Another Case of Someone Not Thinking Things Through
>> Friday
Over the past couple days, I marveled over the discussions pertaining to Chicago's bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. All points brought up have serious flaws and clearly show certain people writing off the cuff instead of researching and thinking things through. In Mike's article, he makes some good points why Chicago would struggle hosting the Summer Games and they are legitimate concerns. But, he fails to think realize that all of his concerns are easily resolved.
1.) The first concern brought up was that of Traffic in the Chicagoland area. Yes, this is a mighty concern, especially for those of us whom live in the city, although I find it hard to believe those whom do not live within the city limits are as concerned as those living within. In 1984, Los Angeles had roughly3 million residents (Chicago currently has about the same) and they were able to reduce congestion through the use of public transportation which was significantly overhauled and revamped prior to the Opening ceremonies. Having the Olympics in Chicago allows the city to redo some of the problem spots of the expressway (they are currently working on the Eisenhower) and the EL. As is the case in London with the Tube, Chicago has a public transportation system that could easily cut down on traffic on the expressways. BTW, I would like to point out that there would be no real immediate need for "summer construction sites" as Mike points out b/c most of those problems should be resolved before opening ceremonies. Also, need I point out that if Atlanta can put on a good Olympic Games with their 10 lanes of death expressway system, then Chicago would be fine.
2.) The second issue is where the city would come up with private funding for the Games. As Nate so bluntly put it, Mayor Daley and other officials within the Illinois government have significant connections to private ownership and buisness. Mike, being a poly sci major and engrossed in Illinois politics, you should have realized this fact. The city would easily be able to put together over 2 million dollars from pivate ownership. Need I mention Corporate Chicago chipping in a lovely 220 million for the Millenium Park project.
3.) The third issue is apparently what would the city do with a new aquatics center which will be built around the ITT campus. This is another one of those points where Mike seems to be rambling off random ideas about why this whole bid would be a bad idea. What would the city do with a state-of-the-art aqautics center? Are you kidding me! If this is one of your arguments, please stick to soccer b/c you obviously have no clue about what you are talking about in anything else. This swimming center would be a wonderful addition to the city and an opportunity to host national and world championship meets as they currently do in Sydney. This would also be a place where they could hold state swimming / diving meets for the high schools. Not to mention, this would be a great public place for swimming besides North Ave beach.
4.) Yes, the plan calls for an 80,000 seat temporary stadium to be built. Now, obviously one with an unimaginative and one-track mind would compare this statement to look like t-ball bleacher's or "grandstands for the British Open." But in reality, it will look like a normal stadium. The stadium in Bejing will be part temporary, as will the stadium in London for the 2012 games. The stadium in London will be taken apart once the paralympics are over with and will become a 25,000 seat stadium. For what purpose I do not know, I am guessing soccer, polo or something of that nature.
5.) The fifth problem is apparently parking in the city and I agree with you excpet that you forget to mention one simple thing...public transportation. With a new public transportation system, it would seem pointless to argue about the parking situation for Bears games, let alone Fire games. For someone who has never been to a Bears game, you seem awful quick to judge what the parking situation is and you rely on nothing but word of mouth. As for someone who has been to about 15 Bears games (me) I can honestly tell you that parking is not a big deal and has never been a problem. Oh and by the way, did I tell you that the LSD is not the only way to get in and out of the parking lot. Oh and also, are you forgetting about the massive parking lot behind McCormick Center? The city could easily build a couple extra parking lots because the entire surrounding areas are nothing but old warehouses. Again, please stick with something you know b/c this is another case of you exaggerating a problem that isn't there.
6.) I don't know why I am responding to this, but in your article, you say that the Olympics would be a bad idea b/c of the duel-stadium idea. What!?!?!? Okay, I agree that it is a bad idea (that is only what it is, it is not set in stone and the IOC wouldn't allow something like that anyways) but how does that fit into your argument. You ralk about economic reasons why the olympics would not succeed here andthe added burdens to the city, but then all of a sudden you say that bringing the Olympics to Chicago is a bad idea b/c of a foolish idea that will not turn to actuality. Jeez, stick to one topic please.
All in all, Mike's article should be ignored because it is all unfounded nonsense. The Olympics in actuality would bring in hundred's of millions of dollars for the city and that is a point that cannot be argued. Yes, certain people will say, well look at the Athens which lose millions of dollars from hosting. Need I remind those people that that all occurred because of poor planning, terrible construction dates, and corrupt politicians. The Olympics would allow the city to revamp many of the problem areas that have been causing headaches for a long time. They would be a wonderful addition to an already sports crazy culture.
Posts
4 comments:
If there's any issues unresolved after this, let's settle them in an e-mail war so we don't clog up the blog. I first want to say that I am not "against" a Chicago Olympics. I said in my article at the bottom that I hoped somebody proves me wrong. That being said, there are lots of things that a Chicago Olympic bid has to work out before it has a chance of becoming a reality.
