Vancouver to possibly host the 2026 Olympics

[misher]

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanco...hosting-future

I think Vancouver could re-use much of what we built originally to host the winter Olympics+it was a huge boost to our tourism sector & economy in general. The Olympics upgraded us internationally from a tier 2 to a tier 1 city. We'd definitely need to free up a bunch of hotel space for it though.

Overall I'd say Vancouver came out the better for the last Olympics and the hefty injections of cash we received helped build some much needed infrastructure. Rinse and repeat?

[whatnext]

That's a midelading thread title. Vancouver is not going to be bidding on the 2026 games, let alone hosting them. This is merely an opinion piece.

[Canucks223]

With the infrastructure and facilities already in place from previously hosting the games, how much would it cost to host this time around? I think its worth considering.

[Galaxy]

Surrey may be a better option to host the games. The city wants to add a Rogers Arena-sized arena and could leverage hosting the games with developing itself into the metros second major city. The buildings and housing all could really spur positive things for Surrey overall and would not significantly affect housing affordability in Vancouver proper as much. Just my thoughts.

[Cypherus]

Unfortunately this is an example of fake news - simply clickbait. They recently changed the title to "Opinion:...." to assuage concerns by the readers. The same page also featured Trevor Linden behind the Seattle NHL team when the facts are completely different - more clickbait or alternative facts. Daily Hive otherwise has a good track record - just depends on the writer...

[WarrenC12]

Thanks I needed the laugh.

Nobody should host the Olympics until the IOC gets their head out of their ass.

[jlousa]

There isn't an appetite with the current municipal/provincial governments to entertain bidding on the games. Reality is all the venues are still around with the exception of the Richmond Oval which was converted. No clue the amount of work that would be needed to convert that back, or perhaps it could get built at SFU as originally planned and serviced by the gondola. Would certainly get fed money rolling to build the skytrain all the way to UBC. The biggest hurdle would be the athletics village. Quick and dirty would be parking 3 cruise ships at Canada Place and you're done. In the meantime best to keep dreaming.

[misher]

Originally Posted by jlousa

There isn't an appetite with the current municipal/provincial governments to entertain bidding on the games. Reality is all the venues are still around with the exception of the Richmond Oval which was converted. No clue the amount of work that would be needed to convert that back, or perhaps it could get built at SFU as originally planned and serviced by the gondola. Would certainly get fed money rolling to build the skytrain all the way to UBC. The biggest hurdle would be the athletics village. Quick and dirty would be parking 3 cruise ships at Canada Place and you're done. In the meantime best to keep dreaming.

We do have all that cleared land beside the oval for river green development into 2030. We could just use one of those buildings for athletes village before handing the units over to owners.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Canucks223

With the infrastructure and facilities already in place from previously hosting the games, how much would it cost to host this time around? I think its worth considering.

That's what Calgary thought, since they hosted in '88 and still have all the parts lying around. Their 2026 Olympic Committee recently concluded that even the current $3.4 billion budget wouldn't be enough, and so this week the city voted to drop the bid before they end up in the poorhouse; we're proposing that we fill the vacancy.

Come on, this isn't even a suggestion, this is the beginning of a "hold my beer" meme.

[svlt]

It looks like Sweden and Italy are still interested in hosting, so there's no real urgency. I wouldn't want Vancouver to get into an actual competitive process. If it's an odd situation where they needed to find a quick stopgap host and would provide all manners of financial concessions and support just to keep the games running, I can see Vancouver, having recently hosted - but just far enough into the rearview mirror by 2026 - would have enough modern facilities in place for this to actually be a pretty good backup host to have in play. Until that sense of desperation sets in for the IOC I wouldn't want to be involved.

[NewfBC]

Salt Lake City is standing by, ready and willing to step in as a backup. No need for Vancouver.

Ron.

[LowerLonsdaleMike]

Misleading title for sure. If you read the whole article the point was that it increases the chances of Vancouver getting another Winter games in the future because a Canadian city dropped out of 2026. It wasn't meaning that we're going to push for 2026... it could be if there's a desire we could pursue 2030, 2034, etc.

[Nouvellecosse]

How about 2030?

