DOCSLIB.ORG

Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 22.01.2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 22.01.2018 OSC REFERENCE COLLECTION Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 22.01.2018 Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 The Olympic Studies Centre www.olympic.org/studies [email protected] 2 OSC REFERENCE COLLECTION The “OSC Reference collection” is published by The Olympic Studies Centre, your centre of reference for Olympic knowledge. It gathers a series of documents providing key historical facts and figures related to different aspects of the Olympic Games and the IOC. In the same collection: Olympic Summer Games Villages Olympic Winter Games Villages Torches and torch relays of the Olympic Summer Games Torches and torch relays of the Olympic Winter Games History of the sports at the Summer Olympic Games History of sports at the Winter Olympic Games Olympic Summer Games medals Olympic Winter Games medals Youth Olympic Games medals Olympic Winter Games posters Olympic Summer Games posters Olympic Summer Games mascots Olympic Winter Games mascots Youth Olympic Games mascots The sports pictograms of the Olympic Summer Games The sports pictograms of the Olympic Winter Games Elections of the Presidents of the International Olympic Committee : candidates and voting results All reference documents, as well as the full collection of digital and printed publications of The Olympic Studies Centre are available on The Olympic World Library (OWL), our library catalogue entirely devoted to Olympic knowledge: www.olympic.org/library This content (the “Content”) is made available to you (“You”) by the International Olympic Committee (the “IOC”) for non-commercial, educational, research, analysis, review or reporting purposes only. The Content shall not be re- distributed, as made available to you by the IOC, in part or in whole, except to the extent that such content is a derivative work created by You. Re-distribution of compilations of the Content made available to you is expressly excluded. You must give appropriate credit, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the IOC and its affiliated entities including The Olympic Studies Centre (“OSC”) endorses you or your use. The IOC by means of the OSC endeavours to provide you with accurate and up-to- date information. The IOC and the OSC make no warranties or representations about and assumes no liability for the information included in the Content, neither its accuracy nor completeness. © 2017 International Olympic Committee The Olympic Studies Centre www.olympic.org/studies [email protected] 3 Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 CONTENT Introduction 5 Paris 1924 8 Los Angeles 1932 11 Berlin 1936 14 Helsinki 1952 18 Melbourne/Stockholm 1956 22 Rome 1960 26 Tokyo 1964 29 Mexico 1968 33 Munich 1972 36 Montreal 1976 39 Moscow 1980 43 Los Angeles 1984 47 Seoul 1988 51 Barcelona 1992 54 Atlanta 1996 58 Sydney 2000 62 Athens 2004 65 Beijing 2008 69 London 2012 73 Rio 2016 77 Credits 80 The Olympic Studies Centre www.olympic.org/studies [email protected] 4 Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 INTRODUCTION Today, the Olympic Village is a key element in the organisation and success of the Games. It brings together the world’s athletes in a unique location, and offers them an accommodation solution adapted to their needs during the final phase of their preparation. It is the fruit of an evolution process inseparably linked to that of the Olympic Games. Already in Antiquity, in order to take part in the Olympic Games, the athletes who had come from different cities gathered and lived in the same place. The town of Elis became the venue for this gathering, and at least a month before the Games, the participants arrived here to complete their training and receive instructions for the competitions. They then went to the sanctuary of Olympia around 60 kilometres away, and stayed there during the actual events.1 As mentioned by the historian Nicholas Yalouris, the gathering of athletes from the Ancient Greek world for the Games encouraged the development of a common awareness and shared ideal. Subsequently, the scope of the ancient Olympic Games expanded with the incorporation of Greece into the Roman Empire and the participation of Roman citizens in the Games.2 For the first editions of the modern Olympic Games, between 1896 and 1920, there was no real Olympic Village. The teams generally stayed in hotels, public or military buildings, with local people or even on the boats which had transported them