Salt Lake 2002 10th Anniversary

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

We're already building our rail lines in the city, so that'll only make a difference on the margins. And the improvements we need to I-70 are hovering around $20 billion. Not even the Olympics would make that project move faster...

So are we,

Frontrunner from Ogden to Provo by late 2012 or early 2013
Light Rail ( Trax ) Airport line late 2012 or early 2013
Light Rail ( Trax ) Draper line early 2013
Light Rail ( Trax ) West Valley line AND Daybreak lines open 2011

With more future lines plan for the near future.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

And the improvements we need to I-70 are hovering around $20 billion. Not even the Olympics would make that project move faster...

Our freeways are already up to date.
I-15 Salt Lake valley less then 15 years old.
I-15 Utah valley to be finish by next year.
MVC Salt Lake and Utah Valleys 2014

The only improvements I can see would be I-215.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Back on the Olympics, I think the number being tossed around for a Denver is $2.5 billion. Makes sense it would be a bit higher. We've got most of the larger venues we'd need, but we'd still have to build a few new ones (bobsled and whatnot) that you guys already have. But they're in the same ballpark. Shouldn't be hard to come up with a couple billion..

Utah has a head start with $500 million to $1 billion worth of infrastructure already in place.

[Future Mayor]

While I hope that SLC is choosen to host the 2022 Winter Games, if we don't I would like to see it go to Denver. Simply to prove that the US Rockies are the finest mountains in the world for skiing.

Best of luck to both cities.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Our freeways are already up to date.

To be fair, the preferred alternative here calls for a high speed rail line unlike anything that exists in the U.S. That's what happens when you have the only real mountains in the continental U.S. - your transportation solutions costs more and require some actual innovative thinking.

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Utah has a head start with $500 million to $1 billion worth of infrastructure already in place.

The rest of the world doesn't want to see pragmatic austerity, they want something new, something exciting. Are we going recycle Los Angeles '84 for 2024 too? Boring!

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

To be fair, the preferred alternative here calls for a high speed rail line unlike anything that exists in the U.S. That's what happens when you have the only real mountains in the continental U.S. - your transportation solutions costs more and require some actual innovative thinking.





The rest of the world doesn't want to see boring austerity, they want something new, something exciting. Are we going recycle Los Angeles '84 for 2024 too? Boring!

Of course we will have to upgrade/update our infrastructure. But at least we have a infrastructure in place. That was the whole point.

How are we boring? "We've proved to the world we can do it, and do it better than anybody else.

[bunt_q]

Repeats are boring. Lots of cities in the world, and only an Olympics every four years, it'd be disappointing to repeat. Any city *can* do it (name me one example of a failed Olympics). Or at least the five or so finalists will all be cities that could do it. That's not the point. The USOC should decide based on who has the best chance of winning, and that's not you guys. There are way too many interesting and new candidates out there in the rest of the world for the U.S. to nominate a blast from the past.

Gotta think about electability. You guys have all the experience, just like Newt. But you're not electable.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Repeats are boring. Lots of cities in the world, and only an Olympics every four years, it'd be disappointing to repeat. Any city *can* do it (name me one example of a failed Olympics). Or at least the five or so finalists will all be cities that could do it. That's not the point. The USOC should decide based on who has the best chance of winning, and that's not you guys. There are way too many interesting and new candidates out there in the rest of the world for the U.S. to nominate a blast from the past.

Gotta think about electability. You guys have all the experience, just like Newt. But you're not electable.

Whatever, if Denver could repeat........they would. And you would be all for it too just like us with Salt Lake.

[bunt_q]

Maybe, maybe not. I'd also be cognizant of the fact that a North American city is only going to win every 12 years or so (maybe less going forward), and greed isn't in my nature. Even if I did want it, though, I wouldn't expect to win.

As an example, I don't particularly think Denver should be going after another Democratic National Convention in the near future. Did we do the best ever? Yep. Is Colorado still one of the most important swing states on the map? Yep. But it wouldn't be what's best for the party I don't think.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Repeats are boring. Lots of cities in the world, and only an Olympics every four years, it'd be disappointing to repeat. Any city *can* do it (name me one example of a failed Olympics). Or at least the five or so finalists will all be cities that could do it. That's not the point. The USOC should decide based on who has the best chance of winning, and that's not you guys. There are way too many interesting and new candidates out there in the rest of the world for the U.S. to nominate a blast from the past.

Gotta think about electability. You guys have all the experience, just like Newt. But you're not electable.

A few years ago, the IOC was discussing having more repeat cities host the Olympics because the cost to host them keeps skyrocketing.

