Rio Olympic Village

[Jim856796]

It was reported that the 2007 Pan American Games Village, which has a capacity of up to 8,000 residents, would be used as an Olympic Village, should Rio de Janeiro win the right to host the 2016 Olympic Games. I'm not sure that we are supposed to reuse a village from a past multi-sport event as an Olympic Village. Why can't Rio build a newly-built Olympic Village for its bid? If I had a proposal for a Rio Olympic Village would still be in the same area that the Pan American Village is in, but I wouldn't want it to be too close to the Pan American Village. I may also want to redevelop a slum in Rio for an Olympic Village for Rio.

[Xikaum]

It was reported that the 2007 Pan American Games Village, which has a capacity of up to 8,000 residents, would be used as an Olympic Village, should Rio de Janeiro win the right to host the 2016 Olympic Games. I'm not sure that we are supposed to reuse a village from a past multi-sport event as an Olympic Village. Why can't Rio build a newly-built Olympic Village for its bid? If I had a proposal for a Rio Olympic Village would still be in the same area that the Pan American Village is in, but I wouldn't want it to be too close to the Pan American Village. I may also want to redevelop a slum in Rio for an Olympic Village for Rio.

where did u read it?

[chicago2016]

...how are they planning to utilize it for the next 8 years?

[baron-pierreIV]

Jim doesn't know what he's talking about. Except if they were dorms, no repeat Olympic hosts have reused their previous Olympic Villages.

The villages' post-Games' use were intended as housing. So after the Games, they have been sold as housing units for the people. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BOOT THEM OUT FOR 2 WEEKS and then HAVE THEM COME BACK AGAIN!! The IOC would not countenance that.

Which is why -- when the IOC was on the verge of taking 2004 away from Athens, they approached Los Angeles and Seoul as back-ups because:

(i) Seoul had the full complement of newer stadia than LA but the matter of an Olympic Village was questionable. The OV from 1988 was already occupied by its new owners, so Seoul would've had to build a new one.

(ii) For LA, its venues were a little older and farther apart than Seoul, but with its split-Olympic Village of 1984 (the UCLA, USC and UC-Santa Barbara campuses), LA's re-use would've quickly accommodated the Village needs WITHOUT having to boot anybody out and CONSTRUCT a whole new Village from scratch. (As an aside, Sarajevo, Salt Lake City and Atlanta were the 3 other Olympics that used college dorms as their OVs. Everyone else built new communities from scratch. )

I don't know where Jim got his ridiculous story.

[baron-pierreIV]

oops, double post. Sorry.

[thorbr]

This time I have to agree with Baron.... PAN AM Games village apart. were all sold out months before the pan am had even started! Now they are used as private residences.... so it doesn't make any sense at all.

[Jim856796]

I read the reuse-the-pan-am-games-village-for-an-Olympic-Village stuff from Wikipedia. I still think it's a lame idea.

[memorabilia]

Please, checj your datas from correct sources.... (Wikipedia !!!!!!!!! ????????????? .................).

The 2016 village will be a built new one.

Page 31 of the official Rio 2016's applicant file

OLYMPIC VILLAGE CONCEPT

The Rio 2016 Olympic Village will deliver an ideal environment for Olympic and Paralympic athletes. Located next to

the shores of the Jacarepaguá Lagoon with views of the nearby mountains of Pedra Branca, the Village is at the heart of

the Games in the Barra zone, ten minutes from magnificent beaches. It is adjacent to Riocentro and in close proximity

to Rio Olympic Park, enabling 50% of the athletes to be accommodated within 5-10 minutes of their competition

venues. For the balance of venues, transport connectivity from the Village is well planned, with direct access from

the Village Transport Terminal to the Olympic Games lanes network on major arterial roads and motorways.

