http://i28.tinypic.com/vpduf8.jpg

The London Olympic Stadium 80,000 seats

http://i31.tinypic.com/2qss3ut.jpg

The Olympic Stadium has been designed in an innovative way that allows for an 80,000 seat Athletics stadium to be converted into a more easily maintained 25,000 seat venue after the Games.
The London Olympic stadium is very diffrent from the previous stadiums of the Olympic games.

The stadium is designed to change and scale down to 25,000 and not reflect other stadiums
of the past that had little use after the games had gone.

A roof will stretch around the Stadium to provide cover and support the lighting and sound systems used to stage the Games. It will also provide a base for special effects during the ceremonies. The Stadium will be built to international track and field standards for athletes.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2cr6efc.jpg

http://i27.tinypic.com/jkep8x.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/2qtcqy0.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/smv8cm.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/mvt16o.jpg

THE LONDON OLYMPIC BOWL

HOK Sport and Peter Cook’s long-awaited designs for the 2012 Olympic stadium were finally unveiled,with a clear emphasis on functionality and
flexibility rather than iconic architecture.

The 80,000 seat stadium will be the centrepiece for the 2012 Games hosting the opening and closing ceremonies and the athletics events. It can be converted down to a 25,000 seat permanent stadium after the Games when it will become a new home for athletics and other uses.

ODA chairman John Armitt said: “London’s Olympic stadium is designed to be different. ‘Team Stadium’ have done a fantastic job against a challenging brief - their innovative, ground-breaking design will ensure that the Olympic stadium will not only be a fantastic arena for a summer of sport in 2012 but also ensure a sustainable legacy for the community who will live around it."

The main features of the design are:

Bowl - a sunken bowl built into the ground for the field of play and lower permanent seating, designed to bring spectators close to the action;

Seats – 25,000 permanent, 55,000 demountable;

Roof - a cable-supported roof will stretch 28m the whole way around the stadium, providing cover for two thirds of spectators;

Wrap – a fabric curtain 'large wrap' will go around the stadium structure, acting as additional protection and shelter for spectators;

Sides - will have changing images;

Pods – facilities such as catering and merchandising will be grouped into self-contained ‘pod’ structures, adding to the spectator experience around the access level of the stadium.

Site - the stadium is on an 'island site' with rivers and cannals around it.


London will have a stadium that will transform after the games and be very diffrent from the previous stadiums because it will change after the event for local use and be made of sustainable materials,this stadium will set a brand new bench mark for all future stadiums and be a first for the Olympics.

The stadium site is cleared..

http://i30.tinypic.com/qnptt2.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/r0rp91.jpg

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

The budget for the Olympic Stadium of £496m was published in October last year
Work starts shortly of the stadium build...as the site is handed over to the Build Team.

http://planning.london2012.com/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=K0LTMFSZK0000

:okay:

so Huge.. :shocked:

Very poor effort.

Of stadia since 68 (because before that was a different era for comparisons) London comes last in my opinion, purely regarding design elements and ambience rather than functionality.

72 Munich amazing! 1st of the stadiums for the Olympics that said something.

76 Since then we had Montreal it went wrong but amazing nevertheless!

80 Moscow, a stadium that already existed but a very historic and imposing colosieum.

84 La, they didnt exactly do anything did they?

88 Seoul not as radical as Munich and Montreal but certainly a statement that asia was modern.

92 Barcelona has to be the dissapointment of the Olympic century.

96 followed by another dissapointment in Atlanta with its temporary effort.

00 Sydney yes back on track, not radical by a Munich or montreal standards but not a dissapointment either.

04 Athens, yes! Without complete reconstruction managed to create an almost flawless olympic arena almost as good as Munich with those beautiful curved rooves.

08 Beijing, back to Munich and Montreal radical statements amazing stadium that I can tell you when you visit it for first time its difficult to grasp how it was constructed.

12 London:bash: OH dear, I know it has to go down to 25 after games but still its just so... standard.

1st Munich 72
2nd Athens 04
3rd Beijing 08
4th Moscow 80
5th Sydney 00
6th Seoul 88
7th Montreal 76
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th London 12

sorry double post

I think you already have like 2-3 threads about this stadium so...:lock:

Personally, this design has grown on me. I still don't like the trusswork above the roof, but the facade is quite good, and for London, it will do the job.

I personaly think there is nothing wrong with the current design & think its quite nice. Reason that many are upset is becuase initial renders when London won the bid were of a quite extrondinary stadium & this well is .......normal.

I personaly think there is nothing wrong with the current design & think its quite nice. Reason that many are upset is becuase initial renders when London won the bid were of a quite extrondinary stadium & this well is .......normal.

The previous render of the the London olympic stadium at the bidbook was one of the reasons IMO that London won the 2012 organization...but this stadium is a big dissapointment now...

I think you already have like 2-3 threads about this stadium so...:lock:

thinks there threads about London 2012 and everything
but not just for the '2012 Olympic stadium'..so here it is!:)


http://i32.tinypic.com/2rhvh38.jpg

piling work is being done the moment, before the 'Team build'
move in..

I personaly think there is nothing wrong with the current design & think its quite nice. Reason that many are upset is becuase initial renders when London won the bid were of a quite extrondinary stadium & this well is .......normal.

Exactly right! London has let us down and not only that it seems there are 3 or 4 stadia with an almost identical roof structure being proposed right now, so not only will it be nothing inspiring it will also have a twin brother and sister who are equallyh plain!

Exactly right! London has let us down and not only that it seems there are 3 or 4 stadia with an almost identical roof structure being proposed right now, so not only will it be nothing inspiring it will also have a twin brother and sister who are equallyh plain!

you're very right but when the games are finished it wont look anything like that, london does not need another 80,000+ stadium we have a 90,000 football stadium, an 82,000 rugby stadium and as athletics isnt followed much at all an 80,000 permanent stadium wouldnt be filled ever again. So yeah the design is a tad bland but look at the athens stadium its beautiful but its hardly ever used and most of it was there in the first place. With the construction costs so high in the UK anything more than a temporary design would have cost a fortune and we just dont need it! It does the job its meant to do and after the games it actually looks a very nice tidy 25,000 seater stadium. London is about a legacy not building a £500 million white elephant - thats why it won the games

Exactly right! London has let us down and not only that it seems there are 3 or 4 stadia with an almost identical roof structure being proposed right now, so not only will it be nothing inspiring it will also have a twin brother and sister who are equallyh plain!

london hasn't let no one down,you are letting london down.London was and is a great bid and the best by far and once the stadium is built you will jump on the bandwagon as other other people are now

It's pretty ordinary really. But still, an 80k stadium is nothing to be sniffed at. :)

So yeah the design is a tad bland but look at the athens stadium its beautiful but its hardly ever used and most of it was there in the first place.

U must be kidding...lol ... :lol::lol::lol: Athens OS probably is the most used stadium in the balkan peninsula!!
The Athens olympic stadium is used weekly as home for 2 major greek teams, Panathinaikos and AEK. It hosts also very often many activities, as concerts, WRC Rally, Athletics and hundred others after the Olympic Games...

The usual comments from a bunch of people who don't understand the reason why it is designed the way it is.

IT IS A MINIMAL LOOKING STADIUM BECAUSE IT'S A TEMPORARY STADIUM.

Guys, the stadium doesn't need to look good as it is supposed to be sustainable and eco-friendly. It may not be the prettiest stadium, but London will be remembered for putting on a financially sound games in 2012 and that's all that matters. :okay:

That said, I *really* dislike the trusswork on the roof too - it looks tired and reused from the Millenium Dome, the London Eye and Wembley Stadium. Also hate the idea of the 'pods' - so 1999....

The site looks impressive though :)

The previous render of the the London olympic stadium at the bidbook was one of the reasons IMO that London won the 2012 organization...

No it wasn't.

you're very right but when the games are finished it wont look anything like that, london does not need another 80,000+ stadium we have a 90,000 football stadium, an 82,000 rugby stadium and as athletics isnt followed much at all an 80,000 permanent stadium wouldnt be filled ever again. So yeah the design is a tad bland but look at the athens stadium its beautiful but its hardly ever used and most of it was there in the first place. With the construction costs so high in the UK anything more than a temporary design would have cost a fortune and we just dont need it! It does the job its meant to do and after the games it actually looks a very nice tidy 25,000 seater stadium. London is about a legacy not building a £500 million white elephant - thats why it won the games

I see some one pulled you up on this and I am afraid I have to also having worked there! Athens Olympic stadium is heavily used for many different events and although it will lose Panathiniakos in 2010 and probably AEK in 2012 it has never been a white elephant.

U must be kidding...lol ... :lol::lol::lol: Athens OS probably is the most used stadium in the balkan peninsula!!
The Athens olympic stadium is used weekly as home for 2 major greek teams, Panathinaikos and AEK. It hosts also very often many activities, as concerts, WRC Rally, Athletics and hundred others after the Olympic Games...

my bad obviously! i just remember seeing pictures of that beautiful stadium with big padlocks on the entrances but im glad to hear it is being properly used!

The usual comments from a bunch of people who don't understand the reason why it is designed the way it is.

IT IS A MINIMAL LOOKING STADIUM BECAUSE IT'S A TEMPORARY STADIUM.

im 1 of the biggest supporters of london 2012 BUT that statement is not true. temporary does not necessarily imply lack of design.
essentially you're saying all those amazing temporary pavillions at world expo events were meant to look minimal too?

again im not questioning the use of the temporary stadium, not even the cost. BUT the BEST design was NOT achieved. I appreciate the current design principles along with CABE but its just not close to what it could have been for that cost and that concept.

Originally Posted by somataki View Post
The previous render of the the London olympic stadium at the bidbook was one of the reasons IMO that London won the 2012 organization..

That is partially true. What cities must do after making the shortlist is to ensure that the IOC members experience and share the vision bid cities have for the Games. The renders, (which included only conceptual designs) played a role that day in July and before July 2005. IOC members don't all vote based on renders, but if they share your vision for the Games they will vote for you.

Guys, the stadium doesn't need to look good as it is supposed to be sustainable and eco-friendly. It may not be the prettiest stadium, but London will be remembered for putting on a financially sound games in 2012 and that's all that matters. :okay:

That said, I *really* dislike the trusswork on the roof too - it looks tired and reused from the Millenium Dome, the London Eye and Wembley Stadium. Also hate the idea of the 'pods' - so 1999....

The site looks impressive though :)


Again you're implying a temporary structure CANNOT look good. Modern day solutions to modular structures throws that out the window. Even designs dating back to expo events in the 80's show that design is not necessarily sacrificed with a temporary structure.

The usual comments from a bunch of people who don't understand the reason why it is designed the way it is.

IT IS A MINIMAL LOOKING STADIUM BECAUSE IT'S A TEMPORARY STADIUM.

Manchester city, stadium Australia both same principal major event then capacity reduction to be economically viable and sustainable and to host a tenant and events where stadium is not empty...but both of those stadia designs are better, in my opinion and it would seem the majority of posters on this thread also think that.

Does temporary mean standard or that the structure cannot have some meaning?

Of stadia since 68 (because before that was a different era for comparisons) London comes last in my opinion, purely regarding design elements and ambience rather than functionality.

72 Munich amazing! 1st of the stadiums for the Olympics that said something.

76 Since then we had Montreal it went wrong but amazing nevertheless!

80 Moscow, a stadium that already existed but a very historic and imposing colosieum.

84 La, they didnt exactly do anything did they?

88 Seoul not as radical as Munich and Montreal but certainly a statement that asia was modern.

92 Barcelona has to be the dissapointment of the Olympic century.

96 followed by another dissapointment in Atlanta with its temporary effort.

