Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
-
Upload
forum-de-desenvolvimento-do-rio -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
1/55
London 2012 Olympic legacies:Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and
Local Government and the regeneration o East London
www.communities.gov.ukcommunity, opportunity, prosperity
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
2/55
London 2012 Olympic legacies:Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and
Local Government and the regeneration o East London
Laura Keogh
September 2009Department for Communities and Local Government: London
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
3/55
AbstractThis report explores the concept o Olympics legacy in relation to the London 2012 Olympic Games. Itsuggests ways in which Communities and Local Government might organise its work to maximise theprobability that a successul legacy is achieved or the Lower Lea Valley (LLV) and East London. It ishighlighted that there will not be just one legacy rom the Olympics but a set o legacies, and that thereis potential to develop an Olympics leverage agenda to address the regeneration needs o East London.
This report is produced by Laura Keogh, Department o Geography, Kings College London, The Strand,London, WC2R 2LS, Email: [email protected], on behal o Communities and Local Government.The author would like to thank those who have given up their time to participate in this research. Inparticular the author would also like to thank and acknowledge Ralph Ward, Georey Tierney andKatharine Rees (Communities and Local Government Olympic Programme) or their views andcontributions which have inormed this report. Responsibility or the inal product is, o course, theauthors own.
The report was written in May 2008 and reflects the situation at that time.
Department or Communities and Local GovernmentEland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DUTelephone : 020 7944 4400Website : www.communities.gov.uk
Queens Printer and Controller o Her Majestys Stationery Oice, 2009.
Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.
This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced ree o charge in any ormat or medium orresearch, private study or or internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it beingreproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged asCrown copyright and the title o the publication speciied.
Any other use o the contents o this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply or aClick-Use Licence or core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp, or by writingto the Oice o Public Sector Inormation, Inormation Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU
e-mail: [email protected]
Any other use o the contents o this publication would require a copyright licence. Further inormationcan be obtained rom www.opsi.gov.uk
I you require this publication in an alternative ormat please email: [email protected]
Communities and Local Government PublicationsTel: 030 0123 1124Fax : 030 0123 1125Email: [email protected] via the Communities and Local Government website : www.communities.gov.uk
September 2009
Product Code: 08ACST05645
ISBN: 978 1 4098 08299
The indings in this report are those o the authors and do not necessarily representthose o the Department or Communities and Local Government.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
4/55
Contents
Chapter 1 5Introduction
Chapter 2 15
The challenge o delivering a successul legacy: lessons rom previous Olympics,mega-events and large scale regeneration projects
Chapter 3 23
Planning or legacy in East London
Chapter 4 39Communities and Local Government and London 2012 Olympic Legacies
Chapter 5 47
Conclusions
Annex 1 49
Reerences 50
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
5/55
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
6/55
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
7/55
6 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
What role can the Department play in securing a successul legacy and3.
how can the Olympics contribute to departmental objectives and wider
regeneration ambitions or East London?
Map 1 The Olympic Park
Source: Communities and Local Government (2008)
In the rst section, this study begins to answer the question what is legacy? by
examining the various ways in which legacy is dened in both academic literature
and by those institutions responsible or delivering the Olympics in 2012.
With reerence to the experiences o previous host cities and other large scale
regeneration projects, the study then highlights the main challenges o securing a
successul legacy rom the Games. In the next section the various legacy plans and
strategies or the LLV and East London are reviewed and areas o similarity and
dierence are noted. Drawing on a series o interviews with key stakeholders in
East London and the Olympics, the multiple perspectives on legacy are examined.
These perspectives then inorm a discussion o the Departments role in securing
a successul legacy and how the Olympics might be used to leverage benetsthat contribute towards departmental objectives, in particular the development
o sustainable communities. Public sector investment o 9.3bn has been
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
8/55
Chapter 1 Introduction | 7
committed to the Olympics2, directed mainly at building the Olympics site and
venues rather than unding legacy delivery. While additional legacy unding may
be required, there is potential to secure legacy ambitions through identiying
existing strategies, programmes and projects which can be enhanced by theOlympics. The study highlights that there are particular needs in the LLV and
East London which, i mobilised eectively, the Olympics could play a role in
alleviating.
1.2 What is legacy?
Legacy has increasingly become a part o the Olympics in recent years but it
remains a concept that is ill dened and oten contested. In a general sense,
Olympics legacy is understood to be the impacts, over varying timescales, o
hosting the Games, whether these impacts are positive or negative. Legacy
should be thought o in the plural there will not be just one legacy rom the
2012 Games but a set o legacies (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 Typology o Olympic legacies
Type o legacy Possible examples
Economic Number o jobs created
Investment in London associated with OlympicsNew hotel developments
Social New housing o a decent standard
Community capacity building through involvement in theGames
Improved disability awareness generated by the ParalympicGames
Health Increased sports and physical activity participation
Provision o sports acilities or local communities
Improved air quality in and around Olympic Park
Environmental Remediation o contaminated land
Removal o overhead power lines
Creation o green spaces and biodiverse parkland
Improved public transport routes and new cycle andpedestrian walkways
Cultural Benets o Cultural Olympiad Programme
Celebration o East London cultures
Provision o arts/cultural acilities or community uses.
2 Tessa Jowells statement o 15th March 2007
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
9/55
8 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
Figure 1 Typology o Olympic legacies
Type o legacy Possible examples
Governance Partnerships between 5 host boroughs
New ways o joined up working
Community engagement in planning and hosting theGames
Hard Construction o Olympic Stadium
Improved rail station at Stratord
Sot Innovative training and skills programmes
Sel esteem and condence generated rom volunteering
or working at the GamesDirect Number o Olympic Park jobs taken by people resident in
Host Boroughs
Indirect New housing developments in areas surrounding OlympicPark
Visible / tangible Creation o new parkland
New walkways and cycle routes in and around OlympicPark
Invisible /
intangible
Impacts o Olympics development on perceptions o East
London as a place to live, visit and work.Sense o pride or host borough communities
These legacies include social, economic, cultural, environmental and governance
legacies. Some legacies will be inevitable as they are required to stage the
Games themselves. These include the remediation o contaminated land in
the Olympic Park, the creation o parkland and improvements to transport
inrastructure. Other legacies require steps to identiy and capture them and
are perhaps better understood as Olympics opportunities.3 There will also be
hard and sot legacies, whereby a hard legacy may comprise the constructiono sporting venues and associated inrastructure and sot legacies may relate to
increased sporting participation and the up-skilling o local communities. Direct
and indirect legacies will also be generated. An example o a direct legacy might
be the number o construction jobs in the Olympic Park taken by people living in
the host boroughs, whereas a progressive increase in employment rates in areas
surrounding the Olympic Park would be an indirect legacy.
Legacies can also be thought o in terms o visible and invisible or tangible and
intangible. Tangible legacies can be readily seen and measured, such as the
creation o new parkland within the Olympic Park. Intangible legacies are more
3 This idea was raised through discussions with Ralph Ward, Communities and Local Government Olympics Programme.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
10/55
Chapter 1 Introduction | 9
dicult to measure, an example might be the impacts o new parkland on
perceptions o this part o East London by potential residents and investors. These
dierent legacies are not always distinct, an economic legacy can generate a
subsequent social legacy, or as LERI (2007) highlights, hard legacies can createsot legacies. For example, they note that The hard legacy o a stadium while
depending on a good subsequent unctional ollow-up use post Games, will
always also carry various memento eects, hard legacy serving simultaneously
as sot legacy in iconic assertion o the citys status as an Olympic host(ibid: 21).
There is also scope to consider whether a Paralympics legacy is dierent rom
Olympics legacy will the Paralympics generate distinct legacies? Or perhaps the
Olympics may lever specic sporting legacies or disabled people?4. It has been
noted that Paralympic legacy is an area which is under researched and there is
limited evidence rom previous Games which evaluates Paralympic legacy (LERI2007). Legacy should be understood as a rich concept that can mean dierent
things to dierent people and organisations and that will change over time and
space. This multiplicity should be considered when the Department and other
institutions are planning and developing strategies or securing benets rom the
Olympics or the LLV and East London.
