Hey, there! Log in / Register

2024 Olympics plan still calls for taking Widett Circle, building stadium, turning it over to a developer

Boston 2024 officials are outlining their "Bid 2.0" version of the proposed 2024 Olympics in Massachusetts. Current Boston 2024 Chairman Steve Pagliuca says the plan still calls for buying out the existing businesses in Widett Circle and building a temporary stadium there - and then turning the land after the games over to a private developer, who would build a whole new transit-oriented development with 4,000 apartments.

Pagliuca says the plan will mean lots of new tax revenue for the city - and 590 units of affordable housing and 15 acres of new parkland.

US Rep. Steve Lynch has vowed to fight the Widett Circle proposal.

Pagliuca estimated a budget of about $5 billion, which he said could be covered entirely privately. However, he said that does not include the $1.2-billion cost of a "pad" on which to build the Widett Circle stadium. He said that's considered an "economic development" cost, not an Olympic cost, because it would be assumed by the developer given the land for rebuilding after the Olympics. He said there's a similar issue with the proposed Olympic Village at Columbia Point, which would be left as 3,000 apartments and about 1,000 dorm rooms for UMass Boston.

The budget also does not include roughly $760 million in upgrades to the T and roads - such as Kosciuszko Circle in Dorchester - that the state has yet to budget for.

Architect's rendering of proposed Midtown neighborhood in 2044:

Midtown

Franklin Park will still get horsey events and the Pentathlon, but pentathletes will have to go elsewhere for their swimming race - after residents complained nobody was asking for a pool in Franklin Park, Boston 2024 took that out of its plans.

Boston 2024 CEO Richard Davey said the T should be able to handle the anticipated Olympics load based on already planned improvements in cars and signaling on the Red, Orange and Green lines. However, he called for a new commuter-rail station at Widett Circle and is still counting on upgrades to the JFK/UMass Red Line stop that the state has not planned for.

Neighborhoods: 

Ad:

Do you like how UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

So much for the "walkable games". This is such a joke. What Olympics has ever been spread out over the equivalent of a small country?

up
Voting closed 0

It's common these days for some venues to be located some distance from the core, especially in the Winter Games where skiable mountains aren't always located near the bid city (e.g. Vancouver, Sochi). Often it's for events with specific geographic requirements; I'm not a sailor so I couldn't tell why Fall River would be a better venue than Boston Harbor for sailing, but there's not a ton of good whitewater venues in the metro Boston area and heading for the Deerfield River rather than creating something artificial sounds like a good idea to me. I recall even in Beijing 2008 the cycling road race was started near the Great Wall, not exactly immediate to the core venues on the Olympic Green.

This isn't to say this is a good idea, but it will look entirely reasonable to the IOC. If the IOC shoots down Boston, it's not going to be because they put canoeing in Franklin County; it's going to be because there's a vocal and presumably statistically significant local opposition to the Games, which is a real buzzkill for the Lords of the Rings.

up
Voting closed 0

Yah, AFAIK, the Deerfield River is the only place you can go whitewater rafting in MA and that is only when they let the dam discharge.

Amazing to see how low the river falls after the Saturday run is over.

up
Voting closed 0

Its the most walkable since Barcelona. All olympics have events far out of the core of the main host city. Hell, Beijing's equestrian events were in Hong Kong!

up
Voting closed 0

Well, the 2012 London Olympics soccer venues were spread out as far away as Wales and Scotland. Glasgow is at least 4x as far from London as Deerfield is from Boston.

Generally speaking, most Olympics tend to have a large number of events in the host city, and a handful of events in the nearby region because it's hard to find places in cities where you can row, canoe, sail, ride horses, and shoot guns. Also soccer matches, due to the number of them that need to be played, tend to have the early rounds spread out to a number of stadia; for example, the 1984 LA Olympics had soccer matches at Harvard Stadium!

Aside from the fact that I think it's weird that indoor events like handball and taekwondo/fencing are slotted for Worcester and Lowell when they could probably be held at one of the dozens of university facilities within reach of the subway lines, this seems like a reasonably compact venue plan. The large majority of events are within the immediate Boston area, and aside from Deerfield, everything else is really pretty close.