there. The General Technical Rules applicable to the 1924 Games in Paris stipulated that “The Organising Committee for the Olympic Games is required to provide the athletes with accommodation, bedding and food, at a fixed rate which shall be set beforehand per person and per day […].”3 As a result, the organisers established an accommodation centre called the Olympic Village, and offered the teams of the different nations the chance to stay in the same location, under the same conditions, and with common services.4 During the preparations for the 1928 Games in Amsterdam, consideration was given to creating an Olympic Village, but the organisers opted for other solutions.5 For the 1932 Games in Los Angeles, however, an Olympic Village with a capacity of 2,000 people was built to the west of the city. From then on, a Village would be created for every edition of the Summer Games, with the exception of London in 1948, which had to face the material challenges of the immediate post-war period.6 For the Winter Games, 1 Jordi Carbonell, “The Barcelona'92 Olympic Village”, Olympic Villages, Hundred Years of Urban Planning and Shared Experiences, Miquel de Moragas, Montserrat Llinés and Bruce Kidd [ed.], International Symposium on Olympic Villages Lausanne 1996, IOC, 1997, p. 141; Ludwig Drees, Olympia, Gods, Artists and Athletes, London: Pall Mall Press, 1967, p. 43; Nicholas Yalouris, “The City of Elis. The Primordial Olympic Village”, Olympic Villages, Hundred Years of Urban Planning and Shared Experiences, Miquel de Moragas, Montserrat Llinés and Bruce Kidd [ed.], International Symposium on Olympic Villages Lausanne 1996, IOC, 1997, p. 24. 2 Nicholas Yalouris, op. cit., pp. 25-26. 3 Statuts du Comité International Olympique, Règlements et protocole de la célébration des Olympiades modernes et des Jeux Olympiques quadriennaux, Règles générales techniques applicables à la célébration de la VIIIe Olympiade Paris 1924, Lausanne: IOC, ca 1924, p. 21. 4 Les jeux de la VIIIe Olympiade Paris 1924: rapport officiel, Comité olympique français, Paris: Librairie de France, 1924, p. 60. 5 The Ninth Olympiad being the Official Report of the Olympic Games of 1928 celebrated at Amsterdam, G. Van Rossem [ed.], Netherlands Olympic Committee (Committee 1928), Amsterdam: J. H. De Bussy, n.d., pp. 108, 191. 6 The Official Report of the Organising Committee for the XIV Olympiad, London: The Organising Committee for the XIV Olympiad London, 1951, p. 143. The Olympic Studies Centre www.olympic.org/studies [email protected] 5 Olympic Summer Games Villages from Paris 1924 to Rio 2016 between 1924 and 1956 the teams stayed mainly in hotels, apart from the 1952 Games in Oslo, where three accommodation sites were created.7 With each edition, the concept was reinforced and developed. As well as the conviviality element, creating an Olympic Village capable of compactly housing thousands of athletes and their entourage members presents numerous advantages, such as economies of scale or the optimisation of team transport. As the success of the Games has grown, the size of the Villages has increased; the services have become more diverse; and the planning and functions of the different areas of the site have evolved and become standardised. The transformation of the Villages has also reflected that of society. For example, for the Summer Games, until the 1950s no women were housed in the Village, but rather in other accommodation sites. At the 1956 Games in Melbourne, for the first time they had their own part of the main Village, but one to which the male athletes were not admitted. However, the women had access to other parts of the Village such as the dining rooms. This situation continued until the 1980s. Starting with the 1984 Games in Los Angeles, the athletes were accommodated by team, and this gender separation disappeared. Technological developments have also had an impact on the facilities and services of the Olympic Villages with, for example, the appearance of internet access in the 1990s and, at the end of the 20th century, the increasing use of materials and methods of construction aimed at saving energy and resources. The main Olympic Village is one of the imposing architectural projects which characterises an edition of the Games. While the first ones were temporary, as in Paris in 1924 or Los Angeles in 1932, they are now built to last. So re-using them after the Olympic event is of key importance to the host city. The authorities see a chance to develop an innovative project, capable of creating a strong urban legacy of lasting benefit to the local population. And what is more, the Villages built today for the Olympic Games are also used for the Paralympic Games held just afterwards. This document presents the editions of the Olympic Summer Games for which an Olympic Village was created. It does not include the potential plans for the editions which were cancelled or the accommodation used when there was no main Village (before 1924 or London 1948). It does however provide details about any other accommodation sites arranged by the organisers in addition to the main Village. As these sites were not necessarily called “villages”, the terminology used varied from one edition to the next.