London 2012 Will we be made to look it a bunch of idiots!

[Paul123456]

With the London game of 2012 fast approching and all the recent press (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/default.stm)about the rising cost will we be made to look like a bunch of idiots?

Before we where awarded the games I all ways wanted them to came to Great Britain but now we have the I am worred that it is going to be another wembaly! And I offten fort that there were many betters cities in Britain than London!:mad:

My forts are will they atually manage to build everything in time:fingers: and will it benafit sport in Britain:fingers:

My personal thoughts are that its in a case of NATIONAL PRIDE that we Make them the best Olympics games ever:fingers:

[Bully]

672

[Linny]

With the London game of 2012 fast approching and all the recent press (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/default.stm)about the rising cost will we be made to look like a bunch of idiots?I don't know how old you are Paul but it isn't the first time. London nearly got to host the 2005 World Atletics Championships at Pickett's Lock (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/1579974.stm).

Much as I'm delighted that London won the bid for 2012 it is pretty astonishing that the IOC could trust us to deliver. In turn, we just have to trust our pathetic government to put in place what is necessary. How we do that when they have proved time and again that they couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery between them is another matter.

[DodgyDunk]

Don't worry, we can always take a leaf out of Athens' book and leave the roof off if we run out of time and/or money...

What do people think about the wavy roof? Assuming the size and complexity of the design is what drives the cost, would you rather save the money altogether, have two extra lanes on the second pool, have a third pool or should the design be ambitiously world class?

[hailstone]

I could be wrong but the designers of the pool also done the new 50 m
pool in dublin the roof blew off the first winter and it was closed for 6 months while someone was found to carry the blame, we dont need the sexy roof we just want a quality pool

[Paul123456]

Linny
London nearly got to host the 2005 World Atletics Championships at Pickets Lock
I'm all to aware of that one! Its worrying me!

I can just see the French Laughing at us if we mess the Olympics up, they have already taken the mickey out of our food!

DodgyDunk
What do people think about the wavy roof?

Looks like an unturn boat to me! one of the sea cat! which take you across the channel.

[chris_lamb]

With the London game of 2012 fast approching and all the recent press (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/default.stm)about the rising cost will we be made to look like a bunch of idiots?

The games will be delivered on time - it has to be! This isn't a project that can be slipped at all, the start date of the games is fixed and has to be met. The government cannot allow the games to fail so they will ensure that all necessary infrastructure is in place.

But will the country be made to look like a bunch of idiots? Yes - that is what the tabloid press does. They will not allow anything to be a success so however well it goes the newspapers will find fault.

[mike_lamb]

And now we hear that they have ordered a redesign of the Aquatic Centre to save money!

[Gina]

Looks like they've made the roof smaller. It looks nicer too from the CGI on the BBC. Just hope it has 10 lanes, is actually 50m with the pads in, has a 10m diving board etc etc - the things that matter. Also on the BBC they mentioned that it's gonna be 20,000 seater so nothing lost there. 20,000 screaming fans will be anazing!

[Bully]

Looks like they've made the roof smaller. It looks nicer too from the CGI on the BBC. Just hope it has 10 lanes, is actually 50m with the pads in, has a 10m diving board etc etc - the things that matter. Also on the BBC they mentioned that it's gonna be 20,000 seater so nothing lost there. 20,000 screaming fans will be anazing!

Unless I was reading the wrong article it said that it was going to be reduced to 15,000 or even 10,000 to ensure that the cost was as per the original quote.

[NotVeryFast]

Looks like they've made the roof smaller. It looks nicer too from the CGI on the BBC. Just hope it has 10 lanes, is actually 50m with the pads in, has a 10m diving board etc etc - the things that matter. Also on the BBC they mentioned that it's gonna be 20,000 seater so nothing lost there. 20,000 screaming fans will be anazing!
If I understand this correctly:
http://www.britishswimming.org/vsite/vcontent/content/transnews/0,10869,5026-142440-19728-28293-264742-9137-5014-layout73-159656-news-item,00.html?ImgDisp=0
it will actually only be 2500 seats, but it will have canopies and temporary seating for the Olympics to extend it to 20000 seats. I'm sure the canopies will look lovely http://forums.snapstream.com/public_html/ubb/rolleyes.gif

[chris_lamb]

And now we hear that they have ordered a redesign of the Aquatic Centre to save money!