Prior to the 1960 Rome Olympics, legacy was not a priority in bidding or and
hosting the Olympics. The increase in scale and levels o investment required or
hosting the Olympics, in conjunction with the new commitments to sustainable
development, have changed this and we now have a context where legacy is
central to the Olympics brand (Gold and Gold 2008). In order to comply with
principles o sustainable development, it is not acceptable or the Olympics to be
just 29 days o sporting spectacle it has to provide long term benet or host
communities (IPPR and DEMOS 2004). This notion has been embraced by cities
bidding or mega events like the World Cup, European Capital o Culture and the
Olympics, which have become seen as attractive mechanisms or driving urban
regeneration and development (LERI 2007, IPPR and DEMOS 2004). In London or
example, the Commission or a Sustainable London 2012 has been established
by the Greater London Authority (GLA) and London Organising Committee othe Olympic Games (LOCOG) to provide credible, independent assurance on the
sustainability status o the London 2012 Games (CSL 2007: 1).
It is widely believed that London won the 2012 bid in large part because o its
ocus on creating a successul legacy or East London and the wider UK. The
geography o the Olympic site played a part in securing the bid, as there was
recognition that the event could provide the opportunity to stimulate a vital
economic regeneration programme in Londons poorest and most deprived area
(London 2012 Candidate File 2005: 23). The bid aspirations or legacy are notedin Figure 2, divided into legacy outcomes within the Olympic Park and outside it.
4 The notion o a specic Paralympic legacy is not explored in this report, but is a policy area which requires urther research.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
11/55
10 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
Figure 2 London 2012 Olympic Bid legacy aspirations
Legacy aspirations within the Olympic Park
the creation o a desirable, socially diverse and balanced new residential areaproviding a housing legacy or London
a model or social inclusion, bringing communities together
a high quality environment or neighbouring mixed use communities
sporting venues to be converted to educational uses including nurseries,primary and secondary schools and lielong learning centres
expanding Londons green credentials
a magnicent legacy park that expands the Lee Valley Regional Park (LVRP)
the creation o a hub or East London
Legacy aspirations that extend beyond the Olympic Park
catalyst or economic and social regeneration in and around the OlympicPark
employment creation or people across the UK and London, but especially inthe LLV
opening up opportunities or education, cultural and skills development.
a legacy or sport in Britain in terms o increased sport participation andworld-class sports acilities
a positive transport legacy
Source: London 2012 Candidate File (2005)
In line with the London bid and the requirements o the International Olympic
Committee (IOC), HM Government have established a set o programme
objectives and sub-objectives or the Olympics and assigned responsibility
or delivery o these objectives to specic organisations and government
departments. The our programme objectives are:
To stage an inspirational Olympic Games and Paralympic Games or the1.
athletes, the Olympic amily and the viewing public.
To deliver the Olympic Park and all venues on time, within agreed budget2.
and to specication, minimising the call on public unds and providing or a
sustainable legacy.
To maximise the economic, social health and environmental benets o3.
the Games or the UK, particularly through regeneration and sustainable
development in East London.
To achieve a sustained improvement in UK sport beore, during and ater the4.
Games, in both elite perormances particularly in Olympic and Paralympic
sports, and grass roots participation.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
12/55
Chapter 1 Introduction | 11
These objectives indicate how legacy is conceptualised at a cross government
level. O particular interest to Communities and Local Government is objective 3,
and sub objectives 3.1.5 which the department leads on, and 3.1.8 which it has a
keen interest in:
3.1.5 Ensure that the Games contribute to Sustainable Communities priorities
including the wider Thames Gateway.
3.1.8 Ensure the UKs diverse communities are engaged with and benet rom
the changes and opportunities arising rom hosting the Games in the UK.
A Public Service Agreement5 (PSA 22) has been created or the Olympics and
the headline ambition or this agreement is to deliver a successul Olympic
Games and Paralympic Games with a sustainable legacy and get more children
and young people taking part in high quality PE and sport(HM Treasury 2007).
The agreement ocuses both on the successul hosting o the event in terms o
delivering venues and inrastructure on time and within budget, and the legacy
potential o the Olympics. The PSA outlines a number o perormance indicators,
and it is indicator two Maximising the regeneration benets or the 2012 Games
which is o signicant interest to the Department. However, this indicator is
very much aboutplanning or regeneration and the development o the Legacy
Masterplan Framework (LMF)6 as the period covered by PSAs is only up until
2011.
In addition to the PSA and Olympics programme objectives, Government have
made ve distinct legacy promises:
Make the UK a world-leading sporting nation1.
Transorm the heart o East London2.
Inspire a generation o young people to take part in local volunteering,3.
cultural and physical activity
Make the Olympic Park a blueprint or sustainable living4.
Demonstrate the UK is a creative, inclusive and welcoming place to live in,5.
visit and or business
5 A PSA details the aims and objectives o government departments. Each PSA is underpinned by a delivery agreement and covers a
three year period in line with the Comprehensive Spending Review. Departmental budgets are linked to perormance in relation toPSAs.
6 The LMF process, led by the LDA, entails development o a masterplan or the legacy use o the Olympic Park. Stakeholder andcommunity consultation is a key part o this process (LDA 2008) and it is anticipated that a planning application will be submitted in2009.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
13/55
12 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
At the London level o governance, the Mayor7 is keen to secure a successul
legacy rom the Olympics and has published his ve legacy commitments (GLA
2008), which ocus on benets or London and Londoners that can be gained
rom the Olympics:
Commitment 1: Increased opportunities or Londoners to become involved in
sport.
Commitment 2: Ensuring Londoners benet rom new jobs, businesses, and
volunteering opportunities.
Commitment 3: Transorming the heart o East London
Commitment 4: Delivering a sustainable Games and developing sustainable
communities.
Commitment 5: Showcasing London as a diverse, creative and welcoming city
Figure 3 outlines how these various legacy promises, commitments and objectives
relate to the initial bid aspirations established in 2005. The bid aspiration to create
a hub or East London is refected in the various legacy commitments in the
language o transormation, and the development o a revived urban centre.
Several points can be made about these legacy promises and commitments in
terms o spatial scale, scope and expected changes. Firstly legacy impacts are
envisaged across dierent spatial scales rom the local areas surrounding the
Olympic Park in East London, to the national scale, where it is hoped to use the
Olympics to increase young peoples participation in sport. The legacy ambitions
are closely related to improving quality o lie or people in the UK whether
this is through increased sports participation, employment opportunities,
environmental improvements, or the promotion o sustainable ways o living.
Other themes underpinning the legacy promises include addressing the issues o
worklessness in East London, and the opportunities or economic development in
terms o tourism and inward business investment related to the Olympics.
