World Multi-sport Mega-event Transport and Mobility

Transcription

1 World Multi-sport Mega-event Transport and Mobility Summer Olympics Athens 1896 Paris 2024 Philippe BOVY Prof. Hon. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne - Switzerland IOC Transport Expert AISTS-MSA-SEMOS- Octobre Revised Draft V 3.1//

2 AGENDA 1. Introduction 2. Olympic Games : world largest multi- sport mega- event 3. Mega- event macro organisation of sport and transport 4. Summer Olympics outstanding transport+ mobility schemes: Sydney 2000 Athens 2004 Beijing 2008 London 2012 Rio Olympic Games success, complexity and crisis 6. Make a 128 year story short -- conclusions AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

3 1. Introduction Tremendous differences in sport mega-events paradigm between: One sport in many Cities, such as FIFA World Cup 2018 in Russia, EURO 2020 all over Europe, all football Tournaments, etc, Many sports in one Host City, such as the Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Youth Olympic Games, etc Note: If Olympic Games become too big and too unsustainable, they might evolve towards a third combination «Many sports In Many Cities» 3

4 Olympic Games: the IF/NOC matrix Olympic Games: ±28 IF sports for 205 NOC countries A complex 28 x 205 operational matrix NOC 205 NOC-NATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEES RESPONSIBLE FOR SELECTING AND MANAGING 205 NATIONAL TEAMS DELEGATED TO THE OLYMPIC GAMES IF 28 SPORTS MANAGED BY 28 IF-INTERNATIONAL FEDERATIONS PART OF THE GAMES PROGRAM FULL RESPONSABILITY FOR ALL TECHNICAL + LOGISTICAL OPERATIONS OF EACH SPORT BY EACH IF 28 OLYMPIC GAMES MATRIX 205 4

5 Olympic Games: Global Governance IOC Mega-event owner Games franchisor OLYMPIC GAMES GOVERNANCE Bidding 9 year process for each new Games HCC-HOST CITY CONTRACT OCOG Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games Games franchisee Host City Public sector institutional organization. Federal.. State City 7 year epehemeral organization to deliver and manage the Games Deliver all SPORT + TRANSPORT infrastructures promised by HCC 5

6 Olympic Games: multi-sport concept in one City ±28 sports are the heart of the Games The ultimate quality and coherence of an Olympic concept lies in the Host City positioning 28 sport competition venues in: Existing up-to-date facilities Rehabilitated existing facilities New permanent facilities Temporary facilities organized in venue clusters inside geographical zones with a few stand-alone venues as integral part of the City urban development Plan as integral part of the City transport and mobility development Plan 6

7 Host City transport + mobility development concept Three generic client-groups during one month Olympics+Paralympics (A) The extended Olympic Family, all accredited have free dedicated mobility during the Games specified by Host City contract: Olympic athletes, team officials, technical officials, IOC-IF-NOC representatives and staffs, accredited media, dignitaries and VVIPs, medical and security, accredited logistical and maintenance services... (B) Spectators, workforce and volunteers, Spectators = primary hosts of the Games. In principle ticketed spectators have free transport. Workforce and volunteers = main support resource of the Games with, in principle, free transport (C) City background traffic Keeping the City fully operational, however with a significant background traffic reduction around critical Olympic traffic concentration areas 7

8 City Olympic public transport + mobility Plan To fully interconnect 28 competition venues, more than training venues, all non-competition venues to all City and regional areas and all City terminals such as international Airports, main railway stations, bus long distance hubs, etc An Olympic integrated public transport Master Plan is essential: The Games attract more than 7 million ticket holders, among them about foreigners, large numbers of non-ticketed City visitors, all Olympic support workforce and volunteers often totalling more then staff Since Sydney 2000 Games, Olympic competition venue accessibility is more than 90 by public transport Public transport is the DNA of Games mobility 8

9 Olympic Games: 3 compulsory Host City plans (1) Olympic competition and non-competition venue plans (2) Olympic public transport + mobility plan Temporary mobility plan serving about 97% of all Olympic client mobility needs in an environment of 1.5 to 2.5 million additional daily travel demands in the Olympic City (3) Olympic road transport + mobility + OLN plan Temporary mobility plan serving less than 3% of all Olympic client mobility needs, with special requirements on security and travel times less than 45 min. A well engineered Olympic Lane Network (OLN) and an Olympic area 20-30% background traffic reduction are necessary to provide satisfactory Games mobility operational conditions 9

