One of our gentle readers sent us an email a couple of days ago, with a link to a local website. The site's article is very well-written, and is entirely germane to most of the discussion we've been entertaining here at Weber County Forum lately:Whether we should sell the last remaining open space on the whole over-developed Wasatch Front benchlands to a so-called "developer" whose only so-far-revealed development credential is marrying the Billionaire Boss's daughter and unavalingly sucking up to the Sinclair Oil executives -- in case you've somehow forgotten, or are a "newbie" here -- is an entirely open question.
This excellent article is too lengthy to post here in full; so we are furnishing a link, for our gentle readers' convenience.
As a former U.S. army troop, your humble blogmeister's attention was immediately drawn to the map. Our initial U.S. Army MOS was artillery survey; and we're still fascinated by good maps, even 30 years after "mustering out." We attribute this odd aberration also, in part, to our junior high-school geometry and trigonometry instructors, BTW, for instilling this jaded interest. When we walk the Ogden city trails, we always take along our Garmin GPS device too, along with our enormous Alaskan Malemute, who ALWAYS knows the quickest and most efficient way to get back to the car (on the trails,) with her evolutionarily-developed and purely biological GPS system. What a pity it is that we still lack the technology to site-map two-year-old Denali's dog/wolf brain.
Rumor has it that one of the more "activist" map-oriented and community-minded WSU professors has produced a "Proposed Golf Course Map," that would include "contour lines," in addition to Mayor Godfrey's totally-lame Mt. Ogden Parkland/Peterson Golf Course "overlay."
We are unabashedly requesting that somebody email us a link to that....
It's OUR opinion in the meantime, however, having examined the map, and being familiar with the entire subject property from the time of our early youth, that the described "more playable" golf course, if ever constructed on the described site -- will require significant quantities of dynamite for its construction.
Update 4/30/06 12:56 a.m. MT: Lo and belold (and as luck would have it,) one of our gentle readers has just emailed us the map we'd been hearing about.
"Yep, I have been working on a map overlaying the "greatly improved" golf course on a topographic base map," says our gentle reader. "I've just uploaded it to the Ogden Sierra Club web site." "I'm no golfer," our reader discloses, "but perhaps you or your gentle readers can comment on the design with more authority."
Be sure to click on the link within the Sierra Club article's text for a graphic representation of the area topography. It compares the site layout slope angle of the new proposed course with the existing one. It's quite an eye-opener, we think.
Well, what about it, gentle readers? Lets hear it from our golfers and map-readers. Does this excellent new map describe a "more playable" golf course than we one we already have right now?
The comment session is open.
29 comments:
It might be wise to see how West Valley City is doing after all of the City sponsored projects that our wonderful Chief Administrative Officer JOHN PATTERSON did while in the employment of that city.
I have heard reports that they are struggling to pay for all of the projects. E-Center, USANA amphitheater, the multi cultural center, all of the nice venues that the tax-payers now have the burden to pay for once he left the community to hang out to dry and pay for.
It seems that the Godfrey Administration likes to attract people to his dream team that likes to hawk their previous employers, and then split.
Look into the past, and you may be able to see our future.
Ever read the book...Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them? Welcome to Ogden.
It just proves that poop attracts poop.
Sick and Tired....brings up a good point about Patterson.
As I read the SmartGrowth link, I became more and more dismayed.
First of all, the WSU land IS steep and I've been concerned from the beginning that homes there would be in danger of slides, just as the folks in Mountain Green are experiencing problems.
They had 'geologists' tell them the land was safe for building homes, and now some are uninhabitable.
Having Mount Ogden Golf Course 'reconfigured' to accomodate homes on the fairway would be disastrous. It seems that Peterson is just as anxious as Matt to make a 'name' for himself. Is he trying to impress Earl Holding"? The execs at Sinclair?
If Peterson is such a great and talented businessman, why isn't HE a Senior VP of Something at Sinclair?????
This is folly and we must circulate petitions with the intent of putting this nonsense to a vote in the November election. Is there anyone out there who would join in?
We Will be bonded forever if Godfrey and Peterson are not stopped. Other cities are taking great pains to improve their infrastructures and prepare for ememrgencies. I suppose the LiftOgden people think we could evacuate Ogden via gondola.
I pray we have sane heads on the City Council to rein in this runaway mayor and Peterson who have visions and delusions of grandeur.
