Athletes' Village designs revealed for Stratford City
Updated: September 21, 2007

Public consultation starts today on Stratford City masterplan by Fletcher Priest Architects and Arup Urban Design

The first images of the £2bn Olympic Athletes’ Village development at Stratford City have been released as part of a public consultation on the scheme.

Developers Lend Lease and partners First Base and East Thames today started a public consultation on the masterplan, which will house more than 17,000 athletes and officials during the 2012 Games. The village will then be converted into a residential community of 3800 homes, of which at least 30% will be affordable housing.

The masterplan was prepared by Fletcher Priest Architects and Arup Urban Design.

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3095923

-------

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/x/i/s/stratford_city_cad_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/l/u/n/stratford_city_cad3_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/c/p/b/stratford_city_cad2_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/y/o/v/stratford_city_cad6_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/u/b/b/stratford_city_cad5_sep07.jpg


http://images.scotsman.com/2007/06/04/2007-06-04T153749Z_01_NOOTR_RTRIDSP_2_OUKTP-UK-BRITAIN-OLYMPICS.jpg

http://images.scotsman.com/2007/06/04/2007-06-04T153749Z_01_NOOTR_RTRIDSP_2_OUKTP-UK-BRITAIN-OLYMPICS.jpg[/QUOTE]

Is it really true that the make of this logo is worth 400,000 pounds? I heard that most of the Londoners were angry/upset by this.

^^ not just Londoners, the world is upset about this... a 5 years old can do better that this

oi oi..that is just my design...not the final design..i did not use london 2012 in the image..i might get sued!

do not remove the images though..use it as a "generic" image

Somewhat the design of Olympic Village is resemble with the 'weird' logo.

what does the post say LONDON OLYMPIC VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT NEWS.If you wanna talk about the logo sod off somewhere else.

Read yesterday in some construction magazine that over 500 architects have registered designs for it with still 3 more weeks left to go!

yeah..over 500 i didnt make the shortlist

Isn't this thread redundant considering its been revealed that the designs are just mock ones, and not the real ones? :bash:

Isn't this thread redundant considering its been revealed that the designs are just mock ones, and not the real ones? :bash:

surely u cud have realised that just from looking at the images.. or not?

surely u cud have realised that just from looking at the images.. or not?

Well the person who posted this thread sure didn't. I thought they didn't look decent enough anyway! British renderings are usually a lot better than those shots

Well the person who posted this thread sure didn't. I thought they didn't look decent enough anyway! British renderings are usually a lot better than those shots

they fine for me..since they only took ten mins.

what will happen to it after the Olympics are over...?

what will happen to it after the Olympics are over...?

Social housing and new apartments - but these diagrams aren't anything to do with the Olympics, just a fan's impression of what could be.

http://images.scotsman.com/2007/06/04/2007-06-04T153749Z_01_NOOTR_RTRIDSP_2_OUKTP-UK-BRITAIN-OLYMPICS.jpg

Is it really true that the make of this logo is worth 400,000 pounds? I heard that most of the Londoners were angry/upset by this.[/QUOTE]

Yes. Most people are more annoyed about how ugly the logo is, the price just adds salt to the wounds (being a bit dramatic here :lol: )

£400,000 is peanuts for a company to pay on a completely new brand identity these days.

I love the designs of the olympic village but the logo looks like a fat swastika designed by Picasso. (no offence to the genius ;) ).

tried this program which produces better renders of my "proposal"
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/20070612235110_1m56s.png
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/20070612234248_8m39s.png

^why Mo spend all that time on the dynamic forms of the blocks and then plonk ugly standard columns underneath, they should themselves be as integral to the spirit of the design (and have a clear objective other than solely holding up the building in their own right).

^why Mo spend all that time on the dynamic forms of the blocks and then plonk ugly standard columns underneath, they should themselves be as integral to the spirit of the design (and have a clear objective other than solely holding up the building in their own right).

i hear u. its the result of spending 10 mins to create something like this.
All you suggestions would be welcome. Its really just conceptual but fire away, im listening.

They remind me of Zaha Hadid's style.

Personally though, I don't think they would make very good homes for the legacy after the Games are over.

They remind me of Zaha Hadid's style.

Personally though, I don't think they would make very good homes for the legacy after the Games are over.

Yeap. Legacy was not really taken into account.
The concept is drawn from the New York 2012 Olympic Village at www.morphosis.net.

I do like how it opens up more green space, doesn't centre around some courtyard system and sort of "flows" across the park.

£400,000 is peanuts for a company to pay on a completely new brand identity these days.


Its peanuts alright. I guess we expect them to design a better logo if its more expensive (sarcasm but I am just a bit upset of the design :bleep:)

Let's just go back to the topic and forget about the logo :lol:

Aren't there any buildings proposed for the Olympic Village at all?! This is a development news section for the London Olympic Village.

excellent design of the olympic village! :okay: i like it a lot

nice village

The village you made is quite extraordinary, but I just really don't think it'll fit nicely into London, the curves and the ultra modernist design are too intense.

tried this program which produces better renders of my "proposal"
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/20070612235110_1m56s.png
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/20070612234248_8m39s.png

^^
What program is that?

Athletes' Village designs revealed for Stratford City

Public consultation starts today on Stratford City masterplan by Fletcher Priest Architects and Arup Urban Design

The first images of the £2bn Olympic Athletes’ Village development at Stratford City have been released as part of a public consultation on the scheme.

Developers Lend Lease and partners First Base and East Thames today started a public consultation on the masterplan, which will house more than 17,000 athletes and officials during the 2012 Games. The village will then be converted into a residential community of 3800 homes, of which at least 30% will be affordable housing.

The masterplan was prepared by Fletcher Priest Architects and Arup Urban Design.

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3095923

-------

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/x/i/s/stratford_city_cad_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/l/u/n/stratford_city_cad3_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/c/p/b/stratford_city_cad2_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/y/o/v/stratford_city_cad6_sep07.jpg

http://www.building.co.uk/Pictures/web/u/b/b/stratford_city_cad5_sep07.jpg

Tower looks to be atleast 40 floors. Interesting, the development looks like it will mix multiple styles together.

Hope you don't mind, but I merged this with your previous thread and re-named it.

Hope you don't mind, but I merged this with your previous thread and re-named it.

haha, np. i totally forgot i made a topic about this already awhile ago, thx.

It looks sooo generic... blegh..

^^

Generic maybe for London but I'd kill for this to be in Sydney.

It looks great and i love the eclectic mix of architectural styles.

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/6835/parkbb2.jpg

None of the venues in that diagram above are the final designs, except for the Aquatic Centre.

that olympic village looks great, nice design.

looking good

is it me or does the London 2012 logo takes the shape of 2 persons conducting oral intercourse?

None of the venues in that diagram above are the final designs, except for the Aquatic Centre.

yes...i just wanted to ask that. I noticed that olympic stadium looks a bit different from what i saw on olympic magazine on TV.

After the Games the Olympic Park will be transformed into the largest urban park created in Europe for more than 150 years

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/Aquatics_Centre_Games-time4-EDIT.jpg
Getting ready: Aquatics Centre
Detailed designs for the venue by architect Zaha Hadid were released in November 2006, in line with the design competition held in early 2005.

The procurement process for the construction contractor is underway, with the preferred contractor due to be chosen in early 2008.

Preparatory works for construction have been taking place throughout 2007. The demolition of all the buildings has been completed and the soil in the area is being cleaned and sorted for reuse on the Park site.

Archaeological investigations are almost complete and 450m of new river walls have been installed to widen the river to the south west of the Centre.

The planning submission for the Aquatics Centre will be made in January 2008 to enable construction to start in summer 2008 and finish in 2011, in time for test events before the Games.

During the Games
The Aquatics Centre will host a range of events including Swimming, Synchronised Swimming, Diving, Water Polo finals and Modern Pentathlon. The capacity will be 17,500 seats for the main competition pool and Diving and 5,000 seats for the Water Polo venue.

The Aquatics Centre will also incorporate a crèche, family-friendly changing facilities and café amenities alongside a new public plaza directly in front of the building.

After the Games
The Aquatics Centre will be adapted to 2,500 seats with capacity to be increased to 3,500 for major competitions. The pools will be a new facility for club, school and community swimming.

The Centre will be integrated with Stratford City and other regeneration projects to help regenerate the Lower Lea Valley.
The Water Polo venue will be taken down and relocated elsewhere if possible.

OLYMPIC STADIUM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/London_Olympic_Stadium_%28Nov_2007%29.jpg
NEW DESIGN RENDER^^^
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/eb/London_Olympic_Stadium.jpg
OLD RENDER^^^
Olympic stadium:
During the Games
Venue Olympic Stadium view from inside during Games 340x185
The Olympic Stadium will seat 80,000 and will be the main venue for the Olympic and Paralympic Games. All Athletics events will take place in the Stadium as well as the Opening and Closing Ceremonies, watched by millions of people around the world.

After the Games
After the Games the Stadium will be converted to a 25,000 seat Athletics stadium, providing a lasting legacy with a range of facilities available for elite competitors and the local community.

After the Games the Olympic Park will be transformed into the largest urban park created in Europe for more than 150 years

Correct me if I am wrong, but the biggest urban park in Europe won't be -after 2012- the Hellenikon Metropolitan Park in Athens (1,000 acres)?

so the stadium's gonna have those athlete figures as well..or not?

so the stadium's gonna have those athlete figures as well..or not?

The art on the 'wrap' isn't finalised yet, it's most likely o be a collection of images from past Olympics, British sporting heroes and lots of colour from the 2012 brand.

After the Games it's going to cut up and recycled, and its planned to be cut up into 80,000 pieces and given to every spectator who attended the Opening Ceremony.

