A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics Agne Arlauskaite BSc (Hons) Architecture Univerity of the West of England January 2017 Word count: 5376
This study was completed as part of the BSc (Hons) Architecture at the University of the West of England. The work is my own. Where the work of others is used or drawn on, it is attributed to the relevant source.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
2
This dissertation is protected by copyright. Do not copy any part of it for any purpose other than personal academic study without the permission of the author.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
3
CONTENTS Chapter One
Introduction
5
Chapter Two
Research Methodology
6
Chapter Three Literature Review
7
Olympic Planning Olympic Villages Urban Impact Whole City and Urban Area Regeneration
Research
10
BARCELONA 1992 • History Olympics • Olympic Village - Location in City • Olympic Legacy A New Seafront Infrastructure The Ring Roads The Olympic Ring Other Legacies
10
LONDON 2012 • History • Olympic Village - Location in City • Olympic Legacy East London Regeneration Thames Gateway and London Docklands Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park Infrastructure Sport Legacy
16
Chapter Five
Summary
23
Chapter Six
Conclusion
24
References
25
Chapter Four
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
4
Chapter One: Introduction ‘To an increasing extent the Olympic Games are being viewed as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the host city (and sometimes country) to embark on a series of major development or redevelopment projects that have the potential to change the way in which the city operates, the feeling local citizens have for their city, and the perception of the rest of the world toward the host city and country’ (Chernushenko, 2004). As the popularity and magnitude of this event have grown it progressively becomes a public declaration about the identity and aspirations in order to change urban environment and raise global awareness of the city in which it occurs as a site for tourism and commerce. In recent years the relationship between sport and strategic urban regeneration has grown in importance, largely attributed to the perceived economic and social benefits as much as bring lasting change in the physical and environmental condition. Although, it is important to clarify that a mega-event as Olympic Games itself is not a sufficient element of effective and sustainable urban renewal. Pursuing the redevelopment of the city only through extraordinary events can be risky approach, as the speed and acceleration given by mega-events are not necessarily synonymous with good and sustainable planning (Essex and Chalkley, 1998; Preuss, 2007). This research draws an investigation into the impact of mega sports events on the urban regeneration and planning legacy, focusing on the analysis of the 1992 Barcelona and 2012 London Olympic Games. The aim of this study is to assess and compare the real legacies of Barcelona and London Olympics in terms of urban regeneration that was succeeded in both cities. The case of Barcelona was selected, among other Olympic cities, because it is widely considered to be one of the most successful Olympics in terms of lasting legacy for the city (Maurrasse, 2012). Additionally, the case of London offers a wide variety of legacies that can be analysed since it already provided a comprehensive legacy plan and a sustainability strategy before the hosting of the Games.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
5
Chapter Two: Research Methodology Comparative case study enquiry has been applied as a research methodology to ‘a comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics’ in order to compare two Olympic cities in a systematic way, in the exploration of different research issues. To achieve that only qualitative research could provide the required findings. According to the Goodrick (2014) comparative case studies involve the analysis and synthesis of the similarities, differences and patterns across two cases that share a common focus. In addition, the strategies used by most of the authors mentioned in the following literature review, clarifies that the case study is the most effective and informing research strategy to satisfy the aim of this dissertation. This approach also accords with literature guidance on archival research method as a process of reviewing already collected data and analysing it. The information will be collected thorough review of literature, by looking at what other architects have written about Olympic Games and combining several research studies into one instead of interacting with participants. In this manner, a good understanding of my comparative case study and its context was generated and gained through examination of an existing information collected for this dissertation. The main focus on this research was an existing data about the Olympic Cities, its history, legacies, urban planning, and also incorporated online research. The secondary sources consist of books, academic journals, and newspaper articles about Olympic News, documentary movies, interviews, blogs and forums. Furthermore, a fieldtrip visits to Barcelona and London were employed in order to develop understanding about each city; to generate ideas, concepts, theories and provide an overview of how the urban planning changed after the Olympic Games.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
6
Chapter Three: Literature Review OLYMPIC PLANNING The planning of Olympic Games might be seen as ‘a comprehensive integrated vision and action which leads to the resolution of urban problems and which seeks to bring about lasting change in the economic, social, physical and environmental condition of an area that has been the subject of change‘(Roberts and Sykes, 2000, p.17). The process of planning the Olympics focus particularly on issues concerned with legacy, including infrastructural development and urban regeneration projects (Gold and Gold, 2007, p.8). Olympic urban development undoubtedly affects the whole of the city and its population, and requires the broad and cohesive involvement of city leaders, regional and national authorities, Games organisers, local communities, commercial partners and all the members of the Olympic Movement. Each city that bids for an Olympic Games has to consider from the outset how they could utilize the event to bring positive, long-lasting benefits to its area and citizens. This sort of planning typically begins a decade before the start of a Games (J. Rogge, 2012). The Olympics involve large-scale investment that, if applied properly, can achieve mega-event-driven urban regeneration and offer