Usually, another's delusions of grandeur are harmless, but in this case, we will be delusioned into the poorhouse...and buddy, that ain't grand!
Okay, Lovely Jen,
Here's what we can do: Rudi has my number. I'll get the correct info on how to proceed and what it may cost to get the voterlists, etc to start a petition drive to GET ON the ballot.
If you are interested to help circulate the petitions, and help with costs, call me.
Okay---questions begin. Where are the tennis courts? Are they at the top left corner?
Is the street to the west Taylor? Meaning that #4 will actually be very close to Taylor?
Is the blue square at the top of the map the current clubhouse? (I think Peterson has said that the new clubhouse will be at the south end. Is that marked? Where would that be?)
If the soccer field is the oddly shaped thing by the notation 4600, will players on #4 be hitting toward the soccer field?
Would players on #9 be hitting into players on the putting green?
The housing development will be on top of the word "Ogden?" Looks like that area would be under constant bombardment.
If there is a contour line and you follow it along, does this mean that that line is at the same elevation always? And are these lines 200 feet in elevation apart, is it?
If the answer to all these questions is yes, then I know where I am.
No way could anyone walk this course. It looks like a Bad course to me. But I am not a golfer. Perhaps golfers would find this unique, and challenging.
Am interested in hearing from golfers.
Dian:
Yes, a contour line is a line of constant elevation. The contour interval on the map up on WC Forum seems to be twenty feet, not two hundred. Meaning five lines represents a one hundred foot change in altitude.
According to the Sierra Club website description:
"The contour interval of the map is 40 feet."
Each contour line comprises an often irregular closed loop that connects points of equal elevation. The line with a darker shade of brown, typically every fifth line, is called an index contour and usually has the elevation printed on it. Elevations refer to elevation above sea level.
You know what really bothers me? Godfrey has everyone (who's interested, that is) TALKING about this scheme as if it's a done deal!
His MO is: "say it often enough, loud enough, and get the SE to print it" and the people will buy it.
And boy, will the people buy it. "TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!" How many times will be bonded for another vision?
Now we're into maps, and meetings at WSU, with charts yet. I think we're being sucked into this whole legacy hunt by talking about it as if it's valid.
Are Lovely Jennifer and I the only ones who want to vote in November?
Throw the Bum Godfrey out of office before the ship sinks. The rats have already started to jump ship.
which rats are those, do tell us.
are they jumping from the 9th floor window??
Rudi:
Yup. Your're right. I mis-counted. That makes the five line difference 200 feet, not one hundred. My mistake.
On the proposed petition drive to get the matter on the ballot:
Two points:
I'm not at all sure that matters can be put on a local ballot by petition. Does Utah municipal law provide for this? I expect that, as most things involving municipal governance seem to be in Utah, it is determined by state law. Or is there some kind of local option arrangement for referenda driven by petition? I don't know. But before any extensive time or effort is devoted to this, it'd be best to make sure it is even legally possible.
Second: being the good old fashioned populist Democrat that I am, I have no problem with putting a matter of great controversy like this up to a popular vote to decide. I'm not sure it's the best way to proceed, though; working through the normal processes of affecting city government decisions may be the wiser course to follow. Government by extraordinary procedures is, usually, not a good idea. And if a referendum is arranged, all will be bound by the results, win or lose. And I don't think at this point it is clear which way such a referendum would go.
There is a danger, sometimes, among passionate advocates for [or against] a particular course of action to make overly-optimistic assumptions about how "the people" are, of course, on their side.
Very often passionate advocates talk [mostly] to other passionate advocates for the same policy, and thus conclude [without real evidence] that their view is necessarily the popular one. [The Lift Ogden folks are prone to the same potential error on their side.]
And of course a referendum reflects the views of those who vote, not precisely the same as "the people" at large. If a binding referendum is possible via the petition process, we need to remember also that it will be decided by a good old fasioned hard-nosed political campaign. [Ask anyone who has worked for a school bonding issue how this works.] The general electorate will have to be convinced that not selling the Mt. Ogden Park Golf Course to developers is a good idea.And more of them who think our way will have to be motivated to take the time to get out and vote. Most people don't bother, as a rule.
Such campaigns take not only a great deal of volunteer effort, but also tend to involve a lot of money for publicity, etc. And I suspect the Lift Ogden faction is considerably better financed in that regard than the other side is.
