Hey, there! Log in / Register
Olympics bid submitted; even if we don't win, mayor says we could be the next Brooklyn
By adamg on Tue, 12/02/2014 - 1:41pm
The Herald reports the private group pushing for the Olympics beat the deadline to submit their official bid; quotes Mayor Walsh as giving Brooklyn as an example of a place that is now booming because of an Olympics bid, even if the city didn't win. Also: City won't be on hook for any debt should the Olympics run over budget by a billion or ten.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Scant details on that promise
I believe that he believes it, I just don't believe it.
Note:
Brooklyn has not been a city since 1898.
Oh no
Is Mayor Walsh going to sell us to NYC ...
You mean 1957 ?
You mean 1957 ?
i would love to see the
i would love to see the Olympics here. finger crossed
You're alone here
You're almost alone here in thinking that.
Good we'll put the stadium right next to your home so you can't use it for two months. Or we'll tell your job to shutdown because employees can't get to work.. lets see how much that effects your paycheck.
People who are for this have absolutely no clue how bad it really will be.
anon is not alone
Only the smugly over confident believe that everybody sees thinking person agrees. I'm with anon, hoping that it happens. The Olympics are a great thing, and Boston is a city that could definitely make it work.
have you
have you lived in a city that hosted the Olympics?
I'll guess its a big no.
I have. I can speak from experience that this will be a monumental train wreck.
So I'll say it again "the people who are in support of this are also the same people who don't have a clue how much of a disaster this really will be"
There's way more to this bid than meets the eye folks. Supporters, take note. You're being taken for a very long ride on a very short train track.
I was in Chicago when...
... it nixed a bid (cheerled by the honchos) for the Olympics and in Atlanta when it had to endure the Olympics. Chicago made the better choice (back then). Very few people in the Atlanta area got much benefits from the Olympics -- and many were _very_ inconvenienced.
Your guess would be wrong
I lived in L.A. in '84. I suspect you are thinking of Atlanta. Not all cities are Atlanta. The particulars of the Boston proposal are very different.
right
And LA is not Boston either.
Boston just does not have the infrastructure or space to host these games. LA and Atlanta did.
Also keep in mind that a lot has changed about the Olympics since 1984.. or for conversation point, since 1996.
hmm
So are you saying that this is Boston, not LA?
LA already had the facilities
LA also has a much larger population and overall budget.
Boston is much closer to Atlanta when it comes to an event this size in a city this size.
Just so folks know..
I was curious so I looked it up.
Atlanta is 132.4 square miles
Boston is 89.63 square miles
LA is 503 square miles
Gee I was gonna say I thought Atlanta was far bigger than Boston. But then again like Atlanta, once you incorporate places like Brighton, W Rox, and the burroughs, it is just as big. Atlanta just seems bigger because its flat and spread out.
Brighton and West Roxbury are
Brighton and West Roxbury are already part of that 89.63 square miles because they're within the city limits of Boston.
Irrelevant
Modern Olympics are only nominally held at the "host city". Look at how scattered the venues are and you'll get the idea.
Use land area, not total area
According to Wikipedia, Boston has 48.42 sq miles of land area (and nearly the same in water, ie the harbor).
So Atlanta, at 131.8 sq mi, is nearly three times the size, at least as regular folks think about it. Even adding the 'inner metro' cities doesn't get us to even. You have to include almost everything inside 128 to get a similar footprint.
(And, ahem, as tape pointed out, West Rox and Brighton are already parts of the city. I would also add that we don't have boroughs.)
Atlanta IS far larger than Boston -
That 89 square mile quote for Boston includes about 50 square miles of Boston Harbor; the landmass is a bit over 45 square miles. Or smaller than Taunton or Barnstable, and about half the size of Plymouth.
Boston is actually 48 square miles
41 square miles is water.
