Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Robin Kelly with free pass? Maybe not for long
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* According to the Tribune, the new International Olympic Committee report on all the proposed 2016 sites appears to be a draw. The Tribune headline this morning is: “No clear favorite emerges from IOC report”…
An International Olympic Committee document assessing the bids of the four cities vying for the 2016 Summer Olympics this morning noted several problems with Chicago’s bid. But problems also were found with Rio de Janeiro, considered by some the emotional favorite to win the Games.
The committee also had concerns about the other two cities, Madrid and Tokyo. It cited organizational problems in Madrid’s bid, and the low level of public support in Tokyo.
* But AFP thinks Rio and Chicago did the best…
Rio Janeiro and Chicago’s chances of hosting the 2016 Olympic Games received a boost on Wednesday after they appeared to edge ahead in the technical evaluation of the four candidates.
The Lausanne-based International Olympic Committee’s evaluation report still identified key shortcomings in the Brazilian and US cities, notably on transportation and some of the planned venues.
However, the report released Wednesday used blunt language to fault Madrid and Tokyo, even though all the potential hosts were regarded as being of “an extremely high level” and presenting both “risks and opportunities.”
Then again…
Sources close to the IOC told AFP earlier this month that Rio de Janeiro’s bid to become the first South American city to host the Olympics has been gaining momentum, while Chicago has been losing ground.
* The full IOC report can be read by clicking here.
* Sun-Times…
Perhaps the biggest red flag for Chicago in the 90-plus page report: the questions raised about Metra’s ability to handle an expected doubling in demand during the Olympics.
The commuter rail line is key because it’s expected it would handle two-thirds of the “overall Olympic traffic” and that would “more than double peak commuter traffic demands,” according to the IOC report.
And while the IOC praises the compactness of Chicago’s proposed Olympic Village and 22-venue plan, and even lauds the Chicago 2016 bid committee’s work to ensure that no white elephants — buildings that no longer serve any purpose — are left standing after the Games, the report questions whether plans for re-calibrating existing facilities, for example, might ultimately prove to be costlier.
The report calls the city’s proposed budget achievable.
* AP…
Rio — seeking to take the Olympics to South America for the first time — may have gained the most, receiving the fewest direct criticisms in the report summary.
The 98-page report also cited low public support in Tokyo and a lack of understanding of different roles in Madrid.
Rio bid leaders said they believed they received the best review.
* Related…
* NBC5: Olympic Report Cites Wind as a Concern
* AP: 2016 Olympics Bid City Capsules
* Washington Post: IOC Report Takes Technical Look at 2016 Hopefuls
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:15 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Robin Kelly with free pass? Maybe not for long
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Not a problem says the Mayor, we will build a new CTA and Metra by 2016 at no cost to the lone taxpayer who still resides in the city by 2016!
The only hope is that SA has never hosted the games. Start saving for that $1700 ticket now!!
Comment by Hank Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:24 am
After the incredibly lavish Beijing games, you have to think that financial guarantees from national governments will be a big deciding factor. U.S. law currently prohibits a national guarantee, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon.
I think the only thing that could put Chicago over the top is if NBC weighs in for the city so it can broadcast top events in prime-time, real-time.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:33 am
I think crime is a big problem in Rio (even bigger than in Chicago) based on experiences of family members who made business trips there.
I absolutely agree that the games should be spread around the world and that Latin America, a wonderful place to travel, should have its opportunity. And Brazil is a rapidly developing economy which could use the boost the Games can give.
I’m neutral on whether Chicago gets it although if Chicago loses, what will poor Mayor Daley do?
It’s been the focus of his work life for years.
Comment by cassandra Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:35 am
Hank - Why start saving? If Rio gets the games, the average Chicagoan will probably save $1700 because taxes and fees won’t have to be raised to cover the cost of having the games in Chicago.
That logic alone should allow all Chicago taxpayers to fly down to Rio to see the games.
Comment by Johnny Cakes Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:40 am
we will build a new CTA and Metra by 2016
If the city is “cleared out” of residents by 2016, the system that serves 3 million residents and thousands of out of town commuters every day could surely handle a few hundred thousand tourists for a few weeks.
Seriously, this is a 2+ week event and calls for a “temporary” transportation and logistics solution, although if Chicago lands 2016 many permanent things will be built in the name of a few weeks of “need”.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:41 am
Pride is a good thing and a bad thing. We are all proud of our City, but only so far. It would be a terrible thing for us to land the Olympics.
