A compenduim of Dian's Notes from the 11/14/06 Council/RDA meeting
Gentle reader Dian has outdone even her normally prodigiously intelligent and rosourceful self today. The depth of her work product this day exceeds everything that any of the print media have reported, or could report, (given page-space limitations,) re: last night's council/RDA session.
Take notes people. Last night's meeting was FAR MORE COMPLICATED. politically, than anything you'll ever read in an Ace Reporter Schwebke article.
Dian has produced FOUR articles (from nineteen 11x8 pages of rough notes) for our gentle readers' consumption concerning last night's combined Council/RDA meetings.
For those gentle readers who want detail... It's right here, thanks to the efforts of our own gentle reader/WCF Contributor, Dian.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
58 comments:
I liked thi spart from part 3:
"This began with a power point presentation by Bill Cook. There were two hand-outs available for this--one a breakdown on blue paper of the resolution and another white paper of the resolution itself. In the blue paper breakdown, there was a list of 8 steps:
1. Mt. Ogden Community Plan
2. Planned Community Development Zones (Mixed-use Zones) and Sensitive Area Overlay Zones.
3. Petition and Review of the Chris Peterson Project.
(Note: This petition might include: amendments to the Ogden City General Plan, which in turn would involve: open space, open space zoning, annexation, sale of property, and more.
4. Mixed Use Zone for a Specific Project.
5. Development Agreement and Project Master Plan.
6. Annexation.
7. Property Sale.
8. Budget amendments.
Dumbass Bill Cook calls point 5 "the point of no return!"
Bill Cook is obviously a complete bureaucrat and dumbass.
The first step obviously ought to be reciving a concrete offer from wannabe developer Peterson.
That's the first step in any NORMAL transactions, ferchrissake!
What's wrong with the friggin' council anyways?
Why do they even listen to this Bill Cook Moron?
Tom Ellison has a perfect client in the ne'er do well Peterson, and a perfect "adverary" in the Ogden City low self esteem government schmucks.
So low in self-esteem are you Ogden people, you're willing to line up and kiss the ass of a developmet nobody, a guy whose only claim to fame is porking a billionaires' daughter.
Call my office immediately in the mornig.
I can help you out a lot!
Ernie the Attorney
Dian:
Thanks again for the very full reporting. I was pleased to see that not only public comment but Council members seem to be running out of patience at being asked to devise a process and to "signal" approval for a proposal that as yet has not been presented to them, to the Planning Commission, to, it seems, anybody, not even to the Mayor or to Mr. Bob Geiger, head of Lift Ogden.
Which leaves the Mayor and Mr. Geiger arguing that they don't know what might be in the proposal from Mr. Peterson, should one ever in fact appear, they don't know the details it might include, they can't speak to the financials, they have apparently seen no market studies to indicate that it is even commercially feasible, but by God, whatever the propsal may involve and contain, they are for it and they are annoyed that the Council will not "signal" its advance approval for this pig in a poke too.
Such is [you should excuse the expression] "leadership" in Ogden City, 2006.
One of the things that I noticed at last night's meeting was that those who spoke in favor of approving this process resolution stated that it would show the community the Council's intent regarding the Peterson proposal.
Yes, it would. And this is precisely why I do not think this resolution should see any official action at all. They don't need to approve it officially. When and if the proposal arrives, they can use this proposed resolution as a suggested framework as to how to deal with it, but I really don't think it requires ratification or anything like that.
In fact, approving it officially could be construed as an intent to officially approve the proposal itself, when and if it should arrive. I don't think we want that, especially this early on. After all, we don't even know what the proposal involves, which is why the Council has been unwilling to state an official position except that of neutrality for an entire year now.
So I think tabling was very wise of them. Went right along with their heretofore announced position of neutrality.
Dian...
But... but... but... not sitting up and fetching and rolling over as Mr. Peterson demanded is so unfair to him! Weren't you listening to Councilman Stephenson when he explained that?
Exactamundo, Dian...
Implied contract
Yes I was, Curmudgeon, and there was a lot more to that speech, which went sort of to the effect that it is the duty of elected officials to look at development ideas which show potential for economic development in a city.
Very well and good. But since when does the Council need to take official action in order to agree to look at something?
Especially when there is nothing there to look at?
Have you ever heard of anything more bizarre?
Fair is one thing. Courtesy is another. But requesting that an elected body officially agree to look at something that is not there I think more than slightly off.
I believe that Jason Wood's childhood project was a "bicycle pedal powered submarine". They did research as children and came up with the "concept" of the plan...
"What we had were a concept and a lot of pretty drawings," Jason said. "That is all the Peterson 'project' is at this time, a concept and a lot of pretty drawings." One must laugh. A most appropriate analogy, Jason.
What concerned most of the citizens present was the obvious position that the resolution takes of recognizing the Peterson plan (which is no plan), and, as Brandon Stephenson said, "telegraph[ing] our intention as to this project." This means that the city's intent is to deal...
Why is that a problem? It iterates a desire to deal... even without a firm proposal upon which to deal. It proves intent. It opens the city to lawsuit based on intent or good faith dealing with Chris Petersen, who has shown no willingness to deal at all. It could be argued that it was the city's intent to deal and that the city would deal based on the successful completion of this process.
This is just one reason that the council should be careful in its language in the resolution. You do not want to "telegraph" anything to anyone who is not:
1. Answering questions
2. Developing a proposal
3. Showing FORMAL intent
4. Running around with everyone and stirring up comment from everyone except those who have a say in a.) land sales (WSU - no proposal as well), b.) zoning, c.) financial outlays (the Council).
It is lunancy at its finest and most blatant. If Chris Petersen truly wants to develop this project, he would do well to actually deliver some of those necessary elements for formal consideration.
The wrong course from the council would be to take Bob Geiger's advice and "go get some of the answers." The Council should await answers from the developer, as it is not their job to develop the proposal! That was absolutely ludicrous advice from Mr. Geiger. How can the Council get answers, when the proposal is just a phantom "concept with a lot of pretty drawings"?
Toad:
I am starting to hear, backchannel, that the Lift Ogden Amen Chorus is now angry at the Mayor over the ham-fisted blundering way he rolled this project out, way too early, before it was fully developed, which both invited opposition and permitted it to build. They are getting tired of constantly having to trail after the mayor, trying to clean up his tactical mistakes. Comments [out of his hearing] on his ability are becoming... well, let's just say "colorful." Or so the backchannel says of late....
Too funny, Curmudgeon.
Assuming the truth of this "backchannel" stuff, it would be hilarious to hear that the commanders in charge of the "Lawn Sign Campaign," the "Brochure Campaign," and the many other "Shock and Awe" paramilitary pro-gondola campaigns orchestrated by the LO military commander wannabe "Captain Bob." have started bitching to Boss Bitch about their firing-off of all the ordnance before the "battleplan" was complete.
