy@jacksonholearttours.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Stirn</title>
		<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-427</link>
		<author>Kelly Stirn</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-427</guid>
		<description>We may not be an active ranching community, but I’m sure we would love to continue the character of a ranching community. Open space is provided by the ranching community. If they leave, is it a correct vision to fill that open space with a hundred homes. I hope not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We may not be an active ranching community, but I’m sure we would love to continue the character of a ranching community. Open space is provided by the ranching community. If they leave, is it a correct vision to fill that open space with a hundred homes. I hope not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sonja Boehne</title>
		<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-54</link>
		<author>Sonja Boehne</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:04:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-54</guid>
		<description>The Vision is still valid, but even a Vision changes.....

Town is going through a major building boom since the last 4 to 5 years. To many big Development Projects are getting looked at. It is all about money right now and everyone wants to build....and rezone etc...

So we need def.  clear statements ,about what should be allowed and how much. It has to be more clear what Developers are allowed to build. Projects which then are out of the "box" shouldnt even be looked at by our elected officials. If everything is clearly written out (which will be interesting to get there in the next 18 months) there should be no questions!!!

I think Town doesnt now where it is going for the next 20 years. 
We are having already a housing bubble over the pass and things didnt happen as everyone thought. Missplanning???

I think it would be a good idear to look at a cap, of how many people can this town accomodate without loosing its identity and being a threat to the wildlife which has to live with us. We are a community in the middle of National Parks, National Forest and BLM Land. We cant be a big city like some people like to see it, who moved here from big metropolitean areas. This is Jackson, Wyoming and not Los Angeles or Atlanta. 

A lot of people in the past have done really great things to keep this town special...and this has to be preserved...

Everyone wants to live here because it is so beautiful. We could build homes by the hundreds and never fill the demand. And that is dangerous....

I think the comprehensive plan needs to clarify zoning and  building of structures and developments.. it is being handled to loosely right now. 

Outdoor recreation and mainting quality of life is important and all the other visions we have currently on the plan.   

Thank you for your attention

Sonja</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Vision is still valid, but even a Vision changes&#8230;..</p>
<p>Town is going through a major building boom since the last 4 to 5 years. To many big Development Projects are getting looked at. It is all about money right now and everyone wants to build&#8230;.and rezone etc&#8230;</p>
<p>So we need def.  clear statements ,about what should be allowed and how much. It has to be more clear what Developers are allowed to build. Projects which then are out of the &#8220;box&#8221; shouldnt even be looked at by our elected officials. If everything is clearly written out (which will be interesting to get there in the next 18 months) there should be no questions!!!</p>
<p>I think Town doesnt now where it is going for the next 20 years.<br />
We are having already a housing bubble over the pass and things didnt happen as everyone thought. Missplanning???</p>
<p>I think it would be a good idear to look at a cap, of how many people can this town accomodate without loosing its identity and being a threat to the wildlife which has to live with us. We are a community in the middle of National Parks, National Forest and BLM Land. We cant be a big city like some people like to see it, who moved here from big metropolitean areas. This is Jackson, Wyoming and not Los Angeles or Atlanta. </p>
<p>A lot of people in the past have done really great things to keep this town special&#8230;and this has to be preserved&#8230;</p>
<p>Everyone wants to live here because it is so beautiful. We could build homes by the hundreds and never fill the demand. And that is dangerous&#8230;.</p>
<p>I think the comprehensive plan needs to clarify zoning and  building of structures and developments.. it is being handled to loosely right now. </p>
<p>Outdoor recreation and mainting quality of life is important and all the other visions we have currently on the plan.   </p>
<p>Thank you for your attention</p>
<p>Sonja</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hamlin</title>
		<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-11</link>
		<author>hamlin</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:47:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>if you don't have the ranches, Jackson is just another ski town....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>if you don&#8217;t have the ranches, Jackson is just another ski town&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-7</link>
		<author>Anonymous</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2007 23:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.jacksontetonplan.com/blog/2007/09/question-is-the-1994-vision-for-the-community-still-valid-if-not-what-would-you-change-or-add/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Comments for the community vision:

We are no longer a ranching community, nor is it important for policy to preserve the traditions and character of the rocky mountain west - this cannot effectively be regulated.  People, not policy, preserve culture.

Need to stress the importance of affordable housing and a resident work force - Need increased requirements for affordable housing and development incentives.  Need increased options, particularly for more attainable options for the growing middle class who are quickly being out priced by the expensive real estate market.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Comments for the community vision:</p>
<p>We are no longer a ranching community, nor is it important for policy to preserve the traditions and character of the rocky mountain west - this cannot effectively be regulated.  People, not policy, preserve culture.</p>
<p>Need to stress the importance of affordable housing and a resident work force - Need increased requirements for affordable housing and development incentives.  Need increased options, particularly for more attainable options for the growing middle class who are quickly being out priced by the expensive real estate market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