Comment by LisleMike Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:43 am
Johnny, good point
Comment by Hank Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:46 am
Metra would be much more able to handle the extra traffic if the CREATE plan had been implemented. This is a collection of infrastructure projects aimed at reducing some of the bottlenecks in our rail and freight system. However, instead of funding that, as transportation planners beg for year after year, money was earmarked for projects like the Prairie Parkway a.k.a. the “Hastert Highway”. To me this is just another example of the fruits of our cockeyed political system and the poor leaders that rise to the top because of it.
Comment by Lakefront Liberal Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:49 am
A commitment from Obama to attend the selection ceremonies in Copenhagen may very well give Chicago the edge. Let’s hope he politely declines.
Another interesting and topical story is the one regarding competing oversight bills. It’s well past time for the city council to use their leverage and insist that Daley and his toadies accept their version.
Comment by The Doc Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:53 am
Go Rio!
Comment by Cheryl44 Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:54 am
So, how much is the cost of a track and a field?
Jeez, this Olympic thing has just gotten way too whacked up by the keepers of the money temple. Bong hits for Phelps.
Comment by vole Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 11:56 am
Word, true enough if you’re considering strictly American viewers. However, Rio is only 2 hours ahead of us (GMT-3). They might be able to schedule events at times accomodating to both European and American viewers.
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:01 pm
“Perhaps the biggest red flag for Chicago in the 90-plus page report: the questions raised about Metra’s ability to handle an expected doubling in demand during the Olympics.”
I would suggest that another, perhaps somewhat smaller, red flag for Chicago is the auto-swallowing potholes.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:03 pm
Secret, good points. And yes, I was speaking about just the American TV market, which I believe is the single-most lucrative.
Goofy point: If the Summer games do go to Rio, they will be held there during their Winter. The weather is still better there than here, and it has been done a couple of times in Australia.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:09 pm
I am certain we can count on Commando Kirk to gets pals to ante up for the Games…crusts or not.
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:17 pm
Anyone who thinks that Chicago’s infrastructure, crime, and public corruption problems should disqualify it from Olympic consideration probably has not been to Rio. Yes, both are great cities in their own ways, but when it comes to slums, poverty, and crime, I believe Rio has us beat hands down (or up)
Does anyone know how hosting the Games affected Salt Lake City, Atlanta and L.A. in the long term?
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:20 pm
I know Atl shipped their homeless to other southern cities.
On a similar note, which company provided the insurance for the Cost Overruns?
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 12:26 pm
I have been a big fan of the Olympic games for a long time; every apsect of the games and what it stands for I find to be momentous, not to mention a lot of really great competitions.
I am excited of the prospect of Chicago getting the games; it will be an event that will make the worlds fair event pale in historical comparison. I am sad to see such narcesstic or isolationist responses to the games which focus so heavily on individual fears of taxes etc. Chicago has a chance to host on the international stage an event that brings the world together; from the major super powers to countries with 3 atheletes and populations smaller then cook county. The games drive incredible creativity in th design of facilities and their own wonderous spectacle. They leave behind infrastructure and improvements that often would not have occured; and provide huge fincial boosts from construction for years etc.
It will be a loss of historic proportions to a city that could use a bit of an upgrade and a stronger international presence. it is time again for Chicago to extend itself beyound its humble beggings and hold itself out as a participant on the worlds stage.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 1:08 pm
Secret Square: It gave Atlanta prestige more than anything, because the construction ramping up to the event was a mess. How enduring is the prestige? Well, St. Louis hosted the Olympics just before the Cubs won the World Series and now would not be able to land a World’s Fair…
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 1:13 pm
==stage an event that brings the world together==
Except in 1980 and 1984…
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 1:14 pm
In 1996 Atlanta got $3 Billion from the federal government for infastructure improvements. Someone want to tell me where that money might come from if the Olympics go elsewhere?
Comment by Johnnyc Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 1:38 pm
==it will be an event that will make the worlds fair event pale in historical comparison==
How, exactly? It certainly hasn’t achieved that objective for a number of the recent hosts cities, which have a legacy that includes years of public debt and abandoned venues.
==Chicago has a chance to host on the international stage an event that brings the world together==
Geographically, that’s accurate. But I question the oft repeated canard about how this will boost Chicago’s international presence in a tangible and measurable way. Outside of the summer of 2016, are we to expect a huge influx of new tourists, or businesses, or whatever, simply because we’re hosting a 2-week party seven years down the road?
==The games drive incredible creativity in th design of facilities and their own wonderous spectacle==
No doubt it’ll be a spectacle, but methinks our respective definitions of such are quite different.