a broad package of benefits (Gold and Gold, 2007, p.5).One of the first countries successfully focusing on long-term and strategic planning rather than piecemeal and area-specific interventions is Barcelona 1992(Gold and Gold, 2007,p.155) Indeed, the ‘Barcelona Model’ encompassed a number of key features that other countries ,such as United Kingdom (London 2012), have subsequently attempted to replicate. According to the ‘Beyond Plan B‘ article ‘Project: Barcelona ’92 Olympic Games‘ hosting the Olympic Games was used as the driving force in the renewal of the city. Barcelona’s situation from the early planning stage was poor since there was no representative waterfront established which would involve a marina, restaurants, beaches or cultural attractions, and not enough infrastructure to cater for the leading international sporting event. Barcelona’s main focus was to change from a typical industrial city into an exciting, flexible and cultural core, to improve the urban quality of life and restructure the waterfront and make it open to the public (Beyond Plan B, 2016). Since the nomination, all projects were forced to develop quickly and urgently to a deadline. This led to a change in pace and scale. Barcelona decision to locate the Olympic events in the four vertexes of the city led to increase its renewal area within the whole city (Ibid.). When London Olympic planners were looking for inspiration on legacy, they looked at Barcelona example above all others (Bond, 2012). London saw a Spanish city as a role model, and despite the fact that the overall concept might be similar, there are many differences between these two cities. London Olympics could be a distinctive example of how a host city can use large-scale investment and legacy planning to achieve urban regeneration. Jacques Rogge (2012) in his article ‘Early legacy planning key to producing long-term benefits‘ claims that the London organisers had a great deal to pass on to their successors, who were given crucial insight into, among other things, producing and remaining focused on a long-term vision for their Games and ways to integrate the public into the event. From the beginning, The London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) identified environmental sustainability, local economic development, and long-term planning as top priorities for the Olympic Park. All plans included three phases: ‘Games Mode’, ‘Transformation’ and ‘Legacy’ (Rose and Al, 2013). The area of the Lower Lee Valley, chosen for the Olympic Games was a low-income industrial zone. The main strategy of Olympic planners was a regeneration of this massive industrial wasteland in East London, providing the local community with world-class sporting venues to train and compete in, new parks and residential areas, better transport connections and infrastructure. (Rogge, 2012)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
7
Chapter Three: Literature Review OLYMPIC VILLAGES Mega-events like the Olympic Games are widely regarded as key opportunities for cities to accelerate large-scale urban development projects through the construction of Olympic Villages (Scherer, 2011). In fact, the first Olympic Village with a ground-breaking meaning emerged in Los Angeles in 1932, which set up an ideal model for Olympic Villages in the future (Gao, 2011). In early Olympic Games, organizers had to rent all over the host city to house athletes, trainers and officials during the Games. As the number of the athletes grew, this way of hosting became very expensive and inconvenient. In the 1924 Paris Summer Games, some cabins were built near the Olympic Stadium, which they called the Olympic Village, to house some athletes (The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016). After a full Olympic Village was constructed for 1932 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, 1992 Barcelona Games demonstrated the first economic success from building an Olympic Village. These Games helped to revalorize former industrial or under-developed waterfront land through the construction of extensive Olympic Villages (Munoz, 2006; Hughes, 2016). As the importance of Olympic Village grew, Beijing in 2008 presented the ‘green village’ that is known for its sustainability focus, particularly for solar hot water heating system (Hughes, 2016). Another successful attempt was London 2012 Games, which Olympic Village provided vacancies for more than 46,000 local people of whom 10% were previously unemployed (Ibid.). Ever since the first idea of the Olympic Village appeared and was developed from its initial concept to an entity and was continuously developed and changed, it gradually enriched the connotation of Olympism and was further interpretation of Olympic Value (Gao, 2011). The Olympic Village has been integrated into the organism of modern Olympic Games and has begun to be taken into consideration, especially of its rational design, and enriched day by day (Ibid.).
URBAN IMPACT At the beginning of the modern Olympic movement, the urban impact of the Games was minimal. Over time, as the Olympics grew in scale and complexity, their impact on the city grew, but mainly involved the direct consequences and multiplier effects of building stadia and directly related facilities and services. In the last decade, city planners have again reconceptualised notions of regeneration by linking its various components to environmentalist ideas about sustainability. (Gold and Gold, 2010, p.151) In general, the period from 1908 to 1932 saw the Games better organized, larger in scale, and using facilities constructed specifically for the Olympic Games. London 1908 also set the pattern by supplying a purpose-built venue and facilities as much as greatly improving the organization and planning of the Games (Organizing Committee, 1908; Mallon and Buchanan, 2000; Gold and Gold, 2010, p.152). Rome first thoroughgoing attempt to attach a general exercise in urban development to the festival in 1960, allowed the Games to be used to address the needs of the home city in return for the extraordinary investment of time and effort needed to stage the modern Games. By the time of Barcelona in 1992, the balance had altered so dramatically that only 17 per cent of total expenditure actually went on the sports elements of the Games compared with 83 per cent on urban improvement (Gold and Gold, 2010). That might well be the case, but Barcelona‘s real success was in choosing urban renewal over sporting legacy. Two decades on, London was promising to do both (Bond, 2012). All venues and infrastructure investments have been validated by their long-term viability in order to transform previously-neglected sections of East London (Littlefield, 2012).
