OGDEN — Mount Ogden residents anxious to have a community plan adopted for their neighborhood will have to wait a little longer.Ace reporter Schwebke reports some of the general characteristics of the plan:
Following a lengthy public hearing Wednesday evening, the planning commission delayed approval of the plan to further fine-tune the document.
The commission will revisit it during an April 25 work session. Final approval of the plan will rest with the city council.
The plan, based on input from several citizen committees, lists characteristics important to the Mount Ogden area, including community identity, land use, parks, open space, public infrastructure and services.As to the issue of open space, this morning's article provides some specifics which wouldn't appear to bode well for the elephant in the room:
... a citizen committee assigned to study park issues recommends Mount OgdenMr. Schwebke's article also addresses the issue of moving the golf course clubhouse, a plan detail which some of our readers suspected to have originated not with citizen committee members, but with planning staff:
Park, including the golf course and undeveloped adjoining land, be preserved as
public open space.
Another recommendation attributed to the committee says the city should consider relocating Mount Ogden Golf Course’s clubhouse to the top of 36th Street, if it enhances the course.Does that clear the latter issue up? We honestly don't know that it did.
However, Deb Badger, a Mount Ogden resident who volunteered to help draft the community plan, said during Wednesday night’s planning commission public hearing, the clubhouse recommendation apparently came from the city’s planning staff and not the committee.
Jeff Sanders, a planner for the city, said the recommendation regarding the clubhouse was discussed by the committee, but it was not strongly endorsed or discouraged.
What is clear is that the Mt. Ogden Community Plan seems to be moving forward in a manner generally consistent with the wishes of the majority of the citizens who labored in committee meetings over the summer.
What's equally clear is that the current posture of the Mt. Ogden Community Plan doesn't sit well with the Emerald City Gondolist Cult, who are now desperately hoping to derail it, before the plan can be submitted to a commission vote.
In that connection we link a copy of an email sent to us by several of our gentle readers. The Blind Faith Faction now cries foul. "Those SmartGrowth meanies messed up our lawn sign campaign," claims the ever-more-manic Lift Ogden Chairman. Little Bobby is pulling out all the stops -- in multiple colors and fonts.
The Std-Ex website's article email function is currently down again. Thus we are unable to provide a link to today's Scott Schwebke story.
We'll update this page as soon as we can furnish a proper link.
In the meantime, don't hesitate to chime in with your comments.
108 comments:
Little Bobby and the Chorus will do anything to get their ride to no where up and sucking the tax payers dry.
Two comments:
First, a thanks to the Planning Commission. I attended both of the community meetings they ran in Mt. Ogden neighborhoods to solicit the residents' input [note: ALL the residents. The PC tried to notify every resident of both meetings and seems generally to have succeeded.] And, with an exception here and there, but not much, the plan in the draft form considered this week seems, as Rudi noted, to generally reflect the community's input. The PC members are volunteers, not paid city employees and the job they do takes an ungodly amount of time [and opens them occasionally to some unfortunately heated verbal on line abuse]. We owe them our thanks for taking on the job.
Second: about Mr. B. Geiger's email rant. Why, I haven't heard that kind of juvenile whining demanding a "do over" since recess on the play gound in middle school.
After reading Bob Geiger’s email, all I have to say is that this is becoming ridiculous. Don’t get me wrong, a neighborhood plan for Mt. Ogden is an important step in the right direction, but it is also going to be a huge magnet for the Lift Ogden-Gondola-Peterson-Godfrey-Mickey Mouse Club folks. No matter what comes out of that plan will be contested, and once approved it will be spun to fit their agenda. I would like to think that the plan could positively halt or put a major wrinkle to the Mayor’s “visionary” plan for Ogden, but I am highly skeptical.
2 points:
first, the assertion by some that the community plan is skewed in favor of preserving public open space because of the impending Peterson proposal is not correct. I don't see how the absence of this proposal would have changed my position in the parks and rec subcom. I (and many, many others, I presume) still would've said that Ogden needs to protect it's open space and preserve the park as public land. In fact, my guess is that many LO's would've supported the same, had it not been for the Peterson (non)proposal. So the implication that this altered the draft of the community plan because people are against the Peterson proposal just doesn't seem to make sense. Yes, SGO initiated the process in response to the Peterson proposal, but the Mt Ogden community was one of only two(?, one?) communities without a plan. Had the plan process been started 5 or 6 years ago, preserving public open space would still have been at the top of the list.
Point two: the claim that protecting Mt Ogden park does not serve the 87% of Ogdenites who don't live in the Mt Ogden community is just absurd. The entire city uses the soccer fields, picnic areas, hiking trails, mt biking trails, etc.
tk:
Well said on all points.
As for the last point you make, I was at a meeting last year when someone said this of the Mt. Ogden parklands and the people from all over the city, all levels of income, all races and ethnicities, who come there: "Mt. Ogden Park is where Ogden meets Ogden." Exactly.
The thing I find interesting about Mr Geiger is how he is very deceitful in his own right - but fails to notice or recognize it in himself. The other thing I notice is whenever there is a quote by a SGO supporter or leader in the paper, if there is anything referencing even close to a negative tone towards his little group of dreamers, he takes it and turns it into a full out attack on the SGO Leadership.
The quote I'm referring to is the "Barbarian" quote Mike Vause used MANY months ago in the Standard. If people can remember, the quote was used very tastefully by Mike and, of course, had literary value if you read the rest of the article it came from. Taken as Mr. Geiger takes it - completely out of context, it sounds like an insult.
It amazes me that someone so passionate about a purpose (Lift Ogden's Gondola project) would stoop so low as to send out mis-information to his fellow followers just to get them all up in arms. If the "upper-crust" of Ogden society (as Mr. Geiger says supports his and the Mayor's dream) actually falls for his petty attempt to use mis/half quotes to stir up emotions, then it is a sad day for the "upper-crust". I would hope some day they would see through the drum beating LO usually does when they feel they are losing the battle.
The constant referral to the eloquent "Barbarians" article as a negative to inspire hatred towards Dr Vause is sad and a sign of a weak argument and a weak mind. It is a well know fact that if pushed in a corner, Mr Geiger attacks (either physical or emotional) like a child. There is never a constructive adult conversation with him.
There will never be a day we see a negative email sent from the leaders of SGO. And if anyone says otherwise, then produce it, let us all see it, and discuss it. It will never happen. On the other hand, we see always see Negative campaigns from LO, it is their bread and butter it seems.
why is it, the few new people that move into ogden and godfrey is one of them, come in and think that they know what is best for the rest of us. wake up and find out what the people want, that are going to be affected by this proposel.
I think that is exactly what the cummunity plan does....
"Second: about Mr. B. Geiger's email rant. Why, I haven't heard that kind of juvenile whining demanding a "do over" since recess on the play gound in m"iddle school."
LOL Do you ever read the posts on this sight?
Nobody have comments on beloved Jesse Garcia wanting to spend $3.5 million on the stadium?
Dittos to the comments about Bob Geiger’s rant of unsubstantiated slanders of his neighbors. But now I have a small issue to take up with the WCF community.
I know what you mean when you use the term “faith-based” to refer to people like Geiger, but I fear it may be counterproductive. I suspect most of the people in our community are people of faith, including myself. The suggestion that the Godfreyites are the “faith-based” group may tend to align some with them who might otherwise do so.
Bob Geiger’s reference to President Hinckley, both in his previous emails as well as at the PC meeting, is an attempt by him to align LDS people who might be inclined simply to follow leaders, to his cause. In fact, the church’s position is one of strict political neutrality as stated in our church meetings over and over.
As many of us know, Godfrey also often infers or directly claims he has the backing of the Church, if not God himself, for what he is doing. He is lying. But there are many who are inclined to follow those who claim to be doing what’s best – who claim to have God on their side.
"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Rather than sustain their lies, why not refute them? I suspect we can find a better term for the Godfreyites than “faith based,” maybe “blind followers” or “Führer followers” or “Führer-centric” or some other more accurate moniker than “faith-based.”
Sorry to continue stamping and stammering on - but emails like this just increase the anger I feel myself towards this whole issue.
In regards to the LO sign campaign, and I know it has been discussed to death here on the WCF, but it amazes me. One thing people may have mentioned, but I fail to remember reading, is a number of the probable reasons this all came about last summer.
Since SGO has had their sign campaign going, there has been many MANY SGO signs vandalized or stolen in the beginning. Was that ever mentioned by the SGO leadership? No. Why? Because why does it matter to them. Again, they don't run a negative campaign.
Now let's look at the LO sign campaign. These signs were put up in response to the Very successful SGO campaign. LO wanting to make sure they are seem all over the city as well. It makes me laugh when Mr. Geiger says there was just a many, if not more LO signs, around Ogden. Well of course there were when they place 2-3 signs per yard, placed them on vacant business lots and so on. But enough of that old story.
Now, with the constant barrage of the emails from Mr. Geiger about the very issue of how they had their signs defaced, destroyed, taken and so on, it leads one to think - Bob you crafty man (one can dream right?).
He thinks to himself, "let's put up our own signs, then a couple of days later, let's have LO people run around and vandalize them. Why not? then I have ammunition for years about how SGO is dirty and not as upfront and conscious as they seem. I have no dirt on them, so I'll make some. How can anyone prove otherwise?"
Who can argue that this isn't something that can come from a man like Mr. Geiger - want proof? just look at every email sent since then - they are always referring to this incident.
Makes you think huh.....
Ok - I'm sorry to kick a dead horse, but with this email spam campaign he has begun again, it drums up the old dormant emotions. :)
Now I will stop trolling this issue from you fine folks.
DAPS:
Want comment on the Lindquist field bonding proposal? Sure. (a) the field has proven successful. Average attendance at the games there has hit the "trigger" point... did so last year... for agreed on improvements in the field. (b) the particular facility has a proven record of success and so putting additional money into improvements is not the so speculative a venture as it might otherwise be.