As I said, I have no problem with it going to referendum. But I don't think the outcome is as evident and inevitable as some may think.
Curmudgeon
We need look no further than November last to see which way the wind is blowing here in the land of Oz in matters concerning the Lord Mayor and his visions, and schemes and dreams.
The Four prevailing council members in that election were all tied strongly to anti Godfreyite positions of one sort or another. The four defeated candidates were ALL strong supporters of the Lord's madness.
Glasmann's early campaign slogan was "Stop the Madness"! All the other winners were definately looked at as "anti - godfrey madness candidates!!!
The Godfreyite's, as you may remember, went on the record right away as discounting the election because of the "low turnout", which by the way was larger than when the Little Lord was elected! They said it didn't really mean much because the results didn't reflect what they believe the "people" want!
I never did accuse them of not being "Cheeky Bastards"!!
I say "bring on the vote!" I do not think the Lift Ogden group has gained any traction what so ever with the general public. They make a lot of public noise, but they are a small group of young no-nothins that are being manipulated by an even smaller gang of well off gamers, that are trying to leverage the public owned golf course into a $500 million dollar deal that THEY will own!
If you look at what they are proposing, you will see that Peterson is not going to be laying the $500 million on the table - the PUBLIC will be. He and a small group of insiders and banks will own the whole damn deal - from the Down Town train station to the top of the friggen mountain! The public will take ALL THE RISK, and own nothing in return - except some promised and very nebulous tax dollars some where off into the foggy foggy future! (This is a repeat of course of the sneaky way they got the money for the Matt Godfrey Mall -(MGM) - which will indebt the citizens of Ogden for the next 25 years).
I found the article a couple of threads back about the Sinclair VP - to be very interesting! It certainly supports the theory that I have subscribed to for a while now - that Chris Peterson is not in the main stream on the Holding money, that he does not have any control over amounts in the hundreds of millions, that he may have access to any where from two to five million of his wife's personal money. As such, he is just another hustler out their in the land trying to put a deal together. Don't make him a bad guy by the way, just another "developer" looking to make a pile of money.
The question then becomes - will Ogden, and does Ogden, just drop our collective shorts every time some run of the mill "developer" rolls into town and starts talking big about throwing tons of investment into the community? Do we roll over if he talkes more than $100 million? $200 million? $500 million? Just where is the point where we turn into the whores that would sell off the future generation's access to the foothills of Ogden to some hustler that is going to pick our pocket inorder to pay us for the land we already own?
OB:
You don't have to convince me. I think the gondola/gondola scheme is a bad idea for many of the reasons you mention and more. Even if I was not disposed to think that way already, and was among the uncommitted, I'd oppose approving until the city got to see a feasibility study on the Malan's Basin Resort [done by someone other than the promoter], and good financials, again from an external source, on the golf course condo development, potential change in the tax base, feasibility of the course redesign proposed, etc., none of which have been produced yet by the supporters.
However, referendum votes [again, presuming such are permitted in matters like this] are tricky things. Timing can matter a whole lot. Other events, [like breaking news on a matter the voters see as related] over which referendum proponents have no control, can swing things dramatically one way or another if they affect turnout. I'm raising a question about tactics, not ends.
The reply to your comment about the Mayor's faction [I'd say party, but I don't want to start that discussion over again] losing all of its contests in the last Council election would be this: well, since a majority of the Council are now, by your rekoning, in the anti-Godfrey faction [presuming one exists], if the people have indeed spoken through the last election, then what do we need a referendum for? Shouldn't the newly-chosen Council exercise its best-judgement regarding this matter? Didn't the decision of the people at the polls place it in their hands to decide?
And, as I said, governance by extraordinary means [policy referendum] is not as a rule a good idea, though I agree there are certain times when it may be called for.
Have received answers to my questions from a blog-shy friend. Will post the salient info here:
Regarding proximity of development, etc., to Tayor:
...#4 wouldn't be any closer to Taylor than the golf course is already.
I find this helpful. Gives an idea of scale.
...The blue square is the small reservoir behind the apartment building near the top of 29th. The new clubhouse would be the small brown rectangle just SW of the putting green.
...will players on #4 be hitting toward the soccer field?
... I don't think this would be any worse than it is already.
Would players on #9 be hitting into players on the putting green?
Perhaps, but the putting green is small enough that I'm sure it can be protected with some sort of barrier if necessary. The real problem will be all the places where trails cross the lines of fire.