LOL!
We swear you couldn't make a story like this up.
It's too Friggin' weird.
A little like premature... well... you know. Give a little too much, a little too early... and POW... you lose all credibility and that amorphous gondola mystique.
Bob Geiger's threat of bringing out the 'big guns' of the city's business community also sounded a bit hollow in light of this plan without a plan. I have to wonder how many people would actually get behind a plan that seems as ephemerous as gas on a windy day. There are not too many business people who would continue to back a 'vision' without solid steps. Most of them have dealt too long and too much with the other Utah malady... the MLM... to give this much continued credence.
Stepenson's toadying to Godfrey is so blatant that one would think even HE would be embarrassed.
Objecting to any delay by tabling was just him following Godfrey's orders again.
Jason: Loved your 'submarine project'...but YOU had the 'pretty drawings'. So far, Peterson hasn't even come up with those. Unless you count those slick highschool renditions of his 'visions' that he set up on easels for the early dog and pony shows.
Bobby ordered the Council to go after the answers. I thot he was Peterson's bud. Surely, someone as tight with Pete as the Geigers' could've shaken loose a couple answers to the 184 by now.
Guess this high-powered VP doesn't understand that the 'developer' brings all the info, plans, financials, timeline, etc TO the table. Or did he and Dad run around and do all the footwork for their ski shop friends whom THEY have brot to Ogden?
When Bob threatened to bring all those bankers and business people back to the Council meetings to tell their stories again, was he referring to that group of LO's who showed up with pieces of white paper emblazoned with YES pinned to their shirtfronts?
I recall some construction types regaling us with the wonders of the gondola, while visions of a hefty bankroll danced in their heads...and a real estate broker or two who may have envisioned selling Pete's 'footprint' homes, but the most impressive in my mind, and surely the most compelling reason for having a gondola run from downtown to Malan's was Ed Allen's description of the exquisite sunsets over the lake as viewed only from the Malan's Basin.
Upon reflection, I think we would be remiss in NOT taxing ourselves half to death, if we could see a sight like that! Why surely, Curt is right. "Ten million cars go past Ogden on I-15 annually on their way to Yellowstone, and 10% will stop off here just to ride that gondola"!
Perhaps we're being short-sighted here. Perhaps someone with a good calculator could crunch the numbers and figure out how many tacos from that stand in front of the Municipal Bldg would be eaten by tourists running to hop on the gondola on 23rd Street?
I'm tired of being called 'non-progressive' and 'negative'...by golly, I've decided I'm foursquare for PROGRESS!!
HOW ABOUT YOU?
Mr. B
Your second paragraph is totally inaccurate.
Never have I said that I support the gondola project without any reservations.
All I have ever said, is that the concept of the gondola and the "hope" that it "can" be done and will be done, if it "can" be done, is bringing business to the city of Ogden and oppurtunity for us.
Unlike "all" of you, I did approach, and have talked to all of the companies that have committed to move here. I do know why they came.
I have personal knowledge.
Unlike all of you however, If it "can" be done, I believe we should take a very close look at
the project.
I also want the details. I want a process started to get those details.
Different from most all of you, I do not refer to people that I disagree with as a DUMB ASS or a Crook or a NAZI just because they want to closely look at the project. A project that has brought Ogden to the attention of new companies that have brought a minimum of $25 million is salaries to the citizens of this city.
I have talked to the management of these companies. They do not want to live in Eden or Huntsville. They are looking at homes in Ogden. I assume that this is good news but I may be wrong.
I do not want the trails ruined but if changeing them can enhance the oppurtunities for my grandchildren then I favor doing so. (The foothills that my father climbed upon are now the homes of many of you). It was considered progress at the time.
Okay, you my all go to work calling me a liar, twisting my words, denighing the jobs that have come.
Have Fun
Curt Geiger
Mr. Geiger. Did any of those companies that you personally spoke to come to Ogden for any of the other immenities that is offered here in Ogden already? Are these businesses that naive to base such big decisions on a speculative idea that has no bearing in reality? Are they not aware of the controversy and the many hoops this project has to go through before it even comes to close to a reality. If they indeed come to Ogden "just" for the gondola, someone has been feeding them a line of bull and it does not seem to be a wise business decision. It is not a reality. Will they go away when it does not happen and will you stop promoting the qualities of Ogden then as well? The beautiful mountains, reasonable rates, world class resorts, growing downtown, economic growth, commuter rail, fantastic homes, access to the airports and the western states, low taxes, recreation, four seasons and the wonderful people are not enough to bring businesses, people and jobs to Ogden? Will they go away when the gondola does not happen? Lets give credit to what is here now, Curt, not to the promise of a pipe dream that has not even been proposed yet. There is enough in reality to come to Ogden. Peterson and the gondola have no place in reality, only fantasy at this point in time. Nobody really knows if it is a good idea for Ogden now, why would we as businesses, elected officials including the Mayor, the Ogden-Weber Chamber of Commerce feed untruths to businesses to get them here? And where is Mr. Peterson anyway? Where is his plan? He wants a full guantee and open ticket before he gives us a nickel or an answer. The reality of Ogden is enough to bring business and tourists here. You say it "can" be done, but is it the best for Ogden? I for one do not think so and I am invested here in Ogden for what is here now as I am sure you are as well. Have you ever even considered the fact that you may be barking up the wrong tree?
Curt,
If you really want us to "take a very close look at the project" then why are you supporting a process that would commit us to the project before we have had "a very close look", i.e. your logic above is in conflict with your actions. If you really want us to believe that you are sincere about what you state above, then you too should be demanding that our City Council require answers and economics from the developer before the city considers changing zoning ordinances and our general plan as suggested by the developer and our administration.
Second, I appreciate your personal efforts to bring Ogden to the attention of the companies that you take full credit for having brought here. But let's be honest some came not even knowing about the gondola project, some came because of the low cost of doing business in our city as compared to other cities, some came because of the association with other companies in the same industry and some came because of finacial incentives provided to them to come. None of these companies are going to leave if the gondola isn't built, none of them are going to leave if the gondola to Malan Basin isn't built and none of them will leave if there aren't homes built on our open space. They came for sound business reasons and wouldn't up stakes and leave if these project weren't developed. They like the access to a world class ski mountain called Snow Basin and that in conjunctions with the reasons mentioned above is why they're here.
Wow.
You know, with all the PR they do we get to thinking these guys are more than they are. Look at Curt's letter.
It is repetitive as well as vacuous. Curt says he wants details and wants to start a process to get those details. How about this Curt - Give Chris a call and tell him to submit some details!
And yes Curt, neither the mayor, nor Bob, nor you even use slurs like "naysayer", "obstructionist", "CAVE", etc. to refer to those with whom you disagree. No, you are above name calling.