10 Beach Volleyball at Horse Guards Parade in the heart of historical London 10

11 Maracana Stadium renovation for Copa 2014 & Olympics 2016 WCup1950 = spect. /same renovated facility spect!

12 1980 to 2016 behavioural changes From 85% by car to 97% by public transport

13 Ancient Olympic Games in Olympia-Greece Every 4 years during 1170 years (from BC to AD) 13

14 PyeongChang (S-Korea) Flame Olympia

15 ...the Olympic truce About 2700 years ago local tribes populating today Greece the Aegean Sea - Western Turkey and Southern Italy were often at war on land and sea Olympic Games were held in the majestuous pine tree site of hilly OLYMPIA --Western Peloponesus every four years from 776 BC to 394 AD to celebrate Peace through fair sport competition Participating athletes of all tribes and clans, even enemies, would be accommodated and hosted in a common athlete camp-- the same concept as the modern Olympic Village 15

16 2. Olympic Games characteristics Since 1896, every four years with few war exceptions, the modern Summer Olympic Games unite the world through sports and fair competition (Winter Games started in 1924) Athletes of >200 nations (Winter >85 Nations) compete in a secured multi-sport multi-media environment From Games to Games, the Olympic program content and format is adapted /updated. Cultural, historical, political, institutional, infrastructural, economical and environmental Host City specificities generate outstanding different Games Olympic Agenda 2020 re-orients the Games, limits its size (?) while providing slightly more organizational flexibility AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

17 Summer Olympics global numbers Summer Olympic Games = largest world mega multi-sport event = biggest transport challenge = biggest legacy and sustainability expectations Very high traffic demands reaching 1,5 to 3.0 million journeys per day in addition to Host City ordinary background traffic 4,0 to 8,0 million ticketed spectators / up to pax per day NTV non-ticketed visitors Generally unknown numbers but growing from megaevent to mega-event (2006 WCup G.) Up to logistic + service workforce, staff + volunteers transported every day - - multiply by 3-4 to have number of daily trips or journeys AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

18 Summer Olympic Games numbers 28 sport competition programs running simultaneously with own schedules across venues : 310* events during 16 days * athletes, 5 000* accredited coaches and support personnel from > 200 countries Olympic officials and VIP > accredited media (TV and radio broadcasting, written press, photographers and new medias) > sponsor guests workforce including more than volunteers AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

19 Athens 1896 to Rio 2016 Olympic Summer Games key numbers 1.Nb 2.Nb 3.Nb 4.% 5.Nb 6.Nb 7.Nb 8.Nb 9.Total NOC. Events Comp. Female Medias Volunt Tickets TV.vw TV rights 1896 ATHENS Paris Berlin Rome MUNICH LOS ANGELES Seoul BARCELONA Atlanta SYDNEY Athens BEIJING London RIO (10 est.) , ? /2016 growth (%)* Legend 1. Number of NOC nations / 2. Number of competition events / 3. Number of athletes (±50) 4. Percentage of female athletes (%) / 5. Number accredited medias, press and broadcasters (±100) 6. Number of volunteers (±1000) / 7. Number of spectator tickets sold (±0,1million) 8. Number of world TV viewers (±0,1billion) / 9. Total TV rights (±5 mio US$) / 10. Rio estimates *1984 LA to 2016 RIO, 9 Games /32 year growth in percent (±5% or less) PhBy / March 2013 AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February 2016 To be updated 19

20 3. Mega-event transport organization Mega-event global governance: (1) Owner ( franchisor) (2) Bidding process to select mega-event organizer (3) Organizer (franchisee) in charge of mega-event delivery (4) Mega-event sport program (5) Coordination Commission controlled by mega-event Owner (1) to supervise and assist mega-event Organizer (3) National, Regional, Local public sector interventions and partnerships: Sport facilities,transport, Airport, Security Transfer-of-knowledge (18) by the mega-event Owner (1) AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