00 Sydney yes back on track, not radical by a Munich or montreal standards but not a dissapointment either.

04 Athens, yes! Without complete reconstruction managed to create an almost flawless olympic arena almost as good as Munich with those beautiful curved rooves.

08 Beijing, back to Munich and Montreal radical statements amazing stadium that I can tell you when you visit it for first time its difficult to grasp how it was constructed.

12 London:bash: OH dear, I know it has to go down to 25 after games but still its just so... standard.

1st Munich 72
2nd Athens 04
3rd Beijing 08
4th Moscow 80
5th Sydney 00
6th Seoul 88
7th Montreal 76
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th London 12

last perhaps...
but ure forgetting that Chicago will prob host the games in a temporary stadium and possibly many hosts after that...is London then not setting a trend? moving the games forward to a place where gigantic white elephants( of which there are enough examples) do NOT simply get built each time the games come around? is it not making the games more accessible to all cities by proving that a temporary structure is perfectly fine to meet IAAF and IOC standards?

last perhaps...
but ure forgetting that Chicago will prob host the games in a temporary stadium and possibly many hosts after that...is London then not setting a trend? moving the games forward to a place where gigantic white elephants( of which there are enough examples) do NOT simply get built each time the games come around? is it not making the games more accessible to all cities by proving that a temporary structure is perfectly fine to meet IAAF and IOC standards?

I agree, but my argument is as you also said temporary can still be inspiring, radical anything-temporary does not mean minimal and boring and a design that almost beam for beam is the same as 3 or 4 other stadia out there at the moment.

I must admit, I'm also kind of disappointed with the final looks of the olympic stadium. The design used for bidding was much better and much more propriate for the year of organization, after all, we are talking about 2012.
Well, this one is not that bad, but it's too ordinary for sure. Anyways, I do not doubt in the quality of the games :) everything will be great ;)

I agree, but my argument is as you also said temporary can still be inspiring, radical anything-temporary does not mean minimal and boring and a design that almost beam for beam is the same as 3 or 4 other stadia out there at the moment.

yip i think ive posted a few of those sister stadia.

Im impressed with the advice from CABE though. they were a bit anal with the liverpool anfield design but understood the dynamics of the temporary olympic structure. they suggested the wrap be raised to show the trusses and not hide the temporary concept. as a truss loving person i couldn't agree more.

Top Olympic stadiums:

1st Athens 04
2nd Beijing 08 (the roof from inside is just too "enclosing")
3th Sydney 00
4th Moscow 80
5th Munich 72
6th Seoul 88
7th Montreal 76
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th London 12

Top Olympic stadiums:

1st Athens 04
2nd Beijing 08 (the roof from inside is just too "enclosing")
3th Sydney 00
4th Moscow 80
5th Munich 72
6th Seoul 88
7th Montreal 76
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th London 12

MP our lists are similar so it would seem that we have similar taste so I dont understand how Munich is 5th? Fair enough athens beijing but Moscow in front of Munich please explain?

It's not just the fact it's temporary; it's more to do with the horrendous rising cost of steel and the fact money spent on temporary frills is better spent on permanent frills.

The stadium will sit in one of the most extensively landscaped parks, the biggest of which haven't been seen in Europe for 150 years, and be surrounded by a piece of artwork that will celebrate the history and future of the Olympic movement. Pretty spectacular if you ask me.

Top Olympic stadiums:

1st Athens 04
2nd Beijing 08 (the roof from inside is just too "enclosing")
3th Sydney 00
4th Moscow 80
5th Munich 72
6th Seoul 88
7th Montreal 76
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th London 12

i loved munich. for its time it was breakthrough and still is quite an icon.
not a fan of the birds nest that much!! montreal is awful. athens was a great roof and quite iconic. moscow is ok and so was seoul. barcelona just had a great feel!

LA bleh
atlanta --shoot me now

the monstrosities in montreal and atlanta pushes london up that list.

lol sorry... mistake... i ment this:

1st Athens 04
2nd Beijing 08 (the roof from inside is just too "enclosing")
3th Sydney 00 (movable stands which moved upwards, the design is very pleasing)
4th Munich 72 (originality to the max, but the tent like roof was overdone)
5th Seoul 88
6th Moscow 80
7th London 12
8th Barcelona 92
9th LA 84
10th Atlanta 96
11th Montreal 76

It's not just the fact it's temporary; it's more to do with the horrendous rising cost of steel and the fact money spent on temporary frills is better spent on permanent frills.

The stadium will sit in one of the most extensively landscaped parks, the biggest of which haven't been seen in Europe for 150 years, and be surrounded by a piece of artwork that will celebrate the history and future of the Olympic movement. Pretty spectacular if you ask me.

I guess we agree to disagree because regardless of media spin for most people the games is about the two weeks its on and not the legacy. If the government really cared about long term rejuvination of east london believe me they have the money to have made decent basic sports facilities there without an Olympic games. Afterall didnt they spend about 10 Olympic games money on a certain recent and pointless war and ongoing occupation of a country that has got absolutely nothing to do with England?

I guess we agree to disagree because regardless of media spin for most people the games is about the two weeks its on and not the legacy. If the government really cared about long term rejuvination of east london believe me they have the money to have made decent basic sports facilities there without an Olympic games. Afterall didnt they spend about 10 Olympic games money on a certain recent and pointless war and ongoing occupation of a country that has got absolutely nothing to do with England?

look thats not what happens in the real world.

governments dont spend this kind of money unless its accelerated by a mega-event. we are only getting major transport upgrades in cape town due to 2010, without it would have taken 10 years more. in the real world mega and not so mega events play a vital role in projects that in some cases have been proposed decades back.

The Olympic Stadium in Atlanta later became the home of the local professional baseball franchise, the Atlanta Braves. Also, the 71,000+ seat Georgia Dome was completed 4 years before the games.

sydney 2000 stadium was the best ever stadium for the olympics :):):)

Shall we open a new thread to compare all these olympic stadiums?;)

when will they start construction on the stadium ? ? ? ?

middle of this year

middle of this year

No its next month May! hence the start of the thread..by me!
everything has moved forward by 3 months........

sydney 2000 stadium was the best ever stadium for the olympics :):):)


I agree with you... not only the stadium but Australia is a great place for Olympic Games
IMO, the London's Games aren't about legacy, and this is what disturbs me the most. I wonder if is there any "big" stadium in England which could host a major athletic event?? If so I apologize but If there isn't, what legacy do you let by resizing the olympic stadium to only 25.000 seater? So appart from the Olympic swimming pool and the "Velodrome", I don't see major upgrade from London with those games

IMO, the London's Games aren't about legacy, and this is what disturbs me the most. I wonder if is there any "big" stadium in England which could host a major athletic event??

Wembley Stadium.

what legacy do you let by resizing the olympic stadium to only 25.000 seater? So appart from the Olympic swimming pool and the "Velodrome", I don't see major upgrade from London with those games

Apart from the largest urban park built in Europe in 150 years, extensive new transport links, a whole new residential city with 50% affordable housing, a massive swathe of former toxic industrial wasteland regenerated into natural wetlands and nature reserves and a selection of top quality sports venues suitable in size for the local community and council to maintain to high standards for the next century. Yeah, no major upgrades whatsoever.

Wembley stadium can host track and field??

A park... yes the legacy will be something ecological... politics are just waiting pressure to do things like that... It will be interesting to call your 25.000 seat stadium "the London Olympic Stadium" in 20 years...
OG really need change I think... England infrastructure doesn't need the games to be developped anymore while we see so many poor or not so poor countries that aren't able to build infrastrucures...Athens games for this reason were good, same for Beijing, hope we don't go in the Atlanta, London direction in 2016, like 2014

Wembley can be converted into an athletics stadium, but the capacity would be reduced to about 60,000/70,000 seats as the lower tier would be covered up by the running track. I doubt it'll ever happen to be honest.

....a massive swathe of former toxic industrial wasteland regenerated into natural wetlands and nature reserves and...

That's not very 'sustainable' - natural wetlands contribute 76% of the world's output of methane, a greenhouse gas with 62 times the global warming potential of CO2.

I hope for our climate's sake, that you've simply got your wires crossed and are misquoting from somewhere. Don't be fooled by media buzzwords like 'natural' or 'green' or even 'sustainable'.

I hope for our climate's sake, that you've simply got your wires crossed and are misquoting from somewhere. Don't be fooled by media buzzwords like 'natural' or 'green' or even 'sustainable'.

After the Games the Olympic Park will be transformed into the largest urban park created in Europe for more than 150 years. (http://www.london2012.com/plans/olympic-park/legacy/index.php)

The new park will be connected to the tidal Thames Estuary to the south and the Hertfordshire countryside to the north.

It will be designed to enrich the local ecology, restoring wetland habitats and planted with native species.

The canals and waterways of the River Lea will be cleaned and widened, and the natural floodplains of the area will be restored to provide a new wetland habitat for wildlife for birdwatchers and ecologists to enjoy. The natural river system of the valley will be restored, canals dredged and waterways widened.

The park will be planted with native species, including oak, ash, willow, birch, hazel, holly, blackthorn and hawthorn, providing a home for wildlife in the middle of the city.

The world-class sports facilities will be adapted for use by sports clubs and the local community as well as elite athletes. New playing fields sitting alongside these facilities will be adapted for community use.

The Olympic Village, where athletes and officials will stay during the Games, will be converted into homes, many available for key workers such as teachers and nurses.

In all, over 9,000 new homes will be built within the Park. Riverside housing, shops, restaurants and cafes will provide new amenities for the local community.

A range of transport improvements serving the Park are already underway, including an extension to the Docklands Light Railway, increased capacity on the Jubilee Line and the upgrade of Stratford Regional Station.

The communities surrounding the Park will enjoy access to the open space via a network of canal towpaths, footpaths and cycleways.

Economically, the area will be transformed. Thousands of new jobs will be created in the Park alone, many of these coming from the conversion of the International Broadcast Centre/Main Press Centre to create a new centre for employment in Hackney.

In addition, job and training opportunities will be created for local people, and local residents will be engaged in the planning of the Games and the benefits the project will bring afterwards.

There will also be a wealth of benefits to the wider community, such as cross-city transport improvements in London, more training and job opportunities for the UK and the chance for a vast array of businesses to be involved.

The Games will leave a key legacy of national benefits in culture, sport, volunteering, business and tourism.

We are working with the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation, London Development Agency, the Greater London Authority and the Host Boroughs to develop the Legacy Masterplan Framework, which will set out a clear vision for the future pattern of development of the Park, which will begin immediately after the Games.

After the Games the Olympic Park will be transformed into the largest urban park created in Europe for more than 150 years. (http://www.london2012.com/plans/olympic-park/legacy/index.php)

The new park will be connected to the tidal Thames Estuary to the south and the Hertfordshire countryside to the north.

It will be designed to enrich the local ecology, restoring wetland habitats and planted with native species.

The canals and waterways of the River Lea will be cleaned and widened, and the natural floodplains of the area will be restored to provide a new wetland habitat for wildlife for birdwatchers and ecologists to enjoy. The natural river system of the valley will be restored, canals dredged and waterways widened.

The park will be planted with native species, including oak, ash, willow, birch, hazel, holly, blackthorn and hawthorn, providing a home for wildlife in the middle of the city.

The world-class sports facilities will be adapted for use by sports clubs and the local community as well as elite athletes. New playing fields sitting alongside these facilities will be adapted for community use.

The Olympic Village, where athletes and officials will stay during the Games, will be converted into homes, many available for key workers such as teachers and nurses.

In all, over 9,000 new homes will be built within the Park. Riverside housing, shops, restaurants and cafes will provide new amenities for the local community.

A range of transport improvements serving the Park are already underway, including an extension to the Docklands Light Railway, increased capacity on the Jubilee Line and the upgrade of Stratford Regional Station.