Regarding the housing development:
There are hundreds of golf courses all over the US where housing developments are mixed in among the fairways. Yes, there are occasional problems with stray balls hitting roofs and windows, but the problems must be rare enough that people are willing to live with them. Of course, I'm sure that minimizing these problems requires a good design and considerable expertise.
Regarding contour lines:
... yes, a contour line is a line of constant elevation. The contour interval on this map is 40 feet. Every fifth contour is darker than the others; the interval between these is 200 feet.
The main thing to look at on this map is how close together the contour lines are: closer means steeper. Compare the contour spacing on the existing golf course to the contour spacing in the areas that are currently undeveloped. Also, count contour lines within the fairways and between the tees and greens.
Would still like to hear golfers' opinions, as would my knowledgable friend. Are there other courses with this kind of difference in elevation? Where are they and who's played them and how was it?
Curmudgeon
I would not call the winners in November's election a "faction" at all. Nor would I think them a "party". They in no way appeared to be linked in some common cause - during the election, and certainly not now!
They did however all seem to appear to oppose Godfrey and his policy's in one way or another. I do not see them as a "anti Godfrey" faction. That may very well be a problem with them now. They do not seem to be on the same page politically. I think as individuals they are way too succeptible to the "charms, wiles and intimidations" of the Godfrey team. Standing seperate as they appear to be now, they are all very weak in regard to the powers that are exercised so meanly by his Lordship and his minions.
As we all know, the Little Lord and the entire Godfreyite movement went into high gear after the election and put enourmous pressure on the "new" council. Godfey intimidated them for sure. He smeared them big time over the "Ernest" fiasco which was pure disingenuous Godfrey from start to finish. Godfrey seperated the council and taught them a hard learned lesson in "who's in charge" around here.
The Lord even caught them by surprise with all this "official communications channels" bull shit he laid on them in the beginning. Hey the little bugger don't play fair and he aint moral - so what's new?
In spite of being a little punk, the little big guy is a dirty, and for keeps, kind of fighter. He is very dangerous to his opponent's well being. He tried and failed to take Glasmann down, during the election, with a bit of chicken shit smear campaign. It didn't work cause Glasmann fought back and won on the issue. Decency prevailed in spite of what Godfrey tried to perpitrate..
I think since that first introduction to "kick in the balls" politics, administered by the Lord hisself,. it woke the council up to the realities of what is happening at city hall. It aint pretty, and it aint for sissy's! I think so far the "new" council is doing fairly well. They seem to be picking themselve's up off the floor after the drubbing that Godfrey administered, and are feeling their way back into the game. At least I hope they are!
The real ball game is yet to be played with this council. The true test will come when they start voting on the various issues that will be nesessary before Godfrey and Peterson can pull off this colosal magic gondola trick they are attempting to perpitrate on to the public.
A true test of character and intelligence is in the immediate future for this sitting Ogden city council
I agree, OzBoy....for sure, Godfrey very nearly knocked the 'newbies' on the council off balance.
However,, it appears they are back on their feet. Jeske did not meet with the little Nazi and has had to hold her own against hostility, and the 'cold shoulder' from some on the council.
If it wasn't so serious, we could call it '8th grade girls meanness'.
Curm...you make some good points. I believe that IF a petition drive was initiated, signatures of only 20% of the VOTERS in the last election would be needed to place the question (gondola/Mount Ogden) on the ballot. The rec center petition drive required close to 8500 names, of 37,000 voters...many on the voter lists were dead or had moved away & not been taken off the rolls.
But, I think you are correct about the LO's having more money than the rest of US. We know what dirty fighters they are, and will stop at nothing THIS time to make sure we'd fail.
Since the petitions would not need to be filed til first part of Oct...we have time to do this right...if at all.
It's true that advocates for or against ANYthing tend to express their passionate views to one another. But, just look at the letters in the SE...I'd say that more are against Godfrey, the gondola and the sale of Mount Ogden. Most are vehemently opposed to WSU even thinking about selling off their land.
My understanding is that if WSU does NOT sell their land to Peterson...he's dead in the water (along with those rats from the sinking ship??) and thus the stupid gondola vision can retreat back into Godfrey's crystal ball.
Just talk to the common folk...not the bankers and realtors and other well-heeled 'investors', and overwhelmingly they are appalled at Godfrey's hubris (thanks OzBoy...it fits!), arrogance, immaturity, and amorality.