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
8
Chapter Three: Literature Review WHOLE CITY AND URBAN AREA REGENERATION According to the Olympic News ‘the success of Barcelona’s Olympic legacies was due to careful planning, with a number of Games venues located in areas that would maximise the urban regeneration of the city and ensure that there would be a community use for them post-Games‘. The 1992 Olympics brought Barcelona much-needed new transportation infrastructure and the revival of a declining coastal area (Maurrasse, 2012). David Bond (‘BBC’ News, 2012) reveals that one of the architects responsible for Barcelona Olympic Games was British-born David Mackay, who believed, that without Olympics, Barcelona would never have had the money or the momentum to create Port Olympic. Moreover, the greatest impact of these improvements travelled to United Kingdom, where the rhetoric surrounding contemporary urban renaissance draws strongly upon the Barcelona experience. London also tried to achieve similar long-term viability, however, the main problem is that there is no guarantee that these alluring longer-term gains will materialize, as the experience of many host cities readily testifies (Gold and Gold 2010, p.6). Apparently, Mackay did have a warning for London over their legacy planning which approach first was promising. ‘London has missed an opportunity with the Lee Valley’ said Mackay, who knows the area well having spent some time working on a project in the area. ‘They should have used the Olympics to really open it up and take it to the River Thames, but they have stopped some way short of that. They should have been more ambitious.’ (Bond, 2012) The Olympics provided an investment leverage opportunity to accelerate development of London. However, this took place only in the Thames Gateway London region, rather than the exurban segment, reinforcing London’s development preference and creating a shadow effect over the outer Thames Gateway (Monclus, 2003, p.399-421; Gold and Gold, 2007, p. 313-314). It was argued that the regeneration of London and the country as a whole, should be developed in the ‘national’ rather than the ‘local interest’ (Poynter and MacRury, p. 201-202). In contrast, Barcelona’s expansion has not been limited to the Diagonal and new Forum zone linking the old city to the Olympic Village and beyond (Monclus, 2003, p.399-421; Gold and Gold, 2007, p. 313-314). Barcelona was ambitious and the billions ploughed into regeneration of the whole city have clearly paid off since it enabled Barcelona to project a new image to the world (Bond, 2012) Even though Barcelona did not stop at where it was, not everything that Barcelona did on legacy was perfect. While many of the smaller sporting venues do have community, some of them are in danger of becoming white elephants. Up to Montjuic, the hill which overlooks Barcelona and where most of the main venues were located, the diving venue sits idle for all but eight weeks of the year. Even then, it only gets limited use for diving training and local competitions (Ibid.). Nevertheless, back then ‘Barcelona’s legacy master plan was clear. It decided to carry out ambitious projects that would benefit the city as a whole, convinced that what was good for the residents would also be good for the Olympic Movement‘(Barcelona ‘totally transformed’ by hosting 1992 Olympic Games, 2012).
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
9
Chapter Four: Research BARCELONA 1992
Logo of Barcelona Olympic Games (Source: wikipedia.org , 2016)
HISTORY Nowadays we think of the Spanish city as a land of sun, sand and sangria, but it is easy to forget that before the games in 1992, it was a somewhat different place. The city had become an industrial backwater under the long rule of General Franco, who was perhaps angry at the city’s Catalan population for its resistance during the Spanish Civil War that took place from 1936 to 1939 (Taylor, 2012). The industrial city, which in 1930 had one million inhabitants, had become a metropolitan region of more than four million, in which extensive industrialization experienced a profound crisis. This was the period of ‘Grey Barcelona‘ – the city of ‘development policy‘, of ‘informal‘ growth, of ‚‘peripheral‘ developments and shortfalls in urban facilities, all set against a background of growing of speculation (Gold and Gold, 2010, p. 221-222). The city attended to regenerate or treat central spaces through small operations of urban reform; and the ‚‘strategic‘ projects that characterize later intervention. Pasqual Maragall, who is the mayor of Barcelona (between 1982 and 1997), understood that by improving public spaces, the social and economic problems can be solved as well. He stressed the leap to a more ambitious strategy in the mid1980s, when the initial small-scale operations were followed by large-scale strategic urban planning projects (Gold and Gold, 2010, p.224-225).