And I'm tired of the Geigers telling me how grateful we should be for them. Those two have caused far, far more consternation, division, and indeed, corruption than they are worth. Do me a favor Curt, take your lemonade stand and hit the road.
It's nice to know they read this blog though - they might learn something.
Curt Geiger wrote: "The foothills that my father climbed upon are now the homes of many of you. It was considered progress at the time."
Mr. Geiger,
Unless you have moved lately, YOU live in the foothills - or is being up on the side of the mountain considered something different? Although, at least you do live in Ogden.
If Chris Peterson thinks so much of our city, what is he doing living in Sandy? Why isn't he living here where he can meet the lumpenproletariat as he waits in line at Smith's, eats on Historic 25th Street, and contributes something to the local economy? Guess he's afraid he might get an earfull of what those of us who care about the Ogden our grandchildren will inherit think. One would think that after over a year of floating "concepts" that anyone serious about doing more than ripping off our parklands for private gain would have come up with hard numbers, studies, and serious information.
Considering the alternative I think I'm proud to be a CAVE.
Curt... BTW. Here's your chance to be honest. Redeem yourself. Did you sell your soul to the devil, er I mean the Mayor for getting your wife a plush job for Ogden City, in no less, the Economic Development Dept? Is this your motivation for all this or is it something that Chris Peterson promised you? Homes? Commissions? Gratuitys? It is about money somewhere? That seems to be the only motiviation in all fo this. What do you Geigers, Mayor Godforsaken and Chris Peterson have worked out? What is the real payoff? What is the truth in all of this. Lets be honest. And do not say it is for the betterment of the Ogden community. Go to our Mt. Ogden Community Plan meeting tonight and you will see what the good folks of Ogden really want in our neighborhood and for our community. To be left alone and to leave our open space land as it is and not be sold to a land grabbing gold digger who does not give a rats A$$ for this community but to make huge profits. That is the only motivation for any of the supporters. Not the beauty, not the preservation of our greatest asset, but that certain LO peoples will profit from this deal somehow. Lets be honest. And it is not honest to sell this city to prospective business with something that is not here and more then likely will not. That is deceiving and dishonest. There are scams going on everywhere in this deal and there is no deal. Who is getting what where? Just a bunch of hot air for now. Why would we sell our prime land and use the moneys to fund a private transportation system to the very person who bought it. This makes no sense at all. Peterson build your resort on your land and use other modes of transportation such as buses that already go there several an hour. Leave the public lands alone. He has shown nothing. Why do you buy into such an empty plan? In ten years lets talk about transportation if this resorts succeeds. He needs to prove to Ogden, not the other way around. He needs to answer to Ogden and not the other way around. Save our open space, your grandchildren will thank you someday, unless they too will be living in one of the luxury homes that would be passed down to them. If it hasn't slid down the mountain by then.
you have it wrong! ogdenlover.
ITS CAGE.
C-itizens
A-gainst
G-odfreys
E-ndevors
I think that is much better word.
Dear Mr. Geiger:
I really hate to harp on this, but... you wrote Okay, you may all go to work calling me a liar, twisting my words, denying the jobs that have come.
Once again, not everyone who posts here [on both sides of the question] engages in name-calling and scurillity. Witness a couple of the replies your posting drew. In fact, one of the most irritating things [for me] about those who post on the pro-gondola side of the question is the assumption, often stated, that those who think differently on the matter "say no to everything" and "oppose everything" and [note your statement quoted above] "all" call LO folks liars, etc.
I agree, running off the rails in anger [which too many too often do] and denoucing all those on the other side in scurrilous terms does little to advance the discussion or to find some middle ground that will best serve the citizens of Ogden.[Think "Option B."] But then, neither does the tendency on the other side, yours, to lump all opponents together as mindless opposers of progress, and irrational critics, etc. All of us are for progress. The problem is, we disagree about what, in this instance, constitutes progress as opposed to mere change.
I am glad to see that you too seem to be becoming frustrated at the lack of concrete information about his plans so far made public by Mr. Peterson. Or did I misread your post? If not, then on that matter we can agree, I think, in good conscience, the both of us.
As for "starting the process," the problem there is "starting the process" was presented at the recent Council meeting as displaying the Council's "support" in advance for the proposal, which they have not yet received, and about which you and I and the Council and the public lack key information. There's the problem. It seems to me that Mr. Peterson's letter to the Council laying out what he is willing to do, what parts of the Council's already adopted procedure for considering his proposal, whenever he makes it [the Discovery Ogden process, I think the Council calls it], he is "willing" to comply with, and what parts he is not, and laying out what he expects the taxpayers to fund as part of his application makes it plain he wants some kind of prior committment from the Council before he completes his proposal for submission.
I don't think you -- or any fair-minded person -- can dismiss opposition to that idea out of hand as unreasonable or thoughtless.
Thanks, as always, for weighing in. And again, let me recommend that, in the future, you ignore the hot-headed over-the-top name-calling posts. It's an open blog. Anybody can post nearly anything they like. There's an upside to that, but there is, as you note, also a downside.
I suggest replying to what you consider substantive comment, and ignoring the rest. Doing that really helps keep the blood pressure down [and on that score, this three-pill-a-day guy can speak from experience].
I hope everyone reads the excellent feature story in City Weekly today about the loss of the community and rural nature of Ogden Valley.
Peterson doesn't live in Eden because the homes are too expensive. And, when you've been sipping from the holy grail of the Holdings', Ogden deosn't have the swanky lure of the east hills of Sandy.
It's okay for Bob G to call people names and say 'scurrilous' things about them, and for Curt to whine and pout, but if anyone gives it back....then WE"RE baaaad. But, Curmudgeon will always come in and make it all better.
Cage is pretty good...so is
T axpayers
A gainst
P eterson's
S cams
S mart
P eople
A gainst
M att's
S cams
Curt and Bobby, why don't YOU get the answers to the burning questions and 'bring them to the table"?
Gee Curm, reading your post about helping Geiger know how to interact with people I . . . I wanted . . . I just wanted to reach for a Kleenex, or . . . or maybe for my . . my violin. It . . . it was just so . . . so thoughtful.
On the other hand, did it ever occur to you that the Geigers already know all of this and that the reason they demonize people and lump those who disagree with them into groups that they then deride, is because it is a political tool that has worked for them in the past? Do you suppose they need you to tell them that this is inappropriate – as if they don’t already know it?
When they try to infer that those who disagree with them are perhaps lacking in knowledge and experience and should defer to their banking and real estate cronies’ far greater wisdom and knowledge, do you suppose they need some counseling for their people skills?
Do you suppose that when they call people’s employers and try to get them fired for their political beliefs that they are truly trying to improve those organizations by relieving them of those employees? When they try to get the family members of those with whom they disagree fired, are they trying to improve business in the community? Would you like to suggest to them another way to do that, that would keep blood pressures lower?
Do you think that when they flatter you and when they appear to agree with you and to concede on trivial points that they don’t know what they’re doing?