Of course, having the Olympics here is a terrible idea and I don't endorse it in any way.

up
Voting closed 0

I think it's weird that indoor events like handball and taekwondo/fencing are slotted for Worcester and Lowell

I think they're trying to groom enough statewide support for the games to cancel out all the local opposition. They're basically rigging the referendum.

up
Voting closed 0

What a f**king land grab this is..

And "hand it over to a developer" come on.. this is very very very very clear this is nothing more than a land grab now. Who profits from such a land grab, the builder and developer. Saying the city would "have more tax revenue" is a bullshit argument and insulting (because how much is this gonna be off set by the cost over runs by the Olympics.. a lot more than a few piddy 1 bedroom apartment's property taxes)

Fix the T? Build ToD? how about we do those things WITHOUT the big O? Why can't we do these things without it? We're going to pay for it anyways.. so we can do without the distruption and cost overruns.

I hope Lynch wins.. I think Widdett is going to be a uphill battle anyways, because you know those folks won't sell due to its location to the highway system.

I really hope this is the last nail in the coffin known as Boston2024 so this bid gets pulled and go elsewhere so we can get on with our lives (and the politicians can get back to what we elected them for, not some party in 10 years)

up
Voting closed 0

Fix the T? Build ToD? how about we do those things WITHOUT the big O? Why can't we do these things without it? We're going to pay for it anyways.. so we can do without the distruption and cost overruns.

If using the games to make our transit system better is their ace in the hole, game(s) over.

up
Voting closed 0

the Olympics, I totally see and understand all the reasons against it. I am probably one of the few people that are kind of down the middle and can see positives and negatives on both sides. One thing I would say, however, is that without the Olympics you are not going to just get those positive things anyways. Right or wrong, the Olympics would be a catalyst for change to things like the MBTA and redevelopment plans, that absent the Olympics will probably just continue on as-is. The MBTA literally broke down for almost an entire winter, and so far the only changes I have seen are the governor firing the Board, and they are fixing the 3rd rail heaters on the outdoor section of the track.

So it's fine to say that you don't want the Olymipcs and all the things come with it, both bad and good, but you can't say you don't the Olympics but want the good stuff anyways, because that is not going to happen. No Olympics basically just equals status qou.

up
Voting closed 0

that's the spirit!

Give us what we want, allow us to enrich ourselves through this silly boondoggle or enjoy your walk on the tracks from in between Boylston and Park St. in 100 degree heat?

Let them eat cake, indeed.

up
Voting closed 0

that's not at all what I said, so you might want to re-read. What I did say, is that there will be positive and negative outcomes. You are making reference to some of the negatives outcomes.

If you want to think that we will get any large-scale improvements in this city with a catalyst event, than that's fine, you are welcome to think that. I don't share the opinion, and I think past history supports that view. Of said cake above, you rarely get to have it and eat it too.

up
Voting closed 0

"No Olympics basically just equals status qou."

And what past history has shown us from the Mass Pike to the Big Dig is that developers and politicians are not to be trusted with the taxpayer dollar. So sell that shit about "catalyst events" being the criteria for positive change somewhere else.

Our core infrastructure is ancient and should be addressed before any nonsense about an Olympics that precious few in this state will be able to afford to see and if you disagree, when was the last time you took a family of four to a sporting event in this town?

So doughy Steve Pagliuca can sit up there with his green tie and his shout out's to leeches like Bob Popeo and John Fish from the podium to the applause of a bunch of interns from Mintz-Levin and Bain, that presentation showed me nothing but a developers wet dream.

up
Voting closed 0

going to agree on much, but I also do not trust politicians and developers with tax payer money. If they can pull this off with little to no taxpayer backing, then I say go for it, if not then kill the thing. I am just willing to listen a little further before totally writing it off. Like I said, at this point I'm in middle, not for or against it.

One other thing we agree on is that our core infrastructure is ancient and outdated. Maybe you have seen a plan for fixing it, but I haven't. Anything that can come along and force the states hand for any infrastructure improvements, I view as a good thing. It doesn't necessarily have to be the Olympics, but I don't know what else it is going to be. I just don't see this stuff happening without a specific reason. I think it's been proven that the system just being old and broken is not a good enough reason (in the eyes of our elected leaders, at least).

I don't really know very much about the history of the Mass Pike, so I can't speak to that. But in regards to the big dig, yea, it was an absolute cluster F that was mismanaged to epic propositions. But, did it make the city a better place to live and work? Yes. Demanding that better management be put in place for further larger-scale projects is one thing. Just saying that the big dig was a mess so lets never do anything again is another.