7 At time o writing, Ken Livingstone was Mayor o London. The new Mayor, Boris Johnson has yet to make clear his position on theOlympics, but it is noted that a campaign pledge emphasised the sporting legacy or London over regeneration benets o hosting theGames (see The Guardian, 15.05.08)
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
14/55
Chapter 1 Introduction | 13
Figure 3 Legacy aspirations
Legacy aspirations detailed in Bid
(Candidate File 2005)
OlympicProgramme
Objectives
PSA22
Government5leg
acy
promises
Mayors5Legacy
Commitments
Within the Olympic Park
The creation o a desirable, socially diverse andbalanced new residential area providing a housinglegacy or London.
a a a a
A model or social inclusion, bringing communitiestogether
a a
A high quality environment or neighbouring mixeduse communities
a a
Sporting venues to be converted to educationaluses including nursery, primary, secondary schoolsand lielong learning centres
a
Expanding Londons green credentials a a a a
A magnicent legacy park that expands the LVRP a a a
The creation o a hub or East London a a a
Beyond the Olympic Park
Catalyst or economic and social regeneration inand around the Olympic Park
a a a a
Employment creation or people across the UK andLondon, but especially in the LLV.
a a a
Opening up opportunities or education, culture
and skills development
a a a a
A legacy or sport in Britain in terms o increasedsport participation and world-class sports acilities
a a a a
A positive transport legacy a a a
The degree o change and investment required to achieve the legacy
commitments and promises is signicant. The ambition to transorm East
London includes a diverse range o issues such as employment creation or
local communities, new housing, transport improvements, improvements to
the quality o the environment and a positive change in place image to namea ew. Delivering this promise undoubtedly means a very signicant degree o
change and eective partnership working across all levels o government and
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
15/55
14 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
with Olympic bodies such as the Olympic Development Agency (ODA) and
LOCOG. Partnership working is necessary or the achievement o all the legacy
commitments and promises. For example, the pledges to make the UK a world-
leading sporting nation and increase opportunities or Londoners to participate insport, require investment in sporting venues, sporting technologies and coaching,
the co-ordination o school sport initiatives that will require the Department or
Children, Schools and Families (DCSF), Sport England and local authorities to
play a role, in addition to active participation rom communities. Drawing on
the experiences o previous host cities and other mega-events, the next section
highlights some key legacy challenges or London.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
16/55
Chapter 2 The challenge o delivering a successul legacy: lessons rom previous Olympics, mega-events and large scale regeneration projects | 15
Chapter 2
The challenge o delivering asuccessul legacy: lessons romprevious Olympics, mega-eventsand large scale regenerationprojects
As with other mega-events and large scale regeneration projects, the delivery
o a successul legacy, or a set o legacies, rom the Olympics is a considerable
challenge (LERI 2007, IPPR and DEMOS 2004, NWDA 2004). The National Audit
Oce (2007) has highlighted six key areas o risk associated with delivering a
successul Games in London, one o which is identied as Planning or a lasting
legacy. A key theme rom reviews o previous Olympics and the impacts on host
cities is that the hard legacy outcomes, such as improved inrastructure and
sports venues, are more readily achievable than the sot legacy benets that
include skills, employment, sports participation, community empowerment anddisability awareness. It has also been noted that a degree o scepticism surrounds
event regeneration strategies (Smith and Fox 2007: 1125). Drawing on research
which assesses the legacies o previous Olympics, mega-events and large scale
regeneration projects, this section briefy highlights the key challenges or
delivering successul legacies within the Olympic Park, in the surrounding LLV and
East London area, and the wider context o London and the UK.
2.1 Legacy challenges inside the Olympic Park
Modern Olympics tend to concentrate most o the sporting venues and Games
inrastructure (such as a broadcasting centre) within one site. In 2012, the
majority o the Olympics activities will take place within the Olympic Park at
Stratord, with some exceptions such as sailing (Weymouth and Portland, Dorset)
and ootball (Wembley Stadium, Millennium Stadium or example). The Olympic
Park is associated with hard legacy gains, and it has been noted that all host
cities pursue these gains which include inrastructure, the reorientation o city
spaces, improved amenity, new types o land use and economic activity. (LERI
2007: 9).
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
17/55
16 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
Mega sporting events leave a legacy o sporting venues that represent signicant
economic investment. Previous host cities have had varying levels o success at
nding productive long-term uses or the venues. Sydneys Olympic Stadium
or example is thought to be heavily under used and loss making (Gold andGold 2008). In Athens, the Olympics Sports Complex at Maroussi similarly
remains underused and relatively inaccessible to communities (ibid, and LERI
2007). Securing long term ownership, management and uses or venues
and other acilities such as the broadcasting centre is thought to be key to
achieving a successul legacy within the Olympic Park. As LERI (2007: 9) states
planned in legacy osets white elephant syndrome in some casesin all
cases legacy needs to be built into initial conceptions, design and delivery o
Olympic acilities. One example rom London is that the Lea Valley Regional Park
Authority has ownership o the Velodrome in the Olympic Park and will overseethe management o this venue ater 2012. This approach could be replicated
with other venues and acilities in the Olympic Park and is an important actor in
securing successul legacies rom London 2012.
A signicant challenge or fagship regeneration projects like the Olympic Park is
how they relate to surrounding areas and integrate with existing communities.
As Raco (2004: 34) highlights agships can create islands o development that
barely connect to the localities in which they are situated. This integration, and
the blurring o boundaries between the park and surrounding areas is a key
criteria or legacy success. Achieving this is not easy and requires a combination o
(a) hard planning and design mechanisms to promote linkages between places,
provide accessibility or all and ensure sensitivity to the existing environment
and (b) sot approaches which eectively engage local communities and do
not overlook local attachments to place. Regeneration o the scale o the
Olympic Park has the potential to redene the geography o a large
section o East London. There is a need to ensure that local communities
are part o this process, with strategic eorts made to prevent
communities eeling that this new space is not or them. It is suggested
that the Olympics needs to generate development o, not just in local areas(Raco 2004: 37). This is key or securing successul legacies rom 2012 the
development oand not just in East London.
This relates to another issue highlighted in research on previous host cities
who will the Olympic Park be or? Concerns raised rom experiences o other
host cities include provision o aordable housing or local communities versus
housing or a wider catchment area (LERI 2007), and gentrication which
to some degree are an inevitable part o regeneration endeavours but have
potentially detrimental impacts, such as existing communities being priced out othe local housing market, the displacement o local services and the development
o alternative services (public, entertainment, retail) that do not necessarily meet
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
18/55
Chapter 2 The challenge o delivering a successul legacy: lessons rom previous Olympics, mega-events and large scale regeneration projects | 17
the needs o existing communities. These issues have implications or sustainable
community building and community cohesion both departmental objectives or
Communities and Local Government.
The experiences o previous Olympics suggest that the planning and
management o the Olympic Park can be an arena or competing legacies to
arise. For example, a successul legacy or the IOC may be about achieving a
debt ree Olympics which may compete with local authorities and communities
ambitions to secure raised living standards in and around the park (IPPR and
DEMOS 2004: 10). The desire to raise local living standards is likely to involve
additional investment which LOCOG and the ODA are not equipped to provide.
As LERI (2007: 10) highlights, the defnition o assurance o legacy alongside
cost is typically at the heart o stakeholders agendas. The Olympic Park is alsothe ocus o environmental sustainability issues and concerns associated with
climate change. As these concerns have grown in signicance (see Stern Review
2006) there is increasing pressure to deliver a green and sustainable Olympics
(ODA 2007). Previous host cities have achieved varying levels o success in terms
o positive environmental legacy, but London has pledged that the 2012 Games
will be the most sustainable Games to date. It will be a challenge to meet this
ambition in terms o balancing environmental losses and gains, investing in new
technologies, reducing carbon ootprints yet encouraging people to visit the
Games. There is scope here or best practice and technological innovation
to be shared between the Olympics and the work that the Department
and partners are doing to develop an eco-region in the Thames Gateway.
2.2 Legacy challenges outside the Olympic Park:regeneration or local communities
Research on previous Olympics shows that the event and associated activities
do have a degree o leverage, meaning that additional benets can accrue
rom hosting the Games (LERI 2007, IPPR and DEMOS 2004, Preuss 2004). Thechallenge is how to capture these Olympic eects. It is in the area surrounding the
Olympic Park where this leverage could be most signicant and used to urther
local priorities and address needs (Map 2 highlights how the Olympic Park cuts
across the boroughs o Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest).
It is acknowledged that the Olympics can have a positive impact on the economic
perormance o a host city but that it is oten dicult to dierentiate between
Olympic eects and the eects o other changes, such as Cross Rail in London or
changes in the economic climate (LERI 2007, GVA Grimley and RICS 2006).