We heard that last year - http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/4488368.stm. Today's announcement was the result of that redesign.

[chris_lamb]

If I understand this correctly:
http://www.britishswimming.org/vsite/vcontent/content/transnews/0,10869,5026-142440-19728-28293-264742-9137-5014-layout73-159656-news-item,00.html?ImgDisp=0
it will actually only be 2500 seats, but it will have canopies and temporary seating for the Olympics to extend it to 20000 seats. I'm sure the canopies will look lovely http://forums.snapstream.com/public_html/ubb/rolleyes.gif

The plan has always been for the permanent facility to have only 2500 seats and the remainder temporary for the games. But be honest, how many events have 15000 spectators?

[NotVeryFast]

The plan has always been for the permanent facility to have only 2500 seats and the remainder temporary for the games. But be honest, how many events have 15000 spectators?
Well, yes, I see that, but what I'm saying is what will it look like when the games are taking place, when the whole world is looking at it? If the seats were to be added inside, like they did at Manchester, I could understand it, but if they need canopies, that suggests they would otherwise be exposed to the elements, i.e. must be outside the permanent structure, so what will it look like then?

[Steve]

Well, yes, I see that, but what I'm saying is what will it look like when the games are taking place, when the whole world is looking at it? If the seats were to be added inside, like they did at Manchester, I could understand it, but if they need canopies, that suggests they would otherwise be exposed to the elements, i.e. must be outside the permanent structure, so what will it look like then?
Like the commonwealth games pool in melbourne? The two temporary grandstands there were under canopies (and in fact the permanent one too)

http://www1.dvc.vic.gov.au/ocgc/building/sunset_MSAC.jpg

[DodgyDunk]

Well, yes, I see that, but what I'm saying is what will it look like when the games are taking place, when the whole world is looking at it? If the seats were to be added inside, like they did at Manchester, I could understand it, but if they need canopies, that suggests they would otherwise be exposed to the elements, i.e. must be outside the permanent structure, so what will it look like then?

If you went to World Masters Champs in 2000, you will have seen the "legacy" version of the 1972 Olympic Pool. One entire side of stadium seating was removed and replaced by floor-to-ceiling glass. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Olympic_Pool_Munich_1972.jpg

Still looks fine and the pool was great! It would be quite a fast pool if it weren't for the poolside beer concessions...

I remember queuing up for my 100m free outside the windows in the dark at 10:30pm due to the sheer number of swimmers.

[Paul123456]

Quoto the London 2012 website (http://www.london2012.com/en/news/press+room/releases/2006/November/2006-11-27-11-30.htm)"Notes to editors:

1. The design concept of a sweeping sculptural arched roof and key visual imagery from the original bid has been retained, but the Aquatics Centre will now be accessible directly from the bridge and after the Games it will also be accessible by car from a new loop road around the Olympic park.

2. The Aquatics Centre is smaller. For example, the roof is now 14,000 square metres, compared to 35,000 metres originally.

The pool sizes are:-

Competition pool: 50m x 25m – 10 lanes
Training pool 50m x 21m - 8 lanes
Diving pool 21m x 25m x 5 m deep
3. The competition pool will have 2 booms and 2 moveable floors to allow a large number of configurations and different swimming uses ranging from shallow water for children to swimming training. The training pool will also have a boom and a moveable floor and the diving pool will have a moveable floor. These options will give maximum flexibility of use and allow a full range of different swimming programmes after the games."

What made me think is do we need moverble floors in all the three pools. I just hope they stik to the new plans and get no with it!

Here's a good link the the old design (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wRqnejg778), if any one now's where I can see the new design like this it would be great.

[Gina]

This is a link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/6187774.stm)to a news report with a small picture of the revised Aquatic centre

[SplashNblub]

Aquatics centre estimate £210 million now. With four years to go. So it is achieving the remarkable feat of getting smaller and more expensive at the same time. It would have helped greatly if it could have been build from off the shelf parts. It will look jolly nice but a slightly less pretty bit of kit and a few more pools nationwide or even some more adequate financial support for swimmers would not be a bad thing.

[chris_lamb]

Aquatics centre estimate £210 million now.

Source?

[SplashNblub]

Source?
Me. Papers shortly no doubt.

[chris_lamb]

And here now - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7218590.stm.