The planned apartment complex will house up to 17,500 residents, ensuring sufficient capacity for all athletes and

team officials. With a focus on quality and comfort, the Village will be developed in accordance with IOC technical

requirements and environmentally sustainable design principles. Accessibility will be a key feature, accommodating

the specific requirements of Paralympic athletes. The site is served by multiple operational roads to ensure ease of

internal movements. Minimal surrounding development and easily controlled access from nearby roads will ensure

secure Village perimeters.

NOC offices will be conveniently located within the ground floor of the apartment buildings.

RESIDENTIAL POST-GAMES USE

Following the Games, the Village development will provide much needed new residential accommodation in the

fastest growing region in the city. Approximately 60% of current residential development within the city limits of

Rio occurs in the Barra region. The demand for accommodation of this nature in the Barra region was demonstrated

following the 2007 Pan American Games Village, when more than 90% of the 1,480 apartments utilized for the Games

Village were sold in a single day after the sales launch.

FINANCING THE OLYMPIC VILLAGE

Financing for the Olympic Village will be undertaken through a proven public-private partnership model. The financing

plan follows the model successfully implemented for the 2007 Pan American Games Village, involving the combination of

development concessions by Government, attractive government-backed buyer financing and private investment.

[jim jones]

Jim doesn't know what he's talking about. Except if they were dorms, no repeat Olympic hosts have reused their previous Olympic Villages.

The villages' post-Games' use were intended as housing. So after the Games, they have been sold as housing units for the people. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BOOT THEM OUT FOR 2 WEEKS and then HAVE THEM COME BACK AGAIN!! The IOC would not countenance that.

Which is why -- when the IOC was on the verge of taking 2004 away from Athens, they approached Los Angeles and Seoul as back-ups because:

(i) Seoul had the full complement of newer stadia than LA but the matter of an Olympic Village was questionable. The OV from 1988 was already occupied by its new owners, so Seoul would've had to build a new one.

(ii) For LA, its venues were a little older and farther apart than Seoul, but with its split-Olympic Village of 1984 (the UCLA, USC and UC-Santa Barbara campuses), LA's re-use would've quickly accommodated the Village needs WITHOUT having to boot anybody out and CONSTRUCT a whole new Village from scratch. (As an aside, Sarajevo, Salt Lake City and Atlanta were the 3 other Olympics that used college dorms as their OVs. Everyone else built new communities from scratch. )

I don't know where Jim got his ridiculous story.

Actually Baron there is another Olympics that used College dorms and that was Calgary 1988. I believe Moscow also did the same. Your point is taken thou that not many Olympics recently have used college dorms.

What happened there was they built on the University of Calgary the Athletes Village Buildings and then turned it over to the University of Calgary post games. It was not a prior set of College Dorms but rather an athletes village that became College dorms.

The Question of Building a new athletes village every time you stage a sports festival I think is a place where rationalization of the games can occur. What are these building but a few possible things . A accoms for Colleges B. Accoms for Civil Servants in Capital Cities. C. Possible Time Share developments D. Condos .

Condos of course carry the biggest prize to have Organizing Committees with a private sector developer build the athletes village at their expense and then reap the profits post games. The Problem as we see with Vancouver 2010 and London 2012 is the financing has dried up during construction so the Risk is being shifted to the Taxpayer. Condos in East London and Vancouver seemed like great ideas at the time of the bids but of course you can never predict the future. I saw on the BBC last night ever 17 minutes someone in Britain is losing their home via foreclosure.

To me I ask why not College Dorms?

Most of your rank and file athletes are actually live in College dorms before and after the games and the Big Pro Athletes Generally rent their own Accoms in the host city or lodge themselves in 6 star hotel suites. The only reason to make Athletes Accoms rival 6 star hotels is for high value Condos post games. With Vancouver and London those type of purchases may not come for a long while.

If you are Rio a timeshare might be the answer considering the Tourist Draw Annually.

Who knows the Pan Am Games village could certainly have been a massive hotel complex post games. The provision that the years sports festivals were stage could provide other accoms for a time sharers effected . Hey who throw in event passes for the games and the Time Share becomes more attractive. With a Time Share development you also have a maintenance company that would be able to insure a suite is repaired and ready much quicker then a college Dorm in some Cases.

