Tourist and Recreational Legacies of World’s Fairs
Jose Alfredo Torres, PhD
University of Connecticut, 2015
This study examines the level of success of World’s Fairs venues and structures that were designed to serve post-event tourism and recreational roles during the last half century in cities in countries in North America, Europe and Oceania in which English, Spanish, and Portuguese are official languages. Current literature discusses the topic of special events and mega-events, such as the Olympics and World’s Fairs, as tools to revitalize or reinvent cities, to attract tourism, to improve the profile of a city, and to encourage economic development by encouraging the leisure and entertainment sectors of the economy. A more limited discussion that is dedicated to the legacy of venues and individual structures that are designed for the special events exists. This study focuses on the present-day uses of World’s Fairs venues and structures and how those uses are linked to the tourism industry. This study aims to determine the legacy of World’s Fairs venues and structures by doing a qualitative analysis of four different types of information sources: a survey of tourism websites of all cities that have hosted these events, a survey of traveler opinion websites for those cities, an analysis of maps and satellite images in those cities, as well as a survey of publications which discuss the legacy of World’s Fairs, their venues and their structures. This research will provide two important contributions. Empirically, it will add to the body of knowledge about mega-event venues and structures that are expected to serve a functional purpose beyond the mega-event itself. Second, and more theoretically, it will contribute to the study of mega-events as special events that may become effective symbols of urban landscape renovation and tourism and recreational appeal.
i
Tourist and Recreational Legacies of World’s Fairs
Jose Alfredo Torres
B.A. DePauw University, 1987
M.A. University of Florida, 2002
A Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
at the
University of Connecticut
2015 ii
Copyright by Jose Alfredo Torres
2015
iii
APPROVAL PAGE
Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation
Tourist and Recreational Legacies of World’s Fairs
Presented by
Jose Alfredo Torres, B.A., M.A.
Major Advisor ______Nathaniel Trumbull
Associate Advisor ______William Berentsen
Associate Advisor ______Kenneth Foote
University of Connecticut 2015
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my major advisor, Nathaniel Trumbull, and my associate advisors, William Berentsen and Kenneth Foote, for your advice, mentorship, friendship, dedication, and hard work. I would also like to thank Adam Keul and Scott Stephenson for going way above and beyond what is expected of you and helping me succeed whenever you have had a chance to do so. I also need to acknowledge Timothy Fik and Barbara McDade-Gordon (University of Florida) and Clifford Haury and Kit Decker (Piedmont Virginia Community College) for serving as referees when I applied for admission to the Geography program. I would also like to thank the Multicultural Scholars Program, the Graduate School, and the Department of Geography for their generous funding of my doctoral studies. To Evelyn Matos.
v
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 – Introduction to the Study ...... 1 1.1. Overview...... 1 1.2. Background of the Study and Literature Review; Mega-Events, Mega-Event Structures, and Tourism ...... 3 1.3. The Tourism Industry Worldwide ...... 10 1.4. Statement of the Problem...... 11 1.5. Research Question and Hypothesis ...... 12 1.6. Methods and Procedures ...... 12 1.7. Limitations and Significance ...... 14
Chapter 2 – The Tourism Legacy of post-World War II World’s Fairs in North America and the Iberian Peninsula: Mega-event Venues ...... 15 2.1. Municipal Tourism Websites ...... 16 2.2. Opinions of Writers from Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet ...... 22 2.3. Readers’ Ratings from Trip Advisor ...... 26 2.4. Presence of Hotels within or Adjacent to the Perimeter of the Venues ...... 28 2.5. City-by-city Observations ...... 30 2.6. Conclusion ...... 48
Chapter 3 – The Tourism Legacy of post-World War II World’s Fairs in the Iberian Peninsula: Mega-event Structures as Tourist Attractions ...... 50 3.1. Introduction ...... 50 3.2. Results from Municipal Tourism Websites, Travel Advice Websites, and Trip Advisor ..... 51 3.3. Discussion ...... 59 3.4. Conclusion ...... 61
Chapter 4 – New Urbanism, Tourism, and Urban Regeneration in Eastern Lisbon, Portugal ...... 66 4.1. Introduction ...... 66 4.2. Theory and Definition of New Urbanism ...... 67 4.3. Pre- and Post-Expo ‘98 ...... 70 4.4. Discussion ...... 75 4.5. Conclusion ...... 86
Chapter 5 – Conclusion to the Study ...... 89
References Chapter 1 ...... 100 References Chapter 2 ...... 102 References Chapter 3 ...... 106 References Chapter 4 ...... 107 vi
References Chapter 5 ...... 110
Appendix 1 ...... 112 Appendix 2 ...... 114 Appendix 3 ...... 116 Appendix 4 ...... 117
1
CHAPTER 1 – Introduction to the Study
1.1 Overview
In 1998 the World’s Fair, Expo '98, took place in the city of Lisbon, Portugal. The site for the
Expo was created by clearing a brownfield in the northeastern part of the city along the Tejo
(Tagus) River that used to be occupied by abandoned warehouses and industrial facilities, as well low-cost rental housing, and it was designed to become a public park, renamed Park of Nations, once the World’s Fair ended. Within the park, structures were built with two purposes in mind: to showcase the Expo during the event and to become permanent tourist attractions once the event ended.
The Park of Nations is only one example of what changes can take place in a city once a mega-event ends. There is existing literature on mega-events that will be discussed in the section below. The discussion includes a set of expectations that indicate that mega-events often bring about specific desired benefits that are economic or that include urban renewal and the expansion of the tourist sector. There have been instances in which the hosting of mega-events has failed as a way to enhance tourism in a city, with the most notorious example being the city of Montreal,
Canada, which hosted a World’s Fair in 1967 and the Summer Olympics in 1976. In the case of
Montreal, the investment of billions of dollars in two mega-events resulted in losses that amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars and did not create the expected increase in number of tourists to the city (Levine, 2003).
While there is literature dedicated to mega-events and their desired and actual effects on a city, venues and specific structures that are part of the mega-event and which are built specifically in order to highlight the mega-events have not been the subject of significant 2 discussion in the literature, even though venues and structures may be as important as the mega- event itself. These venues and structures are sometimes designed as a way to change the image of the host city, and/or to stimulate economic development with a growth in sectors that include the tourism sector. In order to provide a much-needed focus on these venues and structures and to add them to the ongoing discussion of mega-events, this study concerns itself with providing empirical evidence that supports the importance of the study of not only mega-events, but also the legacy of mega-event venues and mega-event structures as tourist attractions (MESTAs) as well. This study will investigate that legacy of World’s Fairs venues and MESTAs in cities that hosted the events after World War II.
The theory and models that have been applied to the discussion of mega-events and tourism activity have been limited to the gravity model that measures flows from originating cities and countries to event-hosting cities, and to a knowledge-creating framework that concerns itself more with the event itself, spatially and temporally, and not with the long-term characteristics of tourism activity on venues, structures, or in areas surrounding the former venues that may have been modified in order to stage the event. In order to help fill the current gaps in theory and models that analyze mega-events together with tourism activity, it is important to know the current use of venues and structures that were developed or built for the events, the role that tourism plays in the venues and structures, and whether or not there are spatial and functional features that help or hinder the development of tourist activities in these spaces that remained after the mega event, in this case the World’s Fair, ended in each city that is analyzed in this study.