OLYMPICS Although the Barcelona Olympic Games were heralded as a huge success by virtually all who watched, attended and completed, the real huge success, at least as far as the city of Barcelona and its residents were concerned, was the long-lasting positive impact the Olympics had on the city (Limited, 2011). Barcelona’s $11.4 (2012 USD) investment in the Olympic Games was a catalyst for modernization and development within a city that had been lagging behind its peers in updates to infrastructure and general upkeep of the city (Rose and Al, 2013). The Games showed a new and exciting city to the world and helped Spain to improve its image worldwide (International Olympic Committee, 2013). By the end of the 90s Barcelona had become one of Europe’s most visited cities, behind London, Paris and Rome (Limited, 2011).
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
10
Chapter Four: Research OLYMPIC VILLAGE – LOCATION IN CITY The venues of Barcelona 1992 Olympic Games were strategically placed within a 2.5-mile radius of the city centre, with four target areas: Valle de Hebron, Diagonal, Montjuic, and Parc de Mar (Olympic Village). The main focus when locating the venues was infrastructure upgrades that would have a lasting impact (Rose and Al, 2013). In reality, two key areas were considered for the sporting facilities (with a third of less importance) and a strategic location of the Olympic Village. The main venue was planned in the Montjuic Mountain, where a park with cultural and sporting facilities had been planned here in 1929. The second Olympic area was that of ‘Valle de Hebron’, which was planned in a semi-developed area of the first periphery, surrounded by diverse amenities, a strategy in which the wish for urban regeneration was clearly shown. In addition to these two venues, and in contrast to the aforementioned, another was reorganized around the most prestigious route of the city- ‘Diagonal’ – with the objective of taking advantage of the existing installations. Finally, the Olympic Village was located on the waterfront, with the objective of its regeneration and the ‘opening of the city to the sea’ (Gold and Gold, 2007, p.226-227). This heavy redevelopment of the waterfront helped this formerly industrial area of Barcelona to be transformed into a recreational waterfront zone that today is one of the city’s main public assets (Stewart, 2016). ‘For the first time in its history, the city of Barcelona was able to turn and face the sea with pride‘(Barcelona ‘totally transformed’ by hosting 1992 Olympic Games, 2012).
A diagram shows where the Olympic Venues are located in the city context
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
11
Chapter Four: Research
A bird view of Barcelona Olimpica (Source: barcelonaolimpica.net , 2016) Plan of the Olympic Village which shows the new the port, marina and beaches on the right, the housing designed around courtyards in the middle of the image, and the many parks and public spaces in between the two. (Source: http://trulab.org/beyond-objects-city-as-flux/ , 2016)
OLYMPIC LEGACY Barcelona as a host city underwent an impressive urban transformation that provided good functional and balanced public network, including transportation, communication, aesthetic and environment. In addition, all the buildings for the Olympic Games were constructed in a flexible structure so in the post-Olympic period it not only incorporated the new buildings into the everyday functions for its residents, but also provided for their use to serve as a central social centre for the surrounding area (Usborne,2008).
Main urban renewal areas in Barcelona 1986-1992 (Source: beyondplanb.eu, 2016) A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
12
Chapter Four: Research A NEW SEAFRONT The biggest achievement of Barcelona is the renewal of the city’s seafront were appeared five kilometres of new beaches and waterfront facilities that have transformed the landscape (Usborne, 2008). This process was complemented by improvements to the district of Barceloneta and the conversion of the old industrial and warehousing zone of PobleNou into a residential area (Future Cape Town, 2012). The Olympic Village was developed on a 130 hectares site at Parc de Mar, which was undergoing a process of de-industrialisation and separated from the rest of the city. The beaches were in extremely degraded state and railway lines separated the district from the sea (Ibid.). The Olympics provided an opportunity to redevelop the area, which also involves the reconstruction of railway network, new ring roads, the Olympic Village and Olympic Harbour development and the sewage system reconstruction (Brunet, 2005). The marina port of San Adrian Del Besos was built, allowing the Avenida Diagonal to reach the sea (‘Beyond Plan B’, 2016).
A new seafront of Barcelona; plan (Source: futurecapetown.com, 2013)
This is the waterfront pre-1992 Olympic construction. Prior to this is mainly industrial use and not accessible to the public (Source: beyondplanb.eu, 2016)
Marina port of San Adrian Del Besos after construction (Source: www.areabesos.com, 2016)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
13
Chapter Four: Research INFRASTRUCTURE Barcelona Olympic legacy appeared in the infrastructure projects that were accompanied by improvements in the use of the existing road system. Some infrastructure work before the Olympics was resumed, such as the second ring road, which had been in abeyance for more than thirteen years, the connection between the first and the second ring roads through the Rovira tunnel, the area of the Vallvidrera tunnel through Tibidabo and the Valldaura–Llucmajor–Via Julia axis (Future Cape Town, 2012). New road projects also influenced an increase of 15% in new green zones and an increase of 78% in beaches (‘Beyond Plan B’, 2016).