Do you suppose that were you to meet Satan himself that he wouldn’t greet you by offering a warm handshake, looking you in the eye, and nodding approvingly? Do you suppose the Geigers – salesmen – don’t know how to sell?
But then, perhaps they are just idiots, and know none of these things. Pray tell Curm? And do continue to enlighten them, and us, with your sympathy for the Devil.
Dear Curt, You said...
"Unlike all of you however, If it "can" be done, I believe we should take a very close look at
the project."
We have been taking a very close look at the project. I'll contend that most on this blog have taken an inordinately close look at the project. Instead of just promoting an idea blindly, we have been out doing the research, looking at maps and the terrain. I've talked to Doppelmayer. Hiking the area is a good way to get a feel for it. Envisioning the construction and operational phase from a logistical standpoint. Don Wilson addressed the terrain of malan's from a ski experience. The town gondola versus streetcar transit corridor has been examined from an economic engine view. It fails miserably. A four-mile, 3 or 4-leg, town gondola is fraught with operational limitations and hiccups that only someone who has spent some time on a multi-leg system would understand.
Need I say more...Hell yes
What about the snowbasin connection? They don't want it. Period...Why...Bob thinks it's just billionaire's at play. Bernie thinks that once you build it Earl will come around.
LISTEN... I will personally take you, Curt, on a little ski tour to that ridge that would be the only possible terminus. This is no place to drop anyone... I mean even so called experts. Maybe you haven't skied Snowbasin much but those who do, call it FOGBASIN. The visibility at Snowbasin on the best snow days is sometimes described as the MILKBOTTLE. I have been there MANY days where I could not see the snow below me. The terrain on the Snowbasin side is only negotiable in powder conditions by an experienced well-advanced expert and hopefully with some visibility. Once that snow in the bowl gets chopped and iced in a few hours it is impassable. There are death cliffs heading towards Needles lodge and cascading down towards you from Mt Ogden. This area of the mountain is a No-Man's Land. It is the very last area of the mountain to be cleared for avalanche safety. You cannot by any stretch of the imagination even get near Needles lodge from that descent and you CANNOT just go around to Strawberry. I have seen weeks go by without a single sole venturing up to that bowl.
And you guys continue to say it's possible or you can simply "go over" to Snowbasin because it's there. YOU, Curt, AND Bob, know NOTHING what you are talking about.
You have never adressed any of my technical points. Of course you would discount my experience and expertise. Most of the points that demonstrate the limitations and risk associated with this proposal DO NOT require an expert or consultant to answer. In fact, that is YOUR DEFENSE whenever presented with well reasoned analysis, to say that the experts will tell us the real story. I guarantee you that when the rela experts speak you will hear exactly what has been said on this blog forever.
Please talk to us, now, Curt
Dian Woodhouse did a great job reporting on a long, boring meeting. I only wish that all of the commentators on her report were as fair, honest, and insightful.
I don't understand why some people feel the need to hide their identities as "anonymous." Resorting to childish name-calling, innuendo, and ad hominen attacks does a dis-service to the other participants in the discussion.
Whether or not you agree with Curt Geiger, you must admit it was brave of him to address his critics head-on, and identify himself plainly. If you can't do likewise, then what DO you have to add to this discussion?
What I have is a Salt Lake Tribune article from May 24, 2000, titled "Snowbasin Land Swap Finally Signed--Developer Earl Holding Backs Down, Agrees to Give Up Taylor Canyon; Land Swap Gets Past Final Hurdle."
Here is the key excerpt:
An Ambivalent End : Ogden Mayor Matthew Godfrey said he is "somewhat ambivalent" about losing the chance to keep Taylor Canyon private for construction of an overhead gondola or tram. He said he will guage public opinion about finding another route up Mount Ogden--one that would require lengthy environmental anyalysis--by including a few questions about the gondola project on a citywide survey of Ogden's recycling program.
"Now it becomes a 10 to 15-year project, which is OK if that's what people want me to do," Godfrey said. "I'm happy to get the ball rolling."
END of EXCERPT
Maybe I'm mis-reading this, but it seems to me that--6 and a half years after this article was published-- Ogden City is somewhere in the middle of Mayor Godfrey's "10 to 15-year project" to build a gondola on Mount Ogden.
If so, can everybody please just CALM DOWN?? Because proposals for gondolas are not just going to go away. If Chris Peterson's initial proposal fails, rest assured--there will be another. This is going to be a looooooooong process, so get used to it.
In conclusion: The next available Winter Olypics Games will be in 2014. That is the soonest possible date for Ogden to invite the world to our fair city. Whether or not there will be a gondola on Mount Ogden for the next Utah-based Winter Olmpics--and who will pay for it--is the question.
So this is either a link to the May 24, 2000, Salt Lake Tribune report, or not:
May 24, 2000 Salt Lake Tribune article
Dear Curious and I was Thinking:
Sorry guys, but I have said since I started posting, and I say again now, that name calling angry screeds [from either side] are only counter-productive and self-indulgent. They make the poster feel good. Period. They do not advance the dicussion or contribute much of anything to it, except heat. They do not convince the undecided. They make it harder to make the case to those not yet committed, to Council members, to Planning Commission members, and others, that the gondola/Peterson land speculation is not a good idea for Ogden. And when the rants descend to to attacking someone's wife, I think they actually build support for the other side.
You think differently, fine. It's an open blog. Post away. But as for me, I think civil discussion of public matters is vital to any community. Conducting public discussion by claiming those on the other side are lying Nazi bastards [on their good days] makes civil public discussion difficult if not impossible, and serves no end but to make the poster feel good. You want to treat WCForum as your personal sandbox to play in, have at it. But don't expect me to join you.
Dang--sorry the link didn't work. Try again:
sbank.com:AWNB:SLTB&rft_val_format=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=100EE1F
E7575CCB8&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated4&req_dat=104CE35943F5BE9D" REL="nofollow">May 24, 2000, SL Tribune do-over
If this fails, ask Rudizink for help. 'Cuz I e-mailed the link to him, too.
Or you can access it through Newsbank, a Premium Database, available through your local public library.
(Ed. Note: Sorry, Bob. I've tried multiple times with multiple approaches, but still can't make your link work. - Rudi)
Curm,
I stand by what I said, but agree with you as well. You're a smart guy and I like you for that.
Dang I gotta close this window and get back to work.
Bob Sawatzki,
Please see my previous post as to why this proposal keeps failing. It's always non-skier's or those who really do not know the terrain who think it's just some little glitch that keeps getting in the way of Ogden's tramway. Not true...Unfortunately the LO promoters can't even see that Earl Holding, who had the best chance, the capital, the land, the WILL, THE FRIGGIN' SKI RESORT ON THE OTHER SIDE...This man decided it was not worth it. Are you kidding me that someone thinks he just decided that there was something wrong with simply giving Ogden tramway access to his resort. There are SOLID and NUMEROUS technical and operational AND safety reasons why this project is impractical. NOTICE I did not say IMPOSSIBLE. The combination of EXTREMELY challenging and DANGEROUS terrain, poor visibility, cost of maintaining trails in this area of the mountain, ETC, ETC, ETCX...is why this project cannot hold water.
