Boston 2024

Harvard might be willing to donate the Beacon Park land if they got their cross-Allston subway built. It would also help for the games.
 
OK, here comes the fun:

http://goo.gl/maps/LK8po

I was pretty surprised how many of the venues could fit in and around Boston, without even fully using all the college and university arenas. Obviously, you'd have some Soccer and perhaps even Basketball at other arenas around the country, but trying to identify those would uncenter the map.

I used the list of venues from the London 2012 website. I don't think I forgot anything major, but there's lots of alternatives for lots of things. I took my first guesses at where things should go (the Whitewater Course, for instance, can go on any large open site - I thought an abandoned airfield was a good place for it, but you could do the same thing at Devens, and perhaps should).

During the Olympics, DMU services are as follows:

Riverside to South Station (continues after the Games)
Readville to Beacon Park (rerouted to South Station after the games)
Beacon Park to North Station (DMU shuttle only during games along GJ)
Anderson RTC to Beacon Park (either eliminated or rerouted to North Station after the games)

EDIT: This plan also should include water taxi shuttles running pretty constantly (except during rowing events) all up and down the Charles and back into Lechmere, to Rowes and Long Wharves, South Station/Fort Point, and the Airport. They would form a supplemental transit network which could be temporarily assembled with incredibly low capital costs.
 
Last edited:
Imagine the hue and cry environmentalists and Thoreau lovers would raise over erecting giant bleachers at Walden Pond...

I really like this plan, though.
 
You don't really need to build a new handball venue when you have Matthews Arena, which has a similar capacity to the London handball arena. Plus cutting a pool into Matthews would be expensive when you can just use the pool in the Aquatics Center for Water Polo. London had a separate facility for Water Polo but I'm not sure that that is necessary.
 
Proposition Joe said:
You don't really need to build a new handball venue when you have Matthews Arena, which has a similar capacity to the London handball arena. Plus cutting a pool into Matthews would be expensive when you can just use the pool in the Aquatics Center for Water Polo. London had a separate facility for Water Polo but I'm not sure that that is necessary.
Click to expand...

The pool at Matthews Arena is the craziest part of this whole plan, I think (other than that it exists). I was basically just trying to use it somehow and had to put Water Polo somewhere. The reason Handball fits better at the Olympic Park is that it's actually a hugely popular sport in some Eastern European countries, so having it around other stuff worked well in London, and Matthews is in the middle of nowhere relative to the other venues. You're probably right, though.

As to Walden Pond, well, it could be anywhere. Fresh Pond is closer, as is any of the local reservoirs (Chestnut Hill, Brookline) and Jamaica Pond. As I say in the map, I just love the idea of using Walden Pond for something, and I doubt the bleachers would need to be that big. How many people watch people swim in circles for hours, really?

EDIT: On reflection, I moved the Whitewater Center to Devens Airfield. It would make more sense to consolidate venues along Route 2 for shuttle and dedicated lane purposes, and there's nothing else near South Weymouth. Also, I'm warming to the Wachusett site for BMX and Mountain Bike, as opposed to Blue Hills. The owners of the ski area might pay for it for the promotional value, and since they might be able to get some profitable use of those things for summer recreation after the Olympics.
 
I still like Moakley Park in Southie for Beach Vollyball. Revere Beach would be too crowded I Imagine.

Also, New Balance is a great idea. They are building their whole athletics center thing there right around the same time this would happen either way. Even though corporate sponsorship is not allowed, I'm sure the cameras would pan over the big "NB" on the adjacent towers a few times =)

Seriously, I hope they get wind of this and throw some weight behind it. Seems like a natural fit.
 
Equilibria said:
The pool at Matthews Arena is the craziest part of this whole plan, I think (other than that it exists). I was basically just trying to use it somehow and had to put Water Polo somewhere. The reason Handball fits better at the Olympic Park is that it's actually a hugely popular sport in some Eastern European countries, so having it around other stuff worked well in London, and Matthews is in the middle of nowhere relative to the other venues. You're probably right, though.
Click to expand...

Water Polo could probably go at the existing BU aquatics center, though it would require adding some temporary bleachers on one side of the pool deck, and maybe also a temporary expansion of the gallery bleachers out on to the patio between it and Agannis. They could also place temporary bleachers above the BU diving pool -- doing all three things would allow for a very respectable crowd size.
 
Equilibria said:
As to Walden Pond, well, it could be anywhere. Fresh Pond is closer, as is any of the local reservoirs (Chestnut Hill, Brookline) and Jamaica Pond. As I say in the map, I just love the idea of using Walden Pond for something, and I doubt the bleachers would need to be that big. How many people watch people swim in circles for hours, really?
Click to expand...