And with that I am going to just agree to disagree on the rest.

up
Voting closed 0

One other thing we agree on is that our core infrastructure is ancient and outdated. Maybe you have seen a plan for fixing it, but I haven't. Anything that can come along and force the states hand for any infrastructure improvements,

Then answer the question.. WHY do we need the Olympics as a catalyst to do the stuff that needs fixing? Why burden the tax payers with cost over runs for Olympic crap when we're already going to be on the hook for fixing the T?

How about we do all the things planned for the Olympics, minus the games themselves. If these people running Boston2024 really cared and believed what crap they are spewing, the Olympics should NOT be a catalyst for doing this stuff, it should be done automatically.

But no.. stating all our worldly problems will be fixed because of the Olympics is the biggest crock of shit I've seen since I used to shovel out the chicken coop as a kid (and even then, chicken shit smells a lot better right now than Boston2024). These people don't care about fixing the T, they are looking to do a land grab and then hand it over to their rich, connected friends.

Because if they did, we would already be planning Boston2024 as a "Vision" plan (i.e. Boston2030) rather than having the Olympics be it. Better yet, if all these 'connected' people actually cared about this stuff, it would have been done a long, long time ago.. long before anyone ever breathed the word "Boston2024".

Like I said, it's a clear land grab and a tax payer scam, they don't fucking care about us. Only their wallets and the wallets of connected friends, while they leave the rest of us out to dry.

up
Voting closed 0

...the other problem is that just simply getting the MBTA upgraded to the point where if can handle a busy weekday in Boston, perhaps under adverse weather conditions, is alone going to take many, many years. The Boston 2024 folks don't even have the money (they're counting on "pre-planned infrastructure projects") to fix the MBTA. As we're starting to see, they're going to be lucky to have the funding to do all of these white elephant (or limited lifespan elephant) venues. There's no magic pot of Leprechaun money out there to pay for dragging the MBTA system into the 21st Century.

Even with a Pentagon-sized budget, what's being promised is more than can likely be done in the years we have left before 2024. Nearly impossible with unlimited funding. Now try doing it on a shoestring budget.

Talk about a bunch of developers fantasies...

up
Voting closed 0

Even with a hard deadline in 10 years it will still be a tall task to get all of these infrastructure upgrades completed. So take out that hard deadline and what are you left with? 30 years until we have a normally functioning transit system? 50 years? Never because every year the funding will dry up as it does now?

up
Voting closed 0

One could just as easily argue that this obnoxious Olympic yapping would make him sand bag T upgrades even more. It's paradoxical intent.

None of the idiots from 2024 who make these infrastructure cost loads seem to understand who they need to court. Pretending he doesn't exist won't work.

In a way we may be lucky to have these old guard guys calling the shots as neoliberal pipe dreams for the big score are probably as hazardous as letting the T rot.

up
Voting closed 0

If they can pull this off with little to no taxpayer backing, then I say go for it

I applaud your optimism. Personally, I don't believe any of their assurances that they won't need public money. So we'll be on the hook for the inevitable cost overruns, then the connected developers get to sell off half the city anyway. It's a lose-lose situation.

up
Voting closed 0

Plenty of people want to take ownership of how they move about the city. Hence the Uber vs Taxis vs bikes vs walking flamewars.

It is a quality of life issue that has tremendous economic and immaterial consequences.

Your lack of imagination regarding what could lead us to adequate infrastructure is understandable. It is very difficult to trust information from think tanks, unions, and spreadsheets...

I PROPOSE: In all Honesty: That we start a Rush hour ferry service from Chelsea to downtown boston that is row-powered. By strapping lads and ladies. Reduce obesity thereby. Give me a paddle: it would be safer than my dismal bike route now.

Your turn.

up
Voting closed 0

One thing I would say, however, is that without the Olympics you are not going to just get those positive things anyways.

Translation: "A bunch of rich developers will make sure that you can't have any improved infrastructure anywhere by simply demanding and paying for it. They will hold these basic things hostage, and make sure they can't happen without first paying 3x the cost of that infrastructure (on top of the cost of the infrastructure) to their development companies so they can make huge profits".

up
Voting closed 0

more on local politics and regulations making it almost impossible to get anything done around here, but yea you end up in the same place.

up
Voting closed 0

I would put it more on local politics...