To which you might fairly reply that the initial funding for the park was more speculative. Yes, it was, but even then Ogden had a tradition of supporting minor league ball.
Your post seems to imply that Mr. Garcia and others presumably skeptical about the gondola/gondola proposal should necessarily oppose all investment in Ogden's development or be hypocritical.
Nonsense. The point people like me raise [Mr. Garcia can speak for himself] is that the proposed gondola/gondola and land scale schemes have a very low probability of success. No where in the US... no where... does a flatland gondola as a form of urban transit successfully exist. No where. Nothing has been produced yet to show that the trifecta the city would have to "hit" to even have a chance of making its 35 to 50 million dollar investment in the flatland gondola and the surrender of its largest park complex work has even a reasonable probability of succeeding [the walled-city development of Mt. Ogden park as vacation villas has to succeed enough for Mr. Peterson to profit enough to build the up mountain gondola, and a Malan's basin mini ski resort which has to succeed in order for the up mountain gondola to succeed....]. Where are the market studies, feasibility studies, etc that indicate a reasonable probability that this will work?
I know it's convenient for you to pretend that those who oppose the gondola/gondola scheme oppose all public investment in Ogden, or they are being hypocritical. Neither assumption is true, however convenient you may find it to pretend otherwise.
By way of background, Curm, our readers should be reminded that the Raptors played their first tow seasons at west Ogden's Simmons Field, even prior to construction of Lindquist Field.
The place was packed even back then, in the smaller pr-existing baseball park.
Building Lindquist Field was actually something of a no-brainer, inasmuch as the Raptors were already a proven draw.
Ditto, Curm, on the response regarding the baseball stadium. I have supported the stadium from the very beginning, although I have always been adamently opposed to the gondola proposal as is (there is no parallel between the two if that is what's being proposed). Going to games at Lindquist is actually one of my family's fave activities during the summer months in Ogden (almost as enjoyable as hanging out at and around Mt. Ogden park--although I do not live near that part of the community).
Bob must truely feel his back's against the wall. Something that would not go un-noticed may be the changing faces of his LO group. Now front and center is an all new cast of characters, Wilkerson, the investment guy from Arizona and the new couple from Hawaii. Even Chris Peterson has diappeared. Seems to me SGO has not suffered any loss in support, may have actually increased substantially. Poor Bobby. I wonder if those early E-mailers still support LO, or if they've left their ranks as well.
Geiger's argument that the Mt. Ogden Community Plan was orchestrated by SGO belies the fact that those meetings were publicized and open to everyone. Where were the LO supporters? They weren't excluded, they just didn't show up. I'll leave others to explain why that might be.
Anyone was able to stand up and voice their opinion; comments were encouraged. Those hesitant to speak could leave post-it notes or cards with their comments.
The overwhelming feeling of the meeting I attended was "Leave our park and golf course alone!" Changes were suggested, but they were to improve street lighting, add more sidewalks, and encourage shopping areas that people could walk to enjoy to build a further sense of community.
ON ballparks, trax lines, and gondolas:
I understand that there was at the time opposition to funding Lindquist field, just as there was opposition to funding TRAX in SLC [on the prediction that nobody would ride it]. Nothing surprising in either case. I'd expect opinions to develop on both sides of any proposed major public investment in development or transit.
The key, is, though, that the decisions in both cases were made after a careful examination of the evidence, the probabilities for success, the success [or failure] of similar projects in similar circumstances elsewhere, etc. And after a careful consideration of the evidence, and a careful weighing of the probability for success, the cities involved decided to go ahead and commit public funds. Both decisions [Lindquist field and TRAX] turned out to be wise ones in the end.
Naturally the greater the size of the public investment called for and the larger the allied "costs" [e.g. losing the Mt. Ogden parklands to private gated community development], the more carefully the proposed public investment must be vetted.
What's disturbing about the gondola/gondola and largely [to date] mythical "Peterson Proposal" [whatever it might be this week, neither Peterson nor the Mayor are saying], are their wildly speculative natures, and the breath-taking lack of supporting evidence for them that has come [or not come, as the case may be] from their proponents over the two years since Version 1.0 of "the gondola" [a tram from Ogden to Snow Basin] was first floated by Lift Ogden. Now we're being told that Ogden should sell off its public benchlands and sink possibily50 million in public funds into the scheme on "blind faith."
Private investors may sink whatever they like into speculative projects on blind faith. It's their money. If they're wrong, they lose their investment. But public funds, especially large amounts of public funds, with heavy allied costs [losing the public benchlands] should never be put at risk on the basis of "blind faith."
Are the sale of the parklands to fund an up-mountain gondola and private mini-ski resort in Malan's Basin and to finance [in part] the building of a 35 to 50 million dollar flatland gondola that will not connect Ogden to Snow Basin prudent investments of public resources? So far, the evidence suggests the answer is no.
No matter how loudly Mr. B. Geiger whines about it.
I almost forgot, SGO may have kicked started the proccess, which, how Geiger can contend is a bad thing,escapes me. But it was driven by the people of the community. Not SGO. There were 3 very heavily attended meetings, as I can vividly recall the first 2 Geiger's behavior was rabid, he probably damaged his cause beyond repair, anyone that witnessed his assaults on women or any other person inclined to disaggree with him would have been put off by his demeanor. He must have seen the true lack of support for his cause which must have resulted in his uncontrolled eruption. At the 3rd meeting, at the Mt.Ogden middle school, he appeared dejected and beside himself, no support. Wouda shoulda coulda, spilled milk. Hey Bob, now you know how many felt about the rec center. If you're looking for what may be the catalyst to the massive public involvement you had not anticated, it just may lie with the mayors' action on the previous fronts. Anyway you slice it, the folks are awake and active now.
I'm not much of a baseball fan but I like Lindquist Field and I'm glad that it's downtown. That said, I wasn't pleased with the way the previous mayor first told the Council it would cost the city only a certain amount (maybe a million), then kept coming back asking them for more money. As I recall, the city ended up funding the vast majority of it, despite the mayor's promise that the majority would be privately funded.
Some level of public subsidy was certainly a good idea in order to put the ballpark downtown and bring spectators downtown. I'm a bit disturbed that the public is now being asked for yet another subsidy; I should think that the ballpark ought to be paying for itself by now, given the good attendance. But again, maybe the subsidy is a good investment in downtown.
The real question, I guess, is this: If the city is going to invest another couple of million dollars in downtown, is Lindquist Field the best place to make that investment? I don't know the answer to this question, but I can think of other worthwhile projects. The biggest potential, I think, is for a streetcar system. I hope the Council will save some money to invest in that this year. (Specifically, we need to start on a more detailed study of options, to pin down the ultiimate cost and what we'd get for it.)
Dan S:
You make a good point. Every investment of public money in one place means not investing that money in another place.
About the field: the only thing I'd want to keep in mind is that is has turned out to be a success, measured by attendance, and so there is a track record to be examined when considering the wisdom [or lack thereof] of further investment. But presuming for the sake of argument a review shows the evidence to suggest, strongly, that expanding the stadium would be a wise investment for the public, that does not answer the question you raised: would it, given the limit on funds available for such purposes, be the wisest use of that public money? Or are there alternative projects that would pay even better dividends [so to speak] to the public?
Nice point, Dan, and one too often I think forgotten. Even if a public project is deemed a good one, it may still not merit funding because it is not at that point given the options available the best one in which to put the public's limited funds.
Thanks for the reminder.
Bobby Geiger seemed like a whipped dog when he spoke up in City Planning Commission. He could tell he/they are losing. His comments were rambles with on real point only alluding to his real position. His strongest comment was that he will never apologize for quoting the prophet. Or was he meaning the PROFIT? This email is a continued reflection of this ramble. But what was even more interesting was Sue Wilkersons rant about let Chris Peterson show us his proposal where as this plan would just block it. She was the only person who really spoke up about Chris Peterson such as this. I was listening. It seems to me that the plan is ready to be voted upon but it was the emails and comments of the night that the Planning Commisson wanted to go over and add some fine tweaking as one commissioner said to find perfection, as near as possible to reflect the wishes and input of this community. So I think it is ready to go and anything they will add or take away or change will only strengthen the position of the community. They were listening too it seems. Then for City Council to approve. This will block the future developments, at least get in the way. Kudos to Mary Hall and all the other folks who spoke out declaring the fairness of this process. It has been eleven months of working and there was plenty of time for anybody to voice their feelings and desires. It was fair. Good job City Planning Commission and City Planning Staff.
In regards to Bob Geiger’s comments,
I take exception with Mr. Geiger’s suggestion that the Mt. Ogden Community Plan, which is still being fine tuned to more accurately reflect the community’s intentions, is not reflective of the interests of the community and his suggestion that in fact it represents the desires of a specific group, that being the Smart Growth Ogden organization, is inaccurate. I am not a member of that organization by the way.
I did participate in two of the public meetings that were held within the community. In both of those meeting, there was an over whelming general consensus as to what the community wanted the area to look like in the future and what was important to the community. The vast majority of the residents expressed concern for maintaining the area as it exists today as a stable single family community and for the preservation of our publicly owned park, golf course and open space.
The city then formed subcommittees to further refine the suggestions made by the community in those meetings as it pertained to specific aspects of the community. These subcommittees looked at various considerations relating to how the community wanted to look in the future and what issues needed to be addressed to achieve those goals as it pertained to housing, infrastructure considerations, parks and recreational issues to just name a few. I served on one of those subcommittees.
The reason that I mention these subcommittees is that they were made up of people that volunteered from within the community. The city requested that people interested in being on one of these committees submit their names to the city. The city then sent out a form for those interested parties to fill out. The form asked the regular questions such as your name, where you live within the community, what committee did you want to serve on and lastly (in an effort for fair representation) whether there was a specific group that you identified with, i.e. Lift Ogden, Smart Growth Ogden, or neither. The city made every effort to provide representation to all parties on all subcommittees. The fact that Lift Ogden’s vision is not reflected in this document is, in my opinion, only validates the community’s lack of interest in that vision ,as those that identify with the Lift Ogden group had every opportunity to influence this document with their representation on the various subcommittees. They either were an insignificant minority within the committees or did not feel strongly enough in their views to support them. The basic fact of the matter is that the community shared a common view when it came to the vision that they saw for their community.