So now we are asked to sell the BEST damn parkland and municipal golf course on the Wasatch front to finance what cannot be built under conventional business parameters.
And you say CALM DOWN....Well for one, most here are calm, but certainly frustrated by the numbness of the LO position. I agree that this project will likely NEVER go away.
If the LO group simply paid for a comprehensive study of their own they would save thamselves alot of trouble and breath and Family time. It is they who should calm down and let this idea die. Let us get on with Ogdens Transit corridor and create some quality of life WITHIN the for those are are here NOW not for those who will visit once in a great while to their footprint lodge.
Bob Sawatzki:
Just want to note that there is already "another gondola proposal" out there. It is Kent Jorgensen's "Option B" which calls for the city to sell Mr. Peterson five acres or so at the head of 36th Street so he can build a base station for his WSU/Malan's Basin gondola. That will permit him to develop his land in Malan's Basin as a resort either with his own money, or with investment capital he can raise from the usual sources backing such developments:pension funds, banks, etc.
Under Option B, everybody wins. Ogden City gets to keep its Mt. Ogden park and trail lands as public property and a great draw for residents and vistors, and Ogden gets to build a trolley line from downtown to WSU and McKay-Dee Hospital which will serve residents, and promote business growth, all along the route. Mr. Peterson gets a base for his gondola so he can develop his property in Malan's Basin. What's not to like? [Six busses an hour in each direction already connect the head of 36th Street with the transit hub and Frontrunner station downtown.]
I suspect a mini-ski venue in Malan's Basin is not economically viable [and Mr. Peterson's evident inability to interest venture capital in his resort development suggests the market doubts its viability too]. But if I am wrong, and he builds it and it succeeds, we all win. He does, his investors do, and Ogden does. But if the Malan's development and up mountain gondola fail, Ogden still has its parklands, will not have sunk millions in public funds into building and then operating a gondola designed primarily to deliver customers to a failed resort up mountain. The only losers will be those who invested in the project unwisely. Which is as it should be.
As I said, what's not to like about Jorgensen's "Option B"?
Thanks for the link to the old article about the Taylor Canyon route. But I should mention that route presumed a connection to Snowbasin. Let me remind you again that the proposed gondola/gondola scheme the Mayor now supports will not bring downtown Ogdenites or visitors to Snow Basin. Unless you expect the Olympics a decade down the road to make Malan's Basin an Olympic venue, I don't see how the present proposed gondola/gondola scheme will matter at all in making Ogden an attractive Olympic tourist destination.
I was Thinking:
You let work interfere with blogging? Man, you have got to get your priorities straight.... [grin]
Exactly, Curm, What IS not to like about the Jorgensen idea. I honestly think that there is far more there for Peterson too. He doesn't have to get mixed up in this crazy town gondola, he doesn't have to reconfigure the golf course and build homes on land that will undoubtedly give little return due to the high cost of just about everything he wants to do on it, he can have considerable lease income from any base station space...
Peterson is biting off far to huge a bite for anyone, especially him. The Kent Jorgensen alternative keeps it manageable and profitable for all.
Excuse me!
What you people keep attributing to neoCON Kent Jorgrenson (plan B)is actually an idea floated earlier on this blog by Mercy Livermore, I recall.
Comrade Kent is done in local government, as I see it.
This Godfreyite former member of the "Gang of Six" rubber-stampt Ogden City council will be resurrected to prominence in Ogden City Government over many dead bodies.
Dumb Kent should just take a hike, and quit taking credit for Mercy Livermore's great idea.
Praise be to Mercy Livermore!
Digger:
First place I saw the idea was in a handout from Kent. If Mercy was touting it before that, great. It's a good idea, and seems to me a reasonable way out for the Council and for Ogden. If Rumplestillskin offered it up, I'd support it.
I'll go further. If Godfrey endorsed it, I'd back him. A good idea is a good idea, where ever it comes from Hell, now and then even Republicans have good ideas. [Even a stopped clock is right twice a day....]
But if Mercy offered it up first here, more power to her.
Dear Ano's
While there are many in the community that have had face to face communication with the companies that have decided to come to Ogden. (Many people are working daily to bring jobs to the city). I am the only person that writes on this blog, that has done so.
I try to tell you why they are coming and you refuse to believe me. Every economic incentive that was offered in Ogden was matched by the city of Salt Lake, and then, private companies offered additional incentives to get AMER to not choose Ogden.
Amer and Descente came here because of the possibility of a change in the city brought about by Mayor Godfery's efforts and Chris Peterson gondola and resort.
The denial of this is nonsence.
The denial that the empty buildings in the inner city, that are now being refurbished, is because of this Peterson Proposal is nonsence. Go ask the people that are remodeling them. You are correct, they may be fools to do so, but the prospect of the Peterson Proposal is their motivation.
It was not a friend of mine that I refered to last night at the councel meeting. I asked a stranger in the audience who he was. He told me that he owned a strip mall on Harrison. He is very interested to know if this Peterson proposal will happen. If it does ahppen, he will remodel the property toward high end tenants. If not, he will not remodel at all and my try to find a buyer. (His words not mine)
I believe comments like this should be taken into consideration.
I was born and raised in Ogden. I care,like all of you, about the future of the city. I was very shocked when I showed my company board of directors a huge cost savings if we moved the company to Ogden and they said "NO". Only the prospect of the city changing, do to a gondola from the city to WSU to a mountain resort changed their minds about Ogden.
I am the person that made the 1st contact of Scott USA to get them to come here. They also said, no way will we locate in Ogden. I told the management that their may be a gondola across the city to a new resort in Malans Basin and that sparked their interest. Months later, after much work by Mayor Godfrey, they announced that they were moving the "back engine" of the company to Ogden. They have one foot in and the other foot out, waiting to see what we do.
The same story goes for Rossignol.
They have one foot in, and the other foot out, waiting to see what we do.
I did not know if the drawings of the resort that Mr Peterson shows for Malans Basin are even possible to build.
Like you, how would I know.
I did, this summer, run into engineers while hiking in Malans Basin. They had the drawings that we have all seen, with them. I asked, just as would be expected, if they actually thought this design could be built.
They responded that it would "Be a little trickey, but the engineering challenge is what would make it so unique". The engineer volunteered the following comment.
" What is it most intreging part of this project, and I have designed many resorts, is the gondola across the city. It will work like a release valve on the mountain. Most resorts have to cram all of the venues into the emmediate area of the property. This resort will be exceptionally beautiful because so much of the attraction will be located downtown and managed and owned by other investors". "Less Stress on the environment". Said He.