Fresh Pond is an active reservoir for the city of Cambridge. Can't use that for anything. Chestnut Hill Res is an inactive reservoir that is kept for emergency backup purposes, so it's out too. Jamaica Pond and Brookline Res are possible.
 
perhaps Spy Pond in Arlington? Horn Pond in Woburn? The Mystic Lakes?
 
Equilibria said:
OK, here comes the fun:

http://goo.gl/maps/LK8po

I was pretty surprised how many of the venues could fit in and around Boston, without even fully using all the college and university arenas. Obviously, you'd have some Soccer and perhaps even Basketball at other arenas around the country, but trying to identify those would uncenter the map.

I used the list of venues from the London 2012 website. I don't think I forgot anything major, but there's lots of alternatives for lots of things. I took my first guesses at where things should go (the Whitewater Course, for instance, can go on any large open site - I thought an abandoned airfield was a good place for it, but you could do the same thing at Devens, and perhaps should).

During the Olympics, DMU services are as follows:

Riverside to South Station (continues after the Games)
Readville to Beacon Park (rerouted to South Station after the games)
Beacon Park to North Station (DMU shuttle only during games along GJ)
Anderson RTC to Beacon Park (either eliminated or rerouted to North Station after the games)

EDIT: This plan also should include water taxi shuttles running pretty constantly (except during rowing events) all up and down the Charles and back into Lechmere, to Rowes and Long Wharves, South Station/Fort Point, and the Airport. They would form a supplemental transit network which could be temporarily assembled with incredibly low capital costs.
Click to expand...

I think this is great, and would fully support that vision. One problem I find is linking the village to the stadium by a DMU line that may or may not prove to be long-term sustainable. Here's another option that aims to keep investments more localized...

Olympic Village: Pappas land east of D Street. A nice waterfront location and a really really good investment in housing stock for the Seaport district. The BCEC is right there and can be included in the perimeter as a central staging and support ground. Excellent airport access to the site including by ferry.

Olympic Stadium: South Bay Shopping Center - literally a 1.5 mile walk from Pappas' land/BCEC and a very easy shuttle circuit. Tie better pedestrian access into Andrew Station and you have a great and accessible location, linked nicely into the MIT and Harvard facilities on the Red Line.

Infrastructure investments: The major upgrade to serve the eastern Seaport would be Silver Line conversion to Green Line. I still think that the Essex Street Transitway surface option is perfectly acceptable to link Boylston and South Station, but going south and under the NEC would work as well. I think many many other transit investments would be justified around the system in addition, but wouldn't be as critical.
 
I've thought about the South Bay option, and also like it. It appears on the maps that it would be possible to construct a rail line linking it to the BCEC area by using the ROW next to the Boston Bypass Road, then going elevated for a short distance to get to the South Bay venues. Ideally, Shepherd's idea for SL conversion to light rail would go hand and hand with this idea, so we'd have at a minimum, a light rail line running from South Station to South Bay via the Seaport. Along with the Olympic Village, I suspect the Seaport would get most of the new hotel rooms, so it would really be important to have that link.
 
The South Bay idea seems awesome but I don't see the city leveling Home Depot, Best Buy and Target. Most of those businesses have only been open for 2-6 years. I do like it's proximity to transit and that part of town could use some redevelopment and cleaning up.

The seaport/pappas st. land where the BAC (Boston Athletic Club), WB Mason, UPS buildings are is a huge area of land that could lend itself nicely to a stadium or Olympic village. Question is, would Southie buy into it and how could traffic flow be improved if the only in/out road is Summer Street and West/East First Street?

Here's a map I put together based on a 1994 Olympic bid plan that made the Harvard Athletic facilities along Soldiers Field road the heart of the Olympic Village. You can see the Harvard option marked in the green space to the left and on the upper right you can see an alternative plan at the Wonderland race track.

http://boston-2024.org/images/olympic_sites.png
 
Shepard said:
I think this is great, and would fully support that vision. One problem I find is linking the village to the stadium by a DMU line that may or may not prove to be long-term sustainable. Here's another option that aims to keep investments more localized...

Olympic Village: Pappas land east of D Street. A nice waterfront location and a really really good investment in housing stock for the Seaport district. The BCEC is right there and can be included in the perimeter as a central staging and support ground. Excellent airport access to the site including by ferry.

Olympic Stadium: South Bay Shopping Center - literally a 1.5 mile walk from Pappas' land/BCEC and a very easy shuttle circuit. Tie better pedestrian access into Andrew Station and you have a great and accessible location, linked nicely into the MIT and Harvard facilities on the Red Line.

