Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Westside Stadim

  1. #1
    Here is an article/open letter from Mayor Bloomberg regarding the 2012 Olympic bid and how it is tied to getting the Westside Stadium done. We all know the what the tone will be, but it is a good read. This should get everyone fired up again....

    The 2012 Olympics
    Would Be a Winner
    For New York

    By MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG
    September 29, 2004; Page D11

    New York

    For thousands of delegates and peaceful protesters, the 2004 Republican National Convention was an opportunity to participate in the democratic process. For New York, it was an opportunity to show millions of people around the world that we have rebounded from 9/11, safer and stronger than ever. It was also a chance to show organizers of large events -- including the International Olympic Committee -- that the city's expertise in hosting high-profile, high-security events is second to none.

    Our success during the convention in keeping all five boroughs safe (crime dropped 6% citywide), while also minimizing disruptions to New Yorkers' daily routines, has bolstered our chances to win the 2012 Olympics, which would lead to the greatest private investment in public infrastructure in the city's history.

    When I visited Athens during the recent Games, it gleamed with new roads and subways, state-of-the-art athletic facilities, modern housing, and a new airport. It was all built for the Olympics, which lasts only 17 days, but residents will enjoy these improvements for decades to come. As I traveled around Athens, visions of the long-term benefits that the Olympics would bring to New York appeared at every stop:

    As I watched international basketball, I thought of aging high-school gyms in Manhattan and Queens that would be upgraded into Olympic practice facilities. As I toured the cycling center, I thought of the Bronx, where we would build a cycling and athletic center on the Harlem River, strengthening our efforts to revitalize the neighborhood around Yankee Stadium.

    When I visited the Olympic Village, I thought of Queens West, where magnificent new housing would initially serve athletes but then provide 4,600 new apartments to New Yorkers, who would enjoy 43 acres of parkland and a stunning waterfront promenade. In Brooklyn, beach volleyball courts and an aquatic center would be built on the waterfront; Staten Islanders would enjoy new biking trails and equestrian facilities. In all five boroughs, private Olympic financing would create an unprecedented legacy of new sports and recreational facilities, parks and housing, at no cost to taxpayers.

    Athens's spectacular Olympic Stadium reinforced my commitment to build an ultra-modern Sports and Convention Center (NYSCC) atop rail yards that blight Manhattan's Far West Side. The NYSCC would not just serve the 2012 Olympics, but would also be used for all types of conventions and athletic competitions, including New York Jets home games, the Final Four, and even the Super Bowl. These and other events will strengthen the city's growing tourism industry, which creates jobs for New Yorkers in all five boroughs.

    The Jets will pay $800 million of the NYSCC's cost, while the city will pay $300 million, largely to deck the rail yards -- something the city must do if anything is to be built on the site. But the Convention Center is part of a broad revitalization plan that would more than pay for itself, as an analysis appointed by the Independent Budget Office confirmed.

    Together with changes to the city's antiquated zoning rules, the NYSCC would create the conditions for new private and public investment (including an extension of the 7 subway line) that would transform a vastly underutilized area of auto garages and warehouses into a thriving neighborhood. Building it is central to our plan to create the office space, housing and parks that New York needs to remain an attractive and affordable place to live and work in the 21st century. And make no mistake -- without it, we will not get the Olympics.
    The International Olympic Committee will choose the site of the 2012 Games next year. America has pinned its hopes on New York for good reason. Our facilities, transportation and security are world-class, and our diversity is a living embodiment of the Olympic spirit. In Athens, 202 nations competed in 28 sports. In New York's public schools, immigrant students hail from 199 of those nations! We are the world's second home, a five-borough Olympic village where all ethnic and racial groups excel.

    Over the past few months, however, the owners of Madison Square Garden, desperate to preserve their monopoly on large events in Manhattan, have been financing false attack ads aimed at derailing construction of the New York Sports and Convention Center. But narrow-minded critics led by self-interest or afraid of short-term obstacles have always opposed New York's greatest public projects. History reminds us that when the city was building Central Park, the Common Council tried to cut its size in half. Naysayers also opposed the building of Times Square and Lincoln Center. Today, we cannot imagine our city without these places.

    Transforming the Far West Side of Manhattan is one of the smartest investments New York City can make in its future. It is the best way to maximize America's chances to win the Olympics -- and create a golden legacy that generations of New Yorkers and our visitors will enjoy.

    Mr. Bloomberg is the mayor of New York.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    220a, Row 12
    Posts
    4,197
    As someone who lives in Queens West, I would love to see the area developed quickly.

    The stadium debate will rage on all day, but first a not about the RNC.

    From all the hype of the NY and world media, you would have thought this entire city would have come to a standstill.

    Not only did I ride the LIRR, subways and walk around tow all week, I also drove on the LIE and passed through Penn Station twice.

    Not a blip.

    Not an interruption.

    Not a hassle at all.

    If they can do half as well with the Olympics (which I believe they can) it will work out much better than all of the doubters would have everyone believe.