... that would be us.

We have a choice. We can demand quality government and elect those who we think will spend our money wisely and take care of our infrastructure, and then hold them accountable for performance come the next election cycle... or we can not. The choice is 100% ours.

up
Voting closed 0

without the Olympics you are not going to just get those positive things anyways. Right or wrong, the Olympics would be a catalyst for change to things like the MBTA and redevelopment plans, that absent the Olympics will probably just continue on as-is.

That is the problem - We shouldn't NEED the Olympics as a catalyst for basic infrastructure improvements. Or anything really. To call this town a world class city and then base our entire infrastructure on the Olympic games? That's a problem.

We're one of the oldest major cities in the country, and one of the biggest (in status, not size obviously). Boston has experienced major growth in every sense of the word for decades. Academics, population, business, tourism, gentrification (love it or hate it, it's a growth factor), the economy, and the skyline itself, Boston is getting bigger and bigger. If that isn't catalyst enough to improve our infrastructure, I don't know what is.

up
Voting closed 0

Yup!

http://www.boston.com/business/2015/05/06/where-stand-south-boston-socce...

Apparently the New England Revolution needs a home too.

up
Voting closed 0

 

up
Voting closed 0

Looks like they have it off on the map saying "TBD". Does it say they are building an island somewhere.

In a prior life long ago in a universe very far away I worked in the golf industry. A pro for a new course built on an island off of Hong Kong told me never to build a golf course on an island, even if you get the land for free. There is no way it makes sense.

That said - I think the target for golf is The Country Club in Brookline (town council vote notwithstanding). My personal favorite is to build a new municipal course with an eye toward a future US Open on the land the city owns in Woburn - Mary Cummings Park. With or without the Olympics, the USGA wants more public courses (see this year's course - Chambers Bay) for the US Open and they will often generously finance it if they can find the right location (see Bethpage in Long Island). If they can make a course to the appropriate standards - length, agronomy etc. - they would much prefer that over The Country Club.

up
Voting closed 0

Letting your golf opinions cloud your humor detector. (Admittedly a bit of Dad humor, but humor nonetheless.)

up
Voting closed 0

"the number of golf courses is often undercounted, with controversial courses in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Mosul, Iraq, often left off the lists, which makes assessing the total costs difficult.
Although lower-ranking service members don’t get private jets and personal chefs, U.S. taxpayers still spend billions of dollars a year to pay for luxuries that are out of reach for the ordinary American.

The Pentagon, for example, runs a staggering 234 golf courses around the world, at a cost that is undisclosed.

According to one retired lieutenant colonel in the Air Force, who also just happens to be the senior writer at Travel Golf, the very best military golf course in the U.S. is the Air Force Academy’s Eisenhower Blue Course in Colorado Springs, Colo.

He writes, “This stunning 7,000-plus yard layout shares the same foothills terrain as does the legendary Broadmoor, just 20 minutes to the south in Colorado Springs. Ponderosa pines, pinon and juniper line the fairways with rolling mounds, ponds and almost tame deer and wild turkey.” (The Department of Defense did come under fire a number of decades ago when it was discovered that the toilet seats at this course cost $400 a pop.)

Yet some courses rack up staggering expenses as they become far more than mere stretches of grass.

According to journalist Nick Turse, “The U.S. Army paid $71,614 [in 2004] to the Arizona Golf Resort — located in sunny Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,… The resort actually boasts an entire entertainment complex, complete with a water-slide-enhanced megapool, gym, bowling alley, horse stables, roller hockey rink, arcade, amphitheater, restaurant, and even a cappuccino bar — not to mention the golf course and a driving range.”

DoD’s Sungnam golf course in the Republic of Korea, meanwhile, is reportedly valued at $26 million.

For non-golfers, the military also maintains a ski lodge and resort in the Bavarian Alps, which opened in 2004 and cost $80 million." Salon-12/12/12

up
Voting closed 0

Our soldiers stationed away from home should just sit around and polish their rifles? Or go into town and drink (if that's even allowed).

In the scheme of things this is tiny.

