London Olympic Stadium

[Citius]

Wembley is mostly owned by the FA and they decided that the stadium should primarily be a football stadium....no retractable seating was allowed to be installed....instead they proposed an atheltics platform....however the government deided that it wasn't happy with such a temporary solution and told the FA to install a permanent athletics track or give back the government money....which is fair enough since the money was primarily towards the additional costs associated with making the stadium multi purpose. The FA refused to compromise and so the whole Wembley project was put on hold so that the FA could find investors to plug the gap left by the government money...this took some time and in the meantime the government in its wisdom had agreed to host the 2005 IAAF World Athletics Champs in London. Obviously there was no stadium to hold them in and no other suitable venue could be found....so they handed back the Championchips and Helsinki was awarded them instead.... all very embarassing.

Thanks for that clarification.  Where does Pickett's Lock come in?

Also, the details posted from the Wembley site seem to give us the solution we need for the Games.

[Citius]

I think this is the most amazing graphic. Those who went the old Webmley will appreciate how huge the new one is going to be from this:

The arch has always looked poorly placed IMO: it's not symmetric.

[Kenadian]

Too bad...I can't help thinking the Olympic flame would look spectacular burning atop the giant arch.

[Robert Henson]

Too bad...I can't help thinking the Olympic flame would look spectacular burning atop the giant arch.

How would it be lit, helicoptor maybe? Or get Branson down in his balloon? Or loads of really intense lights all shining up to the point where the flame would be?

[I Love Minneapolis]

Now that I have seen the stadium, I guess London 2012 would be cool. It's just I haven't really looked at the Paris and London websites for a really long time, but they dont seem to have as much info on venues as NYC.

[arwebb]

Wembley is mostly owned by the FA and they decided that the stadium should primarily be a football stadium....no retractable seating was allowed to be installed....instead they proposed an atheltics platform....however the government deided that it wasn't happy with such a temporary solution and told the FA to install a permanent athletics track or give back the government money....which is fair enough since the money was primarily towards the additional costs associated with making the stadium multi purpose. The FA refused to compromise and so the whole Wembley project was put on hold so that the FA could find investors to plug the gap left by the government money...this took some time and in the meantime the government in its wisdom had agreed to host the 2005 IAAF World Athletics Champs in London. Obviously there was no stadium to hold them in and no other suitable venue could be found....so they handed back the Championchips and Helsinki was awarded them instead.... all very embarassing.

Thanks for that clarification.  Where does Pickett's Lock come in?

Also, the details posted from the Wembley site seem to give us the solution we need for the Games.

Pickett's Lock was the proposed site for the 2005 stadium once it was decided to have a separate national athletics stadium (during Chris Smith's tenure as Culture Secretary).

[Guest]

Sadly, the new Wembley stadium will not be used for London 2012's athletics... instead a new Olympic Park will be created in the eastern part of London. I'm not even sure a final design for the stadium has been confirmed (perhaps, if and when the bid wins, there will be a contest similar to that for Beijing) but a provisional picture on the London 2012 site shows what looks like a sleek minimalist stadium. It's at the centre of this picture:

[Robert Henson]

Now that I have seen the stadium, I guess London 2012 would be cool. It's just I haven't really looked at the Paris and London websites for a really long time, but they dont seem to have as much info on venues as NYC.

There's loads of info on the London 2012 site regarding venues ILM. It is here.

There's virtually nothing of this sort on the Paris site.

[PatchMan]

It's worth noting, though, that some of the venues were changed, for the sake of compactness - Bisley, Alexandra Palace and Swinley forest have been changed for venues in the Olympic Park.

[arwebb]

It's worth noting, though, that some of the venues were changed, for the sake of compactness - Bisley, Alexandra Palace and Swinley forest have been changed for venues in the Olympic Park.

Where have you heard this? I've just been on the London site and it still lists Alexandra Palace, Bisley and Swinley Forest as venues for their respective sports.

[Aronious]

Could London sustain a 100,000+ venue for the games much like Sydney, then reduce afterwards?

[PatchMan]

It's worth noting, though, that some of the venues were changed, for the sake of compactness - Bisley, Alexandra Palace and Swinley forest have been changed for venues in the Olympic Park.