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Star Architects, Urban Spectacles and Global Brands
    Star Architects, Urban Spectacles and Global Brands: Exploring the Case of the Tokyo Olympics 2020 Abstract Olympic stadia are often regarded as a political showcase involving a range of influences: the host nation’s international politics, the interests of transnational capitalism along with site-specific meanings and the power of iconic architecture. By examining the 2020 Tokyo Olympic main stadium as a case study, the paper analyzes the controversial Zaha Hadid’ stadium plan in relation to the Japanese nation branding initiative. In doing so, the paper argues that ‘branding’ should be seen as part of an economic and cultural system which seems to enhance the global value of iconic architects and their buildings. Yet, the power of brands can be understood as a contingent entity. This is because its ambivalenct nature entails a tension between exclusiveness and banality; additionally, it could be difficult for branded architects to work across the different regimes of global and local politics; and they are of course also constrained by the logic of neoliberal transnational capitalism. By investigating a major global branded architect, Zaha Hadid and her architecture plan, the paper considers why a new image of Japan could not be adequately created by Hadid’s aesthetics and narratives of the Olympic stadium which should be regarded as a national cultural legacy. The paper then discusses the contested processes of image-making and narrative creation in relation to the representation of Japan in contemporary Olympic culture. The paper concludes with an examination of Kengo Kuma’s architecture language in his 2020 Tokyo Olympics stadium design.
    [Show full text]
  • Olympic Candidate File of 2016 Rio 5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic
    5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic Cities Olympic Candidate File of 2016 Rio Page 47 5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic Cities Olympic Candidate File of 2016 Rio and Transport Strategic Plan Page 48 5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic Cities Olympic Candidate File of 2016 Rio and Transport Strategic Plan Page 49 5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic Cities Summary of Transport Aspect of Olympic Cities Main Olympic Area 89 ㎢ 128 ㎢ 159 ㎢ 155 ㎢ 511 ㎢ Population 4.6 Million 3 Million 7.5 Million 8.2 Million 6.3 Million Main Transit for Rail/Metro Metro/Tram Rail/Metro Metro - 4 BRT Olympic Transport Bus Bus Bus improvement- Metro –line4- Bus Rail-new vehicle Dedicated Lane Some 3 Routes 34 Routes 240km More than 150km Buses 285.7km ITS -Traffic Control -Traffic Control -Traffic Control -Traffic Control -Traffic Control Center, Field Center, Field Center, Field Center, Field Center, Field Equipment and Equipment and Equipment and Equipment and Equipment and systems systems systems systems systems -R$65million -Co-Operation -Co-Operation -Co-Operation -Co-Operation -Co-Operation with Security, with Security, with Security, with Security, with Security Transit and Transit and Transit and Transit and Transit and Olympic Stadium Olympic Stadium Olympic Stadium Olympic Stadium Olympic Management Management Management Management Stadium Management Progress? Page 50 5. Comparative Analysis of Olympic Cities Issues and Key -Size of Olympic Area Rio 2016 has Largest and Widest Main Olympic Area ⇒Minimizing Travel Time with Traffic/Transportation/Transit Mgmt -Core of Venues It will generate traffic of Spectators and Athletes Participants ⇒How to assure the linkage of each Venue and Accommodation -Main Transit Main Transit for Spectators is BRTs connecting with Metro and Rail in Other Cities; Metro or Tram or Rail ⇒ Secure Smooth Traffic On the Road ⇒ Ensure Connection of Different Mode ⇒ Traffic/Transport/Transit Operators Cooperation is most important Page 51 5.
