Jump to content

phandrosis

Members
  • Posts

    767
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Posts posted by phandrosis

  1. I found and article clearing up some of the statements trhown out recently about the stadium. Here are the facts:

    ( http://number.bunshun.jp/articles/-/823372 )

    1. The retractable roof will be constructed after the games due to both budget and time constraints.

    2. The stationary roof (obviously) will be built as planned.

    3. The retractable seating feature will not be constructed. Therefore, the stadium will be in track mode permanently (like Nissan)

    4. Not 30,000 seats, but just 15,000 seats will be temporary. Therefore the final capacity will be 65,000 which is plenty for a national stadium.

  2. I have some sad but at the same time happy news. After a meeting with the Governer of Tokyo, the JSC has announced that the New National Olympic Stadium will be constructed without the retractable roof. As an additional cost saving measures, some seats will become temporary. There is no mention of removing the retractable seating, so I assume that will stay as planned. However, fear not my retractable roof lovers! Since the stadium will be a concert venue many times after the games, the retractable roof will most likely be built after the games for that purpose.

    The best thing out of this is not the money saved, but the fact that spectators wont have to look up at the sky through a wiry mesh anymore!


    source: http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/10124944/

    • Like 2
  3. Additionally, why pick an unknown despotic country with virtually no accomplishments within the Olympic Movement when you can pick the most populous country on this planet, start developing a winter sports market there and use some of the venues from the Summer Olympics on top of that. Further, the IOC could then block a further Chinese summer bid for the foreseeable future. From a communications point of view, it is preferable for the IOC to pick China since it's a known quantity already - and that includes the skeletons in its closet. Pick Kazakhstan and you risk a PR disaster over a narcissistic dictatorship with a very skewed understanding of human rights and endless debates about the ethics of the IOC handing the Olympic Games to the highest bidder à la FIFA. As for the snow: If the IOC wants Beijing, I'm sure the Chinese will come up with an ingenuous way to have enough artificial snow at the ready for the Games. Tropical Sochi also made it happen...

    The problem is that the IOC doesn't want anyone to repeat Sochi. I bet that Beijing can make all that snow, but if they choose Beijing and let them spend all that money on snow, they are going against everything Agenda 2020 stands for. It's easy to say Beijing could host the games tomorrow, and preparation would be easy. However, the article states that the mountain venues for Beijing are underdeveloped while Almaty is in good shape venue wise in both categories.

    The fact of the matter is that Beijing, no matter how much it argues, would be an action of hypocrisy for the IOC. They would be allowing China to spend billions on snow. Almaty has snow. They would be allowing China to justify the building of an extremely expensive high speed rail since the mountain venues are so far away. Almaty's venues are naturally close together. In any case Beijing will spend much more than they claim, much more than Almaty will eventually spend if they win.

  4. The one that stood out was Almaty's 8 versus Beijing's 3 for weather/snow. Given that these are Winter Olympics and the IOC (hopefully) knows how expensive snow is to be made/transferred, this aspect could give Almaty a real advantage they are already playing on with the "Keeping It Real" slogan. B)

    • Like 1
  5. The way I see it, both cities are more even now than ever.

    Beijing is very reluctant to release the costs of the high speed rail to the public, stating it is unrelated. I know we all remember Sochi's highway to the mountain venues and how much that cost. They, like anyone else, can say now that it does not pose a fiscal risk, but the price changes and if they win we could find the first city chosen under Agenda 2020 to be just the opposite of what they wanted. Of course, they are using a lot of existing venues which does reduce costs, but refurbishing these venues for winter sports (It's kind of difficult to turn a water park into a place for curling) still costs money.

    Kazakhstan is very much still a risk for the IOC. First of all, they are not required to include the price of the venues built for the 2017 Universiade in their budget since they will be existing venues by 2022, so the cost still remains for the taxpayers (if that is where they get the money from), just a few years earlier. However, personally I believe the deciding factor is the most simple.

    It snows in Kazakhstan. A lot.

    This is just my opinion, but I bet it costs a lot of money to ship snow from somewhere else to Zhangjiakou than it is to just have it right in Almaty.