3
1.2. Background of the Study and Literature Review; Mega-Events, Mega-Event
Structures, and Tourism
Special or planned events bring together people, either as participants or as an audience, so they can be part of an activity that does not occur frequently. “Planned events are spatial– temporal phenomenon, and each is unique because of interactions among the setting, people, and management systems (Getz, 2008).” In order to delineate among the different types of events, ranging from large-scale and broad to the smallest and most personal, Getz (2008) presents an event typology that he developed in 2005. This event typology presents a useful summarized account of different reasons that may motivate the staging of special events. These reasons are not mutually exclusive, as special events may have more than one motive behind their staging.
This typology helps place World’s Fairs within the context of special events, and it helps to establish a link between special events and the type of visitors, including tourists, that events may attract. Here is a summary of the typology:
CULTURAL CELEBRATIONS – festivals, carnivals, commemorations, religious events
POLITICAL AND STATE – summits, royal occasions, political events, VIP visits
ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT – concerts, award ceremonies
BUSINESS AND TRADE – meetings, conventions, consumer and trade shows, fairs,
markets
EDUCATIONAL AND SCIENTIFIC – conferences, seminars, clinics
SPORT COMPETITION – amateur/professional, spectator/participant
RECREATIONAL – sport or games for fun
PRIVATE EVENTS – weddings, parties, socials 4
Events such as an Expo fit within the ‘large-scale and broad’ categories. They are mega- events. Specifically within Getz’s typology, Expos combine the elements of Cultural
Celebrations, Arts and Entertainment, Business and Trade, as well as Educational and Scientific.
The main theme of Expo ’98 was a commemoration of the Age of Exploration that led to
Portuguese seafaring navigation achievements around the world going as far back as the 15th century.
Spier (1998) explains the origins and the evolution of World’s Fairs in the following manner:
Historically, Expo is a nineteenth-century creation that introduced people to new or exotic goods and lands while confirming the Western world's industrial, cultural, and economic superiority. At the end of the twentieth century, however, the assured superiority of the industrialized world is more problematic and the ubiquity and potency of media has made the world smaller if not virtual. To these changed cultural circumstances add the considerable expense to the host country and the increasing reluctance of participants to invest time and money in what is after all a temporary exhibition and there are many grounds for questioning the viability of the Expo tradition (p. 26).
The first World’s Fair took place in London, and it was called the Crystal Palace
Exhibition of 1851 (Gonzáles Loscertales, 2008). “At their core,” World’s Fairs “have never strayed too far from” the main purpose, which is “To forward the progress of industrial civilization (González Loscertales, 2008, p. 7). Gonzáles Loscertales (2008) elaborates on the purpose of World’s Fairs:
Expos are platforms for innovation and for showing citizens the problems that the global society faces in different cultures and different latitudes. Expos also show the efforts made by corporations, governments, and non-governmental organizations in order to meet the challenges for the day-to-day life of the citizens. This is what expos are about and their great value lies in their power to gather around a relevant theme for all humankind (p. 1).
5
Rydell, Findling and Pelle (2000) explain "the current debate about how to understand world’s fairs” (p. 5) in their historical context, delineating six schools of thought:
The cultural hegemony school sees World’s Fairs as being staged “to win popular support
for national imperial policies” (p. 5).
The audience-centered school which states that World’s Fairs are staged to allow
fairgoers to elaborate their own ideas and draw their own conclusions after attending the
events.
The counter-hegemony school explains that World’s Fairs, which exploited
underrepresented groups, unintentionally gave these underrepresented groups a chance to
provide their own point of view and their own narrative to fairgoers.
The fourth school sees World’s Fairs as “potlatches, rituals of abundance and gift giving
that usually end in the destruction of property and possessions” (p. 6) that are linked to
consumerism.
The fifth school sees World’s Fairs as opening “windows on the technological, scientific,
architectural, and urban planning dimensions (p. 6)” of special events. This school of
thought is reflected in the list of why cities seek to host mega-events (below).
The sixth school sees World’s Fairs as producing a tradition of writing of historical
accounts and magazine articles, and also encouraging the collecting of memorabilia that
can become a historical account of each World’s Fair’s timeframe.
Since the first World’s Fair, this type of event has taken place mostly in Europe, North
America, Asia, and Oceania. Table 1 in Appendix 1 shows a list of Expos that have taken place since the end of World War II, with numbers for attendance and financial gains or losses included. 6
Several studies have provided reasons that motivate city planners to seek to attract and host mega-events such as the World’s Fair:
To increase and/or improve the profile/image of the city (Bramwell, 1997; Burbank et al.
2002; Greene, 2003; Chalip and Costa, 2005; Hall, 2006; Getz, 2008; Smith, 2012)
As an investment in the tourism sector (Bramwell, 1997; Hiller, 2000; Burbank et al.
2002, Getz, 2008; Andranovich and Burbank, 2011). Roche (2000) sees this investment
as taking the form of World’s Fairs as temporary theme parks which in turn have inspired
permanent theme parks. Smith (2012) identifies events as having “short-term and long
term effects” (p. 192) on tourism, and he also specifically discusses event sites and
venues as tourism attractions, where some venues have retained their original use, have
been reconverted, or are just iconic towers or structures. In this discussion, Smith (2012)
introduces the idea of ‘iconic buildings fatigue’ (p. 199) as both an explanation for
Zaragoza’s unremarkable World’s Fair performance and as a warning of possible
decreasing impacts of future mega-events structures.
To spur development by encouraging leisure and entertainment pursuits (Andranovich,
Burbank and Heying, 2001; Burbank et al. 2002, Paton, Mooney and McKee, 2012)
González Loscertales (2008) states that World’s Fairs “have first and foremost provided a
massive impulse to the local economy” (p. 2) and that they “also contribute to the
development of a commercial apparatus for tourists, day-trippers and shoppers” (p. 2),
directly linking a mega-event with tourism and an injection of funds into a local
economy.
To reshape and regenerate the city (Bramwell, 1997; Hiller, 2000; Rydell, Findling and
Pelle, 2000; Burbank et al. 2002; Coaffee, 2007; Short, 2008, Abramovich and Burbank, 7
2011; del Romero Renau and Trudelle, 2011; Paton, Mooney and McKee, 2012; Smith,
2012), including the regeneration of areas suffering industrial decline and areas declared
as brownfields (Smith and Fox, 2007), as well as the building of “landmark structures”
(Hiller, 2000, p. 439)
The perceived “promise of an economic windfall” (Baade and Matheson, 2004, p. 344),
with a similar idea presented by Pillay and Bass (2008)
A limited amount of theory and models has been applied to the discussion of mega-events and tourism activity. Fourie and Santana-Gallego (2011) apply the gravity model to measure the effects of mega-events on tourist arrivals. “Traditionally, gravity models have been applied to explain country-pair flows, such as international trade” (Fourie and Santana-Gallego (2011, p.
1365). The gravity model is effective in explaining changes in tourism flows when the host country of a mega-event is one of the two countries for each one of the two country-flows, but it only helps measure tourism flows that take place during the mega-event, as there is no way to correlate directly future changes in tourism flows to the actual mega-event once the event has ended.
Getz (2007, 2008, p. 413) illustrates a framework for the understanding and creation of knowledge about event tourism. The framework links event-hosting motives to the nature and meanings, planning and management, and outcomes of the events, giving the motives factor the same importance as the other components of the event-hosting experience. This kind of interconnection shows the interrelationship that exists between what can be taken into account in the planning process of a special or mega-event and the realities of the tourism experience and activity at a given point in time. It also illustrates the complexity that exists not only in the 8 creation of knowledge about event tourism, but also in the implementation, for tourism destinations and for tourists, of the process that culminates in tourist activity.