The fact that the community plan envisioned by and developed by the community does not reflect the wishes of Mr. Geiger or his organization is neither the community’s nor the city’s problem.
The Mt. Ogden Community Plan should represent the vision of this community just as the other plans that have been developed within other communities within other parts of the city represent those communities. With a little more help from the planning commission in the fine tuning the Mt. Ogden Community Plan, we should have a plan that accurately reflects and best represents the interests of the community.
I would like to be serious here for a brief moment and comment on Bob's letter and on some of the things said about Bob in the comments.
First of all I recognize how some of what Bob says and does is taken by some folks as rather looney. But I definately do not think Bob is off his nut or a bad guy. On the other hand I do believe he is extremely passionate about this Gondola cause that he is championing and he does get a little over the top when he charges into battle to defend his position. I actually admire his dedication and enthusiasm in the pursuit of what he believes in. This in spite of the fact that I absolutely deplore his current cause of the Urban Gondola and his apparent blind spot when it comes to Godfrey.
I have had several conversations with Bob over the last couple of years. One in particular lasted about 4 hours! I found him to be very bright, articulate and dedicated to his cause. He is very sane and well read over a wide range of subjects and contrary to popular belief around town, he does have a sense of humor. The one gap that I believe he has is in his understanding of PR, which of course is what his main function with LO seems to be about.
Bottom line, I like and respect Bob and his enthusiasm, but then he has never tried to head butt me either! I predict when all this current BS about Gondola's takes its next ten year hiatus, that Bob will evolve into a serious and respected player in Ogden city affairs.
As to Smart Growth Ogden:
As a dyed in the wool and loyal Ogden boy I became very concerned when I became aware a couple of years ago of Mayor Godfrey and his imperialistic mentality about remaking Ogden into some "town below the ski lift". After several email exchanges with him and a number of visits to the City Council where I observed his demeanor and arrogant know it all attitude, I decided that out of love and loyalty to my dear home town I had to do what ever I could to stop him and his circle of empty suits from driving the town completely into the dirt of bankruptcy and ruin.
When this Gondola maddness surfaced it only intensified my resolve to stand up and be counted. To that end, I looked around for viable organizations and individuals to join with in combating this insanity and incompetence that seems to have taken over the city government.
I became aware of Smart Growth Ogden and from my initial understanding of them felt that they would be a good organization to align with. So I went to a couple of their meetings and started a dialogue with several of their leading members.
I found them all to be very nice, intelligent and well motivated citizens who were banded together with the common cause of sheparding smart growth in Ogden.
I also found them to be very un-agressive and way too mellow for my taste in this sort of political warfare that was being waged by the Godfreyites. I tried to incite them into taking a much stronger approach in their methods, but found them to be much more inclined toward a polite debating society stance. Every time I talked to any of them about getting meaner and nastier with Godfrey, Peterson and the Gondola idea, I was met with resistance and rejection. I was told several times by the leaders of SGO that the organization was not against anything or any body, but was for Ogden and an intelligent and fair approach to all of the city's growth issues. They repeadedly refused my intreaties to go after Peterson, Godfrey and the Gondola with bare knuckles. Several of them told me several times that they and the organization were in fact not against the Gondola if it was proven out to be "smart"
Bottom line, I could never get SGO and their leaders to do the very things that Bob and others seem to be now accusing them of doing all along.
Just as I like Bob, I also very much like and respect all of the SGO people I have talked to over the last couple of years. However, they are way too gentle and reserved for my taste, and I have percieved that I am way too aggresive and outspoken for theirs. I came to feel that they were a very dedicated and intelligent College debating society, but that they weren't who I wanted to be with in a knock down drag out war that I forsaw this latest Gondola scheme to be.
So, I find it extremely hard to swallow this business of SGO being some kind of effective gorilla warfare organization. In my opinion their tendency to make speeches at a knife fight is not a winning plan.
I also believe that there are lots of honest dedicated people on both sides of this Gondola issue, and that they all have the same motive - a better Ogden for the future.
So lets meet in the parking lot after school and see who really wants a good old fashioned Ogden style slug fest. I'm too old to participate personally anymore, but that won't stop me from inciting the brawl from the safety of my locked car. Whoops, I'm sorry, I said at the beginning of this screed that I was going to be serious, but like Bob, sometimes I just can't hep myself. Us pugnacious Ogden boys are just like that I suppose.
Over the years I’ve discovered who the Geigers are, who Gadi is, and some other folks. One PC meeting I was at I sat in the back and those three were here and there in the room. Slowly, they began moving and finally they were all sitting beside me! I was dozing one minute, and the next, I was sitting on “Power Row.” You could have picked me out because I believe I was the only one not wearing black!
At one point the usual placid Curt got fired up and started yelling at a news reporter. “These people want to live in the SAME house, the SAME street, NOTHING changing, then they come ask me for money for their causes! A nice young girl (reporter) like you – if these people get their way there will be NOTHING here for you!” And so it went. I thought: “Nothing here? Gee, I’m here, and so are some other folks. There seems to be SOMETHING here.”
My feeling, Oz, is if somebody’s trying to do this city harm, then their motivation and their personal qualities hardly matter. Job One has to be to defeat them and prevent them from doing the harm. After that, we can all be friends if they want to be.
I know a few Lifties as well as some Smarties and we all get along just fine. But there’s something about the Geigers that is just very different.
Curt, Bob, Gadi, Rupert, Sue Wilkerson, the guy from Scottsdale, and a few others of their small, small group – it’s all just part of this weird and wonderful town.
Oftentimes the press, in its use of words, confuses matters. Take the local use of the word, “gondola.” By allowing the mayor to use it as he has, the word has become almost a profanity. For example,
Ogden, Utah (AP) – Autoliv officials, in an attempt to reduce costs and increase money available for executive bonuses in an increasingly-competitive environment, announced today that they will be closing their Ogden operations and moving those processes to Mexico. A select few will be transferred, but over the next 18 months most of the remaining 235 employees will be, in local parlance, “forced to take the gondola.”
Thus we are left to wonder whether a “gondola” is a quaint Venetian pole boat, or a euphemism for a broom handle.
All my life, the thing that Godfrey wants to build has been called a “sky ride.” For example,
Ogden, UT (Reuters) – Officials today announced the rankings for transportation funding along the Wasatch Front. Rail, streetcar, and bus service topped the lists. Ogden Mayor Matthew Godfrey, a long proponent of a sky ride linking the train station to Weber State University, was disappointed that his approach was rejected. Transportation officials commented that while the sky ride was a novel approach, it did not appear to qualify for federal funding and would not specifically address transportation issues.
Use of the term “sky ride” would make things a lot clearer, and to me is the correct term for cable cars strung overhead.
So what's the deal Ozbo, you angling for a nobel peace prize, or a Godfrey Piece of the action prize? It sounds to me like your trying to board the "G" Train and think buttering up conductor Bob will do the trick.
Bob G is an aggressive little single minded bore that has no respect for you or any one outside the narrow little clique of Gondolistas. You must have been drunk if you spent four hours with him and came away thinking he was smart and well intentioned. He has shown the people of Ogden on numerous occasions just what a punk he is. Too bad he didn't head butt you, it might have knocked a little sense into your numb skull. this latest letter to the mayor says all there is to say about the sore loser.
Bob Geiger and his Dad will never be major players in Ogden or anywhere else. They are rag salesmen and petty opportunists, nothing more, nothing less.
A Little Confused:
The "sky ride" instead of "gondola"?
I love it!
Some of you have commented on Bob Geiger and have asked why they let him be in charge of Lift Ogden. In addition, some of you have made fun of the Mayor recently and some of the decisions he has made. I want to tell you the reason, anonymously, only because as time passes it will become increasingly important for people to be compassionate as the truth slowly comes out. Bob has taken over Lift Ogden by himself and is now really the only remaining member, and both he and Matt are suffering from a chronic neuropathic degeneration. The common terminology is they are both slowly checking into the hazelnut hotel.
Your first inclination will be to make a joke of it. But madness is no laughing matter. It is a dark, cold place, with long halls and little locked rooms to either side. It is a place of large, red buttons and blaring sirens and people in white coats yelling, “She’s out! Tell the matron Sue is out again!” And then it is a place of needles and a sudden, sickeningly calm feeling.
It is place where there are cruel men who say, “It’s Friday and nothing to do. Hey, let’s get all the orderlies together and dope Wilkerson up and put her in the rec room again.”
And insanity is scary – scary like putting four hundred grand into a house on Jefferson, then realizing you couldn’t sell it for quarter that.
And so I ask, resist the temptation to make fun. There will be moments when it will be hard. But in the name of decency, I ask you to try.
Rudi and all,
Blogs are at their best when they share information, views, and the varied experiences by the different people that participate.
When we get away from debate the blog loses its value. I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the blog. Rudi and Curm have been fair to me and I will make every effort to be fair to them.
I am not able to be on the internet or the blog very much which is why I don't consistently participate. I try to talk with those that come to our meetings and who I know participate on the blog.
I have a problem with the 30% slope issue because I have never had anyone tell me why 24% or 38% are not better. Maybe there is a good explanation that I simply haven't heard, yet. I also believe there are areas where 10% slope is unbuildable because of other geologic hazards in the area. Thus, our ordinance should be based on science and not a vague number. I know that Dan S. and others have information and I look forward to receiving it.
Sincerely,
Rick Safsten
I heard bobby assure the P/C chambers that he would not apologize for using the prophet's name....does he know what a prophet is? It was like listening to a little brat scream.."No! I WON'T say I'm sorry for calling you a name...and you can't make me!" And shame on him for his tawdry tactic of bringing 'religion' into the mix.