My favorite Sports Festival city certainly deposed of their first athletes village in a unique way . 29 dollar lotto tickets to have the chance to buy a unit at 100,000 dollars per unit. 10 million in Ticekts were sold and units for 6000 athletes where then sold to the lucky lotto winners with payment in full 60 days after winning.

I can actually see in the future temporary Athletes Villages. you are now seeing Temporary College Dorms and factory build hotels in Europe. I don't think Baron it is the over riding hand of the IOC but rather the decisions made locally with politicians and LOCs that can shape these things. Only in hine site can we say that Vancouver and London perhaps have gone down paths that might end up costing the locals greatly.

Jim jones

[Rafa]

I don't know where Jim got his ridiculous story.

whats new?

[zenica]

Rio has no chance to organize the Olympic Games, as Brazil won the FIFA World Cup Trophy Soccer Organization in 2014 and is now organizing the Olympic Games in 2016 in the first place is a crazy idea, and the other Rio Not much money, and the third would be better if the money's role in the social projects and solve your infrastrukturen.Diese only lose time around the application and receipt of money, without the possibility that they are to one day come back. Of course Rougge looking forward to the nomination, because another candidate more than once IOC decides that the only true favorites for the Tokyo Games 2016, and Chicago, and in this way, not from Rio, for more investitionen.Echt right, which is not the case.

[jim jones]

Rio has no chance to organize the Olympic Games, as Brazil won the FIFA World Cup Trophy Soccer Organization in 2014 and is now organizing the Olympic Games in 2016 in the first place is a crazy idea, and the other Rio Not much money, and the third would be better if the money's role in the social projects and solve your infrastrukturen.Diese only lose time around the application and receipt of money, without the possibility that they are to one day come back. Of course Rougge looking forward to the nomination, because another candidate more than once IOC decides that the only true favorites for the Tokyo Games 2016, and Chicago, and in this way, not from Rio, for more investitionen.Echt right, which is not the case.

What does the World Cup have to do with Rio's Chances Zenica ? Mexico City 1968 Summer Olympics Mexico 1970 world Cup

Munich 1972 summer Olympics , Germany 1974 world cup , USA 1994 world cup Atlanta 1996 Olympics . Seems to me a World Cup can actually strengthen and Olympic bid unless you can point to other countries/ cities that have lost an olympic bid because they would also be hosting the World Cup your point is not really valid.

Tokyo can have the best bid in the World but the fact remains repeat hosts awarded are the Exclusive Domain of Europe and going to Asia 8 years after Beijing 2008 is as doubtful as going to Madrid 4 years after London.

The contest is really between Chicago and Rio as this makes for great TV Programming for the American Networks and sponsors who indeed Pay the shot of the IOC's revenues. Rio is one hour ahead of New York Time and that is Golden for TV rights holders in the US . The US pays 2 dollar to every 1 that the entire European union pays for Olympic broadcasting rights

The biggest thing Chicago has going against it is the dispute with the IOc over the Cut the USOC takes of America TV and Sponsors. There is no news of that being resolved and thus Chicago may be in a very long line of Olympic Bid Failures by the US . Atlanta 1996 was the very first real bid competition the USOC won. Los Angeles tried 9 times and failed every time despite hosting two profitable games when No one wanted to host the Olympics. If you go by the history Books Chicago 2016 is actually a bit early but this is also the age of TV and big sponsorship dollars coming mostly from the US.

Jim jones

[zenica]

also the age of the major TV and sponsorship dollars come mainly from the US.Diese is a set, came into force in the world of professional money or you have no money and who it would be sponzoriert.Wann, as they are spoken they say so, as it is to Brazil, the USA or Russia with its billionaire, not Brazil.Na end we wait to vote, and you will see how it is at the end.