    [Show full text]
  • London 2012 Venues Guide
    Olympic Delivery Authority London 2012 venues factfi le July 2012 Venuesguide Contents Introduction 05 Permanent non-competition Horse Guards Parade 58 Setting new standards 84 facilities 32 Hyde Park 59 Accessibility 86 Olympic Park venues 06 Art in the Park 34 Lord’s Cricket Ground 60 Diversity 87 Olympic Park 08 Connections 36 The Mall 61 Businesses 88 Olympic Park by numbers 10 Energy Centre 38 North Greenwich Arena 62 Funding 90 Olympic Park map 12 Legacy 92 International Broadcast The Royal Artillery Aquatics Centre 14 Centre/Main Press Centre Barracks 63 Sustainability 94 (IBC/MPC) Complex 40 Basketball Arena 16 Wembley Arena 64 Workforce 96 BMX Track 18 Olympic and Wembley Stadium 65 Venue contractors 98 Copper Box 20 Paralympic Village 42 Wimbledon 66 Eton Manor 22 Parklands 44 Media contacts 103 Olympic Stadium 24 Primary Substation 46 Out of London venues 68 Riverbank Arena 26 Pumping Station 47 Map of out of Velodrome 28 Transport 48 London venues 70 Water Polo Arena 30 Box Hill 72 London venues 50 Brands Hatch 73 Map of London venues 52 Eton Dorney 74 Earls Court 54 Regional Football stadia 76 ExCeL 55 Hadleigh Farm 78 Greenwich Park 56 Lee Valley White Hampton Court Palace 57 Water Centre 80 Weymouth and Portland 82 2 3 Introduction Everyone seems to have their Londoners or fi rst-time favourite bit of London – visitors – to the Olympic whether that is a place they Park, the centrepiece of a know well or a centuries-old transformed corner of our building they have only ever capital. Built on sporting seen on television.
    [Show full text]
  • The Olympic Movement
    OLYMPIC LEGACY 2013 “Creating sustainable legacies 1WHAT IS OLYMPIC LEGACY? 5 is a fundamental commitment SPORTING LEGACY 13 2 of the Olympic Movement. 1 3SOCIAL LEGACIES 23 Every city that hosts the 4ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACIES 33 Olympic Games becomes a temporary steward of the 5URBAN LEGACIES 45 Olympic Movement. It is a great 6ECONOMIC LEGACIES 55 responsibility. It is also a great 7CONCLUSION 65 opportunity. Host cities capture worldwide attention. Each has a once-in-a-lifetime chance to showcase the celebration of the human spirit. And each creates a unique set of environmental, social and economic legacies that can change a community, a region, and a nation forever.” Jacques Rogge, IOC President International Olympic Committee Château de Vidy – C.P. 356 – CH-1007 Lausanne / Switzerland Tel. +41 21 621 61 11 – Fax +41 21 621 62 16 www.olympic.org Published by the International Olympic Committee – March 2013 All rights reserved Printing by Didwedo S.à.r.l., Lausanne, Switzerland Printed in Switzerland 2 3 4 WHAT IS OLYMPIC LEGACY? 1 A LASTING LEGACY The Olympic Games have the power to deliver lasting benefits which 6 can considerably change a community, its image and its infrastructure. 7 As one of the world’s largest sporting events, the Games can be a tremendous catalyst for change in a host city with the potential to create far more than just good memories once the final medals have been awarded. Each edition of the Olympic Games also provides significant legacies for the Olympic Movement as a whole, helping to spread the Olympic values around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the 2004 Olympic Games on the Greek Economy 3
    Ι∆ΡΥΜΑ ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΚΩΝ & ΒΙΟΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΕΡΕΥΝΩΝ FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 11 Tsami Karatassou, 117 42 Athens, Greece, Tel.: +30 210-9211 200-10, Fax: +30210-9233 977 The impact of the 2004 Olympic Games on the Greek economy January 2015 2 The research for this study was conducted by N. Zonzilos, E. Demian, E. Papadakis, N. Paratsiokas and S. Danchev, under the supervision of the Director General of IOBE, Professor N. Vettas. The researchers would like to thank C. Katsiardis for his research assistance and all the individuals who offered their assistance with data and insight on the Games. IOBE would like to thank Gianna Angelopoulos-Daskalaki for the financial support of this study. The judgments on policy issues and the proposals contained in this study express the opinions of the researchers and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the members or the management of IOBE. The Foundation for Economic & Industrial Research (IOBE) is a private, non-profit, public-benefit research organisation. It was established in 1975 with the dual purpose of promoting research on current problems and prospects of the Greek economy and its sectors and of generating reliable information, analysis and proposals for action that can be of high value in economic policy making. ISBN 978-960-7536-61-7 Copyright 2015 Foundation for Economic & Industrial Research This study may not be reproduced in any form or for any purpose without the prior knowledge and consent of the publisher. Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research (IOBE) 11, Tsami Karatassou St, 117 42 Athens, Tel. (+30210 9211200-10), Fax:(+30210 9233977) E-mail: [email protected] – URL: http://www.iobe.gr Foundation for Economic & Industrial Research IOBE The impact of the 2004 Olympic Games on the Greek economy 3 FOREWORD Without a doubt, the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens and in the other four Olympic cities had a multiple impact on the Greek economy, on many levels and at various time periods.