The communities surrounding the Park will enjoy access to the open space via a network of canal towpaths, footpaths and cycleways.

Economically, the area will be transformed. Thousands of new jobs will be created in the Park alone, many of these coming from the conversion of the International Broadcast Centre/Main Press Centre to create a new centre for employment in Hackney.

In addition, job and training opportunities will be created for local people, and local residents will be engaged in the planning of the Games and the benefits the project will bring afterwards.

There will also be a wealth of benefits to the wider community, such as cross-city transport improvements in London, more training and job opportunities for the UK and the chance for a vast array of businesses to be involved.

The Games will leave a key legacy of national benefits in culture, sport, volunteering, business and tourism.

We are working with the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation, London Development Agency, the Greater London Authority and the Host Boroughs to develop the Legacy Masterplan Framework, which will set out a clear vision for the future pattern of development of the Park, which will begin immediately after the Games.


Actually the biggest urban park of Europe after 2012 will be the Hellenikon Metropolitan Park in Athens.

After the Games the Olympic Park will be transformed into the largest urban park created in Europe for more than 150 years. (http://www.london2012.com/plans/olympic-park/legacy/index.php)

The new park will be connected to the tidal Thames Estuary to the south and the Hertfordshire countryside....

That's really bad. Not being facetious, but while natural wetlands increases animal diversity, it really is not good for the climate (current methane levels are 1745ppb compared to a historical 650kyr average range of 320-790ppb). It'd be more environmentally friendly to build a motorway junction (remember, 62x more polluting than CO2).

This is the kind of myopic thinking (on the part of the LDA) that went into T5 as well. How much did it cost again (££ and CO2) for ecological remediation to remove a few hundred badgers? High-profile projects like these should accommodate the issues on the EIA where possible but stop pandering to the pressure groups that threaten litigation over it. Friends of the Earth and groups like them, bless 'em, do a good job at quantifying the number of species in an area etc, but they don't know jack about the global issues of pollutant emissions and wasted energy.

To be honest, a lot of the 'sustainability' aspect of the London 2012 games seems a gimmick to me, other than a few aspects: 20% onsite renewable generation (if it's even achieved), CHP and greenery. From the LDA's history (wrt Palestra) and from what colleagues at Buros tell me, I wouldn't be surprised if their sustainable ethos either doesn't work or gets panned by quantity surveyors.

Furthermore, the media and public needs to dissociate subjective terms like 'biodiversity' and 'natural habitat' from the real issues of heteronuclear pollutant emission and associated stratospheric warming, which should be our no1 preoccupying environmental consideration. Long story short: people need a lesson in science.

the only gimmick is that you think it's a gimmick read what darjole has written again 2012 is all about legacy and if you or iron man can't see that then you really are blind

the only gimmick is that you think it's a gimmick read what darjole has written again 2012 is all about legacy and if you or iron man can't see that then you really are blind

*sigh* This is the problem with the public. Scant knowledge of real sustainability issues and mindlessly parroting dumbed-down media blurbs but with the audacity to consider themselves an authority on the matter.

marrio415 - don't have such a reckless attitude to the environment. It's not a case of 'plant a few trees, throw in a couple cycle tracks and it'll all be okay'. We have to move away from the Dave Angel Eco Warrior mentality

2M662XNAmcM

That's really bad. Not being facetious, but while natural wetlands increases animal diversity, it really is not good for the climate (current methane levels are 1745ppb compared to a historical 650kyr average range of 320-790ppb). It'd be more environmentally friendly to build a motorway junction (remember, 62x more polluting than CO2).

This is the kind of myopic thinking (on the part of the LDA) that went into T5 as well. How much did it cost again (££ and CO2) for ecological remediation to remove a few hundred badgers? High-profile projects like these should accommodate the issues on the EIA where possible but stop pandering to the pressure groups that threaten litigation over it. Friends of the Earth and groups like them, bless 'em, do a good job at quantifying the number of species in an area etc, but they don't know jack about the global issues of pollutant emissions and wasted energy.

To be honest, a lot of the 'sustainability' aspect of the London 2012 games seems a gimmick to me, other than a few aspects: 20% onsite renewable generation (if it's even achieved), CHP and greenery. From the LDA's history (wrt Palestra) and from what colleagues at Buros tell me, I wouldn't be surprised if their sustainable ethos either doesn't work or gets panned by quantity surveyors.

Furthermore, the media and public needs to dissociate subjective terms like 'biodiversity' and 'natural habitat' from the real issues of heteronuclear pollutant emission and associated stratospheric warming, which should be our no1 preoccupying environmental consideration. Long story short: people need a lesson in science.

Well, shit....if we can't restore tiny areas of natural wetlands to what they once were for fear that the world will suffocate in all enveloping methane, then the world must have been one truly fucked up place before man mercifully came along and destroyed all the previously existing vast hectares of wetlands in order to build motorways and cities and factories and to develop intensive farming.

Yep, mother nature is the enemy. Man is the saviour.

Seriously, mate...get a grip. And don't talk down to others on this board. Long story short: you need a lesson in humility.

the only gimmick is that you think it's a gimmick read what darjole has written again 2012 is all about legacy and if you or iron man can't see that then you really are blind

Why do you always get so defensive, you're like a little kid. Id prefer to listen to someone like Shaun who actually sounds like he knows what hes on about

JimB

To be fair, I started out having a go at the LDA and the tone of my post was written with that in mind. Marrio410 then obviously disagreed with me (without reason or qualification, mind you) so I retorted.

On the subject of humility, why don't you suggest it to some of the blindly supportive proponents of the London Olympics* who won't hear of any comment that bears detriment to the games and are quick to flame any dissenters? It's like they're children singing "la-la-la I'm not listening *2012 Olympics are the greenest* la-la-la" http://www.georgehernandez.com/h/xComputers/Communicating/eSpeak/Media/y7/107.gif. But when I come along, somebody who has a little knowledge in the field and contributes to the discussion but ends up saying something those blindly supportive forumers dislike hearing, I'm told to be humble :|

On the rest of your post.... god help us. It's that kind of hippy attitude that damages the environmentalist 'cause' (for want of a better word); the idea that in order to be environmental, we need to give up civilisation and urbanity and retreat to the forests to live off the land. Obviously, that will turn people away and is indeed why it deterred me for some time from being an 'environmentalist'. Sustainability means maintaining our way of life as best we can without raping our planet. So that means, while I support the greenery after the Olympics, I'm sceptical as to any claim for it being sustainable considering that proposed natural wetlands are going to exacerbate the climate problem, not remediate it. The ODA have a nice idea, but I just hope that the implementation is better than what's coming out of the press releases.




*Not directing this at DarJole, who although is very supportive, has also been instrumental in propagating London 2012 development information to this forum

After 2028 none of us need to worry about anything:angel:

Whats the point in saying something when people are obviously against it no matter what you say.This is why i support the games.1-Regenerating one of the poorest parts of london if not the uk.Stratford looks like a bomb has hit it,there are no jobs/or any great paying jobs of worth.The olympics will bring business,jobs,new infrastructure to the area not to mention the benefits of the olympic park i.e the sporting and recreational facillities and the olympic village which will be turned into affodable housing and then there's the Stratford City Development to.I've been a few times to stratford and this surely has to be good for the residents.2 London and the country will be in the world spotlight after the Bejing games right up until closing ceremony of the paralympics.And we should and will show the whole world what london as a city and the country is about(the noise coming from this forum though says were nothing but a bunch of wingers.)We should be proud of what is gonna be achieved THATS THE LEGACY.I have to say if this was the world cup coming everyone would be up for it rightly so but it wouldn't bring to stratford what the olympics is bringing would it.Beeston Lad yes i do get defensive about this thats because i'm sick of the negativity toward this and okay were all entitled to opinions but it does get to a point where it's like hang on,if this was Nottingham you certainly wouldn't be on here bashing it as we know what some parts of Nottingham is like.I wish my hometown got a regeneration like that.I think just because it's london as well is why people bash it,this country has a habit of knocking the good were like the tabloids.Well there's my say if you don't like it lump it.BRING ON 2012

Can someone remind me how much this is costing. Isn't it around 500 million. This is my only real problem with this stadium. It just seems so much compared to other stadia being built currently.

Yes, 670Millions €.... at start the price was 400M€ (280M£):ohno:

All this bickering comes down to one thing. Everybody wants one of the worlds most organised and outstanding cities to fail. Im from Birmingham, I have a right to, but even I am not that ignorant to see they are going to produce one of the finest games in history! Why do others feel the need to oppose everything being done!

Money leads to success. London has more then any other city apart from Beijing when it comes to the games. It is going to be along way off being a failure. Wake up and smell the coffee guys.

they were awarded the Games with LIES

Yes, 670Millions €.... at start the price was 400M€ (280M£):ohno:

at the start every bid city quoted ridiculous prices, thats the IOC's issue not the bid cities. the IOC asked for 2005 prices.

they were awarded the Games with LIES

What lies, precisely?

And which of the other bidding cities do you know, for certain, were entirely truthful about their plans?

Honestly, I wish people like you would get over it. It's so boring, all this petty London bashing.

What lies, precisely?

And which of the other bidding cities do you know, for certain, were entirely truthful about their plans?

Honestly, I wish people like you would get over it. It's so boring, all this petty London bashing.

paris quoted 65m dollars for a 25,000 seat aquatic center...maybe in mars you can build an aquatic centre for that price. madrids aquatic centre has DOUBLE in price since the 2012 and 2016 bid. some of the other bid cities had some laughable estimates.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION AT THE DOWNING STREET
WEBSITE TO MAKE THE 'FIRST DAY' OF 2012 OLYMPICS
A NATIONAL HOLIDAY FOR THE UK (July 27th 2012)

Click below and sign> if you support

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/2012Holiday/

http://i25.tinypic.com/2a7x8qs.jpg

give a chance for folk to trully enjoy the park and the olympics/buildings:)
or to watch/celebrate where ever in the UK

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION AT THE DOWNING STREET
WEBSITE TO MAKE THE 'FIRST DAY' OF 2012 OLYMPICS
A NATIONAL HOLIDAY FOR THE UK

Click below and sign> if you support

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/2012Holiday/

http://i25.tinypic.com/2a7x8qs.jpg

give a chance for folk to trully enjoy the park and the olympics/buildings:)
or to watch/celebrate in the UK

got my vote!! hpe u do the same in 2016 for me!! :lol:

sorry, i cant... im not a british citizen

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION AT THE DOWNING STREET
WEBSITE TO MAKE THE 'FIRST DAY' OF 2012 OLYMPICS
A NATIONAL HOLIDAY FOR THE UK (July 27th 2012)

Click below and sign> if you support

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/2012Holiday/

http://i25.tinypic.com/2a7x8qs.jpg

give a chance for folk to trully enjoy the park and the olympics/buildings:)
or to watch/celebrate in the UK

What exactly do you mean by the 'First Day'? The Friday of the Opening Ceremonies only? Or the next day, Saturday, which is the first day of full-blast competition?

Why would they want to make the Friday-OC a 'national holiday'?

1. Think of the many man-hours lost.
2. Nothing's really going on except for those working the Opening Ceremony that night; and the crowds going.

3. Security and Olympic authorities wouldn't want EXTRA thousands of people milling around Olympic Park that evening, without purpose. Whatever wide-screens for public viewing would probably be spread out all over the city rather than just concentrated in Olympic Park. There are security reasons for NOT concentrating and centralizing everything in one spot.

4. The UK will have spent enough for those Games. I don't think they want another few hundred thousands of labor man-hours frittered away.