• Video Link

I'm a bit skeptical but something to consider. Seems like it might be more appropriate for Calgary or QC or someone to host if another winter games happened since 20 years seems a bit soon for not only the same smallish country but the exact same city.

[White Pine]

I like the idea in theory, but I think it would be better to wait until 2050, assuming we still have winter by then.

20 years is a bit too soon to go back to the same host. I guess the two redeeming factors could be:

1. Winter Olympics has a smaller pool of cities to work with.
2. If they push the "Budget Olympics" idea, this might get smaller.

That said, I still think they should let at least one more Games pass.

[svlt]

This might be the catalyst to push our large scale transportation infrastructure investments (UBC line, Surrey-Langley lines) to be completed this decade. For those reasons I'd be onboard if we could use most of the existing facilities that we had built for the 2010 games.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by White Pine

I like the idea in theory, but I think it would be better to wait until 2050, assuming we still have winter by then.

20 years is a bit too soon to go back to the same host. I guess the two redeeming factors could be:

1. Winter Olympics has a smaller pool of cities to work with.
2. If they push the "Budget Olympics" idea, this might get smaller.

That said, I still think they should let at least one more Games pass.

Innsbruck held the Winter Olympics twice in 12 years and LA will have held three within 100 years after LA 2028, so I don't see why we can't do two in 20. Not that we necessarily should, but didn't we pull a pretty decent profit off the last one? And that was including the costs of new venues which we wouldn't have to do (as much) this time.

Originally Posted by svlt

This might be the catalyst to push our large scale transportation infrastructure investments (UBC line, Surrey-Langley lines) to be completed this decade. For those reasons I'd be onboard if we could use most of the existing facilities that we had built for the 2010 games.

2010 got us a pretty decent highway to Whistler, but it also got us a budget, value engineered, limited Canada Line. It might not be worth it to rush it.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Innsbruck held the Winter Olympics twice in 12 years and LA will have held three within 100 years after LA 2028, so I don't see why we can't do two in 20. Not that we necessarily should, but didn't we pull a pretty decent profit off the last one? And that was including the costs of new venues which we wouldn't have to do (as much) this time.



2010 got us a pretty decent highway to Whistler, but it also got us a budget, value engineered, limited Canada Line. It might not be worth it to rush it.

False. The Canada Line was value engineered because people didn't want to spend a couple extra hundred million on it.

Originally Posted by svlt

This might be the catalyst to push our large scale transportation infrastructure investments (UBC line, Surrey-Langley lines) to be completed this decade. For those reasons I'd be onboard if we could use most of the existing facilities that we had built for the 2010 games.

Most of the cost of the Olympics is actually the marginal cost of actually hosting.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by fredinno

False. The Canada Line was value engineered because people didn't want to spend a couple extra hundred million on it.

And if we decide to fast track projects, the people in charge might have to cut costs. I'm not necessarily saying that the hard deadlines caused the current Canada Line situation, but a similar hard deadline might cause another situation.

[Galaxy]

I’d prefer that Surrey host the games this time around. The games in Surrey could totally be a great catalyst for building sports/arts and other facilities. Surrey also has land to build a Olympic village and the city has indicated it wants a stadium like Rogers Arena. Surrey could also then use the build out as a opportunity to fast track redevelopment of its downtown. There is so much more Surrey could benefit from hosting the games that Vancouver would not benefit from. That’s at least my opinion.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I’d prefer that Surrey host the games this time around. The games in Surrey could totally be a great catalyst for building sports/arts and other facilities. Surrey also has land to build a Olympic village and the city has indicated it wants a stadium like Rogers Arena. Surrey could also then use the build out as a opportunity to fast track redevelopment of its downtown. There is so much more Surrey could benefit from hosting the games that Vancouver would not benefit from. That’s at least my opinion.

Last time "Vancouver" hosted the Olympics, it was really Whistler+Vancouver+West Vancouver+Richmond+UBC. At the very least, Surrey needs Whistler or the North Shore for any alpine events, and at that point you're crossing over Vancouver so it would only make sense to include Vancouver. Then it becomes the Vancouver Olympics