21 21

22 Multi - public sector major involvement Organizing major mega- events require strong and reliable public sector support and partnerships: (6) Governmental support : often massive infrastructure renovation and construction of new facilities, Games deficit guarantee, labor regulations, visas (7) City Transport and (8) Airport extensions and upgrades (9) Security / Health / Medical (12+13) Sport Venue infrastructure developments and non competition venues: Olympic Village, IBC/MPC, Media Village (16) Environment and Sustainable development AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

23 Mega-event main support functions Many functions among the closest to TRANSPORT: (10+11) Accommodation for athletes / teams + support, accredited medias, accredited officials, mega-event workforce,(such as Olympic Village, Media Village, etc) Accommodation for general public, spectators, visitors, (14) Media Right holding broadcasters, Press, Photographers, new media and mega-event Technology (15) Marketing / Ticketing / Accreditation (17) Finances (OCOG and non-ocog budgets) AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

24 Finance and transport costs Two fundamentally different budgets : OCOG (Organizer) in charge of Games operating budget: revenues from mega-event owner, broadcast rights, sponsoring, merchandising and ticketing // also assuming all Games operation costs. Since Sydney 2000 all OCOG Summer Games finances have been in the black Games transport operations cost are about 5% of Games operating budget (Summer million US$ out of 3 billion US$). Non-OCOG (Government) financing permanent infrastructures in sports, transport, some accommodation, City logistics + services, City image, environmental projects City or metropolitan transport investments vary considerably from Games to Games depending on City and regional legacy plans. Public transport new infrastructure was way behind in Rio and costed about 10 billion USD / running the State Authority broke AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

25 World other major sport mega-events FIFA-Football World Cup, UEFA-EURO Cup, Commonwealth Games, Youth Olympic Games, Pan American Games, South American Games, Asian Games, All-Africa Games, Mediterranean Games, Universiades, European Champions League, Tour de Franc, Giro d Italia and many more... Mono or multi-sport mega-events can trigger Host City positive development impacts if a vision of sustainable development and legacy is integrated in mega-event planning from the beginning (see Olympic Agenda 2020) AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

26 4. Transport progresses since Sydney 2000 Atlanta 1996 Olympic Games troubled by major transport, logistics, technology and security operational failures an Olympic counter-example! Most outstanding Olympic transport innovations: Sydney % spectator by public transport, free public transport for ticketed and accredited Athens 2004 Olympic dedicated priority lane for reliable Olympic accredited client travel (athletes, officials, medias...) Beijing % general traffic reduction during 60 days to improve global mobility and reduce air pollution London 2012 Convivial outstanding public transport performance and highly flexible mobility management well adapted to Games Rio Massively improved public transport system Rio =3rd world worst congested Olympic City Semi adequate City traffic management during the Games! AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

27 Sydney 2000

28

29 Sydney innovative transport policies 95% spectators, workforce and volunteers travelled on substantially re-enforced public transport No spectator parking within 1km of Olympic venues 24 hour free public transport for ticketed spectators + Olympic officials, staff, workforce, volunteers Sydney Olympic Park = access 77 % by rail, 15% by express bus, 3% by walking/biking and less than 5% by car Sydney Games had outstanding down-under conviviality // first Games enjoy to go to sport venues without a car = new travel behavior / rediscovery of family and group of friend rail travel AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

30 Athens 2004 Marathon arrival in this Stadium on August 29th 2004, 108 years+ after the first modern Olympics

31 Athens transport developments An often delayed, 25 year Athens regional Transport Plan was implemented in 6 years : Urban motorway system completion (+40 km) Metropolitan arterial upgrade (about 80 km) Modernization of 30 km of metro line N 1 and extensions of metro lines N 2+3 New suburban rail network connected to new Athens International airport and national rail New 23 km light rail /Athens Centre to Sea Coast All these transport projects provide a better sustainable legacy AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

32 Olympic dedicated lane: Athens 2004 innovation Athens 2004, first Olympic Games ever to have an Olympic network of dedicated priority traffic lanes : 160km network of Olympic priority lanes for all accredited vehicles + express bus lines Average Games bus speeds increased from km/h to a km/h.. at everybody surprise!...mostly the very critical foreign media! Road congestion--one of the biggest worry in Athens-- was replaced by fast convenient Games travel journeys AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