Anyway, the laughable but sad part was listening to him castigate SGO for putting together the Mt Ogden Neighborhood meetings for EVERYONE to give opinions and volunteer to be on committees and then...and then...and then whine that there weren't very many LO's who participated.
Now is that SGO's fault? Surely, LO's live in the Mt Ogden area? Surely some can read? Or know those who do?
Yet, Bob admitted that he couldn't muster enough LO's to care about Mt Ogden, other than to sell the entire area to a scammer like Peterson.
Ozboy may like the little mean-mouthed kid...but the rest of us would be hard pressed to spend four minutes with him, much less four HOURS!
How the heck does any business get done at Descente if Bob is at his computer sending those whiny, self-serving emails around town?
The temperatures are rising (true enough), so perhaps mittens and ski caps aren't 'hot' items right
now.
BTW, the reason LO's had so many signs out is that some yards had four in them! The little widows in my neighborhood were coerced by the fine upstanding LO's to place signs in their yards. These little women said they were 'too afraid' not to give in.
Ozboy, if you really believe that SGO folks are too tame for this fight to preserve Ogden's resources...then explain why LO's had so FEW of their supporters at the Mt Ogden meetings when ANY citizens were invited and welcomed to attend. Maybe it's because the Amen Chorus find bobby and curt to be too off-key?
The other answer is that integrity, honesty and deceny trump lying, and bullying.
Dan S....It was Sue W who urged one and all to 'have faith' in the little king's visions for Ogden. That's where Rudi picked up the 'faith based' moniker for that faction.
I like fuhrer followers or fuhrer-centic also.
Bobby Geiger ought to be horse-whipped for bringing up the prohet's name in his self-serving political discussion.
If he did that, he's ripe for Devine Retribution.
Ozboy....I was saddened when you took leave of WCF some time ago. Thank goodness you are baaaaack!
I'm replying to your magnificent and enlightening post on the making of the Gadi Insurance Fraud major motion picture!
I hope all your fans will read your snyopsis and explanation on the earlier thread.
The real money is made by these major motion films going straight to DVD! Of course, a world premiere held in our very own ampitheatre would be appropriate and thrilling.
I feel secure knowing one as bright as yourself has the mayor's ear and is privy to the workings of the inner sanctum.
I'd very much like to audition for you sometime, Mr. Ozboy. If you ever decide to do another major motion picture say, about global warming, I'm considered to very 'hot' as we say in the Biz. I also work for scale and a nice supper (doesn't that sound chi chi?) at Rooster's.
Thank you sooo much for clearing up Gadi's perceived unfortunate circumstances that could have spelled doom for our mayor's 'projects'. It is such a relief to know that everyone in our city administration, including cronies and 'developers' are ALL honest and full to overflowing with integrity!
PS...are you having open auditions?
The only reason I continue to read this blither is for "material", and sometimes I do wonder if what you write, your baseless and unfounded accusatory crap, is actionable. Our lawyers are looking into it.
It sure is good for my mini-series, which, by the way, has had a positive response from a major network ... and it won't be straight to DVD. Keep it up, if you can. It's getting juicier and juicier.
I have copies of it all. I just can't figure out what fallen actress I should cast as this new little whiny voice ... "l'il lola" ... but there are enough out of work hags that would love a SAG contract ... if my first choice hasn't already been booked as Sharon.
GO TEAM ... WE'RE GETTING THERE.
to producer rupert,
which major network in the third world are you talking to?
Hi Rupie...is that short for Ruptured?
Anyway, I'm so, like, anxious to be in the movies. I haven't seen any of your award winning works...(are they on DVD yet? ). I did see a lttle dvd about Ogden. Was that your special?
I didn't see any actors in it except for Mr Godfrey, and Mr Geiger, that I could recognize.
Anyways, like I said, I'm just dying to be a star and get out of this one-horse town. I've been told that I have great depth and range of motion...and not just with my E motion, if you get what I mean.
I hope you will keep me in mind when you cast your next major motion picture, Rupie. I'm real star material. All the guys..uh...crtics say so.
I was a runner-up in the Miss Saddlebag competition in Copperton one year. It was grueling to work in hot dusty arenas all day. So, I know I could work under hot lights and things like that.
Please don't refer to me as a 'new whiny voice'. Ackshully, I've been told I have a real nice voice. Kind of like that actress who played the good witch in Wizard of Oz...or was that Cinderella? I get mixed up real easy sometimes. But, I can learn lines FAST! Guess that's because I've heard so many!
Well, Rupie honey, you aren't a fairy, are you? Ewwww! I don't think I could make it with a fairy. Though I'm sure you're a very nice person and all. Just not my type, if you know what I mean. It would be a waste of good perfume don't you know?
Well, if you'd like to meet me and go over my attributes or something....just leave a note for l'il lola.
kisses and hugs~~~~
Producer
Which team is that? And where are you going?
Producer,
You say "Our lawyers are looking into it." Does this mean you're a couple now or does this mean you and your part time assistant?
Also why do you continually need to reassure yourself and us of your ability to actually market something in Hollywood, "by the way, has had a positive response from a major network ...". My question is when, talks cheap, action is another thing. Seems to me that we heard too much of this stuff from you without seeing anything on the silver screen or on the tube.
If you need to be constantly reassured that you can do something (i.e. stroked) or that you're going somewhere in your career, then you and godrey have a lot in common.
Interesting op ed in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning on elected officials who ignore the public will to ram through legislation opposed by the public. [Link here.]
It's by one Pat Shea, identified as "an attorney practicing in Utah and Washington, D.C. He teaches and does fellowship advising a t Westminster College and served in the Clinton administration 1996-2000."
He suggests, briefly, that the "arrogance of power" he finds so prevelent in Utah elected officials is in some part attributable to "many in the Legislature" likening "their public authority, most often unconsciously, to the ecclesiastical authority they exercise when appointed to an LDS Church position." I have no opinion on that point, and mention it here only to note, since I'm recommending his piece, that Shea's comment is a minor part of the essay. In its main points, I think the piece well worth the reading. I particularly liked this conclusion: "We citizens need to scrutinize candidates for public office to make sure they will serve the civic needs of our state."
Exactly. We get the government we deserve [God help us] because we elect it. Interesting eassy.
I just watched "Jaws III" on cable a couple of nights ago, Rupert is a great producer. I was spellbound by all the young gals in bikinis.
He just needs to get back into his groove.
And it speaks well of him that he now appears to be hooked on blogging.
We have lots of oddball characters on this blog.
Be nice to him, he's one of us!
Well, Curm...I appoint you ( and DO accept the position) of educating the common folk on the egregious behaviors of Mr Godfrey and his sycophants.
DO get the word out that a cursory scrutiny of this demagogue (visions of granduer for Ogden via gondola, for one) will uncover unsavoriness in astonishing layers of deceit.
LDS citizens have a moral and civic obligation, to scrutinize any LDS candidate for office, just as carefully as we hope they do any other man/woman candidate.
It is very true that too many jacklegs are put into office only because they are Mormons! The uninformed and easily beguiled LDS do this community and country a disservice by casting their votes based solely on the fact that 'he's in my ward', or 'she's really nice. Bakes the best cakes.' "He's so friendly!"
Look what the dopey Mormons did in Nevada: foisted Harry Reid, that UNAmerican, Cindy Sheehan hugging fool onto the national scene. Now he stands with that other dim light, Pelosi.
Look at Godfrey. Surely noone in his right mind could ever believe that this kid could have been elected TWICE if he wasn't the son-in-law of Ed Allen...a Stake President! Or that Ed would have been elected a State Senator except for his visible membership in the Church and his professional credentials.
So many of those 'yes men' around the throne are LDS too. Is that why the lumpenfolk trust them?
Oh yeah...it's because the king has more integrity than anyone else in the room.
Well, I'd rather these sheep stayed home on election day if they haven't the energy or common sense to ask questions and get the answers on the pressing issue facing our community and country.
THINK of the scams that have been perpetrated on the ostrich mentality and/or greed of hood-winked Mormons. Does Wayne Ogden ring a bell?
Sharon:
I recommended the piece because I think it's right on the money about the arrogance of power of elected officials, and the two examples he uses most [REAL Salt Lake Stadium and the Vouchers bill] I thought were good examples.
I mentioned his comment about religion, as I said, to note that it was a minor part of the piece, and I think an unnecessary one. I was afraid people would concentrate on that one line, and lose sight of the main point of the essay by concentrating on his comment on religion and Utah.
There were a handful of legislators who ran opposed to vouchers, for example, who switched on the final vote, and voted in favor, including the representative whose vote put the voucher bill over by a single vote. [I have no idea of the religious affillications of those who campaigned against vouchers then voted for it. Nor do I care.] It will be interesting to see what happens to them in the next election. If they are docilly returned to office despite having renegged on their campaign committments, then the voters will have no right to complain. If waffling legislators [all parties, all regligious affiliations or none] are not made to pay for their arrogance on election day, nothing will change.
For all the influence of money in government, we [the voters] have one thing we can do. One day every two years, or every four, the SOBs have to rely on us. They have to sweat it out. On one day every two or four years, they can't control what happens, and every now and then a few of them get dumped by an angry electorate they didn't expect ever to hold them to account. [I believe Mr. Curtis came within three dozen votes of losing his seat this term, for example.] That sort of thing needs to happen much more often than it does, or the arrogant disregard of the public will will continue.
But I'm afraid people have a very very short memory. Every elected politican knows that if he's going to do something unpopular, he needs to do it in the very first session following election. No matter how angry people are at his [or her] apostacy, two years later they will mostly have forgotten it. Usually they are right. Be interesting to see if any of the weasels are held to account for their voucher vote this time, or for choosing a REAL stadium over a veterans home in N. Utah. My guess would be that they, two years from now, will not be held to account.
We shall see.
I agree with you Curm. However, my remarks about the voting mentality of too many LDS citizens stand.
