Tag: Whistler Question

Whistler’s Answers: February 17, 1983Whistler’s Answers: February 17, 1983

February 17, 2022 Whistler MuseumWhistler Museum 0 Comments

In the 1980s the Whistler Question began posing a question to three to six people and publishing their responses under “Whistler’s Answers” (not to be confused with the Whistler Answer).  Each week, we’ll be sharing one question and the answers given back in 1983.  Please note, all names/answers/occupations/neighbourhoods represent information given to the Question at the time of publishing and do not necessarily reflect the person today.

Some context for this week’s question: An alternative route between Vancouver and the Garibaldi area through the Capilano Watershed was first proposed back in 1929, prior to the construction of Highway 99. In the early 1980s, a transportation committee with representatives from throughout the Howe Sound corridor, brought the idea back as an alternative to upgrading the existing route. Public opinion was divided over where the alternate route could be located, with some arguing the Capilano Watershed route would not change anything for Whistler, some arguing the proposal would interfere with a major fresh water source for Vancouver, and more arguing that the cost would be too high. At the time, the Duffy Lake Road was not open during the winter, though some proposed creating a circle route that would go from Whistler up through Lillooet and back to Vancouver.

Question: Are you in favour of the alternative route to Whistler going through Capilano Watershed?

Jon Paine – Structural Engineer – Emerald Estates

I think they should open the road that already goes through the watershed for use as an emergency route then improve it for long term access. It is a lot shorter and cheaper to build than the Harrison Mills route. I wonder how they will deal with plowing though if the route is just to be used for emergencies.

Mike Cleven – Musician – Emerald Estates

The loop would be the more useful route as visitors can then go straight north from Seattle and avoid tie-ups in Vancouver. It would also cut off a lot of time in the drive from Calgary. It’s fine if it has to be gravel at first. We might as well ram it through and concentrate on a more holistic plan, one which will open all kinds of recreation opportunities, for the long run. I just don’t like the idea of using our watershed.

Art Reid – Professional Engineer – North Vancouver

Sure, I think it’s okay to use the watershed route. They can control traffic once it’s built and during the building of the road crews could be very careful not to disturb the balance. To me the longer circuit route just doesn’t make sense – it’s not an attractive alternative to the present route. That distance has to be kept under 100 miles.

READ MOREREAD MORE

Whistler’s Answers: February 10, 1983Whistler’s Answers: February 10, 1983

February 10, 2022 Whistler MuseumWhistler Museum 0 Comments

In the 1980s the Whistler Question began posing a question to three to six people and publishing their responses under “Whistler’s Answers” (not to be confused with the Whistler Answer).  Each week, we’ll be sharing one question and the answers given back in 1983.  Please note, all names/answers/occupations/neighbourhoods represent information given to the Question at the time of publishing and do not necessarily reflect the person today.

Some context for this week’s question: We’re pretty sure this one is self explanatory.

Question: Is Valentine’s Day important to you?

Sharon Berry – Manager, Husky grocery store – Gondola Area

Yes, I think it is if you have someone special in your life. It’s just another opportunity to remind them how much you care.

Dorothy Stenger – Lifite, Blackcomb Mountain – White Gold Estates

Sure it is. It’s the only time of year you have a possibility of getting flowers! It’s also nice because it’s the only day of the year that’s totally devoted to two people who are in love.

Don Turner – “Pacheena” stage manager – Alpha Lake Village

I think it’s important because it’s a good day to be close to your family and other people you like. I always give my mum and my sister something just to remind them I love them.

READ MOREREAD MORE

Whistler’s Answers: February 3, 1983Whistler’s Answers: February 3, 1983

February 3, 2022 Whistler MuseumWhistler Museum 0 Comments

In the 1980s the Whistler Question began posing a question to three to six people and publishing their responses under “Whistler’s Answers” (not to be confused with the Whistler Answer).  Each week, we’ll be sharing one question and the answers given back in 1983.  Please note, all names/answers/occupations/neighbourhoods represent information given to the Question at the time of publishing and do not necessarily reflect the person today.

Some context for this week’s question: Students at the original Myrtle Philip School often remember helicopters landing on the field near the school in the early 1980s. There was no municipal airport, though a tri-service airport facility had been under discussion. At the beginning of 1983, a helicopter pad was proposed for the roof of the Tantalus Lodge, in order to have a site near to the Whistler Village.

Question: Where do you think a Whistler helicopter landing pad should be?

Warren Borden – Shipwright – North Vancouver

This is not a matter of convenience but of safety. The maximum period of danger with helicopters is during takeoff and landing so they just must be away from people. Ideally they shouldn’t be landing near tall buildings because of the updraft. If you’re going to land outside your medical centre they should cordon off an area as well.

Keith Dalley – Lift Maintenance Supervisor, Whistler Mountain – White Gold

The roof of Tantalus parking structure seems fine to me because it’s handy to transport injured people from the medical centre. My next choice would be Function Junction. The thing you have to remember is that no matter where the pad is, in a real emergency, a helicopter will land wherever the pilot wants.

Frank Thiessen – Professional Pilot – Alpine Meadows

The critical thing with helicopters is that they stay away from congested areas. I don’t think either the practice fairway or Tantalus are particularly good spots for a landing pad around here. Although the odds of something going wrong are small – they are really safe machines – you’ve just got to be away from crowds. I suggest they move back to the school or to Function Junction.

READ MOREREAD MORE

Whistler’s Answers: January 27, 1983Whistler’s Answers: January 27, 1983

January 27, 2022 Whistler MuseumWhistler Museum 0 Comments

It’s a new year, which means we are on to a new year of Whistler’s Answers!

In the 1980s the Whistler Question began posing a question to three to six people and publishing their responses under “Whistler’s Answers” (not to be confused with the Whistler Answer).  Each week, we’ll be sharing one question and the answers given back in 1983.  Please note, all names/answers/occupations/neighbourhoods represent information given to the Question at the time of publishing and do not necessarily reflect the person today.

Some context for this week’s question: In the midst of a recession in the early 1980s, the Ministry of Education cut back the funding to school boards. For the Howe Sound School Board (today SD 48 (Sea to Sky)), this meant cutting almost $700,000 from its budget in 1983. 37 teachers’ aides were let go and five teachers and services and programs were scaled back.

Question: Do you think the school board budget cuts have been reasonable?

Alexander Fordham – Grade One Student – Whiski Jack

I like the field trips we go on. Last year our class saw the firehall and the Children’s Festival. Now I know about those things. Mrs. King (teachers’ aide) helps me with my work a lot too. It’s too bad she will go.

Bob Daly – School Principal – Alpine Meadows

It makes no difference how they institute cutbacks because someone is always going to feel it. The board had to come up with a list of priorities. Teaching was at the top of that list and things farthest down on the list are the first to go. Unfortunately this meant the end of extra help and field trips, but there’s not really any other way they could do this.

Melanie Causton – Village Employee – Pemberton

Reading, writing and arithmetic are not all there is to a child’s education. I think the board should take a long look at other ways of cutting back before they eliminate field trips and other social activities which make up a big part of education. There might, for example, be certain other fringes the schools could do without.

READ MOREREAD MORE