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
19/55
18 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
A key lesson rom other Olympics, particularly Barcelona (1992), and also
Manchester Commonwealth Games (2002), is that the mega-event must be part
o and complement a wider regeneration agenda (LERI 2007). The Barcelona
Olympics is oten cited as a model or London, but the contexts are very dierent.In Barcelona, city leaders sought to regenerate the entire city o 3 million people
(ibid) whereas in London the event is very much ocused on a section o the city
(2.5 square kilometres, albeit with a signicant population living in the ve host
Boroughs). Comparisons may be made between East London and Barcelona, but
the scale o the wider regeneration agenda in East London, which the Olympics
can realistically contribute to, should be careully considered. The Olympics in
London complements a signicant existing regeneration programme the LLV is
identied as a key opportunity area in the London Plan (GLA 2004) and is a ocus
o activities or the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation (LTGDC).
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
20/55
Chapter 2 The challenge o delivering a successul legacy: lessons rom previous Olympics, mega-events and large scale regeneration projects | 19
Map 2 The Olympic Boroughs and the Olympic Park
Source: Communities and Local Government (2008)
The mixed use development o Stratord City, which will include the Olympic
Village, was planned prior to the Olympics bid, and the Olympic Park is within the
boundaries o the Thames Gateway, a designated growth area and governmentpriority programme. It is thought that the Olympics will add credibility and
visibility to the much wider regeneration that is taking place in East London.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
21/55
20 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
(Experian 2006: 55) This wider regeneration agenda has a long history and the
East London area has received support rom national and European regeneration
initiatives. These include the Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) and Stratord City
Challenge which ocused on improvements to the town centre, and EuropeanRegional Development Fund (ERDF) objective 2 investment in the regional station
at Stratord.
Research on the Manchester Commonwealth Games (2002) suggests that mega-
events can be used to prompt a concentrated regeneration eort. Smith and
Foxs (2007) research highlights how in 1995, when Manchester was awarded
the Commonwealth Games, the city took action to create a wider regeneration
agenda themed around the event in the East Manchester area. The East
Manchester Regeneration Company was established, the area was designated anEducation, Health and Sport Action Zone by Sport England, and was targeted or
Sure Start, SRB and New Deal or Communities support (ibid). A similar approach,
concentrating regeneration programmes in and around the Olympics, could
be developed in the LLV and East London to complement and enhance existing
strategies that seek to address needs in this area.
The Olympics in London are anticipated to create signicant employment
opportunities but lessons rom previous Games raise questions about who the
jobs will be or, the types o employment in terms o skill level and duration o
employment (Crookston 2004). Research suggests that Olympics employment
peaks in the pre-Games period and the challenge or a host city is to sustain
this growth through programmes and structures post-Games. Construction
employment at the Olympic Park and Stratord City is expected to peak at
20,000 in 2010 (ODA 2008). Previous host cities have a poor record o achieving
signicant improvements to the skills o local communities (LERI 2007, Experian
2006) a key challenge or London in light o the comparatively low levels o skills
in the ve host boroughs. The ODAs Employment and Skills Strategy(February
2008) is a positive step in addressing these issues within the Olympic Park, but
is very much ocused on pre-Games and Games time employment. It has alsobeen suggested that communities should be engaged in the ormulation o
employment and training schemes to ensure that programmes meet their needs
(Experian 2006).
LERI (2007) in their review o previous Olympics recommend that the knowledge
base developed in preparing or and hosting the Olympics should not be
dispersed ater the Games. They suggest that the expertise o individuals and
organisations such as the ODA and LOCOG should be retained ater 2012 and
the knowledge gained should be put to eective use in urthering regenerationagendas or the areas in and around the Olympic Park. This approach could
be valuable or the LLV area a number o highly experienced proessionals
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
22/55
Chapter 2 The challenge o delivering a successul legacy: lessons rom previous Olympics, mega-events and large scale regeneration projects | 21
have been drated in to deliver the Olympics and it would be benecial or local
regeneration agendas i some o this expertise could be captured post 2012.
Improvements to inrastructure, particularly transport inrastructure, are widelyrecognised as a key legacy benet o the Olympics. Improvements to existing
transport systems and the development o new networks and connections
associated with hosting the Games are expected to leave a legacy or local
communities and businesses long into the uture. Transport is one area where
Olympics leverage is particularly clear, in terms o the Olympics speeding up
transport development and instigating new transport improvements. Evidence
rom Barcelona, Atlanta and Athens suggests that the Olympics can accelerate
inrastructure projects (LERI 2007). This legacy is arguably more readily
achievable than some o the other legacy ambitions (participation in sport orexample). The ambition in London is to host a public transport Games and
inrastructure improvements in Stratord and the Olympic Park are planned and
under construction to deliver this. Transport developments include upgrading
the capacity o the DLR, improvements to the North London Line and Stratord
Regional and International stations. The wider regeneration o the LLV area
should benet rom these improvements and local planning agendas should seek
to capitalise on these developments.
2.3 Wider Olympic benets
The wider legacies o the Olympics on a broader geographical scale, together
with the more indirect legacies, are perhaps the most dicult to conceptualise
and then to achieve. These wider legacy outcomes centre on the potential or a
sporting and cultural legacy across the whole nation and draw on the notion that
the Games can be inspirational or the host country and all its communities.
An important part o the London 2012 bid was the potential benets that
hosting the Games could generate not just or the communities in and around
the Olympic sites but across the UK. Olympic Programme Objective our andLegacy Promise one (see pages 7-8) make commitments to secure nationwide
sporting, skills, and cultural benets. These benets are intended to be achieved
through a range o initiatives (including the Cultural Olympiad) and through a
range o partners. Nations and Regions or example, are currently drating plans
to capitalise on the Olympics (Nations and Regions East 2007 or example). A
Legacy Trust endowed with 40m has been created to oster the development
o sports, education and cultural benets rom the Olympics between 2008
and 2012. The trust aims to lever an additional 40m o match unding and
organisations including community groups will be able to bid or unding to
deliver projects across the UK. Following rom previous Olympics and other mega-
events (including Manchester Commonwealth Games), volunteering is thought
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
23/55
22 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
to be a mechanism to raise aspirations and enhance peoples employability and a
volunteering programme Personal Best has been created or 2012.
Previous Olympics suggest that securing a sporting legacy o increased sportsparticipation is dicult to achieve. In Barcelona and Sydney there is some
evidence o short term impacts but researchers note that most evidence on
sports participation is anecdotal (LERI 2007). A report produced or the London
Development Agency (LDA) and London Health Commission (ERM 2004) ound
little evidence o a link between the Olympics and uptake in sport and physical
activity. Similarly there is limited evidence to suggest that previous Olympics
have generated health improvements in host communities. Research on the
Manchester Commonwealth Games suggests that sports events can help to
access groups most difcult to reach(Smith and Fox 2007: 1141). This highlightsthat there may be potential to use sporting events associated with the Olympics in
London, to engage with hard to reach groups and work to ensure that they gain
some benets rom the Games.
2.4 Summary
The above sections outline some o the major lessons in securing successul
legacies rom previous Olympics and other mega-events and projects. The
key points or London 2012 and those that are o particular relevance toCommunities and Local Government in terms o meeting departmental
objectives and sub-objective 3.1.5 are summarised below:
sot legacy outcomes (such as employment or local communities, skills
improvements, sports participation, healthier liestyles and overall quality o
lie) will require a range o programmes and initiatives to support ambitions.
