With the IOC’s coordination commission for Paris giving a ringing endorsement to the city’s Olympic project on their first inspection visit in June, organisers are maximising efforts to use the Games as a platform for major developments at the city, regional and national levels.

Amid reports of rising costs, IOC inspectors’ concerns were alleviated by a joint financing deal between Paris 2024, the city and French government guaranteeing €1.4 billion ($1.63bn) of funding for Olympic-related infrastructure. The agreement provides more certainty for two of the most controversial projects, channelling extra money to build a permanent aquatics centre with a redefined legacy concept and enhancing value for local residents around the Olympic Village site.

The post-Games plan for the aquatics venue will see the region of Seine-Saint-Denis receive nine swimming pools after the Games rather than the five initially planned, to plug a shortage of community sports facilities in the area. While the Olympic Village remains in its originally planned location, residents living nearby will benefit from the undergrounding of power lines, new housing and the creation of new green spaces.

Jean-François Martins, deputy mayor of Paris, says the city and Games officials are delivering on their ambitions thanks to the help of an agreement between the mayors of London and Paris.

“After Brexit [vote in 2016] Mayor Anne Hidalgo and Mayor Sadiq Khan decided not to be competitors but to have really strong relations between London and Paris and to create together, at the heart of Europe, cities that will shine on a worldwide scale,” he told Host City at SportAccord.

“So they decided to work together especially with the Olympics where the learnings, skills and experience of London will be precious for us and maybe as well we can share what we can do 12 years after London and to inspire each other.”

In addition to collaborating to combat societal issues, Hidalgo and Khan are undertaking huge efforts to tackle the global climate crisis. “Both of them are really committed in the fight against climate change… so we are putting the Olympics at the heart of the Paris agreement on climate change which will help us deliver an environmentally-friendly Games,” Martins added.

The two mayors are scheduling a conference in 2019 to discuss climate issues. “I am pretty optimistic about this cooperation,” he said.

Hidalgo is also chair of C40 Cities, which connects 96 cities to take climate action, and represents 700-plus million citizens and one quarter of the global economy. Organisers of the next four Olympics – in Tokyo, Beijing, Paris and Los Angeles – are supporting a new IOC partnership on climate issues inked with the C40 group at the end of June. They are working with interested cities, candidate cities and Olympic hosts to help them reach their sustainability goals.

C40 chair Hidalgo, who also heads Olympic delivery partner SOLIDEO, emphasised that hosting the Olympics “is a unique privilege for any city, and provides an amazing opportunity to accelerate the climate and air quality initiatives that mayors need to implement for the future of their citizens.”

It’s so far, so good for Paris 2024. The IOC coordination commission chair Pierre-Olivier Beckers-Vieujant was gushing with praise after the inspection visit.

“Paris 2024 is delivering on its commitment to host pioneering Olympic Games fully in line with Agenda 2020, the IOC’s strategic roadmap,” he said.

“I have been particularly impressed by the ambition of all of the stakeholders involved in this project to take advantage of the opportunity of the Games to create a springboard for the city, region and nation.”

This article first appeared in the Summer 2018 issue of Host City magazine. Jean-Francois Martins will be speaking on legacy planning for Paris 2024 at Host City 2018 in Glasgow on 20-21 November

A study from UK’s largest business electricity suppliers Haven Power has revealed that more than a quarter (27%) of British businesses think renewable energy is just a passing trend, with the hospitality and entertainment industries showing the least commitment.

The research found that businesses in the hospitality and entertainment industry are unlikely to make sustainable changes as they don’t believe it’s a priority to their customers.

Paul Sheffield, Chief Operating Officer at Haven Power, said: “It’s surprising that an industry employing a large number of environmentally-conscious millennials, such as hospitality and entertainment, are seemingly ignoring the environmental agenda, when it is so important to both potential customers and employees. Organisations must recognise that it’s more than just customers who deliver business success, and they may be impacting their ability to attract and retain the best talent.

The survey of utility decision makers showed the biggest barrier preventing business from implementing sustainable change was cost (37%), followed by lack of government support (24%) and uncertainty by energy decision makers on how to discuss with senior management (23%). In addition, more than 80% of respondents feel it is energy providers’ responsibility to educate decision makers on the different types of energy available.

The financial services sector showed the highest degree of scepticism towards renewables, with 40% of respondents saying that it was a passing trend.

Paul Sheffield, Chief Operating Officer at Haven Power, said: “It’s concerning to see the proportion of businesses that still view renewable energy as a passing trend, despite evidence showing that a move to cleaner energy is essential for the environment. It’s clear more needs to be done to demonstrate the wider opportunities and benefits of renewable energy for businesses.”