    BZ

  3. #3
    Super*****/Prom Queen
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Italian Riveria in Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    16,039
    "The NYSCC would not just serve the 2012 Olympics, but would also be used for all types of conventions and athletic competitions, including New York Jets home games, the Final Four, and even the Super Bowl. These and other events will strengthen the city's growing tourism industry, which creates jobs for New Yorkers in all five boroughs."

    This is what I'm talking about. Anyone who works for the unions would know that you have to pay your monthly union dues whether you are working or not, so for all the union men & women who need to work & put food on their tables, this project will feed their familes for the next 6 years.

    And yes Regen, their kids will be working in the new stadium for minimum wage putting mustard on my hot dog, but wasn't it nice when you were a kid and brought home your very own paycheck?

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    9,517
    Originally posted by Limolady@Sep 29 2004, 08:22 AM
    "The NYSCC would not just serve the 2012 Olympics, but would also be used for all types of conventions and athletic competitions, including New York Jets home games, the Final Four, and even the Super Bowl. These and other events will strengthen the city's growing tourism industry, which creates jobs for New Yorkers in all five boroughs."

    This is what I'm talking about. Anyone who works for the unions would know that you have to pay your monthly union dues whether you are working or not, so for all the union men & women who need to work & put food on their tables, this project will feed their familes for the next 6 years.

    And yes Regen, their kids will be working in the new stadium for minimum wage putting mustard on my hot dog, but wasn't it nice when you were a kid and brought home your very own paycheck?
    what about people who are not in unions?

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,472
    I don't believe NYC will ever get the Olympics. This city intimidates many who are not from here and their are many who hold NYC as an example of everything they don't like about the US. The world will not vote it to us.

    I also don't believe that this project will yield scads more conventions. Winter is winter, and those conventions go to warm weather spots. Also see above point about people who are intimidated by such a big city.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    9,517
    wasn't it already established that there are two countries ahead of us on the list to get the olympics- whether we make the necessary changes

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    220a, Row 12
    Posts
    4,197
    Originally posted by djaparz@Sep 29 2004, 09:32 AM
    wasn't it already established that there are two countries ahead of us on the list to get the olympics- whether we make the necessary changes
    Yes, but in the history of the Olympics, the city rated #1 before the pick, never won it.

    BZ

  8. #8
    i've said it before, i don't want the olympics here, but if it helps get the stadium done, i'll take it. besides, I live and work in NJ so it won't really effect me

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    9,517
    ok answer me honestly now -
    lets say the Giants leave the Meadowlands and the Jets become the sole NFL users of the current stadium and we go and make upgrades and luxury boxes and all bells and whistles.

    They build the NYSCC and get all these unions work and get the Super Bowl and the Final 4 and concerts etc. But its the new home the NY GIANTS -

    is everyone still in favor of this project? answer me honestly!!!

  10. #10
    Originally posted by Piper@Sep 29 2004, 07:30 AM

    I also don't believe that this project will yield scads more conventions. Winter is winter, and those conventions go to warm weather spots. Also see above point about people who are intimidated by such a big city.
    That's just not true. This city has MULTIPLE conventions ALL year long. Having another larger, state of the art place to host them will only bring more. Let's also not forget that the RNC is actually not a HUGE convention. The people ATTENDING the convention warranted the upgraded security, but as far as size goes... NYC is used to conventions larger than that on a regular basis.

  11. #11
    Super*****/Prom Queen
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Italian Riveria in Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    16,039
    Originally posted by djaparz@Sep 29 2004, 09:27 AM
    what about people who are not in unions?
    Two step process DJ. Union workers first, then plenty of non-union workers coming in as sub-contractors to help expedite the construction.

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    220a, Row 12
    Posts
    4,197
    Originally posted by djaparz@Sep 29 2004, 09:44 AM
    ok answer me honestly now -
    lets say the Giants leave the Meadowlands and the Jets become the sole NFL users of the current stadium and we go and make upgrades and luxury boxes and all bells and whistles.

    They build the NYSCC and get all these unions work and get the Super Bowl and the Final 4 and concerts etc. But its the new home the NY GIANTS -

    is everyone still in favor of this project? answer me honestly!!!
    Honestly, I want the Olympics to happen and the Jets west side stadium to happen.

    I would take one without the other either way, both are big $ for the city.

    If the Gints took over the stadium after it was built, that would suck, but at least the rest of the Olympics would happen.

    The better question would be: Would you be for the stadium if it were for the Gints and had nothing to do with the Jets or the Olympics.

    To that, I would say: Not as much, but still for it. It would still get the games, Superbowl, and have the once a year thrill of going to a pre-season game there and watching the Jets play the Gints.

