奧運會結(jié)束后，奧運會場館何去何從

編者注：奧運會期間，絕大多數(shù)場館在比賽日都人滿為患，但奧運會結(jié)束后，很多場館無人問津。奧運四年才舉辦一次，而建成的場館每一天都存在于城市中。只有利用好這些場館，讓他們真正地同城市融為一體，這才是真正的奧林匹克精神。

During the Rio 2016 Olympics， the eyes of the world were trained on Rio de Janeiro， Brazil. But what happens to those Olympic stadiums once the athletes are done and the last spectators go home？

2016年里約奧運會期間，世界目光聚焦巴西的里約熱內(nèi)盧。但是當運動員們完成比賽，當最后一群觀眾返程回家后，這些奧運會場館會怎么樣？

Answer：“l(fā)egacy1”. To prove the rationality2 of the huge cost of the major sporting championships， Games organizers have to prove it worthwhile to spend every penny. What to do with all those stadiums， dining halls and so on？

答案是：“遺存物”。為了證明主要體育賽事的巨額費用的合理性，賽事主辦方必須證明花出去的每一分錢都是值得的。所有這些體育場、餐廳、自行車場之類要怎樣處理呢？

Get it right and you can regenerate a deprived3 part of a city， as the London 2012 Olympics are widely credited for doing. Get it wrong and you can be left stuck with Olympic-sized white elephants4.

這事處理的好，那么城市曾被“剝奪”的那部分就能得到重生，就像2012倫敦奧運會被廣為稱贊的那樣。如果處理的不好，那么你就會被龐大的奧林匹克“白象”困擾。

Repurposing， reusing and even relocating buildings are among the various strategies for securing a sporting venues long-term legacy， says Glenn Scott， an expert at design practice Hassell. Whichever option organizers end up choosing， they should make the decision before the end of the game rather than hesitating after the Games.

悉尼的哈塞爾設(shè)計公司的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施專家格倫·斯科特稱，重新定位、重新利用，甚至重新選址搬遷都是保護一處運動場館長久留存的策略。無論組織者最終選擇哪一種，都應(yīng)在比賽結(jié)束前計劃好，而不是在比賽結(jié)束之后還猶豫不決。

“On paper the easiest thing to do is design a bunch of Olympic venues， which then you end up after an Olympics trying to retrofit5 for some other use... Far better is to decide what a country actually needs and then fit an Olympic event into that building，” Scott says.

斯科特說：“紙上談兵最容易的就是設(shè)計一大堆的奧運場館，而它們在奧運過后最終卻又被你改作其他用途……更好的做法是確定什么才是國家真正需要的（設(shè)施），然后使之與奧運賽事結(jié)合?！?/p>

Of all the infrastructure6 used for major sporting events， stadia are by far the most inflexible. Their opportunities for reuse are limited.

所有用于大型賽事的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施中，體育場到目前為止是靈活度是最差的。它們被再利用的機會非常有限。

London has learned the hard way. The cost of converting the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park into a home ground for Premier League football club West Ham United has topped 700 million—making it more expensive than refitting Wembley stadium.

倫敦在這方面已經(jīng)嘗到了苦頭。將伊麗莎白女王奧運公園改造成為英超西漢姆聯(lián)隊足球俱樂部主場的費用高達7億英鎊，比重修溫布利體育場還要昂貴。

“If theyd at first thought it was going to be a football stadium， then theyd have designed it first and foremost as a football venue and retrofitted it for the Olympics. But they did it the other way around，” Scott says.

斯科特說：“如果他們一開始就想過這里日后會用作足球場，那么他們首先就會以足球場的需要來設(shè)計，然后再為奧運做相關(guān)的改造。然而他們實際卻本末倒置了。”

Smaller， more flexible venues and facilities are certainly easier to repurpose7. Olympic villages are the most obvious case in point， as the Chaoyang district in Beijing now testify. Or take the international broadcast centre at Londons Olympic Park， which now houses8 TV and editing suites for the television channel BT Sport.