While there has been much discussion about special events and mega-events in the literature, the topic that addresses specific venues and structures that are built for these events has not been developed to the same extent. Recently the topic of mega-event flagships has emerged as a topic of closer scrutiny. Mega-event flagships are structures that are designed to become iconic symbols that spur the redevelopment efforts in a neighborhood or a city. These redevelopment efforts may or may not have tourism goals as redevelopment strategies (Deng, 2013 and Deng and Poon, 2013). Not all structures that are built for mega-events are designed to be flagships, though. A pavilion that was designed and used for Expo 2008 in Zaragoza, Spain, was dismantled and relocated to the Spanish city of Valladolid, where it is now a concert venue (El
País, 2013). Deng (2013) and Deng and Poon (2013) identify another important role that mega- event-related structures may have, which is the role of tourist attractions. These structures are designed to be popular draws for visitors during the mega-event, and also to be permanent tourist attractions after the mega-event has ended.
This study fills the gap that exists in the discussion of venues that are built for World’s Fairs and the structures that are built for these mega-events, as well as the roles that these venues and structures can play in the post-event economic redevelopment strategies of the mega-events’ host cities. Specifically, the study focuses on the legacies of World’s Fairs venues and Mega-Event
Structures as Tourist Attractions (MESTAs) that were built for World’s Fairs by providing empirical evidence that supports the importance of the study of not only mega-events, but venues and MESTAs as well. This study will investigate venues and structures that were developed for
World’s Fairs after World War II, when tourism gained popularity among the middle class as 9
Figure 1.1. Parts of Framework for Understanding and Creating Knowledge about Event Tourism that are relevant for this study, modified from Getz (2008).
10
both a leisure activity as well as an economic activity. Port-World War II World’s Fair host cities in countries in which English, Spanish, and Portuguese are official languages, as representative of cities in North America, Europe, and Oceania, will be the subjects of the study of the legacy of World’s Fairs venues and structures.
1.3. The Tourism Industry Worldwide
People around the world engage in travel to places near and far and the impacts of tourism, including related development of land for tourism purposes, are far-reaching. The tourist industry, defined by the World Tourism Organization as “the activities of persons travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes” (UNWTO, 2013b) has become increasingly an activity of worldwide importance. Furlough (1998) traces the beginning of the large-scale popularity of tourism to paid vacations and post-World War II prosperity that encouraged mass tourism, fostered in part by images from cinema, television and advertising. The tourism industry “has experienced continued growth and deepening diversification to become one of the fastest growing economic sectors in the world” (UNWTO, 2013a) and it “is closely linked to development and encompasses a growing number of new destinations” (UNWTO, 2013a). The
World Tourism Organization explains that:
Today, the business volume of tourism equals or even surpasses that of oil exports, food products or automobiles. Tourism has become one of the major players in international commerce, and represents at the same time one of the main income sources for many developing countries. This growth goes hand in hand with an increasing diversification and competition among destinations (UNWTO, 2013a).
In addition, the World Tourism Organization (2013a) offers the following figures about the tourism industry worldwide: 11
It provides 5% of the global GDP. It supports 235 million jobs worldwide. It provides 30% of the world’s exports of services. It generated $1,032 billion in tourist income from foreigners, referred to as export earnings, in 2011.
There were 980 million international tourists worldwide in 2011, and it is projected that there will be 1.8 billion international tourists by 2030.
1.4. Statement of the Problem
Cities worldwide seek to host mega-events, expecting specific benefits that include an increase in tourist activity, and bid to become hosts of these types of events because the economic and prestige gains to the cities are expected (at least as plans for the events are usually presented by city leaders) to offset the expenses associated with the hosting duties. A part of the planning for the stages of mega-events such as World’s Fairs include the development of venues and building of individual structures that are often designed to be memorable architectural achievements that will showcase the event while it is in progress, and to showcase the city once the event ends. There is a large amount of literature devoted to how special events like mega- events are staged during their proceedings, but less attention has been paid to venues and specific structures that are meant to bestow a particular meaning to the venue and to the host city. While tourism has been identified as an important element in the staging of mega-events, less attention has been paid to mega-event venues and structures as originators of tourist activity in host cities or what their overall legacy is. This study aims to address this topic.
The gravity model that has been applied to events tourism is useful to measure increases of tourism flows during mega-events, but not the effects of venues and MESTAs on longer-term visitor and tourist numbers. The Getz framework for understanding and creating knowledge 12 about event tourism indicates that adding a separate discussion of venues and MESTAs to the knowledge of event tourism could contribute to our understanding of how grounds and structures may become a factor that leads to increasing levels of tourist activity (it is a seldom-discussed issue within the frameworks of Planning and Managing Event Tourism and Outcomes and the
Impacted in Figure 2).
1.5. Research Questions and Hypothesis
The questions that this study seeks to address are the following:
What is the current use of venues and structures that were built for the World’s Fairs?
What role does tourism play in the current use of the venues and structures that were built
for the World’s Fairs?
The main research question of this study is whether or not the venues of World Fairs in
their aftermath have become successful sites of tourism and recreational activities only
when they have been able to be integrated spatially and functionally into larger urban
landscapes.
1.6. Methods and Procedures
This study is a historical case study that will use qualitative and quantitative methods. The study seeks to examine and determine the role that venues and MESTAs have played in the tourist industry and recreational opportunities of World’s Fair hosting cities.
The legacy of World’s Fairs will be studied and analyzed by focusing on three sets of host cities: 13
(Chapter 2) What is the tourism and recreational legacy of World’s Fairs in cities in
which at least part of the venues remain in countries in which English, Spanish, or
Portuguese are official languages? The legacy will be determined based on four focal
themes: present-day spatial characteristics of the former venue, tourism planners’
representation on promotional websites, the discussion provided by staff writers in three
travel websites (Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet) and the rankings of venues and
structures based on voluntarily-provided public evaluation of attractions made by tourists
in the Trip Advisor travel website.
(Chapter 3) What is the legacy of mega-event structures that were built for World’s Fairs
in the Iberian Peninsula? The legacy will be determined based on the same focal themes
that are used on Chapter 2. Structures are evaluated separately from former venues
because they are two distinct types of tourist spaces. The space in venues is broad and
may combine uses other than tourism, such as recreation, while structures are smaller
spaces whose function is more specifically that of a place that caters to tourist
consumption activities.
(Chapter 4) How did the legacy of the 1998 Expo/World’s Fair in Lisbon lead to the
creation of what Turismo de Portugal-Lisboa (2014) identifies as a tourist zone in this
ancient European city? This chapter explores how a space which is zoned for multiple
uses, one of which is tourism, may have become an outstanding tourist attraction due to
the multiple uses of the zone, among other factors.
In summary, my methods will be to: 1) proceed from an assessment of the level of spatial integration and functional usage of the 12 World Fair venues (since World War II in English,
Spanish, and Portuguese-language host countries), 2) make a comprehensive determination of 14 the level of effective/successful usage of those venues through the findings, and 3) test correlation between spatial patterns (especially in terms of spatial integration, ease of transportation, and specific functional usage) of those venues and the general “success” of the re- use of those venues from a tourist/recreational perspective in the longer-term aftermath of the
World Fair proceedings.
1.7. Limitations and Significance
World’s Fairs prior to World War II were not included in this study, as tourism began to develop at its current levels of worldwide reach and popularity only after World War II. What this study seeks to accomplish is to examine more than a half century’s worth of World’s Fairs and the venues and structures that were developed and built for these events; again, that period corresponds to a much higher level of significance and reach of tourism as a worldwide phenomenon. This study will present a much-needed picture of the level of success of mega- event venues and structures that have been designed for tourism purposes during this period, and it may provide urban planners with information regarding the long-term effects and legacies of
World’s Fairs, including venues and structures that are developed for the event.