^^going with the Official first day 27th ,opening ceremony day as it says above.......its not
just about London , chance for other UK areas to do there
bit......on this day too, eg several uk cities want to celebrate sport in there own way...

however its not very often, that the UK gets the 'olympics' ( not just about London) so a national holiday would be a good thing to mark this..

also joe public may like the idea of a day...the Brits do like there sport!

Yeah but we like proper sports like football and rugby, not wrestling and gymnastics! ;)

Yeah but we like proper sports like football and rugby, not wrestling and gymnastics! ;)

brits show up for anything. expect packed venues

From bdonline (http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3099433&origin=BDweekly)

The main features of the design are:

Bowl - a sunken bowl built into the ground for the field of play and lower permanent seating, designed to bring spectators close to the action;
Seats – 25,000 permanent, 55,000 demountable;
Roof - a cable-supported roof will stretch 28m the whole way around the stadium, providing cover for two thirds of spectators;
Wrap – a fabric curtain will wrap around the stadium structure, acting as additional protection and shelter for spectators;
Pods – facilities such as catering and merchandising will be grouped into self-contained ‘pod’ structures, adding to the spectator experience around the access level of the stadium.

So all the facilities are going to be located outside the stadium and the spectator experience is going to be added to by having to leave the stadium completely whilst the actions going on to go for a pee or buy a drink?

What are these "Pods" going to look like?

Personally I'd like to see some of the pavilions from the Serpentine Gallery or the AA summer pavilions relocated to the Olympic site.

The mighty Swoosh (http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3109273).

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/468xAny/p/x/v/ELEVATION_ready.jpg

Serpentine Gallery (http://www.serpentinegallery.org/architecture/)

http://www.serpentinegallery.org/Serpentine%20Gallery%20Pavilion%202008%20model%20view%201.jpg

http://www.serpentinegallery.org/pavilion_night_time.jpg

http://www.serpentinegallery.org/1373_LH_007-email365.jpg

Just imagine some of these relocated to the Olympic Park.
Ah well I can but dream.

^^Great idea. These would look absolutely awesome dotted around the stadium. Though I'm sure toilet facilities will be built into the stadium.

'Pods' are so turn-of-the-century

From bdonline (http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3099433&origin=BDweekly)


Personally I'd like to see some of the pavilions from the Serpentine Gallery or the AA summer pavilions relocated to the Olympic site.

this again proves that temporary need not be minimal or uninspiring.

But in the case of the Olympic Stadium, unfortunately, it is.

But in the case of the Olympic Stadium, unfortunately, it is.

yeah well nothing we can do about it.

http://i32.tinypic.com/swsart.jpg

North towards the Olympic bowl (image thanks to Metroranger)

http://i32.tinypic.com/2u77hio.jpg

and yes the electric pylon's are going...great images Metroranger
keep them coming..thought I would ad to the 2012 stadium thread because
shows the bowl,thanks mate!

Olympic Delivery Authority budget is £496m for state of the art stadium

Fears are growing that the price tag for the 2012 Olympic stadium in east London has risen nearly 10 per cent to £540m, in yet another financial blow for the games.

An Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) spokesman insisted that the budget remained £496m. However, a source close to the project argued that this price could not be met.

The source added: "This is about design development, ensuring that all sustainability and design commitments are met. This is state of the art and highly sustainable and that costs tens of millions."

Sir Robert McAlpine, which built Arsenal Football Club's acclaimed Emirates Stadium, signed an agreement with the ODA last month to construct the Olympic centrepiece. The group is on heavy incentives to meet the budget, but every project tender is "open book", meaning that sub-contractors could come in with higher-than-expected costs.

The London Olympics have suffered many financial blows, the most serious being the near quadrupling of the overall bud-get from £2.375bn to £9.3bn. The athletes' village is in difficulties as developer Lend Lease struggles to raise funds in the credit markets, and the company is also arguing with ODA over infrastructure costs.

However, sources said that the ODA and CLM, the private sector Olympic delivery partner, have been "juggling" costs at the main park where the key venues will be located. One source said: "We have saved a couple of hundred million in procurement, for example ordering steel early before prices go up."

This means that the ODA, headed by David Higgins, has not yet dipped into its £2bn contingency funds.

The ODA spokesman said: "There is endless speculation about Olympic costs. The sta-dium budget has been published and remains at £496m. We are making great progress on site, starting construction three months early [at the end of this month], and are confident the overall budget and contingency is realistic. We will provide an update on the budget in the summer."

Work to start on Olympic stadium in two weeks

The Olympic Stadium will be the centrepiece of the Games

Building work on London's Olympic stadium will begin in two weeks' time, the BBC has learnt.

The £496m stadium in east London will start to take shape on 22 May.

The 80,000-seat stadium will be the centrepiece for the 2012 Games and will host the opening and closing ceremonies as well as the athletics events.

Once the Olympics are over, it will be turned into a 25-000-seat community venue and could also become home to a lower-league football or rugby club.

The construction work is about three months ahead of schedule as work to clear the site has progressed quicker than expected, the BBC's sports correspondent James Pearce said.

The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) said many buildings have been demolished and 800,000 tonnes of contaminated soil has been removed since the clearing work in the Lea Valley area began in July 2007.

Will all those power lines be put underground?

Will all those power lines be put underground?

yes, work to start doing that is due to start very soon

Will all those power lines be put underground?

yes tunnels have been built , so the powerlines can be removed
and go under ground........one of the first things they did!:)

Great to see work is starting

I don't understand why they will reduce the capacity after olympics. Maybe a major team in London will like to use it as home (either rugby or football). I believe that an olympic stadium should always remain as it was built as some kind of historic monument. I really hope someone uses it.

Not going to happen. It will retain an athletics track and for that reason alone no football clubs will want it.

Stadium Breaking Earth Ceremony

A ‘breaking earth ceremony ’ is expected next week at the stadium site, to mark the start work on the new Olympic stadium . The ceremony is expected to have several dignitaries and members of the International Olympic Committee coordination commission, which is making its annual visit to inspect progress.

The mayor will attend his first meeting of the Olympic board this afternoon, the agenda likely to be dominated by preparations for the arrival next week of the International Olympic coordination committee. The IOC's three-day visit will provide the mayor with an early chance to meet perhaps the most crucial stakeholders in the Games.

I don't understand why they will reduce the capacity after olympics. Maybe a major team in London will like to use it as home (either rugby or football). I believe that an olympic stadium should always remain as it was built as some kind of historic monument. I really hope someone uses it.

Current major stadiums:

Wembley: National Football 90,000 only built a couple of years ago and capable of holding athletics events (capacity 60,000)
Twickenham: National Rugby 82,000 currently being upgraded

No football team wants to move into an athletics stadium due to the distance from the pitch, also London teams all have pretty big stadiums already or not enough fans to fill 25,000. There's no mid-range teams

Football stadiums

Arsenal -Emirates: 60,000 built 2005(ish) so very new
Tottenham Hotspur -White Hart Lane: 36,000
Chelsea - Stamford Bridge: 42,000
West Ham - Upton Park 35,000
Charlton - THe Valley 27,000
Fulham - Craven Cottage 25,000
Leyton Orient - Brisbane Rd (small <10,000) they were interested but could not fill stadium even 50%

Rugby: domestic game isn't that popular in London

25,000 is perfect for a dedicated althetics stadium and will be the UK premier venue.

Leyton Orient - Brisbane Rd (small <10,000) they were interested but could not fill stadium even 50%

25,000 is perfect for a dedicated althetics stadium and will be the UK premier venue.

So is it final that Leyton Orient won't be the tenant?

And as for the second thing- you think Don Valley will loose it's status? If they redevelop that stadium a bit more, it will be bigger... (although I cannot say anything about it's functionality and stuff).

This site will be the London Olympic institue after the games. So it doesn't matter if its downgraded to 25,000 seats.

London has many many large stadiums.

London has many many large stadiums.

But none athletic :)

Yes we do..Crystal palace Athletics stadium

Yes we do..Crystal palace Athletics stadium

Look up- he said "many many large stadiums".
While this one is 16 000, compared to Don Valley's 25 000 it's still pretty small.
It could be large in Luxembourg, but not England...

I'd guess the facilties in/around the stadium are as much an issue as the stadium itself. Size wise theres really no need for an 80,000 seat athletics stadium, yes they probabley could get a football tenant if they dropped the rent enough but the extra cost of perminant contruction and mantainance would probabley leave them making a loss.

The only time London could need a stadium larger than 25,000 in the future is if it hosted the world athletics championships or the comonwealth games(both likey to be hosted elsewhere in the UK first) in which case they could use the temp Wembley track setup.

there is no city that needs an 80000 seat athletics stadium for athletics more than once maybe maybe twice. athletic events on the scale of the olympic games only come around once. even the commies only need 40000 seats.

The only time London could need a stadium larger than 25,000 in the future is if it hosted the world athletics championships or the comonwealth games(both likey to be hosted elsewhere in the UK first) in which case they could use the temp Wembley track setup.

So, is there any stadium that has a status of "national athletic stadium"? Or will be?

So, is there any stadium that has a status of "national athletic stadium"? Or will be?

well the UK doesn't need a large athletics stadium. if they need to host one off athletics championships, Wembley can be used in athletics mode.

http://i32.tinypic.com/swsart.jpgWork begins on Olympic stadium today


Construction is beginning at the London 2012 Olympic stadium, three months ahead of schedule.

Work on the 80,000-seater stadium was due to begin in August but the date was moved forward, and the first steps in digging the foundations begin today.

The Olympic Delivery Authority said it had been able to make an early start because of progress already made on site.

After the Games, the £500 million stadium will be turned into a 25,000 seat venue.

The milestone comes as members of the International Olympic Committee's Co-ordination Commission enter the last day of their three-day visit to London.

The 18-strong group has been treated to a series of presentations from London 2012 chairman Lord Coe and Olympic Delivery Authority chairman John Armitt, as well as meeting Olympics minister Tessa Jowell and the new Culture Secretary Andy Burnham.

Organisers are expected to say their preparations are on track, and will be hoping to gain praise similar to that of the previous inspection 11 months ago. Work on the 2012 Aquatics Centre is due to start this summer.

Preparation for the Olympics has been marred by reports that the cost of staging the Games has soared by £5 billion since initial estimates were made.

Last month a group of MPs branded the original 2012 estimates "entirely unrealistic" and accused ministers of succumbing to "wishful thinking".

The Commons public accounts committee also said it had little confidence the current estimate of more than £9 billion would not be exceeded.

http://i28.tinypic.com/1zm2cy1.jpg

in^^ this model theres higher new parts?:) could be for lighting?

Its still a cheap can. lol.

The only positive thing about, is the colours

is it really such a monstrous cost to purchase a bit more of that fabric to cover spectators rather than all that steel around the facade. im all for timber.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/other_sport_enl_1194433919/img/1.jpg
Im late for this but My God, is this shit the new London stadium?! has London moved to the Kalahari? How awful (like the their nutty Logo!). What the hell were those crazy poms thinking this time? I loved the leafy design and expected it to go up like planned. Its a scam and I feel the IOC should immediately threaten to take away the Olympics from London if they dont stick to the one that won them the Games in the first place. They are not a fuck serious about the 2012 Games, and should have rather stepped down if this is the case. Paris would have done something iconic and outstanding, not a f&cking ricebowl...shit, what IS that thing!!!:gaah:

I agree its shit but Paris were going to use the Stade de France which is already built and pretty boring (although still better than this)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/other_sport_enl_1194433919/img/1.jpg
Im late for this but My God, is this shit the new London stadium?! has London moved to the Kalahari? How awful (like the their nutty Logo!). What the hell were those crazy poms thinking this time? I loved the leafy design and expected it to go up like planned. Its a scam and I feel the IOC should immediately threaten to take away the Olympics from London if they dont stick to the one that won them the Games in the first place. They are not a fuck serious about the 2012 Games, and should have rather stepped down if this is the case. Paris would have done something iconic and outstanding, not a f&cking ricebowl...shit, what IS that thing!!!:gaah:

yes you have been late and with a stupid comment like that i can see why.Any bid thats won does not build the stadium they bid with.Before you start criticising dude your country just better make sure 2010 goes ok.and for your info the ioc commitee that has just visited has given london a mark of 9.75 out of 10 for the progress so far reached as they are impressed.

couldnt care less what it looked like, its meant to hold 80,000 people for what 2 months for the olympic and paralympics games?! then it gets reduced to 25,000 for the rest of its life so im more concerned what it looks like afterwards! if it was going to be used by a football team afterwards im sure they would have made it more architecturally interesting

The design of the Olympic Stadium is OK, and there is no need to go over the top since it will be mostly torn down after the event.