==They leave behind infrastructure and improvements that often would not have occured; and provide huge fincial boosts from construction for years etc.==
Except for the fact that the info supplied by Chicago’s own bid committee (aka the Daley administration) doesn’t support your premise, particularly regarding permanent infrastructure improvements. In fact, the Chicago bid drives home the point that outlays will be relatively low, and that erection of venues will be minimal. In this vein, we’re the polar opposite from Beijing, which spent $40 billion on infrastructure.
==It will be a loss of historic proportions to a city that could use a bit of an upgrade and a stronger international presence==
A loss of historic proportions? To clouted developers and contractors, perhaps. Your hyperbole aside, what is it that Chicago stands to lose? Recall that NYC bid for the 2012 games? Maybe not, since it never advance past the applicant stage. Did it have an adverse affect on that city?
I visited Vancouver this summer, the host for the 2010 Winter games. And putting aside the fact that the city has incurred serious debt as a result of cost overruns and a dearth of once-presumed private funding, residents have had to endure years of constant construction, closing and destruction of parks and other natural resources, nightmare traffic, and the razing of numerous properties to make way for athletes’ housing, which will remain empty post-games, since a buyer couldn’t be found. Of course, there’s now a four-lane highway to Whistler…
I’m also not in favor of the games because I don’t trust Daley and his bootlickers to organize, implement, and produce anything in a efficient, above-board, and publically beneficial fashion.
Comment by The Doc Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 2:17 pm
Rio, the crime thing is not good. I fear physical harm more than corruption.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 2:39 pm
NYTimes sez:
Chicago’s Olympic Bid Gets an Early Evaluation
By KATIE THOMAS
Published: September 2, 2009
Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 Olympics received mostly praise, tempered by concerns over finances and traffic, in a report released Wednesday by the International Olympic Committee…..The report did not single out a winner or loser among the finalists and instead underscored the closeness of the race one month before I.O.C. members are due to vote on the issue in Copenhagen. Chicago is competing with Tokyo, Madrid and Rio de Janeiro……. “This time there is no clear leader.”…the report called Chicago’s $3.8 billion budget “ambitious but achievable” and noted that the bid has the support of national government officials as well as 67 percent of city residents, according to an I.O.C. poll…..It noted, however, that the bid organizers had not provided a full financial guarantee in the event of an economic shortfall, which is “contrary to I.O.C. requirements.”
Chicago has promised to back the effort up to $500 million, and Illinois has pledged an additional $250 million. …Livingstone cautioned against drawing too many conclusions from the technical report, noting that I.O.C. members often vote for a range of reasons. Past winners, including Beijing, have not come out ahead in the technical report.
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 2:40 pm
Chicago will be poised to get mega transportation bucks out of the federal government to expand and rehab the CTA and Metra.
Comment by north shorer Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 3:05 pm
Don’t worry about street crime for the Olympics in Brasil.
My wife grew up in Sao Paolo, and every street had its own private “policeman” to deal with street crime, usually from abandoned kids who live on the streets.
When these kids step on the wrong toes, the private “police” go into the alleys where they the kids stay, whack a few of them, and the kids disappear.
A bigger problem is with kidnappings of middle class and wealthy family members. This is done by well organized and older crooks, often with some military background.
One of the biggest growth industries in Brasil is personal security, and bulletproof glass on cars is a big item since most kidnappings take place by pulling people from cars at gunpoint.
Another increasing business is plastic surgery, since it is a practice for kidnappers to cut off the ear lobe of the person they kidnapped and send it to the family to show they’re dangerous and serious. When and if they are returned, those kidnapped get surgery to replace their ear lobes.
It doesn’t matter to the kidnappers if their prey is man, woman or child, they still cut.
I suspect that if Rio gets the Olympics, a lot of petty children thiefs and kidnappers will just “disappear” at the hands of their “community police”.
I also suspect that the well armed drug gangs will reach accommodations with the National police to limit street violence while the Olympics are in town in exchange for a moratorium on fire fights during drug raids.
It’s a different world down there, folks.
Comment by PalosParkBob Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 3:07 pm
For Chicago to get the games, we should have planned for it. Another words, Soldier’s Field should have been constructed to be able to house the big ceremonies.
The Olympics was a diversion concocted by Mayor Daley and his cronies to change the subject from his corruption scandals. It’s an, Oh, look a kitty that’s become a mountain lion. The sooner Chicago get’s turned down the sooner we can wish the Mayor a happy retirement.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 4:36 pm
Considering how congested things already are in Chicago, I cannot believe that we want to have tens of thousands of more visitors pack the city during the Olympics.
Comment by JSB Wednesday, Sep 2, 09 @ 8:54 pm