THE RING ROADS In 1988, with the impetus of the Olympic Games, the construction of the ring roads was speeded up in order to improve its existing road system and facilitate the increase traffic flow during the games (Future Cape Town, 2012). As the top priority the ring roads provided well enter and exit from the city and also were fundamental element in the links between the different Olympic areas during the 1992 Games. The opening the Dalt and Litoral ring roads in the Olympic period, immediately increased the circulation of motor vehicles and became the key roads to move around the circumference of Barcelona (Brunet, 2005).
A diagram shows the the major roads of Barcelona, including the ones that were under construction before the Olympics. The Dalt and Litoral ring roads allowed to move arount the city easily.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
14
Chapter Four: Research THE OLYMPIC RING The extensive area of Montjuic hill during the preparation for the Olympics has been renewed and was given a new identity ‘The Olympic Ring’. The Games training venues were mainly renovated or rebuilt existing facilities like the stadium, the acclimatisation garden and the Picornell Swimming pool in order to meet modern guidelines for the Olympics (International Olympic Committee, 2013; Future Cape Town, 2012). There were also constructed two brand-new buildings that are the Sant Jordi Sports Hall by Arata Isozaki and the National Institute of Physical Education of Catalonia (Barcelona City Council, 2005). All these facilities were then available for public use post-Games (International Olympic Committee, 2013). New sports facilities were located in redeveloped Vall de Hebron area (Chalkley, 2003). OTHER LEGACIES Barcelona legacy includes many other successful aspects as 4,500 new flats in the four Olympics Villages, the Granada del Penedès Satellite Communications Complex, the Barcelona teleport in Castellbisbal, two communication towers situated on the Sierra de Collserola, airport enlargement, offices and housing, cultural facilities (especially museums) and 5,000 new hotel rooms (Gold and Gold, 2010; Future Cape Town, 2012). These impressive results in organisational and sporting terms also improved quality of life and an enhanced attractiveness of the city as a whole (Gold and Gold, 2010).
The Olympic Ring in Montjuic. The Olympic Stadium is in the background, the Palau Sant Jordi and the Calatrava telecommunication tower stand in foreground (Source: beyondplanb.eu, 2016)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
15
Chapter Four: Research
Athletes blend with the Barcelona rooftops, giving the impression of diving into the buildings. Great example of reusing and integrating sport facilities into the city (Source: beyondplanb.eu, 2016)
LONDON 2012
HISTORY
Logo of London Olympic Games (Source: wikipedia.org , 2016)
The 2012 Olympics is the third Games that was held in the city of London after previous efforts in 1908 and 1948. The 1908 Olympic Games were scheduled to take place in Rome, but the eruption of Mount Vesuvius on 7 April 1906 prompted the shifting of the Games to London (Olympics history - Summer Olympics 2012 history - London Olympics, 2012). The 1948 Olympics was the first to be held after a 12-year hiatus from the Olympics after World War II. These Games were known as the ‘Austerity Games‘ since after the 1944 it was cancelled due to the war and none of the new venues were built (Ibid.; Rose and Al, 2013). The most recent Games took place in London from 27th of July till 12th of August 2012 and were crowned with success (Ibid.). A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
16
Chapter Four: Research OLYMPIC VILLAGE – LOCATION IN CITY The London 2012 Olympic Village was situated 6 miles east of Westminster in the Lower Lea Valley. London chose a different strategy than Barcelona and was focusing on one specific area in order to transform the landscape of some of the city‘s most deprived communities (Littlefield, 2012, p.62). Stratford was a former industrial settlement that had experienced decades of disinvestment and high unemployment, but with a prime location at the intersection of five major transit lines connecting it to Greater London. The site was also a component in two major ecological features of London: the Thames River Gateway and the London Greenbelt (Rose and Al, 2013). This site for decades served as London’s backyard and suffered serious economic decline. Dumping grounds for obsolete appliances lined abandoned canals overgrown with abundant vegetation. Bisected by the River Lea, minimal east–west connections linked the two sides of the valley. The Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), completed in 2003 with a station in adjacent Stratford, transformed the area’s prospects. Nearby Stratford Regional station serves two underground lines and the Docklands Light Railway, as well as National Rail and London Overground lines. As the idea of a London bid gained momentum in 2002/03, the East London site offered a conjunction of relatively vacant land with excellent transport, essential for access to an Olympic Park site. (Littlefield, 2012, p.62)
A diagram shows where the Olympic Village is located in the city context
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
17
Chapter Four: Research EAST LONDON REGENERATION The Lower Lea Valley was one of the most disadvantaged and underprivileged areas in Britain that was cleaned up and reclaimed for the benefit of the whole London (Mahon, 2007). 75 pence of every pound spent on the Olympics went towards providing a lasting legacy to East London residents (International Olympic Committee, 2013). In fact, the Olympic and Paralympic Village became an integral part of the city. It was converted into a new housing area that includes more than 2,800 flats. The masterplan allows for up to 11,000 units of additional housing in five neighbourhoods when fully developed (Littlefield, 2012). The idea behind this was to provide affordable housing to the people who need it the most. Unfortunately, according to Dr Penny Bernstock, a leading expert on the legacy of London 2012, ‘developers now intend to set aside a maximum 31 per cent (instead of predicted 50 per cent) of homes as affordable housing’, she says, ‘and the final figure could drop even lower’ (Jones, 2016). The International Olympic Committee would never have agreed to such a small percentage had it been written into the London bid (Ibid.). Anyway, many of the facilities in the Olympic Village, which is known as East Village, remained for use by local communities and now features a new educational campus, community health centre, business space and sport venues (Mahon, 2007; London & Partners, 2012). Additionally, the Construction of Westfield‘s Stratford City, Europe‘s largest shopping centre, was stimulated by the development of the neighbouring Olympic Park. The new centre attracted more than one million shoppers in its first week and created ten thousands permanent new jobs from day one, including two thousand for local people who were previously unemployed (Ibid.).