[mr_one]

also the age of the major TV and sponsorship dollars come mainly from the US.Diese is a set, came into force in the world of professional money or you have no money and who it would be sponzoriert.Wann, as they are spoken they say so, as it is to Brazil, the USA or Russia with its billionaire, not Brazil.Na end we wait to vote, and you will see how it is at the end.

Dear Zenica, I don't know if you know (but probably not), Brazil is the 9th biggest economy of the world. Brazil will host the FIFA WC 2014 and has enough money to host both.

[zenica]

Help for street children, assistance to combat poverty in Brazil and so forth, usw.Wann is so then what you are talking big football do not play in Europe and remain in Brazil play like Ronaldo, Ronaldino, Roberto Carlos, Kaka, Dida and so forth, need usw.Warum They Europe when Brazil is so strong and going well economically. Wait for decision on how the summer games the 2016th.

[cslopes54]

Hahah, zenica is just a hater. Lets put it this way..world cup goes to the whole country and invested by the federal government, and Olympics by the Aspiring city with also help by the govt, and Rio gets billions of dollars just from tourists...what more can i say? not necessarely rio will win but it has the potential. and not mentioning Rio won the Pan ams against a US city, just hate when ppl say non sense things..aghhh

[zenica]

Hahah what to do now is Brazil from the organization of major sporting competition, and the Football World Cup, due to 100 years of football federation.Strassen Rio are as safe for tourists to walk streets of, for example in Afghanistan or Irak.Aber you understand it sooner or later after the IOC decision.

[Victor Mata]

HOHOHO. Zenica is sooo funny! Did you know security during the Rio 2007 was an absolute success, right? Not a single problem or disturbance reported. Keep trying, pal

[zenica]

Of course, as sichereit is in the Vatican, then I'm sure.

[Soaring]

What does the World Cup have to do with Rio's Chances Zenica ? Mexico City 1968 Summer Olympics Mexico 1970 world Cup

Munich 1972 summer Olympics , Germany 1974 world cup , USA 1994 world cup Atlanta 1996 Olympics.

While I do believe the WC factor is over hyped, one small difference between Mexico and Germany is that the Olympics were help before the WC, so the IOC didn't feel like their Games were just the dessert. The WC did not strengthen their bids, as the IOC did not even know they would be hosting the WC until after the IOC vote.

The U.S. is the only example of having a WC two years before the Olympics, and the IOC being aware of that before they voted.

[Rob2012]

While I do believe the WC factor is over hyped, one small difference between Mexico and Germany is that the Olympics were help before the WC, so the IOC didn't feel like their Games were just the dessert. The WC did not strengthen their bids, as the IOC did not even know they would be hosting the WC until after the IOC vote.

The U.S. is the only example of having a WC two years before the Olympics, and the IOC being aware of that before they voted.

I think that's the saliant point and why I'd disagree with you that the WC factor is overhyped. The IOC won't want to be second to FIFA and I think they'll look elsewhere for that reason.

[cfm Jeremie]

I don't think it's a question of the IOC not wanting to be second to FIFA WC: let's face it, they won't be! The events are 2 years appart and up to 2014 the eyes of the Olympic Movement will be focused on Vancouver, then London and then Sochi before becoming actually focused on Rio. If anything, staging the Games after the WC won't cast any shadow on the Olympics but rather avoid too much media scrutiny over the Games preparation which is always a PR roller-coaster (think Athens Vs Torino preparation media coverage -> Torino preparations were not tha far ahead of schedule compared to Athens but didn't get a 10th of the bad coverage Athens did...).

The real questions are:

• Can Brazil afford to stage these two mega events 2 years apart? (the answer is not obvious: Rio would benefit from some of the WC 2014 investments but would still need a significant amount of public investment for Games related infrastructures)
  
• Can Brazil find enough domestic sponsors to fund both WC 2014 and Rio 2016?
  

I don't have the answers to these questions but I suspect that's where we'll have to read carefully the IOC evaluation commission report: will it mention possible conflicts between the 2 events or not?

