Boston 2024

I think there should be an effort to divide the concerns about the Olympics in two:

- General Concerns
- Boston-specific Concerns

The first are the same things that come up with every potential Olympics. Cost overruns. Disruption of locals. Security concerns. So long as the Olympics are hosted anywhere that is actually inhabited the rest of the year, these concerns will be perennial. It pretty much boils down to "wherever I am, wherever I'm paying taxes, I don't want the Olympics." Which, in all fairness, is not an invalid point (even though, if I wanted to be mean, I could point out how similar that is to the dreaded NIMBYism). But its a point that people have been coping with for decades. Its also worth pointing out that its quite likely that telecommuting will be even more common 10 years from now than it is now, so many of the 9-5'ers could just work those two weeks (or a portion thereof) from their couch on their laptops.

The second are the concerns that we should really consider, in my opinion. For example, what specific infrastructure improvements would be needed, where to locate venues, how to coax the snail's pace process in the area, etc. etc. For example, concerns about the obsolete nature of much of the MBTA, its stock, its logistics, its everything, are certainly well founded and need to be addressed by any actual bid.
 
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...significant/pLocVzwREMhaaAgois2hZL/story.html

I know they're just doing a responsible phasing of their study, but it does seem a little silly to leave the two most important parts of this to Bostonians - how much will it cost and should the city take on the hassle - to later reports.

I'm still not sure where they plan on hosting Tennis that's pre-built. We were talking about Sailing in Newport a couple of pages ago, so maybe a Tennis stadium could be built there, with the HOF and all. It would reinforce rail service to FR and Newport as a part of the Olympic infrastructure package, at least.

BTW, a little illustration of why Boston 2024 would be nothing like Sochi 2014 in terms of cost: the Newport venues, if executed, would be 70 miles from Boston. Sochi placed about half of its events 25 miles away from its city center. Total cost to build a highway connecting Sochi to those venues: about 9 billion dollars. Total cost to build a near interstate-grade highway connecting Boston and Newport (...'s island): nothing, because it already exists.
 
Equilibria said:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...significant/pLocVzwREMhaaAgois2hZL/story.html

I know they're just doing a responsible phasing of their study, but it does seem a little silly to leave the two most important parts of this to Bostonians - how much will it cost and should the city take on the hassle - to later reports.
Click to expand...

The article is a must read for all participants in this thread. Good early-stage facts. Key points include:

1) Boston has 51,000 hotel rooms, more than the 45,000 IOC minimum
2) Boston has most venues covered
3) Boston would have to build:
(a) 80,000-seat Olympic Stadium
(b) 100-acre Olympic Village, with 16,500 beds and a 5,000-seat dining hall
(c) An Olympic Velodrome (cycling)
(d) A large aquatics center.

Considering that Somerville *alone* needs 6,300 to 9,000 *units* by 2030, I can't see any problem with the Metro Area absorbing an Olympic Village's worth of 16,500 beds (6,000 to 8,000 units?) that came on the market in 2024, particularly if they were on a rail line or BRT or otherwise "Olympic-convenient".

And an unelaborated transit expansion "requiring additional and significant investments in our infrastructure to handle the capacity that an Olympics would bring to Boston"
 
Its worth pointing out that there are also, in addition to the current hotel room stock, 2,000 more rooms coming online within the next 2 years. Even at half that pace for the remaining 8 (an additional 4,000), that would put Boston at 57,000 rooms by 2024. Pretty damn good.

Eager to see this report on friday/saturday.

Edit: Oh, the article says that there are 5,000 expected rooms by 2024. Heh, my estimate wasn't all that far off.
 
First I would redevelop this giant fossil-fuel based industrial waste of space in chelsea and branch the OL to meet Chelsea where a future BL branch would also terminate.

Plenty of space for a proper Olympic complex


2up3c40.jpg


I would like to also see the NE Rev's relocate to a proper MLS sized soccer stadium here in Eastie:

t00w2u.jpg


Someone had made an awesome case for this on some forum (I can't remember where) and made a point about using the location for brand purposes.

Call the team the New England Jets or something... and sell naming rights ie. "Jetblue Field" seeing that it is airport adjacent (and extremely transit-friendly). This could help support olympic operations as well as contribute to something that would permanently serve the city after the olympics.

Also, a big Idea would be with the coming revitalization of Revere Beach, there would be no reason that aquatic sports could not be held there. Beach volleyball and whatnot.. also would contribute to the reshaping of Revere Beach itself and make it a vibrant part of Metro Boston.

Of course the MBTA would need to be immensely improved for all this. But, it seems that retrofitting/expanding a city's infrastructure is a reason to host the olympics and hosting an olympics as a good reason for retrofitting /expanding a city's infrastructure.
 
and how exactly do you plan to move all of that water-dependent industrial use? You do realize it's pretty essential use?
 
I don't know, but it's gotta go. Fossil fuels will be over with this century anyway.
 
