Jump to content

Sf2016 -- Why Not A New Arena At Candlestick Point?


Recommended Posts

Isn't Siss...err, Crissy Field a protected nature habitat? I mean they spend millions fixing it, making it look natural or whatever-the-hell it was supposed to look -- for those few butterflies and horse flies -- so they're going to let 10,000 pairs of feet trample all that? Uh-uh. I don't think it'll happen there.

A Velodrome does not seat 10,000 people. Besides, for all the expense in setting that up; it would be nice to keep it there. I know; I know - Atlanta's was a plywood one. But see, you get legacy points if you keep the venue.

A Natatorium? Well, possibly. But then, it would only have to be for swimming -- because it's easy enough to disassemble the pool (& the practice one). But that would send Diving, Water Polo and Synchronized to Avery or to Santa Clara.

Well, I know I've seen a lot of large events on that airfield, which is just a big chunk of flat grass adjacent to the marsh field. So I believe i is possible. Plus that would be such an amazing backdrop with the GG Bridge right there.

OK, maybe not a velodrome. Perhaps the Natatorium. The city needs more pools, and 2 50m pools and 25m diving pool would be a great addition. Plus it would easily serve the community afterwards. Add another Masters swimming team for the city. Be home to National championship tourneys. Etc etc etc.

I know the Haines Swimming Center and it's a fast poo and is great an all, but is it capable of handling 20K people or so? I think Avery would probably be a better choice... and it's closer to SF anyways. But if SF can build an indoor Natatorium somewhere.. (and an arena, somewhere)... talk about a legacy!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had to decide between legacy points or having a compact/accessible games, I'd vote for the compact games every time. Venues need to be super easy to get to, and close together to increase the excitement.

With that bias, I think a new pool should be built up in the City or a Temp one @ Candelstick or Pacbell. The temporary swim stadium in Long Beach for the 2004 Olympic trials seemed to work out pretty well.

OlympicTrials-LongBeach-298.jpg

The Stanford pool is first rate, but you could only put up stands on one side. It would be easier to set up dual stands at Santa Clara, but the parking and accessability of the Santa Clara pool stink. There really isn't any place else in Santa Clara for an Olympic pool. For Legacy - you could take the Temporary Pool, and replant it somewhere else in the Bay Area. Hopefully Santa Clara. Thats what they did with the 2004 Trials pool. They moved it to Ohio or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had to decide between legacy points or having a compact/accessible games, I'd vote for the compact games every time. Venues need to be super easy to get to, and close together to increase the excitement.

With that bias, I think a new pool should be built up in the City or a Temp one @ Candelstick or Pacbell. The temporary swim stadium in Long Beach for the 2004 Olympic trials seemed to work out pretty well.

OlympicTrials-LongBeach-298.jpg

The Stanford pool is first rate, but you could only put up stands on one side. It would be easier to set up dual stands at Santa Clara, but the parking and accessability of the Santa Clara pool stink. There really isn't any place else in Santa Clara for an Olympic pool. For Legacy - you could take the Temporary Pool, and replant it somewhere else in the Bay Area. Hopefully Santa Clara. Thats what they did with the 2004 Trials pool. They moved it to Ohio or something.

Thanks for the photo, apollo. That is possible. But putting a Natatorium beside the Stade du 49ers only solves the problem partially. You really need a bigger stadium/arena with a SOLID floor so that some 14-15,000 people (the athletes and performers) can assemble there before, during & after Ceremonies. That includes the about 5-6,000 performers in costume.

2 big pools of water does NOT help those logistics. While a beach volleyball court does. The sand does not have to be put in until after Opening Ceremonies are done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the photo, apollo. That is possible. But putting a Natatorium beside the Stade du 49ers only solves the problem partially. You really need a bigger stadium/arena with a SOLID floor so that some 14-15,000 people (the athletes and performers) can assemble there before, during & after Ceremonies. That includes the about 5-6,000 performers in costume.

2 big pools of water does NOT help those logistics. While a beach volleyball court does. The sand does not have to be put in until after Opening Ceremonies are done.

OK. WOuld it be possible to erect a temorary natatorium on Treasure Island along with a new sailing center?

I guess you could put beach volley ball there.... but I'd prefer to see it at Crissy Field.

How about just an outdoor arena of some sort that could be used for nightly concerts and events/medal ceremonies just for the Olympics?? Doesn't have to be an event venue, does it??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. WOuld it be possible to erect a temorary natatorium on Treasure Island along with a new sailing center?

I guess you could put beach volley ball there.... but I'd prefer to see it at Crissy Field.

#1 - Access to Treasure Island is very, very limited as you well know. So I wouldn't put another big, major event there like Swimming. You have to think of access and egress. What if there's an accident at either the entry or the exit on the new bridge? How do you move 10,000+ people in and out of there in a jiffy?

How about just an outdoor arena of some sort that could be used for nightly concerts and events/medal ceremonies just for the Olympics?? Doesn't have to be an event venue, does it??

#2 - But what for? Those are peripheral. Nightly concerts? You need eateries and cafes for that. What about additional security considerations? If you're going the effort and expense of erecting a proper stadium; then use it as a sports venue -- the main job of an Organizing Committee.

