Tag Archives: Chuck Cook

Whistler’s Answers: November 24, 1983

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: It’s no surprise that conditions on Highway 99 have been a topic of conversation and concern since the road to Whistler opened in 1965. The highway was not infrequently closed or rerouted due to washouts, floods, and accidents, at times leaving communities cut off from the Lower Mainland for multiple days. On Tuesday, November 15, 1983, highway officials closed Highway 99 between Squamish and Horseshoe Bay after over 52mm of rain fell in the area within 24 hours.

Question: How should driving conditions on Highway 99 be made less hazardous?

Peter Kirk – General Manager – Burnaby

My main concern is that a road to Squamish should never have been built; the houses along the route should never have been built. It should be on the watershed route. Maybe the secret is to get the Olympics. Then the focus would be on Whistler and the government might be forced into action.

Jim Klement – Corporate Pilot – Coquitlam

I’ve been coming up here since 1966, and I’ve seen a great improvement. The highway has gotten a tremendous boost, and gets a greater share of revenue than any other highway in BC. It’s not true they haven’t done anything for it; you have to consider the severity of the problem. You have to give them credit.

Chuck Cook – Dentist – Whistler Village

From here to Squamish I think the driving conditions are fine with the exception of Brohm Ridge, but that’s under construction. Our problem’s between Squamish and Horseshoe Bay. The depth of the creeks seems to be a problem. They should place the bridge abuttments further apart and move the whole bridge further up.

Whistler’s Answers: February 24, 1983

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: On January 5, 1983, the provincial government proposed to establish a new Crown corporation (WLC Development Ltd.) to take over the operation, assets, and liabilities of the Whistler Village Land Co., which was in severe financial difficulties. Before this could happen, however, the Whistler Resort Association (WRA) had to accept the terms of the corporation, including that WLC would have a majority vote on the WRA board. On January 11, 1983, the WRA board of directors agreed to the deal in principle, but it still had to be voted on by the WRA membership.

Question: Under what conditions do you think the WRA should accept the crown corp. proposal?

Chuck Cook – Dentist – Squamish

I think if the WRA makes any objection to this proposal it is looking a gift horse in the mouth. As for the set up of the WRA itself, I have no quarrel with that group and while I don’t particularly want to pay them more dues, I recognize that it’s the only way we’re going to make Whistler work.

Jan Holmberg – Businessman – Alta Vista

If we seriously want Whistler to become a four-season resort providing year-round employment, facilities like the resort centre and golf club have to be completed. WRA has no option but to accept the crown corp. proposal exactly as it stands.

Pat Kelly – Real Estate Sales – Whistler Cay

I think those who question the government’s conditions don’t realize that the negative consequences of turning down this offer far outweigh the extra assessment they would be paying in the short term. The ability of Whistler to grow will be seriously affected if we turn down the offer. The government is not going to force it on Whistler.