However the article gives no break down of the costs so it's impossible to tell if it is a reasonable increase (as it includes more, material costs have risen, inflation if taken into account, etc.) or an unreasonable increase (the same thing but more money).

[Linny]

Aquatics centre estimate £210 million now.Blimey, you could buy 6.5 Elsies for that. How can it cost so much?

[broomhillsaved]

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=449&storycode=3104503

Article by Tom de Castella looking at the claims that the Olympics will benefit the regions.

This website - Building Design - also looks at the Aquatic Centre.

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=725&storycode=3104840&c=1&encCode=000000000144023e

[Big Nev]

Inanswer to the original question. The Commonwealth Games in Manchester 2002 had the same doubters. They went off briliantly.

The athletics stadium was wonderful and I agree the Aquatics Centre was a bit of a poor design, but during the competition it was great.

Everything we do in Britain is knocked by the eternal pessimists in our society. I saw let's be grateful they finally got the IOC to pick London or any city in Britain for that matter.

Wait for the event to happen and then criticise if it's poor.

[Wildswimmer]

Everything we do in Britain is knocked by the eternal pessimists in our society. I saw let's be grateful they finally got the IOC to pick London or any city in Britain for that matter.

Wait for the event to happen and then criticise if it's poor.

Ordinarily I couldn't give a toss about the Olympics. What <b>does</b> annoy me is the way taxpayer's (and Lottery) money is being siphoned off to finance this corporate jerkfest. Money that could be put to far better uses - for instance, keeping all those threatened local swimming pools open, as well as building some new ones.

Edit: And whoever had the idea of making the Aquatics Centre look like an upside-down beached catermaran. I'm sure that the millions splurged on architects' and consultant fees could have paid for something a little more imaginative. Like with that ridiculous logo, any half-competent schoolchild could have done far better.

Nine billion squid and still counting, for a fortnight's jamboree to benefit corporate and political egos. Not what I'd call value for money. :mad:

Bleuuuuuuuuuuurgh

http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/sick/sick0021.gif

Wildswimmer Pete

[Linny]

Aquatics centre estimate £210 million now. With four years to go. And now much as I hate to feed wildswimmer's anti-Olympic-fest the cost has grown to £303 million (http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/04/2012_aquatics_centre_will_cost_300m.html) although £61 million of that is a bridge.
The value of Balfour Beatty's contract to build the 2012 Olympic Games aquatics centre is just over £300 million.


The Olympic Delivery Authority ended months of speculation this morning over what the final cost would be when it said the deal to build the complex itself would cost £242 million.
In December, Construction News revealed that the cost of the aquatics centre would come in at close to £250 million. The Zaha Hadid-designed centre includes the main swimming pool, diving pool and training pool.
And the firm will also build a 250m bridge that will form part of the centre's roof and will connect Stratford City to the swimming pool complex. This carries a further price tag of £61 million and at its widest will be around 40m across.
The original aquatics budget was estimated at £75 million and the £303 million represents a fourfold increase on that figure which was originally contained in London's bid document which it sent to the IOC.
Balfour Beatty has now formally signed the deal to build the venue – it had been sole bidder after rivals bidders Hochtief and Eiffel pulled out last year – and is expected to begin work on site this July.
The centre will have a capacity of 17,500 during the Games which will be reduced to 2,500 in legacy.
The ODA also announced that the budget of the velopark is £80 million with the cost of its centrepiece, the 6,000 seat velodrome, believed to be around £50 million.
The park will also include a BMX circuit, mountain bike course and one mile road cycle circuit. The £80 million figure also includes the cost of legacy conversion.
Three firms – Carillion, ISG and Spanish firm FCC – are all chasing the main velodrome deal with a winner due to be announced later this spring.

[Baker]

I bet it will end up rubbish as well for anyone wanting to use it afterwards. That or it will be handed to a company like GLL who will then charge £99999 an hour to rent the pool to local clubs and force all swimmers to buy an annual membership.

[NotVeryFast]

Hold on, has anyone spotted what has happened here?

It was originally supposed to cost £75m. It was then going to cost £215m, so they redesigned it to be cheaper and nastier. This cheaper and nastier design is now going to cost £300m. So they would actually have been better off going with the original and better design because that would only have cost £215m. What a shambles.