Conversely, 59% of businesses think renewables are the key to a cleaner future, with three in five keen to start producing their own energy. When asked to list whose responsibility it is to lower carbon emissions, energy suppliers were cited top (58%), followed by the Government (47%) and manufacturers (46%).

The agricultural industry leads all other sectors in both awareness of renewable energy and taking action to procure it. Businesses in the manufacturing industry put their own sector at the top of the list when asked who is most responsible for saving carbon emissions (59%) versus their energy suppliers at 48%.

“Understanding of renewable energy and its benefits varies greatly from sector to sector,” said Sheffield. “We believe that every industry needs to start taking positive steps to reduce carbon emissions and embrace cleaner energy. It’s imperative that organisations of all sizes work together with their energy provider to ensure the future of British business is low carbon. By moving beyond energy being viewed as a commodity, we can help to drive sustainability and profitability. Here at Haven Power we are keen to help businesses understand the wider benefits of renewables.”

With PyeongChang 2018 just around the corner, the following Winter Games might seem a long way away – but four years is a short time in the Olympic movement.

According to the Beijing Organizing Committee for the 2022 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, all venues will finished by the end of 2019, in time for test events in 2020.

The Beijing 2022 Olympic Games will feature 26 venues, all of which are under construction. Some of these are being repurposed after hosting the 2008 Olympic Games. Others, mostly in Yanqing and Zhangjiakou, are being built from scratch.

Speaking at World Winter Sports Expo in Beijing, Irina Gladkikh, Winter Sports Director, IOC said: "There is a great progress across all areas. The IOC president attended the opening of the China National Games where he took the opportunity to visit several Olympic venues of the 2022 winter Games. And the IOC president was very excited about progress in the venue development.

“The sport department of the organising committee is working in close collaboration with the IOC sport department and they are doing a fantastic job.

“We are also delighted to see that the Winter Olympic federations are heavily involved in the Games planning and delivery in the venue development progress, in the test event planning and building a good strong team to deliver the Games. The international federations bring great knowledge and experience and they do share your vision for the great Games, for the great legacy and for the growth of winter sports in China and the global promotion of China as a winter sports destination.”

Risto Nieminen, President, Finnish Olympic Committee and Member of IOC Coordination Commission for Beijing 2022, expressed Beijing’s readiness with an allegory from Canadian Paralympic athlete Chantal Petitclerc, winner of 13 Paralympic gold medals.

“I was listening to her presentation in Montreal in a Congress in 2012 and she was explaining about her career and told her life story, and her progress to be in the Paralympic Games in Beijing in 2008 where she won five gold medals in wheelchair racing.

“In the end of her presentation she showed us a video in which she was achieving her greatest victory in the 100m in the Paralympic Games. It was so exciting, because she only won in the last metre. Everyone jumped up from the audience and started applauding.

“And then she said, thank you for applauding but this is not the reason I came here today to tell my life story. And thanks for the empathy – she was paralysed when she was 13 years old – but that’s what I need either.

“She said, I came here to tell you to understand that I didn’t win the gold medal in the 16 seconds you just saw – I won it in the 16 years I spent preparing for it. And if you have respect for me, don’t have respect because of the 16 seconds, but because of the 16 years I spent trying to achieve my goal.

“And I think this is the essence of sport. It’s not about the victory, it’s not about the instant wins – it’s about the pursuit. It’s about giving everything you have and trying your best, and that’s where the respect comes from.

“We all understand that China will achieve the goals. I know we will build every facility that is needed. But at the same time, we need to be cultivating the winter sports culture behind it, understanding that it’s not the instant victories –  it’s the long-term pursuit, trying your best at building the culture that actually makes the result.

“My second remark is about the very extraordinary thing we have to understand about winter sports. Snow and ice include a very playful, joyful element. Every time you see a kid in the snow – and that includes me at my age; when I see snow and ice it makes me want to place – every kid wants to play with the snow and ice.

“That makes winter sports very special, because lots of winter sports are not only about skills but about having fun and playing, and that’s part of the winter sports culture that’s unique. It makes people want to play – it’s very joyful and very playful sport. That makes it a sport for all. That is something that’s very necessary to understand when we are building facilities, that it is sports for all.

“And it includes the fact that winter sport is always open to new forms of sport. We know that China is very strong in new sports and is open for creating new forms of sport, and that’s very necessary for the development of sport in our society.

“My third remark comes to the issue of sustainability. When we are building facilities and speeding up building, we have to keep up the sustainable ideology. Every method that we are using must be sustainable and the process of planning must be very sustainable so that we are not building anything that’s not necessary or that has no real use. I know that here for Beijing 2022 we are not building anything that does not have a plan for using it as a sports facility for the future.

“To conclude, it’s very much about building and cultivating a winter sports culture, involving a joyful element, remembering winter sports is a fun sport for all, and it’s about understanding youth and new sports in a sustainable environment.”