33

34 Beijing 2008

35 Beijing fast growth challenges China and Beijing huge economic double digit growth rates generated one of the world fastest motorization growth new cars per day! In Beijing Capital about half million new cars every year since 2001 Olympic Games selection Almost full disappearance of bicycles due to better public transport and new car motorization Considerable Increase of air pollution due to fast vehicle growth, poor vehicle and truck environmental standards and huge amount of construction and generated dust AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

36 Beijing 2008 major transport developments Beijing 2008 invested > 20 billion US$ to cleanup the metropolitan environment + major vehicle fleet environmental upgrade (efforts without sufficient results) Tripling Beijing Capital airport capacity with new terminal 3 (largest in the world--1 million sqm) Tripling public transport system capacity in seven years of Games preparation, mostly new subway line developments + Airport rail link Doubling, already considerable motorway and expressway network / addition of, Fifth Ring motorway (105km) and part of Sixth Ring (205km) AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

37 Beijing chaotic traffic conditions 1 year before the 2008 Olympic Games 37

38 Beijing metro from 3 lines in 2001 to 8 lines for 2008 Olympics and 14 lines in

39 Beijing 2008 venues interconnected by 300 km network of dedicated Olympic lanes

40 Beijing centrally controlled motorway Olympic dedicated priority lanes

41 Beijing 2008 massive car traffic reduction Very severe Beijing Summer air pollution (hot and very humid August 2007) due very rapid vehicular traffic growth and construction dust contributed to very high levels of congestion threatening health August 2007, 4 day test in of 40% car traffic reduction Olympic-lane system ineffective without massive vehicular traffic reduction For 2008 Games, reduction of 35-40% of all registered motor vehicles allowed every day / odd-even (ALP) alternate license plates during 60 days, 1,8 million vehicles out of use every day from a total of about 3.5 million AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

42 Beijing comprehensive City wide traffic control and command centre 42

43 London 2012

44 London 2012 Games concept London 2012 Olympic Games concept: Largest urban industrial waste land rehabilitation program in Europe to create the heart of the Games : the Olympic Park in East London Massive once in a century rail transport improvement program mostly centered on East London to substantially upgrade public transport services London Olympic venues optimally located to be accessed by more than one Tube/rail station Most public transport oriented Games concept! AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

45 Figure 7-1: The Olympic Park in 2012 and 2008 Source: Olympic Delivery Authority photograph looks South from Eton Manor photograph looks South West across the northern part of the Olympic Park. 45 AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February 2016

46 London 2012: best public transport Games Strategy No spectator parking at venues Most London venues close to 2-3 Tube or DLR stations Maximised use of enhanced public transport for spectators, workforce, volunteers, visitors and Olympic accredited Well managed ORN - Olympic Route network Smart TDM - Traffic Demand Management to minimize traffic (without Alternate License Plate scheme-- keeping Congestion charge scheme) Vision Integrated approach between Games general transport, public transport, Games venue concept and City development // Last mile concept Sustainability Legacy and sustainability fully integrated into Games planning AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

47 Venue accessibility from tube/rail stations RIO 2016 N 1 transport option is the build-up of a full high performance public transport ring interconnecting all sides of Tijuca National Forest This concept is materialized by a mixed program of public transport projects composed of suburban rail system rehabilitation, metro capacity upgrade+ extension and 75km of high capacity BRT-Bus Rapid corridors This integrated system shall be delivered in six years time The High Performance PT Ring will help connect areas of very diverse socio-economic and urban characteristics

48 Efficient + flexible Olympic route network After 2005 bid victory in Singapour, London 2012 organizers were under constant media criticism: transport and traffic will never work properly for the 2012 Games. The 250km ORN - Olympic Route Network was highly unpopular because felt as un-democratic (undue advantage for VIP type users) After detailed studies, ORN was finally implemented with: a Games Olympic Lane permanent core in City Centre flexible sections activated dependent on traffic loads sections without Olympic lanes but with Olympic route signage and best appropriate priorities AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