I bitch about a lot of government expenses - but if this is the least we can do for those putting their lives on the line so we can enjoy all of those things and more back here at home - happy to see my tax dollars at work for them. Unless you have been an expat, you have no idea how hard it is to find even modest recreation in many foreign countries.

for the record - some of those courses in the Pacific were former customers. I've been to just about all of them. These are not fancy facilities. Pretty much on par with Franklin Park from what I've seen and the land (which is most of the value) is simply part of the base complex where they cut down the trees and planted some grass.

up
Voting closed 0

then why don't they disclose the actual costs?

up
Voting closed 0

Don't know. But figuring a cost of $1 million to operate a golf facility which is in the ballpark for many munis, less fees (base employees, retirees and others get to play - but I believe for a fee - active duty may be free or reduced), we are probably talking $50-$100 million worldwide assuming the 234 courses is accurate.

Again - this is one thing (not just golf courses - all recreation for military) I have no problem spending a little money on given what the typical soldier makes and what they have to do to get that salary. There are much bigger fish to fry in the DoD budget. A live training exercise probably costs more in exploded munitions.

up
Voting closed 0

...as long as services for our veterans are so piss-poor, bullshit like this, should be shitcanned and the money (however much it is) be put towards ensuring we don't have veterans sleeping on the street or struggling with physical and emotional issues alone.

And "the least we can do for those putting their lives on the line so we can enjoy all of those things and more back here at home" is to maybe reconsider what we have to do in order to maintain the enjoyment of "these things" back at home. Maybe having a military presence in every country and a military budget that dwarfs all others might be something to reconsider the cost of.

up
Voting closed 0

Services for Vets come from the VA, which is severely underfunded and continually scapegoated in the news.

Fancy golf parks are paid for by the DoD, which isn't.

up
Voting closed 0

Billerica is a funny pick. It has horrible traffic along Route 3A. And Lowell is no prize, but it has a more compliant political structure.

Greenfield really makes it a great walkable Olympics. The game plan seems to be trying to drum up support in backwaters cause Metro Boston already hates it in large and obvious numbers.

At a certain point you have to marvel at the feebleness of their ploys. That's something I learned years ago, rich assholes are not necessarily smarter, just more tenacious, grasping and often accompanied by low bar ethics.

This is like stupidity proof at "10" on a Marshall Stack. The takeaway is that they flatly failed to come up with anything coherent cause there isn't anything. They are hung on a pole made of all the other developer's greed that has simply made Boston too valuable to tolerate this shit. If anything, the stealth land grab theory looks more plausible all the time.

The nervous closed and stealthy 'community meetings' resemble a W Bush campaign event where they have to stoop to a reverse Leung and tell the gulled that "you are the special ones who truly know how great this is."

They're probably better at other grifts like backroom deals and conning just isn't a strong suit.

up
Voting closed 0

is a pleasant and walkable place, and it has a commuter rail station. BUT, that station cannot handle large crowds well, with its tiny elevators and narrow stairways and bridges. Try going there during the Lowell Folk Festival and you'll see the problem. Maybe they can build a temporary platform at Dutton Street or School Street, another half mile or so up the line?

up
Voting closed 0

It just doesn't deserve this imposition anymore than Boston does.

And if the Billerica venue on the south side, that is extreme high traffic.

up
Voting closed 0

Lowell is a shit downtown that's been trying to becme something other than hair salons and rim shops for a while. It also has the growing high school in the middle of downtown where delinquints like to congregate. All this while ULowell continues to expand and buy up more of the city to make itself richer while not giving a damn about the Greek and Quebecois communities. ULowell must be going absolutely apeshit about the idea of the olympics so they can finally throw money into destroying the Acre and Pawtucketville to finally eliminate any last refuge of culture to turn it into facilities that will eventually house 20 year old drunk kids who wish to turn the city into another Zoo Mass.

up
Voting closed 0

Seriously. This rant is bizarre.

up
Voting closed 0

Two weeks ago to see my aunt and uncle, who have lived in Lowell since the 30s and are property owners who are sick of mess that is Lowell High School and their neighbourhood being bulldozed to house 18 year olds who have no idea what is being lost so they can have their 4 year vacation from their parents.

ULowell is a disease that seeks to destroy the culture of the city and to make it conform to its standards.

up
Voting closed 0

I have to go there soon to follow the Concord River Greenway route, so I'll be sure to let you know.

The politicians are mainly DeLeo Democrats, old school pols, at least the ones with power are. A number of these old rust belt mill towns turned to University expansion if doable to augment the economy as textiles went away.