So does Boston
Many facilities will be at existing venues. Neither L.A. nor Atlanta are perfect comparisons. We are much better prepared to handle tourists in a concentrated area, for example, than either of those cities. I urge people to really study the framework of this proposal. Every city is different, it's important that we play to our strengths and not try to be something we aren't. Boston has a lot of strengths, and can definitely make this work. I feel sorry for people who look at something big and fill with fear, I think we are more capable than that.
At any rate, to reiterate the simple point that started this tangent, it is far from true that nobody supports a Boston Olympics. Making the case against it should involve more than smug statements about how it will be an obvious disaster. That won't convince any of us who see reason to think it could work. Better get more specific than that.
Let me guess
You work for a construction firm in the suburbs.
LOL -- These Gueses!
It's always best not to guess. each one from each of you has been completely wrong. See what I was saying about smug arrogance? Do some due diligence before getting too far in to critiquing.
Simplified.
Making the case against it should involve more than smug statements about how it will be an obvious disaster.
1. Boston does not have the infrastructure to support this
2. The T blows and needs to be fixed
3. Traffic Nightmares (i.e. Construction for years prior; traffic DURING the events)
4. Housing Nightmares (i.e. people leaving town, overbooked Hotels, etc)
5. Politicians and back room deals (which is already happening with this)
6. Inconvenience for every single business in the city in terms of keeping your business open, getting employees to work on time, and overall trying not to lose your shirt while the city is shutdown (this applies to non-service businesses, like financial services, etc)
7. Influx of security (a la DNC 2004)
8. Tax reasons.. either tax payers foot the bill, or get milked out of what was more than promised. And of course, who pays. Should people in Greenfield pay for a Boston Olympics. Ask them how they feel about paying taxes for the BigDig and your answer will be similar.
9. Inconvenience for every single person LIVING or WORKING in the city. From getting around during the games, to getting to work, to .. like.. LIVING.
10. The downsides out weigh the upsides to this, period.
Anyone else want to add more. I know I've simplified this list, feel free to elaborate upon it.
Addition to Simplification
I haven't read through all of the comments so I can't say if this has come up. However, I would take every post that has the word "Boston" or "city" in it and change it to "Boston and its surrounding neighbors" and "city" to "city and suburbs."
I live in Quincy and I'd wager that the Olympics wouldn't do my city any favors. Ditto for Cambridge, Boston's neighbor to the North.
Again - apologies if this has already been mentioned. I'll place a second wager that Cape Cod will also be a nightmare.
This bad, bad, very bad idea doesn't stop at the city border.
yes
because this is a regional effect too! This should be thought of a regional thing, not just a City of Boston thing because everyone as far away as Sagamore to Nashua NH will be effected.
Possibly more than that
If you are not able to get to work and your home is rented, you might want to go to the Cape or to Maine ... those places will see a huge influx.
Much better, but...
Reply
HenryAlan: You won't give it a rest, will you?
I have a few moments, so let's do this again
1. No it doesn't. MBTA is hardly sufficient. Add some road issues. Also add that we would need TWICE as many hotel rooms that we have now. Oh and those trailers you talk about, again gotta have space for them. And where? You seem to have the answers, lets have some concrete ones. Where would be put a stadium? Housing? Olympic Village? Please, residents of Roslindale Village are fighting a Petco, do you think people would quick to support a stadium??!?!
2. No The T sucks. Sorry. Its not just about what they will be doing.. and as a long time resident I can tell you many of these things, as much as I pains me to say it, are nothing more than a pipe dream. Because of the way politics work in this state, many of these promises are just hot air, and getting an Olympic bid DOES NOT mean they will actual happen. There's absolutely NO guarnetee. We were told the same thing about the Big Dig and GLX.. and its 2014, a full 10 years after the BigDitch was completed, and we're still waiting for the GLX.
3. Again, you've completed missed the point. Its not just one area, its many. Again, MBTA construction. Road Construction. Hotel Construction. And on and on and on. It isn't going to be confined to just one space.
4. Yes Housing Nightmares. People will rent their homes out and leave the city. It happened in Atlanta because so many people could make bucks on renting their home, and in the end many had problems doing so (theft, destruction, etc etc). Plus again lets add there's no Olympic Village, along with not enough hotel rooms. Trust me Henry, you are very misled if you think this will not be an issue. Housing will be at a crunch.