As I would expect you would do, I aked him if he was familiar with other resorts like Grouse Mountian, and if he thought this resort would be a success. He resonded " No doubt this resort will be much better than Grouse Mountain". ( Grouse Mountian gets 750,000 visitors per year.)
I then asked this engineer how much skiable terrain would be in the basin assable by lift. He told me approx 1000 acres.
He did say that there would be few beginner ski runs in the reort.
I have a tough time believing that this resort will be a failure after talking to an expert.
I have a tough time believing that Mr Petersons plan will not raise the tax revenues in the city and oppotinities for employment. $25 Million in new salaries came to the city in the last 24 months from the ski companies alone.
I have no money invested or promisses of financial benefit coming from anyone. I am trying my best, to try to help to turn a once great city around. I, like some of you, am searshing for the truth and for answers".
It is not enough that the East Bench of Ogden be pleasant. There are many citizen looking for a chance in life. Is it possible to make accomodations in our life style to assist the other parts of the city that need jobs and a chance for a good education?
Another investor is in Ogden to help complete the river project. He is a friend, not business partner, of Chris Peterson. His plan is to clean up the river at his expense and to build housing and apartments and condos along the rivers route. He is a Cuban man and believes that a hispanic shopping area would be an attractive draw as Ogden has so many Hispanic citizens. He invisions something like the Hispanic shopping areas in San Diego.
We need to get the facts and we need to make a decision that will best benifit all of the people in Ogden.
Mr Peterson is trying to lay out a method to get those facts. Every member of the city councel, that I talk to, says that they do not have a clue where or how to start. Mr Peterson is attempting to lay out the process for them.
We all need to stay involved and be part of the process. Given what has been happening we should not close down the process.
Curt Geiger
Curt,
You seem to have the time to talk, always talk. And for a minute, it almost sounds reasonable.
But it's always hearsay, and hype - nothing solid – nothing documented – we’re supposed to just take your word for it.
You don't seem to get it, and it seems you never will.
Maybe that's why you'll always be a salesman, like Chris Peterson.
You speak of a process? How about Peterson quits asking the Council to first play to his fiddle to prove their interest if not their subservience to him? How about if he puts together a pitch for what he wants to do and perhaps gives a few solid answers to some questions??
And even if all you say is true, why can’t it all work with busses? As Chris has said, he needs the money from the real estate deal. You know and I know, that’s really the crux of it for him.
Forgive me Curm. But this guy, Curt, is either a con man or a blockhead.
There’s just no other explanation.
Oh Lordy,
Curt, your third paragraph is a telegraph, Perhaps?
Does that sound like your new acquaintance at the meeting hopes and maybe knows that Godfrey intends to run for mayor again?
Help us all, dear Lord, if this ego driven little person thinks he can hoodwink the 'lumpenvillagers' yet again.
Tell your friends, new and old, that Ogden is FINE, that Peterson is going to use his own money, or his unnamed investors' money and build his dang gondola up to his unbuilt resort HIMSELF!
Yes, I did suggest that along time ago, and repeatedly over time that that's what should be done. That's what Peterson SAID he'd do, til he decided he'd raher build all those luxury homes on our land.
I still say that Peterson has no intention of building a gondola, a resort, a ski venue of any type in Malan's. That's just the carrot he holds in front of the bunny mayor's twitching nose.
Godfrey wants a legacy...Peterson wants a bundle...and we'll end up the poorer in so many ways.
Thank you for remembering what I wrote, Digger, so many months ago.
It makes sense to have Peterson fulfill his first promise, and then track its success or failure.
Ogden is doing just fine without the GGG's constantly dangling visions to businesses to get them to settle here. Any business that decides to locate here on the vacuous idea of a gondola to nowhere is not one I'd invest in.
. . . as far as us ano's, remember most of our Founding Fathers wrote as ano's. It's good enough company for me.
If Chris has money...or can get some, and wants to realize a great return on luxury homes, then building over in Huntsville would be the place to go!
OR, Morgan. That is a place on the move...and not just the homes on the hillsides. Very chi chi now to live in Morgan.
BTW, the word is that Larry Miller is going to take over Round Valley....can you imagine how impressive that course will be? What a coup to have a home THERE?
Hurry, Chris, surely you and the pillagers can grab some prime land over there.
Regarding this process as detailed in the Discovery Ogden material:
1. Mt. Ogden Community Plan
2. Planned Community Development Zones (Mixed-use Zones) and Sensitive Area Overlay Zones.
3. Petition and Review of the Chris Peterson Project.
(Note: This petition might include: amendments to the Ogden City General Plan, which in turn would involve: open space, open space zoning, annexation, sale of property, and more.
4. Mixed Use Zone for a Specific Project.
5. Development Agreement and Project Master Plan.
6. Annexation.
7. Property Sale.
8. Budget amendments.
Has it occurred to anyone that it is out of order? I think it is. It has the designation of a MU zone for a specific project and approval of a development agreement for a piece of property over which Ogden City has no jurisdiction at the time those decisions are being made.
Doesn't it?
In the just-arrived issue of Utah Business, there is a gack-inducing photo of Little Matty to introduce the story of Ogden being the ski business hub. Fair enough. But this is a direct paragraph:
Godfrey says the project, which "is in the middle of its development," will cost close to a half-billion dollars. Though the gondola idea has been hotly debated within the city, Godfrey hopes to have final approvals for the project by the end of the year.
I would guess the council and the constituents its members represent might take issue with the Small Man's assertion there.
Hey...I misspoke...it's JOHNNY Miller who is rumoured to take over Round Valley in Morgan. Even better, eh?
Gplfers should design and REdesign golf courses!
Anon:
The project is "in the middle of its development?" No proposal, no purchase, no action by WSU, no Planning Commission submission or action, no financials, no business plan, no feasibility studies [so far as we know] yet done or made public. And the project is "in the middle of its development?"
It is statements like that, Mr. Geiger, that raise in peoples' minds not entirely unreasonable questions about the Mayor's objectivity, honesty and tenuous grasp on the concept of ethical conduct in public officials.
By the way, if as you say City Council members have not a clue how to get answers to the questions they want answered about the as yet non-existent Peterson proposal, may we fairly conclude that Mr. Peterson does know how to get answers to those questions? And perhaps, since he is apparently hoping for city approval within six weeks, that he has in fact already obtained the answers to many of those questions? And if he has, we then have to wonder why he has not provided that information to the public and to the Council.
Mr B
I don't know why it takes so long to get the answers to the questions
I have never tried to build something as complex as is this proposed project. Have you.
I am sure that there are issues that you and I have never thought about.
I do know, that the engineers have been and are continuing to travel in and out of Malans Basin.
I do know that the gondola people have been here more than once.