15
CHAPTER 2 – The Tourism Legacy of post-World War II World’s Fairs in North America and the Iberian Peninsula: Mega-event Venues
Of the 12 cities that hosted World’s Fairs in English, Spanish, and Portuguese-speaking nations after World War II, ten of those cities have preserved the Fair venue in some form of another. Only in New Orleans, Louisiana and in Brisbane, Australia have venues been entirely built-over. The ten cities that remain are all located in either North America or in the Iberian
Peninsula (in chronological order, the cities are Seattle, New York, Montreal, San Antonio,
Spokane, Knoxville, Vancouver, Seville, Lisbon, and Zaragoza). In the next paragraph background information about each of the ten cities’ venues will be provided, along with the venue’s post World’s Fair name.
The grounds of Seattle’s Seattle Center had been set aside to build a civic center, but were used as the venue for the World’s Fair instead. Once the event ended, the civic center was built
(Seattle.gov, 2015). New York’s Flushing Meadows/Corona Park had been the venue for the
1939 World’s Fair and was used again for the 1964-65 Fair (New York City Department of Parks and Recreation, 2015). For Montreal, the St. Lawrence River island of Saint Helen’s had additional land added to it to expand its surface area, and the island of Notre Dame was created close to Saint Helen’s Island (Tourisme Montreal, 2014). A residential neighborhood with homes dating back to the 1800s was torn down in order to create the World’s Fair venue in San Antonio that is currently known as Hemisfair Park (Hemisfair ’68 Online, 2015). Spokane’s Riverfront
Park, Knoxville’s World’s Fair Park, and Vancouver’s Canada Place all used to be rail yards with depots which were in poor condition before they were reconverted as World’s Fairs venues
(Riverfront Park Master Plan, 2014; ExpoMuseum.com, 2015; Canada Place, 2015). Seville’s
Cartuja Island used to be a mostly barren piece of land with a historic building in it (Rubio,
2012). In Lisbon a brownfield was chosen to be decontaminated and redeveloped to become 16 what is now known as the Park of Nations zone (White, 1996). In Zaragoza, Spain a bend in the
Ebro River that used to contain small tracts of farmed land and a small riverside forest was chosen to become the venue for the World’s Fair and now is known as Recinto Expo
(Ecologistas en Acción, 2005).
The role that former venues play in the tourism scene in each city will be analyzed by looking at figures and observations from municipal tourism websites, the discussion and ratings from travel writers on the travel advice websites Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet, the readers’ ratings on multi-purpose travel website Trip Advisor, and the number of hotels that are found either within the venues or adjacent to the perimeter of the venues.
The first section of this chapter will show results in table and graph form. The second section will discuss results on a city-by-city basis, and will include local and regional media coverage of the tourism legacies of these venues. The third section will present concluding statements.
2.1 Municipal Tourism Websites
As an activity with economic implications, the tourism industry relies on promotion, the promotion of a place, to attract customers. “The representations in place promotion must maintain a balance between presenting the characteristics of a destination that are most likely to attract tourists and creating realistic expectation for the experiences they would have at the destination” (Nelson, 2013, p. 260). Place promotion involves the careful choice of images that are used to create a sense of place that will be attractive to tourists (Williams 2009) and it “must maintain a balance between tapping into generalized ideas of a place and creating a sense of distinction among other destinations (Nelson, 2013, p. 260)”. By now, “the Internet has become the most important medium for place promotion (Nelson, 2013, p. 257)” and for that reason the information that is presented by municipal tourism websites is a useful part of this study. 17
Individual results for each city will be listed in table form. In addition to responses, the entries will show points assigned for the recorded observations. The point system for observations made
11/29/2014 is as follows, based on where the information is found on the website:
Home Page (HP)– 1.0 point 1 click from homepage – 0.8 points 2 clicks from homepage – 0.6 points 3 clicks from homepage – 0.4 points 4 or more clicks from homepage – 0.2 points No mention – 0 points Yes/No categories: Yes – 1 point No – 0 points Otherwise: Appearing on the municipal website – 1.0 point Appearing on link to venue that is included in municipal website – 0.5 points No mention – 0 points
To varying degrees, World’s Fair venues in the ten cities that were studied are included in what municipal tourism website content developers have considered to be important tourism attractions in the cities. The strongest presence of the venue in a municipal tourism website is the venue for Lisbon, while the weakest presence of a venue within the overall city tourism offer is found in San Antonio. With Montreal being somewhat of an exception, of the ten cities that were studied, the venues from the five most recent World’s Fairs represent a more important element in their cities’ overall offer of tourist attractions.
18
Seattle
Information Sought Seattle Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 3 clicks – 0.4 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Seattle Center Website, on "About Us" – 0.5 Explanation of how to get there? Seattle Center Website, on "About Us" – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of No on Municipal, yes on Center's website – 0.5 former venue or of structure? Point total: 2.9 Table 2.1. Observations from Visit Seattle (2014)
New York
Information Sought NYC Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 4 clicks – 0.2 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? Yes ("get directions"; NYC parks website) – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of No on city tourism website; Yes on NYC Parks former venue or of structure? website – 0.5 Point total: 3.2 Table 2.2. Observations from NYC The Official Guide (2014)
Montreal
Information Sought Montreal Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 2 clicks – 0.6 Weblinks to venues & structures? No venue/ yes structure, 0 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? Yes - 1 Reference to mega-event in description of On buildings' websites – 0.5 former venue or of structure? Point Total: 3.1 Table 2.3. Observations from Tourisme Montreal (2014)
19
San Antonio
Information Sought San Antonio Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 3, 0.4 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? 2 clicks - 1 Explanation of how to get there? 2 clicks - 1 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total: 4.4 Table 2.4. Observations from Visit San Antonio, Texas (2014)
Spokane
Information Sought Spokane Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 4 clicks – 0.2 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? no, yes on park's website – 0.5 Explanation of how to get there? no, yes on park's website – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total 3.2 Table 2.5. Observations from Visit Spokane (2014)
Knoxville
Information Sought Knoxville Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 3 clicks – 0.4 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? on Park's website – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of In name of park - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total 3.9 Table 2.6. Observations from Visit Knoxville (2014)
20
Vancouver
Information Sought Vancouver Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 2 clicks – 0.6 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? Yes - 1 Reference to mega-event in description of No; yes on venue’s website – 0.5 former venue or of structure? Point Total: 4.1 Table 2.7. Observations from Tourism Vancouver (2014)
Seville
Information Sought Seville Venue Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 3 clicks – 0.4 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? Yes - 1 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes; most structures were dismantled - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total: 4.4 Table 2.8. Observations from Visita Sevilla (2014)
Lisbon
Information Sought Lisbon Venue Photographic reference on homepage? Yes - 1 Written reference on homepage? Yes (identified as a tourism zone) - 1 How many clicks from homepage? 1 clicks – 0.8 Weblinks to venues & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? not on municipal website; yes on individual website – 0.5 Explanation of how to get there? not on municipal website; yes on individual website – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total: 5.8 Table 2.9. Observations from Turismo de Portugal Lisboa (2014)
22
2.2. Opinions of Writers from Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet
These websites provide advice written by people who specialize in the travel and tourism industry. Global results will be listed for each city in table form.