I hope that Wembley is uitlized and given a lot of airtime during the Olympics. THAT is a beautiful stadium.

Fools, they shouldn't even had bovered with the olympic stadium, they could had just used wembley.

And that would be even more "ecological"

Fools, they shouldn't even had bovered with the olympic stadium, they could had just used wembley.

And that would be even more "ecological"

In athletics mode wembley would only host 60,000,good for a world champinships but too small for an olympics

well if they really wanted they could find a way of holding 10,000 tempory seats, they could had done something similar like in sydney, the two end extra stands.

And since the roof retracts at the end stands, this should had been no problem.

I think it should also depic the idea of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table

well if they really wanted they could find a way of holding 10,000 tempory seats, they could had done something similar like in sydney, the two end extra stands.

And since the roof retracts at the end stands, this should had been no problem.

smart never thought of that. just remove the part of the roof that supports the retractable portion when in use. change the spacious seats in some areas to gain space. its something to look at. IOC requires 60,000 but 75,000 could be possible with some tweaking.

Source:Government Response to the Fourth Report from the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee Session 1999-2000

WNSL indicated in its evidence to the Committee (page 48/para 158 of Minutes of Evidence) that Stadium Australia has minimum C60 sight-lines based on a focal point on the outside edge of the outside lane around the whole track. It also indicated that the Wembley proposal reached this standard only for the inside or second lane in parts of the stadium. The independent report submitted by Ellerbe Beckett confirms that, taking a focal point in the outside edge of the track as in Stadium Australia, the proposals put forward by WNSL to provide 80,000 seats in athletics mode, would reduce the C value of the first eight rows of seating in the lower bowl, and some seats at the ends of the stadium, to below C60. Thus the view of the track would be seriously compromised for a significant proportion of spectators.

We agree with the Committee’s conclusion that the platform solution for athletics with 80,000 spectators does not meet the sight-line standards in the design briefs for the Olympic stadia for 1996 and 2000. It is clear that, if we are to mount a bid with a realistic chance of success, we must do so with a stadium which offers comparable, or better, quality.

Source:WEMBLEY STADIUM ATHLETICS PROVISION ANALYSIS by Sports Concepts

GENERAL
An event will benefit from being held at the new Wembley Stadium because of the “state of the art” facilities. In terms of spectator amenities, athletics will benefit more than most. The stadium is designed for 90,000 spectators, yet when the stadium is configured for athletics, approximately 68,400 spectators have access to the same facilities. With the addition of temporary seats, the capacity of the Stadium whilst in athletics mode can be increased to 70,000 for athletics, football, and rugby events.

The additional 1,600 seats can be added on temporary seating decks on and between the disabled seating platforms located at the edge of the raised platform. Three rows are proposed that extend approximately 50 percent of the way around the seating bowl. These seats provide good sight lines to the track and infield because they are elevated above the existing seating bowl.

Does Wembley have room for:

1. a warm-up track ?

2. additional free space around for sponsors' tents, Ceremonies materiel storage, etc.?

3. an auxiliary stadium used as a staging point for the athletes and performers for the Opening Ceremony?

4. Where would 2012 stage its football finals if Wembley were in a T&F configuration?

5. And how would they covert it back to football mode for the final Saturday; and then back to T&F for the final Sunday? Can't be done in 24 hours each way.

Does Wembley have room for:

1. a warm-up track ?

2. additional free space around for sponsors' tents, Ceremonies materiel storage, etc.?

3. an auxiliary stadium used as a staging point for the athletes and performers for the Opening Ceremony?

4. Where would 2012 stage its football finals if Wembley were in a T&F configuration?

5. And how would they covert it back to football mode for the final Saturday; and then back to T&F for the final Sunday? Can't be done in 24 hours each way.
report: Wembley athletics track study report (http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sportengland.org%2Fwembley_track_study.pdf&ei=LS44SPWUIYagebCMkNMN&usg=AFQjCNH_6_oMLCb_OCJ-IsAicTF1atLlMw&sig2=ZWVipx2Had87Nxb0Du9g_g)
1. See online report which considers alternative sites for a warm-up track
2. Additional free space would be the same issue for a world cup match in terms of hospitality. Would wembley arena not suffice? The stadium itself is quite large in terms of the areas available for sponsors/vip's etc.
3. Various sites (of which there are 4/5) considered for the warm up track could use a temporary structure or structures to house athletes. OR wembley arena
4. football competitions could also be accommodated at wembley but would take place at a reduced capacity of 70,000. numerous alternatives for football finals exist if 70,000 is too low. twickenham..old trafford?
5. why would they need to convert it to football mode. we're talking about the olympic football competition not the world cup. the main olympic stadium in athletics mode is fine for football finals for which the IOC only require a capacity of 50,000. A stadium with an athletics track of capacity around 70,000 hosted the 2006 world cup final. I dont see any major difference with wembley.
4.

report: Wembley athletics track study report (http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sportengland.org%2Fwembley_track_study.pdf&ei=LS44SPWUIYagebCMkNMN&usg=AFQjCNH_6_oMLCb_OCJ-IsAicTF1atLlMw&sig2=ZWVipx2Had87Nxb0Du9g_g)
5. why would they need to convert it to football mode. we're talking about the olympic football competition not the world cup. the main olympic stadium in athletics mode is fine for football finals for which the IOC only require a capacity of 50,000. A stadium with an athletics track of capacity around 70,000 hosted the 2006 world cup final. I dont see any major difference with wembley.

My question #5 was also poised on the presumption that Wembley would be considered as the Olympic stadium. Obviously, if the Olympic stadium was separate (as it will be), then my questions are moot.

Re the Wembley athletics track study report: how very interesting!! Thanks. Was this in preparation for the 2005 IAAF World Championships which London ultimately bailed out on?

If Wembley had been used I very much doubt London would have gotten the games as...

No legacy for athletics.

Stadium not close to olympic park/village and warmup facilties.

Less of a unified plan.

The idea of a multi purpose stadium being the idea solution is easy to understand(why politicans use it so often IMHO) but the reality has tended to be a bit of a disaster.

View of the Stadium bowl from the Greenway May 24 2008.

Wikimapia link (http://wikimapia.org/#lat=51.5387883&lon=-0.0161469&z=17&l=0&m=a&v=2).

http://i31.tinypic.com/sg49d2.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/10wv050.jpg

Barrier goes up to protect Northern Outfall Sewer (Greenway) (http://wikimapia.org/#lat=51.5360522&lon=-0.016855&z=17&l=0&m=a&v=2) from high vehicles.

http://i28.tinypic.com/fv9zma.jpg

For sale: flatpack stadium suitable for Olympic Games. One careful owner ...

· London aims to recycle arena to offset costs
· Plan to ship 55,000 seats across Atlantic

Robert Booth
The Guardian,
Tuesday May 27 2008

The organisers of the London Olympics are planning to pass on more than just the Olympic flag to the next host city when the games end in September 2012. Senior officials have opened talks with Chicago, one of the early favourites to host the 2016 games, which could result in the bulk of London's main stadium being dismantled, boxed-up and shipped across the Atlantic to be rebuilt.

The Guardian has learned that 55,000 seats from London's 80,000-seat arena could be transported to Washington Park in the Illinois capital and used to enlarge a planned, 7,500-capacity community arena into Chicago's main Olympic stadium.

The tactic of recycling the Olympic stadium has been billed as the first step in a new approach to the games, which could become more like a travelling circus to keep costs down and allow poorer countries to play host. Baku in Azerbaijan, Rio de Janeiro and Prague are also bidding for the 2016 games alongside Tokyo, Madrid, and Doha in Qatar.

The plan could also raise tens of millions of pounds to help offset the rising costs of the London games which have quadrupled to £9.3bn. The cost of the main stadium has already risen from £280m to £496m. A spokesman for London's Olympic Delivery Authority said: "It is right that we should explore any opportunities that would recoup some of the cost incurred by the lottery and the public purse."

David Higgins, chief executive of the ODA, last week began talks with his counterpart in Chicago and said he is willing to have the same discussions with other bidding cities in the coming months.

London's deal with Chicago has become a possibility because both cities have decided to build main stadiums with small numbers of permanent seats while erecting giant seating scaffolds for the two weeks of competition. Talks have focused on how London's stadium might be bolted rather than welded together, ensuring the materials used allow it to function properly in another country and climate, and how sections might fit on a cargo ship.

It would be the first time in history that a stadium of this size has been moved. Last year, 16,000 seats which had previously been used at the 2006 football World Cup in Germany were shipped to Barbados where they were used in the ICC Cricket World Cup. "If we could box it up and ship it to the next games, that's something that could benefit the Olympic movement," said Doug Arnott, director of sports and operations at Chicago 2016. "We have had preliminary discussions about what London's stadium design team are planning and how it might fit in. This is to do with the responsible use of materials and trying to avoid leaving infrastructure that will burden a city."

Chicago could include the plan to reuse London's stadium in its bid documents which will be presented to the International Olympic Committee later this year. A spokesman for the ODA said: "We have only held preliminary and very recent discussions with Chicago - at their instigation - covering some of the technical aspects of relocating so many seats, but it is obviously good news that there is already interest in re-using them. We will also continue to explore options to relocate facilities within the UK as a priority wherever possible."

HOK Sport, architects of London's Olympic stadium, have deliberately designed the arena as a kit in part. A permanent concrete bowl of 25,000 seats will remain in place for athletics, lower league football and rugby, but every other component could be sold on. Chicago has made staging a low-impact games a core part of its bid. It is using several existing arenas, including Soldier Field where the Chicago Bears NFL team play, and the Chicago Bulls' basketball arena will host gymnastics and basketball. "Chicago think this would be a coup for their bid, and would show they are putting their money where their mouth is on their commitment to sustainability," said a source.

Last week Gordon Brown joined members of the International Olympic Committee at the site of London's Olympic stadium in east London as building work began ahead of schedule. The IOC gave London's preparations a ringing endorsement but London's mayor, Boris Johnson, has pledged to drive down costs.

In numbers

55,000 Number of seats left over after the London Olympics

10,000 Tonnes of steel in London's stadium - it is the lightest Olympic stadium yet

7,500 Number of seats in Chicago's Washington Park stadium after the games, if it wins the bid

$0 Cost to the public purse of Chicago's bid. It is funded by the private sector

^^ I thought the termporary stands would go to Glasgow first for their 2014 Games?

I've held this idea all along. Especially for American cities w/o a sufficiently large T&F stadium. The USOC could own the material, and rent it out to its chosen cities.

So Chicago would still have to add some 25,000 seats (including the permanent 5,000 it plans on leaving behind).

Then after Chicago, it could then head to Capetown for 2020 (as Mo as opined before). So, it may be the 'lucky stadium.'

It could also be used for a World Cup staging.

Bad journalism.... Chicago is not the Illinois capital ;)

^^ I thought the termporary stands would go to Glasgow first for their 2014 Games?


why does it need 55,000 temporary seats it has a stadium? it has hampden which more than meets CWG capacity requirements.