One interesting thing about politicians of stature here, (that actually have power), like Deleo and Baker is their diffidence toward this 2024 hoopla. Deleo probably wonders why the more ready sites such as Wonderland and Suffolk Downs aren't seeing much love. His parents owned a restaurant across the street from Suffolk.

It almost make you wonder if this Duval cabal is trying to get back at the Speaker. I can't see it ending well.

up
Voting closed 0

also has a commuter train station -- but it's at the opposite end of town from the proposed shooting venue, and Billerica is a BIG town (in area, not population). So I don't see how anyone's actually going to get to that venue.

up
Voting closed 0

The gun club there only has access from a two lane road through wetlands. It's a traffic access nightmare.

up
Voting closed 0

It is most definitely a grab for land and public money. They want to scam us but don't want to put in any effort, hence yet ANOTHER incomplete plan unveiled. You can tell they are mad that the people of Boston aren't just letting them get away with their con.

up
Voting closed 0

They actually don't care if they get the Olympics or not.

What they want is to rezone, get the government to grab things, and then hand them over to the developers. NYC's experience indicates that even a failed bid gets them what they want.

up
Voting closed 0

A lot of the land around JFK/UMass station is just plain vacant and unused. Any plan that redevelops it in a transit-oriented manner is better than the current conditions.

(I'm not talking about Widett Circle here -- just Columbia Point)

up
Voting closed 0

Greenfield really makes it a great walkable Olympics. The game plan seems to be trying to drum up support in backwaters cause Metro Boston already hates it in large and obvious numbers.

1. It's not Greenfield, it's Charlemont. The proposed venue is about 20-25 miles west of Greenfield. Completely immaterial to you, I know, but since you decided to name the town, I thought I'd correct your error.

2. This venue was chosen not because of your notion of the "game plan", but because it already contains the venue in question, a whitewater rapid that has been used for national championships in the past. As odd as it may seem to you, this particular venue is probably the best equipped of any of the proposed venues to simply hold its event with no additional work or preparation. Having it anywhere else in New England south of the Forks in Maine would involve construction of an artificial rapid, and having it on the Kennebec would require construction of access roads through what I believe is protected land.

3. The idea of "trying to drum up support in backwaters" is laughable. Charlemont has a population of just over 1,000. If it were the 1,000 most wealthy and influential people in the Commonwealth, you might have a point, but Charlemont's population mainly works in farming, logging, and (seasonally) outdoor recreation. The idea that the "support" of this town, which does not even get visited by its own elected officials, would be seen in any way as influential in an Olympic bid, is absurd.

up
Voting closed 0

Why do I suspect you've never been there and don't know that the old Mohawk Trail has very few accommodations.

It was popular for road trip vacations in the 50s and 60s but the whole mess died when cheap air fare exploded the vacation choices.. That whole part of Route 2 is like a ghost land of strange and fascinating old time tourist traps rotting away.

I would suggest it's a pitch to Franklin and Berkshire county rather than a specific town.

up
Voting closed 0

Why do I suspect you've never been there and don't know that the old Mohawk Trail has very few accommodations.

Because you're an idiot? I can pretty much guarantee I know Charlemont and the Mohawk Trail better than you do, son. The subject of accommodations didn't come up; had it, I could have told you that there are indeed very few "accommodations"...but we're talking about whitewater slalom, not futbol, son. It isn't going to draw a crowd in the tens of thousands.

That whole part of Route 2 is like a ghost land of strange and fascinating old time tourist traps rotting away.

Yeah, now I know you're talking out your ass. That or you're a couch potato who drove through twenty years ago and never got out of the car.

I would suggest it's a pitch to Franklin and Berkshire county rather than a specific town.

Another logic fail, son. Again, we've already had big whitewater events here, and will continue to do so. Having another one, even if it's got five rings attached to it, is not gonna make anyone out here bite on a hook.

up
Voting closed 0

It looks the same as it did in 2009, the 80s when I did a July road trip with a friend and the 70s when I first went there.

In fact, thanks, cause some of the same old fading tourist traps are still there. It's heaven for Americana photographers.

Here are a few.

The Oxbow is still there http://www.oxbowresortmotel.com/ It's closed for 2015.

And the Red Rose, is still there, just like in 1973. http://www.redrosemotel.com/

That's pretty much it for Charlemont with a few items in Shelburne Falls.