    [Show full text]
  • U2 Tour 2010/2011
    U2 360° TOUR 2010/2011 EUROPE: 06-August Turin, Italy Stadio Olimpico Kasabian 10-August Frankfurt, Germany Commerzbank-Arena Kasabian 12-August Hannover, Germany AWD Arena Kasabian 15-August Horsens, Denmark Casa Arena Snow Patrol 16-August Horsens, Denmark Casa Arena Snow Patrol 20-August Helsinki, Finland Olympiastadion Razorlight 21-August Helsinki, Finland Olympiastadion Razorlight 25-August Moscow, Russia Luzhniki Stadium Snow Patrol 30-August Vienna, Austria Ernst Happel Stadion OneRepublic 03-September Athens, Greece O.A.K.A Olympic Stadium Snow Patrol 06-September Istanbul, Turkey Atatürk Olympic Stadium Snow Patrol 11-September Zurich, Switzerland Stadion Letzigrund OneRepublic 12-September Zurich, Switzerland Stadion Letzigrund OneRepublic 15-September Munich, Germany Olympiastadion OneRepublic 18-September Paris, France Stade de France Interpol 22-September Brussels, Belgium King Baudouin Stadium Interpol 23-September Brussels, Belgium King Baudouin Stadium Interpol 26-September San Sebastian, Spain Estadio de Anoeta Interpol *30-September Seville, Spain Estadio Olímpico de Sevilla Interpol *please note change of date – tickets for previously scheduled performance valid at the door 02-October Coimbra, Portugal Estadio Cidade Coimbra Interpol 03-October Coimbra Portugal Estadio Cidade Coimbra Interpol 08-October Rome, Italy Stadio Olimpico. Interpol AUSTRALIA / NEW ZEALAND: Nov. 25 Auckland, NZ Mt. Smart Stadium Jay-Z Nov. 26 Auckland, NZ Mt. Smart Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 01 Melbourne, AU Etihad Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 03 Melbourne, AU Etihad Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 08 Brisbane, AU Suncorp Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 09 Brisbane, AU Suncorp Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 13 Sydney, AU ANZ Stadium Jay-Z Dec. 14 Sydney, AU ANZ Stadium Jay-Z Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Lillehammer Olympic Park
    LILLEHAMMER OLYMPIC PARK Olympic City: Lillehammer Country: Norway Edition of the Games: 1994 Winter Olympic Games Preliminary remarks As you may have seen, two governance cases are dedicated to Lillehammer. Reasons that support this choice are twofold. First, Lillehammer hosted two editions of the Games. If the latter built upon the former to deliver great Games, it also produced its own legacy and consequently, structures to deal with it. Second, as legacy is about both venues and facilities at one side and education, knowledge transfer and experience sharing at the other side, two different cases were necessary to encompass various ways Lillehammer manages its Olympic legacy(ies). Inherited from the 1994 Games, the Lillehammer Olympic Park is a structure run by the municipality of Lillehammer that takes care of the majority of Olympic venues and events. The Lillehammer Olympic Legacy Sports Centre is an emanation of the Norwegian Sports Federation and Olympic and Paralympic Committee and is a direct legacy of the YOG. Obviously, many bridges and crossovers exist between these structures and collaboration and common understanding are key. The big picture also encloses the Norwegian Top Sports Centre of the Innland region dedicated to elite athletes (Olympiatoppen Innlandet), the University, the Olympic Legacy Studies Centre as well as the remaining Olympic venues run by other municipalities or private companies. With all these partners involved in managing Lillehammer’s Olympic legacy, clusters (venues, events, training, research, etc.) facilitate organisation and legacy management. Toolkit: Keeping the Flame Alive – Lillehammer Olympic Park 1 World Union of Olympic Cities 2019 HOW LEGACY GOVERNANCE STARTED IN LILLEHAMMER Since 1990 Lillehammer & Oppland https://www.olympiaparken.no/en/ • • • WHEN WHERE WEB ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… “The XVII Winter Olympics did not exist.