The Aquatics Centre looks great. Isn´t it? Smooth and sleek desiged. Like a whale in the deep sea.

The new render of stadium is nothing special... IMO the old was better...

It doesn't need to be anything special as two thirds of it will be demolished after the Games.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/London_Olympic_Stadium_%28Nov_2007%29.jpg

Btw, the blobby buildings around the outside of the stadium are toilets/help desks/food courts and so on.
there will be no food available inside the stadium thats to reduce fire hazards and stuff..

I like the old one better.

^^ i do too

The initial design for the olympic stadium was far more interesting than the new one and I was really looking forward to seeing it built. The new one isn't anything special and doesn't reflect British talent, nothing about it stands out.

I think I'll go with the new design. It's more classy and will probably withstand the test of time better.

^^ no suburbanwalker, Olympic is not a time building classic, it is time to show-off the best of UK to the world. In this case...bad logo and not so good stadium (I like the old one too) , and they try to say they will be a better show that the Chinese and the Australian one....funny to see how it will turn out.

The UK and London doesn't need to show off - everyone all over the globe knows what London is like. It doesn't need to prove anything.

The stadium is designed the way it is because the outer sections of it will be taken apart after the Games, because London doesn't need another 80,000 spectator stadium. London will be the first Olympics where there will be no white elephants after the Games have left London.

White elephants doesnt exist for the past 3 OG as I know. In Athens all the stadiums and the rest infrastucture are now in use or remaking for convention centers/shopping centers etc...

The UK and London doesn't need to show off - everyone all over the globe knows what London is like. It doesn't need to prove anything.



So Beijing Athens had to show off?? Anyone knows that Athens is the historic capital of Europe and has an incredible history and monuments, anyone knows how glorious and historic city Beijing is as well. The cities that host the OG have nothing to proove to the world, are already famous and world wide known. And exactly because everyone all over the globe knows what London is like, that's why everyone expected a state of art design for the main olympic stadium..

Not really. Sydney, Athens and Beijing were all trying to push themselves further onto the world stage through their Olympic Games. Athens built iconic stadia but now have the problem of them being white elephants. Beijing are building permanent iconic venues because China is using the Olympics as a 'coming out' process to be the new superpower and needs these venues. London is pioneering legacy and building venues for their use after the Games and not during, that's why the aquatic centre and stadium have temporary seats during the Games.

London isn't building an 'iconic' stadium because it's not using its Olympics to push itself on the world stage - it's already there. Also the stadium won't exist as a 80,000 seater after the Games so isn't wasting money on building something flamboyant that is only there for a few weeks.

As has been said before (and which so many people seem to be unable to understand) is that the London Games are not going to be anything to do with patriotism, London or Britain in an overt way, but more returning the Olympic movement to its understated humble beginnings, and not the architectural nationalistic-hijacking that it has become in the last twenty years or so. This games is all about the youth from all over the world and getting them interested in the Olympic movement, which is why the logo and the 2012 brand is the way it is, and why there will be so many kids in the Beijing handover ceremony and at the opening ceremony. London is re-inventing what an Olympic Games is all about.

I don't know if that's the right attitude. "London doesn't have to prove anything". I mean it doesn't, but we wanted the olympics so we could put on a show and take the responsibility to make it as awesome as possible. And who doesn't want to provide the world with the best olympics.

On the other hand, those who think we're going to screw it up, like our Texan friend above seems to, are going to be proven completely wrong. It'll come together fantastically IMO in the world's greatest city.

Athens built iconic stadia but now have the problem of them being white elephants.

Can u name more than 1-2 stadia from a total of 20 which are not in use after the games??????

I don't know if that's the right attitude. "London doesn't have to prove anything". I mean it doesn't, but we wanted the olympics so we could put on a show and take the responsibility to make it as awesome as possible.

Er, no we didn't. London bid for the Games to regenerate a polluted corridor of east London, increase youth participation in sport throughout the UK and the world, and to leave a legacy of new 21st century sporting facilities that the local population can afford to look after and use.

Nowhere was it mentioned we were bidding for the Games simply to 'make London's the best'.

Can u name more than 1-2 stadia from a total of 20 which are not in use after the games??????

They might be in use, but there are rarely full except for a few events a year, and I expect a lot of them cost a hell of lot to maintain.

London doesn't need another 80,000 stadium. What it does need is a smaller more compact stadium that can be used many times throughout the year by the local people and can be maintained to a high standard by the local council, one of the most poverished in the UK. That's why after the Games the stadium is downsized to 25,000 and will become a dedicated athletics centre.

Seeing as it is being downsized mere weeks after the Games are over, it is not worth wasting money on an overt whistles and bells 80,000 seater stadium by an 'iconic' architect, when that money can be better spent on the legacy of the Olympic Park itself, or better seating for the permanent portion of the stadium. And anyway, the stadium is being designed with athletics in mind, as well as atmosphere inside the bowl during the Games. London's stadium will see so many world records broken because it's being designed to make it as easy as possible for that to happen; for example they've made sure (unlike Athens) that no wind can get into the centre of the stadium and cause drag on the runners.

It's not about showing off, it's about practicality, and making sure the local people can afford the upkeep of the Olympic venues after the games have gone.

Er, no we didn't. London bid for the Games to regenerate a polluted corridor of east London, increase youth participation in sport throughout the UK and the world, and to leave a legacy of new 21st century sporting facilities that the local population can afford to look after and use.

Nowhere was it mentioned we were bidding for the Games simply to 'make London's the best'.

Alright, but it was given to us because people had faith that we would make it so. If we don't make it a great show then OK we'll still have the regeneration but we'd have let down the rest of the world and missed an opportunity to show off a little. Something we don't do enough IMO.

If it is purely to regenerate the area, then why not apply for the Olympics to be held in the areas in Wales or the North East that need help more than East London?

What's wrong with getting a little patriotic for a change?

They might be in use, but there are rarely full except for a few events a year, and I expect a lot of them cost a hell of lot to maintain.



I dont know any olympic venue in Barcelona or Sydney which was daily in use after the games.

The cost of Athens games is another story, called "Terrorism-hysteria".

By the way, I expected a better Olympic Stadium in London. Olympic stadia use to be symbols for every city, in some way indicate the history of each city. It would be preferable for me, to make some modifications to the new Wembley (an absolut amazing stadium), in order to host the athletics and the ceremonies, than to built a boring stadium, which will dissapear after the games.

If it is purely to regenerate the area, then why not apply for the Olympics to be held in the areas in Wales or the North East that need help more than East London?

Because the IOC said London was the only city in the UK capable of hosting an Olympics. Birmingham bid twice and Manchester once and won none, mainly because the IOC never took them seriously as bids.

Plus the area the Olympic Park is in borders three London boroughs that are in the top five most impoverished of the UK.

By the way, I expected a better Olympic Stadium in London. Olympic stadia use to be symbols for every city, in some way indicate the history of each city. It would be preferable for me, to make some modifications to the new Wembley (an absolut amazing stadium), in order to host the athletics and the ceremonies, than to built a boring stadium, which will dissapear after the games.

So you're saying London should just build an 80,000 iconic stadium which it doesn't need just for two weeks of Olympic Games? What happens after the Games? Do you just 'expect' the locals to pay for its upkeep and it's emptiness for 99% of the year?

And if you think a London games is not going to be as amazing as all the rest because the stadium isn't an architectural wonder then you are mad. London has enough symbols and is hosting enough events in iconic venues (more than Beijing, actually) that the games will be spectacular.

Wembley isn't viable as an Olympic stadium because it is too much hassle to transport the athletes from the Olympic village in Stratford all the way over to West London. Plus it doesn't leave an athletic legacy in east London which is the point of having an Olympics in east London.

So you're saying London should just build an 80,000 iconic stadium which it doesn't need just for two weeks of Olympic Games? What happens after the Games? Do you just 'expect' the locals to pay for its upkeep and it's emptiness for 99% of the year?

And if you think a London games is not going to be as amazing as all the rest because the stadium isn't an architectural wonder then you are mad. London has enough symbols and is hosting enough events in iconic venues (more than Beijing, actually) that the games will be spectacular.

Wembley isn't viable as an Olympic stadium because it is too much hassle to transport the athletes from the Olympic village in Stratford all the way over to West London. Plus it doesn't leave an athletic legacy in east London which is the point of having an Olympics in east London.

No, I am sure that London will organize an amazing olympics.
I think that London needs to give to the games a new icon, not in order to make city better, but to give its id to the Olympics, as Athens did and Beijing will do.

Athens olympic stadium actually had no need of a roof, or -better- no need of a calatrava roof. This stadium, roofless,hosted succesfully an IAAF world championship at 90's, and noone complained. The same could have been done in olympics, without a roof (Olympic stadium was roofless in candidacy after all) At least, Athens could have constructed a roof for the stadium with cost only 1/10 of the cost of the calatrava roof. But Athens spent money not only to make the stadium iconic, but to also give a symbol for its Olympics.

All i want to say is that London will host a great games, no matter of how the olympic stadium looks like. BUT, Greeks accepted to pay huge amounts just to give a stigma to their games. Why not Londoneers as well? just think how easier is to do so for a country like UK, comparing with the poorer Greece.

I think that London needs to give to the games a new icon, not in order to make city better, but to give its id to the Olympics, as Athens did and Beijing will do.

It does - the Aquatic Centre, which is staying as it is after the Games. But it will be giving to the Olympics more than architecture - it will be galvanising the youth of the world, and securing the Olympics future in the 21st century.


BUT, Greeks accepted to pay huge amounts just to give a stigma to their games. Why not Londoneers as well.