Fodor’s:
Point System Based on Observation for Venues from Fodor’s; Date 11/30/2014 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Mentioned 2 = Outstanding Mention/ Top Things to Do (TTD)
Frommer’s:
Point System Based on Observations for Venues from Frommer’s; Date: 11/30/2014 0 = Not Mentioned 1 = 1 star 2 = 2 stars 3 = 3 stars
Lonely Planet:
Point System Based on Observations for Venues from Lonely Planet; Date 11/30/2014 Numbers 0 = Not Mentioned 1 = 5th page or further (4 clicks or more) 2 = 3rd or 4th page (2 or 3 clicks) 3 = 2nd page (1 click) 4 = 1st page 5 = ‘Top’ attraction/ sight
23
City Score Venue & MESTAs Seattle 0 Seattle Center: NM New York 0 (NYC) Flushing Meadows/Corona Park: NM for 1 (Queens) NYC, Mentioned in Things to Do/ Sights for Queens, 1 of 13 Montreal 0 Ile Sainte Helene Attractions NM 0 Ile Notre Dame NM San Antonio 0 Hemisfair Park: NM Spokane 2 Riverfront Park: “Fodor’s Choice/ Top Reasons to Go – Family Attractions”; 1st page of TTD/ Sights, out of 11 Sights (alphabetical order) Knoxville 0 World’s Fair Park [And Knoxville]: NM Vancouver 1 Canada Place: Sights, 1 of 77 Seville 2 Isla de La Cartuja: TTD/ Sights, 1 of 29 Isla Mágica Park: Included in the Description of Isla de la Cartuja Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM Table 2.12. Observations from Fodor’s Travel (2014)
City Score Venue & MESTAs Seattle 1 Seattle Center: 1 of 5 “Best Family Attractions” New York 0 Flushing Meadows/Corona Park: NM Montreal 0 Ile Sainte Helene Attractions NM 0 Ile Notre Dame NM San Antonio 1 Hemisfair Park: Listed among attractions (1 of 34*; 4**; 4***) Spokane 0 Riverfront Park: NM Knoxville 0 World’s Fair Park: NM Vancouver 2 Canada Place: Attractions (17*, 1 of 15**, 8***) Seville 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM Table 2.13. Observations from Frommer’s (2014)
24
City Score Venue & MESTAs Seattle 1 Seattle Center itself not a Top Thing 7th page (6th click) on “Sights” that list 153 New York 2 Flushing Meadows/Corona Park: 4th page (3 clicks) on “Sights” that list 455 Montreal 4 Ile Sainte Helene Attractions – Very first ‘page’ of sights, out of 148 3 Ile Notre Dame – Second page (1 click) of Sights, out of 148 San Antonio 0 Hemisfair Park: NM Spokane 4 Riverfront Park: Top Left on Sights, 10 Sights Listed Knoxville 0 World’s Fair Park: NM Vancouver 4 Canada Place: Attractions – First Page in ‘Sights’, 111 Listed Seville 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM Table 2.14. Observations from Lonely Planet (2014)
City Venue & MESTAs Fodor’s Score Frommer’s Score Lonely Planet Score Seattle Seattle Center 0 1 1 New York Flushing 0 0 2 Meadows/Corona Park Montreal Ile Sainte Helene 0 0 4 Ile Notre Dame 0 0 3 San Antonio Hemisfair Park 0 1 0 Spokane Riverfront Park 2 0 4 Knoxville World’s Fair Park 0 0 0 Vancouver Canada Place 1 2 4 Seville Isla de La Cartuja 2 0 0 Lisbon Park of Nations 0 0 0 Zaragoza Recinto Expo 0 0 0 Table 2.15. Compilation of data from tables 2.12-2.14
26
These websites overall don’t consider World’s Fair venues as worthy of too much attention.
Fodor’s and Frommer’s only identify the venues in three cities as worthy of recommendation, while Lonely Planet sees venues as playing an active role in the tourism offers of five of the ten cities in the study. Vancouver’s Canada Place is the only venue that is recommended for a visit by all three websites, while Seattle Center and Spokane’s Riverfront Park are recommended by two of the websites. The other six venues are either mentioned once or they are not mentioned at all.
2.3 Readers’ Ratings from Trip Advisor
Trip Advisor collects ratings and opinions from tourists. Detailed information for Trip
Advisor ratings is provided in Appendix A2.
Trip Advisor Scoring System A, by ranking 0 = Not Mentioned 1 = Ranked 31 or lower 2 = Ranked 21-30 3 = Ranked 11-20 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
Trip Advisor Scoring System B, by ranking (1-10) and by quartile 0 = not mentioned 1 = Ranked Third or Fourth Quartile 2 = Ranked Second Quartile 3 = Ranked Top Quartile but Not in Top 10 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
Global results will be presented in table form, Date: 11/30/2014:
28
Ratings supplied by tourists have a higher regard for the present-day uses of former World’s
Fair venues than advice writers do. Only the venues in Seville and in Zaragoza receive zero recognition from travelers. The venue in New York City also does not receive any recognition as an attraction in New York City, but it is well-regarded as an attraction in the borough of Queens.
Spokane’s Riverfront Park receives high rankings in terms of absolute numbers as well as in terms of top ten numbers combined with quartile placements. Knoxville’s World’s Fair Park is ranked in the Top 20 category and Lisbon’s Park of Nations is ranked in the Top 30. All other venues that are ranked are ranked 31st or lower.
Taking into account Top 10 rankings and quartile rankings, Seattle Center, Montreal’s St.
Helen’s Island, and the Park of Nations rank in the Second Quartile, while the other venues that are ranked are ranked Third or Fourth Quartile.
2.4. Presence of Hotels within or Adjacent to the Perimeter of the Venues
Global results will be presented in table form, from observations made 11/30/2014.
The Lisbon venue is the one that has by far attracted the most hotels to the venue or adjacent to the perimeter with eight hotels, followed by San Antonio with four, Seattle with three,
Vancouver with two, New York, Knoxville, and Zaragoza with one, and Montreal, Spokane, and
Seville with none.
30
2.5. City-by-city Observations
Seattle
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Seattle earns a low score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website presents
Seattle Center among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Seattle Center is recognized by two of the three websites,
but is not highlighted as an outstanding place to visit in either website.
Trip Advisor: Though ranked by travelers in the Top Quartile of attractions in the city,
Seattle Center is not ranked among the top 30 destinations in the city.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: There are three hotels within the venue
or bordering the perimeter. Among the ten cities studied, Seattle’s venue has the third-highest
number of hotels that fit inside the category.
Seattle Center overall as a former World’s Fair venue and current tourist attraction receives a moderate-to-low level of acknowledgement. This may be a result of Seattle’s variety of tourist attractions.
The Seattle Times (2006) mentions Seattle Center as a must-see attraction for those who only have one day to spend in the city. The same newspaper also (2006, 2008) also recommends going to the top of the Seattle Needle structure while referring to the structure as ‘kitsch’.
New York
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues, New
York earns a low score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website presents
Flushing Meadows/Corona Park among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
31
Figure 2.5. Location of Seattle Center in Seattle. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
32
Travel Recommendation Websites: Flushing Meadows/Corona Park is mentioned by only
one of the three websites, being recognized as an outstanding place to visit.
Trip Advisor: Flushing Meadow/Corona Park does not receive any kind of mention on Trip
Advisor.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: One hotel fits inside this category.
As a tourist attraction in the entirety of New York City, Flushing Meadows/Corona Park is virtually nonexistent, mainly because “Queens is skipped by tour buses” (New York Times,
2014a). The former venue does serve as a popular park with local residents, but this hasn’t stopped land developers from wanting to take land away from the park (New York Times 2012a,
2012b). In 2006 the New York Times presented an article about the state of disrepair of some of the World’s Fair “once grandiose structures”, which has more recently led to the creation of a conservancy alliance (New York Times, 2013), and there have been reports of funding being granted to carry out the restoration of the structures that have been in disrepair (New York Times,
2014b). This venue is an example of conventional wisdom changing from indifference to recognition of the tourism and recreational importance of World’s Fair venues.