49 Olympic Route Network & Olympic lanes RIO 2016 N 1 transport option is the build-up of a full high performance public transport ring interconnecting all sides of Tijuca National Forest This concept is materialized by a mixed program of public transport projects composed of suburban rail system rehabilitation, metro capacity upgrade+ extension and 75km of high capacity BRT-Bus Rapid corridors This integrated system shall be delivered in six years time The High Performance PT Ring will help connect areas of very diverse socio-economic and urban characteristics

50 50

51 Most successful public transport Games London 2012 transport was more successful than predicted by British media : enough capacity - flexible management - excellent communication and signage - transport helpful and convivial volunteers The Underground operated at capacities up to 30% more than maximum ever recorded (DLR-Railroad was up 100%) TDM achieved reduction of road traffic demands of 30-35% in hotspots allowing the Olympic Route network (ORN) to work better than expected Significant shift of Olympic accredited users entitled to use dedicated Olympic transport to more efficient and faster rail public transport AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

52 Rio 2016

53 RIO 2016 to solve crucial transport problems To overcome Rio chaotic road traffic and public transport situation, Rio bid promised a much extended and upgraded public transport system Rio had only a small metro (40km) for City of 6 million. Olympic Park in Western not properly connected to Rio Centre and South Zone hotel and touristic areas Investments of 10 billion US$ (twice the bid amount) have been made to develop HPPTR -- High Performance Public Transport Ring interconnecting all four Rio Olympic zones Rio 2016 Games were an outstanding catalyst to make a 25 year forward jump of high performance public transport in 6-7years ( ) To overcome Rio worst world traffic congestion, Rio bid promised to cut background general traffic by 25-30% through an alternate license plate scheme (like Beijing 2008 or Sao Paulo-Brasil) This key measure was not/partly implemented resulting in severe traffic difficulties throughout the Games and impairing OLN operations AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

54 Games and Rio ambitious development plans Four Olympic zones: Maracana / Rio Centre Copacabana Barra - Deodoro to be interconnected by a high performance public transport system aligned with Rio master development Plan Public transport construction/rehabilitation program: METRO, line 4 Ipanema General Osorio Barra Jardim Oceanico extension RAIL, Deodoro suburban rail line extensively capacity and safety upgraded, with 6-7 new and rehabilitated stations serving major Olympic venues (like Maracana and Olympic Stadium) and surroundings BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) new 125/150km high performance express bus system (world largest such new system) with International Airport linkage to first Brazilian Airport served by Public transport AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

55 Public transport infrastructure developments LRT, Light rail tramway, one new line system serving Rio harbour +City Centre + SDU City Centre Airport GIG, Rio Gateway International Airport capacity extensions Share of public transport clients using high performance, faster, safer and better quality public transport (mostly Rail and BRT see MAP) doubled between 2011 and 2016 (16% to 33%) EXTRAORDINARY 6-7 year accomplishment and an immediate better mobility legacy for 2.3 to 3.0 million DAILY Rio public transport journeys An extensive paper Rio 2016 Olympic Games public transport legacy and sustainability is available on

56 RIO considerable public transport system development = shown in RED

57 BRT - Bus Rapid Transit High capacity bus systems RIO BRT largest such system in the world controlled by a Central Command and Control Centre 57

58 Rio integrated command centre for all-transport, global surveillance and traffic emergencies 58

59 Rio Four (5) zone system 59

60 Rio 2016 worst problem: traffic congestion! WORLD MOST CONGESTED CITIES in relation to MEGA-EVENTS 2014 Tomtom Gps Navigation Traffic Congestion Index for 220 World Cities General congestion index: 00% Peak hour congestion: 00%, most critical am or pm peaks Olympic host and candidate cities after 2000: in bold italics Next Summer Olympics: in bold italics red - Rio Ranking (from most congested to least) Congestion index 2014 (%) Gen level Peak (am or pm) Congestion index > Istanbul (multiple cand / last 2020) pm 2. Mexico City (S. Olympics 1976) am 3. Rio de Janeiro (S. Olympics 2016) pm 4. Moscow (S. Olympics 1984 / 2018 WCup)** pm Congestion index St Petersburg (2018 Football World Cup)** pm 10. Los Angeles (S. Olympics 1984) pm 13. Rome (Candidate S. Olympics 2024) am 15. Beijing (S. Olympics 2008) pm 16. London (S. Olympics 2012) pm 20. Vancouver (W. Olympics 2010)* pm Congestion index Sydney (S. Olympics 2000) am 22. Paris (multiple cand / last 2012) Shanghai (World Expo 2009)

