20 photos which prove that hosting the Olympics is a great way to regenerate a city

Oh. Athens' canoeing and kayaking venue, as of 2014. Image: Getty.

Barcelona is the largest city on the Mediterranean – but until the 1980s, it largely ignored its coastline, a drab industrial zone, cut off from the city by a stretch of urban motorway.

Hosting the 1992 Olympics was a great opportunity to change all that. The city cleaned up the waterfront, installed two miles of beaches, and got Frank Gehry to design this sculpture:

Gehry's "Peix d'Or" sculpture. Image: Till Niermann/Wikimedia Commons.

Today, thanks to the Olympics, Barcelona's waterfront is a key element of the city's appeal to tourists and business travellers alike. The city's Olympic athletics park, halfway up Mont Juic, is still in use today, too:

Bacelona's Olympic Park in 2004. Image: Madalvarez/Wikimedia Commons.


To host the 2012 games, London turned a derelict industrial area into a vast new waterfront park. It’s since turned the athletes village into new residential and commercial area, the East Village. Here’s a new resident moving in in 2013:

The area even got its own postcode, E20 – though some of the street names are a bit on the obnoxious side:


When Berlin hosted the 1936 Olympics, the sports-loving Nazis decided to build the vast new Olympiastadion:

Image: Bundesarchive.

Remarkably, 80 largely uneventul years later, the stadium is still standing:

Image: Wolfgang 26/Wikimedia Commons.


Sarajevo hosted the 1984 Winter Olympics. Here's a photograph of the ski jumping venue, 30 years later:

And here's the bob sleigh run:


Of course, Sarajevo was at the centre of the Bosnian War between 1992 and 1995, so its Olympic Park received unusually heavy bombing. Athens managed to achieve much the same effect without the assistance of a horrific civil war.

The Greek capital spent €9 billion hosting the summer Olympics in 2004. It was all worth it, though: here’s a picture of the aquatic centre, ten years on:

And here’s the beach volleyball stadium:

This is the pool in the athletes village:

And here's a view of the canoe and kayak slalom. There's another at the top of the page:

Not even sure what this one is. Seriously, not a clue.


The 2008 Beijing Olympics had five different Olympic mascots, each a different Olympic colour, each representing one of the traditional Chinese elements, and each reflecting a particular “wish”.

JingJing, for example, was a panda representing the forest. He is black and his wish is happiness.

Nini is a green swallow, representing the sky, while Yingying is a yellow Tibetan antelope, representing the earth. They represent good luck and good health respectively. As you can probably tell:


Beibei is a blue fish, symbolising water and prosperity.


Last but not least, there's Huanhuan, who as you can clearly see represents fire and the passion of sport. He isn't an animal, but the embodiment of the Olympic spirit. Look:



All these mascots were photographed lying face down behind an abandoned, half-constructed mall, which is definitely not a metaphor for anything. Neither is the fact that their pal Fu Niu Lele, the mascot of the 2008 Paralympic games, was lying nearby:



Still, I'm sure everything in Rio will work out just fine.

Jonn Elledge is the editor of CityMetric. He is on Twitter, far too much, as @jonnelledge.

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.

Unless specified, all images courtesy of Getty.


Everything you ever wanted to know about the Seoul Metro System but were too afraid to ask

Gwanghwamoon subway station on line 5 in Seoul, 2010. Image: Getty.

Seoul’s metro system carries 7m passengers a day across 1,000 miles of track. The system is as much a regional commuter railway as an urban subway system. Without technically leaving the network, one can travel from Asan over 50 miles to the south of central Seoul, all the way up to the North Korean border 20 miles north of the city.

Fares are incredibly low for a developed country. A basic fare of 1,250 won (about £1) will allow you to travel 10km; it’s only an extra 100 won (about 7p) to travel every additional 5km on most lines.

The trains are reasonably quick: maximum speeds of 62mph and average operating speeds of around 20mph make them comparable to London Underground. But the trains are much more spacious, air conditioned and have wi-fi access. Every station also has protective fences, between platform and track, to prevent suicides and accidents.

