Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aviation And Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny proposed helipad expansion after residents and staff raise habitat, precedent concerns
Summary
The board denied a proposed amendment to the Snake River Canyon Ranch Resort master plan that would have allowed a second helipad for High Mountain Heli on Lot 3‑2; the conditional-use permit that depended on the PUD amendment also failed.
The Teton County Board of Commissioners on June 17 rejected a proposed amendment to the Snake River Canyon Ranch Resort master plan that would have allowed a conditional aviation use (a second helipad) on Lot 3‑2 and then denied the related conditional‑use permit.
What the applicant sought: High Mountain Heli and property owner Jake Laskin asked the county to amend the PUD master plan for Subarea 2 so aviation would be listed as a conditional use limited to Lot 3‑2, allowing a new landing site about a quarter mile east of the existing pad near the Astoria Mineral Hot Springs. The applicant said the second site would act as an alternate landing area for certain groups and avalanche‑mitigation flights and would reduce noise and congestion at the existing pad.
Why staff and the planning commission opposed it: County planning staff and the Planning Commission recommended denial. Staff focused on the planned‑resort master plan’s intent for Subarea 2 as a largely residential area that should protect rural character and natural resources, and on aviation standards in the Land Development Regulations that say permanent aviation uses should be separated from residential uses "to the extent practical" and that approaches should be free of hazards. The board packet notes the proposed pad would be visible from portions of Astoria Park and sits inside a biologically sensitive river corridor used by wintering wildlife.
Public input and conservation concerns: Speakers included representatives of Astoria Park Conservancy and the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, who said a second landing site would expand the area of disturbance and diminish the public’s experience of the new hot‑springs park. Several residents from Snake River Sporting Club and nearby properties also submitted a petition opposing earlier versions of the proposal; the HOA ultimately approved the revised single‑site proposal on condition it be limited to Lot 3‑2.
Board action and reasons: The board rejected the PUD amendment (vote recorded as 0–3) and then declined the conditional‑use permit on the same grounds. Commissioners cited the master plan goals for the Canyon Corridor, the residential character of Subarea 2, wildlife concerns, and uncertainty about whether authorizing an additional aviation site would create precedent for additional helipads.
Ending: The county denied both the PUD amendment and the CUP. Staff and the board urged any party seeking to revisit the question to work with agencies and neighbors and address wildlife, flight‑path and hazard concerns before re‑submittal.