Montreal
Travel Recommendation Websites: St. Helen’s Island and Notre Dame Island are mentioned
by only one of the three websites, being enthusiastically recognized as outstanding places to
visit.
Trip Advisor: St. Helen’s Island is ranked in the Top Quartile and Notre Dame Island is
ranked in the Second Quartile. Neither island is ranked in the Top 30 for Montreal.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: There are no hotels inside the venue or
bordering its perimeter. 33
Figure 2.6. Location of Flushing Meadows/Corona Park in New York City (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
34
St. Helen’s Island and Notre Dame Island are presented by the city’s tourism website as being important tourist attractions in the city, but travel advice writers, the traveling public, and hotel builders don’t share that enthusiasm, although the lack of hotels in either island could be the result of several factors, one of which may be building and/or zoning restrictions.
There have been rejected calls to link St. Helen’s and Notre Dame Islands to Montreal’s old port via an air gondola (The Montreal Gazette, 2009), but plans to provide the islands, which form part of the Jacques Drapeau Park with an upgrade “to turn them into a tourism and urban destination” (The Montreal Gazette, 2014). Montreal also reflects recent recognition of the tourism and recreational value of an upgraded World’s Fair former venue.
San Antonio
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues, San
Antonio earns a low score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website presents
Hemisfair Park among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Hemisfair Park is acknowledged as a place to visit by one
of the websites but is not highlighted as an outstanding place to visit.
Trip Advisor: Hemisfair Park is ranked in the Second Quartile and is not one of the Top 30
attractions.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: Hemisfair Park has the second-highest
number of hotels that fit inside this category, with a hotel count of 4.
Though the perimeter of Hemisfair Park registers four hotels, the park is not highly regarded
by municipal websites, travel writers or tourists.
Recently, redevelopment plans were announced (San Antonio Express-News, 2013a; 2013b)
to turn the park, which had been determined to be “an underutilized resource for 35
Figure 2.7. St. Helen’s and Notre Dame Islands in Montreal. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
36
Figure 2.8. Hemisfair Park in San Antonio. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
37
locals and visitors” (San Antonio Express-News, 2011), into a “world class civic park” (San
Antonio Express-News, 2013b). San Antonio joins the group of cities that see the tourism and recreational value of upgrading its even venue.
Spokane
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Spokane earns a low score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website presents
Riverfront Park among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Riverfront Park is mentioned by two of the three
websites, being enthusiastically recognized as outstanding places to visit in both.
Trip Advisor: Riverfront Park is among the Top 5 attractions in Spokane.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: There are no hotels inside the venue or
bordering its perimeter.
Riverfront Park is highly regarded by travel advice writers and by tourists who have visited
Spokane.
The legacy of the former venue as a valuable urban park and as a tourist attraction has been noticed by media outlets outside of Spokane (Seattle Times, 2008; The Tennessean 2014) as well as in Spokane (The Spokesman-Review, 1995). In November, 2014 Spokane voters approved the issuing of park improvement bonds (The Spokesman-Review, 2014), helping Spokane join the ranks of cities with valued and upgraded venues.
Knoxville
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Knoxville earns a moderate-to-high score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism
website presents World’s Fair Park among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer. 38
Figure 2.9. Riverfront Park in Spokane. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
39
Travel Recommendation Websites: World’s Fair Park does not receive any kind of mention
in any of these websites.
Trip Advisor: World’s Fair Park was ranked within the Top 20 attractions, but in terms of
quartiles, its #15 ranking out of 51 attractions placed in in the Second Quartile.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: One hotel fits inside this category.
Other than World Fair’s Park presence in the municipal tourism website, the park importance for tourism is among the lowest overall for venues.
Tennessee-based publications from Knoxville, Nashville, and Memphis did not show any articles when a search was made about the city’s World’s Fair Park. Though the former venue now exists as an urban park, but it does not appear to play a noticeable or significant role in the city’s tourism scene.
Vancouver
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Vancouver earns a moderate-to-high score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism
website presents Canada Place among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Canada Place is the only venue that is mentioned by the
three websites, being enthusiastically recognized as outstanding places to visit by two of the
three websites.
Trip Advisor: While ranked in the Top Quartile of attractions, Canada Place was not ranked
as a Top 30 attraction.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: Vancouver is one of only four cities with
hotels that fit inside this category, with a count of 2.
40
Figure 2.10. World’s Fair Park in Knoxville. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
41
Figure 2.11. Canada Place in Vancouver. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
42
While traveler rankings do not place Canada Place near the top of Vancouver’s attractions, the former venue is depicted as an important tourism attraction by the municipal travel website and by travel advice writers. There were no results shown when a search was done for printed media sources for Vancouver.
Canada Place’s tourism and recreational legacy seems to be mixed, playing a more important role within tourism website and travel website writers than it does among travelers to the city.
Seville
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Seville earns a moderate-to-high score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism
website presents Cartuja Island among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Cartuja Island is mentioned by only one of the three
websites, being recognized as an outstanding place to visit.
Trip Advisor: Cartuja Island did not receive any mentions on Trip Advisor.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: There are no hotels inside the venue or
bordering its perimeter.
The municipal tourism website presents Cartuja Island as a notable tourist attraction, but travel advice writers, tourists, and hotel builders do not rate the island as highly.
Printed media coverage in Spain presents a problematic picture for Cartuja Island/Magic
Island. The creation of the Magic Island theme park was announced in 1996 (El País, 1996) and it opened in 1997 being dubbed as ‘the first urban theme park in the world’ (El País, 1997). As early in the history of the theme park as 2001, and repeatedly since then, Spanish publications have reported on announcements that Magic Island is in danger of shutting down (ABC, 2001,
2002, 2008, 2011a; El País, 2013), on the shortening of the park’s tourist season and the 43
Figure 2.12. Cartuja Island in Seville. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
44
suspension of the sale of season passes for the following year’s season (ABC, 2012, 2013) on the need for a government bailout in order for the attraction to remain open (El País, 2004b), on the possibility of having to relocate the theme park so that the land can be used to expand the research park facilities that exist on Cartuja Island (ABC, 2010) and on acknowledgements that theme parks are a mismatch with local Spanish culture and are mostly unprofitable (El País,
2004a, 2007, 2014; ABC, 2011b). The tourism legacy of the former venue in Seville is a weak type of legacy that may disappear completely in the future.
Lisbon
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Lisbon earns the highest score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website
presents the Park of Nations among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: The Park of Nations receives no mention by any of the
three websites.
Trip Advisor: The Park of Nations was ranked 27th out of 242 attractions, placing it in the
Top Quartile of attractions.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: Lisbon’s venue has by far the largest
number of hotels, eight, which is twice as many as the number of hotels in or adjacent to the
venue with the second-highest number.
Though travel advice writers do not mention Park of Nations as tourist attraction that is worth a visit, the municipal tourism website promotes the former venue aggressively, giving the park the most prominent place of all ten municipal tourism websites for their venues. The park is one of only two former venues that are ranked both as a Top 30 attraction and as a Top Quartile attraction. 45
Figure 2.13. Park of Nations (Parque das Nações) in eastern Lisbon. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
46
Print media in Portugal discusses the Park of Nations zone more as a regenerated neighborhood and as a business district, than as a tourist attraction, but there has been mention of the tourism sector as well. The supply of hotel rooms increased throughout the 1990s, in part thanks to Expo ’98 along with a healthy local and global economy throughout the decade (Diario de Notícias, 2005). In 2007 plans were approved to build a 5-star hotel inside the park, to be built right next to the iconic Vasco da Gama Tower, which had been marked for demolition (Diario de
Notícias, 2007).