This comments in this article were made at World Winter Sports Expo in Beijing in September 2017 and first appeared in the Winter issue of Host City magazine.

Given the significant and unstoppable changes being created by global warming as a result of environmental pollution and pollutants originating in human activity, speaker after speaker at the 2017 IF Forum, many of whom represent international sports federations, shared case studies outlining the actions they are taking, and appealed to peers to take advantage of the unique opportunity in sport, to lead the way towards a sustainable agenda – the focus for the conference programme.

The politics of climate change are shifting. Saving planet earth is more than just a fad and international sports federations can have impact. Delegates heard how new voices and new strategies are taking the lead – and how sport can shift attitudes towards achieving global sustainability. Speakers reinforced the view that sport is in a unique position to raise awareness on many levels, engage fans and global citizens everywhere, as well as empower young volunteers and change-makers, with sustainable initiatives and show how innovations can be impactful.

The urgency and poignancy of these messages were the subject of 24 presentations and case studies throughout the IF Forum, attended by 109 international sport federations and associate members, as well as 7 observer organisations.

Inger Andersen, Director General, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) provided some thought-provoking and motivating insights during her session on sport and biodiversity and the role of the sporting community ending with a passionate plea, “Planet earth is the only place we know as home. If we don’t take action, there is no alternative home for us. Sport has a responsibility and an opportunity to do what it can for sustainability, to secure our future and make planet earth a better place for future generations.”

Lorenz Isler from Ikea Group gave a candid account during his session on the reactive to proactive ways of handling resources in industry: “As a Sustainability Manager from the IKEA Group I found it very interesting to participate at the IF Forum 2017. Such gatherings are important to discuss challenges and exchange best practices so that we can learn from each other. Climate change and resource scarcity are real, and urgent actions are needed. I am thus positively surprised that this years’ IF Forum was fully dedicated to the topic of sustainability.”

Hosted by SportAccord Convention, delegates were welcomed by Thomas Bach, President, International Olympic Committee, and Philippe Leuba, State Councillor Department of Economy and Sport, Canton of Vaud.

Patrick Baumann, President of GAISF and SportAccord Convention gave the opening address. Summing up the IF Forum President Baumann said: “I would like to thank the many expert speakers for making this year’s IF Forum on Sustainability so illuminating, bringing clarity and insight to important issues and highlighting ways in which we can help make a difference.

“While we have a clear duty to preserve and promote sport for the next generation we have an even greater Duty of Care to our environment to ensure that the world we hold in trust is a great place to live and to play sport.

“This has been a fascinating, rewarding and useful Forum and I am sure delegates will go back to their Federations inspired and full of new ideas.”

In conclusion, Raffaele Chiulli, President of ARISF and UIM, and GAISF Vice President shared the following message in his Closing Remarks: “IFs are uniquely placed to promote the conservation on biodiversity and sustainability in sport. It is imperative that we also take a leading role in spreading our message and encouraging all our stakeholders to do more as well.”

The IF Forum conference programme was a collaboration between the IOC and the stakeholders GAISF, ASOIF, AIOWF, ARISF, AIMS, and Associate Members.

Panel sessions were led by David Eades, Anchor and Journalist, BBC World who served as Master of Ceremonies for the IF Forum 2017.

Official Partners included: JLT Specialty, Nielsen Sports, Reno Tahoe Winter Games Coalition; Legacy Partner Sport Event Denmark; and Host City Partners Lausanne and the Canton de Vaud.

A time-saving and eco-friendly option for making running tracks that are showing their age as good as new again is to have the synthetic surface professionally re-topped. This entails laying a new wear layer on top of the existing installation – so there is no need to excavate and dispose of the old material.

In its portfolio, Polytan has two re-topping products that can be installed on any existing surface: Rekortan M RT, the water-impermeable system coated in situ, and Spurtan WS RT, the structural system that is permeable to water. One is a PUR coating with strewn EPDM granules, the other a spray coating.

Running tracks with elastic synthetic surfaces such as we know them today have been the only acceptable surface for athletics events at elite level since the Olympic Games in Mexico in 1968. The functional qualities they provide for sport, such as energy enhancement and shock absorbency, mean they are now part and parcel of modern sports facilities – whether the running tracks are for schoolchildren, amateur or professional athletes.

Intensity of use and type of system determine the useful life

The useful life of a synthetic surface generally varies between 10 and 30 years, depending on the intensity of use and the type of system that is in-stalled. In principle, a surface that is coated or poured in situ (also called a solid synthetic surface) is much more hard-wearing and long-lasting than a structured surface (sometimes referred to as a spray coating or spray surface).