This is particularly relevant or the LLV and East London where programmes
should seek to capture the opportunities conerred by the Olympics and
address local needslegacy uses or sporting venues and acilities should be identied as early as
possible and be incorporated in planning and the LMF process
engagement with local places and people to oster a sense o ownership with
the Olympics is important
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
24/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 23
Chapter 3
Planning or legacy in East London
The section examines the planning or Olympics legacy in the LLV and East
London. Firstly the various legacy plans and strategies produced by a range o
stakeholders are reviewed. This reveals a degree o coherence across legacy
priorities, but also a variable geography o legacy, whereby some priorities are
deemed more important by some areas than others. The ollowing sub-sections
examine the multiple perspectives that stakeholders have on legacy. These
perspectives can contribute to dening what successul legacies or East London
might entail and the challenges o achieving them. The section concludes by
highlighting that stakeholders thought an agreed strategic vision or this area or
quarter o East London was important or achieving successul Olympics legacies
3.1 Review o legacy plans
Numerous legacy plans, strategies and statements have been produced by
a range o stakeholders involved in the Olympics. These include plans andstrategies by HM Government (DCMS, orthcoming), government departments,
the Nations and Regions, Regional Development Agencies (SEEDA 2007 or
example), the Local Government Association, (LGA 2007), local authorities
across the UK, business organisations (London First 2007 or example) and
British Waterways. This section will ocus on the strategies and plans that are
most relevant to the LLV and East London. In summary these are the plans by
government, the Mayor o London, the LDA and the ve host boroughs. Figure
4 maps the legacy priorities outlined in these strategies and highlights that the
key priorities which all stakeholders commit to are job creation and business/
investment opportunities.
Government are in the process o publishing a national Legacy Action Plan,
which seeks to elaborate on the ve legacy promises made previously. The
nationwide ambitions, such as increased sports participation, and celebration
o cultural diversity are relevant to East London but in particular it is the promise
to transorm the heart o East London that is most striking. The Mayor has
produced a compelling legacy strategy in his ve legacy commitments (GLA
2008), setting out an aspirational vision or the legacies o the Games or London.
It is concise, outlines milestones and targets or a range o outcomes, andprovides details on how outcomes will be achieved through specic programmes
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
25/55
24 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
and initiatives. Figure 5 outlines some o the key programmes detailed in the
strategy which are designed to accrue legacy benets or London.
As Figure 4 highlights, there are a number o legacy themes that reoccur in thedierent legacy strategies and plans. This demonstrates that there are some
shared priorities and a degree o agreement over what a successul Olympics
legacy or East London might look like. Refecting governments legacy promises,
these shared priorities centre on sports participation or all, young peoples
activity, job creation, skills training and environmental improvement. These are
primarily the soter legacy outcomes that, as noted in section 2, are recognised
to be more challenging to achieve. The issues associated with worklessness
in East London and within the host boroughs are perhaps the top priority or
Olympic legacy. It is hoped that hosting the Olympics can really make an impacton addressing this issue through tangible actions such as job brokerage
schemes, training initiatives and volunteering programmes and the anticipated
(i somewhat ambitious) intangible impacts on peoples aspirations, sel esteem
and willingness to participate in the labour market. All the host boroughs have
job brokerage programmes that work to secure employment or local people
in construction within the Olympic Park and Stratord City. Employment gures
rom the ODA or February 2008 indicate that out o 2,478 construction workers
currently employed at the Olympic site, 430 (17.35 per cent) are rom the ve
host boroughs (ODA 2008a).
The ve host boroughs Greenwich, Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and
Waltham Forest have all produced documentation on Olympics legacies. For
Hackney and Tower Hamlets, this is the orm o a legacy plan while or the
others, it is a statement o objectives and work in progress towards securing
benets rom the Olympics. There is a signicant degree o coherence within
the boroughs strategies and objectives in terms o headline commitments
to legacy. However, the strategies do reveal clear variation in the perceived
geography o legacy and highlight that the individual boroughs place more
importance on some legacy ambitions than others. The strategies suggest thereis a hierarchy o legacies within the individual boroughs, ie or some boroughs
the employment legacy is top priority but or others this has less importance. For
example, Greenwichs legacy objectives place more emphasis on sport, culture
and capturing the visitor economy o the Olympics. These objectives refect
Greenwichs spatial distance rom the Olympic Park, its existing tourism market
and also that the borough has existing venues that can be used or the Olympics
(or example the O2, the Royal Artillery Barracks and Greenwich Park).
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
26/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 25
Figure
4PlanningOlympicslegacyfo
rEastLondon
Olympiclegacypriorities
Legacyp
lan/strategy
Lead
partner
Sport s participation
Elite sport
Disabled peoples sportingactivity
Job creation
Addressing worklessnesthrough skills and training
Housing or London
Increase aordable housing
Parkland/new open space
Young peoples activity
Sustainable liestyles
Transport improvements
Business/investmentopportunities
Place image and perception
Reduction in carbonemissions
Culture and diversitycelebration
Healthy living
Community cohesion
Enhanced visitor economy
LegacyAc
tionPlan(2008)
GOE/DCMS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
FiveLegacyCommitments
(2008)
Mayorof
London
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LegacyNo
w:Shapingthe
OlympicP
arklegacy(2008)
LDA
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Legacypriorities
LBGreenwich
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ahostfor
2012:TheLondon
Olympica
ndParalympic
Games(2007)
LBHackney
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OurObjectivesfor2012
LBNewham
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Olympica
ndParalympic
GamesLe
gacy:Strategyand
Programm
e
LBTower
Hamlets
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Itshappe
ninghereandyou
areinthe
frontrow
LBWaltham
Forest
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
27/55
26 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
Figure 5 Programmes to encourage participation in London
Programme/Initiative Lead organisations Aims
London Employmentand Skills Taskorce(LEST) or 2012
LSC and LDA Use the Olympics tomake permanentreductions inworklessness acrossLondon. Includesinitiatives such asEmployers Accord and
job brokerage schemes
Personal Best LSC and LDA Encourage
disadvantaged peopleto learn new skillsand to volunteer withthe aim o improvingemployability
Summer o Sport LDA, Sport England,London Councils
Annual event toencourage participationin sport
Winter o Sport Mayor and DCSF Increase young peoplesparticipation in sport
through ater schoolclubs and coaching
National Skills Academyor Construction at theOlympic Park (proposed)
ODA, LDA and LSC Provide people withconstruction skills andimprove employability
Lets get moving (pilot) DH, NHA London,Sport England, NaturalEngland and Londonboroughs
Training or healthproessions toencourage patientsto get more physically
active.
The geography o legacy is also apparent in Hackneys Olympics priorities. The
International Broadcast Centre and Media and Press Centre (IBC/MPC) is located
within the area o the park that alls within Hackney. As a result, one o their
main priorities is the legacy o this venue in terms o creating employment or
local communities, inward investment and the development o a new creative
hub or East London. The dierentiation between the boroughs legacy priorities
the geography o legacy is a message that emerged rom interviews with
stakeholders and is explored urther in section 3.2.1. The recognition that
there is a variable geography o legacy is important or the planning o
legacy in East London. Dierent places in and around the Olympic park
have dierent legacy priorities and programmes designed to achieve
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
28/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 27
a successul legacy will need to refect this diversity and recognise that
they will have varying impacts in dierent places. As the department o
place (Communities and Local Government 2007), Communities and Local
Government should be aware o this geography and ensure that this context isconsidered in the development o legacy agendas, and the development o the
LMF.
3.2 Perspectives on legacy
The previous section outlined the key strategies and plans or legacy in East
London and highlighted a degree o coherence in legacy priorities across
stakeholders. Drawing on interviews with a number o these stakeholders this
section will now examine some o the dierent perspectives on legacy.8 These
multiple perspectives can contribute to dening what successul legacies or East
London might entail and the challenges o achieving these.
3.2.1 The geography o legacyDiscussions with stakeholders highlighted that there is spatial variation in (or a
geography o) their plans and expectations or Olympics legacy. This geography
was perceived in terms o inside and outside the Olympic Park and also the
dierent geographies o the host boroughs in relation to the Olympic Park. A key
point made by all stakeholders was that the integration o the Olympic Park withsurrounding areas was crucial to achieving success. There should be no red line
boundary around the Olympic Park ater 2012 and it was suggested that a sign
o long term success would be that i you go to East London ater the Games you
should not be able to tell where the boundary was. Integration o the Olympic
Park with surrounding areas in terms o how the place looks, eels and is
managed was thought to be an important part o legacy success. LVRP Authority
or instance would like to see the quality o parkland sustained throughout the
Olympic Park and LLV, and were keen to ensure that service delivery in the area
was joined up. For example, post 2012, people should be able to hire a bike in thenorth o the Lea Valley and return it in the Olympic Park.