And the best part, the old "Native Views" yet lives. This is great period roadside Americana.

They don't have a website but here's their map url. https://goo.gl/maps/2TH0Y

The whitewater things are probably for day trippers. That would explain the absence of large modern facilities. Hawley was still struggling to get DSL cable in 2009

So you do realize there are camera crews, IOC people and others that would probably exceed Charlemont's population, right?

And we aren't even talking about spectators.

up
Voting closed 0

"rich assholes are not necessarily smarter, just more tenacious"

It's always fun to watch rich guys who are used to being obeyed have to try persuading people who are not beholden to them for a paycheck.

'No' is some obscure word whose definition they are not clear on.

up
Voting closed 0

Boston2024 is poisoning the spirit of good will the Olympics are supposed to embody. Shame on all involved.

up
Voting closed 0

That shipped sailed decades ago. The IOC is one of the most greedy and corrupt groups in the world. They create a mess in a city and then force the taxpayers to clean it up and pay the bill.

up
Voting closed 0

...to WADA.

up
Voting closed 0

They make FIFA look virtuous!

up
Voting closed 0

IMAGE(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTE5NFgxNjAw/z/0ZEAAMXQlUNRQ5SB/$(KGrHqFHJC8FCbJLCPu5BRQ5SB2k,!~~60_1.JPG?set_id=880000500F)

up
Voting closed 0

...they'll need at least three or four of those.

up
Voting closed 0

I mean, Boston has never been a city of grocery stores and public bathrooms, but where will all these people get their groceries if Widett is wiped out?

up
Voting closed 0

getting all of those vampires to come out in the day. Judging from the applause, I would say that's entirely who that audience consisted of: the vampires who are looking to suck this city dry under the ridiculous pretext of an Olympics.

Rush hour starts in the town at 2:30 and goes to 8:00 in the afternoons now and these idiots think that by adding so called affordable units at Widett Circle will not add a few hundred more Mini-Coopers to our already overcrowded roads.

This is nothing more than another way for the rich in this town to rape the poor. That's it.

Loved the shout out to John Fish at the end, he's a real civic minded motherfucker, that one.

up
Voting closed 0

If that rendering is supposed to sell me on the whole thing, it's woefully mistaken.

It looks like a bunch of buildings standing in a circle looking at the spot where another building died. Look, I love how our city has probably more green spaces throughout it than most other major US metro areas, but a giant midtown sports field/vacancy and then crowding all the other buildings around like they're mulling over a crime scene just looks like a total waste of space.

up
Voting closed 0

from laughter...

It looks like a bunch of buildings standing in a circle looking at the spot where another building died... [A] giant midtown sports field/vacancy and then crowding all the other buildings around like they're mulling over a crime scene

You win the nets today.

up
Voting closed 0

In Bid 1.0, these were proposed for Draw Seven Park in Somerville, next to Assembly station, as well as for some of the adjoining Charlestown MBTA bus maintenance grounds. Where are they in Bid 2.0? I don't see Somerville on that new map.

up
Voting closed 0

Like the velodrome, which Curtatone came out against.

up
Voting closed 0

is notably missing from the Bid 2.0 map. In Bid 1.0, there was archery at MIT and swimming at Magazine Beach. Where have these moved to?

up
Voting closed 0

Archery is at Harvard Stadium.

They have not announced where the aquatics center would be yet - one of the three most expensive venues....

up
Voting closed 0

Probably because they picked stupid sites like Magazine Beach.

https://youtu.be/MPD1UZJrOTE

That place is where the truth about the founders outlook on guns is expressed. The magazine was the place where you'd get your gun powder allotments because the people then thought it was too dangerous to keep quantities in individual homes.It's a wonderful asset but kind of small and strapped in by Memorial Drive.

Harvard told em to shove it too. You gotta love the cheek of involving Harvard without making the deciding powers aware they were part of some promise.

It is glib idiots talking out of both sides of their mouth.

up
Voting closed 0

I'm suddenly acutely aware of how my eyesight is starting to go, trying to read that map, but it looks like the icon for aquatics has moved to Boston proper, between the icons for what I assume are interpretive dance and ... bowling, maybe? I can never tell what these things are supposed to be.

up
Voting closed 0

They did their job then!

up
Voting closed 0

Bostonians are saying "No", so they're appealing to the rest of the state now. They're "spreading the wealth" so to speak to garner support to save their precious baby. All state tax payers will be paying for this so they need to show how it will bring the games to all areas of the state.