[Wildswimmer]

The Olympic Delivery Authority should relocate to London's Beckton sewage works - the largest in the country. With all the verbal diarrhoea they come out with they'll feel at home there and the smell will be as sweet as roses compared with that of the corruption so obvious in everything to do with the 2012 squanderfest.

Edit: FOI request to Department of Culture, Media and Closing Swimming Pools:

http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/FOI_requests/archive_2007/case_66660.htm

Note the response - needless to say I don't believe a word of it.

Wildswimmer Pete

[Leprechaun]

Hold on, has anyone spotted what has happened here?

It was originally supposed to cost £75m. It was then going to cost £215m, so they redesigned it to be cheaper and nastier. This cheaper and nastier design is now going to cost £300m. So they would actually have been better off going with the original and better design because that would only have cost £215m. What a shambles.

The contracting regimes must be as watertight as sieves and the procurement authorities have screwed up completely somewhere. In many lines of consulting business I am sure that to advise someone the cost of a project is 75M and have it turn out to be 215 or 300 is incompetent or even negligent and should leave the advisor open to a claim, usually against Professional Indemnity cover. It may be that we find the contractual terms are such that the"answer" didnt have to be binding - in which case we should, as ever, sack the politicans/civil servants who facilitiated the mess.

[KatieBun]

I think I'm going to change nationality before 2012. I think we'll get it right eventually but at what cost?

[Nat-action]

That's sad because one of the major point of your designation was the fact that it would be cheaper than Paris... But actually that was a lie. But whatever, the chinese or american who will come to the see the olympics will go to Paris as well in the same time, as it is not far, so we ll have in france a raise of the number of tourist without spending a pound (or a euro).:king:
Good luck anyway.

[chris_lamb]

That's sad because one of the major point of your designation was the fact that it would be cheaper than Paris...

Really? The only evidence I can find is a commitment that tickets would be cheaper than Paris and New York. I can't find anything that says the overall cost of the games would be lower. In fact I'd be amazed if this was true as one of the key elements of the Paris bid was that they would using alot of existing venues.

But actually that was a lie.

Even if that claim was made, do you know what the costs of the Paris project would have got to by now? They would have had many of the same issues including general increased costs, increased security requirements, etc. that London is facing.

[Taxiandbank]

Balfour Beatty main contactor, increasing costs http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press/2008/52-08 make your own conclusions.

[broomhillsaved]

Good article Taxi - it's just a joke isn't it? I believe the Govt even had difficulty getting anyone to bid for these projects after the Wembley fiasco, so the £300 million or whatever is probably in-built compensation for agreeing to take on another white elephant.

[Wildswimmer]

This scam must be a nice little earner for the construction conglomerates and no doubt is a major contributor to local authorities inability (ie unwillingness) to build new pools or refurbish old ones.

One way around the problem would be for councils to give the work to local family businesses rather than the large contractors. Mind you, small local businesses couldn't afford the...........er............."little inducements".

Wildswimmer Pete

[broomhillsaved]

The worst of it is that even with an expenditure of £300 million plus, there is no guarantee of quality - as we have seen with T5, you can pour in billions but if you haven't got the commonsense to train and orientate staff properly, manage staff car parking and try out the new system with a small number of passengers rather than the bravado of opening with a flourish then the money won't help.

Where is this £300 million going anyway? Into the practicalities of the Aquatic Centre?? By the time the consultants, sons-of-the-consultants, first cousins twice removed from the consultants have had their share it'll be cheap fixtures and fittings, a completely useless computer system, blocked showers etc.

[KatieBun]

Apparently T5 is now to be known as Hotel California.
.....You can check out any time you like but you can never leave.

[broomhillsaved]

Apparently T5 is now to be known as Hotel California.
.....You can check out any time you like but you can never leave.

The insurance companies have moved fast, haven't they - to say that people know the risks if they travel through T5 and therefore can't expect compensation! New policies will have T5 as one of the "exclusions" ; how's that for a world wide advert of BA incompetence.

[selkie]

I thought the assumption was that humans could get themselves out of Terminal 5. It was just the baggage that vanished into some sort of interdimensional vortex never to be seen again.

[chris_lamb]

It was just the baggage that vanished into some sort of interdimensional vortex never to be seen again.

It's a little harsh to describe Milan as an interdimensional vortex!

[Juicy Lucy]

It's a little harsh to describe Milan as an interdimensional vortex!