There was a concern raised by some stakeholders that the LMF process should
not just be about the uture o the Olympic Park, but ocus on the wider LLV
area, incorporating the LLV Opportunity Area Planning Framework (GLA 2007).
The ringe masterplans are a clear priority or the our boroughs surrounding
the Olympic Park and these are reerred to in the proposed LMF. However
there is some concern that the ringes outside the Olympic Park will be second
stage areas relative to the Olympic Park, where better land uses that generate
higher economic returns or provide higher standards o design quality will be
8 See Annex 1 or list o stakeholder organisations interviewed
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
29/55
28 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
given priority. The renewal o town centres is a priority in East London (see GLA
2007) and the London Thames Gateway (Communities and Local Government,
2007), and there is perhaps potential or the Olympics to be used strategically to
accelerate these regeneration aims over this wider geography.
As noted in previous sections, there is a geography o legacy in terms o the
host boroughs pursuing slightly dierent legacy ambitions. The host boroughs
do have similar characteristics but it is important to recognise that their starting
points or regeneration and socio-economic contexts do dier. It was suggested
that some boroughs have greater place aspirations (Newham, Tower Hamlets)
whilst others prioritise people aspirations (Greenwich). Greenwich or example
prioritises sports and cultural legacies rom the Olympics and has developed
initiatives such as a Sport-a-thon, a Paralympic Forum, and a proposal or a Centreo Excellence or Arts. This refects Greenwichs distance rom the Olympic Park,
the boroughs regeneration context, and local needs. Greenwich already has its
Olympics venues in place, and the major physical development projects in the
area, such as Woolwich town centre, are not directly related to the Olympics.
Priorities in Newham and Waltham Forest also highlight this geography o
legacy. Newhams starting point or regeneration is (arguably) more advanced
that some o the other host boroughs. Stratord City is a major mixed-use
development that includes signicant transport improvements, the potential to
change the character o the Stratord area and create thousands o jobs (5,000
jobs by 2016 projected in the Thames Gateway Delivery Plan, 30,000 proposed
by LB Newham by completion o the development). In light o this development
context, an Olympics legacy priority or Newham is to use the Olympics to inspire,
encourage and support the boroughs residents to benet rom new employment
opportunities. In contrast, Waltham Forest has limited physical development
within the borough and has jurisdiction over a comparatively small section o
land in the Olympic Park (see Map 2). In light o this regeneration context and
geography, the boroughs legacy priorities are ocused on ensuring communities
can access the opportunities on oer beyond their boundary, at Stratord Cityor example. A successul legacy or Waltham Forest would entail improving
connections with the Olympic Park and wider LLV area in terms o public transport
provision and inrastructure such as bridges, pathways and cycle routes.
Figure 6 suggests the host boroughs top legacy priorities as indicated in interview
by borough ocers. These priorities may provide the ocus or an Olympics
related Multi Area Agreement (MAA). There appears to be support rom the
boroughs in principle or an MAA, an initiative which is unlikely to have emerged
without the impetus o the Olympics in East London. Cross borough working isoten dicult to achieve in practice and it is thought that an MAA might help co-
ordinate the boroughs plans or the areas around the Olympic Park. The act that
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
30/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 29
the boroughs have dierent legacy priorities does not detract rom the easibility
o an MAA it perhaps provides more reason to have this agreement and a orum
or communication, with the potential to coordinate the dierent priorities.
Joined-up working oers the potential to gain added value rom regenerationplans and investments. Co-ordination can allow the boroughs to make the most
o developments outside their boundaries.
Figure 6 Five host boroughs legacy priorities based on discussions withborough ocers
Borough Top legacy priority
LB Greenwich Increasing participation in sport and culture, and
promoting the visitor economyLB Hackney Securing the legacy use o the IBC/MPC to benet local
communities and develop a cultural/creative centre inthe borough.
LB Newham Use the Olympics to raise aspirations and improvepeoples capacity to benet rom major developments inEast London
LB Tower Hamlets Addressing the wider regeneration needs andstructural socio-economic issues in the borough
LB Waltham Forest Good connectivity to the Olympic Park and otherdevelopment projects in East London to enable localcommunities to access services and employmentopportunities
3.2.2 Olympic OpportunitiesStakeholders expressed mixed views on the opportunities that the Olympics could
provide or the LLV and East London. This section will briefy highlight some o
these perceptions
The Olympics can be used as a hook to raise aspirationsThe GLA and host boroughs noted that the Olympics can be used to raise
host communities sel-esteem, condence and sense o sel. This in turn is
thought to improve peoples quality o lie and employment opportunities.
In Newham, or example, the local authority showed condence in the bid
process alone. The Local Strategic Partnership allocated 1m o Neighbourhood
Renewal Funding to the Olympics bid, and a urther 12m or kick starting
legacy processes.9 Research suggests that in London a key impact o hosting
the Games could be achieved by capitalising on the inspirational potential to
create a undamental shit in peoples aspirations, through the desire to be part
9 The nature o Neighbourhood Renewal Funding meant that the latter unds (12 million) were not expended until ater the securingo the Games.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
31/55
30 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
o such a successul and exciting event(Experian 2006: 55). Evaluation o the
Manchester Commonwealth Games supports this view and highlights that the
event provided a good hook or participation rom needy benefciaries, as well as
rom project workers and key players(Smith and Fox 2007: 1141). Experienceso previous Olympics host cities do not however provide strong support or this
hypothesis (LERI 2007, IPPR and DEMOS 2004), but it is highlighted that the
Olympics can potentially be used as a mechanism or raising aspirations and
mobilising communities,
Enthusiasm, perhaps inspired by the powerul aective charge associated with
the Olympic brand, can encourage an overestimation and presumption, in terms
o specifc socio-cultural outcomes ushered in by the magic o the Olympics.
Nevertheless it is also the case that the presence or a period o the the Olympicspirit in the host city, and in the national imaginary, does oer a real and rare
opportunity to develop and mobilise cultural, communal and social action
opportunities to catalyse large scale transormation.(LERI 2007: 16).
Some stakeholders refected this view and thought that a careul balance was
required between maximising the opportunities o the Olympics and raising
expectations too high.
Awareness that legacy outcomes will not just happenRefecting research on mega-events such as the Olympics, European Capital o
Culture, World Cup and estivals, there was recognition amongst all stakeholders
interviewed that a successul legacy would not happen by accident. There
was awareness that programmes and initiatives are required to deliver legacy
outcomes. As a representative or Newham commented, the opportunities
or a successul Olympics legacy are there to have but we need to go out and
get them . This refects Smith and Foxs (2007: 1130) argument that securing
regeneration rom events requires careul planning and event managers who are
sensitive to the importance o legacy.Securing uses and owners or Olympicsvenues at the earliest stage possible was thought to be important in achieving
a successul legacy or East London. There is potentially a role or Communities
and Local Government here, as lead department or regeneration, in terms o
monitoring and supporting this process.
Role of the private sector in maximising Olympic opportunities
Some stakeholders, particularly those that represent and work with businesses
stressed the importance o engaging the private sector in planning or Olympics
legacies (see also London First et al 2007). East London Business Alliance (ELBA)
and London First argued that the private sector should be a key part o the
LMF process, and not just be involved at the delivery stage once the majority o
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
32/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 31
planning decisions have been made. It was argued that the worst scenario or
the private sector would be that the public sector alone decides the vision or the
Olympic Park. Stakeholders suggested quite strongly that the private sector are
enthusiastic about opportunities associated with the Olympics and arekeen to play an active role in the planning o the Olympic Park and LLV.