Because the UK is pretty much secure in itself not to worry about people thinking any less of them because they haven't got a wavy piece of architecture over its Olympic stadium. Who cares anyway? No-one is going to be watching the stadium but what goes on inside it - the actual events themselves. The Olympics has never been about iconic architecture, and yet in the last decade or so (or mainly since Athens) people now consider the architecture of the main stadium more important than the actual records broken or the needs of the athletes competing inside them. Which is totally the wrong way to be thinking about the Olympic Games and what they are trying to achieve. London's games won't be as in your face or flashy as Beijing's, and thank god for that. London's Games will be understated, humble and much more in tune with the original Olympic roots and ideals.

It does - the Aquatic Centre, which is staying as it is after the Games. But it will be giving to the Olympics more than architecture - it will be galvanising the youth of the world, and securing the Olympics future in the 21st century.



Because the UK is pretty much secure in itself not to worry about people thinking any less of them because they haven't got a wavy piece of architecture over its Olympic stadium. Who cares anyway? No-one is going to be watching the stadium but what goes on inside it - the actual events themselves. The Olympics has never been about iconic architecture, and yet in the last decade or so (or mainly since Athens) people now consider the architecture of the main stadium more important than the actual records broken or the needs of the athletes competing inside them. Which is totally the wrong way to be thinking about the Olympic Games and what they are trying to achieve. London's games won't be as in your face or flashy as Beijing's, and thank god for that. London's Games will be understated, humble and much more in tune with the original Olympic roots and ideals.

^^ :lol::lol::lol: Please don't act you know everything.

At Ancient Olympics:
Myths say Heracles was the creator of the Olympic Games, and built the Olympic stadium and surrounding buildings as an honor to his father Zeus, another word it is a monument to his father.

Fast forward to Modern Olympic:
The very first modern Olympic Games way back in 1896, the Greek government had been unable to fund construction of a stadium, a wealthy Greek architect, Georgios Averoff, donated one million drachmas to restore the Panathenaic Stadium. Because his understand it is a monument to the God.

Olympic is a time to celebrate humanity, do the best you can do. It is what the Olympic motto stand for: Citius, Altius, Fortius (Faster, Higher, Stronger). It stand for do it better that the last one, it is nothing humble about the original Olympic.

London's Games will be understated, humble and much more in tune with the original Olympic roots and ideals.

... then the London 2012 Logo was a great start!! :lol: sorry for that be it had to be

As about how humble the London Olympics will be... ( i dont know why you think those Games wil be so humble): is there something more humble and in tune with the original roots then to stage the olympics in their home country? is there something more symbolic of olympism then the Athens 2004 Logo? Something more humble then to compete in Ancient Olympia and at the original Marathon Root? Something more human-interlinking as the first global torch relay ever? An Opening Ceremony that starts with a heartbeat and ends with an olympic cauldron which moves down to the athlete to get lit as a symbol of respect to athletism and humanity?

Patriotism doesnt excludes decency, pride doesnt excludes humbleness, Olympism doesnt excludes the creation of great architecture.

As for Athens being mainly the first to concider architecture more important then the actual records broken or the needs of the athletes competing inside them:

That shows that you are very young or dont know much about the Olympic Games of the past. Munich and Montreal build 3 decades before iconic Olympic Stadiums for the Games. As for the needs of tzhe Athletes competing inside of them; for this one there are the International Federations which approve the venues. In Athens all Federations were excited about the venues, the proof: we had 54 new world records in Athens.

As for the London Olympics: i am very excited about them. i already volunteered, the Olympic Park will be wonderfull. Even if i hate the Logo (a disgrace in my opinion), even if i dont like the fact that the Olympic Stadium has a "circus tent" charakter i am looking forward to those games.

Darjole you make to many excuses. Its shite. admit it.

Yaaahhhhhhhhoooo!! :banana::banana::banana:

I'll be there in time for the Olympics :banana::banana::banana:

Darjole you make to many excuses. Its shite. admit it.

Come back to me in 2013 after the Games when it's hosted the best olympics ever and turned quickly and efficiently into its legacy mode and say that.

And the only reason I defend its design is because people seem to be too stupid to understand the reason it is designed the way it is.

r u freekin kiddin me with the new design. its effin appauling. to be honest i would rather paris host the olypics because frankly the already compleded stade de france is better than this expensive heap of shite. people watching this years olympics will think

"wow look at that stadium, next years will be even better aswell! cant imagine it..."

you only need to say to them

"dont bother using your imagination you'll only be let down''

its just so dissapointing. And the whole dismantling it and giving bits to the people who attended. thats the worst thing about this...people will feel privelaged to keep a piece of it to remember forever.

ugh it makes me sick!

It's not about showing off, it's about practicality, and making sure the local people can afford the upkeep of the Olympic venues after the games have gone.

So why London had bid with an absolut spectacular olympic stadium design? I believe that one of the main reasons that London was the choice of 2012, was the iconic olympic stadium, unlike the so booooooring stade de France of paris. But then when the new design was presented, almost everybody all over the world, was dissapointed.:ohno::ohno::ohno:

That's simply not true. The vision of the Olympic Park shown to the IOC in 2005 was nothing more than a rough idea of what a park could look like in London. There hadn't even been a competition for the venues then. Everyone voting knew that.

look. london doesn't need another massive iconic stadium. if one was built solely for the olympics it would be an appalling waste of time, effort, and money. the one proposed will be more than adequate. besides, what about the spectacular olympic park surroundings? it will be an incredible experience and atmosphere to be there in 2012. doesn't the rest of the site count? the whole package, including the regeneration of a run down area, is more important than the stadium's exterior design. sort yourselves out, people! the olympics is an event, not a stadium.

perhaps also this is what make the 2012 olympics different from other olympics - less flashiness, more of a pragmatic approach - but still the same human spirit and togetherness that is the olympics. maybe every olympics event should strive to be as suited to the needs of the host city as possible? make each one a bit more unique maybe.

Why do you even bother DarJole?This thread is full of angry 13yos and its pointless debating with them.

Looks like karma is biting someone in the buttocks.

The irony seeing some of the usual suspects that go trolling in other threads getting the same crap they dish out here.

I'm not disappointed with the stadium design, and the olympic park in general looks great. All I'm saying is that it would be great if we, as a country, could be a little more patriotic every now and again. We're a fantastic country and London is a fantastic city, so why can't we use the olympics as a chance to show off a little bit? We never do normally!

The UK and London doesn't need to show off - everyone all over the globe knows what London is like. It doesn't need to prove anything.

The stadium is designed the way it is because the outer sections of it will be taken apart after the Games, because London doesn't need another 80,000 spectator stadium. London will be the first Olympics where there will be no white elephants after the Games have left London.

What makes you think Sydney has 'white elephants'? The venues are used for all matter of events. These venues are making money so hardly the white elephants you suggest. London will not be the first.

Sydney did develop some temporary structures as is being suggested in the London plan, this can help minimise the white elephant syndrome.

The only real "white elephant" that I can think of in Sydney is the airport rail link. And that's largely because a private firm constructed it, and now charge an astronomical amount for using it. The stadium is used quite often though, as is the Aquatic centre. Maybe the velodrome and shooting range aren't, I'm not sure, you never really hear about them these days.

Not really. Sydney, Athens and Beijing were all trying to push themselves further onto the world stage through their Olympic Games. Athens built iconic stadia but now have the problem of them being white elephants. Beijing are building permanent iconic venues because China is using the Olympics as a 'coming out' process to be the new superpower and needs these venues. London is pioneering legacy and building venues for their use after the Games and not during, that's why the aquatic centre and stadium have temporary seats during the Games.

London isn't building an 'iconic' stadium because it's not using its Olympics to push itself on the world stage - it's already there. Also the stadium won't exist as a 80,000 seater after the Games so isn't wasting money on building something flamboyant that is only there for a few weeks.

As has been said before (and which so many people seem to be unable to understand) is that the London Games are not going to be anything to do with patriotism, London or Britain in an overt way, but more returning the Olympic movement to its understated humble beginnings, and not the architectural nationalistic-hijacking that it has become in the last twenty years or so. This games is all about the youth from all over the world and getting them interested in the Olympic movement, which is why the logo and the 2012 brand is the way it is, and why there will be so many kids in the Beijing handover ceremony and at the opening ceremony. London is re-inventing what an Olympic Games is all about.

This is very accurate. Athens and Beijing were cultural powerhouses at one point in time but had, by and then for the better part of the modern era, descended into provincial backwater status in parallel to the countries they represent. Both cities -- especially Beijing -- were awarded the games as a way to announce the transformation that has taken place over the last quarter century. As such, pomp and flourish are essential in promoting the national agenda, the success or failure of which, though hinging on the Games themselves, tends to overshadow their original purpose: celebrating individualism in the context of goodwill and good-natured competition. After Athens, the media focused on how Greece surprised everyone with such a good show. This fall, if everything goes according to plan, it will be how advanced and developed China is.

As far as re-inventing what the Olympics are all about, I'm not so sure. It seems like the Olympic Committee will be favoring other nations on the model of Greece and China in the future, "rewarding" those that have similarly transformed. Rio, Doha and Baku have all garnered significant attention, and Delhi, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur have expressed great interest in hosting the Games in the future.

This is very accurate. Athens and Beijing were cultural powerhouses at one point in time but had, by and then for the better part of the modern era, descended into provincial backwater status in parallel to the countries they represent. Both cities -- especially Beijing -- were awarded the games as a way to announce the transformation that has taken place over the last quarter century. As such, pomp and flourish are essential in promoting the national agenda, the success or failure of which, though hinging on the Games themselves, tends to overshadow their original purpose: celebrating individualism in the context of goodwill and good-natured competition. After Athens, the media focused on how Greece surprised everyone with such a good show. This fall, if everything goes according to plan, it will be how advanced and developed China is.

