Financing however seemed to be the recurrent concern echoed throughout the report. Calling the Chicago budget "ambitious but achievable," the IOC said Chicago will need an "extensive sponsorship program" to make it work. The Olympic Village plan was described as a potentially "special experience for the athletes," but the IOC report noted that no full financing guarantee for its construction was provided when the commission visited in early April. Another risk cited in Chicago's bid was the planned use of temporary venues.
The report expresses concern that such structures may place a greater financial burden on the Olympic organizing committee because they are not paid for and managed by the city in the same way that permanent structures would be.
Paradoxically,the IOC also espouses a somewhat contradictory idea that host cities should not build expensive, permanent venues; in the belief that they will ultimately be underused, costly-to-maintain white elephants.
In its summary of the Chicago bid, the report said there was increased risk to Chicago because of its "emphasis on major temporary or scaled-down venues." This includes the Olympic Stadium, which would be a temporary, 80,000-seat structure.
This lack of permanence could be the major failing in Chicago's Olympic bid. It might just be that Chicago 2016 has failed to recognize a key motivating factor which has previously led the IOC to award host city status to both Beijing for the 2008 Games, and to London for the 2012 Summer Olympics.
London's success was attributed to its focus on urban regeneration and the importance of a sporting legacy being conferred upon future generations. Speaking before Parliament, following the award of the 2012 Games to London, Jack Straw (Britain's Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office) commented that: "London's bid was built on a special Olympic vision; that vision of an Olympic games that would not only be a celebration of sport, but a force for regeneration. The games will transform one of the poorest and most deprived areas of London. They will create thousands of jobs and homes. They will offer new opportunities for business in the immediate area and throughout London... One of the things that made the bid successful is the way in which it reaches out to all young people in two important respects: it will encurage many more to get fit and to be involved in sport, and, whatever their physical prowess, to offer their services as volunteers for the Olympic cause."
Straw's statement is telling and instructive as to why London's bid was successful, emphasising non-sports related outcomes, and focusing on using the games as a means to encourage non-elite participation in sport and exercise. The ultimate objective, on a much larger scale is attaining a transformative legacy which will impact East London vis a vis a successful staging of the 2012 Games. The British government's own commitment to social inclusion is cited as another "transformative legacy" intended for the Games.
Chicago 2016's plans for Washington Park, and the transition of temporary Olympic Athlete's housing into homes for Chicago's residents notwithstanding, it is again the lack of transformative permanence which the IOC has obviously picked up on; and might ultimately prove the failing of Chicago's bid to host the Games. But it is not too late to lay the groundwork now for a bold initiative which could possibly impress the IOC enough to see Chicago's bid in a newer light.
As indicated here, as well as in previous posts, Chicago's mass transit system, most notably its underground and elevated rails, is in serious need of improvement. It seems unlikely, even if the Games are awarded to the City, that there would be enough funding to subsidize a rebuild of the CTA's rails; probably the most immediate and critical element needing attention.
What might prove more viable, especially given the objective of augmenting and enhancing the transportation needs for the City during a major event such as an Olympics, would be to develop an extensive infrastructure to accomodate Bicycle transit and commuting in Chicago. Currently, there are hardly enough routes to encourage bicycling for anything other than recreational riding and the few who do utilize Bicycles for daily commutes.
Before he descended underground for his tour of the Beijing Subway System, Mayor Daley could not have missed the dedicated infrastructure designed to accomodate Bicycles and other non-automobile traffic in the Chinese Capital. With wide lanes separating Autos, Trucks and Buses from the Bikes, Trikes and Scooters which still swarm and crowd the busy Beijing thoroughfares, a seemingly chaotic but elegant flux of diverse modes of transport has evolved.
Concrete barriers in some places provide additional insulation from newly licensed drivers, allowing Beijing's seasoned cyclists to roll more confidently and safely amidst the ever widening river of automotive insanity crowding the City's highways and biways.
Richard M. Daley, Chicago's green, biking, rooftop gardening Mayor, could further polish his legacy through such a bold initiative as this: the design and construction of a transportation infrastructure which increases the emphasis on Bicycle transit throughout the City. Whether as an adjunct to the planning for the regal Olympic summit which Daley has sought to conquer; or, even absent such a crowning glory, as a lasting template for other major American urban centers to emulate; the establishment of a comprehensive integrated bicycling road system for Chicago would represent a transformative legacy which would resonate for decades to come.
Posts