Thank you, Mercy, you said what I was going to...but you did it better.
Looks like you did some digging.
Think about this, there are lots of people in Davis County praying we won't get our gondola. Why?? Well guess who owns the east side of Farmington Peak? Those in Davis County would like nothing better then to start a gondola at their conference center that goes to a ski destination. Trust me there won't be a bunch of hillbillies that oppose it. Then we can thank smart growth ogden for their efforts in keeping ogden in obscurity, sending us back 30 years of possible development and success. Smart indeed!!!
Anonymous:
Several points. First: Smart Growth Ogden has as yet taken no position, for or against, the Mayor's gondola/gondola scheme. It has, so far as I know, advocated to date only three things:
1. Full and open disclosure of information reagarding development plans for Ogden, because Ogden residents need to have the most information, and the most accurate information, they can get when discussing and debating development plans for the city's future. SGO has encouraged citizens --- pro, anti and undecided --- to ask questions of all involved in order to be better informed about the issues involved. If you, anonymous, think this is bad advice for Ogden's citizens, then you ought to say so plainly. I think it's good advice for all citizens all the time myself.
2. With respect to transit needs, SGO has endorsed the study done by the Wasatch Regional Council regarding recmmendations for the transit corridor in Ogden between downtown, WSU and McKay-Dee Hospital. See the SGO website for more detail on this. SGO's stand on the matter is clearly laid other there.
3. SGO supports developing a Community Plan for the Mt. Ogden neighborhood [one of only two neighborhoods in the city without one] and developing it before irrevocable decisions are made involving the sale of Mt. Ogden Golf Course for development of 400 homesites, which development will significantly impact the neighborhood. To that end. SGO sponsored a very well-attended meeting of Mt. Ogden neighborhood residents some weeks ago, and will be presenting the resulting petition by residents asking that a Mt. Ogden community plan be developed to the city council on, I think, 16 May. By the way, the meeting was open to all Mt. Ogden resdidents, and all who wanted to say something to the meeting were offered an equal opportunity to do so --- including for example Mr. Bob Geiger --- and all were treated by the crowd assembled politely. No cat-calling, no heckling, and applause for most speakers, whose opinions about the future of the neighborhood were all over the lot [so to speak]. An interesting contrast, I think, to the by-invitation meetings the Mayor is holding at which his views are presented formally. True, questions are solicited, but at the meeting I recently attended, those who expessed opinions not comporting with the Mayor's were sometimes heckled by shouters saying "you've got rocks in your head!" and " You're a knuckle head!" Sadly, the gibes were returned in kind. I merely want to note here that nothing like that happened at the SGO Mt. Ogden Community meeting.
So, Anon., if you are going to criticize an organization, you should at least do it [and the public] the courtesy of summarizing its positions accurately.
OK, second point. You wrote, speaking of a Davis County plan to build a gondola from it's convention center to Farmington Peak [news to me, by the way]:Trust me there won't be a bunch of hillbillies that oppose it. Hillbillies? You folks supporting the gondola/gondola scheme need to get together to keep your stories straight. The usual line is that those opposed to selling Mt. Ogden Park and building the gondola/gondola scheme are a bunch of rich elitists college professors. And here you are announcing they are in fact instead all barefoot ignorant hillbillies. [Didn't you get the memo?]
Well now anonymous, I have read a lot of really dumb stuff on this blog over the last few months, but your little fantasy about the powers that be in Davis County planning a gondola to the top of Farmington Peak is the hands down winner in pure unadulterated stupidness.
There is absolutely no skiable terrain off the back side of those mountains. You can drive all the way up and take a look yourself! Of course there are also no ski resorts, nor are any even remotely being considered.
The Guys and Gals that run stuff in Davis County are way to smart to even entertain flights of fancy like this idiotic Gondola scheme. They are too busy courting and winning decent size companies and events. Like the biggest ever ski convention that is coming up. They are not fixated on some nonsense magic schemes that will pull every thing out of the mudd - like the gondola and Rec Center. They are not spending millions of public dollars chasing little 3 man start up ski companies to fuel their oconomy.
The folks in Davis are trying to build a new addition to their very successfull, and fairly new, convention center because it is so busy. Incidently, that convention center cannot hold a candle to the mostly empty facility that Ogden owns.