As far as re-inventing what the Olympics are all about, I'm not so sure. It seems like the Olympic Committee will be favoring other nations on the model of Greece and China in the future, "rewarding" those that have similarly transformed. Rio, Doha and Baku have all garnered significant attention, and Delhi, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur have expressed great interest in hosting the Games in the future.


I think that Athens, London and Beijing won the bid of the games because they had the best candidacies. Buenos Aires and Cape Town, for example, had bid also for 2004. It would be a good opportunity for IOC to give the games to these cities, just to proove how advanced and developped they are, but I dont think that this is the matter of the games. If u want my opinion, Athens won the bid race not only because had the best candidacy (between Rome, Cape Town etc etc) but also because the IOC owed it to Athens, after the 1996 fiasco of Flatlanta. Beijing also won because had the best bid among the others, but this will not change the fact that the human rights in China are in a medieval condition.

especially Beijing -- were awarded the games as a way to announce the transformation that has taken place over the last quarter century. As such, pomp and flourish are essential in promoting the national agenda, the success or failure of which, though hinging on the Games themselves...

I don't agree with you there. Showing off the transformation of a nation and city is part of the benefit it come with hosting the game. But even Beijing fail to host a good game....do we think China and Beijing isn't a power-house and world class city anymore.... Same go for London Olympic. London is London - even it fail to host a good Olympic game, nobody will think anything less about London. Do you think the world will using double standard look at UK and China?

My point is: The outcome of this game sure won't change London on anyway, but Londoner can take this opportunity to show the best of London to the world, somebody in Malawi or middle of Dakota may never see. Do London and UK really care that few million pounds more just for better show and better building, it isn't too late to call Lord Forest for some help??

What makes you think Sydney has 'white elephants'? The venues are used for all matter of events. These venues are making money so hardly the white elephants you suggest. London will not be the first.

Sydney did develop some temporary structures as is being suggested in the London plan, this can help minimise the white elephant syndrome.

Sydney does have some of its minor venues facing issues wrt to its use. BUT apart from an equestrian stadium or a rowing course..the games in sydney still remain IMO the best ever, in a a balance between venues, organization and other factors.

wrt to the olympic stadium concept in the 2005 bid for london 2012. it was just that..a CONCEPT..like the fencing arena and velodrome and temporary halls..they were all just concepts and not designs.

Can u name more than 1-2 stadia from a total of 20 which are not in use after the games??????

www.olympicproperties.gr

The bid proposals for Olympic Stadiums often never come to light - - and are subject to change.

The original Stadium Australia plan during the Sydney 2000 bid campaign from 1991-1993:
http://www.crawford.com.au/projectpictures/sport_olympic_2.jpg

^^ It looks more like the Athens Olympic stadium.


What was actually built for the 2000 Olympics:
http://www.panstadia.com/vol6/64c-big.jpg

And what it looks like now:
http://home.iprimus.com.au/dantm/stad/TelstraStadium2004.jpg

It looks simply like a more "economical" version of the same stadium, more realistic. The temporary seats, after removed, gave place to the rest of the covering, which is probably better for the after-use.
England has major sports venues because it participates in almost all of the categories: rugby, football (soccer), tennis, and so on. I don't think an Olympic Stadium ever becomes a white elephant; it could host a sports team of its own, as long as they can draw massive ammounts of people to their games. Also, London could profit from temporary (or even "mobile") structures, such as Sydney's.
Anyhow, the new design may not seem as state-of-the-art as the first, but imagine that stadium for 80K people! Must be a truely amazing sight!
As a comparison: Barcelona's Olympic Stadium is still there, and the park surrounding it is one of the city's main tour spots. I think London will do fine with whatever it does.

www.olympicproperties.gr

As you see in the link u posted the sport venues are already in use and some of them are going to change their use in the near future.

As you see in the link u posted the sport venues are already in use and some of them are going to change their use in the near future.

My point was that Athens did face a significant challenge with white elephants in comparison to Sydney, or we would not see a list of so many venues, searching for tenants. They were only able to search for tenants/owners for some of the venues after the games, having to accept some proposals for commercial activities at the venues, which impacts on the sporting legacy after the games.

So what's your problem with Athens venues? Most of Athens venues host sport activities, are in continuous use and will remain in sport use for the city of Athens and major athenean teams (Olympic Stadium, Velodrome, Aquatic Center, Athens tennis Academy, Indoor Olympic Arena, Peace and Friendship Stadium, Karaiskaki soccer Stadium, etc.) For the rest of the state of the art venues, which are no more useful as sport venues after the games, there are already tenants for all of them, except 1-2 with minor capacity. Some of them are planned very soon to be commercial centers, museums, some other will be Universities (Nikea Weightlifting Center will be a part of University of Piraeus and Ano Liossia venue will be the Academy of Arts of Athens), another one will be the Athens Metropolitan Conference Center (Tae kwo ndo venue)..
The matter is that all of them will supply the nesessities of Athens in infrastucture (and certainly before Beijing olympics) and no one of them will remain a white elephant.

So what's your problem with Athens venues? Most of Athens venues host sport activities, are in continuous use and will remain in sport use for the city of Athens and major athenean teams (Olympic Stadium, Velodrome, Aquatic Center, Athens tennis Academy, Indoor Olympic Arena, Peace and Friendship Stadium, Karaiskaki soccer Stadium, etc.) For the rest of the state of the art venues, which are no more useful as sport venues after the games, there are already tenants for all of them, except 1-2 with minor capacity. Some of them are planned very soon to be commercial centers, museums, some other will be Universities (Nikea Weightlifting Center will be a part of University of Piraeus and Ano Liossia venue will be the Academy of Arts of Athens), another one will be the Athens Metropolitan Conference Center (Tae kwo ndo venue)..
The matter is that all of them will supply the nesessities of Athens in infrastucture (and certainly before Beijing olympics) and no one of them will remain a white elephant.

I have no problem with the venues. But I do believe that a future use/legacy should be found before the Games rather than after. All of them will eventually find a use, but after the Games many of them were essentially white elephants.

I have no problem with the venues. But I do believe that a future use/legacy should be found before the Games rather than after. All of them will eventually find a use, but after the Games many of them were essentially white elephants.

Ok. I agree. Just inform me in how many years after the games, a use/legacy for all the venues of Barcelona and Sydney was found.

stunning

The bigger point though is Londoners won't accept any of the newly built Olympic venues becoming white elephants for any length of time. The press will be out for blood if after the Games the permanent venues haven't found a private owner or tenant.

The Labour Government were burned incredibly badly by the fiasco over the Millennium Dome, and it took six years for it to finally be turned into a profit making venue, and there is no-one in the UK who will accept that length of time paying for the upkeep of an Olympic venue.

However the Olympic organisers are looking at spending 2010-2012 to find private investors to take over ownership of the downsized stadium, aquatic centre and velopark. With the other venues temporary, London will hopefully have no white elephants for any length of time after the Games.

Unfortunatley people don't seem to be getting it Darjole. When the London games come, and have been and gone, people may just realise that London had changed the Olympic movement for the better.

stunning

I don't mean to sound rude here, but whenever you comment, you simply write something like 'stunning' or 'beautiful! Amazing!' - why not ask a question, or say that you hate something? You don't have to write the same thing again and again.

And the media in Britain will absolutely slaughter the government if anything, even the slightest thing, goes wrong. There'll be constant comparison between London and some other city that's hosted (probably European continental) with a running commentary about how 'they do it better' because their 'health and education system aren't as 3rd world as Britain's' and 'don't let in as many immigrants'. The story will be published over and over with as many angles to insights as the press can give, until, eventually, no one gives a shit anymore.

It's just the nature of the beast.

amazing

I don't mean to sound rude here, but whenever you comment, you simply write something like 'stunning' or 'beautiful! Amazing!' - why not ask a question, or say that you hate something? You don't have to write the same thing again and again.

And the media in Britain will absolutely slaughter the government if anything, even the slightest thing, goes wrong. There'll be constant comparison between London and some other city that's hosted (probably European continental) with a running commentary about how 'they do it better' because their 'health and education system aren't as 3rd world as Britain's' and 'don't let in as many immigrants'. The story will be published over and over with as many angles to insights as the press can give, until, eventually, no one gives a shit anymore.

It's just the nature of the beast.

So do French, I can see what do the French thinking if the Brit fail to host a good game :lol::lol:

The bigger point though is Londoners won't accept any of the newly built Olympic venues becoming white elephants for any length of time. The press will be out for blood if after the Games the permanent venues haven't found a private owner or tenant.

The Labour Government were burned incredibly badly by the fiasco over the Millennium Dome, and it took six years for it to finally be turned into a profit making venue, and there is no-one in the UK who will accept that length of time paying for the upkeep of an Olympic venue.

However the Olympic organisers are looking at spending 2010-2012 to find private investors to take over ownership of the downsized stadium, aquatic centre and velopark. With the other venues temporary, London will hopefully have no white elephants for any length of time after the Games.

DarJoLe I totally see your point, and the Millennium Dome is just bad from the start. But if you plan ahead...it is possible to avoid white elephants. Like the Chinese, if you go check out the Chinese venues, a lot of them are inside a university, After the game it will become university's own gymnasium. Two will stay as nation's stadium and aquatic center, one will turn back to convention center, all other left is those shooting range, beach ball court, tennis court, baseball park and a rowing-canoe park... it won't be any white elephants.