I think at the very least considering future population growth and density in and around Greater Boston, and if there is any chance of hosting an Olympic Games the T would have to become:

91ifdj.jpg
 
Has anyone discussed the south bay shopping center as a potential site for a stadium and/or other large structure? it's right next to a T stop and interstate - and it's a very underutilized site.
 
c_combat said:
I think at the very least considering future population growth and density in and around Greater Boston, and if there is any chance of hosting an Olympic Games the T would have to become:
Click to expand...
Ooh lala. Orange Line to Chelsea. I like you.

rinserepeat said:
Has anyone discussed the south bay shopping center as a potential site for a stadium and/or other large structure? it's right next to a T stop and interstate - and it's a very underutilized site.
Click to expand...

I believe all the stores there are high volume/top performers and very difficult to move out. Perhaps if Tremont Crossing happens, some could relocate their big boxes there and start to vacate South Bay Center.
 
I like that T map - and would like it to happen - except I don't think it's going to happen for the games (too expensive, would take too much time to plan). IMO - the cheapest solution is going to be upgrade the existing T system and then fully build-out the 30 year plan for the bike network (and expand hubway). I'm wondering why bikes aren't being considered a viable mode of transportation for a significant % of people during what is usually nice weather. Can you imagine the novelty of coming to a city and being able to bike everywhere? You won't be tied to the T and you won't need a car - and it'll have a significant future impact on the city - and we won't have to spend a ton of money.
 
rinserepeat said:
Has anyone discussed the south bay shopping center as a potential site for a stadium and/or other large structure? it's right next to a T stop and interstate - and it's a very underutilized site.
Click to expand...

I like that idea. I just thought about Suffolk Downs as well...
 
rinserepeat said:
I like that T map - and would like it to happen - except I don't think it's going to happen for the games (too expensive, would take too much time to plan). IMO - the cheapest solution is going to be upgrade the existing T system and then fully build-out the 30 year plan for the bike network (and expand hubway). I'm wondering why bikes aren't being considered a viable mode of transportation for a significant % of people during what is usually nice weather. Can you imagine the novelty of coming to a city and being able to bike everywhere? You won't be tied to the T and you won't need a car - and it'll have a significant future impact on the city - and we won't have to spend a ton of money.
Click to expand...

I wish Boston would revamp the streets like they've done in Montreal. They're really serious about making a bike friendly city. Their urban environment is much bigger than Boston as well.
 
c_combat said:
I don't know, but it's gotta go. Fossil fuels will be over with this century anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but no. This is insanity.

That area is more essential to metro boston being able to function than the financial district. Everett terminal (produce), the cng port (natural gas), the power plant(s), the massive recycling facility, I'm pretty sure there is something to do with gasoline too. It can't just "go". It may be ugly, but its one of the most vital pieces of infastructure we have.
 
davem said:
I'm sorry, but no. This is insanity.

That area is more essential to metro boston being able to function than the financial district. Everett terminal (produce), the cng port (natural gas), the power plant(s), the massive recycling facility, I'm pretty sure there is something to do with gasoline too. It can't just "go". It may be ugly, but its one of the most vital pieces of infastructure we have.
Click to expand...

Like I said, fossil fuels will be over with in the coming century.


I think Boston would be just fine without, what with all its colleges and various other economic engines.

The produce can go to an expanded Massport facility in S.Boston.

The obsolescence of a fossil fuel industry will make this place useless in the future and rightly so. The proximity and potential transit connectivity here would have more economic output potential than some refinery and oil tanks.

So this isn't insanity.
 
c_combat said:
Like I said, fossil fuels will be over with in the coming century.
Click to expand...

Rrrrrighttttt. So then what is the entire area heating their houses with? Magic? Olympic joy?

Or the produce terminal? Move that and now you've got the bazillion trucks that currently only need to drive out of everett driving from *wherever*. Same with the recycling facility. And then there's the power plant.

I'm not trying to be offensive. You can't move this stuff. Don't even think about it, because it can't and won't happen.
 
davem said:
Rrrrrighttttt. So then what is the entire area heating their houses with? Magic? Olympic joy?

Or the produce terminal? Move that and now you've got the bazillion trucks that currently only need to drive out of everett driving from *wherever*. Same with the recycling facility. And then there's the power plant.

I'm not trying to be offensive. You can't move this stuff. Don't even think about it, because it can't and won't happen.
Click to expand...

I know you're not trying to be offensive, but my roomates and I were able to heat our apartment this last month on Olympic joy alone. Pure Sochi Olympic joy, and it stayed a pretty comfortable 75 degrees.

But foreals, the real estate seems too valuable for what it is used as now. Considering a long term outlook on the city's growth and all.. It would make Chelsea smell better too.

But I am also a militant objector to big oil and fossil fuels in general.
 
davem said:
Rrrrrighttttt. So then what is the entire area heating their houses with? Magic? Olympic joy?

Or the produce terminal? Move that and now you've got the bazillion trucks that currently only need to drive out of everett driving from *wherever*. Same with the recycling facility. And then there's the power plant.

I'm not trying to be offensive. You can't move this stuff. Don't even think about it, because it can't and won't happen.
Click to expand...

I would absolutely choose to heat my home with Olympic Joy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top