Jump to content

Chicago's Revised 2016 Plan


LA84

Recommended Posts

Thanks. Insofar as the press release, SF2012's Information Director, Mark Dolley, said that no SF venue will be farther than 54 minutes, travel time, FROM the epicenter of all distances, the Olympic Village. I guess that would be either of the San Jose venues: HP Pavilion or Spartan Stadium. Of course, it would be quite easy shuttling the athletes down there: down 101, cut over either the San Mateo or Dumbarton bridges and down 880 right into San Jose. (Of course, the "F_rry" word is an alternative. But, ssssshhh.)

Palo Alto to Napa is 75 miles so yes, the plan for the MAIN competitions are spread out over that amount of area. As opposed to Chicago's which is spread out over 9 miles. :P

I can see Jan Jose/Palo Alto being within 54 minutes because there is good public transport down there. SF to Napa in 54 minutes however is not realistic unless it is on a weekend day. It takes me an hour each day to get home (27 miles) and Napa is further north of me.

Nope, LA is not counted in the SF scenario because the Bay Area would five (5) decent venues for soccer: (1) MacFee Stadium, Oakland (63,000+); (2) Stanford Stadium (newly refurbished for 50,000 seats); (3) Memorial Stadium at UC-Berkeley (73,000; could be slightly less after a major refurbishment); for the prelims, these 2 smaller stadia: (4) AT&T Park in the City (41,500); and (5) the future home of the returning Earthquakes in Fremont (right now, est. at 20,000). So there would be no need to reach outside the area. (And if need be, maybe Sacramento might be another fall-back area.)

Thus, Chicago's venues will indeed be farther away (from either Olympic Stadium or the OV) than SF's.

If baseball returns by 2016 then those parks will be utilized by that. Also, I am not sure that they can be used for anything other than what will fit on the baseball field (equestrian perhaps?). Since the Olympics are right in the middle of baseball season I cannot think that they would allow for both fields to be torn up to be reconfigured for soccer.

Besides, it may not be in the plan but there is no way that the Olympics will return to California and a soccer game not played at the Coliseum. :P For that matter, I fully expect that a soccer game will probably be played in St. Louis if Chicago gets 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1. Palo Alto to Napa is 75 miles so yes, the plan for the MAIN competitions are spread out over that amount of area. As opposed to Chicago's which is spread out over 9 miles. :P

2. SF venues may be within 54 minutes from the epicenter WITH NO TRAFFIC but if one were to drive from Palo Alto to Napa it would probably be around 1-1/2 hours on a good day.

3. If baseball returns by 2016 then those parks will be utilized by that. Also, I am not sure that they can be used for anything other than what will fit on the baseball field (equestrian perhaps?). Since the Olympics are right in the middle of baseball season I cannot think that they would allow for both fields to be torn up to be reconfigured for soccer.

4. Besides, it may not be in the plan but there is no way that the Olympics will return to California and a soccer game not played at the Coliseum. :P

1. Road race-cycling in Napa would just be 2 days. & reporters covering the Napa road races will probably not be the same ones covering events in Palo Alto. How can Chicago's spread be only 9 miles apart when you just said Ann Arbor is about 250 mi from Chicago? :blink:

2. There will be NO Traffic. Remember, I've lived in the 2 US Summer city hosts during the Games. Traffic will NOT be an issue. Besides, I believe they will be making the Car Pool lanes on the freeways "Olympic Traffic Only" dedicated lanes on the most crucial days. So, the athletes and press buses will get there pronto.

3. Baseball? Highly unlikely it will return. It's not that popular w/in the IOC circles. So they may give us the Games, but NOT AND softball. AT&T Park apparently hosts regulation-field int'lsoccer matches. As a matter of fact, the last one -- USA v. Japan I think was held on the OPening Day of the Torino Games. And if it does, there are the 4 other venues in the Bay Area.

4. They didn't use the Coliseum for football in 1984; nor in the 1994 World Cup. Its main venue was the Rose Bowl. With a track, the LA Coliseum's infield is too far from the seats for a good, close soccer venue. So, sorry; no go on your favorite stadium for football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Road race-cycling in Napa would just be 2 days. & reporters covering the Napa road races will probably not be the same ones covering events in Palo Alto. How can Chicago's spread be only 9 miles apart when you just said Ann Arbor is about 250 mi from Chicago? :blink:

The main venues are in a 9 mile radius as opposed to SF's 75. Historically soccer venues are spread out so that people in towns across the region/state can attend.

Besides, San Francisco hasn't even released their plan so we don't know for sure where everything is going to be! <_<

However yes - at this point it does appear that SF's soccer venues will be closer than Chicago's. Assuming LA doesn't host some of the prelim's (see #4, below)

2. There will be NO Traffic. Remember, I've lived in the 2 US Summer city hosts during the Games. Traffic will NOT be an issue. Besides, I believe they will be making the Car Pool lanes on the freeways "Olympic Traffic Only" dedicated lanes on the most crucial days. So, the athletes and press buses will get there pronto.