更小的、更靈活的場地和設(shè)施肯定更容易改變用途。在這一方面，奧運村就是最顯而易見的例子。北京朝陽區(qū)如今就是最好的證明。或者以位于倫敦奧運公園的國際廣播中心為例，那里現(xiàn)在是廣播電視的大本營，也承擔(dān)了BT Sport電視頻道的編輯工作。

Adapting existing buildings presents an attractive option too： less resource use， less environmental impact， less investment. The classic example here is Athens use of the Panathenaic stadium （scene of the opening ceremony of the first modern Olympics in 1896） for the archery competition and marathon finish in the 2004 Olympics. The Rio organizers followed suit， adapting the Sambódromo （the venue of the Rio Carnival） to the same ends. In 2000， the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre was similarly modified for a host of indoor competitions.

改造現(xiàn)有建筑也不失為具有吸引力的選擇：利用更少的資源，對環(huán)境造成的影響更小，投入更少。這方面典型的例子就是雅典對帕那辛納克體育場（1896年第一屆現(xiàn)代奧運會開幕式場地）的利用，2004年該場館被用作2004雅典奧運會射箭比賽場地和馬拉松比賽的終點。里約奧運的組織者也效仿此法改造利用了桑巴大道（里約狂歡節(jié)場地）。在2000年，悉尼會展中心也被用類似的方法改造成了室內(nèi)比賽場地。

Relocating9 venues can lead to potential legacy gains as well， experts note. The

blue-and-pink surface used by hockey10 competitors in the London 2012 Olympics， for example， now graces the pitches of Sheffield Hallam University in Yorkshire. The cost of relocating is a big problem， however. Hence the plans to relocate the basketball stadium used in London 2012 for the Rio Olympics were given up.

專家們稱，場地整體搬遷也能帶來潛在的益處。比如2012倫敦奧運會使用的藍紫相間的曲棍球比賽場地地面，如今為約克郡的謝菲爾德海蘭姆大學(xué)的球場增添了一份優(yōu)雅。然而，整體搬遷的費用是個問題。因此，搬遷2012倫敦奧運的籃球場用作里約奧運場館的決定最終被放棄。

If theres a single factor on which the legacy question rides， it is the extent to which Games venues are integrated into a citys existing infrastructure. The vogue11 for a long time （especially in the United States） was to build stadia on huge empty lots out of town.

如果說只有一個因素決定了遺存物問題是否得當，那就是運動場地與當?shù)噩F(xiàn)存基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的融合程度。很長一段時間以來都流行在城區(qū)外的空曠地區(qū)建造體育場館（尤其是在美國）。

Today， the thinking has turned full circle： the more central， the better. Barcelona， which used the 1992 Olympics to regenerate downtown industrial areas of the city， provides a successful example. Tokyo is taking Barcelonas lead and using the Olympics to hopefully regenerate its downtown waterfront district.

如今，想法又回到了原點：離中心越近越好。巴塞羅那利用1992年的奧運場地重振中心工業(yè)區(qū)為此提供了一個成功的例子。東京則效仿巴塞羅那，希望借奧運使海濱中心區(qū)域重獲新生。

“By locating venues in the heart of a big city， you have the benefit of not creating white elephants on the edge of town and instead creating spaces that can be easily reused by businesses and others，” says Rob Turner， an urban infrastructure expert. “You also get the benefit of existing transport infrastructure， which makes them easier for people to access and popular with businesses.”

城市基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施專家羅伯·特納說：“在大城市中心建造場地的好處是不會在城市邊緣建造‘白象，而是建造了能夠很容易就被企業(yè)或者其他人再次利用的空間。這同樣也為現(xiàn)有的交通帶來好處，即變得更加便捷，更受商業(yè)的歡迎。”

Notes：

1. legacy [] n. 遺贈物；先人或過去遺留下來的東西

2. rationality [] n. 理性；合理性

3. deprived [] adj. 被剝奪的

4. white elephant n. 白象（一種罕有的白色或淺灰色亞洲象，在印度被視為圣物，后引申為累贅）；昂貴又無用之物

5. retrofit [] v. （飛機等）式樣翻新；改進

6. infrastructure [] n. 基礎(chǔ)；基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施

7. repurpose [] v. 為……改變用途；改換意圖

8. house [] v. 給……房子住；儲存（某物）；容納

9. relocate [] v. 重新裝置；再配置；放在新地方

10. hockey [] n. 曲棍球

11. vogue [] n. 時尚；流行