The Park of Nations stands out overall as a highly notable tourist attraction, even if travel advice writers don’t recommend it. The importance of the former venue as presented by the other platforms that were evaluated in this study indicate that the tourism legacy of this venue is widely recognized in Lisbon.
Zaragoza
Municipal Tourism Website: When compared to the other nine cities and their venues,
Zaragoza earns a high score with the analysis of how the municipal tourism website presents
Recinto Expo, or Expo Campus, among the tourist attractions that the city has to offer.
Travel Recommendation Websites: Recinto Expo receives no mention by any of the three
websites.
Trip Advisor: Recinto Expo did not receive any mentions on Trip Advisor.
Hotels within the venue, or bordering the perimeter: One hotel fits inside this category.
Though the municipal website presents the former World’s Fair grounds as a notable tourist attraction, travel advice writers and tourists ignore Recinto Expo.
Printed media in Spain reports to there not being a positive legacy for the World’s Fair that took place in Zaragoza in 2008. Immediately after the Expo ended, the city’s mayor was 47
Figure 2.14. Recinto (Campus) Expo in Zaragoza. (Source: Google Maps, 2015)
48 lamenting the fact that attendance figures that fell below expectations meant that the city did not achieve the international attention that the event was expected to give to the city (El País,
2008a). Later in the same year an announcement was made that the venue would become a business park, while keeping the aquarium, its hotel, and two pavilions that would be turned into museums (El País, 2008b). Less than a year after the event ended the venue already seemed to be in ruins (ABC, 2009), and as recently as June, 2014 there was still no evidence that the business park would ever materialize, and the venue at that point had brought on losses that amounted to more than €700 million (ABC, 2014).
The World’s Fair in Zaragoza failed to meet expectations and the former venue has not met expectations as a tourist attraction or as playing any other kind of role. This could be explained by the fact that Zaragoza is not as popular a tourist attraction as other cities or as coastal locations are in Spain. If the city planners expected Zaragoza to become a tourist destination with long-lasting increased popularity, their goals were not reached.
2.6. Conclusion
Overall the legacy of World’s Fair venues in the ten cities that were studied is one in which the venue has endured long after the event ended, and to varying degrees for each city, an enduring venue also represents a tourist attraction for the city. In Lisbon the venue has become a significant tourist attraction even though the city is an ancient European capital with a wide range of tourist attractions. Other cities appear to have neglected their World’s Fair venues for long periods of time but recently have taken steps to upgrade them, in what could be interpreted as a reflection of changes in tourist interests and behaviors and/or a rediscovery of the tourism value of those venues. 49
In some locations, such as Zaragoza and Knoxville, neither the event nor the surviving venue represented tangible gains in popularity when compared to other cities in their respective regions or countries. In New York the venue serves more as a local urban park than as a tourist attraction. In cities with a perception of having a large amount of tourist attractions, such as
Seattle, Vancouver, and Seville, the venues are tourist attractions but are not perceived as standing out among the many attractions in those cities. Only in Lisbon does the World’s Fair venue represent a notable tourist attraction even though the city has more than 240 tourist attractions.
The discussion of the venues as separate entities does provide evidence of the tourism and recreational legacy of World’s Fairs. Still, a discussion of mega-event structures as tourist attractions (Chapter 3) and an in-depth discussion of the how the Park of Nations in Lisbon has been able to intertwine tourism, recreation, and urban renewal (Chapter 4) will add will provide a broader, more comprehensive set of empirical evidence that will strengthen the significance of the findings in this study about the tourism and recreational legacy of World’s Fairs.
50
CHAPTER 3 – The Tourism Legacy of post-World War II World’s Fairs in North America
and the Iberian Peninsula: Mega-event Structures as Tourist Attractions
3.1. Introduction
This chapter performs an analysis that is similar to that of Chapter 2, applied to Mega-Event
Structures as Tourist Attractions in cities in the Iberian Peninsula that have hosted World’s Fairs after World War II. Narrowing this discussion to three cities that are located in the same region and that hosted a World’s Fair in 1992, 1998, and 2008 serves a transition point between the broad discussion of venues in Chapter 2 and the specific case of Lisbon in Chapter 4.
The role that structures that were built for the event play in the tourism scene in the three
Iberian Peninsula cities of Seville, Lisbon, and Zaragoza will be analyzed by looking at figures and observations from municipal tourism websites, the discussion and ratings from travel writers on the travel advice websites Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet, the readers’ ratings on multi-purpose travel website Trip Advisor. Using an approach that is similar to that of the previous chapter, the first section of this chapter will show results in table and graph form. The second section will discuss results on a city-by-city basis, and will include attendance numbers for MESTAs that keep track of the number of visitors. The third section will present concluding statements.
In Seville, some of the surviving event structures were incorporated into a theme park called
Isla Mágica. It is important to note that there are parts of the World’s Fair venue in Cartuja
Island that are not part of the theme park, but they are not identified as tourist attractions. In
Lisbon, there are three event structures that were planned as tourist attractions, an aquarium, a science museum, and a metal tower, and a structure that was not planned as a tourist attraction 51 but has become one, and is located adjacent to the periphery of the venue, the Gare do Oriente intermodal transit station. In Zaragoza, the event structure that was planned as a tourist attraction is also an aquarium, and the structure that was not planned to be a tourist attraction is, as is the case of Lisbon, an intermodal transit station.
3.2. Results from Municipal Tourism Websites, Travel Advice Websites, and Trip Advisor
Municipal Tourism Websites
Individual results for each city will be listed in table form. In addition to responses, the entries will show point values for the answers.
Point System for observations made 11/29/2014:
Home Page – 1 point 1 click from homepage – 0.8 points 2 clicks from homepage – 0.6 points 3 clicks from homepage – 0.4 points 4 or more clicks from homepage – 0.2 point No mention – 0 points Yes/No categories: Yes – 1 point No – 0 points Otherwise: Appearing on the municipal website – 1 point Appearing on link to venue that is included in municipal website – 0.5 points No mention – 0 points
The scores for the structures were lower than those for the venue in in each one of Seville,
Lisbon, and Zaragoza, but the structures in the three cities still stand out as prominent tourist attractions according to their cities’ municipal tourism websites. Instead of being presented to information seekers as separate, independent entities, these structures receive recognition as separate attractions as well as for being part of the venues in the tourism websites for the three cities.
52
Information Sought Seville Structures Photographic reference on homepage? No - 0 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 3 clicks, 0.4 points Weblinks to venue & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? Yes - 1 Reference to mega-event in description of [Note - the venue is part research park, part former venue or of structure? private theme park; most structures were dismantled] Yes - 1 Point Total: Structures/Venue 3.4/4.4 Table 3.1. Observations from Visita Sevilla (2014)
Information Sought Lisbon Structures Photographic reference on homepage? Yes - 1 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 1 clicks, 0.8 points Weblinks to venue & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? not on municipal website; yes on individual website – 0.5 Explanation of how to get there? not on municipal website; yes on individual website – 0.5 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total: Structures/Venue 4.8/5.8 Table 3.2. Observations from Turismo de Portugal – Lisboa (2014)
Information Sought Zaragoza Structures Photographic reference on homepage? Yes - 1 Written reference on homepage? No - 0 How many clicks from homepage? 1 click, 0.8 points Weblinks to venue & structures? Yes - 1 Mention of location within city? Yes - 1 Explanation of how to get there? No - 0 Reference to mega-event in description of Yes - 1 former venue or of structure? Point Total: Structures/Venue 4.8/6.0 Table 3.3. Observations from Turismo Zaragoza (2014)
54
Opinions of writers from Fodor’s, Frommer’s, and Lonely Planet
Global results will be listed for each city in table form. The venues and their scores are included in the tables and will be presented in italics.
