That’s what they did for the practice arenas at Split Rock at Santa Anita last fall. My understanding is that everything they put in the infield was going to stay (competition and warmup rings) whereas the stabling and arenas across the backstretch in the parking area would be removed. I don’t know how it would hold up over time but it doesn’t have to for the Olympics.
1 Like
Any details about the how and where of the CC course?
Still in “And then a Miracle Occurs” territory.
7 Likes
At BEST, they can build an Eventing Showcase course. That is a shortened XC in connected arenas. About 4.5 minutes (about 1/2-2/3 the length of a normal 4*S course). Think timed 1.25m jumpers on steroids. All consideration of conditioning beyond what is done for jumpers, gone. Footing and terrain, gone. This is the death of Eventing in the Olympics. The IOC and FEI will say that Santa Anita can’t build an XC course in time and so they now will have a showcase (which will then be the new “eventing”).
My money is that Belinda Stronach made a deal so that they can attempt to raise the value of the property (they have been trying to sell it in parts or whole for years).
8 Likes
So I google earth measured it and there technically is enough room to run the worlds most boring CC course. My poorly drawn red line is 2.23 miles; short but with turns, adding in water elements in the areas they can (I can’t imagine them tearing up the track but 
) they could make the 3 mile minimum. But considering most of the course would have to be on track… well, it certainly would be boring.
5 Likes
The golf course across the street is 185 acres and owned by the county, and other county-owned properties are being used as venues elsewhere. I feel that there must be discussion about putting some or most of the XC course there (and Wikipedia is citing Arcadia County Park as an equestrian venue, which is the little park north of the golf course), then linking it to the track or infield with galloping lanes. Nothing else really makes sense.
As another thought, it’s supposedly going to be a “car-free” Olympics with all spectators arriving via public transit or shuttle buses, so presumably some of the the (vast) parking lots won’t need to be used for cars and could have footing/galloping lanes laid down on them or could be ripped up to build something like a water complex…?
1 Like
Look at a satellite map. That is not “across the street.” There is no “linking” without literally putting down tons of sand on city streets.
It costs millions of dollars to build a dedicated 4* course. A good water complex is about $250,000 to build. It takes years to lay it out, prepare the lanes, run test events etc.
3 Likes
Just a thought, what about the Arboretum? It almost backs up to the barns. Its not that big and would need to be well designed but it could loop through the vary pretty gardens maybe against that iconic Queen Anne Cottage made famous by the original Fantasy Island. The gardens and lake hosted many movie crews in its day.
Just a thought.
1 Like
The problem with using both the arboretum or the golf course is that they would have to be shut down to the public for years and they would likely be irreparably damaged. Golf courses cost millions of dollars to install and are extremely thoughtfully planned out. The arboretum would have to have a ton of plants killed or moved to make room for both the course and spectators. I can’t imagine selling either option to the public. Also, the golf course is managed by a private firm and I would assume they have a contract that would prevent anything like this being considered.
2 Likes
Yeah, maybe I wasn’t very clear, I live in LA and have been to Santa Anita so I am familiar with the scale. We’re saying the same thing: to connect anywhere big enough for a proper XC course to the main property you would have to either make a galloping lane crossing city streets, or maybe, if coming from the arboretum side, build a bridge.
I’m not saying I think that’s going to happen, but it would be hypothetically doable if they could get access to part of the other properties. And other Olympic cities have created the XC courses from scratch so that’s also hypothetically doable. But Galway made much more sense as a venue, this feels like a very weird pivot.
3 Likes
More practical to use the Santa Anita parking lots than the Arboretum. That’s not a horse friendly space.
Do they really have to shut down for months/years? When did they start building the course at Versailles?
Even if they only did it at Santa Anita Park, they aren’t going to shut down the racetracks for months let alone years, for example, ceasing turf racing for multiple seasons to build the course.
And several lots off of DePortola that could also have been used.
That wouldn’t have solved the problem of traffic on Temecula Parkway. The neat thing about using lots right off the 15 to the north and south is that it would keep people off Temecula Parkway and hopefully be in areas with more hotels. Moot point now though.
2 Likes
London held xc and dressage/sj on a municipal park, it wasn’t built years before and was an incredible success. I think the Olympics should always be held where riders never normally compete, what would be special about xc at an existing venue? Just my opinion
1 Like
@StormyDay @M1ssmouse The London 2012 equestrian events were all held in Greenwich Park. It is only 183 acres, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, and set in the extremely dense human population of South London. The Olympic events were only permitted after a legal wrangle with some locals and the Organising Committee was bound to return the Park to its previous condition - nothing was to remain. A temporary grandstand to hold 80,000 was built around a temporary arena that was suspended above the ground surface so as to protect the heritage site. Temporary stables, vet clinic, storage, warm up arena, even a canter track were built on site. The IOC limits the number of horses in the equestrian sports and the disciplines are sequential so there were only 70-80 horses on site each day. Grooms were housed in a hotel set beside a gate into the Park, which was possibly the best accommodation Olympic grooms had ever had up to that time. The riders were in the Athletes Village. The Park and the museums remained open to the public for the entire period of preparation and construction. The cross country took longest because the main thing was preparing the ground. There was a thin strip of bright green grass evident for a few years before it was all dug up and the old grass was put back down. Local runners were really upset when they lost that lovely surface. Jumps were built elsewhere and put in a few days before. A children’s play pond became a major water jump, another was built and then filled in again. There were 50,000 people in the Park watching the cross country. They all arrived by public transport. The advantage Greenwich has over Santa Anita is that the Park is located on a hilly site so the terrain was testing. Paris was also a historic site which defined where the competition could be held and how it was run. The Park stayed open to the public. It was also very flat for the cross country. Tokyo was so hot, shoes had to be reset after exercise on the artificial surface of the arenas but the heat mitigation actions worked. It has been done. Where is that famous American can-do attitude?
7 Likes
What everybody keeps forgetting/missing is the Olympic Agenda 2020+5 document that states the equestrian events should be held at a single site to maintain sustainability of the games. This is followed up in the FEI documentation of venue requirements.
All of the options being floated and comparisons to games past is moot/pointless. The LA2028 games are the first games with these requirements. Thus, previous games don’t have any bearing in this discussion.
The London games are a great example of why this dictate was put into place. The games have always been a money loser for the host (why Colorado is the only place ever to refuse an invitation host the games in 78). The cost of the games is out of hand and using existing facilities is one way to make them financially sustainable.
The London Olympics were $6 billion OVER a $2 billion budget all paid by taxpayers. And that is cheaper than Rio ($13 billion/$3 billion over budget) and Tokyo ($13 billion/$2 billion over and a $800 million loss on ticket sales). I doubt folks in LA are wanting to foot billions in added costs either given their already existing budget shortfalls.
6 Likes
The last LA Olympics made money and is still helping to fund youth sports in the city so there is some hope. Like the upcoming LA Olympics they made extensive use of existing facilities. They did build a velodrome (still in use as such) and a temporary off-site cross country course.
Temecula would have had issues. Santa Anita will also, including where to put the cross-country phase of eventing. As we’ve all doubtlessly noticed, none of the official statements regarding the Santa Anita venue have addressed this. Also absent has been who was behind the Santa Anita bid; my suspicion is a combo of the track people and Split Rock.
5 Likes
