Page 3 of 10
Less could be more
What would be wrong with leaving Lots 1 and 9 alone? This is a great green space right in the village. An ice rink might be nice there but I fail to see how anyone could argue that clearing that land is more sustainable then letting it stand and grow. Imagine an old growth forest in the village, it may take some time, but it will never happen if we bulldoze the land.
Why do we seem to think bigger is better? How many remember when the powder would last for days (not hours) in Whistler Bowl before the peak chair? Would less visitors really be such a tragedy? High cost of housing, longer hours for business owners, staff burnout are just some of the problems that a reduced visitor count could help solve. I would be just as happy to live in the No. 7 resort in North America as I am to live in the No. 1.
I truly believe that Whistler should be more concerned with quality over quantity. If Whistler was to follow this idea it is true that some businesses will close, some people will be forced to leave, and less profit made. I ask you, do we not already have those problems?
Some of the public may be shocked by my suggestions, and wonder how I can be so callus about people?s livelihood. Well to answer you, to all things change must come. I mean, how many blacksmiths do you see working in the village these days?
By the way, I would love the chance to vote Ken for Mayor!
Just don?t get it
The opportunity to get $20 million, now, for a rink that Whistler has been promised, is being aggressively courted by another community. Good for them, and shame on our council for deceiving someone. If it goes to Squamish, shame on the council for taking away our legacy. If it goes to Whistler, shame on council for giving Squamish hope.