I do know, as do most people interested in what is happening, that Mr. Petersons attorney is not cheap. Why spend money on an attorney when you have no money and no possibility of a plan?
I am as "in the dark" on detail as anyone else.
If the council could bring a discovery plan to the table then Mr Peterson would not have to.
The problem is that if the council spends time and money on developing a discovery plan then they are critisized.
If Mr Peterson pays for the cost of developing a discovery plan then they counsil is following down the golden path.
The real issue to me is finding out what , where and when as soon as possible.
After that is done, then true maybe intelligent, discussions can be had.
I know that I just had 2 real estate brokers in my office from Coldwell Bankers. Their office has been assigned the responcibility of finding homes for 80 AMER excutives. THey wanted my opinion of where most of these new citizens will want to live.
I told them that I was encourageing them to buy homes in Ogden not Ogden Valley. I did say that some of them had shown interest in Uintah Highlands.
Neither of these brokers want the discussion or the process shut down.
Curt Geiger
curm,
what is not to like about the kent jorgenson is that the 5 acres that plan b has instore, is that it is a bad idea and by that I mean that the city would have to move the Main feed water mains that go under that property and if kent really did his home work he would know that. after all he was on the council and should know where all the water mains are and there is also south ogden water mains in that area.
bad idea
this still will be a lose, lose deal
Grouse Mountain
Since it seems that Ogden is no longer to be the "next Aspen," it's now to be the next "Grouse Mountain," and since I had no idea what or where Grouse Mountain was, I googled it. Found out some interesting information. It's the ski area for Vancouver, British Columbia [a city with approximately six times the population of Ogden. A somewhat interesting fact not included in the post above.]
And how do people reach the slopes from Vancouver? Why, they drive, the official Grouse Mountain website says [base of the mountain only fifteen minutes drive from downtown Vancouver]. Or, if they don't want to drive they have another alternative. You won't believe what it is. [No, it's not a gondola.] From the Grouse Mountain website:
The public transit system offers regular service to the base of Grouse Mountain every half hour. Catch Bus 232 from Phibbs Exchange or Bus 236 from Lonsdale Quay.
Take the bus? But... but... but... the Lift Ogden folk have explained over and over that the ski tourist who is going to fly into SLC interntational airport and take a cab to the Frontrunner to catch the train to Ogden absolutely will NOT ride a bus to the base of a gondola at 36th Street to ride up the mountain. Odd, skiers and other seem to ride the public busses to the base of the mountain in Vancouver. Imagine that.
And when they reach the base at Grouse Mountain in Vancouver, they can ride a tram to the resort. The ride takes just under 15 minutes. Gee, that's less time than it will take the downtown to WSU gondola to get you to the base of the proposed Malan's Basin resort gondola above WSU [estimated time: 18 minutes]. Imagine that.
What it seems Grouse Mountain is a model for is the Mercy Livermore/Kurt Jorgensen "Option B" proposal in which city transport and/or roads bring people to the base of the mountain,and then a cable system [tram or gondola] takes them up to the resort. That's what links Vancouver and Grouse Mountain. There is no gondola from the base of the mountain to downtown Vancouver. Imagine that.
So, the model for Malan's Basin/ Ogden is to be Grouse Mountain Ski area where the base of the mountain is a fifteen minute drive or bus ride from downtown [about what would take to drive from downtown Ogden to the Malan's Basin gondola base above WSU], where people evidently take public busses if they don't want to drive, and where a city six times larger than Ogden serves as a customer base for the mountain.
For some reason, Ogdenites and visitors, according to Lift Ogden, will not not ride busses from downtown to the base of the planned Malan's Basin resort [though Grouse Mountain skiers see to]. Guess Ogdenites don't want to be mistaken for Canadians by riding ski busses. [Well, we can all certainly understand that.
Yup. Sure looks like Ogden is a carbon copy of Vancouver, so Malan's Basin can't help but be another Grouse Mountain.
Water Works Knows:
Well, wouldn't that be as true if Mr. Peterson gets to buy all the city land around there, as he has asked to do?
There may well be problems involved with the Livermore/Jorgensen proposal. But I am interersted in finding some way out of this acrimonious and long-running disagreement that (a) preserves the Mt. Ogden park lands and trails for the public and (b) doesn't involve the city in spending multi millions in public money building and operating a downtown gondola that won't serve as a transit system and (c) nevertheless permits Mr. Peterson to develop his Malan's Basin property as he wants to with his own financing. So far as I can see, the Option B plan is the only one on the table that will accomplish all those ends. Troubled or not, I don't see another alternative out there at the moment that will accomplish a, b and c.
More on Vancouver:
Poking around a bit more, I googled Vancouver public transit. And discovered that people who don't drive or use the city's extensive system of bikeways either ride public busses or... wait for it... use rail transit in the city. Rail transit. Yes, that's right. They damn fools did not build a gondola system to move people around in the city. They built rail transit instead.
And Ogden is supposed to take those bozos as a model for itself? We're to be "the next Vancouver/Grouse Mountain?" If we are to be that, we'd have to build a trolley line from downtown to WSU to connect with a cable system [gondola or tram] there up to the resort.
Hmmmmmm.... Hey, now, there's an idea....
Realtor #2
Well, I didn't find that strange, that some realtors might talk to someone who was involved in recruiting Amer to Ogden, and who [however you might want to describe it] is an executive officer involved in an outdoors-oriented industry, trying to get some idea of the kind of properties the Amer execs might be interested in. I'd call it reasonably good prep work.
Thanks to all who attended the first Mt. Ogden meeting and to those who served on the committees. Some very good ideas came out of the committees that had the stamp of some very good and thorough thougt processes behind them.
One thing in particular that really started me thinking was the possibility of upstairs residential with lower level retail. This type of development has worked very well in the 9th and 9th and 15th and 15th areas of Salt Lake City. You get neighborhood markets, bakeries, boutiques, and coffee shops next to historical residential. The entire concept allows and encourages greater foot traffic, neighbors getting out and meeting each other, and reduces the need for climbing in your car. I can clearly envision something like this type of development around the university (to increase housing density without large apartment buildings) and in our older neighborhoods to increase the sense of community. It is unfortunate that Mixed Use has become such a hateful word as of late. This is mixed use that I can clearly see working in some of our neighborhoods.
As to development in the city, I do and have seen for a number of years that Ogden has incredible potential. The city did not necessarily need a catalyst as much as it needed to be appreciated. I think the potential is obvious to just about everyone. What I can't understand is the need for a gondola through the center of town. It makes absolutely no sense. There are simply better modes of transportation. Why is it constantly 'my way or the highway' with the mayor? Hasn't he ever heard that there are different ways to increase the vitality of an area? It must be nice to have such a high horse to ride around.
