Letters, May 19-21: Volunteerism is alive and well in Park City | ParkRecord.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Letters, May 19-21: Volunteerism is alive and well in Park City


Volunteerism is alive and well

On behalf of more than 150 moms and daughters in the Summit County chapter of the National Charity League, we want to thank The Park Record for your continued coverage of the important work being done by our local charities.

This past year presented unimaginable challenges, increasing everyone’s need for good news and to learn where to get help or how to give back.



And, give back we did! Volunteerism is alive and well in and around Park City.

During our chapter’s just-completed 2020-21 program year, our members set a new record — completing roughly 2,000 hours of volunteer service. This is the greatest number of philanthropy hours the group has ever accrued in one year and, quite notably, 500 more than clocked in the previous, pre-pandemic year.



With health restrictions in place last spring, we worked closely with the charities we support to create new activities our mothers and their daughters, rising 7th- through 12th-graders, could do safely together at home. This included making baby blankets for the Children’s Justice Center, bracelets and pillowcases for deployed service members through Operation Gratitude, snuffle mats for rescued dogs at Nuzzles & Co. and Valentine’s Day packages for victims of domestic abuse and their children safely sheltering at Peace House.

Our members also assembled 300 dental kits for the People’s Health Clinic and more than 200 snack kits that were included in student backpacks for EATS.

As we begin our new program year, we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to roll up our sleeves and get out in the community more. But the good news is this — no matter what we face, we know this group of moms and daughters is resilient and will find a way to help others.

This year has taught us that, in the face of adversity, it’s more important than ever to find ways to help one another.

Kim McGuire, Julie Perry and Brenda Moss

Summit County NCL presidents (past, current and incoming)

*****

Honor passholder refunds

When a company sends an email stating they’re going to give their customers insurance, that’s a great thing. Exactly what Vail Resorts did at the beginning of the 2020/2021 season. The email stated that should a customer decide they want to cancel their pass for any reason, they’ll get refunded.

The email mentioned if you lost work, lost your job, weren’t comfortable with COVID protocols, or even couldn’t make it out to ski, they would refund the pass.

The reality is very different.

Their insurance doesn’t allow for COVID protocols as a reason. They don’t care if you weren’t comfortable with their lack of enforcing COVID protocols. Loss of work, sure — if you’re employed by a company, show a pink slip. Self-employed? No coverage if you don’t work for a corporation.

It’s impossible to talk to someone about the situation. Calling the number Vail Resorts provides connects to the Philippines where there is no authority. Emailing “customer support” gets zero response. Calling their corporate office buried on their corporate HQ page is a voicemail system that leads nowhere.

For a company that is in customer hospitality, they are about the most inhospitable company there is. Mr. Katz has made it impossible to chat with anyone about refunds or even transfers.

After months of attempting to get a refund, my experience has been that Vail’s stance is a giant middle finger to everyone without a note from their doctor, or not in a corporate job. They don’t care about COVID, nor do they care about locals.

Grand Targhee offered their passholders the ability to get a refund or transfer their unused pass to next season.

Shame on Vail for not honoring their stated refund policy. How PCMR allowed this corporation to take over and run the resort with such horrible policies is beyond baffling. Vail’s pure greed will lose them local value and dissuade future consumers.

Vail, will you do the right thing? I ask you to honor your refund email from the beginning of this season.

Jody Whitesides

Old Town

*****

An ill-advised decision

It makes zero sense to remove the parking lots at the base of PCMR and turn them into additional developments.

Vail Resorts already has the right to develop millions of square feet of properties at Canyons Village. The resort is already crowded, even before this development occurs. Traffic into town is already more than our roads were built to handle, or that our geography itself can handle (i.e. there are just two ways into town).

If the town approves more development on the PCMR parking lots, it is saying that even after millions of square feet of resort properties are added to our community, Vail Resorts still needs more.

I recognize that Canyons Village is not in Park City proper and that if the parking lot development is approved then Vail Resorts will sell the land to the developer, but these are technicalities. Our community exists in a small valley, surrounded by mountains and with few roads in or out. In recent years, traffic and the lack (yes, the lack) of enough parking has been a huge issue at all the ski areas surrounding Salt Lake City.

It would be shortsighted and ill advised to remove parking lots to support even more development.

Bruce Kasanoff

Park Meadows

*****

PCMR parking plan is half baked

I live at the top of Crescent Tram/8th Street in Old Town. Every morning during winter season I watch the constant parade of cars load into PCMR. Resort traffic starts at 8 a.m. and continues for most of the morning, even when the parking lots are full. In February there were 23 of 28 days when the parking lots were full by 10 a.m., and on 20 of those days the lots hit full capacity at 9:40 a.m.

This will only get worse as the base area expands with more commercial space and condominiums.

The current PEG Companies base area development proposal under review by the Planning Commission requires 2,223 parking stalls to meet the Land Management Code parking demand. The developer, PEG, and the city are pursuing a reduction of 502 parking stalls to meet a future goal of reducing traffic in the area.

The proposed 502-stall reduction amounts to 50% of the minimum parking required by our code for this 650,000 square feet of new construction. The reductions in parking stalls will require all additional resort visitors to park at a park-and-ride lot and be transported to PCMR.

While I agree that adding more parking only increases traffic to the resort, we should not overlook the code requirements without an actual solution in hand.

At this time there are no concrete plans, let alone timelines, that can provide an analysis of how many buses are needed to meet the demand of the thousands that look to hit the slopes first thing each morning. How can we ask the Planning Commission to approve a reduction in parking when there is no plan, no funding and no calculations of anticipated skier/visitor growth?

Should the community just trust that everything is going to work out?

We all need to pay attention to the decisions being made at City Hall. As citizens, we all need to make sure adequate transportation commitments and funding sources are in place before City Hall enters into another half-baked development proposal.

Tana Toly

Old Town

*****

Solution to PCMR parking

Regarding paid parking at PCMR, columnist Tom Clyde asks the correct question: “Where will the off-site location for a remote parking lot be?”

I suggest Hideout.

Phil Palmintere

Park City


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Park City and Summit County make the Park Record's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.

 

Letters


See more