Since spray coatings have a thinner wear layer than products poured or coated in situ, they wear out much sooner due to the effect of spikes, for instance. In addition to abrasion, the running tracks harden over time and become brittle – an ageing process of synthetic floors that occurs relatively quickly in the case of prefabricated strips. Polytan's product range includes only synthetic surfaces that are installed in situ in liquid form, allowing them to be optimally adapted to the local circumstances.

The condition of the old surface is the decisive factor

Whether re-topping makes sense will depend on the condition of the existing running track. This is determined in a defined test procedure in which variables such as shock absorption and tensile strength are analysed alongside the evenness of the surface and the general condition of the substrate.

If the re-topped track is to be certified as meeting the requirements for inter-national competition laid down by the IAAF, the governing body of world athletics, the inspection is much more intensive than if the aim is merely to refresh the look of the track. For successful re-topping it is immaterial what method of construction was used for the initial installation, whether it was laid in situ or as prefabricated strips, or who the original manufacturer was: the cost of rehabilitation is determined only by its condition.

If the substrate is suitable for re-topping, the old surface is first cleaned thoroughly and any damaged areas are improved. The next stage is – if necessary – to adapt the existing sports equipment, such as the sandpit for the long jump, to the higher level of the future surface. The third and final stage is the actual re-topping process. This is when a new wear layer is laid seamlessly on the existing old surface, optionally as a PUR coating with strewn EPDM granules or as a spray coating. Once hardened, the rehabilitated running track can no longer be distinguished from a new installation. 

The Rekortan M RT (PUR coating) and Spurtan WS RT (spray coating) re-topping systems from Polytan can be used on tracks that are permeable to water as well as those that are impermeable. Both rehabilitation solutions have structured surfaces, are suitable for spikes and therefore offer the optimum base for professional applications.

For more information visit www.polytan.de

Why is sustainability so important for major events?

Gary Meador (GM): Organising committees and bid cities are always weighing up the cost benefit of permanent versus temporary infrastructure; and creating a lasting legacy versus leaving things as the way you found them. A lot of the LOCs (local organising committees) are considering, along with the public consciousness, the most efficient and sustainable way to host major events, whether it is an international sporting event or music festival.

What a lot of the events are looking at now is they don’t necessarily need to build everything as a legacy. Not every city has the need for a permanent velodrome or a rowing venue. One of the things that Aggreko is really good at is working with customers to find innovative solutions to challenges around temporary power, air-conditioning and heating, or whatever their needs may be – to come in and help them make as little impact on the venue. At the end of the event we pick our stuff up and go away.

On the other hand, we also work with event organisers to help design what are meant to be legacy venues. We use our experience and key learnings during the planning phases, acting as a strategic partner as early as possible, to contribute to ideas on how infrastructure can be built or where it will have a fair use afterwards for example.

The benefit of adopting temporary power and cooling systems means you don’t have to build a venue to meet its peak requirements. You can build it to be somewhat less than that and supplement with on-site services to meet the additional capacity demand during the event.

For example, for a building that would normally seat 20,000 for a regular sporting event but has to seat 30,000 for a major event, you don’t have to put in an air-conditioning system that will cool 30,000 people, just one for 20,000 people that can be supplemented.

There’s all kinds of different ways we can work with LOCs to help them meet those goals.

You mentioned LOCs, do you work with them at this stage when they become an organising committee or is this something that potential event bidders can be thinking about earlier in the game?

GM: I think it’s definitely beneficial to think about sustainability earlier because a lot of people don’t have a great deal of experience with the temporary. Their only base of knowledge is working with a design-engineering firm, for example, that have only ever designed permanent structures. The earlier we can get involved the greater the opportunity is to improve efficiency and help create lasting benefits for the organising committees as they move forward.

It doesn’t have to be an organising committee, it could be the PGA of America, the US Golf Association or Formula 1, that’s just something we have developed a special niche for in the past 30 years.

Do you think that the rights holders and event organisers are fully aware of the possibilities of how solutions, like your temporary power solutions for instance, can make an event more sustainable?

GM: We are trying our level best to raise awareness of the benefits of temporary systems, but no I think that knowledge is still low. We have a lot of work to do moving in that direction. It’s not just our discipline; it’s the tent companies, the bleacher companies, the restroom trailer companies, everyone. We have mastered the ‘art of the temporary’ and either supplement or fully provide services for an event from start to finish but need to spread the word on the benefits of this approach.

Which particular events have you been working on recently to enable these sustainable solutions?

GM: We have supported quite a few major events on the world’s stage lately: the Ryder Cup in Minneapolis, Minnesota and the Trump inauguration in Washington DC. We didn’t have a huge amount of time to think about sustainable solutions for the inauguration as it comes together virtually in a week after the election, but at the Ryder Cup we were able to do some neat things.

