Reader comments: Salt Lake Council OKs motion to build City Creek skybridge

9 comments  |  Read story

CougarKeith | 9:13 p.m. April 8, 2008
Good-Bye Rocky, Hello Skybridge! Good-Bye Rocky, Hello Good Developement For The City! Good-Bye Rocky, Good-Bye Ultra-Liberism. We won't miss him! This is a good thing, get rid of the Pan-Handling on the Streets, and people would not be so apt to Want The Skybridge! These people are a Menace! Sorry to say that, but many of them make a better living than we do pan-handling! I offer to take them to the church office for help they REFUSE! I offer to buy them food, they refuse, They want Money. Skybridge, Skybridge, Rah Rah Rah!!!
Bewildered | 10:05 p.m. April 8, 2008
CougarKeith, the best argument you can come up with for why a skybridge is necessary is that panhandlers are a menace?

And I doubt many of them make a better living than you. Perhaps some do, but not many.
CougarKeith | 10:08 p.m. April 8, 2008
Re:Bewildered, I wasn't making an argument, just saying people don't like walking by them. The Skybridge will Beautify the City, a lot of big cities have skybridges. This is wonderful thing, it is a Protectant from the rain we may have some days, and snow. It is a wonderful piece of architecture. I personally am not worried or bugged by panhandlers, I know which ones are the scammers, they have been there for years, some even have Panhandling "Pimps", I have seen it. Skybridge is going to be wonderful! I hale it!!!
Comments continue below
Anonymous | 10:10 p.m. April 8, 2008
Actually, I believe that CougarKeith probably doesn't make as much as a panhandler ... with those brilliant logic skills.
Bewildered still | 10:20 p.m. April 8, 2008
CK, I appreciate your optimism regarding the skybridge and I too hope the project is a success. I do not disagree that the skybridge will be a good addition to the project, I just didn't see why you needed to assault panhandlers in your jubilation.
SLC'er | 12:24 a.m. April 9, 2008
lol, amen Anonymous @ 10:10. Hope this skybridge succeeds. I think it will, though I still don't like the idea. Why are people so supportive of a thing that is designed to keep them inside? You all really hate God's rain and snow so much that you can't take it for 1 minute to cross the street?
Advocate | 7:12 a.m. April 9, 2008
For years cities like Seattle, San Diego, Portland, Vancouver, Spokane and many others have proven the safety, convenience and architectural beauty of skybridges. This is not a new or unique downtown addition. People of SLC, why all the fuss? We have spent more money in debate and regulation than this thing will cost. This downtown development, the entire project, will unquestionably be a first class improvement to the City and the region. Detractors offer nothing in response ... only added cost and contention. Let's get the project completed so we all can enjoy it!
Jake | 9:57 a.m. April 9, 2008
I like the skybridge. Hooray for the city council!

Give CougarKeith a break; I think he makes some valid points about panhandlers. I used to work in a part of Salt Lake City that could be called transient central. I know there are a lot of homeless people, but the panhandlers are usually the least "needy".
tomturf | 8:42 a.m. April 11, 2008
Coming from Calgary, Alberta, Canada (about 800 miles north of you) that has the most extensive skybridge network in the world (we call them Plus15 - check wikipedia), it may be wise to be cautious about these. Our city is now rethinking it's 10 mile network of 59 above ground bridges because it has removed people off the streets. Planners are now trying to figure out how to get people back to street level. Yes, it is great to be able to move thru out our downtown indoors when it is below 0 F, but there is a price to pay in street level life. I don't however think that ONE skybridge in SLC is going to change your downtown dramatically.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.