It's unbelievable....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7325723.stm

[DodgyDunk]

The worst of it is that even with an expenditure of £300 million plus, there is no guarantee of quality - as we have seen with T5, you can pour in billions but if you haven't got the commonsense to train and orientate staff properly, manage staff car parking and try out the new system with a small number of passengers rather than the bravado of opening with a flourish then the money won't help.

Where is this £300 million going anyway? Into the practicalities of the Aquatic Centre?? By the time the consultants, sons-of-the-consultants, first cousins twice removed from the consultants have had their share it'll be cheap fixtures and fittings, a completely useless computer system, blocked showers etc.

What a cheery view of the world!

What do you propose as an alternative to building the Aquatic Centre at Stratford? Reuse an existing facility? Tiller Road Baths on the Isle of Dogs perhaps?

Unfortunate that there was only one bidder, I admit, but there is pressure on the contractor to keep the quote realistic because of the remaining contracts on which they want to bid.

I believe in the case for building a permanent showpiece competition facility in London, rather than a temporary pool, but am not sure if the "wave roof" design is warranted. It would be interesting to know whether the costs would be lower if the building were of a more traditional design.

[NotVeryFast]

I believe in the case for building a permanent showpiece competition facility in London
Will this be such a facility, though? Someone suggested it will only be accessible by public transport, which seems like a pretty disastrous failing to me, for long term usefulness.

[DodgyDunk]

Will this be such a facility, though? Someone suggested it will only be accessible by public transport, which seems like a pretty disastrous failing to me, for long term usefulness.

I don't believe that will be the case in legacy mode.

[Gina]

I'm hoping we'll get a Sheffield standard competition pool to race in and nationals will be held in the south FINALLY. I have had enough with all the trips up north to Sheffield, Manchester and now Liverpool and I wouldn't mind a short course nationals at somewhere like Crawley, but that will never be.

[broomhillsaved]

What a cheery view of the world!

What do you propose as an alternative to building the Aquatic Centre at Stratford? Reuse an existing facility? Tiller Road Baths on the Isle of Dogs perhaps?

Unfortunate that there was only one bidder, I admit, but there is pressure on the contractor to keep the quote realistic because of the remaining contracts on which they want to bid.

I believe in the case for building a permanent showpiece competition facility in London, rather than a temporary pool, but am not sure if the "wave roof" design is warranted. It would be interesting to know whether the costs would be lower if the building were of a more traditional design.

I have nothing against the idea of a permanent world class facility being built; my objections are to the extragavant wastefulness that is taking place; as others have pointed out the Aquatic Centre is suffering cutbacks whilst the price keeps rising.

[DodgyDunk]

I have nothing against the idea of a permanent world class facility being built; my objections are to the extragavant wastefulness that is taking place; as others have pointed out the Aquatic Centre is suffering cutbacks whilst the price keeps rising.

The "price" hasn't risen. What has gone up is the estimate as the design has been elaborated.

The intial estimate would have been based on nothing more than building "a world class facility with a given capacity".

When the architect was selected, there was a more refined estimate. It would have been at this point that the cost of the massive and complicated roof design became apparent.

As far as I know, it was at this point that the design was "sent back" by Tessa Jowell to cut costs. The major decisions made were to modify the roof and make some of the seating temporary. I'm not sure what has been "cut back". At this point it is still all estimated, but there are few comparatives for such a project. Who'd be the quantity surveyor on that one?

The price can only be known when the contract is signed.

I understand that the figures are not exactly comparable since the scope of the original estimate did not include the cost of building the bridge to access the centre. I'm sure there are other such "enhancements". Saying that, it's right that questions are asked about why the initial estimates were under by so much, but perfectly understandable.

Such differences between estimates and prices are one reason there is such a large contingency built into the overall budget.

BTW - what "extravagant wastefulness" has taken place?

[Baker]

Because people campaign all the time to keep pools open, build new ones, better training facilities, funding, advice etc etc

Then suddenly we spend near £300m on one pool, which I very much doubt anyone will be able to use afterwards, and I doubt anyone will go to see it anyway as the ticket prices will no doubt be a joke. You could build 40 world class training facilities like Loughborough for that, and still have money left over. Obviously everyone understands that more money and bigger venues are needed to host the Olympics, but this is just stupid.

All funding seems to be aimed at getting medals in 2012 now as well. What's going to happen in 2020?