[jim jones]

I don't think it's a question of the IOC not wanting to be second to FIFA WC: let's face it, they won't be! The events are 2 years appart and up to 2014 the eyes of the Olympic Movement will be focused on Vancouver, then London and then Sochi before becoming actually focused on Rio. If anything, staging the Games after the WC won't cast any shadow on the Olympics but rather avoid too much media scrutiny over the Games preparation which is always a PR roller-coaster (think Athens Vs Torino preparation media coverage -> Torino preparations were not tha far ahead of schedule compared to Athens but didn't get a 10th of the bad coverage Athens did...).

The real questions are:

• Can Brazil afford to stage these two mega events 2 years apart? (the answer is not obvious: Rio would benefit from some of the WC 2014 investments but would still need a significant amount of public investment for Games related infrastructures)
  
• Can Brazil find enough domestic sponsors to fund both WC 2014 and Rio 2016?
  

I don't have the answers to these questions but I suspect that's where we'll have to read carefully the IOC evaluation commission report: will it mention possible conflicts between the 2 events or not?

well Jeremie you have two excellent points there as to whether Brazil can afford the Two events . I read that the Brazilian Federal Government will not invest a dime into Stadium construction for 2014 . The simple fact is states,cities and Clubs are clamoring to be Hosts with too many applicants to choose from. Places like Porto Alegre have clubs wanting to have updated , modern and some new Stadiums. There are 17 cities applying and an expanded number that will be chosen to host at 12 cities. There looks to be very few new stadiums for WC 2014 just revamps of old stadia to WC standards.

The Federal governments role will be the transportation infrastructure side of things which will fit with the Olympics as well.

Domestic sponsorship could be a problem but also consider that Rio 2016 is not starting off from scratch like a London, Beijing or even Sydney. The venues and the footprints are there . WC 2014 will force Rio, possibly with two venues, to have the transportation infrastructure of the standard that is needed for both events. Even if Maracana is the sole Rio Stadium for 2014 the urban train line runs past JH Stadium and will have to be improved probably going out to the Airport.

domestic Sponsorship well that is probably the largest unknown as to supporting both events. Considering the growth of the Economy in Brazil in the last decade they probably can seize on both events like they couldn't seize on one of these events before.

Jim jones

[Rob2012]

WC 2014 will force Rio, possibly with two venues, to have the transportation infrastructure of the standard that is needed for both events. Even if Maracana is the sole Rio Stadium for 2014 the urban train line runs past JH Stadium and will have to be improved probably going out to the Airport.

Is that really true? Rio will host a few matches in 2014. That doesn't require quite the same infrustrcure as an event which will take over every venue, big and small, in a city for two to three weeks day after day.

[jim jones]

While I do believe the WC factor is over hyped, one small difference between Mexico and Germany is that the Olympics were help before the WC, so the IOC didn't feel like their Games were just the dessert. The WC did not strengthen their bids, as the IOC did not even know they would be hosting the WC until after the IOC vote.

The U.S. is the only example of having a WC two years before the Olympics, and the IOC being aware of that before they voted.

what do we have now with Knowledge of what is out there being bid on ? when 2014 was "awarded to Brazil" we knew they were also bidding on the 2016 olympics for Rio.The 2016 Summer Games bid is know along with the 2018 WC candidates.

I would not doubt if you looked it up both Mexico and West Germany for those periods of time that you would find that both where known to be bidding on both events at the time of their Summer Olympic Bid successes. I know what you are saying in regards to the difference between before and after but also with Atlanta's Case there was no Fifa Soccer Venue in the Southeastern US for 1994 aside from Orlando and the Atlanta Fifa Olympic Tournament was limited to the Southeastern US. The only common venues between 1994 and 1996 was Washington DC's RFK stadium and the Citrus bowl. Even today USA 1994 remains the highest average attendance for the World cup ever. Ticket sales for the Olympics in Atlanta were not hurt by the WC two years prior either with the Soccer Tournament especially.

I know october we will know if hosting the world cup has an negative impact for the RIO 2016 bid but somehow I don't think it does.

Jim jones