All I can say is that it might cost Chicago more to purchase the 55,000 seats than building from scratch. London better offer some major discount on those used seats/trusses etc.

well if they really wanted they could find a way of holding 10,000 tempory seats, they could had done something similar like in sydney, the two end extra stands.

And since the roof retracts at the end stands, this should had been no problem.

theres no way they could do to wembley what they did in sydney...it just couldnt happen

The Guardian has learned that 55,000 seats from London's 80,000-seat arena could be transported to Washington Park in the Illinois capital and used to enlarge a planned, 7,500-capacity community arena into Chicago's main Olympic stadium.

WRONG!

1 to 10

Athens Olympics Stadium = 8.00 (Calatrava)

Beijing Olympics Stadium = 9.8 (Herzog & Meuron)

London Olympics Stadium = 6.5 (...?)

1 to 10

Athens Olympics Stadium = 8.00 (Calatrava)

Beijing Olympics Stadium = 9.8 (Herzog & Meuron)

London Olympics Stadium = 6.5 (...?)

? large text...oooh

1 to 10

Athens Olympics Stadium = 8.00 (Calatrava)

Beijing Olympics Stadium = 9.8 (Herzog & Meuron)

London Olympics Stadium = 6.5 (...?)

i wonder what your favorite stadium is...:nuts:

New Stadium Wrap

Following the recommendation by CABE to expose the temporary elements of the stadium rather than hide them, the stadium wrap has been adjusted to expose elements of temporary nature of the stadium.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/stadiumpodview.jpg
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/stadiumwrap.jpg
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/stadiumroofmodel.jpg

well if they really wanted they could find a way of holding 10,000 tempory seats, they could had done something similar like in sydney, the two end extra stands.

And since the roof retracts at the end stands, this should had been no problem.

Surely the retractable roof and all the support structure for it is one of the most expensive elements of the stadium (I know it was at Telstra Dome here in Melbourne)... So, to deconstruct that, then deconstruct the ends of the stadium in order to allow two big ugly 'end zones' to be constructed... Then to rip out the front half dozen rows of seats in order to get a running track around the pitch... Then to return the venue to it's original state afterwards... It would cost a fair bit more than building the entire Olympic Stadium.

The stadium has to be up to the IOC standard which is at least 85,000 occupants (correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty confident that's the standard.) I know the UK (my heritage) can accomplish AT LEAST that. I think a redesign is in order. It's time for the UK to strut it's stuff. Right now in my opinion compared to Beijing and Athens. It just isn't cutting it for me.

The IOC are perfectly happy with this stadium.

i supported this stadium through thick and thin and i still do but that new wrap around is stupid i think they are doing it to save money or something cos it should be complete no exposing like it's doing.But then i'll wait til i see it in person so to speak then really judge it

The stadium has to be up to the IOC standard which is at least 85,000 occupants (correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty confident that's the standard.) I know the UK (my heritage) can accomplish AT LEAST that. I think a redesign is in order. It's time for the UK to strut it's stuff. Right now in my opinion compared to Beijing and Athens. It just isn't cutting it for me.

The IOC benchmark is 60,000. This stadium meets IOC and IAAF requirements.

omg the logo of the london olympics is so bad:ohno:

i think they are doing it to save money or something cos it should be complete no exposing like it's doing.

They are doing it to show people that the upper tiers are a temporary structure and the lightness of the stadium. This is the whole basis of why the stadium is the way it is.

1 to 10

Athens Olympics Stadium* = 8.00

*(NOTE: Calatrava only designed the trussed roof.)

Atlanta = 12.00 (HMK)

Barcelona = 9.5 (Fascisti & Hijos)

Beijing Olympics Stadium = 9.3 (Herzog & Meuron)

Chicago = 11.5 (SOM)

Los Angeles = 11.0

London Olympics Stadium = 6.5 (...?)

how will it look after 2012?

how will it look after 2012?

Only the sunken lower bowl of 25,000 permanent seats will remain.

and the roof?

actually i asked for pics :D

There are no pics. It depends whoever uses the stadium afterwards.

[B][COLOR="Purple"][SIZE="6"]1 to 10

Athens Olympics Stadium* = 8.00



use normal sized text or you'll just be considered a spammer.

^^ and a spanner.

The stadium has to be up to the IOC standard which is at least 85,000 occupants (correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty confident that's the standard.) I know the UK (my heritage) can accomplish AT LEAST that. I think a redesign is in order. It's time for the UK to strut it's stuff. Right now in my opinion compared to Beijing and Athens. It just isn't cutting it for me.

Hundreds of millions of pounds are not going to be wasted so the UK can "strut its stuff", money that would be much better spent on perminant structures.

The stadium really isnt anything speical but I see very little problem with it either, certainly nowhere near the diaster that was Atlanta in 96.

It may not be an architectural wonder on the outside, but on the inside is where it is going to come alive. It's the tightest bowl I think in an Olympic stadium which is going to create an incredible atmosphere.

If they are only keeping the sunken bowl, then IMO they should have a glass dome over the top of it when it is in Legacy Mode which is open at the top. That would look cool.

http://allsaintsgazette.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/wembley-stadium-small.jpg

Theres no need to remove anything.

Thats how wembley looks withan open roof. They just need to add 2 wooden temporery end stands to that (with there own steel support, so that the wemblay remains untouched)

Thats how wembley looks withan open roof. They just need to add 2 wooden temporery end stands to that (with there own support, so that the wemblay remains untouched)

I wonder about some people on here I really do.

masterpaul
WTF :D
Do you know how high the stands are? :)

Thats how wembley looks withan open roof. They just need to add 2 wooden temporery end stands to that (with there own steel support, so that the wemblay remains untouched)

lol?
wooden stands on Wembley?

[B][SIZE="4"]
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/stadiumroofmodel.jpg

Thats not it, is it? :ohno:

Thats not it, is it? :ohno:


Of course not. That's a model, duh.

What about those two pillars?

They called that: Inspiration from old wemblay.

lol

It's wind test model so I expect the pillars are just to hold up that bit of the roof structure, which is reality will be a cable roof structure held up to the steel ring on the top.

The pillars won't exist because every seat has a direct view onto the track.

Is it circular or oval shaped, its hard to tell?

As for exposing the temporary structure, whats the point? People will be well aware its a temporary stadium, they dont need constantly reminding.

Is it circular or oval shaped, its hard to tell?

Oval.

As for exposing the temporary structure, whats the point? People will be well aware its a temporary stadium, they dont need constantly reminding.

Well reading many of the posts on here makes me feel not many do realise.

Is it circular or oval shaped, its hard to tell?

As for exposing the temporary structure, whats the point? People will be well aware its a temporary stadium, they dont need constantly reminding.

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

do you have more plans?

do you have more plans?

http://planning.london2012.com/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=K0LTMFSZK0000

EDIT
WTF
why i can't download the files?
takes too much time :ohno:

hmm i could download them almost instantly!

What about those two pillars?

Pillars? Those are going to be 2 giant toothpicks for the Opening Ceremony -- signifying the first 2 London Olympics -- 1908 and 1948!! :lol:

crapy stadium design with a crapy logo....good job London! We knew you guys would not live up to the standards Beijing is setting.

crapy stadium design with a crapy logo....good job London! We knew you guys would not live up to the standards Beijing is setting.

And atlanta did eh that stadium was as bland as any olympics i have seen and london is not worse than that i can tell you

And atlanta did eh that stadium was as bland as any olympics i have seen and london is not worse than that i can tell you

Well i can say that during the olympics Atlanta did suck but it was never made to look attractive, just to save money on the very nice baseball stadium it was to become

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/23774241_0011072c4c.jpg?v=0

Well i can say that during the olympics Atlanta did suck but it was never made to look attractive, just to save money on the very nice baseball stadium it was to become

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/23774241_0011072c4c.jpg?v=0

That was an excellent and most judicious recycling of facilities. It would simply have withered if they kept it as a track stadium. I was part of the Opening Ceremony.

BTW, where did they move that god-awful Cauldron Tower to?

And atlanta did eh that stadium was as bland as any olympics i have seen and london is not worse than that i can tell you

That was a nice stadium for 1996, and dont lie to your self, you know that back then you thought that is was cool looking

That was a nice stadium for 1996, and dont lie to your self, you know that back then you thought that is was cool looking
Yeah, we know- everybody loves all that is American, some people just don't realize that :)
By the way- what en aloborate signature :lol:

We knew you guys would not live up to the standards Beijing is setting.

Good. London would bankrupt itself if it tried to.

That was a nice stadium for 1996, and dont lie to your self, you know that back then you thought that is was cool looking

To mop it was a very ugly Olympic stadium, but I like what they did with it afterwords!

That was a nice stadium for 1996, and dont lie to your self, you know that back then you thought that is was cool looking

looks good now as a baseball stadium but as an olympic stadium simply the worst there has been.Not everything ameriacan is great you know

To mop it was a very ugly Olympic stadium, but I like what they did with it afterwords!

was awful. would have preferred if the entire stadium was just temporary like the temporary additions they added to form the stadium bowl.

Some stuff from the planning documents. The plan is from the podium level, showing the permanent seating in the bowl, and location of the surrounding pods.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2237/2534215928_cc6fdd6187_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3131/2534218774_eb6012aabf_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/2533406355_208621b8c7_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2323/2534222760_eeeaf58c8e_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/2533409193_f2cfd0e912_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2151/2533410445_89a8c88749_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3282/2533411713_d90a2959a2_b.jpg

This stadium should go up quickly shouldn't it?

Thanks a lot DarJoLe
Can you post more plans etc?

Its terrible. It looks completly messed up, no harmony in it.

was awful. would have preferred if the entire stadium was just temporary like the temporary additions they added to form the stadium bowl.

If they didnt plan to turn it into a baseball stadium afterwards it would have been a lot nicer obviously

This stadium should go up quickly shouldn't it?

Three years. To be completed summer 2011.

i quite like it.

what the hell is a vomitory entrance though? does one spew as one walks through it?

I don't know who came up with this terminology. I guess it's supposed to look like an open mouth (instead of a doorway) that "vomits" people in and out of the stadium :nuts:


I guess one should look up what the (ethymological) dictionary has to say on "vomit".

i changed my mind looking at the last pic, the new wrap around does actually look pretty good.

what doesnt make sense is why they want this stadium to look so fancy when half of it is going to be demolished. What a waste of money. Sometimes simple is beautiful. A two decked stadium with a simple roof is really all thats needed IMO.

Good. London would bankrupt itself if it tried to.

Then London doesn't deserve it. I love London but it has already had two Olympics. The IOC has made a poor decision.

If they didnt plan to turn it into a baseball stadium afterwards it would have been a lot nicer obviously
AGREED!

Well i can say that during the olympics Atlanta did suck but it was never made to look attractive, just to save money on the very nice baseball stadium it was to become

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/23774241_0011072c4c.jpg?v=0

They did not suck. Torino sucked.

iwhat the hell is a vomitory entrance though? does one spew as one walks through it?

:lol: :lol: Yes, as an homage to the ancient Roman rulers of Britain. The site is being built on an ancient Roman whorehouse.

one is holding oneself back at making a comment about salt lake city....ahem corruption and bribery ahem.

back to the topic. i am become very positive towards this stadium. functional, looks good yet wont be a complete waste of space after the 20 odd days of the olympics.

london doesnt need a new massive stadium so this is the perfect idea imo!

They did not suck. Torino sucked.

Torino had class. Something Atlanta unfortunately could not buy.

