Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The thing you LA boosters just can't seem to understand is that the IOC only cares about what the host city will do for "the Olympic movement." The sports federations are not interested in urban devel

Sigh! I've tried not to get too involved in the tit-for-tatting in the whole LA debate. And tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and allow that you're a passionate and blinkered supporter of LA

I am struck by the statement that "there is no reason to attack LA." There is no reason to attack any city or any people in any city. This is the horror of terrorism. Whichever city wins any Olympi

Well, the thing is...if LA fails this time, would the land destined for the OV still be available for a stab at 2032? Which means whomever owns that parcel has to be agreeable to let it sit empty UNTIL LA wins again or gives up.

And I wonder how much LA is willing to blow this time?

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the thing is...if LA fails this time, would the land destined for the OV still be available for a stab at 2032? Which means whomever owns that parcel has to be agreeable to let it sit empty UNTIL LA wins again or gives up.

And I wonder how much LA is willing to blow this time?

Union Pacific owns that lot which is currently a rail yard called the piggyback yard. It's an ideal location sitting next to the LA River near Union Station, which is practically LA's crossroads for all major transit lines (perfect for an Olympic Village). The ones in charge of restoring the LA River, Army Corps of Engineers intend to include that lot as part of the restoration project, however, Union Pacific is holding off selling the property for a higher valuation which is putting the restoration project out of budget and on hold. The LA River project will be funded by the feds, state and city, so to answer your question yes, it's safe to say the land won't be sold anytime soon on current terms and still be waiting for the Olympics all the way til 2025 (The 2032 Olympics selection year).

The piggyback yard is about 120 acres so it's the right size for an Olympic Village. Downtown LA is currently experiencing a housing boom so that land will be very valuable in the future, however that's not the case right now because Downtown LA has so many smaller empty lots in other ideal locations available for developers to grab. No developer would be willing to prop up 10,000 - 15,000 all at once in Downtown LA's current maturity level unless there's a need to get that many units ready all at once in one location, which is what an Olympics would do. So the Olympics would really be the catalyst to get the ball rolling on LA River's restoration and the icing on the cake for downtown LA's resurgence.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10,000 - 15,000 units

Summer OVs now number in the 3,200 units (London's was around that) to 3,600 (closer to Rio's OV). So they double up people in the OV units. 1 bdrm can sleep 4 people; 2 bdrms can sleep 6-7; three bdrms can sleep 8- 9 (if they have a large living room). Since the "kitchens" aren't put in until they're ready to sell, they usually sleep one person in the kitchen area. So, LA could probably do with 3,000 new units; and USC would become the "media" village; and UCLA/Pepperdine would take care of overflow accommodations for Security, Ceremonies and the Observer Cities delegations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Revised LA Downtown Cluster, it appears Farmers Field has been replaced by a convention center expansion:

141021_LA+Live+Night+.jpg?format=1000w

http://stephennieto.com/work/

Original:

2vsrtax.png

Per the last NFL meeting, if they are going to build, it's going to be in Carson...no longer even in the City of Industry as it used to be. I don't know why they want Carson -- city of Carsin-ogens after all those refineries down there???

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are looking at Carson because:

1. It has one of the few large tracks of empty land with great freeway access. Of course, the reason the land is empty is because it is filled with toxic waste,

2. The goverment is masively corrupt, which means opportunities for lots of people to get rich of the deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^No. They're only ideas the last time I checked. Actual projects are across the street from the LA Live, but they weren't included in the renderings.

(at least in the area where the convention center is)

I thought the new skyscrapers were a part of the expansion, an effort to turn the whole area into a real Civic Center and connect it to the 101 Park (which will also be an Olympic live site).

Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing the bid book, I'm disappointed they removed Long Beach entirely from the venue plan. I think that's a shame because Long Beach would've been a visually pleasing backdrop for the water events. The Marine Stadium would've been great for rowing as well as sailing alongside the Queen Mary. Along with that came the events at the Long Beach Convention Center and Long Beach Arena. I know Long Beach feels isolated from the region, but this is a lost opportunity because Santa Monica is the only beach city in the bid now with just a few events and it would've been nice to showcase more than one beach city, as LA is known to be heavily influenced by it's beach communities. I think the organizers wanted to keep as many events as possible within LA city limits and with the help of some reshuffling, the Long Beach cluster was pretty much sacrificed in favor of the Valley cluster as to not make the venue clusters appear too spread out, and probably so they wouldn't disappoint 1/3 of LA's population. This was an inferior move imo, who would trade Long Beach over the Valley? Hopefully they'll revise this aspect of the bid down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

-----

L.A. Mayor

Caitlyn Jenner Should Carry Olympic Torch
... In 2024
8/28/2015 6:54 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
If L.A. gets the Olympics in 2024, the Mayor says he already has one person in mind for the all-important lighting of the Olympic Cauldron ... Olympic legend Caitlyn Jenner!!!
The lighting of the cauldron is a HUGE honor -- with the host country usually selecting someone it feels can proudly embody what the country stands for on a global stage.
Past cauldron lighters have been Muhammad Ali, Wayne Gretzky and countless inspiring athletes from all over the world.
So, with the City of Los Angeles battling to get the 2024 games, Mayor Eric Garcetti told TMZ Sports the first person to come to mind for the honor is Caitlyn.
Now, all Garcetti has to do is beat out Paris, Rome and Hamburg for the 2024 bid -- and then Caitlyn should start to clear out her schedule.
Link to post
Share on other sites

But the agreement before the council does nothing to resolve concerns about the city's underwriting of potential Olympic deficits. And there are signs of burgeoning alarm at City Hall over the Games' financial risks, suggesting that the question of taxpayer liability is far from settled.

Andrew Zimbalist, an economics professor at Smith College who has studied the financial risks to Olympic host cities, said L.A.'s plan appeared to underestimate some key expenses such as building an Olympic Village for 17,000 athletes on property near the L.A. River that currently serves as a rail hub for Union Pacific Corp. The plan sets the price of buying and developing the property at $1 billion.

"This sounds to me like a project that's $2 or $3 billion, not $1 billion," Zimbalist said, noting the potential costs of relocating a major train facility and converting the land from an industrial to a residential site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the IOC REMOVES the clause from the host-city contracts in which someone OTHER THAN THEM will catch the cost overruns, you will always run into this PROBLEM. All cities should REJECT this preposterous condition of the IOC and have THEM swallow cost-oveeruns due to their demands. That is the crux of why very qualified and desirable cities are bailing out -- becuz the IOC is just a chicken-sh*t organization that won't own up to its own demands. The time, IOC, has come for you to redraw your charter.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

As Mike Huckabee said of Chelsea (Wo)Manning's quest for an operation -- The Army is NOT a social experiment. Neither are the Olympics. I don't think the IOC would OK it. Why this one misguided person who's caused an asterisk in Olympic records -- when there are tons of others who deserve it?

How about a REAL woman athlete since the US has never given the honor to a REAL WOMAN athlete? Why, some 'surgically-altered,' attention-grabbing Kardashian cast-off?

While posts like these from uncouth swine are uncalled for, I agree that Caitlyn is not the best choice to light the cauldron. Her lifelong desperation on capitalizing her success as an athlete with all her endorsements, attempts to make a name for herself in acting, and her stints in reality TV just leave a bad impression for me She's not even a good role model for transgender people, I'd give that honor more to Chastity Bono, Thomas Beatie the "pregnant man," Buck Angel and Laverne Cox who plays Sophia on Orange Is The New Black.

Caitlyn doesn't even have an attachment to California until years after win win. She has also ceased to give back to sports ever since winning her gold medal, and instead focused on trying to capitalize monetarily her gold medal any way she could. If there is a decathlon who deserves it way more, it's definitely Dan O'Brien. He's an adopted child and is of mixed race. After being the heavily favorite to win gold in Barcelona but failed to make the Olympic team, he came back and won us gold on home soil. O'Brien also gave us a decathlon gold after a much longer drought than when Caitlyn won it. The only reason why people think Caitlyn's win means so much is because the previous winner was a Russian, and this was during the height of the Cold War. He also continues to give back to the sports community as well http://www.danobrien.com/

But instead of these one-gold winners, how about we consider giving it to these multiple-medal winners: Michael Phelps (18 gold, 22 total), Mark Spitz (9 gold, 11 total), Carl Lewis (9 gold, 10 total), Jenny Thompson (8 gold, 12 total), Matt Biondi (8 gold, 11 total), etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...