Could it all have something to do with the fact that the Davis Development people have their act together? Could it be that the so called "Development" gang that the incompetent Lord has surrounded himself with couldn't sell oil at ten bucks a barrel, let alone economic development in the real world?
Common now, Layton is beating Ogden - the Ski "Hub" at their own game - the ski industry! Layton! can you believe that, and they don't even claim to be interested in the ski industry!!!
Dear Curmud and Ozboy aka Laurel and Hardy,
Don't make me laugh! SGO has not come out against the gondola!? Pleeeease, I just had to surf their web site for two seconds and I found anti-gondola propaganda.
And Ozboy, you pin the same arguments on Davis county as you do Ogden, "unskiable terrain". I have flown over that area several times and found it most suitable for skiing. Try this drive up weber canyon and take a good hard look to your right. Then go look at Snow Basin. There is a good reason Davis County is hosting a SKI CONVENTION! Also, Talk to some of the board of regents members down there. You may be suprised. But please, get more original with your arguments I am getting bored.
Dear Anon:
There is a lot of information up on the SGO site, from a lot of different sources. But SGO has not taken a position on the gondola matter yet. I expect it will, but please recall until the very recent presentation of the development plans at Weber State University, there were not even the outlines of the plan out there now available to the public. Much, if not most, was rumor and guesswork as Lift Ogden and the Mayor kept to secret by invitation only briefings and witholding information for tactical reasons. [Do I need to point out yet again Mr. B. Geiger's statement, on the record to the SE, that Lift Ogden was keeping some of its plans secret out of fear of engendering more public opposition?]. Hard to take a stand on a plan kept mostly secret from the public until just a couple of weeks ago. As more information about what the gondola/gondola Malan's Basin development involves, about what the plan its supporters still call "a work in progress," undergoing constant revision in the light of public comment [or so the Mayor said last night], I expect SGO will take a stand on the issue. But it has not yet.
Remember, please that the "plan" has changed quite a bit. First it was to be a tram over the mountain to Snow Basin to connect Ogden with "world class skiing." [I was at the early Lift Ogden meetings, where we were presented with a Lift Ogden logo showing a tram like Albuquerque's rising over Ogden.] Then it was going to be gondolas instead going over the mountain to Snow Basin. At that time, the Mayor was touting the downtown to WSU gondola as a solution to Ogden's mass transit problems.
Well, all that's changed, now. Now... for the moment at least... the Mayor tells us the gondola is not a mass transit project. And now the gondola is not going over the mountain to Snow Basin, it's going instead to an as yet unbuilt ski resort in Mallan's Basin which, magically, has assumed the mantle of "world class" resort. And not so much as a lean-to yet built. That's really impressive. A non-existent ski-resort that is already [the Lift Ogden folks tell us] "world class." And now the project requires selling the city golf course at Mt. Ogden Park and the lands above it to Mr. Peterson for 400 vacation homes.
What will "the plan" involve tomorrow, I wonder? Who knows?
At the early Lift Ogden meetings, I learned the tram would make Ogden the "next Albuquerque." Then we were to be the "next Aspen" or "the next Vail." For a while there, Ogden was going to be "the new Park City." Got to the point where I wanted to show up at Lift Ogden meetings shouting "Score card! Score card! Hey, getcha score card! Can't tell what the gondola will make Ogden without a score card!"
Be patient. SGO will I am sure take a stand on the plans. But it has not yet, whether you find it convenient to think so or not.
I have spent hundreds of great days over the last 6 or 7 years up Farmington Canyon and all over those mountains front and back. Almost all of it incidently is forest service land. It is all pretty steep and seems very unlikely that it could be good ski terrain. I have done a lot of snow mobiling in those mountains, and I just do not see how there is or could be any decent skiing there.
Out of curiousity, I called two of the Davis County Commisioners yesterday and today and ask about any plans or ideas about sking or gondola's in the mountains east of Davis County. I was told that as far as they knew, it isn't feasible and there has never been any serious discussion of this at least in the last 10 years or so.
The reason they got the upcoming major ski show at the Davis Convention Center in Layton is that they out hustled and out sold the Ogden development people. They were basically selling the same thing - Northern Utah, Snow Basin, Close to SL airport, etc. So even tho the people in Davis have no dillusions about being some sort of Ski Hub, they still out did the mayor and his whole develpment team in getting this big convention in Layton and not Ogden.