Curt,
I read your post of November 16, 2006 2:47 PM. You stated “I did, this summer, run into engineers while hiking in Malan’s Basin. They had the drawings that we have all seen, with them. I asked, just as would be expected, if they actually thought this design could be built. They responded that it would "Be a little tricky, but the engineering challenge is what would make it so unique"”.
First a question, what was the engineers name and what engineering company is he with and who was he representing? I mean an expert on all aspects of a resort development and gondola operations all in one engineer and just happened to be up in Malan Basin! Most engineers that I deal with have specific expertise.
Second is an observation from having dealt with outside engineers, that when an engineer representing a company that has been hired to review a project for a potential client and he makes a comment about a project like, “ Be a little tricky, but the engineering challenge is what would make it so unique”, you can be assured that that’s about as negative a comment as he can dare make. Anything stronger and he or the company would be replaced with one that says the right thing from the developer’s point of view. Obviously you haven’t spent much time with engineers.
You then when on to say, “I then asked this engineer how much skiable terrain would be in the basin accessible by lift. He told me approx 1000 acres.
So now this same engineer that’s an expert on resort development and gondola building is now an expert on ski terrain! Wow, this is quite a guy. Oh, by the way there might be more skiable terrain up there, but it is outside of Peterson’s property boundary and the forest service as said they don’t want Peterson using it, right. You forgot to mention that.
You then state, “I asked him if he was familiar with other resorts like Grouse Mountian, and if he thought this resort would be a success. He responded " No doubt this resort will be much better than Grouse Mountain". ( Grouse Mountian gets 750,000 visitors per year.)” Wow again this guy really know everything, engineering, financial viability of other resorts and even their annual visitors per year, all off the top of his head! Did he also tell you that that mountain is right next to a city (Vancouver and greater Vancouver area population of over 2 million) that is bigger than all of SLC and all of the surrounding communities around SLC? Did he also tell you that in order to get to a real resort similar to Snow Basin you must drive about 2 ½ hrs away from Vancouver? Even though it’s only 75 miles away it’s a two lane road the is very congested to Whistler.
Now let’s talk about your comment about Rossignol. Isn’t it true they simply moved their warehousing here from Freeport in Clearfield to BDO (with a financial deal to do it) and isn’t it true that they just built a new corporate office in Park City. I believe you were made aware of this same misquote used by you in an Exchange Luncheon a few months. Maybe you forgot.
Your comment that really gets me too is, “It is not enough that the East Bench of Ogden be pleasant. There are many citizens looking for a chance in life. Is it possible to make accommodations in our life style to assist the other parts of the city that need jobs and a chance for a good education? You haven’t been reading the paper much have you? If you had, you realize that the economy in Utah and Weber County for jobs is booming. But here again you don’t care what the truth is you just want to keep beating your drum with the same story that Ogden is going down for the count and you as a concerned citizen are here to solve our problems.
Your comment that, “Mr. Peterson is trying to lay out a method to get those facts. Every member of the city council, that I talk to, says that they do not have a clue where or how to start. Mr Peterson is attempting to lay out the process for them.”
and
The problem is that if the council spends time and money on developing a discovery plan then they are criticized.
and
If Mr Peterson pays for the cost of developing a discovery plan then they council is following down the golden path.
Truth be known, the City Council is looking for and should be receiving assistance from the various city departments to assist them in understanding what steps need to be followed, and their not getting it. Instead of getting assistance these departments, these departments are being strong armed by the city administration, to simply accept Peterson’s stepped process as presented. I attended the meeting where Peterson attorney presented his process and reviewed the letter that he sent to our mayor. Interesting how the city department suggestions to the City Council were almost verbatim with what the Peterson attorney had suggested.
The first steps in any project, should be the review of the project including the costs, the economics, the financial proforma of the project, the funding of the project and the cost to the city in regards to infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the project.
To the City Council
Most large projects today are developed using what is called a "Staged Gate Process". This is a chronological stepped process that outlines all of the requirements needing to be fulfilled before the process proceeds to the next gate.
The gates that are established while relatively consistent do vary from the point of view of who is in controlling the process. It appears that Peterson’s attorney came across this process somewhere in his travels and then modified it to fit his client’s needs. Unfortunately for the city, the process that he is recommending to our City and that our administration passed on to our City Council is starting in the middle of the process rather than at the beginning of a process that would be developed or reviewed by a city.
I would be glad to assist the city in establishing or acquiring a Stage Gated Process for the City Council, with their input, but I would also suggest that the city already has one available to them (or knows where to find one)and that the administration would prefer that the departments not use it as it would not support the steps that are currently being suggested.
Ano
Good let's get going with the staged gate process.
Curt
I hope you're saving some of the blood money for the lawsuits, Curt.
You and your retard kid will be in the thick of it, when the fun begins.
Curt,
My offer was to the City Council Members, I think you've already had enough input into the process.
Curmudgeon, Great last post above. I was stirring over those same ridiculous claims by Curt. Curt also claims the ColdWallBankers are also stopping by on their way to find Amer execs homes and he claims all these big financiers swing by to his office too. He claims to have brought the ski companies, etc. Seems this whole thing just swirls around Curt Geiger and he is the right place at the right time even on his Malan's hikes.
So the "engineer" in Malan's claims 1000 acres??? How??? I gues this engineer is no better at reading topo maps than Godfrey or Geiger. Jeez, Curt , just pick up a topo map and look at Malan's Basin. You can see that it is less than 200 acres. Even if you added additional acreage in upper Strong's canyon and even reached over into Beus Canyon and included Taylor Canyon the total acreage might come close to 1000 acres but those skier's venturing into those gulches will be in for an hellacious runout to the bottom!!
If that engineer cannot read a map well enough to estimate the skiable acreage how can he design a ski area?
I wish I could post screenshots from my topo app. I get so sick of these fools spouting and regurgitating so much misinfo that has been countered and refuted numerous times in the past. Can't a real map finally shut you up Curt and your continued misrepresentation. Are you the kind of fool that when presented with a clear PROOF of total acreage looks at it with a harrumph...and then continues on to another day of deception...You kind makes me sick. Learn to read a map and learn your area geometry and how to estimate an area of an irregular shape. That was 8th grade for me I think. You have some backpedaling and make up homework to hand in...
Here you go Curt, A link for you and an exercise in basic geometry and map reading...
Estimating Surface Area
It just occured to me that people in sales, Like Curt Geiger are noted for persistence for getting the sale at any cost and under any circumstance. Little details like scientific fact usually has little effect in that field.
With science and engineering the process of elimination of scenarios based on FACTS of area, volume, aspect etc are how conclusions are arrived at and how to further the science. When something has been eliminated from the process by fact and proof there is no need to revisit those factors when the agreed scientific conclusion has eliminated it. Pseudo and non scientists and hardcore religionists continually try to rewrite the facts or conclusions to match their beliefs. Hence we have BS floating around these days like "Intelligent Design".
New comments are not allowed.