The uniqueness of the Olympics
Overall there was a genuine passion rom the host boroughs and other
stakeholders to embrace the unique opportunities o the Olympics. The sense
that this is a one o event and an opportunity to diverge rom the norm in terms
o scope o policies and ways o working was expressed. It was noted that the
Olympics could contribute to a transormational change in East London, with
the potential to revitalise the environment, improve place perception and theareas relationship with West London and the rest o the capital. The opportunity
presented by the Olympics was compared to the transormational change
that has been witnessed in Canary Whar. Canary Whar is not necessarily
viewed by everyone as a model or regeneration, butit does demonstrate the
scale o change that regeneration can create. There has undoubtedly been a
transormation in Canary Whar. Whether this is a positive transormation
continues to be ercely debated but the scale o regeneration here cannot be
disputed. Some stakeholders also compared the opportunity presented by
the Olympic Park to that o the Southbank area in London. Over a longer time
period this area has undergone a major transormation and has been redened
as a cultural quarter which is a popular place to visit. The Royal Festival Hall, The
Hayward, Coin Street, and the Millennium Eye are thought to have played a key
part in transorming this place successully. It is dicult to conjure up a model
or successul regeneration one approach might be to draw on a range o best
practice examples, the parts that worked well in other regeneration projects in
London, the UK and across the world.
3.2.3 Accelerating regeneration in the Lower Lea Valley and East London
There is a shared view that the Olympics will, or already is, contributing to theacceleration o regeneration in this area o East London It is thought that the
Olympics has encouraged an anything is possible mentality or the LLV which
was previously perceived by developers and many stakeholders as an area o
limited development value. It is dicult to measure this acceleration eect and
assess whether developments and changes in perception o the LLV might have
happened without the arrival o the Olympics. The important point however is
that developments areplanned and taking place in the LLV and there is a sense
that regeneration is happening, whether this is as a result o the Olympics, wider
market eects, or other projects in East London such as Stratord City, Cross Railand Canary Whar.
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
33/55
32 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
It was noted that projects such as improvements to the North London Line,
increased DLR capacity, and the housing phases o Stratord City have been
accelerated by the Olympics. The LVRP Authority noted that the Olympics have
accelerated and unded their ambitions to create a Velopark and canoe course.However, the acceleration o regeneration is spatially selective some areas and
projects are prioritised over others. For example, Waltham Forest commented that
Leyton underground station is scheduled or upgrade post-2012 and suggested
that this development could have been brought orward to coincide with the
Olympics.
Some stakeholders raised concerns about possible implications and unintended
outcomes o a speeded up process o regeneration. Burdens might be placed on
host boroughs social-rented housing supply in order to accommodate an infuxo migrant workers associated with the construction sites. Some stakeholders
expressed concern about the need or host boroughs to increase their capacities
in terms o stang and resources to capture the benets o the Olympics or local
communities. Accelerated regeneration may have implications or community
cohesion in terms o creating divided urban spaces (inside/outside the Olympic
Park), tensions over who development is or and the risks o overlooking
existing communities attachment to place and uture aspirations. Who is
development or? is an important question or Communities and Local
Government when thinking about Olympics legacies.
Sustaining a momentum or regeneration ater the Games was thought to be key
to securing successul Olympics legacies or East London. The risk o a lengthy
time-lag between the Games and subsequent public use o the site was viewed as
detrimental to legacy ambitions. It was suggested that provision should be made
to ensure that some areas within the Olympic Park are accessible as soon ater the
Games as possible. In terms o the transormation o the park, some stakeholders
thought that careul planning and management will be required to ensure that
post 2012 there is not a revert back to what the area was like beore. Another
potential risk to legacy ambitions was that ater a period o time, the OlympicPark might just be regarded as another development project and that this would
be a missed opportunity. There was a sense that i the Olympic Park became
just another development project it would lose its Olympics leverage, perhaps
in terms o delivering better regeneration, higher standards o environmental
sustainability and quality o design.
3.2.4 The sot legaciesSome stakeholders said that the sot legacy outcomes were just as important, i
not more so than the hard legacy o the Olympics. Some reached this conclusionbecause they thought that the hard legacy, such as improved public realm, new
transport connections and sports venues, were given, clearly on-track to be
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
34/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 33
achieved and were being monitored through the Olympics PSA and programme
objectives. Others thought that the hard legacy might ail to deliver on all its
claims and that eort should be invested in sot legacies, as real benets or East
London could be achieved here. Representatives rom the GLA, GovernmentOce London (GOL) and the boroughs commented that the soter legacies were
their domain o responsibility and a legacy priority. There was the view that the
ODA, LOCOG and even the LDA are involved in the Olympics in the short term
and ocused mainly on the hard legacy o Games time while the boroughs are the
institutions that will continue to exist and be accountable in the longer term.
Encouraging people to get involved in sport, education, culture, and the Olympics
event itsel, are perceived as ways o improving peoples quality o lie in East
London. Refecting government legacy promises, increasing young peoplesactivity is perceived as an important part o a successul legacy. There is a view
that the Olympics should have a positive impact on the Olympics generation.
Some stakeholders commented that there is a potential policy gap here, in that
the engagement o older people in the Olympics might get overlooked. In general
it is somewhat easier to encourage young people to participate in sport through
schools and the national curriculum, than it is to encourage working age people
to become more active.
As highlighted in section 3.1, it is thought that the Olympics can contribute to
alleviating the problems o worklessness in East London. Some stakeholders
said that employment is the key to so many other quality o lie issues income,
housing, health, activity, living environment that it warrants signicant attention
and investment. It was suggested that a successul Olympics legacy or East
London has to achieve a marked reduction in worklessness. Skills and training or
local communities are highlighted as key to securing an employment legacy rom
the Olympics. The London Employment and Skills Taskorce (LEST) and the City
Strategy Pathnder Pilot initiatives are very much welcomed by stakeholders but
there is a sense that more needs to be done to address the underlying problem o
worklessness in East London. It was suggested that education, in terms o qualityand not just numbers o schools, was an issue that the Olympics could potentially
be used to address. Jobs will be created in the Olympic Park, Stratord City and
wider LLV, but stakeholders raised questions about a) the types, skill levels and
duration o the jobs that will be created b) the capacity or local communities to
obtain the higher paid and graduate level jobs and c) the risks o the Olympic Park
becoming a place to work or people living elsewhere rather than providing jobs
or those who live there.
3.2.5 Economic constraints on legacyA recurrent theme that stakeholders highlighted was the economic constraintson achieving a successul Olympics legacy. As previous Games have suggested,
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
35/55
34 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
there is tension between the dual aspects o the Olympics the running o a
spectacular sporting event and the longer term impacts o that event on the host
city and country. Stakeholders were condent that the Olympic Park would be
delivered on time, but there were concerns that as we get closer to 2012 costmight become more o an issue with the risk that unds could be diverted rom
legacy priorities to the event itsel.
Stakeholders thought that unding or legacy was not a priority or all
organisations involved in the Olympics. Some elt that the legacy aspirations
in the bid were about appeasing the IOC and winning the bid, and that because
o spending cycles, nancial planning or legacy is a challenge. The Aquatics
Centre was noted as an example o the tensions that can arise between cost,
Games time priorities and legacy. The plans or the Aquatics Centre proposedthe construction o two 50 metre swimming pools. The ve host boroughs
collectively raised concerns that this acility would not be o use to local
communities ater 2012 and that they would like to see leisure water provision
in the centre. Newham and Tower Hamlets have now agreed to und this
provision and are contributing 6.5m to secure the legacy o the Aquatics Centre.
These are the types o tensions which might increase i the Olympics budget
becomes more o an issue closer to 2012. This example highlights that it is the
use value o the Olympics venues and inrastructure that is key to a successul
legacy.
A range o stakeholders noted that there are questions about legacy unding.
Whereas some boroughs very much embraced the Olympics opportunity, others
expressed more concern about nancial burdens associated with hosting the
Olympics and thought that a lot was being asked o under resourced (in terms o
nances and expertise) local authorities.