    [Show full text]
  • ADFC-Routenplan (Route 3)
    ADFC-Routenplan (Route 3) Wie alle drei Routen der FUSSBALL ROUTE BERLIN beginnt auch Route 3 am Brandenburger Tor in Berlin-Mitte. Die Strecke hat keine Nebenroute und ist ca. 24 km lang. Der Startpunkt ist westlich des Brandenburger Tors am Platz des 18. März, hier befindet sich Station 0:0. (Hinweis: An diesem Standort ist leider noch keine Informationstafel aufgestellt, da die Baugenehmigung noch nicht vorliegt.) Vom Platz des 18. März überquert man zunächst an der Ampel die Ebertstraße. Danach fährt man rechts den diagonal führenden Weg entlang. Nach 80 m ist die Scheidemann- Straße zu überqueren. Dort liegt auf der rechten Seite die erste Station dieser Route (3:1). (Hinweis: An diesem Standort ist leider noch keine Informationstafel aufgestellt, da die Baugenehmigung noch nicht vorliegt.) Wir fahren weiter in westliche Richtung bis zur Ampel und biegen dort nach links auf die Yitzhak-Rabin-Straße ab. Diese geht es bis zur nächsten Ampel entlang. Dort wird die Straße des 17. Juni überquert. Man fährt einfach geradeaus in den Park, umfährt die Amazone und weiter geradeaus. Man sieht bereits die Philharmonie, überquert dort die Tiergartenstraße und fährt in die Herbert-von Karajan-Straße. Nach 200 m geht es auf den Matthäikirchplatz. Man lässt die Kirche links liegen und fährt gleich dahinter links in die Sigismundstraße. Nach 140 m biegt man rechts auf die Potsdamer Straße ab. Nachdem man nach etwa 200 m den Landwehrkanal überquert hat, fährt man an der Ampel nach links über die Kreuzung und biegt südlich des Schöneberger Ufers rechts ab in die kleine Straße „Am Karlsbad“.
    [Show full text]
  • Officieele Gids Voor De Olympische Spelen Ter Viering Van De Ixe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928
    Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 samenstelling Nederlands Olympisch Comité bron Nederlands Olympisch Comité (samenstelling), Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928. Holdert & Co. en A. de la Mar Azn., z.p. z.j. [Amsterdam ca. 1928] Zie voor verantwoording: http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/_ned016offi01_01/colofon.htm © 2009 dbnl 1 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 2 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 3 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 4 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 5 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 6 [advertentie] Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 7 Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade Amsterdam 1928 UITGEGEVEN MET MEDEWERKING VAN HET COMITÉ 1928 (NED. OLYMPISCH COMITÉ) UITGAVE HOLDERT & Co. en A. DE LA MAR Azn. Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 8 Mr. A. Baron Schimmelpenninck van der Oye Voorzitter der Olympische Spelen 1928 Président du Comité Exécutif 1928 Vorsitzender des Vollzugsausschusses 1928 President of the Executive Committee 1928 Officieele gids voor de Olympische Spelen ter viering van de IXe Olympiade, Amsterdam 1928 9 Voorwoord. Een kort woord ter aanbeveling van den officieelen Gids.
    [Show full text]
  • Original Article Specificity of Sport Real Estate Management
    Journal of Physical Education and Sport ® (JPES), Vol 20 (Supplement issue 2), Art 162 pp 1165 – 1171, 2020 online ISSN: 2247 - 806X; p-ISSN: 2247 – 8051; ISSN - L = 2247 - 8051 © JPES Original Article Specificity of sport real estate management EWA SIEMIŃSKA Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, POLAND Published online: April 30, 2020 (Accepted for publication: April 15, 2020) DOI:10.7752/jpes.2020.s2162 Abstract The article deals with issues related to the management of the sports real estate market resources, with particular emphasis laid on sports stadiums. This market is not studied as often as the residential, office or commercial real estate market segments, which is why it is worth paying more attention to it. The evolution of the approach to sport, followed by the investing and use of sports real estate as a valuable resource of high value, means that increasing attention is being paid to the sports real estate market. The research objective of the article is to analyse and identify key areas of sports facility management, which the success of events organized on such facilities depends on, as well as to examine the requirements for sports facilities. The research used a lot of source information on the scope and standards of sports facility management as well as good practices and recommendations in this area. The following research methods were used in the article: a method of critical analysis of the subject literature on both the real estate market andthe sports market, as well as a descriptive and comparative methods to identify the evolution of the main directions of sports property management in the real estate market.