Land grabs and the rest... they'll worry about that later. Hell at this point they hope they have those arguments. Today they're looking for support now because they're extremely close to losing this bid, regardless of how they're posturing themselves.

up
Voting closed 0

No beach volleyball on the Boston Common is an improvement, I'll grant that. Squantum seems to be a fair place to put it.

However, I see that the Harvard section entails using part of Smith Field in Brighton, a public park where many city softball leagues play on the three softball diamonds and which also houses two Little League diamonds, basketball courts and a playground. Unless they plan on allowing public access to Harvard's playing fields - not likely, given how much Harvard even now hates having folks cutting through their properties to access the current fields - I say thumbs down on that.

Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com

up
Voting closed 0

I am an Olympic skeptic, but I find the proposal for Columbia Point to be…exciting! In addition to the housing, improved landscape, etc. It would force improvements to the JFK Library stop, and the Red Line in Dorchester, even though there is no money in the budget - yet.

This could change my mindset from nearly opposed to almost-in-favor.

up
Voting closed 0

Are you serious? Have you been to the rotary at rush hour down there? You can't get anywhere near it. It will ruin that whole area for local residents.I would like to know where South Boston's local elected officials are on all of this. I have not heard a word from Senator Forry or Rep. Collins. Are they in favor of the stadium and the massive development at Moakley Park?

up
Voting closed 0

Something should be built on all that vacant land. Whether the Olympics are the best way to achieve this, I'm not sure, but it makes no sense to have parking lots and empty land surrounding the station.

As I said earlier, I have no objection to a "land grab" if it will genuinely improve the neighborhood without displacing any residents or businesses.

up
Voting closed 0

And that is staying put, despite cavalier thoughts to the contrary from Somerville Auslanders.

This is what Citygirl is talking about, bless her. It speaks volumes to the 2024 stupidity and is also a neat concentric pattern. https://goo.gl/maps/bco1W

I was there in late April to cover the last part of Harborwalk from Castle Island to the Dorchester Border.

If that vicious, crazy intersection was a rafting element it would probably be a class 5 rapids traverse. I'm speaking as a pedestrian. I have no idea how mush it most suck for everyone else, bikes, cars, trucks, you name it.

When I encountered it and thought about 2024, it was a striking instance of rich asshole bubble think.

You can figure it out, with some study, but feeding hapless auslanders into its maw would be cruel

up
Voting closed 0

I mean the ex-Bayside Expo center and its adjoining parking lots, the Star Market parking lot, the vacant TV and radio station buildings between Star Market and the Globe, the parking lot in front of the T station, etc. etc.

up
Voting closed 0

U Mass owns it and may already have something in the works.This may be the parcel set that has a project approved and signed off.

It was a source of early hilarity over at BMG that 2024 seized on it like a grasped straw without a sense of its provenance, so you aren't the only one in the dark.

The wiki entry looks like it's been sleazily goosed by 2024 to make it seem like it's really theirs. With luck someone at No2024 ou UMB can fix that weasel sleazery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayside_Expo_Center

It has been proposed as the site for the Olympic Village as part of the Boston bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics. The property is located near the JFK/UMass station on the MBTA Red Line, which would be renovated under the Olympics plan.

What do you want to bet that grand assumptions about land parcels are probably useless because everything is spoken for?

UMass would beg to differ.

The Bayside property holds great potential for future redevelopment. In its current state, however, the property includes approximately 1,300 parking spaces and will provide additional space over the next several years as UMass Boston builds new campus facilities and renovates existing facilities. This construction is all part of UMass Boston’s 25-year master plan.

In the near term, UMass Boston will use the Bayside site to:support construction of the new academic buildings, (and) replace faculty, staff, and student parking lost to construction

Source https://www.umb.edu/the_university/masterplan/bayside

up
Voting closed 0

It's not the worst piece of urban planning I've ever seen, but I don't love it either. If you look at the renderings, it's a lot like the South Boston Waterfront... Lots of big towers, not much human-sized detail at street level.

up
Voting closed 0

Man! I got dizzy just scrolling all the way down to the end of the comments!

up
Voting closed 0