Mayor Corroon, was so right on about NOT having the soccer stadium. HE and his associates did the right thing, crunched all the numbers, and like the good administrator he is, said NOPE!
Unfortunately, Huntsman ran right over him and the soccer stadium, it appears, will be built.
I think it's a crime. I agree with so many others that our vets are getting short shrift.
I hope we all will have lonnnng memories this time around. I also hope that registered voters will do their due diligence and vote on he issues, the candidate's character and not because they see that person at church!
Councilman Safsten,
I was worried that the discussion of the 30% slope angles had gone stale, lost in an earlier thread. So thanks for bringing it up again, now that I have a bit of time. Here are a couple of points in response to your latest:
1. Yes, the precise figure of 30% is somewhat arbitrary. But it would be a logical fallacy to assert that because the precise figure is somewhat arbitrary, there should be no strict limit at all. Consider, for comparison, highway speed limits. During good weather when there isn't too much traffic it can be quite safe to drive faster than the posted speed limit. On the other hand, there are times when driving at even half the speed limit is unsafe. Does this mean we should eliminate speed limits, and simply require that people drive no faster than is safe for the conditions? I believe Montana actually tried that several years ago, and found that the "safe speed" law was unenforcable. With both speed limits and hillside construction, having a strict numerical limit is a helpful and necessary way of preventing much (not all) unsafe behavior.
2. Speaking as a professional scientist, I can assure you that geotechnical engineering is not an exact science. There's always a good deal of uncertainty over what's safe and what isn't. So rather than relying solely on geotechnical reports, it's prudent to put additional safety measures into our ordinances.
I don't recall the veteran's home and the stadium to be competing deals, a one or the other type thing. It has been discussed as such, but there never was a real either or situation.
The Stadium deal happened because the Governor knows better than Carroon and his debt review committee and all the citizens combined. It was reported that the Governor wanted it because his wife lobbied him to make it happen. If true, that means that the Governor's wife's wishes are more important in Utah than all the common sense, due dilligence, and overwhelming majority of citizens combined. Sad state of affairs if you ask me.
There was a huge surplus in the state, and in spite of that the legislators screwed the Veterans unilaterly without a connection to the stadium. Their distain for our veterans is a stand alone deal. My guess is that very few of these worthless bastards in the legislature ever wore the uniform of our country, so most of them can't relate to the importance of a veteran nursing home, nor do any of them even give a squat for that matter. (most of these people still give great lip service to the slaughter of innocents in the Middle East, and most of them still would sell us all down the river for a picture of themselves with Bush and Cheney)
These moron Republican so called leaders on the hill would rather spend $3.5 million for a completely useless and meaningless presidential preference primary election than they would for the Vets.
And Curmudgeon, if you don't think that the 800 pound "bishoprick" gorilla in the Utah legislature is the overriding dominant force that controls everything there and in the state, then you need to smoke some more whacky weed. Do you have any good stuff? I might come over and educate you on our quaint little ways here behind the Zion curtain if you want to twist one up and discover the "rest of the story". I heard that being whacked out makes it all make a lot more sense. I of course have never tried the stuff, and I sure wouldn't advocate any one else doing so, but I would try anything that might make the Utah Legislature make any sense.
Mr. Safsten
Here are some more arbitrary numbers you can chew on:
16 yrs old for a drivers license
21 yrs old to drink alcohol
17 yrs old to join the military
20MPH in a school zone
4 years on your term on the council
18 yrs old for a girl to consent
21 yrs old for a man to consent
All the zoning restrictions on lot sizes
65 yrs old for Social Security
I could go on and on if I wanted to spend the time, but being a smart guy I think you might get the point.
We live in a society of rules. There are lots of these rules that are some what arbitrary, especially for those directly affected. If I wanted to get really ambitious, my guess is that I could go through your record on the council and find a lot of arbitrary dicisions that you have participated in or championed.
On the slope restriction, I would suggest you start by reading the UBC. The 30% rule just didn't get pulled out of somebody's kiester.
Ozboy, dude, all you need are sandals, granny glasses and a guitar slung over your shoulder!
Oz:
(a) ON the stadium/vets home matter: granted, the money for each was not coming out of the same pot [so to speak]; they were not directly competing projects for state funding. But a comparison that is fair to make is the one you point out: when the governor [or his wife] or the majority of the legislature wanted a stadium to happen, even after SLC County government said no, it happened, and damn fast. When the legislators didn't want to pony up money for a Vets home [to be largely reimubused by the Feds for Gawd's sake!], nothing happened. So it is fair to compare their priorities using the two examples, stadium and vets home. And their priorities stink.
(b) I wouldn't bet too much, Oz, on veterans being somehow, by virtue of their service, less susceptable to the big bucks of lobbiests or the ego stroking of celebrity. [All together now, can we say "Duke Cunningham"?].
(c) Sorry, can't help you on the whacky weed. I don't smoke. Anything. Never started. Lucky there.
(d) Well, of course the LDS church plays a role in legislative policy here. The evangelical and fundamental protestant churches play one in Alabama, and the Catholic Church plays one in Massachusetts. The point I was trying to make above is that I don't care what the motive is behind a legislator's abandoning a campaign stand [say, against vouchers for example], or approving the stadium against the public will. Matters not to me if a waffler is motivated by greed or an unconscious world view imbibed as an LDS Bishop or a Catholic deacon or a circuit riding fundamentalist evangelist or whatever. What matters to me is their actions, and the need for the voting public to hold them to account for those actions. Since the attention span of the general electorate does not extend out two years from each election, that holding to account, sadly, rarely happens. At least not nearly as often as it should to encourage honesty and integrity in office. But we don't have to go to the legislature for examples, or the Congress. We have enough right here at home. Mayor Godfrey, at the time of his last election, was already discussing the gondola/gondola and committed to it. But he didn't let the voters know that when he ran, presumably because he believed they would have opposed the plan [and him]. Since then, he's been flogging the gondola/gondola plan incessentaly, and there is no evidence that the public wants it even now, after two years of a Lift Ogden and Godfrey marketing and PR campaign. And he's still flogging it, and dragging his feet on other responsibilities to preseve the possiblity of its happening. Sort of defines both arrogance of power and contempt for the public, que no?
(e) Your point about the primary is a good one. Utah is still not going to matter a hill of beans in the nomination of most candidates for the two parties. Maybe, maybe, in the now all but impossible event of a brokered convention [i.e. one that arrives with truly no evident nominee], it might. But taking part in a western "flyover state" participation primary isn't going to matter much at all. It's a good indication of how legislators focus far too often on appearances, on show, instead of on substance, on how things look rather than how things are.
Angle of Repose
Here's a good reference, Mr. Safsten. I am quite surprised that this needs explaining. Avalanches are most common on 28-33 degree slopes. This is the critical range of slope where gravity begins to overtake the relative stability of rubble. Oz made the arbitrary point quite clear. Having a clearly defined slope restriction relieves the city of massive review time for challenges.
tec,
To be fair, however, a 30% slope is only about 17 degrees. The problem, I think, is that construction activities require cuts and fills. When the slope is already 30%, cuts and fills create steeper, unstable slopes. The only alternative is ugly retaining walls, and these are often unsafe as well.
Now someone like Councilman Safsten might argue, if it's the cuts and fills and retaining walls that we don't want, why not regulate those directly? Answer: Subdivisions get approved long before you're at the level of detail where you look at cuts and fills and retaining walls. Once a piece of land is subdivided, the city is pretty much obligated to allow construction on every lot. So you need a criterion that can be applied at the time of subdivision to determine how many lots are actually feasible.
Jason,
It is unfair and bad taste to denigrate Mr. Dowse.
He brings to Ogden a quality company and a lot of top paying jobs. Unfortunately, for the mayors' plans, now having an industry leader like Amer Sports I think Ogden has reached the saturation point. I doubt few, if any medium to larger companies would have an interest in locating in a town where their top competitor is featured on the towns central downtown attraction.
That, along with the fact that the Amer Sport employees are likely smart people with a green mentality. They won't be fooled by these gondola visions. I honestly do not think Amer knew what they were walking into and that they would be used by Godfrey to forward his evil plan. Cut them some slack and allow them to move here and be welcomed instead of creating ill will before they get here. Insulting their executive after he chose Ogden to move his operations isn't going to sit well with anyone in the company. That will surely prevent any of them from becoming active and joining the fight to save our open space.
"I am a big proponent of it."
--Mike Dowse, speaking of Godfrey's gondola in the Stand-Ex. Stand up and be counted, gondola boy, or get the f+++ outta my town. Also, playing golf with my ski patrolman buffy who works at Snowbasin the other day, he said that he was cutting snow for landings under a cliff when a boarder ripped over his head without scoping the jump; "Stupid patrolman," said the offender. Guess what his last name was? Geiger.
These boulder retaining walls that are so common these days are quite the hazard. Many are not built to spec and many of the boulders are placed awkwardly. They are particularly expensive to repair when not stacked correctly first time. It is an art and some of these guys don't take the time to position optimally. I can point out several precarious boulders in a wall nearby that will require elaborate replacement. When done well they can be attractive. I prefer the look of naturally stackable stone. I worked with a lot of Kaibab sandstone in AZ. Makes beautiful and strong retaining walls.
Oh ... buddy. That was bad.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE.
Jason, I think we're going to find Amer distancing themselves from any proposal that requires the city to sell-off a substantial portion of our public open space. You can bet some of us are prepared to make an issue of it with their clearly stated green initiatives. There is no case for selling off urban recreational lands for development and it is counter to the marketing of Ogden as a recreational destination. Let them get settled in a play a round at Mt. Ogden. It's infectious.
Tec is correct when he refers to the statistics with regards to the stability of snow.
When I was a ski patroller and attended an avalanche courses, those were the degrees of the slopes mentioned where most avalanches took place (BTW steeper slopes, say 60 degrees, were safer because they released their overloaded condition all the time. Safer for skiing maybe but and not safe to build on or build near because of the constant release). Usually a release that is then referred to as an avalanche is triggered by a disturbance of the snow surface such as, the cutting of a supporting structure within the snow, i.e. a fracture (weakening stability both above and below the cut) or the load on the slope has hit a critical point of retention or the slope experiences a vibration caused sometimes by only noise.