1.) As to traffic. I didn't mean traffic in the Chicago Metro area. Naturally Chicago is a large city and will have traffic. My issue was traffic would become unmanageable because of the compact location of the games. Only two events would be held outside of the metro area and 16 of 38 sports would play at McCormick Place. Archery would be held on Northerly Island, soccer matches would be held at Soldier Field, and the rowing basin and field hockey areas would be set up on 31st Street east of LSD. What this amounts to is that half the sports AND the Olympic Village AND the International Broadcast Center would all be within 2 miles of the confluence of I-55 and I-94.
2.) Actually, despite my political science background, I don't follow state politics very closely, but thanks for assuming. My contention on $2 billion of private funding wasn't that Chicago didn't have the capacity to raise a great deal of money, but rather that politicians often have a hard time accomplishing anything ONLY with private money. If these games are to go on, to think that no taxpayer money will be used is naive. As to Millennium Park, the $220 million from corporate Chicago only covered about half the park's costs. Construction alone for the Olympics would cost 4 times as much as Millennium Park (with no delays, and no CTA expansion). On an unrelated note, you switched your millions and billions. Chicago has 3 million people, and construction would cost 2 billion dollars. Also, for most of your solutions, you mentioned the extension of public transportation. That money isn't private. I'm not saying that public money shouldn't be spent to upgrade CTA and other infrastructure for the Olympics, but I think it's duplicitous for the Mayor's office to say that no tax money will be used.
3.) OK. I can see how the aquatics center could be used post-Olympics. The thought of high-school swim state finals there did occur to me. Followed by "What about the other 360 days of the year?" Opening it up to the public is an interesting idea. However, I fear the facility would then go the way of the Pettit Ice Center in West Allis; struggling financially despite its design for Olympic competition and its openness to the public. It could work out, but it looks like a white elephant venue at this time.
4.) As for a Chicago Olympic Stadium (COS), its temporariness is a blessing and a curse. Sydney reduced capacity of their Telstra Stadium from more than 112,000 to 80,000/73,000. Telstra hosts regular competitions. Several rugby clubs call the grounds home, and rugby finals and other competitions are held there as well. You said yourself that the London stadium will be reduced in capacity and used for something else after the games. That's great. However, the fact that COS would be temporary is both good and bad. Good because it won't be a white elephant venue. Bad because all these other stadiums that are being reduced have a purpose afterwards (Atlanta, Los Angeles and Barcelona too). This stadium would be used for nothing. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but it seems like an awful lot of trouble and expense to build a $250-500 million stadium just to take it down again after four weeks. With the end result being a return to the parking lot from whence it came, I'm having trouble figuring why anyone would invest the extra money to create something that wouldn't look like an eyesore.
5.) I may not have been to a Bears game at New Soldier Field, but I know a parking disaster when I see one. For Fire games and US National Team games, the fastest time I ever had getting out of a parking lot without sprinting back to my car as soon as the match was over was 20 minutes. 30 minutes was the norm, and one time I was stuck in the parking lot for nearly an hour. Even at the most well-attended of these games, Soldier Field was 1/3 empty. My friend who went to the Bears game was stuck in the lot for over an hour. I’d be very surprised if the roads suddenly change on Football Sundays compared to Soccer Saturdays.
Yes, there are multiple ways to get out of Soldier Field. However, from my experience, McFeteridge Drive is only open to the underground premium lot, and traffic has always been directed south on Museum Campus Drive every time I have gone to Soldier Field, prohibiting the use of either McFeteridge or Waldron by departing spectators. Unless I've completely misread the map, all roads spit you out onto LSD.
6.) I didn't mean to say the games were a bad idea because of the two stadium idea. I meant to say that the two-stadium idea is stupid, and handicaps the entire bid. Yes, even with the extra parking behind McCormick Place, that will be right by the Olympic Village, and will be filled by athletes, journalists, coaches, and fans. There simply is not enough parking in the area to support 140,000 fans even with public transportation. Even if the IOC disallows the 2-stadium plan, that's still in excess of 80,000 fans and all of Soldier Field's parking spaces are gone because the stadium is on top of them. There's probably a creative solution out there, but so far, I haven't heard it.
I think a Chicago Olympics would be cool, but I don't see how it could happen without running into the kinds of problems I've mentioned. I'd like to hear some more details from the Mayor's and Governor's office.
Whoa nelly.
I thought I was harsh. Also, haven't I heard this debate somewhere before? I can't remember.
By the way, I fixed that billion/million typo. Phew...at first I thought I woke up in the year 2150 to massive population growth, incredible deflation, and people talking about a 134 year-old Olympic bid.
Wait a minute..."let's settle them in an e-mail war so we don't clog up the blog."?
Clog up the blog? This from the guy who writes about soccer, lacrosse, car racing and summer-league baseball.
Come on, you're the last person to complain about cluttering our blog with pointless shit that no one cares about.
Leave soccer to your blog and Europe. Leave lacrosse to (potential) rapists. Leave SLU baseball to your family reunions. And leave NASCAR to the south. THAT will keep our blog free of "clutter".
My favorite line of Pat's article:
"Need I remind those people that that all occurred because of poor planning, terrible construction dates, and corrupt politicians."
Nope, no way the last part would be problematic in Chicago.
Post a Comment