We introduced some LED lighted balloons that replaced standard diesel-generated light towers. We took some of those to the site, plugged into the on-site power source we were already providing, and helped the PGA of America eliminate the need for 20 light towers they would have had to rent. I think this saved about 40,000 tonnes of carbon across the length of the job.

We are trying to find innovative ways to work with event organisers and help them to meet their sustainability goals too. We are looking at battery technology to come in and maybe take over a small load at night, so the generator can shut off and the load can run on battery. Then when the load grows larger than the battery system, the generators start back up during the day.

We are continuing to look at new innovations likes these to really help events lower their carbon profile and meet their sustainability goals as well as cost savings. We owe it to our customers to help them find better and economical ways to do things. That’s part of our mission.

Energy storage is becoming increasingly important for a whole range of industries, but you can see why in the major events sector…

GM: Yes, we are waiting for that magic battery to be built that makes it ultra-efficient to store this power too. The technology isn’t quite there on the batteries, but it’s getting better.

Agenda One: Event Delivery
The first agenda is to deliver the Games; that is non-discretionary and something you have to do. The cost is given and it’s mandatory, because it’s the IOC requirements and there’s national pride involved and a number of other considerations. 
The cost of this has been remarkably constant over the last 15 years – around US$2.5bn to US$3bn. But that’s covered by income from IOC contributions, local sponsorship, ticket sales and merchandise so there is no net cost.  

Agenda Two: Sporting Legacy
The second agenda is leaving a sporting legacy. That is partly mandated by the IOC requirement, but you have some leeway on how you do that. So you have a choice of whether your stadiums and arenas are permanent structures, which always runs the risk of being white elephants, or temporary or demountable structures – or even, according to Agenda 2020, you can move it to another city. 
For example, if you don’t have a velodrome you have to deliver one somehow. And if you do it correctly, that can be a legacy – but there are lots of examples of not being a legacy: The Athens 2004 Games is the prime example of white elephants and a complete horror story.
The main issue with this second agenda is that venues should be designed for legacy and enabled for Games. Most people do it the other way round and then there’s a rush to modify it for legacy.
A positive example is the aquatics centre in London; we worked very closely with Zaha Hadid on that. It was designed to be a community swimming pool with 2,500 seats. Temporarily, those wings were built – they looked absolutely awful, but they were functional and it ended up being an Olympic-compliant aquatics centre of 17,500 seats. It was designed for legacy and enabled for the Games temporarily. 

Agenda Three: City Legacy
The third agenda is what you want to use the Olympics for and our advice to any city or region that wants to host the Games is that you first have to decide what you are going to use the Olympics for. And if you don’t get that right, you run into a lot of problems about public acceptance of the Olympics as a project.
This is where discretion comes into play. It cost London GB£1.8bn just to make the Olympic park into a building site. London made that call because it wanted to use the Olympics to regenerate part of East London. The city didn’t have to do it; they chose to do it because otherwise it would never happen; it would still be a dump with remnants from the blitz, asbestos, oil and corpses.
A bad example is Sochi. A lot of what happened in Sochi had nothing to do with the Olympics. It cost US$55bn, but only a fraction of that was Olympic costs. They wanted Sochi to be a tourist destination and they also wanted to be able to build for the football World Cup in 2018. So they wanted to use it for something completely different from the Winter Olympics. That was their choice and that has poisoned the bidding process for a number of other cities, including my home town of Oslo where the population got a backlash going against bidding for the 2022 Winter Games. 
Our advice to cities or regions who want to stage Olympic Games is to first of all to get the third agenda right, because that is what you need to sell it to the population, to get a yes vote on a possible referendum. It has to be something more tangible than a velodrome. 
What we like to do very early in the process is to make the city or region able to make an informed decision whether to bid or not. To do that they need to cost out all the three agendas. What we usually recommend is to do a number of technical and financial feasibility studies, cost-benefit analyses over 20 to 30 years. 
One city we have recently worked with is Amsterdam, who will probably not bid for the 2028 Olympic Games. And way back in 2002-2003 we wrote the original feasibility study that made a business case for London to bid for the Games. 

Beyond the Bid – Tokyo and Qatar
We also see our role to be the trusted technical advisor for a host city. We like to work in tandem with the communications agencies, because if you give them a free rein you need a lot of engineers and technical consultants to clean things up in the back room.
We have been working for two and half years on Tokyo 2020 for Tokyo Metropolitan Government; we are currently negotiating for a third year. When we started work on Tokyo, we looked at some of the things that they proposed and advised that they weren’t going to work. The stadium was one of those things, and some of the temporary venues they wanted to put on the island out in the bay.
And we have been working for about five years on the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. From our side it’s going well; we have been working on technical assurance of the stadiums: sitting client-side and advising the design consultants based on FIFA compliance and other criteria. 
The thing I am a little bit concerned about is that I don’t think they’d gone far enough on planning what they wanted. I think they sold it on the basis of demountable stadiums, so they basically said we are going to build a number of 40,000 seater stadiums and send 20,000 seats off to Africa. It is feasible, but it hasn’t been designed yet. Somebody calculated that you need 178 containers to dispatch the 20,000 seats. Apart from that, everything is deliverable, no doubt about that.