5. Uh.. Did you miss the article a few weeks ago about Fish, Patrick, and Walsh and a few 'movers and shakers' of Boston already pretty much deciding that this is going to happen with ZERO public input. And as I state in #2, if you think there won't be pay off deals and 'sweet deals' made to friends of politicians, you are very very very wrong. It happens to just about everything that is done in this state. And hello.. John Fish? Please he has the most to gain and he's all buddy buddy with Walsh and Patrick to make sure he gets what he wants. Sounds like a sweet deal to me.
6. Tell that to me and my coworkers who work in DTX or to my roommate who works at MGH. Who are REQUIRED to be on site for our jobs. I cannot work remotely. I have to be in my office. Same could be said for many many people who live and work around the city. This is probably the single most BIGGEST issue that will happen. The city will be closed to everyone, and it will be IMPOSSIBLE to get into or out of it. Didn't we learn ANYTHING from the DNC. Now imagine TWO WEEKS of this. I'm sorry if you think the 'good' will out weight the bad, you're an dumber than a box of rocks. More money lost in productivity will be lost than will be 'made' during the summer of the Olympics. And let's talk small biz too, sorry it won't be a boon for them. It has been proven time and time again, the Olympics do not bring a 'boon' and in the end businesses lost more money out of the deal.
7. Uh No it is not a non issue. You just have nothing to add or in this case try to discredit me with. I think you realize I am very right and just can't find a way to knock me. Security theatre sucked in 2004. I can't even IMAGINE what it will be like after the 2013 bombings. It will be WORSE. So it is not a 'non issue'.
8. You totally missed the boat on what I was trying to say. Is Boston an Boston-only thing, so residents of Boston City pay, or does everyone in the commonwealth pay, from Lee to Provincetown. Why should someone in Lee pay for something that will not affect them very much? (again, same with my example of the big dig, most people in W Mass are resentful that they have to pay for a road that most don't use).
9. Once again, nothing to add, so you shuffle it away. My point are people DO live and work in the city. My #6 was about business loss which is far different and far reaching than Boston residents. Boston residents (and the towns immediately outside of Boston) will be inconvenienced a ton. It will be hard to get around. It will be hard to do daily life like grocery shop, eat out, shop, go for a run, head to the gym, or whatever for everyone. Many of us could care less about the Olympics, so why should we be inconvenienced from it in our daily lives, especially if we don't want it from the start?
10. I think I've made a pretty good case for you. and I'm sorry it will be a lot more than a 'brief' disruption. Its far more than that, and far longer. Plus add the costs to the tax payers, it's just too much (and you're stupid to believe that it will be no cost to the taxpayers) And finally, let me put it to you this way.. alot in this world has changed since 1984. That was over 30 years ago now, and we have far more things to be concerned about when planning such events like security, housing, safety, transit, and so much more. So much more is now required to host than there was in 1984.
Sorry to be harsh but you clearly are off base here and it's time to take off the rose colored glasses about the Olympics, you're clearly wrong.
Not going to go round and round on this
Both of us have our views and our reasons. I don't think much more needs to be said, other than for me to reiterate the major point that matters, despite the fact that some prolific uHubbers don't know it. There are many people who like and support the idea.
The only other thing to note, is the irony that you mentioned Roslindalers fighting off Petco. It resembles something....
fine by me
VERY few people. Just look at the likes on all my posts compared to yours. I'd say we have a 76-90% disapproval of Boston Olympics.
Yeah it resembles something.. people won't tolerate being taken to the cleaners or advantage by big business trying to force something down our throats that we don't want.
Thanks for the argument. Keeps me on my toes and the old noggin from going to mush. Cheers, Henry.
Valid sample?
If you even begin to think that statistics taken from the UHub population are a representative sample of the general public, you're living in a fairyland.
Just sayin'
Remember the Big Dig
Did you live in Boston though the Big Dig? At least with that project the city got to keep the road.
