REGENERATION CASE STUDY:
London 2012 Olympics
Why was London chosen?
Positives
Negatives
Social
Economic
Environmental
Improved transport links - e.g. Stratford International Station
7,000 jobs created in building the Olympic Park
10,000 jobs in in Westfield Shopping Centre, including 2,000 for local people who were previously unemployed
The Olympic Athletes' Village was converted to 8,000 new homes
Economic
Environmental
Social
Only 35% of the new homes built were affordable for families
4,000 trees were planted
45 hectares of wildlife park area was created
Polluted land and waterways were cleared up
Some of London's poorest areas have been gentrified
Little open space has been created
Pressure for housing means that the little space there is, is being used for housing, not for parks
London's population density is still increasing
Overseas investors buy London's property and leave it vacant, reducing London's housing stock
Led on the potential regeneration of Stratford
Talked about the legacy that the Games would leave behind
Youth engagement
Stratford was very deprived
It is in Newham, which was London's most deprived borough
In Stratford, the average family incomeper year was £28,900, but in London overall, it was £37,000
Focused on sustainability
Suggested a small site
Is one of the smallest Olympic Parks, at only 2.5km^2
Reduces the environmental impact on the area
Many brownfiled sites were available
Greenfield sites didn't have to be used
In Stratford, the population density was 68.8%, in comparison to 47.3% in London overall
The unemployment rate in Stratford was 7.8%, but in London overall, it was 4.5%
Massive construction scheme lasting years disrupts local communities
A new youth sport strategy for the UK invested £1bn in youth sport over the five years following the Games and created 6,000 new community sports clubs
The UK government invested £300 million to transform the Olympic site, which included housing, new schools, health centres, business space and sports venues
Better image for London and East End (rebranding)
The London Olympic Athletes’ Village is the largest sustainable homes project in the UK
The DoE provided £65 million to encourage efforts by physical education teachers to organise competitive sports and train primary school teachers
Some people lost homes, allotments, and areas for fishing
Transport for London invested £6.5 billion in transport infrastructure in preparation for the 2012 Games
Ten railway lines and 30 new bridges continue to connect London communities after the Games
More than 98% of the demolition waste from decrepit buildings that were torn down was recycled
300,000 plants were planted in the Olympic Park’s wetland area
380 businesses had to relocate away from park to make way for Olympics
Cost of living in the area for poorer people will increase
During the summer months of 2012, visitors spent about £760 million in the UK, averaging £1,290 per person: almost double the normal amount.
More than 46,000 people worked on the Olympic Park and Olympic Village, 10% of whom were previously unemployed