That may be true in the past and it may be true in the future but the organizers and the USOC can't just run on that assumption - especially as bad as the supposed "expressways" are around SF - especially when the 101, Golden Gate and Bay Bridge are the only major direct entrances into the city. :blink:

And I will be sooooooooo pissed if they shut down car pool lanes! :angry:

3. Baseball? Highly unlikely it will return. It's not that popular w/in the IOC circles. So they may give us the Games, but NOT AND softball. AT&T Park apparently hosts regulation-field int'lsoccer matches. As a matter of fact, the last one -- USA v. Japan I think was held on the OPening Day of the Torino Games. And if it does, there are the 4 other venues in the Bay Area.
The IOC has said another attempt to bring baseball back after London can happen so it is a possibility.

But again the Olympics occur during baseball season. I would be surprised to see MLB allow both SF and Oaklands fields to be taken out of commision for about 2 months. Which may be why both Wrigley and Comiskey weren't mentioned in Chicago's plan.

4. They didn't use the Coliseum for football in 1984; nor in the 1994 World Cup. Its main venue was the Rose Bowl. With a track, the LA Coliseum's infield is too far from the seats for a good, close soccer venue. So, sorry; no go on your favorite stadium for football.

Of course they didn't use it during '84 for soccer - it was sort of being used for another purpose then. :P

It may very well not happen there and may happen at the Rose Bowl - I don't care. But count on some matches being played in Los Angeles. To return the games to California and not hold an event in the city that hosted 2 successful Olympics would be very surprising on the USOC's part and somewhat selfish on the part of the SF organizers if they insisted otherwise. As I said earlier, there is talk of possibly playing some soccer in St. Louis if Chicago were to get '16 - I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daley is pushing for a North/South Side transport line if Chicago gets 2016:

From the Chicago Tribune:

Daley says West Side rail line needed if city lands Olympics

Published October 1, 2006

CHICAGO -- Mayor Richard Daley said Chicago has a lot at stake in landing the 2016 Olympic Games--namely transportation in underserved areas of the city.

The mayor said Saturday that both Atlanta and Salt Lake City received federal transportation funding, and that if the Olympics were to come to Chicago, he would push for a north-south rail route on the West Side to improve access to Olympic sites.

On a recent trip to Washington, Daley spoke with senators and congressmen from Illinois as well as officials from the White House about Chicago's bid to win the Olympics, along with its transportation needs.

"The Olympics is basically privately financed," Daley said. "What we look at the federal government [for] is what they did in Salt Lake City and Atlanta. They did public transportation and basic security."

Security in Chicago already has been ratcheted up since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, so the city would be free to funnel public funding toward transportation, he said.

The city's rail transportation is a spoke system with no way to move easily from north to south on the West Side.

"We have to move it west so people can come from the north and vice versa," he said. "That's one of the issues I talked about."

This has been needed for a long time - the purple line connected to the red line was the only north/south route available. Something towards the west side and spoked over towards the east would be awesome. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This week Newsweek ran a story on Mayor Daley and Chicago's Bid for the Olympics:

Daley's Reign

I think it is funny that they question if Daley will run again or if he does, that he can be beaten by the likes of Jesse Jackson Jr. or Luis Guiterrez :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting story in this week's Crain's Chicago Business on the economic impact of Chicago hosting:

What Economic Value Would Chicago Gain From Hosting Olympics?

Ironically, on the day that economists are predicting around a $5 billion dollar economic gain from hosting 2016, Daley is on his way to Athens to find out why they screwed up so bad :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the whole article from CBS Chicago:

http://cbs2chicago.com/seenon/local_story_282223135.html

Like LA84 said, I think this trip is just for Daley to learn about the mistakes that can be made in an Olympic Games, though Athens did come together in 04, after that you have rusting beheamouths of venues. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ABC has reported that an addition to Daley's Olympic trip will be added.

Along with Athens, Daley will be arriving in London, for a one on one with Seb Coe, to discuss London's Olympic Bid as well as Chicago's Bid, along with a tour of the city, and the Olympic Park in Stradford.

Link:

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=l...&id=4650655

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On CBS today, Pat Ryan gave a tour of the Chicago 2016 offices overlooking Buckingham Fountain and Millenium Park, as well as announcing Michael Jordan's important participation in Chicago 2016.

In the video, we also find out, Michael Jordan will be in London that same day Daley will be meeting with Tony Blair and Seb Coe.

