Planning for northern South Park is moving toward the final phase as planners look to maximize the amount of housing proposed, likely over 1,000 homes, while providing options for whoever develops the land to reduce the cost and risk of building.

Teton County planners are distilling public comments on three options, unveiled in August, into a final proposal for town and county review. The Gill family has generally supported that tack, though a majority of the steering committee tasked with advising the town and county on the process have asked for a different approach. They advocated planning for a smaller footprint, while putting some resources elsewhere, like developing in town.

“We are moving forward with the process as envisioned,” Teton County Planning and Building Director Chris Neubecker told the News&Guide in an email Monday.

But that doesn’t mean the department’s just picking and slightly altering one of the three alternatives unveiled in August, as was originally proposed. Those early, conceptual proposals evaluated developing between 700 and 2,400 new homes in the area just south of High School Road and put the public cost of subsidizing the construction of income-restricted affordable homes at anywhere from $115 million to $500 million.

Those models were heavily scrutinized.

The Gills questioned the data underpinning the financial analysis, onlookers worried that the financial return for the landowners wasn’t sufficient, and others fretted about the amount of relatively expensive workforce housing proposed versus income-restricted units.

Now, Neubecker said planners are looking at something that will “likely look different than simple refinement of one alternative.”

Read more about what that will mean and how we got here in this week's News&Guide. You can also read online at

Contact Billy Arnold at 732-7063 or

Recommended for you

(1) comment

Judd Grossman

Less people and more open space would be better. The commercial corridor of Town is a better place for dense housing. Using taxpayer money to subsidize private sector workers is a sneaky subsidy of the employer class.

Welcome to the discussion.

Please note: Online comments may also run in our print publications.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Please turn off your CAPS LOCK.
No personal attacks. Discuss issues & opinions rather than denigrating someone with an opposing view.
No political attacks. Refrain from using negative slang when identifying political parties.
Be truthful. Don’t knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the “Report” link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with us. We’d love to hear eyewitness accounts or history behind an article.
Use your real name: Anonymous commenting is not allowed.
The News&Guide welcomes comments from our paid subscribers. Tell us what you think. Thanks for engaging in the conversation!

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.