Bill Hanway, Executive Vice President, Global Sports Leader, Social Infrastructure Leader, AECOM, writes a viewpoint for NLA's latest report on the legacy of Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park.

The Olympic and Paralympic Games have always driven distinctly opposing views. As a veteran of four Games, I understand and share the concerns about the cost and disruption but, if done with clarity of purpose, hosting this event can accelerate the delivery of long-term benefits that transcend the typical timeframe and politics of government funding cycles.

 

London’s successful bid for the 2012 Games was conceived in the spirit of Barcelona 1992 and focused on the regeneration of the historically challenged East End of London. To achieve the desired transformation, the consultant team started the process with environmental, social, and economic analysis to define appropriate targets of success. Once established, the work was undertaken simultaneously at multiple levels — the Games, the post-Olympics transition, and the long-term legacy. This allowed us to ensure that the infrastructure of the main Olympic Park master plan was designed with future housing, schools, enhanced transportation links, and commercial development in mind — later analysis estimated that 80 pence of every pound spent on the Park had a legacy use. Importantly, the team saw the 100ha park (now Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park) as the centrepiece of the plan and key to stitching together the new community with the existing while establishing collective ownership.

 

As early as 2016, it was possible to measure the success of the planning efforts through the real estate values in the neighbourhoods near the Games — analysis showed that these hubs outperformed surrounding areas by an average of 29 per cent. Additional development around Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park continues to fulfil the goal to create a fully rounded community with a new cultural hub at East Bank (formerly the temporary Water Polo Venue location), a creative and entrepreneurial destination in Here East (previously the International Broadcast Centre), and academic anchors of Loughborough University London, University College London, and Staffordshire University London.

 

Rio 2016 had the London 2012 methodology and focus on legacy in mind from the start, but in terms of personality, Mayor Eduardo Paes proclaimed, “We are not London 

or Beijing. These will be a distinctly Rio Games.” The goal was to reflect the beauty and hospitality of Rio while embracing its structured chaos. The bid emphasized that two of the four zones were in fast-growing areas of the city that needed the infrastructure and housing that the Games could help accelerate. The evaluators praised the “excellent legacy plan,” with its emphasis on social integration. 

 

Economic context is important when reviewing Rio 2016. In 2009 Brazil was in ascendence and was pushing towards 7th in the world GDP ranking. The following years saw a complete reversal of fortune with the country mired in political scandal and economic implosion further burdened by the hosting of the 2014 World Cup and Rio 2016. The challenges continue and it will be years, perhaps decades, before we know whether the legacies described in the bid come to pass. There are some successes including a new subway line, 100 miles of rapid-bus lanes, and a 17-mile light-rail system. 

 

These experiences along with the financial success of the 1984 Games have influenced the development of LA28. The plan for Los Angeles 2028 Olympics and Paralympic Games — entirely privately financed — takes many of the lessons of the recent past as far as possible. For instance, the city will not be building any new venues, all events will take place in existing or temporary sites. The addition of SoFi Stadium and the new Intuit Dome have increased the percentage of existing venues to over 75 per cent. In addition, the city will not build a new Olympic Village, instead, athletes will stay in the dormitories at UCLA. The Paris 2024 plan takes a similar approach, relying heavily on existing or temporary venues and officials are promising that every venue will have a post-Games purpose.

 

Without question, hosting the Olympic and Paralympic Games is expensive, disruptive and carries risks. The Games are delivered on a 7-year cycle that does not always match global economic patterns. The success of London 2012 was supported by low construction costs driven by the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent economic recovery that tied into the legacy delivery. Despite the same methodology, the reverse happened for Rio in 2016. For Tokyo 2020, the pandemic resulted in a huge revenue deficit driven by the lack of visitors.  Despite these challenges, success can be achieved through building consensus around a clear social, physical, economic, and environmental vision that goes beyond simply staging a global sports celebration and looks not about what the city could do for the Olympics, but what the Olympics could do for the city.