There were real concerns raised about the implications o the LDAs rst call on
receipts to repay their 650m investment in the Olympics. The implications o
this might be that developments with the highest return value are built rst at theexpense o local community priorities or that higher densities may be used as a
mechanism to increase returns. One stakeholder suggested that government has
taken a long-term view in relation to planning or legacy (the LMF or example)
but in nancial terms their rationale is distinctly short term. It was thought
that the role o the public sector should not be to go in and set the ground or
development and then sell out, but rather to invest in the long-term.
3.2.6 Timescales o legacyThe dierent time scales or Olympics legacy were considered to be important in
dening legacy success or East London. Stakeholders shared a number o views
on timescales o legacy which are outlined below,
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
36/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 35
Legacy is happening now and not just after 2012
There is widespread acknowledgment that Olympics legacies can start now.
However, some aspects o legacy such as increasing young peoples sports
participation are easier to deliver now than others, such as raising aspirations andpromoting healthy living. These legacy ambitions are anticipated to be easier to
achieve closer to Games time.
Legacy should be viewed over a long time scale
Most stakeholders recognised that regeneration takes a long time. 2020 was a
milestone used by several stakeholders, who thought that by this time most o
the physical development within the Olympic Park will be complete (or example
ELBAs tagline, London Legacy 2020). A longer timescale was suggested or the
regeneration o the wider LLV area and town centres in the areas surroundingthe Olympic Park. One stakeholder suggested the timescale o 2050 or a
generational change in East London, whereby lie chances, quality o lie, and
the geography o the area are transormed.
Legacy is an on-going and evolving process
It was highlighted that Olympics legacy is an on-going process, and it will
be dicult to create an arbitrary cut o or when legacy has been achieved.
Successul legacy is in part about setting in motion a regeneration trajectory that
leads to irreversible change in East London. As one stakeholder commented,
it will not be a case o right chaps lets go and get some legacy legacy is an
evolving process. The recently revived O2 arena was reerred to as an example
o how legacy can evolve. Previous host cities have witnessed this trend also,
whereby sports venues may or a period o time be regarded as having a negative
legacy with limited use value, only or new ideas or unding to change their
ortunes. The notion that Olympics legacies are an on-going process presents
a challenge or evaluating legacy and measuring legacy success. As time-scales
lengthen, the boundaries between impacts o the Olympics and other non-
Olympic developments or initiatives, become increasingly blurred (LERI 2007).
3.2.7 Governance o legacyThe governance o legacy now and ater 2012 was a theme that all stakeholders
raised. The host boroughs took similar views o how legacy should be managed
within the borough. Their approaches ocus on the creation o distinct 2012
units which work to embed Olympics in the boroughs directorates and day to
day working. The Olympics has encouraged partnership working between the
boroughs a task which traditionally local authorities have ound challenging.
At ocer level, cross borough working has oten been a success but at a political
level there has been more o a challenge. It was suggested that one legacyoutcome o the Olympics might be a new way o governing and delivering local
services. The proposal or an MAA might be a way to ormalise cross borough
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
37/55
36 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
working around the Olympic Park and provide coherence to regeneration
ambitions and plans or this area o East London. There were also concerns raised
about the role o the LDA as lead partner in legacy planning or the Olympic Park,
given that the LDA has a property-led approach that might compromise theachievement o soter legacy ambitions.
The issue o legacy management ater the Games was discussed by stakeholders
and there was general condence that the LMF process would generate
appropriate governance options. The ollowing options were highlighted by
stakeholders:
Extension o LTGDC ater 2014 to manage legacy o Olympic Park and LLV
An innovative special purpose vehicle that diered rom a UDC
A private estate, similar to the Grosvenor Estate in West London
Business as usual the boroughs retain planning powers and responsibilities
A role or the new Homes and Communities Agency
3.3 Creating a new quarter or East London
Government legacy promises and the Olympic bid ambitions envisage the
development o a new quarter or district in East London centred on the Olympic
Park and LLV. This aspiration is evident in the various legacy strategies relevant to
East London (see Figure 4) and was shared by stakeholders interviewed or this
study. Discussions with stakeholders considered the question What type o place
do we want to create in this area o East London?
In discussing the agenda or this new quarter o London, questions were raised
about current planning requirements in London and the notion o a sustainable
community. One concern that Newham and Tower Hamlets raised related to the
provision o aordable housing in the development o the Olympic Park and LLVarea. It was suggested that these boroughs already have signicant amounts o
social-rented housing and that more private housing is required to address this
imbalance. The Olympics may provide the opportunity to deviate rom normal
planning requirements and it was thought that the types o housing needed and
desired or this area o East London is an issue that should be debated. Other
stakeholders refected the view that housing, in terms o tenure, density, type,
mix and design was a key issue in creating a successul legacy or the LLV and East
London.
Several stakeholders supported the view that a high-level strategic vision is
required or the regeneration o this area, and that the LMF process has the
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
38/55
Chapter 3 Planning or legacy in East London | 37
potential to create this vision. In a similar way to the vision or the Southbank a
cultural quarter, and Canary Whar an international business centre, a strategic
vision could engender an identity or this area o East London. The need to think
big was noted by ELBA and London First and the argument that the vision has tooverride the reality was made. Stakeholders ideas on the vision or the Olympic
Park and surrounding areas are summarised below:
watercity waterways o the LLV provide the ocus or development,
encouraging water based recreation, and waterront ca culture
sporting quarter world class centre or grassroots and elite sport.
Possibilities or innovative sports development such as extreme sports and
snow dome or example
urban park parkland and green space as ocus o development with high
densities increasing the amount o green and wildlie spaces. Suggestion that
this park should be on a par with Londons Royal Parks
cultural centre centred on development o the IBC/MPC as a creative
industries hub. Potential or innovative developments Tate East was one
idea suggested
iconic landmark/eature to provide centre or development and attract
visitors similar to London Eye
European quarter idea that development could capitalise on high speed
train connections to Paris and other European cities, and promote relocation
o European business headquarters to the Olympic Park
3.4 Summary
This section has highlighted a range o perspectives on Olympics legacy that key
stakeholders in East London have expressed. The key points, o most relevance to
the Department, are summarised below:
there is a geography to legacy, particularly the division between inside and
outside the park. This means that legacy will be played out dierently in
dierent places. The same programmes will have very dierent implications
and impacts in dierent places. A positive legacy or some places might not
be viewed the same in others
seamless integration o Olympic Park and surrounding areas is thought to be
key to a successul legacy
the role o the private sector in legacy planning requires clarication
regeneration momentum post-2012 needs to be sustained
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
39/55
38 | London 2012 Olympic legacies: Conceptualising legacy, the role o Communities and Local Government and the regeneration o East London
the Olympics should be used to address problems o worklessness in East
London and make a marked improvement in host communities lie chances
concerns about lack o unding or legacy development
Olympics legacy is an ongoing process
the Olympics can potentially provide the impetus or new ways o working
and the timely opportunity to address regeneration ambitions or East
London
-
8/3/2019 Keogh 2009 Legado Maior Area
40/55
Chapter 4 Communities and Local Government and London 2012 Olympic Legacies | 39
Chapter 4
Communities and Local Governmentand London 2012 Olympic Legacies
This section outlines why Olympics legacy is important to the Department in
terms o meeting departmental strategic objectives and wider regeneration
aims to develop sustainable communities. Drawing on these objectives a
denition o legacy success or East London is set out that ocuses on legacy
within the Olympic Park and beyond the Olympic Park boundaries. Stakeholderviews on Communities and Local Governments role in Olympics legacy are
then highlighted and the development o a wider legacy agenda, driven by the
Department, which addresses regeneration needs in East London, is suggested.
4.1 Departmental objectives, sustainable communitiesand the Thames Gateway
Olympics legacy in a broad sense is important to Communities and Local
Government because it relates to the Departments strategic objectives (seeFigure 7) and national agendas to create sustainable communities. Securing
a successul legacy in East London will contribute to the Departments aims to
deliver sustainable regeneration and to the delivery o the Thames Gateway
agenda. The Department has pledged to establish a role as