Infrastructure investments: The major upgrade to serve the eastern Seaport would be Silver Line conversion to Green Line. I still think that the Essex Street Transitway surface option is perfectly acceptable to link Boylston and South Station, but going south and under the NEC would work as well. I think many many other transit investments would be justified around the system in addition, but wouldn't be as critical.
Click to expand...

I have a couple of concerns with this idea. First, I agree that the city wouldn't demolish a useful retail area, particularly as some of those businesses are amenities that aren't doubled anywhere near Southie, Dorchester, etc. (though the Downtown Crossing Target might change that). There's a big difference between land that isn't utilized at all and land that isn't utilized with the density or land use type one might want, and South Bay is the latter.

The South Boston Athletes' Village is a good idea in terms of building out a currently planned development, and has proximity to South Station and Logan going for it. The only issue I could see developing there would be that the athletes might not want to be right next to hotels for spectators. Also, SLW conversion for Green Line isn't just that simple. It also involves tunnels to get the GL to SS, as I'm sure you're aware. That's a hugely expensive and complicated project.

While of course the Beacon Park site has its own infrastructure issues in moving the Pike, that shouldn't be all that expensive (it's basically 1 mile of elevated highway and a few ramps - not Big Dig-level stuff). More important, to me anyway, is the potential (also there in the Harvard-based plan) to use the Charles as a framing device for many of the venues by placing them at different points along the basin and connecting them with water taxis and DMUs (or EMUs by 2024), as well as the T and shuttle buses. I feel like that creates a games that will look uniquely like Boston (and will be singularly beautiful if the weather holds up).

Most host cities place their stadium somewhere like South Bay - an accessible site with enough room in a depressed part of town. The idea works, but it all seems too Atlanta to me. It could be anywhere. I just think that working with the river gives Boston a proposal that will look and work like no games before, and we get a really awesome Urban Planning bonus by freeing up the Beacon Park land for development in 2025 in addition to the North Point or Seaport Square buildings.
 
Equilibria said:
More important, to me anyway, is the potential (also there in the Harvard-based plan) to use the Charles as a framing device for many of the venues by placing them at different points along the basin and connecting them with water taxis and DMUs (or EMUs by 2024), as well as the T and shuttle buses. I feel like that creates a games that will look uniquely like Boston (and will be singularly beautiful if the weather holds up).

Most host cities place their stadium somewhere like South Bay - an accessible site with enough room in a depressed part of town. The idea works, but it all seems too Atlanta to me. It could be anywhere. I just think that working with the river gives Boston a proposal that will look and work like no games before, and we get a really awesome Urban Planning bonus by freeing up the Beacon Park land for development in 2025 in addition to the North Point or Seaport Square buildings.
Click to expand...

I totally agree! I'm merely an environmental graphic designer and not an urban planner/developer but this was the proposal from an earlier bid. Similar to London and the Thames, Boston's Charles river would be the focal point of the games with rowing/canoeing through the heart of Boston and adding some much improved athletic facilities to BU, Harvard, and MIT along the way. Harvard was 100% on board with the 1994 exploratory bid and it would be helpful to get their blessing with a 2024 possibility.
 
I actually agree and do like the Charles River framing - I think it's a great way to focus. But the Seaport does have a lot going for it in terms of an Olympic Village. And just to correct this notion:

Equilibria said:
SLW conversion for Green Line isn't just that simple. It also involves tunnels to get the GL to SS, as I'm sure you're aware. That's a hugely expensive and complicated project.
Click to expand...

I posted this a while back, which I referenced above. It's my GL routing over Essex Street, which is closed to private autos (they are re-routed to Kneeland). I think the marginal value of a tunnel versus this transitway wouldn't be worth the complexity and the cost.

esstreetjpg.jpg
 
Boston2024 said:
The South Bay idea seems awesome but I don't see the city leveling Home Depot, Best Buy and Target. Most of those businesses have only been open for 2-6 years. I do like it's proximity to transit and that part of town could use some redevelopment and cleaning up.

The seaport/pappas st. land where the BAC (Boston Athletic Club), WB Mason, UPS buildings are is a huge area of land that could lend itself nicely to a stadium or Olympic village. Question is, would Southie buy into it and how could traffic flow be improved if the only in/out road is Summer Street and West/East First Street?

Here's a map I put together based on a 1994 Olympic bid plan that made the Harvard Athletic facilities along Soldiers Field road the heart of the Olympic Village. You can see the Harvard option marked in the green space to the left and on the upper right you can see an alternative plan at the Wonderland race track.

http://boston-2024.org/images/olympic_sites.png
Click to expand...