  6. The need to have the most modern stadium to showcase the most modern nation was definitely a factor in choosing Hadid's design. I'm not saying the other designs were not modern, they all were. It seems like the JSC wanted to choose a design that would allow the nation to showcase it's engineering capabilities while remaining functional in all situations (hence the requirement for the retractable roof), so when you look at the other options it does make sense why they chose Hadid.

    Not to be critical, but this was the entry from one of the Japanese architects (turned stadium preservationist after he lost, weirdly enough) and I'm not too sure it's anything close to the modernity and style the JSC was looking for, even if it was more feasible and functional.

    AJyQLca.png

  7. I read somewhere (don't have a source right now) that the engineers are having a bit of trouble figuring out how to construct the new stadium.

    To begin, the large arches that will support the roof and all are flattened in such a way that they are not as self supportive as most arches are. Because of this, they have to have foundations that go deep into the ground, which costs a lot of money (like that matters anymore)

    Also, the arches are actually huge, and getting them through downtown Tokyo to the building site is no walk in the park. There are no nearby canals so they really only have the options of building them in very small parts or somehow flying in all the large parts.

    In any case this is a very difficult project but they can't back down now. They have to one up China!

  8. "On Saturday officials unveiled a concept that also includes the Opening Ceremony being held in the city and the water, rather than in the Olympic stadium"

    Didn't Istanbul try to do a similar OC, but was rejected by the IOC for security purposes?

    Tokyo in 2016 had their stadium where the current Olympic Village for them is planned. That's the stadium for OC/Athletics/CC the IOC was a little wary about. I guess they were worried an earthquake could occur during the games and people might not evacuate quick enough if there is only one land route out.

    Or maybe they were scared of a mega tsunami I don't know

  9. LIES!! Equestrian 1964 was held in Karuizawa where: Curling in 1998 was also held and where the current Emperior Akihito met his future commoner bride, now Empress Michiko.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equestrian_at_the_1964_Summer_Olympics

    So whomever wrote that story or the Tokyo Organizing Committee release did NOT check their facts! They think nobody's watching them???

    Someone asked this in a Tokyo Skyscraper City thread, and I responded to it there. Some events were held in Karuizawa, some in Baji Park.

    The equestrian events were held in several places. Some in Nagano, and some in Setagaya-ku, where the Baji Koen park is located.

    poyUkrw.png

    This is from the Official Games Report from Tokyo 1964

    http://library.la84.org/6oic/Officia...r1964v1pt1.pdf

    • Like 1
  10. http://www.wbur.org/2015/02/11/bostons-2024-olympics-bill-transparent

    Legislators File Bill To Make Boston’s 2024 Olympics Bid More Transparent
    Two state legislators are seeking to create a commission to oversee Boston’s quest to host the 2024 Olympic Games and disclose any public and private money involved in the city’s bid. State Reps. Aaron Michlewitz and Michael J. Moran, both of Boston, jointly sponsored a bill filed Wednesday that they say will bring transparency to the Olympic bid process. “The feeling is if we’re going to invest state dollars into an Olympics in Boston, then we need to create a process that allows for accountability and transparency,” Michlewitz said in a phone interview. “My biggest fear is that we could be creating a debt long-term through these Olympics that will force future generations to have the burden of cleaning up — similar to the one the MBTA is currently dealing with right now because of the Big Dig.” The bill would create a seven-member Olympics commission appointed by various state officials, according to Moran. The commission would be tasked with maintaining a website where the public could track any private or public money spent on the Games using the state’s open checkbook program. The commission would also assess the social, economic and public safety impact of bringing the Games to Boston, Michlewitz said. The day after the U.S. Olympic Committee picked Boston to be the American bid to host the Games, Mayor Walsh promised to have the “most open, inclusive and transparent process in Olympic history.”Two major issues the bill seeks to address — transparency and funding — have been the main points of criticism regarding Boston’s Olympics bid. The group’s plan calls for utilizing existing facilities as well as infrastructure and transportation projects already in the pipeline. And while there have beenpledges to privately fund the Games, critics have expressed concerns about the use of public funds and additional costs outside Boston 2024’s proposed $4.7 billion operating budget.However, Boston 2024, the private nonprofit overseeing the city’s Olympic bid, did not release the documents andrenderings it presented to the U.S. Olympic Committee until two weeks after securing the bid. Both Michlewitz and Moran said they have not decided whether they are for or against bringing the Olympics to Boston. The commission would provide a source of information that is independent from the groups who have “already decided what side of the aisle they’re on” regarding bringing the Games here, Moran said. “What we’re trying to put in place in this process is an impartial commission that can just simply look at this and ask the basic question: Is this or is it not a good deal for Boston, for the commonwealth and for the taxpayers?” Moran said. Boston’s Olympic plans will continue to develop over the next several months. Final applications from all cities vying for the Games are due to the International Olympic Committee in January 2016 and the host city will be determined in 2017. Moran said he hopes the commission’s work will provide — prior to Boston 2024’s final bid — some sort of statement “by stakeholders at the state level that they either support this venture or they don’t support this venture.”