Curmud,
I respect your argument and understand the difficulty in fathoming an enormous construction effort this project would take. As a supporter of the gondola I too have many questions but there are two kinds of people in business one that says "it can't be done" and another who says "lets find a way". I belong to the latter and have had success in business.
As for SGO, don't insult my intelligence. We all know what they are about.
Also, stop fear mongoring, as set forth in the Weber State meetings, Mt. Ogden or any other park will not be affected.
TL:
What is it with people forcing me to defend the Mayor and his allies tonight? Stop it. Right now. Stop it. I don't want to have to do this again.
But sometimes, what determines where a convention or trade show goes is not the amount of "hustle" on the part of competing venues. Sometimes --- in fact, often --- things like the size of the available display and vendor space, the number of available hotel rooms close to the show floor, etc. are the deciding factors. And sometimes proximity to restaurants, theaters, and off-hour activities figure into the mix. Ogden has lost convention and meeting business at the Convention Center, I'm told because those looking for sites conclude "there isn't enough to do" in Ogden outside the Convention Center, after meeting hours.
That was one of the rationale, recall, behind the Mayor's push for the Rec Center project with associated theaters, sports venues, etc. [Please note: I don't know if that was a good idea or not. I've taken no position on the rec center, not having studied the question. I'm merely noting here that increasing Ogden's appeal to trade show and meeting groups was one of the rationales offered for it.]
But if the physical facilities, available close hotel rooms, vendor space arrangements at Layton are closer to what a show's organizers are looking for than what is available at the Ogden Convention Center, then Layton's Convention Center is going to get the business, regardless of how much "hustle" Ogden's pitchmen may display.
Now STOP posting things that force me to defend the Mayor and his henchpersons. It's put me right off my feed.
Anon:
Ah, still more to discuss. Three things this time.
First: Your wrote there are two kinds of people in business one that says "it can't be done" and another who says "lets find a way". The problem with that formulation of our disagreement is that it presumes that "it" should be done. That's where we disagree. That, by the way, is also the line taken by the Mayor at meetings like last nights. He welcomes criticism and public comment so he can find better ways to make the gondola/gondola scheme happen. Those doing the criticizing however, don't think it should happen at all. If I agree to your formulation of our disagreement, you've already won. We would only be discussing how the plan should be implemented, not whether it should be implemented at all. And that last point is, so far as I can see, what we are disagreeing about.
Second: You wrote "As for SGO, don't insult my intelligence. We all know what they are about. Well, that too is the Lift Ogden line. That anyone who raise questions about the gondola/gondola plan is negative, aways against, never for, etc. I think the SGO people have been, and are being, careful not to fall into that trap, and to try to shape this discussion [that seems to be growing] about Ogden's future along positive, rather than merely negative lines. That approach seems clearly reflected in the brochure explaining SGO they have up on their site. It seemed evident to me at the Wasatch Elementary School meeting. And it seems to matter to many of the SGO people I talk with. Clearly, you disagree about that, as is your right of course. And I'd be the last to deny that many involved in the SGO group are personally convinced the gondola/gondola scheme is a bad idea and have said so as individuals loudly and publically. As is their right. But I generally try not to criticize organizations [like, say, the Chamber of Commerce] for stands it has not taken as an organization, or to attribute to an organization the ideas expressed by one, or some, or even many of its members when they speak as individuals, not representatives of the organization. I think you ought to grant the same courtesy to SGO. When it takes a public stand on the gondola/gondola scheme, have at 'em. But it hasn't done that yet. I suspect it will shortly. Be patient.
Third: You wrote "Also, stop fear mongoring, as set forth in the Weber State meetings, Mt. Ogden or any other park will not be affected. I was pretty careful in what I wrote, I thought. No where did I say Mt. Ogden Park was being sold. Here's what I did write: And now the project requires selling the city golf course at Mt. Ogden Park and the lands above it to Mr. Peterson for 400 vacation homes.
When this whole mess began, I thought the whole park area [golf course, soccer fields, tennis courts, and the public wild land up slope from the golf course] was "Mt. Ogden Park." I've learned since that that is not so, that the playground and soccer fields and tennis courts west of the golf course are a separate park, and in fact I think two parks.