Link:

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_285230251.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what people say about the bid itself, the posters here have to admit that Chicago really seems to have their act together in this whole process (as predicted). We havent heard much from San Francisco (whether or not they're trying to keep things secret), but in general I feel that Chicago is much more committed to their bid and the process than SF is, and it shows.

Anyone else feel the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect, with regards to San Francisco, that because the elections are coming up in November that Newsome is concentrating on those as opposed to the bid. There are some controversial measures on the ballot as well as a few supervisors up for reelection who, if reelected or not, could pose a real threat to San Francisco successfully getting the bid. If the elections work out the way they should we should be seeing more of The Gav supporting the cities plan.

As to why they haven't released their plan - I think they are trying to be careful not to have a repeat of the 2012 "Palo Alto Olympics" plan. The Bay Area is a tricky place to plan an event such as the Olympics and I applaud the city for not releasing anything until they have something in place that is agreeable to the USOC and the IOC.

Chicago's bid so far is a demonstration of how the city works. They decide to do something - it gets done. Period. And in a timely manner. Outside of the 1993 World's Fair that they backed out of (of course that was during Byrne's reign as mayor) I can't think of anything they have wanted to do that hasn't been done.

If they are chosen to be the U.S. representative Tokyo is going to have to really get their act together to combat the city for the rights to host. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what people say about the bid itself, the posters here have to admit that Chicago really seems to have their act together in this whole process (as predicted). We havent heard much from San Francisco (whether or not they're trying to keep things secret), but in general I feel that Chicago is much more committed to their bid and the process than SF is, and it shows.

Anyone else feel the same?

Me. :) ...looks like chicago wants to win this bid; and it also seems that they will, 'cause or their enthusiasm and the lack of it from SF and LA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect, with regards to San Francisco, that because the elections are coming up in November that Newsome is concentrating on those as opposed to the bid. There are some controversial measures on the ballot as well as a few supervisors up for reelection who, if reelected or not, could pose a real threat to San Francisco successfully getting the bid. If the elections work out the way they should we should be seeing more of The Gav supporting the cities plan.

As to why they haven't released their plan - I think they are trying to be careful not to have a repeat of the 2012 "Palo Alto Olympics" plan. The Bay Area is a tricky place to plan an event such as the Olympics and I applaud the city for not releasing anything until they have something in place that is agreeable to the USOC and the IOC.

Chicago's bid so far is a demonstration of how the city works. They decide to do something - it gets done. Period. And in a timely manner. Outside of the 1993 World's Fair that they backed out of (of course that was during Byrne's reign as mayor) I can't think of anything they have wanted to do that hasn't been done.

If they are chosen to be the U.S. representative Tokyo is going to have to really get their act together to combat the city for the rights to host. B)

Chicago is demonstrating one of its strong points, the ability for things to get done. And this very well could be the deciding factor for the USOC and the IOC. After what happened in Athens, the IOC needs a city that can commit to everything on time and affordably. The USOC doesnt want another embarrasing New York stadium fiasco situation either.

Chicago and Mayor Daley can get things done. Period. They've been able to revise and improve their stadium plans with little opposition and only small commentary. In other cities, this isn't always the case. The Mayer has repeatedly shown his dedication to these games by visiting the mayors of Beijing, Vancouver, and London.

It's this sort of ability to acheive things that I think has put Chicago ahead of San Francisco. San Francisco may be the veteran candidate, but Chicago isn't playing this game like an amateur. They're playing it more skillfully than SanFran.

It's Chicago vs. Tokyo now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little recap of Daley's trip to Athens:

Chicago Learns What Not To Do To Gain 2016

Meantime, the odds are in Chicago's favor according to the latest online betting establishments :lol:B)

FAV NAME

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8 Chicago Chicago 7

15 San Francisco San Francisco 14

26 Tokyo Tokyo 25

26 Madrid Madrid 25

26 Los Angeles Los Angeles 25

29 Milan/Rome Milan/Rome 28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meantime, the odds are in Chicago's favor according to the latest online betting establishments :lol:B)

FAV NAME

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8 Chicago Chicago 7

15 San Francisco San Francisco 14

26 Tokyo Tokyo 25

26 Madrid Madrid 25

26 Los Angeles Los Angeles 25

29 Milan/Rome Milan/Rome 28

But they haven't thrown in Doha yet?! Wait till DOha's in there and it'll turn everything around.

Now re the Chicago article: It says Athens tried to provide "for 22,000 athletes..." No wonder they went bankrupt. Didn't anybody tell them that only some 10,500 athletes would compete? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they haven't thrown in Doha yet?! Wait till DOha's in there and it'll turn everything around.

Now re the Chicago article: It says Athens tried to provide "for 22,000 athletes..." No wonder they went bankrupt. Didn't anybody tell them that only some 10,500 athletes would compete? :blink:

I saw that as well and thought "WTF!"

