Ok down to the nitty gritty of evaluating the "Futures".

Our first entry in the "Futures" parade is

Alternative Future #1 - AS IS Branson

Suppose we look at the first paragraph of the narrative given on the official propaganda web site:


The As Is Scenario creates a future for Branson based on “business as usual”. This is the scenario that will likely prevail if no actions or initiatives are taken to obtain a preferred future. This scenario infers that the future will follow trends of the past decade including growth and development, annexation, zoning, community organization, economic development and business trends. This is characterized by low density development in a sporadic manner throughout the City limits and within the surrounding area. Under this scenario, the City will not change policies or land use codes to encourage or direct the location or type of growth; development will be reactive to the market demand.

Oooh,  don't all you developers and entrepreneurs fell a bit dirty?  Right off the bat the writer shows their contempt for the history of our fine community.  See, if we go along and let thing happen as we have in the past, you know the old fashioned American way, then we will not obtain a "preferred future".

Next we see how the horrible historic trends are "characterized by low density development in a sporadic manner...".  See we can have higher density and then since nobody has a yard, we will really enjoy those parks they want to force down our throats.  The difference is the housing becomes more compacted and the balance of the land becomes government controlled.  Thus affording the government politicians more power.  Of course more important is the saving of our mother earth.  Development is distributed in a more sporadic nature because we still live in America where the guy next door may not want to develope HIS property yet and the guy sporadically down the road, wants to do it NOW.  If we are to eliminate the sporadic nature of the development here, we must remove a certain portion of the property ownership rights.

OK, then the obvious and true culprit, the devil himself....  "development will be reactive to the market demand".  How HORRIBLE!  Market supply and demand and customers desires will rule the free market of the City of Branson.  Surely Mr. Branson never intended for this to happen in his town!

PLEASE, can anyone else see a little bias in this first paragraph of the less preferred "Alternative Future"?

Next Paragraph please:

Under this scenario, the majority of the population and employment growth will take place in the suburban fringe and rural areas in the form of low density development. Currently untouched hillside and ridgelines will be developed, negatively impacting the landscape and viewsheds of the Ozark Mountains. Redevelopment of properties along the strip and completion of the platted, unfinished developments will not be a priority. The strip will deteriorate and have the appearance of being tired, the aesthetic will continue to be visually cluttered and the pedestrian experience will be unsafe and disconnected. The City will remain automobile-dominated and city-wide traffic congestion will increase as the local population increases.

Growth in the suburban fringe and rural areas?  Well, of course,  after all this is the very city council that will not let anyone build higher than 35 feet.  NEWS FLASH, higher density will require us BAD developers to go UP!  OH, and those untouched hillsides and ridgelines are currrently owned by PEOPLE, not the government.  When you fix this terrible injustice and take the land away from private citizens you can keep it untouched.  Until then, it belongs to them and they have rights.  This is not Cuba.  anyway, back to my interpretation...

The Strip will deteriorate, if for no other reason then it has become nearly impossible to jump thru the hoops necessary to demolish an old building and build a new project in it's place .  Once you get building plans approved and pay the piper a few times for permits and such, you get to witness more red tape than an MRI patient at a government run hospital in Sweeden while attempting to build it.  Then some bureaucrat reviews of your signage or annual attacks on your employees, and then you get to be pointed out as one of THOSE people who actually invested your hard earned money in an entrepreneurial enterprise that hires people and pays them all the while collecting sales tax for the city.

OK, someone please tell these professionals from out of town that lots of traffic is a good thing.  What nobody seems to want to admit that traffic on 76 is desired.  We have had several ways to solve the problem and the owners along that street do not want the traffic to move any faster.  Branson (on 76) is a drive thru mall.  Every retailer, hotelier, restaurateur, ticket huckster and characature artists on Highway 76 understands that if they are moving fast they will pass them by without seeing them.  Especially since signs are going to outlawed too (another subject).  Imagine a huge mall with thousands of customers going in both direction.  The more customers, the more congestion.  Now some genius decides to put in those people mover sidewalk  contraptions like they have in big airports.  Since there moving faster and have fewer exit points they either don't see the "purse store" or they are so far past it that they go on further into the mall in stead of heading back.  That is Highway 76 in Branson, Missouri.

Branson’s brand remains tied to the entertainment industry. The entertainment and tourism industry will evolve, as the market dictates, and will continue to be a destination for an older demographic. Branson will compete with many other tourist destinations for the Baby Boomer tourist because variety shows and country music do not completely satisfy this demographic. Branson will continue to experiment with a variety of music genres in an attempt to anticipate the entertainment preferences of its visitors. The business climate will remain the same and will provide the support and the foundation for entertainers that move to town. The Convention Center will continue to be a draw for businesses and events and will be increasingly utilized. The downtown will slowly lose its historic character as modern-styled buildings replace dilapidated old structures that once defined the downtown. Downtown growth and vitality will be challenged by a lack of a cohesive business and architectural plan.


The last two paragraphs are slightly confusing to some people,  Since, even in the worst recession in decades, Branson is holding it's own financially as it pertains to income at least, wouldn't the business climate remaining the same be a good thing.  The baby boomers will go elsewhere, the downtown will crumble and loose all historic value and the world will end in fire and damnation unless you ignore the free market and force investment in historic registry rehabilitation and steadfast architectural design restrains and other fine details otherwise known as Alternative Future #2.