Olympics are fun for the two weeks they are happen. They suck for years before and decades after the event.
The best place for the Olympics would be someplace in rural Kanas. Cheap construction, few people to aggravate, easy to deal with security.
And more wrong guessing
This would be nothing like the big dig. Cities that grow and thrive are continuously under some level of construction. If you have taken the time to read up on the proposal, then you can see that it involves very little in the way of new construction aside from things that are happening anyway. This is not to say there won't be disruption only due to the Olympics. But aside from a month in 2024, most is going to happen with or without the rings. A month is not a big problem when traded against hosting the world. I'm not so naïve to see the Olympics as something that will bring lots of free goodies to Boston. But I do see the Olympic movement as a good thing, and expect it to have a meaningfully positive impact for us.
No Free Goodies
I worked in London during the Olympics. The normal citizens HATED it. There were hundreds of articles on how local shops lost money as visitors were confined to just the places with the games and that normal shoppers avoided going out. No local resident I spoke to was happy about it.
The security was nightmarish. It was hard to go anywhere. Shops weren't allowed to ever put the word "Olympics" on signs outside the shops. Now that the games are over they are still trying to figure out what to do with the facilities.
The Olympics are great for *some* select businesses and corporations. They suck for small businesses. They are great for wealthy tourists. They suck for local residents.
All in all the games were fun -- as a visitor. But I would never wish that upon the city I live. For those of us who remember when the DNC came to town imagine that level of craziness for a year and even worst during the event.
Take those finges and shove them far up your nose.
Something needs to fill that vast void of your cranial cavity.
Just what we need, to become
Just what we need, to become the next haven for obnoxious funemployed gentrifing transients trying to translate their art art degrees into something important. Ge ready for a revival of the canning fad.
This post
..just made me sad I was out of town and missed the Honk Fest this year
In defense of Brooklyn - the real Brooklyn
The NYTimes version of Brooklyn that everybody knows (you know: Artisanal cheese shops catering to skinny-jeaned 20-somethings - bearded on the male half - all of whom seem to be working in "creative" fields, except for the ones busy setting up artisanal cheese shops) mostly consists of a relatively thin strip of neighborhoods from which you can see Manhattan. So subtract those 500,000 people (if that many) and you're left with two million people who have absolutely nothing to do with trendistas. It's a lot more like Dorchester (single family homes, even!) than Somerville, if I may go local with overly broad neighborhood cliches.
OK, old Brooklyn boy (from Midwood - a neighborhood that's a bit like Roslindale in that nobody who isn't from there has ever heard of it) shuts up ...
DID SOMEONE SAY 'BROOKLYN'????
This could be you:
No it couldn't
You obviously haven't seen me with my shirt off.
Oops
Too late. It's already on.
Fad?
Fad?
yeah fad?
I love to can.. love it. But I'm a true New Englander Yankee.. and its what we do. And I'm far from a hipster as they come.
which reminds me, I need to bring in some of my strawberry preserves for coworkers. *nom*nom*
Can't be a fad here if it never went out of style
Just from this year I have in my cupboard/fridge: tomato paste, peach butter, concord grape jam with rosemary, apple jelly, and an amazing pepper jelly (those last three courtesy my MIL's garden in Framingham).
After my parents moved out of the old family homestead, it took me and my sibs several years to finally finish off the tomato sauce and pickles.
my midwestern mom has been
my midwestern mom has been canning since forever - we even had a garden and chickens - IN THE CITY - since the 1970s... with heirloom veggies that were from my grandparent's farm. we even had neighbors who had pot-belly pigs. we used to go out someplace and get grapes that my dad made into wine. What's sad is that orchard where we went when I was a kid is now a subdivision full of mcmansions and very few trees.
and if you go to haymarket and buy a box of $5 tomatoes, you have no choice but to can them.
maybe it just seems weird and all hipstery if you grew up in a sterile boring suburb where people spent all their spare time on their lawns...
I suspect
The originator meant 'taken up by the young and trendy'.