The 'we overbuilt" part made me laugh out loud. As well as their observations about the roof. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8 Chicago Chicago 7

15 San Francisco San Francisco 14

26 Tokyo Tokyo 25

26 Madrid Madrid 25

26 Los Angeles Los Angeles 25

29 Milan/Rome Milan/Rome 28

Just looked at the other numbers on this chart -- and it's interesting that -- let's keep our fingers crossed -- CHI and SFO are way ahead of the pack whereas TOK, MAD and LAX are farther behind but neck and neck.

Right there, I think we know who the finalists are going to be -- and Mayor Villaragosa should start saving LA taxpayers' money right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh* Thank goodness there is another article in todays Tribune about Chicago 2016 so we can try and push that pesky Toronto thread down the page ;)

Anywho, Daley hung out with Tony and Seb a few days ago. Actually I think the observations are pretty accurate. Los Angeles and San Francisco definitely have the edge over Chicago for 2016 but they also have a lot of baggage that Chicago doesn't that could thwart their respective bids. If SF can reign in the potential problems then they will probably walk away with it.

Daley's London trip an Olympian effort

By Tom Hundley

Tribune foreign correspondent

Published October 20, 2006

LONDON -- Fifteen months ago, Paris was the heavy favorite to win the bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, but London came away with the prize.

The conventional wisdom is that former Olympian Sebastian Coe's energy and presentation skills whipped London's foundering bid into shape, while Prime Minister Tony Blair's high-octane lobbying during the International Olympic Committee's crucial final deliberations clinched the deal.

Mayor Richard Daley, in the midst of a swing through Greece and Britain to study successful Olympic campaigns, sought out Coe and Blair on Thursday for advice on how to strengthen Chicago's bid for the 2016 games.

So what wisdom did Daley take away from his visit?

"It's got to be an American bid," he said. "It's not just for Chicago, it's for all of America. Everybody has to be included."

The mayor said the key to London's successful bid was simple: "They had a strong message; they had a heart; they really wanted to do it."

Three U.S. cities are in the running for the 2016 games, and Chicago is thought to be the long shot behind Los Angeles, which has twice hosted the games, and San Francisco, which was the runner-up to New York in the domestic competition for 2012.

The two California cities are old hands at this game. Both have well-established organizing committees and refined plans already on the shelf.

San Francisco is one of the world's favorite cities, but do San Franciscans really want the games? Doubts may have hurt its chances last time around. Los Angeles has previous experience as a host, but the selection committee may have a sense of "been there, done that."

Chicago is the new guy. Its selling points are the geographic compactness of the event venues along the lakefront and near downtown, a well-developed transportation infrastructure, plenty of hotel rooms and 60 million potential spectators within a half-day's drive.

After Thursday's meeting with Coe, an Olympic champion in the metric mile, Daley was stressing the importance of involving athletes in the planning and presentation of Chicago's bid and the need to make the games athlete-friendly.

Earlier, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, who also played a key role in the successful bid, had some advice about money. Livingstone said the tide turned in London's favor when he was given clear authority to borrow 2 billion pounds ($3.6 billion).

Chicago's bid is expected to involve some $2 billion in privately financed construction, including $1 billion for an Olympic village near McCormick Place and $300 million for a temporary 95,000-seat stadium in Washington Park. The U.S. Olympic Committee is expected to issue a preliminary evaluation of the three bids this month. By the end of the year, it will decide whether it wants to proceed with a U.S. bid. If it does, it will pick the city by April.

Earlier this week, Daley and Patrick Ryan, the insurance executive who heads Chicago's bid committee, visited Athens, host of the 2004 games, and met with Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis, who was Athens' mayor during the games, and Theodoros Bechrakis, the current mayor.

Thursday's meeting with Blair at 10 Downing St. was not strictly about the Olympics. Blair invited America's best-known mayor to sit beside him at a roundtable discussion about local government with about 20 British mayors.

Daley spoke about economic regeneration of depressed areas, community policing, gun-control legislation and his efforts to improve the city's public schools.

Robin Wales, mayor of the London borough of Newham, the location of many of the planned Olympic venues, buttonholed Daley afterward and asked him to explain the White Sox's disappointing season.

"They lost the team spirit," Daley said diplomatically. "This year, the Tigers had it, the Sox didn't."

On Friday, Daley wraps up his trip with a tour of Scotland Yard, where he will be briefed on Britain's security preparations for the 2012 games, and a visit to some scruffy areas of East London that expect to benefit from Olympic construction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha Toronto.... comeon LA 84, when have the Canadians ever been a real threat? :D

You never know when they could become a threat! Former MP Carolyn Parrish threatened to turn off our power a few years ago :o<_<:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...