Thats pretty cool. You know what would be fun? If you hosted various layout proposals on the website.

Ah man, turning Matthews into a swimming pool. Crazy!

I do like the idea of turning the CSX yard into the Olympic park, though. I'd be inclined to think that the Village itself should be closer. My preference is for decking over the Pike, which isn't all that far...

Oh, and with regard to South Bay, what if they didn't *get rid* of the retail center, but turned it into something more mixed use?
 
DominusNovus said:
Thats pretty cool. You know what would be fun? If you hosted various layout proposals on the website.

Ah man, turning Matthews into a swimming pool. Crazy!

I do like the idea of turning the CSX yard into the Olympic park, though. I'd be inclined to think that the Village itself should be closer. My preference is for decking over the Pike, which isn't all that far...

Oh, and with regard to South Bay, what if they didn't *get rid* of the retail center, but turned it into something more mixed use?
Click to expand...

Given construction times for a stadium, you're still looking at 5 or so years of no South Bay Plaza. Also, Home Depot doesn't really lend itself to TOD.

I like the idea of decking the Pike for the village, but I'm not sure it would retain the "village" concept that the IOC seems to like, with a central plaza and dining facilities. The Pike would be long and thin. Maybe one concept would be to deck right behind BU between Mountfort and Beacon and integrate the resulting buildings into the campus dorms and dining facilities to create a cohesive whole. BU could basically "become" the Olympic Village.

The benefit of doing Villages farther away is that it gives the athletes some privacy, and that both North Point and Seaport Square are commercially viable developments with enough confidence that they're getting financing and corporate support even without the games. That contrasts, say, with Chicago's speculative village housing, which came with the "oh, it's impossible that it wouldn't be useful after the games" argument that has failed so many times before. North Point has the River, Mem Drive, and the Grand Junction as direct traffic-free connectors for use during the games, so travel would be easy.

That said, London's village was on-site, but Rio's will be 11 miles from the main stadium (that said, the village will be co-located with a few venues, but generally Rio's plan seems pretty speculative and pretty spread out). Chicago would have co-located the village with McCormick Place, host to a number of smaller arena events.
 
DominusNovus said:
Thats pretty cool. You know what would be fun? If you hosted various layout proposals on the website.
Click to expand...

I find many of the concepts on here fascinating and if the city is on board with a bid (which we may find out next week), it would be great to open up a design challenge for local firms, architects, etc. The community on archBoston seems to embrace the idea of an Olympics and is thinking creatively about how it can also improve the city.
 
Boston2024 said:
I find many of the concepts on here fascinating and if the city is on board with a bid, it would be great to open up a design challenge for local firms, architects, etc. The community on archBoston seems to embrace the idea of an Olympics and is thinking creatively about how it can also improve the city
Click to expand...

There's a couple of reasons a Boston Olympics may be more realistic now than ever before (or ever again):

1) The USOC and IOC have resolved their differences, making 2024 the first time since 2002 that the US has a reasonable shot at hosting the games.

2) NYC and Chicago failed badly in bids for 2012 and 2016, and no US city was interested in 2020. With the largest US cities sick of bidding, there's an actual dearth of interest in being the US candidate. San Francisco was thought to be the favorite, but they've got their hands full with the Americas Cup and don't want the trouble.

3) Due in part to the USOC's issues, 2024 will be nearly 30 years since the US last hosted the Summer Olympics. In the time since, the Olympics will have been held on every other inhabited continent than North America and Africa, with South America and the Middle East (I assume Istanbul will host in 2020) getting their first bids ever immediately prior. There will have been a 22-year layoff since the US hosted any Olympics, and a 14-year layoff since North America hosted anything, with the intervening games being hosted by Eurasia 3 times (2012, 2014, 2020), East Asia once (2018, you could also count 2008 and Tokyo is the other possibility for 2020), and South America (2016) with 2022 still to be decided. In short, another NA/US Summer Games is overdue.

The key is designing a concept for the Olympics that doesn't only operate as an excuse for useful infrastructure projects, but actually incorporates them. It's not good enough to me to just say "we're hosting the Olympics, give us Blue Line to Lynn!" without having anything in Lynn for the games. I like sites for venues that downright require and include these projects, which applies to Seaport Square as well as North Point and Beacon Park, btw.

If Boston can accomplish that and find a way to spend the lion's share of the billions this will cost to build for the future, rather than just building for the Olympics, then by all means Boston should try to do this. Take the billion-plus we won't be spending any time soon on a new major league stadium for any sport (we're singularly lucky in this regard) and spend it doing something really useful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top