Olympic Park before and after construction (Source: www.webronews.com , 2016)
Olympic and Paralympic Village (Source: Official London 2012 website , 2016)
A bird view of Westfield’s Stratford City (Source: http://i.telegraph.co.uk , 2016)
Westfield’s Stratford City showed in a plan (Source: Westfield’s Website, 2016)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
18
Chapter Four: Research
A diagram of the Olympic Park at 2012 and 2015 (Source: www.economist.com , 2016)
A masterplan showing London 2012 Games to Legacy mode Transition (Source: www.sustainablecitycollective.com , 2016) A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
19
Chapter Four: Research THAMES GATEWAY AND LONDON DOCKLANDS Olympics not only significantly contributed to the regeneration and development of Lower Lee Valley, but also the wider Thames Gateway and London Docklands (Mahon, 2007). Olympic Games provided and increase in social polarisation between rich and poor communities and provided significant proportions of affordable housing in these areas as well (Poynter and MacRury, 2009, p.201). The development of Thames Gateway and the delivery of affordable housing have become synonymous, with targets of 50 per cent for London Thames Gateway and 35 per cent for the region as a whole (Poynter and MacRury, 2009, p.205). The regeneration of London Docklands brought only physical success since the urban landscape has been transformed (Ibid.).
QUEEN ELIZABETH OLYMPIC PARK The grand Olympic Park (renamed to the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park after the Games) was expected to serve as a new attraction point for the capital, offering world-class sporting venues for the benefit of the local community and athletes (Maurrasse, 2012). The 560-acre (2.2sq km) park – the largest to open in London for more than 100 years – has been transformed with newly landscaped parklands, waterways and an action-packed adventure playground featuring swings, a rope bridge and activity zones (London’s Olympic park opens to the public, 2014).
A bird view of Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park (Source: www.joetheexplorer.com , 2016)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
20
Chapter Four: Research INFRASTRUCTURE As the area during the Games was providing 100% efficient public transport to all the venues it ensured a legacy of strong transport links around the Olympic Park. The public transport infrastructure was improved, ranging from Stratford to Hyde Park, in order to serve every venue by at least one overland rail line or tube station. The old East London Line has been expanded and upgraded to the Docklands Light Railway (Peneva, 2015). For the first time there were created strong connections between Highbury, Dalston and West Croydon (Littlefield, 2012). Although Stratford had good external transport connections beyond the site, the Olympic Park site itself was poorly connected to surrounding communities on either side of the Lea River Valley (Littlefield, 2012). The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) built in total 30 new bridges, including the 250m-long and 40m-wide pedestrian bridge giving the main access into the Olympic Park during the Games, in order to link the park to surrounding areas and connect communities across the valley for the first time. Most of the bridges remained on a site and after the Games (Peneva, 2015)
A diagram shows transport links around the Olympic Park and how it is connected with surrounding communities
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
21
Chapter Four: Research SPORT LEGACY To better fit the region’s needs after the Games, five sporting venues, including the main stadium, Aquatics centre, Lee Valley VeloPark, Copper Box, Lee Valley Hockey and tennis Centre remained in the Park. All other structures, such as the Basketball Arena, were temporary and removed completely after the Games (Littlefield, 2012).