[bunt_q]

Well sure, that's the responsible thing to say. But as long as new cities are coming forward with viable proposals - including plans to fund the games - do you really expect them not to listen?

I think the key is a proposal that isn't just a one-off. Either a plan that productively uses the investment for the city after the games, or sustainably removes/reuses/reduces the facilities, etc. You don't have to go with a repeat to achieve that.

[Cirrus]

This is all academic. Neither SLC nor Denver will host an olympics any time soon, because they are both tainted. SLC is tainted by the bribery scandal, and Denver is tainted by being the only city ever to be awarded the olympics and then turn them down. That's just all there is to it.

[Future Mayor]

I am anxious to see the re-broadcast of the opening ceremonies and to participate in some of the events this weekend.

[glowrock]

I have officially cleaned this thread of all of the "trash" that formed.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

This is all academic. Neither SLC nor Denver will host an olympics any time soon, because they are both tainted. SLC is tainted by the bribery scandal, and Denver is tainted by being the only city ever to be awarded the olympics and then turn them down. That's just all there is to it.

I think it's ridiculous that SLC is tainted by the "bribery scandal." Every host city prior to SLC had also bribed Olympic officials. SLC was the place that put a stop to it by having a whistleblower expose the way the IOC had operated.

SLC should be lionized for that, not denigrated.

Plus, I don't really think we're all that tainted after we put on the greatest Winter Olympics in recent history. The two recent Winter Olympics that were praised the most for being the best were '94 Lillehammer and SLC.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Stenar

I think it's ridiculous that SLC is tainted by the "bribery scandal." Every host city prior to SLC had also bribed Olympic officials. SLC was the place that put a stop to it by having a whistleblower expose the way the IOC had operated.

SLC should be lionized for that, not denigrated.

While you may have exposed the corruption in the IOC, it went over positively in the circles who view corruption as a thing to constantly root out. The IOC is not in that circle (along with such stellar bodies as FIFA's congress). You guys made the IOC look bad, and I don't know if it's been long enough to not be a detraction. Give it another ten to fifteen years.

I do think that the 2002 Olympics were a wonderful event, but a lot of that was also due to the global goodwill that everyone was feeling towards the US after 9/11. The world was able to have a big, collective circle-jerk before we pissed it all away in the proceeding six years.

[joscar]

Here is the same thing (minus walking out with the flag) from the HD feed!

• Video Link

And that's one thing SLC has that Denver doesn't, the MoTab Choir! All that aside I would just love to have any Olympic Games back in the United States as both New York 2012 and Chicago 2016 failed

[RiceXIX]

I personally would like USOC to bypass a 2022 winter bid and focus heavy on a '24 or '28 summer bid. Its been awhile since we have had a summer olympics in the US. If the winter olympics were awarded to the US in either '22 or '26 we probably would not see a summer olympics until the '40s at the earliest. I think Seattle would be a good choice maybe if they have any interest?

[UTAZLoVer]

• Video Link

Second 18 is a really, really quick clip from our Opening Ceremonies in 2002.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Cottonwood

I would hope not. That would seem very "corporate" for a religious institution to do.

Not if they're interested in the vitality of the city in which their world headquarters is located. This was the reason City Creek Center was built.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

While you may have exposed the corruption in the IOC, it went over positively in the circles who view corruption as a thing to constantly root out. The IOC is not in that circle (along with such stellar bodies as FIFA's congress). You guys made the IOC look bad, and I don't know if it's been long enough to not be a detraction. Give it another ten to fifteen years.

I do think that the 2002 Olympics were a wonderful event, but a lot of that was also due to the global goodwill that everyone was feeling towards the US after 9/11. The world was able to have a big, collective circle-jerk before we pissed it all away in the proceeding six years.

We made the old IOC look bad. A new IOC was created after the scandal, when most of the comity stepped down.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by RiceXIX

I personally would like USOC to bypass a 2022 winter bid and focus heavy on a '24 or '28 summer bid. Its been awhile since we have had a summer olympics in the US. If the winter olympics were awarded to the US in either '22 or '26 we probably would not see a summer olympics until the '40s at the earliest. I think Seattle would be a good choice maybe if they have any interest?

I think Salt Lake City would be a great choice. The IOC is interested in smaller cities to host the Olympic games (if they can afford them) as the activities in larger cities are beginning to overshadow the Olympic Events. And this way, the USA could be the first country to have a city host both a summer and winter Olympic games. The only event we couldn't host in SLC is the sailing, but that could be hosted in Utah's port city (San Diego). And then the "athletes" could be flown up to Salt Lake City for the medals ceremony in Salt Lake's original Medals Plaza. Of course a new stadium would need to be built, which would probably have to coincide with Salt Lake getting an NFL team.