I only mention this in that even though snow is completely different than soil, what triggers snow to move are the same things that triggers the ground to move, the physics of gravity. Believe it or not snow, like soil, can become very stable and cohesive over time as evidenced by the size of some of the pieces witnessed within an avalanche. A lot of people that are killed in avalanches never have a chance, beeper or not, because they encounter these large pieces which crush them, smash them up against a tree or grind them into the soil below.
Am I an expert, no, but my experience when I was in the construction business is that saturated wet soil (overloaded) that has had its supporting structure undercut (retaining walls), or slopes cut too steep will sluff or soil that experiences vibration (earth quakes or excessive vibrations from road traffic) will react in a very similar manner as snow in similar conditions or under similar stresses. I did not witness any earth quake damage but I definitely saw the movement of water overloaded soil, vibration damage, the failure of steep retaining walls and the damage to both structures and roadways caused by those failures. I don’t want to imagine what would happen if you had overloaded soil conditions, removed supporting structures within the soil and an earth quake all at the same time. I think that as a city, these are the exact worst case scenarios that we have to protect against.
Are there situations where these generally accepted slope degree standards could be increased or decreased, I’m confident that there are situations. But those depend on specific locations, where your anchored, on specific soil conditions, proximity to steeper slopes above or below, precipitation patterns, earth quake patterns and fault considerations just to names a few. Without drilling holes all over the place or doing cuts all over the place, you will not know for sure where these exceptions exist. Additionally both conditions may exist side by side which means that the entire area will need to be examined to determine where it’s safe to develop. A technique similar to clear cutting a forest to harvest the useable trees, only in this case dig up everything to find out where it’s safe to build. After this type of forensic action, you might not recognize the areas that you were trying to preserve.
This reasoning maybe behind why this somewhat arbitrary 30degree slope standard came into existence. This was the degree of slope where those doing the investigations found a cross over between developable / undevelopable slopes. Is may not be concrete, but its strong enough for a lot of communities to enforce, especially when it prevents all the forensic work required, damage to the environment of the surrounding area to prove up the limited development potential on slopes of that steepness or greater.
I will try to do more research on the origin of the 30 degree slope limitation. Also know that we are definitely not the only community that has drawn the line at that number. I’ve seem it not only in other cities in Utah but also in other states as well. This was arrived at and accepted for a good reason.
Thanks Patroller, Excellent elaboration.
Let's take an example to visualize. Suppose you have an acre parcel about 200' square with a 30% slope on the east bench. That means that you have the east side 60' higher than the west boundary. This is determined by a rise of 3' for 10' of linear level run. When you level out a building pad of a quarter acre 100' square that excavation will leave a 30' tall bare cut on the east side. To retain this cut, requires a stepped wall system as you cannot build 30' tall retaining walls without extreme anchorage and engineering. Lets say we lay up 8'tall retainers stepped back 10' to retain 30 feet requires a series of 6 walls to retain back 60' and now up to 48'since you now are raising the cut by 15' by stepping and cutting back from the original cut line. If you build on a slope any steeper you can see by this example that you end up with a diminishing return on your retainment as you never top out. You end up cutting and retaining higher and higher. This is not arbitrary but a factor of the limits of an individual retainment relative to the pressure exerted by the retained material.
Retaining Walls
Another fine reference
Retaining Walls for Non-Geotechnical Engineers
I hate to pat our own back here at WCF but it strikes me as interesting that I cannot remember a single time that any LiftOgden thumper posted anything resembling a technical reference supporting their cause.
Bob Geiger, Curt Geiger, Rupert Hitzig, Matt Godfrey, Bill Spain, Sue Wilkerson, Chris Peterson ANYONE....
Do not one of you have the google-nuts to come up with a coherent reference to back up your visions. You all accuse those of us who support public open space of being against everything and that we never present options. You are liars. Everyone of you. We have tirelessly posted, for over a year, reference after reference to gondolas, slope engineering, transit, TOD, ski area design, etc.
I propose a challenge that none of these LO fools must post a reference to anything like their vision before they can rant gondola style. These children have called us names, questioned our commitment to our community, and insulted us for being locals with local sentiments. All the while, NEVER addressing a single point of well-reasoned contention.
One last document in our Sunday morning engineering course. I know that you LiftOgden loyalists prefer visions over equations. Please take a moment to absorb, at the very least, the forces and criteria that guide slope restrictions. You may have flunked seventh grade algebra but try to "envision" these concepts.
Lateral Earth Pressure for Non-Geotechnical Engineers
Nice work Tec. I do recall one or two incidents where the Geigers made a stab at appearing academic. The first one was when they took a traffic survey for I-15,(St.George to the Idaho border) and tried to equate the number of tourists this gondola had the potential to draw. The second was Bobby's famous fractional episode, the one where he attempted to transfer ski clothing retail data into some twisted case that not only resulted in gondola justification,from a tourism point of view,but also higher enrollment at WSU. I seem to recall some of the fractions carried out to the ten decimal.(one billionth of a percent) They truely have no facts on their side. All they seem to have backing them is Godfrey (city resources), Hardman (former clothier/chamber of commerce employee) and a bunch if carpetbaggers that pass themselves of as local realtors.
Should have read, of carpetbaggers, not if. One more thing of note, seems the Standard Examiner is also back on the G-train. After publishing pro gondola/ Godfrey letters recently, they have burried the oppositions on the flowers and darts portion of their website. Two more yesterday, Lee Carter is a disingenuous S*B. (sorry Rudy,sometimes we just have to call a spade a spade).
All this talk about slope had me thinking about another element of the Malan's Basin vision.
Using TopoUSA routing it is possible to view the topographic profile of a designeted route.
So I created routes over the proposed lift line at Malan's and compared it to the existing gondola lift routes at Snowbasin. I did this to relate the challenges facing any develoment in Malan's. Don Wilson made many key points in his analysis. I'll add this.
Route 1 Malan's Base to Proposed Terminus at level spot at top of Peterson Property.
Linear Path = .98 miles
VerticalRise = 1823'
Average grade = 35%
Route 2 Needles Gondola:
Linear Path = 1.47 miles VerticalRise = 1923'
Average Grade = 25%
Route 3 Strawberry Gondola
Linear Path = 1.74 miles
Vertical Rise = 2314'
Average Grade = 26%
These figures may conflict slightly with Snowbasin's stats but are basically accurate.
What these figures reveal is that Snowbasin has a much more forgiving terrain profile. While advanced skiers and snowboarders prefer the steeper pitches, we are looking at this from a ski area development and management view. Snowbasin's best descents are hiked from the top of the Strawberry Gondola and out of bounds in Hell's Canyon(BE CAREFUL!!)
Snowbasin fans out to form many gullies and sub-drainages allowing many routes of descent. This spreads out the crowd and prevents over-chopping of the fresh on powder days. This also allows just enough sun for a little warming of the snow surface. Too much sun is undesirable, rendering the snow unslidable without salting.
Constructing access roads and maintained ski trails is also much easier without the constraint of a tight valley.
The case with Malan's is quite the opposite. Malan's is funnel shaped and forces traffic to converge into a single path half way into the descent.
Slope maintenance and grooming is quite challenging on these slopes.
Examining the slope from the proposed terminus to the half-way descent point which is the meat of Malan's and would be a very fun bowl on a very cold powder day...this descent would be 1/2 mile in distance and drop 1,115'. The average slope is 43%. This upper area of Malan's would have to be groomed by winch cat. Many ski areas do not groom on such slopes leaving it as a mine field of moguls for the foolhardy with raggedy knees. This upper section is divided in half by a rock band that is quite evident from a distance. This rock band makes it impossible to groom the whole bowl leaving it to be groomed in two seperate paths. Aside from the rare cold and cloudy powder day, skiing Malan's would be a miserable and limited experience. Add the near zero visibility on those powder days, skiing on these slopes above treeline with no visual reference is treacherous. I have descended the bowls on the Snowbasin side in these conditions and it is not for the uninitiated. Malan's would have people shaking in their ski boots.
The only other routes are down the two ridgelines. I cannot see how these routes could be improved for cat access. They are extremely rocky requiring massive earthmoving to level them for a catpath. These routes are the most challenging giving skiers a short, steep, but nice tree run on the north facing aspect and a rocky sometimes impassable descent on the south aspect. Since these routes would be passable ONLY on a powder day the actual usable acreage of a fair weather day at Malan's is considerably smaller.
Most impressive, Tec. I don't ski, but even this earthbound walker understood the perils of skiing at Malan's and the near impossiblity of turning that piece of mountain into anything profitable or safe.
Thanks to you, Don, Dan , Bill and the others who do KNOW what's up (no pun) and can relate facts in a most understandable way.
BTW: HAPPY EASTER, Y'ALL
Tec:
Thanks for the research. Interesting what appealing to facts can do for an argument, and becoming clearer by the day why virtually no facts in support of the gondola/gondola Malan's Ski Resort scheme have been forthcoming over the two years... yes, two years, now... since Hizzonah first floated the idea to a disbelieving [with good reason] public.