This article is based on a Host City interview with Erik G Andersen, Special Advisor of Arup’s Host Cities Advisory Service. Andersen has worked on 10 Olympic Games over 25 years
 

With just two months to go until the opening ceremony of the Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the host city is “on the cusp” of reaping the same legacy benefits enjoyed by London, according to AECOM, the company behind both cities’ Olympic masterplans.
“Despite Brazil’s current economic and political challenges, the guiding principle has always been for the Games to serve Rio and boost its development, improving the quality of life for all its citizens,” said Bill Hanway, Global Sports Leader at AECOM.
Rio is aiming to stage the world’s best value Olympic Games by reducing public cost through partnership with the private sector, and by delivering a simple and sustainable venue plan that applies many of the legacy planning strategies of the London 2012 Games. 
According to the IOC, 75 per cent of capital expenditure relating to London’s preparations for hosting the 2012 Olympic Games was invested in transport and utilities infrastructure, land and water clean-up, public open spaces, new homes, and permanent sports and leisure facilities. 
A similar approach has been adopted in Rio. The Games is boosting the development of public transport, with Linha 4 of the metro to Barra, the site of the Olympic Park, due to be completed just in time for the Games. 
Power and data facilities installed to cater for 20,000 journalists from the international media will make the Olympic Park one of the best connected districts in Rio.
“The Games are a catalyst for changing not only the city, but the aspirations of future generations. As with London, our approach is to take a long-term view that sees the Games as a milestone in the ongoing legacy programme,” said Hanway.
“The Games and the success of the event are the primary focus, but also serve as a driver for the future. It’s an opportunity to invest in underdeveloped areas and significantly upgrade transport and infrastructure. Rio is now on the cusp of reaping the legacy benefits.”

Parallel lines: Games and legacy masterplanning
For the London 2012 Games, AECOM delivered masterplanning, landscape architecture, engineering and sustainability services. Working closely with its partners at Rio’s Municipal Olympic Company (EOM), AECOM has reprised these roles in Rio with additional responsibility for the preliminary design of the Barra Olympic Park’s sports arenas and detailed design of the International Broadcast Centre.
AECOM’s masterplan for Rio covers a 20-year period, with three distinct phases: preparation for the event; a transitional phase; and the long-term legacy. All phases were planned in parallel to smooth the transition between modes. AECOM points to the layout of roads and the capacity of utilities in the Barra Park, which were designed to cater for the planned residential, educational, commercial and sporting legacy.
The deconstruction and repurposing of temporary structures will take between five and seven years to complete after the Games. And in the legacy phase, more than three-quarters of the site will become a new neighbourhood. 
Just under a quarter of the Barra site will be occupied by permanent sports facilities, which in legacy mode will provide elite training facilities for the Brazilian Olympic team as well as a sports high school for future Olympians. 
AECOM delivered preliminary designs for six new sports venues: the new velodrome, Olympic Aquatics Stadium and Tennis Centre, as well as three adjoining Carioca Arenas that will host basketball, judo, taekwondo and wrestling competitions.
The velodrome will remain a cycling venue, the tennis centre will be adapted to host tournaments, and the Carioca Arenas will become a Sports Academy School and multi-sport training facility. The Olympic Aquatics Stadium will be rebuilt as two smaller community pools.
AECOM was also tasked with delivering the strategy for reusable, temporary structures that could be moved and rebuilt as community facilities and schools after the Games.
Venues including the Handball Arena and Olympic Aquatics Stadium employ efficient, highly standardised designs based on modular, stacked and repeated bolted steel structures to ease dismantling and reassembly. This “nomadic architecture” approach will allow the Handball Arena to be transformed after the Games into four new primary schools across the city.
AECOM also provided full architectural services for the International Broadcast Centre, which meets strict environmental and sustainability standards while also fulfilling broadcasters’ needs in terms of power and data connectivity, acoustics and temperature control.
The Olympic Park is designed for more than 150,000 spectators to move safely and freely on peak days during the Games. After the Games, the focus will switch to turning the site into parkland, with AECOM’s landscape design strategy transforming large spectator areas into a new linear park for the community.
 

Over the last few years, the increase in costs to host major sport events has been astonishing. As a result, in the midst of a global economic downturn, many countries have shied away from bidding and hosting major sport events due to the huge investment and infrastructure needed to host a safe and successful event.