However, folks on your side keep talking as if ALL that is being considered is "sale of the golf course." Not quite. The sale includes all of the city land [wild, containing many high use trails] up slope from the golf course and south of it as well. So I looked for a way to include, in a brief statement, accurately what was being contemplated. The golf course "at" Mt. Ogden Park and the wild lands above seemed a reasonably accurate way to put it. No fear-mongering involved. If it was not clear, that's my fault as a writer, and you have my apologies.
Curmud,
You persuade me to become a SGO member, almost. You are one of the few who can articulate your point without getting emotional. I appreciate your candid style of writing. Unfortunately, a vast majority of the SGO members are thugs (this is only my personal experience and may not be an accurate stereotype) who browbeat if I don't agree with them. I could take SGO members seriously if they had some other idea that is as innovative and had as much immediate opportunity for Ogden as the gondola project has. An extra 250K for Ogden Schools? I say yes! Redesign the golf course and stop the bleeding? Yes! Give WSU extra$$ and room to expand across the street? Yes! If SGO is so smart then where is their idea?? I am serious! Give us a better option and I would listen. But so far all I hear is nay saying.
On Sat. while attending a soccer game at Mt Ogden Park I was approached by a crazed woman looking for signatures on her petition against the gondola project when I asked her about this she said, and I quote "That damn little mayor is going to sell off this whole park. We have to stop the little bastard" It was less then a convincing argument not to mention misinformed.
Yes, Telluride does...
From their site http://www.telluride.com/about_telluride/Gondola.asp
The First of its Kind... For several years, the Telluride Ski & Golf Company (Telski) worked diligently to build the first-of-its-kind $16 million public transit system intended to eliminate the transportation and air quality impact of growth in the region. The first part of the system, the Chondola (a high-speed quad with a 4-person gondola cabin every 10th chair), opened in the 1995/96 season. The gondola, joining the historic town of Telluride with the town of Mountain Village and serving several ski runs, opened in November of 1996.
Telski is a ski industry leader and role model to other resorts in building trendsetting technology. The chondola and gondola systems are innovative, imaginative and something no other mountain community has. They signify the giant leap Telski has taken in initiating advanced transit systems.
Telluride's gondola is the equivalent of three high-speed express lifts. While it transports skiers and snowboarders to a mountain ridge, it is primarily a public transportation system and it's free to foot passengers. It virtually eliminates the need for a car and drastically reduces the amount of air and noise pollution. It eliminates growing traffic congestion and subsequently increases safety. It provides residents with an easy commute to work or school and allows guests to avoid renting a car. Most remarkably, it is more convenient and timely than a bus, a car or even light-rail.
It is pretty astounding that this "anonymous" person writes:
"Unfortunately, a vast majority of the SGO members are thugs (this is only my personal experience and may not be an accurate stereotype) who browbeat if I don't agree with them. I could take SGO members seriously if they had some other idea that is as innovative and had as much immediate opportunity for Ogden as the gondola project has."
I have met a few members of the SGO group, and this was absolutely not the experience that I have had. They seem to be a very educated, home owning, successfull, and concerned group of citizens to me. Their meeting at the elementary school a week or so ago had about 400 very well behaved and polite people in attendance. There was not even one incident of rudeness shown to those like the Geiger kid who spoke in favor of the gondola. The Geiger kid incidently did look like a thug, but he was the only one there that did.
It seems to me that this person is practicing the art of "projection". That is, taking the dark and undiserable characteristics of themselves and the Gondola boosters, and projecting that boorish and stupid behavior onto those that do not agree with them.
People who speak against the gondola at the gondola pep rallies are routinely heckled and insulted, and it isn't the SGO people that are doing it.
This other business of SGO not coming up with their own solutions is simply a very stupid argument. The gondola boosters have set up a straw man, and then come up with what they consider a brilliant solution for their pretend problem. Then they attack those that oppose them for not having solutions of their own for the manufactured problem.
Incidently the brilliant solutions for their own mythical problems are all based on fantasy, untrue projections, unfounded stories that they feed themselves, and worst of all blatant lies and manipulations of what the circumstances really are.
The very smartest "solution" to these made up problems is No solution at all! There are no problems in Ogden that are of the magnitude that they describe. The problems that Ogden does have will absolutely not be solved with this gondola idiocy, but rather will be made far worse.
Ogden has taken a huge financial hit over the last six years of the misgovernance of the Mayor and his circle of incompetents. We will be in hock for 25 years over the ill advised "Rec Center". If this gondola madness goes forward, it will add vast insult to our already substantial injury.
New comments are not allowed.