    This is kind of old but I found it hypocritical. The government wants to spend taxpayer money to make sure no taxpayer money is spent?

  11. Here's a few more pictures of demolition. I don't have any perspective as to how long deconstruction should take, but it seems like they're doing it pretty quickly with the main structure.

    source: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1729594&page=2

    7Yz3pff.jpg?1

    rUXjkfS.jpg?1

    aE8nybA.jpg?1

    source: JSC Facebook ( https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.792179577541872.1073741886.305346529558515&type=1 )

    11044604_792179584208538_440659567445522

    10329235_792180060875157_805144873546313

    11046539_792180100875153_738428738160270

    This is another video of demolition like before from the SSC page.

  12. This is kinda old news, but it hasn't been posted here yet. A while ago (2014) the design for the Olympic Village was released by the TMG. (source: SCC http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1729594 )

    "The athletes village will consist of 23 buildings in 4 areas which will all will be between 14 and 17 floors tall."

    g2NNgaf.jpg

    "After the games the area will be transformed into a residential area. 2 towers will be added, both with 50 floors, a shopping center and a school."

    KktHZom.jpg

    http://www.metro.tokyo.jp/INET/OSHIRASE/2014/12/DATA/20ocja00.pdf


    V4i2ajs.jpg

    Construction is to begin in 2016.


    The village will also be the first "Hydrogen Town" (source: SSC http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1729594&page=2 )

    wrhgx68.png

    The Tokyo metropolitan government has decided that the Athletes’ Village for the 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games will be made into a “hydrogen town” where electricity and hot water are supplied through hydrogen energy, The Yomiuri Shimbun has learned.

    After the Tokyo Olympics are over, the electricity and hot water generated with hydrogen energy are expected to be furnished to a school, and commercial and other facilities to be constructed on the village site.

    The plan is set to be the largest experiment employing the new energy source. The Tokyo government hopes to take advantage of the 2020 Olympics as an opportunity to advance the realization of a society based on hydrogen energy.

    Hydrogen filling stations will be constructed by 2020 in the Harumi district of Chuo Ward, Tokyo, where the Athletes’ Village will also be located, according to a conceptual plan by the metropolitan government and others.

    Pipes will be laid around the village to distribute hydrogen to housing facilities, training centers, cafeterias and others. Fuel cells installed at each station will generate electricity and heat through the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen in the air.

    The pipes will be also used to charge the fuel cells of buses used to transport athletes and others during the event.

    About 17,000 athletes and other guests will stay in the Athletes’ Village, which will be the site of 22 accommodation buildings with 14 to 17 floors each. The housing facilities will be converted into condominiums or rental apartments for the general public after the Olympics. Two 50-story residential high-rises, a commercial complex and a school will be constructed in the area to establish a town with a population of about 10,000.

    This month, the metropolitan government is set to begin accepting applications from private firms that want to submit business development plans for the Athletes’ Village. The proposals will be required to incorporate the use of hydrogen energy.
×
×
  • Create New...