Then London doesn't deserve it. I love London but it has already had two Olympics. The IOC has made a poor decision.

the ioc made the best decision on the best bid and it won.Why build a major spectacular stadium which would only be used at least twice a year or whatever.The IOC seen this thats why london won because of the legacy it leaves behind.And one wonders why New york has never had an olympics

They did not suck. Torino sucked.

The Torino stadium I liked very much, specialy as they did not need it realy because it where Wintergames. I saw it as a nice extra to be hounest. Very friendy looking stadium and that says a lot when i say this, because it is actualy some kine of athletic stadium in descise...

Some fantastic pictures there. The lightness of this venue, surrounded by parkland and water is beuatiful and in my opinion will prove a breath of fresh air after the monolithic structures we'll see at this year's Games (impressive though they are). It mightn't be an architectural marvel like Beijing's stadium but there is something intrinsically beuatiful in the simplicity of this structure. I said on another forum more than a year before we won the bid that I hoped the Olympic Park would be like Wimbledon on a grand scale i.e. as much about the park, the environment and the atmosphere as the architecture. These renderings are exactly what I was hoping to see; faublous!

Then London doesn't deserve it.

So basically you're saying that only cities whom deserve the Olympics are the ones that bankrupt themselves in the process?

With that thinking no city in their right mind would ever bid let alone stage one.

The Olympics is about sport, not architecture. Leave architecture to the world Expos.

Torino had class. Something Atlanta unfortunately could not buy.

That doesnt really make sense

So basically you're saying that only cities whom deserve the Olympics are the ones that bankrupt themselves in the process?

With that thinking no city in their right mind would ever bid let alone stage one.

The Olympics is about sport, not architecture. Leave architecture to the world Expos.

Hey Montreal is a city that springs to mind how long did they take to pay for the olympics of '76

Torino had class. Something Atlanta unfortunately could not buy.

That's apples and orange, Mo... or olives and peaches, as the case may be. One is an old-world city; the other is an emerging New World city only some 135 years in the early 90s. How would you like to compare Johannesburg to Paris? :ohno:

What Atlanta did in its 135 years or so, of history -- not even the ancient city of Athens could do -- snagging the Centennial edition of the Olympic Games, was truly remarkable for a B-tier city. And in the process, made itself a fairly presentable modern city without bankrupting itself to the gills!!

That's apples and orange, Mo... or olives and peaches, as the case may be. One is an old-world city; the other is an emerging New World city only some 135 years in the early 90s. How would you like to compare Johannesburg to Paris? :ohno:

What Atlanta did in its 135 years or so, of history -- not even the ancient city of Athens could do -- snagging the Centennial edition of the Olympic Games, was truly remarkable for a B-tier city. And in the process, made itself a fairly presentable modern city without bankrupting itself to the gills!!

True, and Atlanta used the idea of building stadiums to be reused later to perfection

one is holding oneself back at making a comment about salt lake city....ahem corruption and bribery ahem.

back to the topic. i am become very positive towards this stadium. functional, looks good yet wont be a complete waste of space after the 20 odd days of the olympics.

london doesnt need a new massive stadium so this is the perfect idea imo!
I wasn't talking about how it was chosen. I was talking about the ACTUAL games. Which Salt Lake City excelled. And for Salt Lake City to keep the games right after 9/11 just shows that no one really cared about that bribery and "corruption". And this city WILL host again. We are trying so hard to prepare this city for the 2018 and 2022 bid. BTW I'm Atlantian. London dosen't need a huge stadium. It just needs to meet the IOC standards and needs a better looking one. The LOCOG needs to reform it's planning and design team.

So basically you're saying that only cities whom deserve the Olympics are the ones that bankrupt themselves in the process?

With that thinking no city in their right mind would ever bid let alone stage one.

The Olympics is about sport, not architecture. Leave architecture to the world Expos. No what I'm saying is London already had two. I was all for London when it was chosen. But these designs and that horrible logo is deterring me away from my acceptance of the decision.

Torino had class. Something Atlanta unfortunately could not buy. Could not buy? How so?

I wasn't talking about how it was chosen. I was talking about the ACTUAL games. Which Salt Lake City excelled. And for Salt Lake City to keep the games right after 9/11 just shows that no one really cared about that bribery and "corruption". And this city WILL host again. We are trying so hard to prepare this city for the 2018 and 2022 bid. BTW I'm Atlantian. London dosen't need a huge stadium. It just needs to meet the IOC standards and needs a better looking one. The LOCOG needs to reform it's planning and design team.

9.75/10 not good enough for you then, because that's what the IOC evaluation team just gave our preparations - or do you think we hid our stadium plans away from them when they arrived? Thankfully they decide the standards - not you - and they are perfectly happy that London 2012 are meeting their standards.

They, like London 2012 are mindful of what London needs and are grateful that billions of pounds worth of our money is being put towards their event. They are not armchair critics and they are perfectly happy with what they see.

I understand if you personally dislike the design (though I'd disagree with your opinion) but to pretend it doesn't meet IOC standards when everything we've heard in the last couple of weeks says the opposite is ridiculous.

9.75/10 not good enough for you then, because that's what the IOC evaluation team just gave our preparations - or do you think we hid our stadium plans away from them when they arrived? Thankfully they decide the standards - not you - and they are perfectly happy that London 2012 are meeting their standards.

They, like London 2012 are mindful of what London needs and are grateful that billions of pounds worth of our money is being put towards their event. They are not armchair critics and they are perfectly happy with what they see.

I understand if you personally dislike the design (though I'd disagree with your opinion) but to pretend it doesn't meet IOC standards when everything we've heard in the last couple of weeks says the opposite is ridiculous.

The IOC and its experts between them have probably seen/organized/managed tons of olympic games between them. I think Ill trust their judgement over the judgement of people who believe Atlanta 1996 had more class than Torino. Or even some class to begin with.

9.75/10 not good enough for you then, because that's what the IOC evaluation team just gave our preparations - or do you think we hid our stadium plans away from them when they arrived? Thankfully they decide the standards - not you - and they are perfectly happy that London 2012 are meeting their standards.

They, like London 2012 are mindful of what London needs and are grateful that billions of pounds worth of our money is being put towards their event. They are not armchair critics and they are perfectly happy with what they see.

I understand if you personally dislike the design (though I'd disagree with your opinion) but to pretend it doesn't meet IOC standards when everything we've heard in the last couple of weeks says the opposite is ridiculous. Capacity. I'm talking about capacity. And if it does meet capacity than I take what I said back. And the stadium that was presented to the IOC in the bid process was not this stadium. I like that stadium design much better. Like I said before I was all for these Olympics. So for you to add that and make it a basis for your retaliation to what I said is irrelevant. What're the IOC's comments for the designs?

Capacity. I'm talking about capacity. And if it does meet capacity than I take what I said back. And the stadium that was presented to the IOC in the bid process was not this stadium. I like that stadium design much better. Like I said before I was all for these Olympics. So for you to add that and make it a basis for your retaliation to what I said is irrelevant. What're the IOC's comments for the designs?

The IOC's benchmark is 60,000 in terms of capacity of the olympic stadium.

As its been said before the stadium shown to the IOC was a conceptual design, along with the conceptual designs for the velodrome, conceptual designs for the temporary arenas, conceptual designs for the fencing arena.

http://img.findaproperty.com/library/libp3720.jpg


Like Beijing bid for the 2008 games with a conceptual design for its aquatic centre, conceptual design for its olympic stadium, conceptual design for the national indoor stadium, conceptual design for the baseball venue etc.

http://www.strategy4china.com/images/ownertender.gif

Like Sydney bid for the Games with conceptual designs for its Olympic stadium and conceptual designs for other venues.

http://www.austadiums.com/stadiums/special/photos/sydneyolympic.jpg

I hope that gets the message across that London bid for the Games like previous bid cities and host with conceptual designs.

Thank you Mo. I don't know why people find this so difficult to understand.

The capacity is 80,000 by the way; exactly the same as Chicago's proposed stadium for 2016 though smaller than Beijing's or Syndey's in Games mode.

Capacity. I'm talking about capacity. And if it does meet capacity than I take what I said back.

Do you honestly think they go this far with regards to the design without knowing how many people it held?

Have you even seen the plans on the planning documents? Four years before the Games even the screws that hold the temporary components together have been designed and appear on the planning application; so I think something as large and important as how many people it holds has been calculated, don't you think?

And since when did an Olympics rely on the design of the stadium anyway? Thank god London is pulling the Olympics back from the architectural one-upmanship white elephant direction it was heading in and into something a bit more sustainable and remembering who has to pay for the upkeep of these potentially mammoth structures after the Games have been and gone.

i was a hoping an outstanding design for the 2012 Olympic comparing to the Beijing Stadium

i was a hoping an outstanding design for the 2012 Olympic comparing to the Beijing Stadium

This is an outstanding design. It's the biggest temporary stadium in the world for god's sake.

Just one question:
Do you know London and its current Stadiums?
Danm, this city does not need a "super" 80k athetic stadium!!!

Best solution have been made!

Just one question:
Do you know London and its current Stadiums?
Danm, this city does not need a "super" 80k athetic stadium!!!


No, but the Olympics need one. (albeit it doesnt need to have 80k I guess)
Sorry but the current stadium is a poor effort imo.

Well I'd rather have a poor effort that leaves Londoners with a stadium they can afford to maintain than a massive iconic one they can't.

Im sure they could have had a decent affordable stadium.
I mean were talking about London here, which is not a poor city.

i was a hoping an outstanding design for the 2012 Olympic comparing to the Beijing Stadium

Why don't people listen. Why is it that the general public just do not listen. It is most disheartening.

I really love the infusion of such BEAUTIFUL COLORS to this version of the Olympics.

Then London doesn't deserve it. I love London but it has already had two Olympics. The IOC has made a poor decision.


Why don't you bugger off and take your moaning somewhere else.

I wonder where this obsession with the iconic comes from. Were there critics at the time Sydney was designing its venues saying they weren't interesting enough? If there weren't, why has this new obsession developed; is it becasue of Beijing or because of Calatrava and Athens? If there were critics their opinions have long been forgotten haven't they? The Olympics are about soooo much more than the architecture of the venues. Sydney proved that by hosting the best ever Games (one that Beijing with all its bling will find difficult to match) and so will London.

I guess people just expect something special for the Olympics. And the current stadium just looks like an ordinary ground to be honest.
I guess that a lot of people would have just expected that theyd roll up their sleeves and built something interesting since the whole world will be watching.

I wonder where this obsession with the iconic comes from. Were there critics at the time Sydney was designing its venues saying they weren't interesting enough? If there weren't, why has this new obsession developed; is it becasue of Beijing or because of Calatrava and Athens? If there were critics their opinions have long been forgotten haven't they? The Olympics are about soooo much more than the architecture of the venues. Sydney proved that by hosting the best ever Games (one that Beijing with all its bling will find difficult to match) and so will London.

Exactly. It's not like an uniconic stadium is going to ruin the Games- we already have a massive amount of iconic structures in the London Olympics; the Aquatic Centre, Wembley, The Dome, Greenwich Park, Horse Guards Parade, Wimbledon.

That's more than Beijing and Athens combined.

Anyway, it says something that everyone is bitching about the stadium not being iconic enough when the IOC have given it a massive thumbs up and have said it should be used as a model to future bidding cities in how to make future Games more sustainable and within reach for smaller cities and countries.

I guess that a lot of people would have just expected that theyd roll up their sleeves and built something interesting since the whole world will be watching.

Yeah, because it's not like London is building the BIGGEST URBAN ECOPARK in 150 years to house all these Olympic venues, is it.

The world is indeed watching but few people beyond the realms of SSC will mark an Olympics down because the main Stadium isn't an architectural marvel.

Again, I point to Syndey GNU. Relativley uninteresting venues compared to 2004 and 2008 yet the watching world remembers them as the best Games ever.

