Comments about ‘SkiLink proposal divides users over access and environment’

SkiLink is a great 1st step for Utah leaders to showcase a move to a more sustainable and green way of life/future. The 11 minute ride will certainly reduce our carbon footprint - we can all argue about how much it will be reduced, but we cannot argue that this will not provide a positive benefit.

Furthermore it is a simple fact that our "mountain popularity" grows every year. Combine this with the fact our state has one of the fastest growing populations in America and we must compromise and plan for this growth. People movers located next to high density population centers are a key component to a sustainable future. Think about the other choices we will face if we do not provide and plan for this coming growth. Limited access for the privileged few who can afford to pay top dollar ...and/or waiting hours in commuting traffic... or do we wait until we as taxpayers come up with "our plan' and await on 'our tax payer funding" for this yet to be visioned plan?

To maintain our quality of life as our population doubles and our popularity multiplies we have find solutions NOW. The SkiLink proposal is a critical and desperately needed 1st step. Did i mention the additional jobs and the tax benefits we gain from second homers and tourist alike - these guests do not burden our public services yet they pay dearly for our year round needs.

I for one am all for the SkiLink and I applaud all our civic leaders who support it.

How easily it can be accomplished to destroy the environment and lives with the word "money". It creates thieves and criminal representatives with promise of greed.

This proposal is a disaster to taxpayers, the environment, watershed, wildlife, and surrounding residents of the area.

Zoning and limits are created for a reason, and it not to help developers profiteer and get rich with smooth talking snake oil salesman. This kind of project is over the heads of elected officials to even make a decision on. Sometimes you have to sacrifice and limit the wealth of a few to save the other 3 million from poverty and endangerment.

Have you ever seen a ski lift? Does it have 500 permanent jobs? NO. You need a couple of lift mechanics and dozen seasonal minimum wage folks to load and unload. This lift does not start where it might do some good moving skiers, it starts at the ultra rich area named the Colony. This lift is nothing but a sop to the land holders in the colony to get them to the Cottenwood canyons ( and better snow). For this are valued leaders will sell OUR public lands to a Canadian land developer with out public comment.....follow the money. Bishop, Chaffetz Hatch and Lee have all taken money from Talisker. This is a sad day for Utah and our watershed.

Sorry My2Cents, I'm just not seeing how building a gondola is going to result in "3 million [people] in poverty and endangerment." Could it be that you're fear-mongering just a tad?

And you do know that this project would be an environmental plus, right? The impact to plants, wildlife, and the watershed is negligible (this has been studied and proven many times), but would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1 million pounds per year.

Sometimes these types of things really can be a win/win. That's the case with SkiLink. You don't have to be opposed to it just because SOC is - you're allowed to think about it and come to your own conclusions.

I have read Talisker's studies and visited the proposed land sales many times over. Transportation solution? Hardly, a recent trip made by a friend shows that you must buy a $96 ticket, ride 3-4 lifts to get to skilink,then ride SkiLink, then buy another ticket at Solitude, the process taking over 2 hours--if all the lifts are open. SkiLink is NOT a transportation solution. SkiLink ends at the base of the Eagle Chair at Solitude, that doesn't give Brighton skiers any advantage over driving. In fact driving would be cheaper AND faster. Honestly folks, this isn't a solution to the transportation problems.
As a backcountry skier who frequents the area it will most definitly effect the terrain and skiing, hunting, hiking, and most important our watershed.
Salt Lake County and the State ARE currently searching for answers. Two transportation studies are ALREADY underway. They are looking for REAL solutions to REAL traffic problems, not the fabrications of Talisker.
Talisker is yet to prove there is a real traffic problem from PC to the canyons. Also, their data was admittedly based on outliers and anecdotal evidence.
Most important is our watershed. Ski resorts use chemicals to treat their lift towers, race courses, parking lots, not to mention chemicals leaching from cement foundation.

I think this is pretty awesome, let Private Enterprise decide. But remember Orrin Hatch supported the bailouts, who knows what he really believes?

SkiLink is, unfortunately, nothing more than a wolf in sheep's clothing, and anyone telling you otherwise is uneducated on the proposal or lying. There is a simple video explaining that 3-4 lifts are necessary to ride, multiple runs to traverse, a $96 ski lift ticket is required to be purchased (not including the price of Solitude), and over 1 hour later, you can finally ride the proposed SkiLink Gondola to get over to Solitude (ride over the mountain on the SkiLink Gondola (~11 mins) + lift time on Solitude (>30 mins) not included, of course).

See for yourself and make an educated decision by viewing the video on Vimeo by searching for: "SkiLink: Or," on their website (direct links are not allowed in comments here)

I am not opposed for finding a solution. A suggestion for possibly making this work perhaps, could be if there was a Gondola accessible from the parking lot of the Canyons, directly to the Solitude parking lot, the proposal would become a transportation alternative. But in the present form, it is untrue to call it such. I would also suggest that all energy used to power SkiLink be procured from wind farms (such as what Sundance Resort does) to really be able to call this a "Green" initiative, one which reduces our carbon footprint.

In the mean-time, please keep our "Backcountry" &"Backcountry" by preserving our forest, land, and water in its pristine state.