Pittsburgh loses out on hosting World Cup (State College, Penn: neighborhoods, cost)

[JoeLeaphorn]

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

We have thousands of downtown hotel rooms and are building thousands more.

A little more than four thousand. As for the building, slow going in this economy. And it is far less than the number of rooms needed to operate the Convention Center at capacity.

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

For those that complain about public transportation, how about the light rail expansion that will pass right by Heinz Field? How about the plans to connect that light rail system to our state-of-the-art airport that can handle millions more people than it currently serves?

You don't build light rail for events, you build it for commuter transport. The North Shore Connector was a boondoggle and with the limited capacity of the entire system, you'll see far more people walking the bridges than waiting for the next LRT. Also, the connection from the North Shore to the airport is a pipe dream.

Think about it.

People who FLY into Pittsburgh are not going to want the leisurely pace of the LRT which is projected to cross the river, head up 51 passing through McKees Rocks and Coraopolis before heading up to Moon and the airport. If you want state of the art you do a directed, limited stop line using the shortest path. Only if the Parkway West inbound is severly congested will the North Shore route make sense, and when you consider the West Busway, it makes no sense at all.

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

If we had a 2018 or 2022 deadline for added infrastructure, we could get what we need done instead of having it mired in bureaucracy for decades like the North Shore Connector was.

Bureaucracys are sometimes good, especially when they keep lame-brained ideas from happening. The biggest problem is that transportation planning in Southwestern PA is run by politicians who know nothing about transportation planning but a lot about keeping their constituents happy. The result is a typically horse built by a committee.

[Inspire Pittsburgh]

I'm not saying that Pittsburgh is ideal for the World Cup. Hell, look at the short list that the Bid Committee has selected. Bidding Cities | Go USA Bid Probably only a handful of cities are IDEAL (New York, LA, Chicago, Washington) for the World Cup in 2009.

Cleveland? Nashville? Kansas City? My guess is that around half of all these cities don't have a rail link from their stadiums to downtown, and given the more remote spots many of these stadiums are in (specifically Glendale, KC, Cowboys Stadium, Gillette Stadium), Heinz Field is probably in the middle of the pack in terms of hotels within a 5-km radius of the potential stadium.

[JoeLeaphorn]

Cleveland certainly does. Both Browns Stadium and Progressive (Jacobs) Field are located in the heart of the city and both accessible by rail with the RTA having a stop at Browns Stadium and the hub, at Tower City, being a short walk to Progressive Field.

[Inspire Pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by JoeLeaphorn

Cleveland certainly does. Both Browns Stadium and Progressive (Jacobs) Field are located in the heart of the city and both accessible by rail with the RTA having a stop at Browns Stadium and the hub, at Tower City, being a short walk to Progressive Field.

I meant half of the total cities on their list.

But if Pittsburgh and Cleveland will be equal in this respect, have similarly sized stadiums, similarly sized cities, why are they on the list and we're not? That's all that I'm complaining about with Cleveland and some of the other cities.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

But if Pittsburgh and Cleveland will be equal in this respect, have similarly sized stadiums, similarly sized cities, why are they on the list and we're not?

It could actually just be a stadium size issue for all we know. According to the article:

Remaining stadiums have an average capacity of nearly 74,000, and eight are 80,000 or more -- the minimum needed for the opener and the final.

A quick googling suggests Cleveland Brown Stadium has a capacity of 73,200, whereas Heinz Field's capacity is 65,050. Given the stats on the stadiums that made the cut, it seems to me that difference in stadium sizes could have been most or all of the explanation for why Cleveland survived this cut and Pittsburgh did not.

[Inspire Pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

A quick googling suggests Cleveland Brown Stadium has a capacity of 73,200, whereas Heinz Field's capacity is 65,050. Given the stats on the stadiums that made the cut, it seems to me that difference in stadium sizes could have been most or all of the explanation for why Cleveland survived this cut and Pittsburgh did not.

And if this is the case, then I call "poor job" on whoever presented Heinz Field to the US Bid Committee, like the Sports and Exhibition Authority. Temporary stands could easily be added on the plaza at the south end of the stadium (similar to how Raymond James Stadium adds a few thousand seats when they host the Super Bowl) to bring it to over 70,000 seats.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

And if this is the case, then I call "poor job" on whoever presented Heinz Field to the US Bid Committee, like the Sports and Exhibition Authority. Temporary stands could easily be added on the plaza at the south end of the stadium (similar to how Raymond James Stadium adds a few thousand seats when they host the Super Bowl) to bring it to over 70,000 seats.

Possibly, but I am not sure that would have been competitive with stadiums which already had those seats in place, with all the normal planned access, rest rooms, concessions, and so forth.

[ajl777]

I remember reading that Berlin had a mini-baby boom after hosting some World Cup games in 2006. Also, just imagine if you had like 10+years to prepare for it. I'd imagine that would inspire some real significant infrastructure improvements if the money's there.

[JoeLeaphorn]

Originally Posted by Inspire Pittsburgh

And if this is the case, then I call "poor job" on whoever presented Heinz Field to the US Bid Committee, like the Sports and Exhibition Authority. Temporary stands could easily be added on the plaza at the south end of the stadium (similar to how Raymond James Stadium adds a few thousand seats when they host the Super Bowl) to bring it to over 70,000 seats.

The poor planning was in building Heinz Field with too few seats. The same has been said about the David L. Lawrence Convention Center which, while bigger than the older convention center, is still too small to host many of the larger conventions (that plus lack of hotel rooms).

[Copanut]

Originally Posted by JoeLeaphorn

The poor planning was in building Heinz Field with too few seats. The same has been said about the David L. Lawrence Convention Center which, while bigger than the older convention center, is still too small to host many of the larger conventions (that plus lack of hotel rooms).

Joe,

I tend to agree with you are most points, however... The Rooneys did not want a stadium with 80-90K seats. They wanted to keep it smaller so demand would always be there. Its easy to get 65 thousand drunks there every game, but were to you find another 15K?