And it has been. It can be called a fad if one wants to. It's just a looooooooonnnngg one because it's being taken up as a way of life, away from store bought items.
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
Right. And pigs will fly out of my butt...
Which city?
I'm betting that Somerville, Cambridge, and other portions of the Boston Area will be getting no such guarantees, despite their expected and required participation in the massive hassles.
Before you deny "massive hassles", think back to the way that the ENTIRE commuter rail system was fouled up by the DNC in 2004. I was commuting from Medford to Lowell and that was seriously screwed up.
...Brooklyn? Brooklyn is an
...Brooklyn? Brooklyn is an over-hyped, over-priced hipster hellhole. Marty Walsh has turned his back on Boston voters with this Olympics bid BS.
Brooklyn again
A very small part of Brooklyn is
.
There aren't a heckuva lot of hipsters in old timey Brooklyn - Sheepshead Bay for example.
Brooklyn is YUGE and diverse.
Yuge!
Yes! I've mostly lost my New York accent (no cawfee for me!), but wife and kidlet just don't get that kids in NYC get their ice cream from the Good Yuma man.
What?!!
Is that what Marty wants it to be like, Brooklyn!?
What the Hell?
Have you no pride?
Spike Lee would not agree.
Please reconsider this comparison Mayor.
Brooklyn ....
...is fine.
"Private Group," Private Interests
"Private" group, people trying to "Bank" on this to happen - a lot of money into "Private" pockets, no way.
What about the rest of MA?
Does the whole state get the guarantee of no costs being passed on to the tax payers?? I seriously doubt that. And last I checked Boston residents pay MA state taxes as well. And what do the residents of Springfield, Worcester, Lowell, Lawrence, New Bedford, etc... think about funding all of this great new stuff for someone else's city? I don't know about this one.
Check the tax flows
It is less that the rest of Massachusetts would get charged for Boston area toys and more that there would be less money coming out of the Boston area to pay for things in the rest of the state.
My beef is that fixing the T should be the primary priority in any spending, Olympic venues a distant second.
Boston Metro can keep its tax receipts for itself
None need go to western MA.
We (Boston Metro) promise not use any tax receipts from western MA again.
Deal?
Fun except for the Traffic...
Hmmm.... So we're talking ten years from now, with the usual increases in demand on the City infrastructure. I'd guess Memorial and Storrow Drive would be closed to all but VIP traffic and maybe athletes. Probably there'd be no HOV lane on the Expressway for the duration. Colleges would probably have abbreviated summer terms, if any. You'd need to pass through security checkpoints to get on the subway. The Harbor would be closed for the yacht races. Every hotel room within 495 would be booked. Any businesses within 495 would have to plan not to be able to host any business meetings due to lack of hotel space. So pretty much everyone not an athlete or in the 1% is impressed to service this event or endures endless security theater to go about their business or just plain hides out until it's over.
Imagine the Red Sox winning the World Series times 10 and the simultaneous running of the Marathon for a month and maybe you get close to the impact on our usual lives in the city. Not that those events aren't fun, but it will be wearing after a few days.
Are we so freaking insecure about Boston that we invite this cluster for a two week tourist advertisement? It'll be years before we'd get any economic benefit (assuming no terrorist incident or general incompetence). More likely it'd just create more residential hi-rises for the global elite and further class divisions in the city.
The Olympics used to be fun, so were the World Fairs, but they're antiquated relics in this day and age.
I really hope this thing
I really hope this thing doesn't go through. But if it does, I'm taking all the vacation time I have, renting the house out to some rich idiot, and taking the family somewhere far, far away for a few weeks.
Velodrome
As much as I would love to see a velodrome in the city I still think the Olympics are terrible idea. The trades are clamoring for it, which is understandable because it means thousands of jobs and they make up a large portion of Marty's base. However, using the limited amount of land we have to build giant stadiums that will sit empty after the games are over seems counter intuitive. Especially given the shortage of affordable housing in the city. I'll take affordable rent over a velodrome any day.