The International Olympic Committee has never chosen two or more cities to host a single Olympics games. With rising costs of hosting such an International phenomenon, the seriousness of doing such a thing should strongly be considered. Athens is a great example of what happens when a city hosts an Olympics that is small. It is a huge burden on the region and stuck paying off losing billions of dollars. On the other hand, Beijing looks to be an excellent example of a large city hosting the games successfully.
Vancouver is set to host the 2010 Winter Olympics in a mere 18 months. The infrastructure is being finished up and afterward will be a huge addition for the region to use. Seattle is working on building and upgrading its infrastructure with the Light Rail line from Downtown Seattle to Sea-Tac Airport finishing by the end of 2009, while a Stage 2 Proposal is set to appear on the November 2008 Election to expand it north to Lynnwood, and South to Federal Way. Should this pass in the election, it would be finished in 2023, 15 years from now. There is no saying another proposal comes up in the next 10 years afterwards to build onto that.
The big costly part of the Olympics is the facilities. You need many venues to host events. The good part of the joint bid would be to split the costs of building the facilities. There were 31 facilities for the Beijing Olympics. Some of these were temporarily built for the games (8). A few of these were dirt tracks for motor bikes, beach volleyball, and baseball fields.
The good thing is Vancouver and Seattle already have a few facilities built. Seattle is working on an arena renovation in Seattle Center. Vancouver already has the GM Place. Seattle has the UW Bank of America Arena. King County has an Aquadics Center that was built for the 1990 Goodwill Games and holds competitions throughout the year. A new facility would need to be built for the swimming competitions, but this one could hold the diving ones.
Baseball fields and stadiums are all over the region so those shouldn't need to be built should baseball return to the Olympics. Softball fields could use these fields, including college stadiums at UW.
The University of Washington is trying to get funding for a new football stadium. How about building a new big stadium for the opening and closing celebrations, track and field, and other events that would be used by the UW before and after the Olympics. Vancouver has the UBC Facilities that could be used, as well as an Olympic Village that will already be there from the 2010 Olympics. An Olympic Village in Seattle at the UW could be built and later turned into dormatories once the games are over. Olympic Committees help pay for buildings and accommodations so that could help save some costs.
So now, anybody want to join this bid?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Current IOC rules prohibit two National Olympic Committees from participating in the same bid, which means Vancouver would be out. However, Seattle (and the surrounding area) could host the Olympics by itself, as there's already a wealth of venues in the area.
Very true. I think sooner or later, the IOC will start to look at the situation for cities that are close in proximity that makes sense for a games. With rising costs and demands of holding the games, it should be given more consideration in the next decade or so.
I think having the Olympics in Seattle would be a great thing. However, I must disagree on one point. I think that replacing the husky stadium with an all-purpose track & field stadium is one of the worst decisions that the University and Seattle could make.
The University of Washington is a football school. Always has been, always will be--not matter how many losing season we incur. Even last year, against Ohio State, we had the third-largest attendance ever at Husky Stadium.
Therefore, you need to build the stadium for football. What the university SHOULD do is take out the track, lower the field, and build seats down lower to the field, just like Stanford recently did to their stadium:
http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2005/julaug/farm/sports/stadium.html
It would get more seats closer to the field, making the stadium louder than it already is, and increasing ticket revenue from those alumni and boosters willing to pay big bucks for season tickets between the 30-yard lines and close to the field.
Secondly, it would help boost recruiting. Stanford has seen a tremendous shift in recruiting since their renovation. Facilities don't matter you say? Tell that to Phil Knight and the Oregon football team: http://media.www.dailyemerald.com/media/storage/paper859/news/2003/07/22/Sports/New-Locker.Room.Gets.HighCaliber.Makeover-1981632.shtml
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1NyaTVUhFQ
Considering these factors, Memorial Stadium (though parking may be an issue) or a new facility in south Seattle would be a better investment than renovating Husky Stadium to suit a track and field environment.
Latest news about the bid.
http://www.expatica.com/nl/articles/news/Will-Netherlands-bid-to-host-the-2028-Olympic-Games_.html
Wiki entry on it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2028_Summer_Olympics
Here's some other history in the matter.
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/1996/07/29/story2.html
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19981220&slug=2790268
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/archives/1997/9702230062.asp
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19971106&slug=2570688
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/archives/1996/9608070019.asp
http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/news/2003/0207032.htm
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/archives/1996/9608210106.asp
Goodwill Games
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:CZg2nlPVC1gJ:www.historylink.org/essays/output.cfm%3Ffile_id%3D5658+%22bob+walsh%22+%22seattle%22+%22olympics%22+%22bid%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us&client=firefox-a
I personally would LOVE the Olympics to come to Seattle. I was a volunteer at the Aquatics Center for the Goodwill Games. Had a blast doing that and would love to do something like that again.
Post a Comment