Where have you heard this? I've just been on the London site and it still lists Alexandra Palace, Bisley and Swinley Forest as venues for their respective sports.

It was widely reported in the press.

I'd expect you would hear about it from London 2012 when the bid book comes out.

[Brekkie Boy]

To reply to a few points made over the last few pages (there were about 6 replies last I checked!)...

London can't really justify another 80,000 stadium on a permanent basis, as both Football and Rugby Union each have their own national stadia in the capital.

Many other cities across Europe especially have 30,000+ seater athletics stadium, but most of these are used every week by the local football team - a practice which doesn't seem to exist in the UK.

Which brings me on to Wembley!  Looks fantastic, but the FA didn't want a track around it (although the old stadium was set out like an Athletics stadium), as they want the fans right close to the pitch.  A platform for Athletics can be built, but capacity would be around 67,000 - short of IOC requirements.

Personally, I think Wembley should never have been home to the new national stadium - the bid was only interested in being the national Football Stadium.  They may have won it with the promise to be a suitable Olympic Stadium, but months after plans for Athletics were axed.  The thing is back in the late nineties, I don't think their was the will to reject Wembley in favour of another London site.

The new stadium arch looks very impressive from across London - but unfortunately it will over shadow any eventual Olympic Stadium.  Wembley's current position in the bid is to host the mens and womens football finals - so would be a minor venue in the bid.

[Guest]

I'd personally use Wembley for all the football matches. Maybe Upton Park for some group games, as it's so close to the Olympic Park.

I wouldn't have used Wembley for the National Stadium either, not because of London 2012 but because a cheaper and just as impressive venue had been lined up for Birmingham that did not rely on Lottery money and was in a more central location.

[Robert Henson]

I wouldn't have used Wembley for the National Stadium either, not because of London 2012 but because a cheaper and just as impressive venue had been lined up for Birmingham that did not rely on Lottery money and was in a more central location.

The national stadium should be in the capital city of a country IMHO.

[Lee]

Just thought I would add to this thread that the planning permission for the Olympic park is being discussed today.

[Sunshine Canada]

But, they have a plan to build an Olympic stadium in London?

LOL

[Olympic USA]

But, they have a plan to build an Olympic stadium in London?

LOL

Of course they have a plan to build an Olympic Stadium in London should London win the 2012 Olympics,  what kind of question is this?   ???

[Mercator]

Bah, ignore it. It's just a cheap jibe about the 2005 World Championships. That was in the bad old days.

There will be TWO state-of-the-art stadiums in London if the bid is successful - Wembley (hailed as the most up-to-date stadium on the planet when it is completed) and the Olympic Stadium, which will also have to be pretty well brilliant.

[Sunshine Canada]

Mercator, it was a joke!

do you know this word? joke?

[Robert Henson]

Sunshine Canada, I understand what you mean (for once!). It does seem risky submitting a mini bid document and a bid to the IOC saying that the stadium etc. would be build in a certain place without having already obtained the planning permission. However, from what I understand, the Greeks did exactly the same and did not obtain their planning permssion until two years after they'd won the bid. Now the land is free, as Seb Coe has said, building can start the day after London wins.

Building Europe's largest new city park in the last 100 years isn't an easy thing to do. But if (when?) London gets the Olympics, it will leave a beautiful legacy for East London.

Go here

[arwebb]

But, they have a plan to build an Olympic stadium in London?

LOL

Are you one of George Bush's speech writers?

[Brekkie Boy]

The latest plan I've heard is that the long-term use of the Olympic Stadium is for a national Athletics stadium.

The capacity of 80,000 for the Olympics would be reduced to just 30,000 after the games.

[bigdavejb]

So as London has granted planning permission surly there must be some idea of what the new stadium would look like?

Seb Coe has said, building can start the day after London wins.

There is no point in starting work a day after winning the bid if the builders have no idea what there building?

Allthough that might lead to a rather interesting design.

[ghost1]

The national stadium should be in the capital city of a country IMHO.

Agree with that!

It is so in the most countries.

I think in London should be the same!