61 RIO 2016 OLN-- Olympic Lane Network Due to long distances between Olympic Zones located around large Tijuca National Park (105km2= surface of Paris), a 300km system of Olympic Lanes was proposed in 2009 Rio Bid 230 Km of Olympic lane loop network connecting all Olympic Zones was delivered with two types of Olympic lanes: 160km of fully dedicated Olympic Lanes (24h/24h all Games) 70km of priority lanes where Olympic priority traffic was mixed with local general traffic (see map below) Good system but partial failure due to discontinuities between fully dedicated and less protected priority lanes in areas of RIO where Traffic congestion was too high due to lack of sufficient Traffic restriction poliy (Rodizio like in Sao Paulo) 61

62 RIO 2016 OLN Olympic Lane Network 62

63 Rio Transport and Mobility global assessment Rio 2016 extraordinary high performance public transport infrastructure developments Thanks to Olympic catalyst impact, it took Rio only 6-7 years to make a year public transport progress jump towards much better urban mobility for all Rio users of almost all areas of Rio: Rio delivered 70% more new or rehabilitated high performance public transport systems than announced in the 2009 bid. This allowed a doubling of public transport clients (from 16% to 33%) being a able to move around Rio with much better, faster and safer public transport systems. Rio high performance public transport clients has increased 33% of all public transport movements, a tremendous achievement not observed in any previous Olympic Games Cities For the first time in RIO history, a fully integrated RIO public transport map putting together Metro+ Suburban trains+ BRT new network + Light Rail + Ferries was produced (like for London or Paris and other great world Cities!) 63

64 5. Olympic Games success, complexity + crisis Backgound source: Games Management 2020, IOC- doc

65 Olympic Games complexity Olympic Games = world most complex largest mega-event organization Six main Games generic management areas A to F Seven main development domains 1 to 7 Reminder: initial matrix of 28+ sports IF and 206 NOC GLOBAL GAMES MANAGEMENT A OLYMPIC MASTER PLAN B POLITICAL SUPPORT C GAMES FINANCING D GAMES BID+ PREPARATION E GAMES DELIVERY F GAMES TOK + LEGACY DEVELOPMENT MAIN DOMAINS 1. OLYMPIC INFRA- 2. CITY HOSTING 3. TRANSPORT SYSTEMS 4. ENERGY 5. TELECOM / BIG DATA 6. GLOBAL SECURITY 7. HOST CITY LEGACY Ph.BY AISTS-MSA-SEMOS-February

66 A. Olympic Games Master Plan Summer Olympic Games have outpassed their own limits due to continuous growth in most strategic domains, risk of dinosaur effect : Games much too big to be sustainable even in any world mega-city Transport and mobility putting unbearable pressure on any Host City Costs, pharaonic and growing out of reach for potential Host Cities Impacts considerable in many domains Complexity -- outstanding due to the +28 sports / 206 NOC matrix Legacy lack of proven sustainable legacies in too many areas Political acceptability typified by: growing citizen opposition to bidding and to the Games proper in many countries sharp year decline in Summer and Winter Games bids 66

67 A. Games management new orientations IOC answer to Games size + cost crisis = Focus Olympic management parameters to reduce Games OCOG costs // make Games more compatible with future bidders (IOC Games management status Oct 2017) 67

68 B. Political support and acceptability Trend of referendum against Olympic bids in democratic countries Innsbruck 2026 bid master planned on IOC Agenda 2020 orientations failed to win popular support and was turned down

69 C. Global Games financing Complex Games financing structure: IOC-- ever increasing global grants) OCOG-- Local Organizing Committee multiple resources besides IOC global grant Government-- Local+ State+ Federal depending on institutions and Games areas Sponsorship Multiple domains VIK PP venture Diverse typology of financing of each key development areas: 1. Olympic infrastructures (rehabilitation, extensions, new, temporary) 3. Transport + 4. Energy systems 5. Telecom and Big Data 6. Security global, local, venue by venue 69