    BZ

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    9,517
    BZ i can see that your answer was very genuine and truthful - you are pro olympics so the Giants being the team here would disapoint you but you still back the project -

  14. #14
    Board Moderator
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,751
    good morning!

    more BZ, sorry to disappoint, but i don't think we're getting the olympics, nor do i believe "they" really care. i think it's just a way to plow through this massive, high-speed development project. one of several well-made arguments trhat support this opinion:
    Originally posted by Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn@ “A Land Grab
    Wrapped in the Olympic Rings”

    “A Land Grab Wrapped in the Olympic Rings”
    Top 10 Ways to Tell That the Olympics Are NYC2012’s #2 Priority

    1. The $12 billion price tag
    At a time when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is stressing
    economy, and hoping to persuade developing nations that they, too, can
    afford to host the Games, this price tag invites disqualification. [See “Why
    the $12 Billion Price Tag Dooms New York’s Olympic Chances,” page 14.]
    2. Gratuitous construction
    The Olympics plan will “help us expedite recreational and infrastructure
    projects citywide,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg told The Brooklyn Paper’s
    Deborah Kolben on 8/7/04.
    But why? Without the Nets Arena Complex currently proposed for Prospect
    Heights, Brooklyn, New York City already has three major arenas. Our
    competitors -- Paris, London and Madrid -- each propose just one.
    So does New York really need this new venue to qualify for the Olympics? Or
    does Bloomberg need the Olympics to get new development expedited?
    3. Permanent versus temporary construction
    The notion (most recently advanced by Mayor Bloomberg) that constructing
    new, permanent venues is key to our Olympic success, is preposterous.
    NYC2012 could propose using more existing venues, and building temporary
    ones. Paris, for example, needs 18 new venues: 11 of these will be
    temporary—and the IOC has praised Paris for having a plan with “good
    legacy.”
    4. Lack of back-up positions
    Host cities that truly want the Olympics take great pains to convince the IOC
    that they have back-up plans. NYC2012 has taken the opposite
    tack—claiming that its bid can only succeed if the proposed West Side
    Stadium and Nets Arena are built. This argument is not intended for the
    IOC. It is intended to manipulate the public at home.
    In fact, "There are many facilities [besides a new Nets arena] that could host
    gymnastics," a City Hall staffer who did not wish to be identified told the
    Brooklyn Star’s Nik Kovac on 8/12/04. But don’t expect either Bloomberg or
    Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff to admit that to a public that opposes building
    that arena.
    5. Quick, beat the controversy!
    Bloomberg and Doctoroff claim that our Olympics bid is doomed unless the
    Jets Stadium and Nets Arena are rushed through now. But no host city has
    ever broken ground on new construction for a proposed Olympic stadium
    before being awarded the Olympics, and no troubled venue has put a "shovel
    in the ground" just before the IOC’s vote.
    Why, knowing all of this, would a bid committee that truly wanted the
    Olympics as their first priority insist on fast-tracking two new venues in
    neighborhoods that bitterly oppose them? The IOC does not want this kind
    of controversy, to put it mildly—ergo, the choice of where to put these two
    new venues was not made with the IOC in mind.
    6. Other development boondoggles
    NYC2012 must think the word “Olympics” translates into “open season for
    developers,” because the Jets stadium and Nets arena aren’t the only
    obvious boondoggles included. Why, for instance, chop down part of a
    proposed wilderness green belt to build a new equestrian venue in Staten
    Island when the U.S. equestrian team’s world-class headquarters is located
    in nearby Gladstone, New Jersey?
    7. Queens? Where is Queens?
    Flushing Meadows could be the centerpiece of an economical and practical
    Olympic plan. What would have been lost by fully utilizing the open space,
    easy access and history or hosting large events that Queens provides?
    Nothing, except the chance to push through unneeded development in
    Manhattan and Brooklyn, which is clearly NYC2012’s top priority.
    8. “X” marks the spot
    Although it sounds clever, NYC2012’s much-vaunted “Olympic X” actually
    marks the sites of a cumbersome, potentially nightmarish logistical and
    traffic plan. The “X” would treat athletes horribly, forcing them to repeatedly
    transfer between buses, ferries and trains, and walk long distances. The IOC
    heavily criticized this plan in their recent report, yet NYC2012 clings to the
    “X.”
    9. End run around the Host City
    With the appointment of the Empire State Development Corporation
    (formerly the Urban Development Corporation) as lead agency for the Jets
    Stadium and Nets Arena, New York City’s environmental and land use review
    procedures would be completely circumvented.
    The clear message is that NYC2012 doesn't believe that New York’s City
    Council backs their plans for using the proposed Jets Stadium and Nets Arena
    as Olympic venues. From the IOC perspective, this is a devastating
    development. It is hard to think of another instance where major venues
    have been built without the approval of a host city, and it is completely
    contrary to the Olympic Charter to do such an end run around New York
    City’s government, since it is the city itself which would be awarded the
    Olympics, and not a secret authority like the ESDC.
    10. Public? What public?
    NYC2012 acts as if it has a popular mandate to spend billions of dollars and
    reconfigure New York City in ways which will impact civic life (and our tax
    burden) for generation to come. In fact, nothing could be further from the
    truth. Venues were selected in a secret process, with zero public
    involvement, and no public debate has been held on the details of this plan,
    large or small. NYC2012 speaks to the public only when it wants to sell us
    on their decisions.
    As Mike Vaccaro wrote in the New York Post on August 16, “Dan Doctoroff
    told the world yesterday he was presenting this bid ‘on behalf of 8 million
    New Yorkers.’
    “Is he really?”
    [source here (PDF file)]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us