So Beijing Athens had to show off?? Anyone knows that Athens is the historic capital of Europe and has an incredible history and monuments, anyone knows how glorious and historic city Beijing is as well. The cities that host the OG have nothing to proove to the world, are already famous and world wide known. And exactly because everyone all over the globe knows what London is like, that's why everyone expected a state of art design for the main olympic stadium..

there was nothing state of the art about Atlanta,Sydney or athens stadiums.It's about the quality of the sport i.e the athletes they are the ones who determine the games and also the spectators.

stunning

Indeed, Indeed. You are straight to the point, and yet wonderfully descriptive. There are just so many levels on which this post works. Keep them coming please.

I heard that London wants to make this the "greenest" olympics to date.

Asking this question 3 years down the road after London won the 2012 bid might be a little bit redundant, but I simply can't help it. Why bother having the games if U are not willing to bear the cost and make so much noise about it?

Olympic has never been a modest affair in the past, nor that it will ever be in the future. No matter how u sugar-coat it, there is nothing "sustainable" about spending billions of dollar for an essentially, a 10-day circus (not when millions in Africa and Asia still live in abject poverty). So my point is, since London is already bounded by contractual obligation to host the games, might as well make a great statement out of it. Show the world that London too can be at the forefront of design and architecture. After all, this is the home of architectural luminaries such as Zaha Hadid, Norman Fosters and Richard Rogers.

At this moment, it seems that the British authority and Londoners are so eager to downgrade, downsize and downplay the importance of this great event. Cities like Beijing and Barcelona already sets the precedent and expectation of how olympic should looks and feels like. If London give anything less than that, then the London games will be remembered for all the wrong reason.

im sure it will be ok..we are spending about £5 billion on it..its hardly scrimping si it?:lol:

HVsdb7FUqxw

This logo means London, different in shapes, colors and cultures, it is an unforgetable...
Is it really true that the make of this logo is worth 400,000 pounds? I heard that most of the Londoners were angry/upset by this.[/QUOTE]

Is it really true that the make of this logo is worth 400,000 pounds? I heard that most of the Londoners were angry/upset by this.

The £400,000 was for the entire cost of the design for the brand of London 2012, as in the logos, fonts, design and entire rebranding of the old London 2012 bid design. That's pretty good value for the amount of work done by the branding company, but most Londoners don't understand how the design world works and consider that a lot of money, even though other companies have been rebranded costing much much more money.

Also many complained it was a waste of their tax money, even though the rebranding was paid for by LOCOG, whose budget comes from private sponsors and not the public taxes, which is what the ODA have to deal with.

There was a big backlash against the London Olympics which they still haven't recovered from, I still try to this day wonder why it was such a backlash over a logo, considering how successful it has been in attracting sponsors and shows it is an incredibly interesting and adaptable as well as memorable logo over the last six months. I guess it's because the Brits still don't really understand what this Olympic Games is trying to achieve in the long run.

That's pretty good value for the amount of work done by the branding company
:cheer::cheer::cheer::cheer::cheer::cheer::rofl::rofl::rofl:

No, it really is. As someone who works in a branding agency I should know how much it costs for a company to be rebranded.

I don't doubt for the work in generall. But for this ugly and pointless logo, the amount of £400,000 is sourrealistic.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2284/2204648936_f479a393ec_b.jpg

^^^^
woop!

Can't we move this one to the Sports Arena section?

There was a big backlash against the London Olympics which they still haven't recovered from, I still try to this day wonder why it was such a backlash over a logo, considering how successful it has been in attracting sponsors and shows it is an incredibly interesting and adaptable as well as memorable logo over the last six months. I guess it's because the Brits still don't really understand what this Olympic Games is trying to achieve in the long run.

This is utterly condescending. You don't need to have a HND in Design or whatever to be able to tell whether a brand/logo looks good or not. Unfortunately, the brand designers seem to think that only Starbucks-sipping Islington bohemes are the only ones worth pandering to by designing a logo that most Londoners will dislike. I guess it makes them feel more enlightened than everybody else.

Darjole you dont half talk some crap! I was involved in advertising. Something that simple does not cost £400,000. If they appointed a single company to work on a logo it would've cost no more the £10,00 to design something.

^^
i disagree.

they designed the whole london 2012 brand, if your in advertising you should know how big of a deal that is. £400,000 is a decent price for a new worldwide brand which will be seen by billions of spectators. It may look like a simple logo, but the whole brand design is not simple.
http://www.wolffolins.com/london2012.php just look on that link and see how the brand is going to be used. And for people who complain about the logo itself:
It did not asked to be liked, already it has been a very successful logo in how much talk and publicity it has achieved. This is what the logo means: "Our Games will be for everyone."
"Our emblem is simple, distinct, bold and buzzing with energy.
Its form is inclusive yet consistent and has incredible flexibility to encourage access and participation.
It can communicate with anyone from commercial organisations to kids playing sport.". Hopefully we'll never see a rubbish "paint stroke" logo again after 2012. this brand is memorable and modern.

What was your involvement, flog mol? The guy who makes the coffee?

What was your involvement, flog mol? The guy who makes the coffee?

lmao!

I dont like it, seems like humanity is stepping backward....or just Beijing is too far advanced.......

^^
I disagree

Darjole you dont half talk some crap! I was involved in advertising. Something that simple does not cost £400,000. If they appointed a single company to work on a logo it would've cost no more the £10,00 to design something. You just don't listen. It's a brand, not just a logo.

You just don't listen. It's a brand, not just a logo.

Maybe you need to ask yourself, why so many people here feel the same way...maybe it is the LOCOG not listening!!

it's usless arguing because all most people want to do is knock the games in any shape or form.If you don't like it don't post end of.It winds me up when people knock it if it was the world cup coming then everyone would be saying yeah great bring it on.But no not the olympics which is regenerating a deprived area and leaving a lasting legacy the world cup won't bring that apart from some hooligans people do not make sense at times they talk before thinking

Huh! who says I was involved? I said "I was once involved in advertising" nothing to do with this and many years ago and NO! ... its a logo. Not a brand! The brand is the olympics. NOT THE LOGO! the LOGO cost $800,000 ... THINK ABOUT IT.

The brand will be branded with the LOGO.

The brand will be branded with the LOGO.

Which shows you know nothing behind this project, nor the concept of branding itself.

Go to the london2012.com website and look beyond the logo - the colours used, the animation, the shapes and the 'style' of the wording, the way text is written and the overall message that London 2012 is trying to get across. In 2012, you'll be instantly able to recognise something to do with London 2012 without the need for the logo.

That is called a 'brand'. That's what Wolf Ollins designed and cost £400,000. The logo was a small part of this. The brand is what encompasses the whole package.

so there going to have a new logo?

^^
No! Definitely not.
Read back a couple of posts please.

Which shows you know nothing behind this project, nor the concept of branding itself.

Go to the london2012.com website and look beyond the logo - the colours used, the animation, the shapes and the 'style' of the wording, the way text is written and the overall message that London 2012 is trying to get across. In 2012, you'll be instantly able to recognise something to do with London 2012 without the need for the logo.

That is called a 'brand'. That's what Wolf Ollins designed and cost £400,000. The logo was a small part of this. The brand is what encompasses the whole package.

As one of the biggest supporters of these Games, I think the brand and logo are shit! Regardless of the price tag or "aim" of the highly awful job they've done. It really is just depends on the opinion of each and every person, but this time round I'm on the side of the large majority that believe that the logo and brand is a total mess up. It might just be unforgettable for all the wrong reasons.

so there going to have a new logo?

Yes, six months after launching and having the logo plastered over half of London they're going to spend another £400,000 designing another brand.

Jees.

that believe that the logo and brand is a total mess up.

Why why why!? The brand and logo sets out everything 2012 wanted to achieve. It fits the brief PERFECTLY and the fact that every sponsor that has come on board has been able to take the logo and rejig it to their brand guidelines shows how successful a design it is.

I still for the life of me don't understand the whole furore over it. There are far more weirder looking logos out there and many, many more that are far worse (you only have to look at the ones submitted by the public) in terms of flexibility and instant recognition.

I can't grasp why people see it as a mess. Is it the fact it doesn't have a Big Ben on it, or is the fact isn't the Union Jack, or what? The brand colours are vibrant and youthful, the logo has energy and buzz, it's flexible across all media and it projects the image of what the London Olympic Games will be about....so why do so many keep saying it's a disaster?

I back up everything DarJoLe is saying.:)

Its great that sponsors and LOCOG are happy, but its still failed to capture the imagination of the people. I can understand that they have tried very hard, but perhaps its all the trying that has resulted in the logo mess. It looks totally out of place and without class in some of those velodrome interior images. I'm sure the venue overlay and branding will be bearable, but from those boards around the construction site, they've messed that up too.

As somebody has said before. Old people designing something they thought the youth would like.

Bear in mind this is just my opinion. They certainly haven't reached any balance between youthfulness, flexibility and "buzz". Heck even the word "London" is too tiny.

Anyway this is an old topic.
[/QUOTE]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2275/2183569665_0bcb486d2b_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2038/2183571369_8de97c285a_b.jpg

I like the look of the Velodrome, it's simple and is harmonious with the aquatic center.

I like the look of the Velodrome, it's simple and is harmonious with the aquatic center.

thats just the design team that won. not the final design.

Oh, ok^^

Its great that sponsors and LOCOG are happy, but its still failed to capture the imagination of the people. I can understand that they have tried very hard, but perhaps its all the trying that has resulted in the logo mess. It looks totally out of place and without class in some of those velodrome interior images. I'm sure the venue overlay and branding will be bearable, but from those boards around the construction site, they've messed that up too.

As somebody has said before. Old people designing something they thought the youth would like.

Bear in mind this is just my opinion. They certainly haven't reached any balance between youthfulness, flexibility and "buzz". Heck even the word "London" is too tiny.