70 C. Games financing and transport Transport often biggest > 40% Government (non-ocog) Games investment (IOC Games management 2020) OCOG transport City operations 6% only if availability of strongly upgraded transport systems and integrated mobility management 70

71 C. Financing Olympic Sport infrastructures Financing by: IOC---OCOG---GOV---Spons 1.1 Competition venues (>28 venues) Existing / Rehabilitated / New / Temporary 1.2 Training venues (>5-15 venues) Existing / Rehabilitated 1.3 Non-Competition venues ( >8 major venues) Olympic Village (10500 athletes off) Media Center(s) Media Village (s) Olympic Hotel Logistical Center Accreditation Center(s) Airport Gateway Transp. Terminal Gateway 71

72 C. Financing transport developments TRANSPORT SYSTEMS AND MOBILITY DEVELOPMENTS High performance public transport (Major BRT and Metro dev.) Expressway road systems (Few projects and lack of efficient traffic management- Rodizio type) Olympic lane temporary Games network Non-Motorized transport (walking /large pedestrian convivial domain developments / robust cycling network expansion /etc) City traffic integrated management (CCCC-C Central command control and Communication Center) City mobility info systems (bold developments) 72

73 D. Games essential bidding procedures IOC two stage bidding use was the best of all mega-events bidding procedures // First phase pre-selection second phase selection of bids with highest chances of success Too few bidders, IOC moved to Agenda 2020 more flexible three stage bidding process apparently less successfull In key transport domain, potentially requiring the heaviest non- OCOG government investments, more efficient and sustainable bidding procedures are required The aim is to explicitly incorporate legacy as a fundamental consideration in most domains of the Olympic bid to make to be pro-active on political and general public questioins and critics (theme F) 73

74 D. Bidding new transport basic orientations Two most important Games concept maps should be : PLAN A --Olympic venue map with Host City high performance public transport system and key interchange hubs PLAN B --Olympic venue map with Host City main road, arterial, boulevards and expressway system with the Olympic Lane network For each plan description of network flow capacities and detailed last kilometre transport accessibility to all venues Public transport system bidding questionnaire to be strengthened: Public transport is essential critical DNA of the GAMES with more than 95-97% Olympic spectator, volunteer, general workforce, increasing parts of Olympic Family using public transport Bid description of planned Olympic public transport should be very substantially expanded with access priorities to all Olympic venues 74

75 D. Bidding new legacy transport inputs Currently missing are two legacy plans A and B 15 years after the Games These Games plus year plans shall explicit the improved and more reliable mobility conditions on each transport system and on all parts of the Host City The Games + 15 year Public transport Plan A and the Games + 15 year road and expressway Plan B shall be made public and extensively communicated The 15 year after the Games plans are much more relevant to citizens, transport users and tax payers than the original Olympic Games map valid for 1 month only 75

76 E. Games delivery Being a world heavily mediatized event, Olympic systems must be in partial readiness for the Olympic Village opening and full readiness for the Official Opening Ceremony All venues must be tested in principle one-year in advance for both technical and logistical systems and for human resources command and delivery readiness Each new transport facility shall be fully tested and certified prior to Games Special mobility management schemes such as Olympic Lanes and Traffic reduction gain tremendous visibility by being tested early (Case of Sydney 2000 for Olympic Park transport concept and of Beijing 2008) 76

77 F. Essential Games Legacy Future Games legacies shall be the medium to long term ADN of the Games in all domains negatively impacted by the short-lived Games and by the 7 year Games preparation. Legacy analysis is a complex procedure with outstandingly different patterns in different Host Cities. Legacies are broadly considered: In City life overwhelming elements such as air and water protection In City urban services operations In City mobility global and sub-territorial accessibility and quality of services performances (in certain Olympic Cities mobility legacies can be tremendous like for RIO much better public transport) In City safety and global security and particular mobility security 77

78 C. Games financing + F. Games legacy GLOBAL GAMES MANAGEMENT A OLYMPIC MASTER PLAN B POLITICAL SUPPORT C GAMES FINANCING D GAMES BID+ PREPARATION E GAMES DELIVERY F GAMES TOK + LEGACY DEVELOPMENT MAIN DOMAINS IOC OCOG GOVERNMENT SPONSORS SPORT CITY TRANSPORT 1. OLYMPIC INFRA- 2. CITY HOSTING 3. TRANSPORT SYSTEMS 4. ENERGY 5. TELECOM / BIG DATA 6. GLOBAL SECURITY 7. HOST CITY LEGACY PRIMARY IMPACT Ph.BY IMPACT 78