London Olympic Stadium (Source: wikipedia.org , 2016)
Lee Valley VeloPark (Source: www.newhamrecorder.co.uk , 2016)
Aquatics Centre (Source: www.arch2o.com , 2016)
Copper Box (Source: wikimapia.org , 2016)
Lee Valley Hockey and Tennis Centre (Source: ArchDaily , 2016)
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
22
Chapter Five: Summary While the overall concept and planning strategy of Barcelona 1992 and London 2012 Olympic Games is quite similar, both cities approached different tactics of placing Olympic Villages within the city. David Bonds (‘BBC‘news, 2012) states that: ‘unlike London‘s concentrated Olympic Park, Barcelona‘s Olympic venues were spread out across four separate campuses linked by new roads dispersing the Olympic effect‘. The planners of Barcelona 1992 chose to locate new public buildings specifically to stimulate regeneration in adjoining areas, dispersed retail development around the city rather than large-scale centres, and encouraged mixed function land uses (Gold and Gold, 2012, p.157). In comparison with Barcelona, London did not spread the Olympic venues and created a thriving new quarter for the capital. The relationship between sport and strategic urban regeneration in these Olympic cities was considered differently. Barcelona, according to the literature review, prioritised urban renewal over sporting legacy whereas London tried to find a balance and do both. The 1992 Olympics brought Barcelona much-needed new transportation infrastructure and the revival of a declining coastal area (Maurrasse, 2012). A Port Olimpic (a site for the athletes village), which now is a long beach with restaurants and cafes in the heart of the city, can be considered as the most visible example of the Game‘s transformative power (Bond, 2012). Parallel transformation was achieved in East London that after Olympics become a whole new community (Maurrasse, 2012). A tangible evidence of change is the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park that was rebranded. However, some of the most valuable contributions were in housing and in the construction of roads even though it was not a priority in the plans of Barcelona (Williams J. R. Curtis, 2004, p.9). The city expanded its ring road network by 15% and opened up the circulation around the city whereas the Villa Olimpica or Olympic Village was used for housing (4,500 new flats) and re-linking the city to the sea in an area where industrialisation and railways had for a long time separated them (Ibid.; Stewart, 2014, p.15). In contrast, London invested a lot of money into public transport development and housing. Stratford is now the second only to King’s Cross as the most connected part of London (Dugan, 2013). There are already completed 2,800 flats in East Village and five more neighbourhoods are on the way in and around the grounds of the Olympic Park that will provide about 8,000 much-needed homes to the area (Ibid.). Nevertheless, London could improve its transport within the whole city rather than just investing and connecting one part of London. That would have helped to perceive more social and economic benefits as a country.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
23
Chapter Six: Conclusion To conclude, mega-events as Olympic Games create valuable opportunities for sustainable urban renewal, construction of sports facilities and infrastructure as a part of dramatic transformation of the host city. The idea of urban regeneration provokes the cities to bid for the right to host future Games, even though, according to the literature, the results of long-term legacies are not always fortunate. In this case, 1992 Barcelona and 2012 London Olympic Games are acknowledged as one of the most successful in the Olympic history in terms of the whole city planning legacy. Barcelona managed to rebrand itself and deliver long-term sustainable legacies within the whole city by strategically placing the venues in the diverse quarters of the city. That significantly increased the renewal area of the city as a whole and helped to transform the districts that needed it the most. Unlike Barcelona, London only focused on the Lower Lee Valley that strongly reduced the impact of the Olympic Games. It could have achieved more improvements by locating the venues in other deprived areas of London as well.
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
24
References Books Poynter, G. and MacRury, I. (eds.) (2009) Olympic cities: 2012 and the Remaking of London. Edited by Gavin Poynter, Iain Macrury. Farnham, England: Ashgate Publishing. Gold, J.R. and Gold, M.M. (eds.) (2007) Olympic cities: City agendas, planning, and the world’s games, 1896 to 2012. New York and London: Routledge. Roberts, P.W. and Sykes, H. (2000) Urban regeneration: A handbook. London, Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications. Munoz F. (2006) Olympic urbanism and Olympic Villages: Planning strategies in Olympic host cities, London 1908 to London 2012. Sociological Review 54(2): 175–87 Monclus, F.J. (2003) The Barcelona Model: an original formula? From ‘reconstruction‘ to strategic urban projects (1979-2004). Articles London 2012 organisers inspired by Barcelona legacies - Olympic news (2016) Available at: https://www.olympic.org/ news/london-2012-organisers-inspired-by-barcelona-legacies Barcelona ‘totally transformed’ by hosting 1992 Olympic Games (2012) Available at: https://www.olympic.org/news/ barcelona-totally-transformed-by-hosting-1992-olympic-games More London 2012 legacies coming to life (2013) Available at: https://www.olympic.org/news/more-london-2012-legacies-coming-to-life London’s Olympic park opens to the public (2014) Available at: https://www.olympic.org/news/london-s-olympicpark-opens-to-the-public Jacques Rogge: ‘Early legacy planning key to producing long-term benefits’ - Olympic news (2012) Available at: https:// www.olympic.org/news/jacques-rogge-early-legacy-planning-key-to-producing-long-term-benefits Maurrasse, D. (2012) London Olympics: How the games help urban development. Available at: http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2012/08/21/london-olympics-how-the-games-help-urban-development/ Bond, D. (2012) London takes inspiration from Barcelona for legacy. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2012/04/london_takes_inspiration_from.html Clack, D. (2016) Championing Barcelona’s Olympic legacy - time out travel. Available at: http://www.timeout.com/ travel/features/1195/championing-barcelonas-olympic-legacy Gao, X. (2011) Research on Historical Origin of Olympic Village. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.817.6039&rep=rep1&type=pdf Hughes, B. (2016) The history of Olympic villages, from Athens 1896 to Rio 2016. Available at: http://parade. com/499788/beckyhughes/the-history-of-olympic-villages-from-athens-1896-to-rio-2016/ Limited, L. (2011) 1992 Olympic Games Barcelona. Available at: http://www.barcelona-life.com/barcelona/1992-olympic-games Taylor, A. (2012) How the Olympic games changed Barcelona forever. Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/ how-the-olympic-games-changed-barcelona-forever-2012-7?IR=T Usborne, S. (2008) After the party: What happens when the Olympics leave town. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/after-the-party-what-happens-when-the-olympics-leave-town-901629.html#gallery Brunet, Ferran (2005): The economic impact of the Barcelona Olympic Games, 1986-2004: Barcelona: the legacy of the Games, 1992-2002 [online article]. Barcelona: Centre d’Estudis Olímpics UAB. [Date of consulted: dd/mm/yy] Available from: http://olympicstudies.uab.es/pdf/wp084_eng.pdf Essex, Stephen and Brian Chalkley (2003): Urban transformation from hosting the Olympic Games: university lecture on the Olympics [online article]. Barcelona : Centre d’Estudis Olímpics (UAB). International Chair in Olympism (IOC-UAB). <http://olympicstudies.uab.es/lectures/web/pdf/essex.pdf.> A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
25
References Mahon, C. (2007) HOST ING T HE 2012 OLYMPIC GAMES: LONDON’S OLYMPIC PREPARAT IONS AND HOUSING RIGHT S CONCERNS. Available at: http://www.ruig-gian.org/ressources/London_background_paper.pdf Jones, D. (2016) The great Olympics betrayal: What happened to London’s legacy? Available at: http://www.dailymail. co.uk/news/article-3726277/The-great-Olympics-betrayal-9bn-spent-promised-London-2012-leave-golden-legacy-local-community-Four-years-reality-different.html Olympics history - Summer Olympics 2012 history - London Olympics (2012) Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/london-olympics-2012/olympics-history-2012/olympicshistory.cms Lee, T. (2012) The Olympics: London’s history as a Three-Time host. Available at: http://www.dummies.com/sports/ olympic-sports/the-olympics-londons-history-as-a-three-time-host/ Dugan, E. (2013) Olympics legacy: Did the games succeed in rejuvenating East London? Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/olympics-legacy-did-the-games-succeed-in-rejuvenating-east-london-8711691.html Academic Journals Peneva, S. (2015) Olympic park 2012 - Olympic stadium. Available at: https://issuu.com/slaveyapeneva/docs/olympic_park_-_2012_olympic_stadium Rose, E. and Al, S. (2013) Planning after the games: Olympic case studies. Available at: https://issuu.com/pennplanning/docs/casestudiesfinal Stewart, J. (2016) Planning after the games: Olympic case studies. Available at: https://issuu.com/juellstewart/docs/ casestudies_final_5-5 Littlefield, D. (2012) AD: London (Re)generation. Available at: https://issuu.com/chaoweih/docs/ad_2012-1_london__ re_generation Scherer, J. (2011) ‘Olympic villages and large-scale urban development: Crises of capitalism, deficits of democracy?’, Sociology, 45(5), pp. 782–797. doi: 10.1177/0038038511413433. Greater London Authority (2006) Lower Lee Valley Development Framework, London, GLA Websites Beyond Plan B (no date) Available at: http://beyondplanb.eu/projects/project_barcelona_a_92_olympic.html CoBi. ‘Barcelona: Urban Transformation and 92’ Olympic Games’ (no date) Available at: http://www.mt.usi.ch/barcelona-123372.pdf Rotch (2011) Barcelona: Event As Catalyst. Available at: http://urbanwaterfront.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/barcelona-event-as-catalyst.html Goodrick, D. (2014). Comparative Case Studies, Methodological Briefs: Impact Evaluation 9, UNICEF Office of Research, Florence. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica (2016) ‘Olympic games’, in Encyclopædia Britannica. Available at: https:// www.britannica.com/sports/Olympic-Games#toc249544 International Olympic Committee (2013) FACTSHEET: LEGACIES OF THE GAMES. Available at: https://stillmed. olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/Factsheets-Reference-Documents/Games/Legacies/Factsheet-Legacies-of-the-Games-December-2013.pdf Future Cape Town (2012) Barcelona, and the journey of urban transformation. Available at: http://www.sustainablecitiescollective.com/futurecapetown/57461/barcelona-and-journey-urban-transformation Videos London & Partners (2012) London 2012: Legacy. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t85PUIJWH4w
A comparative study on the whole city planning legacy of the Barcelona and London Olympics
26