Anyway this is an old topic.
[/QUOTE]

Just from the design point of view, if I don't know anything about it, I will think it is a Sydney or some Australia city Olympic game, because the "zero" look like Australia and the use of font. a normal Joe won't look at this logo and connect it with UK.

Look back at the logo of Sydney, Athens and even the Beijing one (Beijing isn't as good as Sydney and Athens but still not bad), those logo even without the city name you still can guess what county hosting the game...but without the word "London" this logo have no nationality at all.

thats just the design team that won. not the final design.

Er...yes it is.

I took those photos.

Heck even the word "London" is too tiny.


Actually if there's one thing I would change I would take off the word 'London'. It doesn't need it.

what were some of the other logo concepts?

Yeah.
Without 'London' you won't recognise the hosting city.
There are plenty of other vibrant cities, like Rio, Madrid, Singapore and Sydney that this logo can be attributed to.
And what's with that square in the middle of the logo?
And anyway, this thread is getting off topic.

Ok, so what Arenas/Stadiums are already built for 2012 Olympics, What Arenas/Stadiums are under construction, What Arenas/Stadiums are approved and what arenas/stadiums are still waiting to be designed?

Ok, so what Arenas/Stadiums are already built for 2012 Olympics, What Arenas/Stadiums are under construction, What Arenas/Stadiums are approved and what arenas/stadiums are still waiting to be designed?
i want to know too!

Er...yes it is.

I took those photos.
er.

Velopark industry day, june 2007 ...." We will be appointing a design team NOT a design."

Ok, so what Arenas/Stadiums are already built for 2012 Olympics, What Arenas/Stadiums are under construction, What Arenas/Stadiums are approved and what arenas/stadiums are still waiting to be designed?

built already wimbledon for the tennis,the excel centre for Boxing, Judo, Table Tennis, Taekwondo, Weightlifting, Wrestling, Boccia, Paralympic Table Tennis, Paralympic Powerlifting, Wheelchair Basketball(the excel centre has four arena's for use).The O2 arena for the gymnastics and basketball,lords cricket ground for the archery,Football at Wembley Stadium, Old Trafford, Millennium Stadium, St James’s Park, Hampden Park, Villa Park,Vollyball at Earls Court,Eton Dorney for Rowing and Flatwater Canoe/Kayak, Paralympic Rowing and thats the already exsisting venues for the olympics so you can see london is already well advanced than most other host cities.

now the new venues that will be permanent(scaled down after the games)The olympic stadium the velodrome and the aquatic centre,

Heres some of the venues:

The o2 (formally known as millenium dome) will host basketball and some other sports:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Millennium_Dome.jpg

Main London Olympic Stadium (U/C)
This will be the main stadia for the 2012 olympics:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/London_Olympic_Stadium_%28Nov_2007%29.jpg

Another world class sport stadia, Wembley Arena (already built 2007):
http://www.staynl.com/travelpictures/london/new-wembley.jpg

The Aquatics centre, (U/C), designed by world class architect Zaha Hadid:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/Aquatics_Centre_Games-time4-EDIT.jpg

^^
This is what the logo means: "Our Games will be for everyone."
"Our emblem is simple, distinct, bold and buzzing with energy.
Its form is inclusive yet consistent and has incredible flexibility to encourage access and participation.
It can communicate with anyone from commercial organisations to kids playing sport."

This could be the moto for Barcelona, Athens and Sydney logos as well. I don't see why it suits more to the London logo than to the Barca-Athens-Sydney logos. London needs something more inspired than a frame to put pics of the city inside.

Ive had enough of the logo bullshit now. Can we just get back to the topic?

what does the stadium look like under the o2

Who is the architect that designed the Olympic Stadium?? I am quite disappointed whit it. Why architects like the great Sir Norman Foster or Richard Rogers didn't make the project of the stadium??

Its the democracy of the way the games chooses architects not in a competition but who can deliver apparently? yes agree looks shit and should of been thrown out as a bad concept. Unfortunately this is what we are going to get unless someone at the olympic authority actually listens to the majority of opinion on this stadiums design.

The Olympic Stadium doesn't have to look good... it's only a temporary structure that will largely be removed after the Games.

I'm not sure about the Aquatics Centre though? Is that also temporary?

The Olympic Stadium doesn't have to look good... it's only a temporary structure that will largely be removed after the Games.


Why it has to be ugly? Because it is temporary? The first design was also to be temporary but was amazing...

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_01/olympic2DM_468x263.jpg

Well, if it's not temporary then I have no idea as to why the stadium is really bland :dunno:

I dont think it's 'bland', it's just simple and clean-looking.
personally i think they should of gone with something more vivid and raw-looking (to match the logo), but i suppose in 20 years time the current design will still have its simplicity as to something really unique.
who knows.. maybe the design may be altered a bit.

It is temporary, it's only the carved out bowl that is staying. Seeing as the rest of it is only there for a month there's no point wasting money on an extravagent design when that money can be better spent on the landscaping of the park which is permanent.

I wouldn't say it is bland, especially when it will have the wrap of artwork around it, which no other Olympic stadium has had. One of the other main reasons it's a minimal design is because it uses a small amount of steel, which is expected to become incredibly expensive over the next few years.

The Aquatic Centre is permanent, although it will have temporary seating in parts that will be removed after the Games.

Chief architect Rod Sheard, of HoK Sport, said the stadium would make a big impact, but not in the same way that previous Olympic stadia had.

"This is not a stadium that's going to be screaming from the rooftops that it's bigger and more spectacular," he said. "This is just a cleverer building. This is a cleverer solution."

Chief architect Rod Sheard

He added that the ability to convert the stadium from an 80,000-seater venue to a 25,000 one once the Olympics and Paralympics had finished was highly innovative and showed great forward thinking.

"We've ended up with a very tight, very compelling bowl," said Sheard. "The atmosphere inside this bowl, we think, will be pretty special."

HOK Sport is a firm of architects with a proven record for designing sporting venues.

It has been responsible for such projects as Wembley Stadium, the Millennium Stadium, the O2 Arena, the Emirates Stadium and Ascot Racecourse.
read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/7081346.stm

HOK Sport also is the architect for the 2000 Sydney Olympic stadium too... that one look much better (part of Sydney stadium also temporary too.)

As one of the biggest supporters of these Games, I think the brand and logo are shit! Regardless of the price tag or "aim" of the highly awful job they've done. It really is just depends on the opinion of each and every person, but this time round I'm on the side of the large majority that believe that the logo and brand is a total mess up. It might just be unforgettable for all the wrong reasons.

What would you prefer exactly?

can we not start a big fucking logo rant again? please.

Its great that sponsors and LOCOG are happy, but its still failed to capture the imagination of the people. I can understand that they have tried very hard, but perhaps its all the trying that has resulted in the logo mess. It looks totally out of place and without class in some of those velodrome interior images. I'm sure the venue overlay and branding will be bearable, but from those boards around the construction site, they've messed that up too.

As somebody has said before. Old people designing something they thought the youth would like.

Bear in mind this is just my opinion. They certainly haven't reached any balance between youthfulness, flexibility and "buzz". Heck even the word "London" is too tiny.

Anyway this is an old topic.


What would capture the publics imagination? Something stoic and average perhaps.

Who is the architect that designed the Olympic Stadium?? I am quite disappointed whit it. Why architects like the great Sir Norman Foster or Richard Rogers didn't make the project of the stadium??

Because we do not need a permanent costly stadium as London already has many. It is already a major, major sporting city. All we need is a structure that can last a few weeks, and then be significantly downscaled.

More images of wembley arena.
http://www.hoksport.com/images/hok_sport/sportprojects/wembley/main_1.jpg
http://www.hoksport.com/images/hok_sport/sportprojects/wembley/main_5.jpg
HOK Sport designed Wembley and have designed the Olympic Stadium, so we can be sure of good quality.

Why are they not simply using Wembley?

^^Probably because it's not central London and theres not enough space for all the other venues/olympic vilage.
i guess they needed to regenerate the Olympic site anyway..

Why are they not simply using Wembley?

Because London bid for the Olympics with the reasoning of building an Olympic Park in East London to regenerate a massive swath of derelict polluted land and riverways cutting through its heart. The new Wembley Stadium has already provided the impetus to regenerate its surroundings with a masterplan by Rogers.

Having the Olympic stadium and Park in Stratford in East London means it is only 7 minutes away from Central London via the high speed Channel Tunnel rail link, which forms the backbone for the transport to and from the site.

Chief architect Rod Sheard, of HoK Sport, said the stadium would make a big impact, but not in the same way that previous Olympic stadia had.

"This is not a stadium that's going to be screaming from the rooftops that it's bigger and more spectacular," he said. "This is just a cleverer building. This is a cleverer solution."

^^

Thank God the Chinese are not so "clever" with their stadia design. Otherwise Beijing 2008 would be as just as mundane.:nuts:

Version 1

http://www.tate.org.uk/40artists40days/artworks/zaha_hadid/Aquatic_Zaha_Hadid.jpg
http://www.thomas-uebelacker.de/upload/aquatics_centre01.jpg

Version 2

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/06/magazine_olympic_architect_zaha_hadid/img/1.jpg
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/gallery/media/Paralympics3.jpg
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours/gallery/media/Paralympics4.jpg

Version 3

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/web/j/y/x/aquatics_pic_2.jpg
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/web/t/p/w/aquatics_pic_5.jpg
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/web/q/i/s/aquatics_pic_4.jpg
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/web/c/k/k/aquatics_pic_3.jpg
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/web/l/j/o/aquatics_pic_1.jpg






Bellyflop: Zaha Hadid's reworked Aquatic Centre disappoints - images

28 January, 2008

By Rory Olcayto

As revealed by BD in November, Zaha Hadid’s Aquatic Centre now includes two temporary stands.