Speaking of Malan's Basin, twice this year on his call in show the mayor tried to denigrate the character and credentials of Don Wilson. Never once did his comment contain fact, true to his form the mayor actually lied, his statements were expressed to imply that he had research and fact on his side,but offered nothing other than his own lies and innuendo. To paraphrase some examples, " he was a civil engineer of some sort, and just some ski patrlman, he may have had a business card that said he was over resort development at one time, but no development ever happened under him. While I was meeting with real resort developers, that develope big resorts for a living, they laughed at Don Wilson's take on Malan's Basin." Typical Godfrey, damn the facts, I know everything response. He must not have read the printed copy in the Tribune article, when asked for comment Mr. Peterson himself, concured with what Don had presentented, " it is what it is", was his comment. The lift, the runs and all. As for Godfrey's know it all character assasination, he must have overlooked Don's resume, whigh was encluded with the overview. Civil engineer? How about, Thiokol Corp., Design engineer for ICBM and Peacekeeper missle systems. Just some ski patrolman, National Ski Patrol Professional Patroller for the year 1975. Director of the Patrol from 1968-1967. Resort development, Chis Peterson knew better than to disaggree here, much of what has occured under Earl's ownership follows run designs and such started by Don Wilson. Why does any of this matter? Or better still. Why would the mayor be so invidious to Don Wilson and his overview? Simple, if Don is correct, and most experts would concur, Malans Basin is not a feasible place for Resort development. If the resort won't fly, why a gondola?
A Historical Note for Bill C:
You wrote "a bunch if carpetbaggers ". Seems clear you think "carpetbaggers" is a derogatory term. Au contraire. It was a derogatory term only for the treasonous confederates who didn't seem to realize they'd lost the Civil War and who applied it to agents of the U.S Government and the Republican Party [back when that party actually cared about civil liberties] who came south to help pick up the pieces after the confederacy collapsed and its armies surrendered.
Carpetbaggers were those who moved to the South to re-establish government, and to make sure blacks got the chance to vote for those governments. To teach reading to newly freed slaves. And [among other things] to start many of the southern states' first public school systems. [The planter aristocrats who ran things before the Civil War were loath to tax themselves to provide schooling for the po' white trash who lived in the piney woods and could not afford full time tutors or private academy tuition for their children.]
Carpetbaggers had a proud and honorable role to play in American history. Sadly, though, the purveyors of the "moonlight and magnolias" myth of the Old South, and the romantic [but wildly ahistorical] myth of "the lost cause" have succeeded in turning it into a pejorative for many.
Ok, Curm, then what do you call someone who comes into town just to make a quick buck and then leaves?
As long as the LO are into envisioning things, why not envision the reality of Malan's Basin as an attraction. Since all this ski town/urban gondola/sell the golf course/raise property values/build homes at the top of the foothill/blah blah blah nonsense all depends on one thing...
Is Malan's Basin enough of an attraction to build not one gondola system, not two, not three but FIVE gondola systems!!!?? SIX if you count Peterson's desire to place an overlook and gondola terminal above the waterfall.
And envision this. Suppose he builds a little thing-a-ma-village up there with a couple of restaurants, couple of patio takeouts, 50 unit condotel(he wants 300), etc... What would a casual visitor to Ogden "on their way to Jackson Hole" pay to ride the gondola just to wander around up there in the summertime. First of all it is a beautiful and short hike up there so the access gondola from the foothill to Malan's would have to compete with the free and healthy hike from 27th street. Surely Peterson would offer a voucher for meals with the ticket price just to get there but what about the people who want to picnic up there or just take a walk or mountain bike ride. Will they pay 10 or 20 bucks to get up to Malan's I doubt it. A family of 4 would have to cough up 40 bucks or more to ride up there when they could do the same in a place like Park City and see galleries, choose from dozens of fine unique restaurants, kids could skate the world class Park City Skate Park, and more without paying for gondola access.
In reality there just is no way any feasibility study would point to this being viable. 100 million bucks to create a non attraction consisting of a golf course housing project, cross town gondola ride, to an up-mountain gondola ride, over a third rate waterfall*, and destination Tyrolian mac-village. What is wrong with turn-of-the-century Victorian architecture. Most of the mountain towns in the west were built in the mining boom eras and have that character. Works for Park City, Jackson and everywhere else. Tyrolian??
*Sorry to degrade our waterfall, it is beautiful and majestic but without a rare seasonal torrent it is quite boring. Not even in the class as Yosemite's and so many others. Hardly warrants a several million dollar overlook and extra gondola anchorage.
Tec, Bill, Curm, etc
The only real test of economic viability is - will private capital invest in it, or will it have to be built by the politicians with the unwilling and uninformed public's money - like the Real Stadium?
If the Gondolistas had a lick of sense they would get the Governor's wife on board with this looney idear. She has more power to get financially stupid stuff done in Utah than anything else, as witnessed by the Stadium scam.
And by the way, where's Chris these days? He is starting to remind me of the old "Where's Waldo" cartoons.
Dan S:
A Republican congressman.
B
Chris is in Summit County, if he's smarter than he appears to be!
That's the happenin' place to build. Beautiful scenery, not too far from Kimball Junction, Park City, Jeremy Ranch...even Ogden.
I did hear that some townsfolk are settin' on their porches with their shotguns jest waitin' for a tall, smiley face stranger to appear in their sights.
Tec ... since you used my name, let me invoke a counter challenge. Your grammar in this earlier blog is abominable. The challenge is ... translate this sentence so that it makes sense. It is hard to meet a challenge when it is so poorly stated ... from your earlier blog ... "I propose a challenge that none of these LO fools must post a reference to anything like their vision before they can rant gondola style"
Could any of you "gentle readers" help me understand the challenge? After all, he is one of yours.
Tec,
You're absolutely right in your conclusion (as are others) that the Malan Basin development won't financially work. Even with all of the profits gained from a housing development below Malan Basin plowed into the development up there, it wouldn't significantly fund the investment required in the Malan Basin development and gondola to there, let along make it operationally viable.
This whole scheme is just a rouse to the real objective, that of developing our open space into a housing development. Nothing more nothing less. The mayor is insistent that we commit our open space BEFORE we know anything about the Malan Basin development, does that not in itself defy common business logic and validate my point?
We all should quit wasting our time on validating this as a no go development and focus our energy on protecting our park, golf course and open space, this is what they are really after.
The mayor and administrations intent is to get the open space away from the residents before the majority figure out what the real motivations of this scheme is. Unfortunately for the mayor, I get the feeling more and more people have figured out his plan. His lack of integrity and honesty is starting to catch up with him. He's been caught in too many lies.
Rupert, thought you went to West Hollywood, to get piercing or something like that. How were the paved trails (sidewalks)? You said you weren't coming back till the mayor and Geigers won the battle and there was a gondola. Do you know something we don't? Or have been recruited back, so LO will have membership in double digets once again? I believe Tec was challenging anyone pro-gondola to produce one fact,(if it's possible) when expressing support for this unadulterated bull sh##.
P.S. Rurpert, no freeway traffic studies or retail coat sales data please. You May start with some actual costs, gondolas, South Tyrolian doll houses and such.
Rupy baby,
Back when I was in the "Biz" in Hollywood we said things like: "Put up or shut up" or "talk is cheap that's why there is so much of it" or my fav "money talks and bull shit walks".
Maybe that's what Tec meant.
Yes indeed old buddy, Hollywood is a real walkin place, just full up wih big bull shit artists like you.
Then again maybe you don't really know much about Hollywood being that you're on the other side of the mountain and way the hell out in the porno land of Chatsworth.
Ozboy, Rurpert seems more of a fringe sort a guy, West Hollywood or Northridge.
Gee, Producer, you caught a grammatical error in my hasty typing.
BFD, Dude
I propose a challenge that these LO fools must post a reference to anything like their vision before they can rant gondola style
There Rupe, now do you have anything of substance to contribute or are you playing 4th grade english teacher.
You have made numerous references in the past to my grammar, likely because I have torn you a new one and you are stuck for an intelligent response.
Sometimes in typing and composing it is possible to get a couple of words crossed. I think you get the gist...
Now post something of real world reference to your lame-ass visions.
Absolutely Right,
You are correct. Saving the golf course and our open space is the heart of the issue.
Rupert,
We are not against anything. We are working for the preservation of our open space...period
Playin' with the bold markup.
Rather I'll take Oxboy's lead...Rupe
Put up or shut up
Rupert, about these visions, is something else required for one to recieve them? Say an unabbashed gullibility, a deck of less than 52 cards, terminal greed, the kind that keeps one pursuing that carrot at the end of the stick, just out of reach? Work with us Rupe, we're dying to hear something profound. Maybe special glasses and a club ring handed out at secret lift Ogden gatherings not held at the chamber auditorium?
Rupe,
you may notice my writing style is a mish-mash of Cal-lingo, Ebonics, and STFU, in your face, challenge, to you to come up with a real response.
Listen to some hip-hop you old fart. Braggadacio and challenge is part of the fun. Responding with something of substance is now in your court...
Interesting New York Times article today about blog sites getting out of hand with threatening posts and other personal attacks. The examples make Weber County Forum seem pretty tame by comparison. But I still think it's crossing the line to mention, even jokingly, people with shotguns sitting on their porches. And I'm getting really tired of all the name-calling. Rupert's troll posts are good for nothing but laughs and I admire you guys for taking the time to write entertaining replies, but let's keep it moderately civil, ok?
Dan ... thanks for the civility.
Someone else is using my name, so before it gets out of hand, I will go silent. I wouldn't call anyone a "yokel" unless he or she was one.
I have enjoyed the discourse, and I really do like the Ogdenites I have been fortunate enough to meet in person, but when someone writes hateful things in your name, you gotta get out of the game.
Good luck ... I like open spaces too, but I also can see Ogden becoming a real jewel, with some well placed help from the outside. Relax ... change is coming, and it would be nice to be good change.
Stay tuned for the TV series ... it will be a good one.
For the first time. Cdan, I'm not agreeing with you.
Poking a little fun at Chris, and the folks up in Summit County being on the lookout for a guy like him won't incite violence.
I doubt if anyone in SC een READS this blog!
I do think Rupert's posts sound like two or three different authors.
One thing in common tho...they're all rather wimpy in a limp wristed way.
rupert, there are many more enlightened people in Ogden. you're right, this blogspot is just a bunch of naysayers constantly congratulating each other on how right they think they are. I've tried discussing items with them and as I disagree, in comes the name-calling. My biggest beef is these folks lack of principle- one situation is ok if it means fit their end, terrible if it doesn't. Here's the current one- the SAME EXACT parcel of land proposed to be developed by Chris Peterson is HORRIBLE because foothill open space is paramount- but when Weber State announces they'll build on it- that's just fine, no protests. But here comes the frantic typing on how that's 'different'...