The network

The  service has a complex system of ownership and operation. The Seoul Metro Company (owned by Seoul City council) operates lines 5-8 on its own, but lines 1-4 are operated jointly with Korail, the state-owned national rail company. Meanwhile, Line 9 is operated jointly between Trans-Dev (a French company which operates many buses in northern England) and RATP (The Parisian version of TfL).

Then there’s Neotrans, owned by the Korean conglomerate Doosan, which owns and operates the driverless Sinbundang line. The Incheon city government, which borders Seoul to the west, owns and operates Incheon Line 1 and Line 2.

The Airport Express was originally built and owned by a corporation jointly owned by 11 large Korean firms, but is now mostly owned by Korail. The Uijeongbu light railway is currently being taken over by the Uijeongbu city council (that one’s north of Seoul) after the operating company went bankrupt. And the Everline people mover is operated by a joint venture owned by Bombardier and a variety of Korean companies.

Seoul’s subway map. Click to expand. Image: Wikimedia Commons.

The rest of the lines are operated by the national rail operator Korail. The fare structure is either identical or very similar for all of these lines. All buses and trains in the region are accessible with a T-money card, similar to London’s Oyster card. Fares are collected centrally and then distributed back to operators based on levels of usage.


The Korean government spends around £27bn on transport every year: that works out at 10 per cent more per person than the British government spends.  The Seoul subway’s annual loss of around £200m is covered by this budget.

The main reason the loss is much lower than TfL’s £458m is that, despite Seoul’s lower fares, it also has much lower maintenance costs. The oldest line, Line 1 is only 44 years old.

Higher levels of automation and lower crime rates also mean there are fewer staff. Workers pay is also lower: a newly qualified driver will be paid around £27,000 a year compared to £49,000 in London.

New infrastructure is paid for by central government. However, investment in the capital does not cause the same regional rivalries as it does in the UK for a variety of reasons. Firstly, investment is not so heavily concentrated in the capital. Five other cities have subways; the second city of Busan has an extensive five-line network.

What’s more, while investment is still skewed towards Seoul, it’s a much bigger city than London, and South Korea is physically a much smaller country than the UK (about the size of Scotland and Wales combined). Some 40 per cent of the national population lives on the Seoul network – and everyone else who lives on the mainland can be in Seoul within 3 hours.

Finally, politically the biggest divide in South Korea is between the south-west and the south-east (the recently ousted President Park Geun-Hye won just 11 per cent of the vote in the south west, while winning 69 per cent in the south-east). Seoul is seen as neutral territory.  


A driverless train on the Shinbundang Line. Image: Wikicommons.

The system is far from perfect. Seoul’s network is highly radial. It’s incredibly cheap and easy to travel from outer lying areas to the centre, and around the centre itself. But travelling from one of Seoul’s satellite cities to another by public transport is often difficult. A journey from central Goyang (population: 1m) to central Incheon (population: 3m) is around 30 minutes by car. By public transport, it takes around 2 hours. There is no real equivalent of the London Overground.

There is also a lack of fast commuter services. The four-track Seoul Line 1 offers express services to Incheon and Cheonan, and some commuter towns south of the city are covered by intercity services. But most large cities of hundreds of thousands of people within commuting distance (places comparable to Reading or Milton Keynes) are reliant on the subway network, and do not have a fast rail link that takes commuters directly to the city centre.

This is changing however with the construction of a system modelled on the Paris RER and London’s Crossrail. The GTX will operate at maximum speed of 110Mph. The first line (of three planned) is scheduled to open in 2023, and will extend from the new town of Ilsan on the North Korean border to the new town of Dongtan about 25km south of the city centre.

The system will stop much less regularly than Crossrail or the RER resulting in drastic cuts in journey times. For example, the time from llsan to Gangnam (of Gangnam Style fame) will be cut from around 1hr30 to just 17 minutes. When the three-line network is complete most of the major cities in the region will have a direct fast link to Seoul Station, the focal point of the GTX as well as the national rail network. A very good public transport network is going to get even better.