City Paper is not for tourists
Let’s get serious about this Olympics bid (“Let the Games Begin,” 5/11). Washington already has horrendous traffic (and parking) problems, especially downtown. During the summer, there is already a massive influx of tourists. Metro is slowly reaching capacity in daily ridership with just the local population. The city infrastructure can barely handle those who live and work here, and the normal tourist base.
What on earth are we going to do with the tens of thousands of participants, press, and spectators who might show up for the Olympics? And I say “might” because, on the other hand, the Games have lost some of the cachet and honor they once had. The very commercialization and extensive press coverage that ostensibly made the Games profitable for L.A. have cheapened and made them less attractive to many potential spectators. Never mind the shameful scandals of recent years.
Attempts to bring the Olympics to the D.C. region are primarily based on various people’s shortsighted view of how much money they believe can be made by… someone. What about the quality of life of the people who live and work here?
Quite honestly, I am against the new convention center for the same reason: The infrastructure cannot support it. Would the Olympics drive forward some infrastructure improvements? Possibly, but, as was noted in your article, they might be made hastily and without much long-term planning.
It’s a shame, because I actually think the Baltimore area might benefit from something like the Olympicsa needed shot in the arm to civic pride and commerce.
Say, how about a Baltimore-based bid, with Washington as a minor
Silver Spring, Md.