The temporary seating stands – to be removed after the Games have a ten year lifespan but the Olympic Deliver Authority expects them to be reused and incorporated into a permanent, or semi-permanent facility.

The centre was originally conceived as a 20,000 seat venue but concerns over the games’ legacy has seen that figure drop to just 2,500, with the shortfall addressed by two huge temporary seating “wedges” which will flank the two longer elevations of the centre.

These new images, part of the centre’s planning application submitted two weeks ago, show that the sinuous forms of the wave-like structure will now be obscured by the hard-edged seating stands, one of which, will cantilever over the River Lea.

Spectators will sit under a PVC stretch fabric roof, the most cost effective solution according to the planning submission which also states that measures are being taken to ensure a sustainable fabric is selected.

BD’s buildings editor Ellis Woodman said: “There has been a succession of disappointments as the major Olympic projects have been revealed. The Aquatic Centre was the one that promised to be a work of architectural ambition.

“These new images show that potential has now been squandered by the addition of two very ugly temporary stands.”

read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/7081346.stm

By the way Fosters designed wembley stadium with HOK, not HOK on its own.
Hok is just trying to justify a bad design, it obviously realises that its trying to flog something naff so it comes up with some story that its not a flashy stadium but clever? ah ha. A tempory stadium for over 600million pounds is not value for money.

By the way Fosters designed wembley stadium with HOK, not HOK on its own.
Hok is just trying to justify a bad design, it obviously realises that its trying to flog something naff so it comes up with some story that its not a flashy stadium but clever? ah ha. A tempory stadium for over 600million pounds is not value for money.

they tried to be clever with the logo too.

anyway 2012 is the ancient Mayan Doomsday year we may not even can enjoy the Olympic...LOL
I like the version 1 swimming center why they need to re-work on that one?? first is the Olympic Stadium now the pool getting suck too...what's next? They may not even build the Olympic park after all?

Its a nice design for a Temporary stadium, its designed to house the Olympic games, not over stage it.

Ι prefere version 1. Looks more monumental.

I have to say the new aquatic center (vers 3) is much more better than the other versions. it's great!
WOOP
GO LDN, Go Zaha!

what does the stadium look like under the o2

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=201556&page=17

few pics

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=201556&page=17

few pics

is the Dome the roof for the Arena or is there a full arena with this dome over it?

Ok, never mind, i saw. What i really want to know is what does the Arena look like if you take the dome tarp off of it?

The arena inside has its own roof under the Dome structure.

I guess if they go to removing those two temporary stand after the game....I guess it will be alright. It will end up look like version 2...but the roof make me feel claustrophobic.

2012 Aquatic Centre
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/1927_1_Aqua1.jpg

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/1927_2_Aqua2.jpg

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/1927_3_Aqua3.jpg

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/1927_4_Aqua4.jpg

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=1927

No offense, but is it just me or has anyone else think the area of the Olympic Park is smaller than the one in Beijing, or even, Sydney.

No offense, but is it just me or has anyone else think the area of the Olympic Park is smaller than the one in Beijing, or even, Sydney.

Sydney 640 hectares
Beijing 680 hectares
London 306 hectares, but the probably the most signficant transformation, having the biggest impact.

^^ But, why does it have to be smaller and way more compact than the Olympic parks in Sydney and Beijing? Is there a reason for this (aside from financial ones). Or, do they simply lack funds?

^^ But, why does it have to be smaller and way more compact than the Olympic parks in Sydney and Beijing? Is there a reason for this (aside from financial ones). Or, are they just simply lack funds?

its called "space". i dont think they can exactly make it larger..and why would they..everything is spaced out already.

London does need to show off, cause i found london, to be very dirty and depressing when i visited it.

Is that the final design for the aquatics centre?

It looks quite good - considering all the ups and downs we've had with it.

London does need to show off, cause i found london, to be very dirty and depressing when i visited it.

oh no now youve done it! All the 'london is best' cheerleaders will be out in force now!

oh no now youve done it! All the 'london is best' cheerleaders will be out in force now!

london is very dirty. but depressing? maybe its the weather..but anybody bored in london is just boring.

Overly i was very dissapointed in London, how it looked like and everything i wasnt bored but just really dissapointed.

^^ But, why does it have to be smaller and way more compact than the Olympic parks in Sydney and Beijing? Is there a reason for this (aside from financial ones). Or, are they just simply lack funds?

The area is surrounded by residential homes and town centres. The Olympic Park was originally run down industrial buildings and polluted waterways which ran like a scar through this part of London since Victorian times.

london is very dirty. but depressing? maybe its the weather..but anybody bored in london is just boring.

Hey dont get me wrong I quite like London but ive been to most world cities and think it could be a lot better

Hey dont get me wrong I quite like London but ive been to most world cities and think it could be a lot better

hence the transformation of stratford and the olympic games.

... and the transformation of The City, and Canary Wharf, and London Bridge Station, and Blackfriars, and Elephant and Castle...

London has been through loads of sh*t, but it always works out well in the end, and it seems the post war scars are finally fading, and London is undergoing a transformation like few other cities ever do, it's going to be 'fresh' come 2012 and the Olympics. Perhaps this is why London tends to outlast other world cities, I don't know.

^^ But, why does it have to be smaller and way more compact than the Olympic parks in Sydney and Beijing? Is there a reason for this (aside from financial ones). Or, are they just simply lack funds?

Why does it need to be bigger? It doesn't.

London does need to show off, cause i found london, to be very dirty and depressing when i visited it.

FUCK OFF

Overly i was very dissapointed in London, how it looked like and everything i wasnt bored but just really dissapointed.

See my previous post.

FUCK OFF

He is not that lucky:nuts:

Oh right, and Beijing is the most uplifting place on on earth. I think not.
beijing twice as dirty
beijing twice as depressing.

Calm down, Calm down. Everybody just Calm Down.

Overly i was very dissapointed in London, how it looked like and everything i wasnt bored but just really dissapointed. I'm pretty sure if you visited Beijing four years before you'd probably say the same thing. London will most likely go through a transformation like any Olympic host city before it. Duh.

anyway enough of the rambling..more fabric.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/london.jpg

Love the legacy mode but we really need a bigger aquatics centre in the first place than whats being shown to the world in the olympics. Don't the ODA understand that the design looks quiet frankly terrible no matter how pretty the visuals. As a national sports centre surely 2500 capacity is very small in 'Legacy' mode.

Love the legacy mode but we really need a bigger aquatics centre in the first place than whats being shown to the world in the olympics. Don't the ODA understand that the design looks quiet frankly terrible no matter how pretty the visuals. As a national sports centre surely 2500 capacity is very small in 'Legacy' mode.

well i doubt they intend to host major swimming events after the Games. 2500 is fine, the legacy is the three pools and the fact that its indoor..but is legacy really worth the 250m pounds?

Oooh, are those athletes on the fabric made up of words?

Oooh, are those athletes on the fabric made up of words?

yes

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/london1.jpg

:lol: What did I say!

FUCK OFF

This has to be an unbeatable piece of argument... :ohno:

On the olympic park subject. I don't fancy the stadium very much... But I really like the renders of the aquatic centre. Makes me think of a crossover between Calatrava and buildings in Brasilia. :)

FUCK OFF


CONGRATULATION DEBATER.. U HAVE WON THE NATIONAL AWARD OF THE WORST ARGUMENT EVER.

And u also, made my way into another point. London aint very friendly.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

London is not shit, it just needs some improvents. Metro defintly needs a facelift. There definetly needs to be a lot of buildings repainting.

And alot of cleaning.

Give it time. It's a wonderful city that has already produced two Olympics. It will deliver.

London's only hosted the games once hasn't it?

Overly i was very dissapointed in London, how it looked like and everything i wasnt bored but just really dissapointed.

are you living on the same planet may i ask where your from than we can judge you better

London's only hosted the games once hasn't it?

Twice before my friend 1908 and 1948(this year in particular london was the only city that could host the olympics after world war 2 quite remakable considering really with the hammering the city took a few years before)Says alot about the city unlike what master bates sorry master paul says about london

Love the legacy mode but we really need a bigger aquatics centre in the first place than whats being shown to the world in the olympics. Don't the ODA understand that the design looks quiet frankly terrible no matter how pretty the visuals. As a national sports centre surely 2500 capacity is very small in 'Legacy' mode.

there is ponds forge in shefield as well so this place won't be for the wghole country

..

I'm pretty sure if you visited Beijing four years before you'd probably say the same thing. London will most likely go through a transformation like any Olympic host city before it. Duh.london is already goin through a big transformation phase with new and state of the art architecture wonders although not many places in the world could match the massive change in beijing but i reckon london will do a fine job and also looking forward to it like with every olympics except the disaster of atlanta

http://i26.tinypic.com/2wptl52.jpg

work has started on the olympic bowl /stadium...

http://i27.tinypic.com/2aiiquo.jpg

2012 create inspire excite! a new generation......

http://i27.tinypic.com/2aiiquo.jpg

2012 create inspire excite! a new generation......

:lol::lol::lol:
What new generation??? It looks like stuff from early 90's!

thinks London 2012 will use latest technology.....to communicate
to people at every level....than ever before...there committed to that...hence
the words 'create inspire excite':):):)

there is ponds forge in shefield as well so this place won't be for the wghole country

There's quite a few competition (50m) pools around the UK besides this one. The Commonwealth in Edinburgh and National Pool of Wales in Swansea to name but a few.

omg. how unfortunate about the logo. and i thought ours was bad. but london will put on a great olympics, hopefully i'll be able to make it!

oh and london boring? did you remove your head from your ass once while you were there? that is one thing london cannot be called.

http://i27.tinypic.com/2aiiquo.jpg

2012 create inspire excite! a new generation......
I think 2012 is going to break many traditions. I like the logo. It's different then your average logo over olympic location.