That's more than Beijing and Athens combined.



:|:pet:

Yeah, because it's not like London is building the BIGGEST URBAN ECOPARK in 150 years to house all these Olympic venues, is it.

Who carey about an Ecopark though?
What most people will see during the Olympics will be the main stadium.

Again, I point to Syndey GNU. Relativley uninteresting venues compared to 2004 and 2008 yet the watching world remembers them as the best Games ever.


Well I thought the stadium worked quite well there. I wouldnt say that it looked uninteresting during the Olympics

Its a temporary structure FFS. Why waste even more money and time on something thats going to last a couple of weeks?

Who carey about an Ecopark though?
What most people will see during the Olympics will be the main stadium.

I thinks this comment goes to show your lack of understanding of the whole project. The park is integral to 2012. It isn't just the stadium that will be there but many of the other venues too. There will be big screens in the park, on the hills and off the councourses showing the action to crowds sitting in a beautiful, green environment; like Wimbledon but on a massive scale. There will be stages hosting events in the park during the Games. Look at these images, and try to tell me the park isn't important to the Olympic experience:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/130/419917716_8382b42f59_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/148/419909560_58e729de2c_b.jpg

I would certainly prefer understated venues in an environment like this to iconic venues surrounded by very little. Compare the surroundings of London's and Athens' stadiums and suddenly iconic architecture seems a lot less important and the park aspect seems a lot more important. I know which one I'd prefer:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/39/78125530_358d3ab5b8_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/2533409193_f2cfd0e912_b.jpg

The fact that London is regenerating a huge area around the Olympics is something all Olympic fans should be grateful of. And even those not attending the Games but watching them on TV will be grateful of the greenery they see and the atmosphere the park creates.

I thinks this comment goes to show your lack of understanding of the whole project. The park is integral to 2012. It isn't just the stadium that will be there but many of the other venues too. There will be big screens in the park, on the hills and off the councourses showing the action to crowds sitting in a beautiful, green environment; like Wimbledon but on a massive scale. There will be stages hosting events in the park during the Games. Look at these images, and try to tell me the park isn't important to the Olympic experience:

It might be a nice experience for the people who go there, but the millions of people who will watch the games on the telly will probably not see very much of it.
And having a nice olympic park still imo is no excuse for a poor stadium design.

The fact that London is regenerating a huge area around the Olympics is something all Olympic fans should be grateful of. And even those not attending the Games but watching them on TV will be grateful of the greenery they see and the atmosphere the park creates.

Sure, itll be great for Stratford. The area is a bit run down, have to say though that I personally quite liked it when I was there.

i don't think that the Olympic stadium has to be one of the best in the World.

Every city has his unique way.


London's one is IMO the 2nd best solution (Best one would be a 120k Wembley in football mode and 100k in Athletic mode :D )

It might be a nice experience for the people who go there, but the millions of people who will watch the games on the telly will probably not see very much of it.
And having a nice olympic park still imo is no excuse for a poor stadium design.
.

Poor design? surely most people will see only the inside.

Every single one of your points is flawed by some degree.

The fact that London is regenerating a huge area around the Olympics is something all Olympic fans should be grateful of. And even those not attending the Games but watching them on TV will be grateful of the greenery they see and the atmosphere the park creates.

Of course you do realize that it will take many years after the Games for the park to look like in the renderings!
Even if these plants and trees where planted tomorrow they still wouldn't have enough time to grow -no matter what size they have when you plant them!
So unless you feed them growth hormones, my guess is that you'll get lots of grass and trees like in Beijing!
http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/17/birdsnest.jpg

You might be right but my point about the park being integral to the Olympic experience still stands, whether the trees are mature or not.

Its a park. they wont plant seeds. they will plant a variety of trees, big, small, fat, thin. I really wonder sometimes how some of you survive in the real world.

Of course you do realize that it will take many years after the Games for the park to look like in the renderings!
Even if these plants and trees where planted tomorrow they still wouldn't have enough time to grow -no matter what size they have when you plant them!
So unless you feed them growth hormones, my guess is that you'll get lots of grass and trees like in Beijing!
http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/17/birdsnest.jpg

if u note the progress and the dramatic change in the landscape in just one year after a thorough process of decontamination and general preparations for venue construction to begin then 5 years is plenty time to get the park looking good and ready for the games in terms of landscaping. the landscaping unlike beijing or athens is a 7 year process and run concurrently with venue development as the site is cleaned, shaped, recovered and regenerated.
river walls, paths, bridges, down to the type of shrubs have been planned and discussed.

Many of the trees in the London Olympic Park already exist and are being kept during the construction phase. Especially on the western edge of the stadium which is already quite a mini-wood.

You mean to say they've been taken up and will be replanted for 2012? Good idea.

You mean to say they've been taken up and will be replanted for 2012? Good idea.

No they've kept them insitu. You can see on many of the aerial pics, especially along the riverbanks and to the west of the stadium.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/2387480874_fff8d5884b_b.jpg

Really, I'll have to have a look (btw, I hope you don't mind me using your Flickr photos to illustrate my points as in my post on the previous page; you have a great archive of 2012 photos and renderings!)

Its a park. they wont plant seeds. they will plant a variety of trees, big, small, fat, thin. I really wonder sometimes how some of you survive in the real world.

You think London can have this by 2012?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/2533409193_f2cfd0e912_b.jpg


Good for you!
congrats on finding a solution for quick reforestation too :cheers:

btw, some of us survive in the real world just because we are aware of what is possible and what is not!

@ RobH : i do understand your point and totally agree! just wanted to make a note...

It's not impossible to plant that amount of green in the time span. You can get trees and shrubs that are that far grown shipped in.

Really, I'll have to have a look (btw, I hope you don't mind me using your Flickr photos to illustrate my points as in my post on the previous page; you have a great archive of 2012 photos and renderings!)

they are all at the ODA website. DarJole somehow captures them in high quality.
If possible DarJole please capture those aquatic centre pics too at the planning website.

Crossbowman - you can plant mature trees you know! :bash: Its called landscaping.

Of course you do realize that it will take many years after the Games for the park to look like in the renderings!
Even if these plants and trees where planted tomorrow they still wouldn't have enough time to grow -no matter what size they have when you plant them!
So unless you feed them growth hormones, my guess is that you'll get lots of grass and trees like in Beijing!
http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/17/birdsnest.jpg

Well,4 years ago in my backyard we put in a new tree next to a tree that had been there since the house was built in 95. today it is as big and produces the same amount of shade as the other. Soooooooo, yes, you could plant a bunch of trees tomorrow and they would be grown to look like the rendering. And if a tree can grow like that in the dry Texas panhandle, then I bet i could do better in wet London!

Crossbowman - you can plant mature trees you know! :bash: Its called landscaping.

i wanna hit him too because this landscape talk is pointless, especially if the guys has never worked for a landscaping company (great summer job) :bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash:

This was in forbes top ten super stadiums under construction or planning at the moment.Note to all london detractors of the london stadium and why it's being scaled down after the games ,ook at the last sentance at the bottom.

Beijing National Stadium
Beijing, China

Cost: $500 million
Capacity: 91,000 (approximately 80,000 post-Olympics)
Opens: April 2008

Ground was broken in 2003 for the state-of-the-art venue to be used as the central arena for the 2008 Summer Olympics. The stadium will host track and field events, as well as the opening and closing ceremonies. Following the games, expect Beijing to have an expensive white elephant on its hands.

do they really think people are retarded. Wrap a stadium in steel and they think that price is believable....uhm ok..even with cheap child labour, steel inflation is almost unavoidable. that price is a laugh.

from
bdonline.co.uk

Application reads: “The emphasis in the design has been and will continue to be on minimising the quantity of material, whilst still producing the required performance.

By designing a lean, compact and lightweight stadium, the amount of materials used, and the associated embodied energy have been significantly reduced.”

It also highlights the stadium’s sustainability credentials, with the Olympic Delivery Authority claiming these are superior to the Sydney Olympic stadium and other recently completed football stadiums.

However the exact nature of the controversial fabric wrap which forms the stadium’s elevation is still unclear.

“Sustainable materials, options for the roof and wrap fabrics are currently being investigated,” the application states.

“These include materials using recycled polymer based fabric, hemp and where the polymer based fabric can be recycled after use. Many of these materials could also be re-used after the games for other purposes.”

The application also suggests recycled ship containers could be used as internal toilet pods.

do they really think people are retarded. Wrap a stadium in steel and they think that price is believable....uhm ok..even with cheap child labour, steel inflation is almost unavoidable. that price is a laugh.

:lol: I bet the steel alone would be between 170m and 200m dollars, lets say 45,000 tonnes @ about $3800 / tonne. Not sure what steel is per tonne these days though even that could be too low

Just one question:
Do you know London and its current Stadiums?
Danm, this city does not need a "super" 80k athetic stadium!!!

Best solution have been made! ALL OF EUROPE WILL MOST LIKELY BE GOING TO THIS OLYMPICS. CAPCITY COULD USE MORE IMPROVEMENT.

Well I thought the stadium worked quite well there. I wouldnt say that it looked uninteresting during the Olympics I love ANZ Stadium (before they reduced capacity.). Sooooo much better than the Athens Olympic Stadium.

ALL OF EUROPE WILL MOST LIKELY BE GOING TO THIS OLYMPICS. CAPCITY COULD USE MORE IMPROVEMENT.

There will be 8m tickets available for these Games. Even during the bid stage London was only predicting that 80% of them would be sold (pretty much in line with past Olympics, and pretty much in line with other bids' predictions as well). A 90-100,000 seat stadium would only fill for the opening and closing ceremonies and the blue ribband events such as the 100m final. It would undoubtedly cost a huge amount more to build as well.

I suggest you should be more grateful for what London's giving the Olympic movement because not many cities would be able to centre their games on the largest new urban park seen in Europe for over a century; certainly none of the other 2012 bidders anyhow. What London is doing is incredible and having a main stadium with a smaller capacity than the Bird's Nest won't take anything away from the Games in 4 years, trust me.

And Caps lock doesn't make your point any more valid.

ALL OF EUROPE WILL MOST LIKELY BE GOING TO THIS OLYMPICS. CAPCITY COULD USE MORE IMPROVEMENT.

There will be 8m tickets available for these Games. Even during the bid stage London was only predicting that 80% of them would be sold (pretty much in line with past Olympics, and pretty much in line with other bids' predictions as well). A 90-100,000 seat stadium would only fill for the opening and closing ceremonies and the blue ribband events such as the 100m final. It would undoubtedly cost a huge amount more to build as well.

I suggest you should be more grateful for what London's giving the Olympic movement because not many cities would be able to centre their games on the largest new urban park seen in Europe for over a century; certainly none of the other 2012 bidders anyhow. What London is doing is incredible and a smaller capacity than the Bird's Nest won't take anything away from the Games in 4 years, trust me.

And Caps lock doesn't make your point any more valid.

Exactly. This is the kind of stadium and Games the bidding cities for 2016 should be looking to emulate.

ALL OF EUROPE WILL MOST LIKELY BE GOING TO THIS OLYMPICS. CAPCITY COULD USE MORE IMPROVEMENT.

They could have had plans for a larger capacity, but since they are going to demolish half of the stadium after the games it just wouldnt be worth the money

It's really just going to be 3-5,000 less than Beijing's 81,000. (Remember you take out a lot of seats for the press section, TV camera positions and other smaller adjustments.)

It's all kicking off!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3088/2567546259_c846eeea76_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3132/2567558973_c5fffcaa6e_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3085/2567514331_382e9e0605_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/2568334094_ea150e2d31_b.jpg

First tower crane appears on Olympic site.

http://i31.tinypic.com/2aetf1x.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/2v1lzqt.jpg

Second being erected.