 
As the last 12 months have shown, the sports industry is facing a period where it isn’t just the bidding cities that need to do the convincing, but also the rights holders of those major events too. Major sports events are fast becoming a luxury that few can afford.

Take the Olympic Games as an example, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has already taken a lead to try and reduce the cost of bidding for and hosting the Games through its Agenda 2020 programme, with many other major continental and multi-sport events beginning to follow suit and thinking harder about how to reduce costs in order to attract bidding cities. 

What is apparent is that – in the face of constantly evolving threats and risks and growing security costs - many aspiring host cities and countries now simply cannot afford to host major sport events, particularly in the face of many social, economic and political challenges that face countries around the world today. 

Budgets have overrun on numerous occasions for major international sporting events with many of these costs being borne, more often than not, by the host city and the public purse.      

But what part does security play in the cost cutting debate and what can be done to reduce the costs when planning for security?

Many agree that security has a vital role to play in the success of any major sport event or venue, as well as the overall spectator experience, however over the last decade major event security costs have spiralled in the face of huge international uncertainty and other emerging security threats. This year alone, over R$400 million (approx. US$100 million) will be spent on public security by Rio de Janeiro in the lead up to next year’s Olympic and Paralympic Games. All of this, in the face of a huge economic downturn taking place in the country. 

As part of our work at the ICSS, our team of international experts have dedicated themselves to help develop a more cost effective approach to major event safety and security, as well as encouraging a more coordinated, international and long-term effort to enhance understanding about safety and security issues threatening sport.  
It is clear that the industry - both sport as a whole and the security sector - is at a turning point in the evolution of major sport events and that public and private bodies must be more creative in the way it cuts costs, without cutting corners. 

One approach the ICSS firmly believes in to help host cities in this area is to integrate security planning from the start to ensure that all aspects of security are covered – and in a timely manner.  

Based on years of international experience and research, the ICSS has developed cutting edge models to help secure host cities and countries achieve this and will hopefully serve as a master guide to major event security planning.
It is also critical to perform a thorough threat and risk assessment at an earlier stage of the event life cycle. Resulting from this, security planning and budgeting can be prepared and then  integrated into sport facility security design from the very beginning. 

As we have seen in the past, last-minute surprises and reactive approaches to a security issue have been costly for many host cities, with significant amounts on public money being spent on hiring private security firms or other public sector resources (e.g. police forces, military) being called upon at the last minute in order to fill a security gap. An example of this was London 2012, which exceeded its original security budget by roughly 105%!

By integrating security right from the beginning of the design phase for venues, organisers can make significant savings by identifying potential threats to the event and venues at an early stage in the process and thus preventing rework, delays, penalties and incorrect use of materials later on. 

It is also worth remembering that security at a major event is not just about the venue. It is also about creating a safe and secure environment in other public areas like fan zones and public viewing areas to ensure spectators have peace of mind and can fully experience a city or country by using local infrastructure to create that ‘special’ atmosphere that many organisers are looking for. 

Since athletes, fans and VIP’s have to move between locations, it is also crucial that route and transport security is also fully integrated into the overall design and operations of an event. This requires a significant level of security planning and communication, particularly with the material screening facilities required to screen all goods that enter a venue. 

Through our work here at the ICSS, we have noticed that not enough events at the moment think about how security design of their sport venues impacts on the wider security planning and user experience. By bringing on board the security consultant from the early stages, potential operational problems can be identified from the outset and avoid costly changes to the venue or awkward workarounds once the venue has been built.

Looking ahead, as major events and the industry continues to look at new ways to reduce costs, it is important that security plays its role too. At the ICSS, through our ongoing work helping to secure venues and major events, our experts are contributing and continuing to look for new, cost-effective ways to protect those who attend major events. 

Nevertheless, it is important though that sport does not lose sight of the many new threats in the world today and that we do all we can to ensure the highest levels of safety and security for fans, athletes and the many others that love and attend sport events. 

This can only be achieved by major events bringing on board the security consultant at an earlier stage and recognising the numerous benefits that  a thorough threat and risk assessment and an integrated approach to security can have on an event – both operationally and on the bottom line. 

Malcolm Tarbitt is speaking at Host City 2015

“Nothing had really been done on this scale before,” Tom Jones, principal of Populous, the practice that designed London 2012’s temporary venues, told delegates at International Sport Event Management Conference in London.

“There was a significant amount of temporary venue work going on at golf championships, temporary music festivals and those sorts of things, but this was quite unique.”

London 2012’s venue masterplan was not just unique; it was nothing short of revolutionary. Historically, the majority of Olympic Games venues would be built to last, but designed with the requirements of the short-term event in mind. This meant a relatively small amount of temporary overlay was required; it also resulted in a legacy of underused venues.