The 2012 Olympics are a sign that the younger generations are taking over and adding our pop culture to the old, boring traditional crap we see year to year (though it is beautiful crap)

London's only hosted the games once hasn't it?

Twice before, in 1908 and 1948.

London will become the first city in history to host the modern Olympics 3 times.

create new links across the Olympic Park site for construction vehicles has accelerated with the fourth temporary construction bridge lifted into place and 1km of temporary roads installed on site. Piling works are also now underway on the first permanent bridge to be built in the Olympic Park.

Construction bridges and temporary roads within the Olympic Park will play a key role in minimising disruption to public roads and bridges. Two temporary bridges have already been installed to provide links into the Olympic Stadium site for construction vehicles, with a third bridge in place in the north-west of the site. A fourth 55 metre-long temporary bridge has now been lifted into place in the west of the Park, spanning over the River Lea to link the VeloPark and media centre sites.

Work is also well underway to install a temporary road network across the Olympic Park site to provide safe and secure routes for construction vehicles. 1km of temporary new roads have been constructed, using 5,000 tonnes of material created during the demolition of buildings on site. The roads allow construction vehicles to travel between the east and west sides of the site and down the central ‘spine’ of the Park into the Olympic Stadium site without the need to use public roads and bridges.

ODA Director of Infrastructure Simon Wright said: 'With demolition completed on two-thirds of the Olympic Park, we are already preparing for the start of the ‘big build’ in the summer by putting roads and bridges in place to link the construction sites for key venues. The acceleration of work on temporary roads and bridges is an important step towards providing a network of safe and secure routes across the Park while minimising disruption to public roads and bridges.'

Along with the temporary infrastructure being installed for construction activity on site, the ODA will build more than 30 permanent bridges and 20km of permanent roads in and around the Olympic Park to create an open and accessible area in Games time and legacy. Piling works started this week on the first permanent bridge which will be built in the west of the Park. The bridge will span over the primary loop road to be constructed on site, creating an important north–south link for visitors to the Park in Games time and legacy. Piling works on the bridge will be completed by the summer, allowing work to install the bridge structure to start towards the end of the year.

The acceleration of work on temporary roads and bridges keeps the ODA on track to meet another of its ‘Milestones to Beijing’ – ten targets to be achieved by the time of the Beijing Games this year. Milestone 3 states that the main temporary roads and bridges will have been built, giving access to a safe and secure construction site for the ‘big build’.

Stadium bowl taking shape...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2171/2267424623_3d3282b28e_b.jpg

I love how a lot of people on this website now have the london 2012 logo as their avatar. woo!

little animation for your enjoyment :
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff108/ekajllahsram/218.gif
bigger version here (http://www.universaleverything.com/recent_activity/218)

In the begining I must confess that I was quite disappointed about London 2012 projects and designs, but after checking more about the master plan, I realised that it is a matter to break traditions and rules. Beijing is making it bigger, as Athens was solemn, Atlanta was stupidly commercialised and vulgar, and Barcelona became a classic.

But the case of London, that stadium and logo make me wonder more and more about the XXX Olympiad. I wonder about London's handover in Beijing.

^^Thankyou for being balanced and reasonable on this matter. You at least are trying to understand what it is London 2012 are doing.

Excellent animation jak3m:)

does any one have any clues about the Olympic flame
inside the olympic bowl? or out side? should have a poll!!!!!!!!!
what everyone thinks...

Yes wounder what the handover in Beijing will be could be interesting..
thinks going be lots of Children at a guess...Coe would want that one!

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://2012olympic.proboards42.com/index.cgi

www.2012olympichost.com

does any one have any clues about the Olympic flame
inside the olympic bowl? or out side? should have a poll!!!!!!!!!
what everyone thinks...

It will be outside the stadium to the north and over 150m high.

I love how a lot of people on this website now have the london 2012 logo as their avatar. woo!


everytime i see the 2012 logo, i see lisa simpson doing some bad things

everytime i see the 2012 logo, i see lisa simpson doing some bad things

oh wow, I see it too...

hahaha, thats too funny. Good spot!

What will be the capacity of London's Olympic Stadium? I apologize if this has already been answered.

80,000.

Tessa Jowell, the Olympics Minister, will present a draft version today of a long-awaited legacy action plan as part of London 2012's twice-yearly update to inspectors from the IOC. She is expected to tell Gilbert Felli, the executive director, and Denis Oswald, the chairman of the co-ordination commission monitoring the preparations, how Britain will benefit in the long term by spending £9.3 billion on hosting the Games.

As part of his winning pitch to the IOC in Singapore in 2005, Lord Coe, chairman of the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, promised that he would deliver a “next-generation” Olympics with a lasting legacy for London, the UK and the Olympic Movement and be diffrent
from any other previous Olympics.

A restructure of Sport England has delayed publication of the plan by several months. It is not yet clear whether a budget has been set, but Jowell said yesterday: “It's almost ready to go.”

The IOC team will spend a day scrutinising plans for Olympic venues and progress on sponsorship to fund the 16-day event. Their arrival caps a tumultuous past month for the organisers of the London Olympics, in which athletics was dominated by Dwain Chambers and Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, who mistakenly invited Linford Christie, a convicted drug cheat, to bear the Olympic torch through London, before dropping him.

Happy to see stadium works go well :)

The logo of London 2012 is just a catastroph :ohno:

Twice before, in 1908 and 1948.

London will become the first city in history to host the modern Olympics 3 times.

Technically, Athens hosted it 3 times (1896, 1906 and 2004).
1906 are not included in the history of the Olympics because they are out of sync with the whole 4 year, leap year thing. :)
Infact, these forgotten about Olympics are what started today's trends of Opening/Closing ceremonies, NOC's and raising of the national flags making them one of the most influential of all games!

But I am only joking about London not being the first to host 3 games, just pointing out that technically, it has infact happened before.

Why doesn't London just use Wembley Stadium for the opening and closing ceremonies and the track and field events?

Wembley is too beautiful not to be utilized for the Olympics.

Why doesn't London just use Wembley Stadium for the opening and closing ceremonies and the track and field events?

Wembley is too beautiful not to be utilized for the Olympics.

Because London's bid was based on regeneration of a wasteland in the East of London, bringing with it all the benefits that entails to the local population after the games finished.

Using exsisting venues was one of Paris's major disadvantages and why London won the bid.

Besides, Wembley will be used for the Olympic football final.

Looking out on to the site from the Greenway last Saturday
http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc159/trancestrances/London%202012/Olympic%20Park/OlympicSitefromtheGreenway.jpg?t=1204565091

Aquatics Centre

The site of the London 2012 Aquatics Centre has been cleared and is on track for construction to start by Beijing 2008, new images published by the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) showed today.

A lot of progress has been made in recent weeks on what is one of the most complex and challenging parts of the Olympic Park clean up.

Eleven industrial buildings have been demolished on the site, around 80,000 tonnes of soil has been dug out, much of it contaminated and requiring cleaning, and over 40,000 tonnes of clean soil brought on to prepare the site for construction. Over 500 metres of new river walls have been installed which will widen the river by eight metres when the existing river walls are removed later this year. Archaeological investigations have been completed on site, including recording evidence of a prehistoric settlement.

By the summer construction will start on the Zaha Hadid Aquatics Centre which during the Games will mark the entrance to the Olympic Park from Stratford. The Aquatics Centre will host Swimming, Diving, Synchronised Swimming, Water Polo finals and elements of Modern Pentathlon. After the Games temporary seating will be removed, leaving in legacy a 2,500 capacity swimming venue that can be boosted to 3,500 seats, and local community and school swimming facilities.

The statutory consultation period on the planning application for the venue ended this week. There has been a very positive response from over 150 local people that have attended the drop-in consultations in the Newham, the Borough in which the Aquatics Centre will be based.

ODA Chairman John Armitt said: 'The Aquatics Centre will be the ‘Gateway to the Games’ in 2012 and in legacy will be a new landmark building for London, a new home for elite swimming and a new sustainable resource for the local community.

'The challenging site is starting to take shape ready for construction to start by Beijing 2008. Industrial buildings have been demolished and recycled, contaminated soil is being cleaned up and the waterways are being widened. The transformation of the site for Games and legacy is on track.'
http://i25.tinypic.com/33esia8.jpg

that shot is amazing gives real scope as to the size of constructing the olympic park.And given what they have to do to get it to this stage then you understand why it cost's what it cost's don't think bejing or athens quite had to go through this with contaminated soil and all the contamonated water ways that takes alot of time effort and money.

Nice to see pictures of the site. I hope more to come!

OK, let's go back to the "logo" topic and I think I know the reason for the weird design. I am not being negative here so no need for any brutal attack :). IMO, the logo was made to get attention not only to the people of London but to the world as well. London organizers are being smart here. If you make a logo that looks nice, then only few people will recognize or people will just "ignore" it because everyone expects a good design. If you design something weird, then people around the world will notice and talk about it. And that's what make it more popular. This is similar to the celebrities like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton who are doing everything they can to get attention. Look at how much attention they are getting now.

Well done.

This is similar to the celebrities like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton who are doing everything they can to get attention. Look at how much attention they are getting now.

If u want 2012 games to be the Paris Hilton of the olympics...plastic and cheap....so it's ok but everyone expected a muuuuuuuuuuuuuuch better logo and olympic stadium.