If there are going to be any medal plazas of that sort -- I think the public places now (Union Square, Yerba Buena Gardens, maybe that courtyard outside Zellerbach Hall at UC; Santana Row or whatever the main square is down in San Jose) might provide that. Of course, it all depends on the individual federation involved. I know Rowing insists that their medal ceremonies be at the marinas just used and WITHOUT podia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#1 - Access to Treasure Island is very, very limited as you well know. So I wouldn't put another big, major event there like Swimming. You have to think of access and egress. What if there's an accident at either the entry or the exit on the new bridge? How do you move 10,000+ people in and out of there in a jiffy?

Ummm... Ferry. Get a couple large ferries to shuttle people to and from Treasure Island, which would supplement the buses. The ferries could already be in service by 2016 for Bay Area commuters... or can be used to augment commuting after the Olympics.

#2 - But what for? Those are peripheral. Nightly concerts? You need eateries and cafes for that. What about additional security considerations? If you're going the effort and expense of erecting a proper stadium; then use it as a sports venue -- the main job of an Organizing Committee.

Ok... maybe that wasn't a bright idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm... Ferry. Get a couple large ferries to shuttle people to and from Treasure Island, which would supplement the buses. The ferries could already be in service by 2016 for Bay Area commuters... or can be used to augment commuting after the Olympics.

The IOC was not too keen on the 'ferry' idea in the New York plan. Indeed, it's a very tempting target for terrorists. The USOC and IOC shot down NYC2012's plan to ferry athletes alone from the QUeens OV to the West side stadium -- what more the responsibility of thousands of visitors? I don't know that they would take too keenly to more ferries again in a San Francisco plan. It would have to be BART and buses. Those are much easier to secure and move around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea since we are building imaginary venues all over the Bay Area. :P

Mare Island is 5200 acres of land that was handed over to Vallejo by the government in '96. No redevelopment has been done to date. It's closer than San Jose/Palo Alto, easy access off I-80 and 780 and already has a ferry system in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IOC was not too keen on the 'ferry' idea in the New York plan. Indeed, it's a very tempting target for terrorists. The USOC and IOC shot down NYC2012's plan to ferry athletes alone from the QUeens OV to the West side stadium -- what more the responsibility of thousands of visitors? I don't know that they would take too keenly to more ferries again in a San Francisco plan. It would have to be BART and buses. Those are much easier to secure and move around.

Picky. How are ferries more vulnerable to terrorist attack compared to buses or trains or airplanes? Ferries are and could be a key transportation conduit between venues. THey're used at AT&T Park and could be used at Candlestick as well.

Was NYC2012's ferry meant for Atheletes alone? Or was it also for attendees/visitors.

:huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picky. How are ferries more vulnerable to terrorist attack compared to buses or trains or airplanes? Ferries are and could be a key transportation conduit between venues. THey're used at AT&T Park and could be used at Candlestick as well.

Was NYC2012's ferry meant for Atheletes alone? Or was it also for attendees/visitors.

It's not me, I am merely relaying to you what was nixed in the NYC plan; and that could certainly be applied to any other similar plan. WHy would it be only vulnerable in NYC and not elsewhere.

I think the IOC did not like additional ferries. NYC was not going to add additional ferries because most if its venues were primarily reachable by land access. I don't know what the stand would be for attendees/visitors. But remember, these would be happening during the Games period -- that makes such things automatically more attractive targets than if they were not. Imagine the statement you would be making if you were Al Qaeda. So why risk it? But I dunno -- maybe the SF plan will allow for more passenger ferries. Quien sabe ahora?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not me, I am merely relaying to you what was nixed in the NYC plan; and that could certainly be applied to any other similar plan. WHy would it be only vulnerable in NYC and not elsewhere.

I think the IOC did not like additional ferries. NYC was not going to add additional ferries because most if its venues were primarily reachable by land access. I don't know what the stand would be for attendees/visitors. But remember, these would be happening during the Games period -- that makes such things automatically more attractive targets than if they were not. Imagine the statement you would be making if you were Al Qaeda. So why risk it? But I dunno -- maybe the SF plan will allow for more passenger ferries. Quien sabe ahora?

Didn't mean to say you were picky... I meant teh USOC/IOC.

Perhaps if Atheletes didn't use the ferries, then it would be OK. I dunno though. Ferries seem like a good way to transfer large bunches of people to and from venues.

If proper security measures were taken during boarding and disembarking, there shouldb't be an issue. Place proper security on the ferries and such.

Who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't mean to say you were picky... I meant teh USOC/IOC.

Perhaps if Atheletes didn't use the ferries, then it would be OK. I dunno though. Ferries seem like a good way to transfer large bunches of people to and from venues.

If proper security measures were taken during boarding and disembarking, there shouldb't be an issue. Place proper security on the ferries and such.

It's not so much the boarding/disembarking phases -- as shoulder-fired Stinger missiles fired from just about anywhere or little suicide craft (uhmmm...USS Cole?) that have planners thinking. I mean 'Olympic ferries' would be sitting ducks in just such a scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I got it. Hear ye, GBidders and SF2016, we don't need to build a full stadium beside the new Olympic/49er stadium. I had an epiphany while swimming.

So there will be a warm-up track? If this is fenced off, and with a few risers, some 10,000 seats (and/or benches) can be laid across the field and track to seat the athletes and performers. And with 2 large screens and a stage, voila! you have the "holding-tank" stadium. Then the day after Ceremonies, all these temporary seats and benches can be cleared so the T&F athletes can use the facility. And then restored for Closing again.

So there ya go. I've just solved another 2016 logistical problem and saved the Org. Committee a ton of money. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...