London 2012 subverted this norm. Only six of London 2012’s venues were new and permanent. The remainder consisted of existing world-class venues like Wembley Stadium, Wimbledon and Lords, supplemented by more than 20 temporary venues.

“We had a very high dependence on temporary structures because of the ‘no white elephants’ approach – not building where there was no legacy use,” explains James Bulley, CEO of Trivandi and former director of venues and infrastructure at the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG).

While this was clearly a revolution in terms of sustainability, it transferred huge responsibility onto the organising committee. “London delivered more temporary structures that Sydney, Athens and Beijing put together. That is a big shift; it puts massive onus on the organising committee to deliver substantial temporary structures.”

LOCOG delivered more than 250,000 temporary seats for the London Games, all of which now have been taken down. A 23,000 seat arena was built in Greenwich Park for the equestrian events, plus a 15,000 seat arena in Horse Guards. The basketball arena in the Olympic Park was also completely temporary.

While temporary overlay traditionally fell under the watch of the organising committee, it tended to be a much smaller project. Major infrastructure works would be handled by a separate authority, while the organising committee would focus primarily on selling tickets, running the sports events and overall operations.

In the case of London 2012, the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) delivered the permanent structures, but LOCOG also had a major build on its hands. According to Bulley, “it became very much focused and dependent on the very high risk elements of delivering construction.”

He questioned whether the split of work was reasonable. “We had the ODA delivering the permanent construction. Should they also have taken on the temporary construction? When you are looking at a city delivering immense infrastructure on this scale, whether that sits within the organising committee or outside it is something that should be thought through.”

The temporary nature of the structures meant that they had to be built quickly, and the elements were not on LOCOG’s side in the weeks running up to London 2012. “One of the key challenges was delivering temporary structures in greenfield sites in torrential weather,” said Bulley.

It wasn’t just the organising committee that was under strain. The temporary event commodity market was under pressure to deliver seats, tents, cabins, fences, temporary power supplies, barriers and much more.

“Under extreme pressure, the event supplier commodity market had to deliver huge amounts of infrastructure, which it perhaps wasn’t geared up to do so at the volume at which we needed to do it.”

Nonetheless, London 2012 raised the bar and the result is a faster, higher and stronger temporary infrastructure sector. Bulley points to advances in the seating industry in particular.

“We put in new standards for designs, because the market couldn’t supply what we were looking to achieve. A lot of the seating in London 2012 was new; it was manufactured for the event. We set new standards for safety and comfort, for example the 800mm seat-row depth, rather than the 720mm which you sometimes see in temporary stands.”

Jones adds: “We were keen to make the experience of going to a temporary venue as close as going to a permanent venue as possible, both in terms of comfort and quality.”

London 2012 also pushed the envelope when it came to sports surfaces. “We worked incredibly hard with the governing bodies and sports surface companies to deliver the fastest possible tracks and highest quality fields of play,” said Bulley.

Despite the large volumes and short timeframes, the local industry responded well to these demands. Bulley questions whether mega events in the immediate future will have the same resources to hand. “We had a very sophisticated event supply industry within Europe to tap into. For Brazil, it’s much more challenging.”

The big scale-down
Some of the permanent venues also had temporary aspects to them, with modular construction techniques being deployed to make them scalable. For example, the two “wings” that were plugged in to the aquatics centre to provide extra capacity during the Games are now being removed to leave the 1,500 to 2,000-seat community pool, in line with legacy plans.

Jones said: “The reduction in size of the aquatic centre, the opening of the copper box have all pretty much followed plan. The Olympic stadium is clearly different.”

The 80,000 seat stadium used in Games time was originally planned to be reduced to 25,000 seats, with a permanent athletics track. Bulley said: “We went to the market and said would a Premiership football club be prepared to take the stadium on? That was not the case at the time, so we followed the athletics legacy.”

After much wrangling, the stadium has been determined as the home ground of West Ham United. Having a top flight football club as a tenant will help to ensure regular custom in the Queen Elizabeth Park, as the Olympic Park will be known. “If you can retain it as a large facility it’s a much preferable solution,” said Bulley.

However, it does necessitate major changes. “We are managing to keep a significant amount of the structure,” said Jones. “When we were doing the original design we were trying to keep as much flexibility as possible. But clearly if the legacy use changes, then that is going to create challenges afterwards.”

These challenges include removing seating in the lower tier and extending the roof. The promise of an athletics legacy is also being honoured alongside the West Ham tenancy. “As the Olympic stadium, it will have to serve other uses than football,” said Bulley.

The revised designs for the stadium include a retractable lower tier that reveals will reveal the athletics track for events such as the World Athletics Championships, which the venue will host in 2017.