So let me get this straight, Rupert –
1) You’re either going to sue somebody over posts to this site, or rip them off for TV material to try to breathe life into your career.
2) Ogden will be a real jewel once people like you give us a working over. Or is that the line you use on the women you meet?
I Googled Rupert Herzig and got a list of B-movies. Looking on other sites, you received no credit for those movies – my guess is you were a go-fer who got a “producer” title somehow – shows nowadays have about 15 “producers. So did you make sure there was film in the camera, or did you get the sandwiches?
By the way, in Hollywood, when they’re interested, they give you a contract. When they want you to get lost, they say they’re “interested,” like they told you about your “miniseries.”
Your Ogden film “Cops n’ da Hood”, documenting Ogden’s "all-african-american" police force that you did for Matty, is an example of your work – short films for ad-hoc uses and other chop shop work. Really, it begins to appear you are just another small-time sycophant trying to suck some juice from a gullible small-time mayor with money in his pocket.
LA’s the place for ya, baby. Say “hi” to Gadi when you visit him in the joint.
If Weber State decides to build on their property it would present completely different conditions than if it were sold for home development and golf course expansion.
First of all, Weber State made no commitment to build on it, they simply defined a master plan that included that land as crucial to their future. They made simple calculations of replacement value and determined that the foothill property was worth 40 mil. Smart decision to hang onto it.
If WSU develops, it would not be gated and would likely respect trail systems. I have a lot more confidence in WSU having the aesthetic sensitivity to build in a parklike fashion. Maybe they could go subterranean with just the west faces of buildings showing instead of scarring the view of the mountain. University campuses are much like public open spaces. Plenty of shady spots and paths for jogging. They are usually pedestrian, quiet and a place for ideas and learning. That's more digestible to most than another gated mcmansion pseudo estate conclave for the self-conscious semi-rich to display their good taste in off-the-shelf trophy homes.
Rupert,
I can't recall you debating anything here. Please open up a line of discussion.
Let's talk about Malan's Basin as a ski resort, or
let's talk about gondolas as appropriate urban transit, or
let's talk about public open space and the value to the community
So Rupert, Let's talk. All I have ever heard from you are grammar critiques and calling us locals naysayers and accusing us of having no options on the table. You also have the strange compulsion to insult all of Ogden by insinuating we do not know what is good for our community and we need a little outside help from SoCal!, of all places.
Let's talk Rupert...
Stop being mean to Rupie! If you bullies don't stop insulting Rupie, he won't come to Ogden and make his major motion picure or his TV series about Ogden!
I'm very well known around 25th street and some other trendy places, so I'm sure I will have a very big part in both of his endeavors. He needs someone who can show him around, if you get my meaning.
I know my way around town and am recognized instantly in a LOT of places! So, I am valuable and a very 'hot' property for Rupie.
He HAS done some very exciting film work! That's why our mayor, who is a hip and happenin' guy likes Rupie.
Mr. Mayor likes me too. I can just feel it in my delicate bone structure that I'm destined to be a star any day!!
So, please don't ruin my big chance for success. I'm dying to make it big in Hollywood. I know I can with a little help from Rupie and Mr. Mayor.
Please don't chase Rupie away. He's my only chance to get out of this one horse town. When I make it in Hollywood...everyone in Ogden will be sooo proud of me!
Thank you for making my dream happen!
Kisses and hugs~~~~
L'il Lola
Please take note, gentle readers, that "Producer Rupert" is now posting under a REGISTERED ID of the same nane.
He's pointed out that an imposter has made some derogatory statements which have been wrongfully attributed to him.
We've thus deleted the offending post.
We strongly encourage other regular readers to also register and post under their own unique IDs.
This is by far the most sure-fire way to guarantee that you don't suffer at the hands of imposters.
To the point of outside help making Ogden a real "jewel": Go ask locals in Southwestern Montana and Northern Idaho how they feel about the Californication of their pristine open spaces.
On a recent motorsickle tour of the Big Sky state, I saw a bumper sticker on the wall of a perfectly smelly old saloon that sums it up: "We don't give a f*** how you do it in California."
Lola,
In reference to your post, and the implications therein, I was just now starting to wonder what Sue Wilkerson meant when she said she wants to climb on the G-train.
You've really shaken me up this morning little lady.
Tec,
perfect example of this blog's writers' inability to stick to principle.
If you're for open space in the foothills then you SHOULD be against ANY development becasue that's not open space. But magically, Weber State is different- you state you have confidence they'll build in a 'Parklike' fashion even though this is EXACTLY 'BLIND FAITH' and further their college DOES NOT give evidence to that effect, in fact it's quite an eyesore of different style buildings. But hey if there's a little grass and a concrete path, it's a beautiful 'parklike' place huh?
You people just don't get how full of crap you are. You are COMPLETELY 'ends justifies the means'
Ahem, Anonymous!
Please take note that the "anonymous" ID has been banned from this board. You're still welcome to post here anonymously, without registering, so long as you click "other" and choose a unique anonymous screen name.
See, e.g., Anonymous Posts Banned.
We thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
Gadi and his Gad flies, like Producer Rupert, not only have an exclusive on what we need here in Emerald City to be significant, but they apparently also now have an exclusive on the name "Rupert".
We all know the "real" Rupert who lives in the shadow of the "real" Gadi, who may be living in the shadow of the California state prison, because the "real" Rupert is the one who has to remind us of his big time status by using the name "Producer Rupert". He is either using that handle to distinquish himself from the numerous other "Ruperts" on this blog (like me), or his insecurity in being a real "Producer" is such that he needs to constantly remind himself, and us, of his self appointed and exhalted position of producer.
I guess with such a famous person as "Producer Rupert" it is very important to protect all variations of the name. Next thing you know all us Mormons will have to quit using the word "Saviour" when referring to the Lord because after all Gadi and his Gad flies have that market cornered around here also.
Also to be banned from our lexicon will be "arrogance" because they are also dominating that niche, as witnessed by "Producer Rupert" reminding us with this line from his next epic: "I also can see Ogden becoming a real jewel, with some well placed help from the outside". How arrogant is that? It's like us "yokels" are too stupid to manage our own affairs and need some accused swindler and his sycophant wanna be producer side kick to lead us out of our own incompetence.
Damn, I sure hope that "Producer Rupert" doesn't carry through with his threat to deny us the pleasure of his participation on this blog.
How tragic would that be?
Seems to me that there is a big difference between the University owned land adjacent to the campus that is designated as expansion space for the school - and the city owned park land that is open space for all of the citizens.
The school owned land will benefit all of society if and when it is used for its intended purpose of growing the campus. I do not believe that this school owned land was ever intended as permanent open space.
If the city owned land is given over to Peterson for his housing development, only he and his compadres will benefit at the expense of society. As a gift to the city this land was intended for open space by the Malan family.
I agree with Tec on trusting the University, more than Godfrey and Peterson, to do something nice for the community with THEIR land.
All Ruperts are not created equal. For instance we have the incredibly talented Rupert Holmes, and then we have Producer Rupert who's lack of ......, well you get the idea.
Exactly right, Ozboy. Not only that, the deed to the Mt. Ogden Park property was accepted from the grantor by Emerald City Council by council ordinance upon the express restrictive condition that it be used "for use for park, recreation, and general community purpose(s)."
Rudi
I find it interesting that this city ordinance designating the Mt. Ogden Park as open park land was signed by Mayor Merle Allen, who is the grandfather in law of our very own dear Mayor Godfrey, who of course now wants to defy that ordinance and give the land to his buddy Peterson.
Merle Allen by the way was a very nice genuine man. He is (was?) unpretentious and concerned with all of the citizens of Ogden during his tenure as our mayor. This of course is completely opposite of his grandson in-law Matt who thinks nothing of raping the public for the benefit of his insider circle of friends.
Does any one here know if Mr. Allen is still with us? I had the pleasure of making his acquaintance several years ago and was impressed with what a great guy he was.
As Ozboy and Rudi have pretty much said already, there's nothing inconsistent about being against the sale and development of city-owned park land while being for (or neutral on) the development of university-owned land for university purposes. When WSU acquired the foothill land it never promised to leave it as open space. But Ogden City did dedicate its property as a public park. Big difference.
too lame,
your moniker tells it..
I don't recall being met with a gate last time I took a walk at WSU. I also did not state I was totally against all foothill development. Several on this blog have supported Peterson acquiring a parcel of land for a foothill base. I have stated numerous times that I think he could build a nice little multi-use development at the top of 36th to support his gondola base and that this should provide him sufficient development opportunity to generate some additional capital to make his whole venture viable.
So being full of crap seems to be only that I may disagree with you. Again the LO loyalists are the one's calling names and lack the desire for compromise.
I don't know about your leanings, but the university can expand all it wants if it brings more healthy coeds to town. I'll take that along with open space any time.
As one may recall, Merle Allen was sued for using city resourses for his own financial benefit. I believe it involved two homes he bought that were on a street that is now part of the northwest corner of the WSU campus. He had them moved somewhere out on Old Post Rd. with city personel and equipment. Abuse of power and self serving politicians are no new phenomena, my guess is it's not truely hereditary, though there is an irony in the relationship to Godfrey.
Bill
The heridity factor wouldn't come into play here as Merle Allen is Godfrey's wife's grandfather, not his. That is unless........hmmmm maybe we shouldn't go there. But still, this angle could explain a lot.
So tell us more about this Merle Allen suit. Did he lose the case? Maybe this is where Mayor Godfrey got the idea to use city crews to work on his slum properties like he is reported to have done on numerous occasions.
Merle Allen is Ed Allen's father!
Is there something in the DNA here?
And then does proximity contaminate the in-laws too?
Merle moved the the houses,with city resourses, but they didnever filed the suit.
Post a Comment