    [Show full text]
  • Hollywood Philatelist” Is a Bi-Monthly Publication E-Mail: [email protected] by the Hollywood Stamp President: Parker A
    VOLUME 51 HOLLYWOOD ISSUE 5 PHILATELIST Sept / Oct 2017 GOALS: PROMOTING HSC ACTIVI- STAMP COLLECTING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY TIES AND HSC Details (address, hours, officers) ………….. Page 2 1936 Olympics Berlin ………………………………… Page 4 Great Britain Wolsey Pageant Cover …………….. Page 5 SAS 1952 First Flight Polar Cover ………………… Page 6 PAA FAM-14 Unusual FFC …………………………… Page 7 Holocaust Stamps Project ………………………….. Page 8 President’s Corner ……………………………………. Page 9 Imperial Airways FFC ……………………………….. Page 9 Wall Street Journal on Stamps ……………… Page 10, 11 Russian ROPiT Overprints & others..……………. Page 12 The “Hollywood Phi- latelist” is a bimonth- ly publication of the Hollywood Stamp Club. APS Chapter # 0665-052140 HSC Web Site: www.hollywoodstampsclub.com 1 “HOLLYWOOD Hollywood Stamp Club Officers and Members PHILATELIST” of the Board for 2017 Chairman of the Board: Karl V. Shallenberger The “Hollywood Philatelist” is a bi-monthly publication E-Mail: [email protected] by the Hollywood Stamp President: Parker A. Bailey, Jr. Club. E-Mail: [email protected] Editor: Enrique Setaro Vice-President: Jacqueline Cortes The Hollywood Stamp Club Treasurer: Richard Knierim [$$$} meets every Tuesday from Recording Secretary: Hilda Bailey 5 to 9 PM at the Fred Lipp- Membership Chairman: Alan Levak man Multipurpose Center, Directors: Arthur Morris, Hamlet Gayadeen, Robert Lavoie, Jr., 2030 Polk Street, Holly- Stephen Ehrlich, Alan Levak, Michael Rogers, and Richard Sandler wood, FL 33020, Tele- Editor: Enrique Setaro. Asst. Editor: Thomas Walend phone: (954) 921-3404. HSC All Club members are en- LOCA- couraged to submit arti- TION cles, notices, or any other data believed notable to ON our membership. MAP Contact the Editor, by phone (305) 428-0546, via Skype, ID: ensetaro or via e-mail: [email protected] Enrique Setaro, HSC Editor.
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan C. Got Berlin Perspectives on Architecture 1 Olympiastadion
    Jonathan C. Got Berlin Perspectives on Architecture Olympiastadion – Germania and Beyond My personal interest with the Olymiastadion began the first week I arrived in Berlin. Having only heard about Adolf Hitler’s plans for a European Capital from documentaries and seen pictures of Jesse Owen’s legendary victories in the ill-timed 1936 Summer Olympics, I decided to make a visit myself. As soon as I saw the heavy stone colonnade from the car park I knew it could only have been built for one purpose – propaganda for the Third Reich beyond Germania. Remodelled for the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin by Hitler’s favorite architects Werner March (whose father, Otto March, designed the original 1913 stadium) and Albert Speer, the Olympiastadion was a symbol of power for the National Socialist party and an opportunity to present propaganda in the form of architecture. Being the westernmost structure on Hitler’s ‘capital city of the world’, the stadium was designed to present the then National Socialist Germany to the rest of the world as a power to be reckoned with. Any visitor to the stadium doesn’t only see the gigantic stadium, but also experiences the whole Olympic complex. Visitors would arrive at a 10-platform S-Bahn station able to serve at high frequencies for large events and then walk several hundred meters with a clear view of the huge imposing stone stadium as soon as visitors reached the car park. Though some might argue that neither the U- nor S-Bahn stations named after the stadium provided convenient access to the sports grounds, one has to consider the scale of the event.
    [Show full text]