79 Games transport main issues Topic 3 transport systems of above table Transport is about 6% of OCOG operation costs and often 40% of non- OCOG expenditures to allow the Host City to sustain the 2-3 million extra daily journeys during Games time an extraordinary high global traffic overload Over the last 20 years Games public transport has shown to be the highest Games carrier with 95-97% of all spectators/workforce/volunteers/and part of Olympic accredited Zero parking within m of venues is now a pre-requisite Although public transport is the ADN of the Games, it remains exceptionally weak in the bidding questionnaire ( ) an unfair comparative evaluation component Road and expressway transport amounts to less than 3-5% of all Games journeys. However small this mobility share, it covers all essential traffic demands of the Olympic Family using accredited cars, vans, minibuses and busses certified to use the Olympic priority lane system. Such system is designed to deliver athlete transport services in less than 45 min. door-to-door between the Olympic Village and any competition venue. 79

80 6. Make a 128 year story short 128 years of sustained growth From Athens 1896 to Paris 2024, 128 years of Summer Games continuous sustained global growth. Also 98 year of Winter Olympics growth trends from Chamonix 1924 to Beijing Too big, too expensive and too complex---bordering collapse Even the biggest best operated Cities in the world have massive difficulties to cope with Olympic Games pharaonic costs and extreme pressure on Host City vital urban logistical and transport systems Risk of Dinosaur effect Tokyo 2020 and Paris 2024, two Metropolis with the best high performance rail mobility system in the world will use their utmost capacity resources to handle Games 2020 and 2024 extraordinary heavy Games sport program mobility demands 80

81 6b. Make a 128 year story short Olympic bid sharp decline risk of «No» Games About 20 years of systematic bid number decline sign of Olympic Games endemic disfavour and referendum bid rejection Transport and mobility bid process to be fundamentally upgraded Bidding process to better recognize that public transport has grown to be the Games ADN supplying +95% of Olympic mobility. Games concept Map A shall have all Olympic venues directly tied to main public transport as primary accessibility and to road system as secondary support access Main change of Olympic mobility paradigm Critical importance of year after the Games transport legacy plans for both bidding and Host City promotion Better transport mobility legacy is often the most significant added value provided by long needed City transport project triggered thanks to Games major development schemes For citizens and the general public City transport legacy maps are much more relevant than short lived City Olympic transport system map 81

82 6c. Make a128 year story short Games management re-orientation to re-dynamize the Games AISTS -SEMOS Oct.16 th 2017 Games management 2020 IOC presentation covered Games management optimization potentials and orientations in all domains, functions, techniques, procedures and transfer-of-knowledge areas. Tough main goal for OCOG of cutting OCOG total budget by 25%, or 1 billion USD for Summer Games and 500 million USD for Winter Games. Olympic renaissance with more sustainable, legacy oriented SUMMER GAMES LIGHT Summer Games streamlined to 70-80% of current global size to make them affordable and feasible for more potential bidding Cities on all continents: Games management cost cutting probably not enough if not combined with substantial venue capacity reductions triggering in cascade transport, mobility, support logistics and security functional optimization and down-sizing! Reducing currently pharaonic transport and mobility requirements by 25 to 35% is a must as no more world Cities like Tokyo 2020 and Paris 2024 with extraordinary strong high performance rail transport systems can meet Olympic extraordinary high quality public transport performance coverage needs and general mobility demands. 82

83 After LA 2028 what next Summer Games Light? I l ÿ f\l â ct 6!t Êl &l $. -l k a ôl {T i t \ +»-..s 1-3 rt t?l r Ë ôl & + \ I \ ÿ.l 1 i *r t t I t f I I r o oo C') 3= >!a EE.2 9o E(J o'a oê & Lô tot.il ilü -:^> xx< oo sl (, FEt Ëe=s efiii fi;2ë 83

84 Prof. Philippe Bovy Olympic mega-event transport expert 84

85