Fodor’s:
Point System Based on Observation for Venues from Fodor’s; Date: 11/30/2014 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Mentioned 2 = Outstanding Mention/ Top Things to Do (TTD)
Frommer’s:
Point System Based on Observations for Venues from Frommer’s; Date: 11/30/2014 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = 1 star 2 = 2 stars 3 = 3 stars
Lonely Planet
Point System Based on Observations for MESTAs from Lonely Planet; Date: 11/30/2014 Numbers 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = 5th page or further (4 clicks or more) 2 = 3rd or 4th page (2 or 3 clicks) 3 = 2nd page (1 click) 4 = 1st page 5 = ‘Top’ attraction/ sight
Lisbon is the city for which there is a more marked difference between how the three advice websites view the venues and how they view the MESTAs. The Park of Nations did not receive any mentions, but for each one of the websites one, two, or three of the city’s four event structures received notable mentions. For Seville, one of the three websites ignored the venue and the event structure, and the information in the other two websites provided scores for the event structures that matched or beat the score for the venue. The event structures in Zaragoza were completely ignored by the three websites, just as its venue was. The structures that serve a 55
City Score Venue & MESTAs Seville 2 Isla de La Cartuja: TTD/ Sights, 1 of 29 2 Isla Mágica Park: Included in the Description of Isla de la Cartuja Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM 2 Oceanarium: Attractions ‘Fodor’s Choice”/ “Top Sights” TTD Sights, one of 50 mentioned 2 Science Museum: TTD Sights one of 50 0 mentioned 0 Oriente Staion: NM Vasco da Gama Tower: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM 0 River Aquarium: NM 0 Zaragoza Delicias Station: NM Table 3.4. Observations from Fodor’s Travel (2014)
City Score Venue and MESTAs Seville 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM 0 Isla Mágica Park: NM Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM 2 Oceanarium: Mentioned in Attractions, given a rating of ** (10 Lisbon attractions rated*, 14 0 attractions rated**, 4 attractions rated***) 0 Science Museum: NM 0 Oriente Staion: NM Vasco da Gama Tower: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM 0 River Aquarium: NM 0 Zaragoza Delicias Station: NM Table 3.5. Observations from Frommer’s (2014)
City Score Venue & MESTAs Seville 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM 2 Isla Mágica Park: 3rd page (2 clicks) on Sights, 40 listed Lisbon 0 Park of Nations: NM 4 Oceanarium: Attractions – first page of ‘sights’, 76 listed 3 Science Museum: 3rd page (2 clicks) of ‘sights’ 1 Oriente Staion: 5th page (4 clicks) of ‘sights’ 0 Vasco da Gama Tower: NM Zaragoza 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM 0 River Aquarium: NM 0 Zaragoza Delicias Station: NM Table 3.6. Observations from Lonely Planet (2014)
57
function, Lisbon’s Oceanarium and Lisbon’s Science Museum rate the highest, with the
Oceanarium being the only structure that is recommended by all three websites, and the Science
Museum receiving the second-highest rating overall. The structures in Isla Mágica in Seville are mentioned in two of the three websites, rating slightly lower than Lisbon’s Science Museum.
Lisbon’s Oriente Station is recommended as an attraction by only website, while Zaragoza’s
Delicias Station is ignored by the websites. Lisbon’s Vasco da Gama Tower, which serves no function other than being visually present in the Park of Nations and being attached to a hotel that was built adjacent to it, was not mentioned as a worthwhile tourist attraction by any of the websites.
Readers’ ratings from Trip Advisor
Trip Advisor collects ratings and opinions from tourists. The observations for these tables were made 11/30/2014.
Trip Advisor Scoring System A, by ranking 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Ranked 31 or lower 2 = Ranked 21-30 3 = Ranked 11-20 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
Trip Advisor Scoring System B, by ranking (1-10) and by quartile 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Ranked Third or Fourth Quartile 2 = Ranked Second Quartile 3 = Ranked Top Quartile but Not in Top 10 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
Except for the ‘Scoring A’ method scores for two of Lisbon’s four structures, the scores for the ‘Scoring A’ and ‘Scoring B’ methods either match or beat the scores for the cities’ venues.
This type of difference between scores for venues and event structures is similar to the results
59 that were observed in the analysis of travel advice websites. Contrary to the travel advice websites’ ignoring of the event structures, the structures in Zaragoza and Lisbon’s Vasco da
Gama Tower are acknowledged as tourist attractions, although they are lowly-rated. Travel advice writers’ recommendations reflect what they consider as the most notable tourist attractions, perhaps assuming that potential or returning tourists either will visit the destinations for a relatively short period of time or that they only want to see the top attractions and don’t want to explore beyond the established tourist attractions, with Lonely Planet being somewhat of an exception. Travelers who post their opinions on Trip Advisor, on the other hand, do explore and venture out beyond what is usually recommended by travel advice writers because of influencing factors such as municipal tourism websites, local tourist information offices and booths, word of mouth, and the recommendations of locals. The differences in approaches to what constitutes a worthwhile tourist attraction by travel advice writers and tourists may help explain the differences in the ratings of venues and event structures that have been made evident in the analysis above.
3.3. Discussion
City-by-city observations
Seville
According to Ayuntamiento de Sevilla (2014), in 2013 Seville welcomed 2,891,656 tourists.
El Correo de Andalucía (2013) reported that for the season that had just ended in 2013 the Isla
Mágica theme park had received around 320,000 visitors, well short of the 650,000-700,000 visitors that had been forecast. In 2013 the park also welcomed its visitor number 15 million
(Diario de Sevilla, 2013). Isla Mágica opened in 1997 (El País, 1997), giving it an average of more than 882,000 visitors per year, which means attendance figures for 2013 are more than half 60 a million visitors below the average figures, implying a steep decline in attendance from earlier years. Dividing the attendance numbers by the number of tourists for 2013, 11.07% of tourists in
Seville visited the park. Municipal website writers give a prominent presence to Isla Mágica on their website, but travel advice writers and travelers give only modest attention and ratings to the set of Mega-event structures as tourist attractions.
Lisbon
Instituto Nacional de Estatística/ Statistics Portugal (2014, 2013, 2012) reports its tourism numbers in terms of number of people who stay in lodging establishments and in registered tourist apartments and tourist rooms, and the number of tourists in Lisbon was 3,176,138 for
2013, 2,949,579 for 2012, and 2,856,574 for 2011. The most recent information regarding the numbers of visitors to the Oceanarium (SIC Notícias, 2013) were for 2012, was 920,000 visitors, which was lower than it was for the previous year (SIC Notícias, 2013). The Oceanarium registered its visitor number 18 million in its sixteenth year of operation, for an average of 1.125 million visitors per year. The most recently published attendance numbers for the Science
Museum was an average of 850 visitors per day, or around 310,250 visitors per year (TV
Ciência, 2011). Dividing the most recent numbers for attendance and using those numbers as attendance numbers for 2013, and dividing by the number of tourists in Lisbon, 31.19% of tourists in Lisbon visited the Oceanarium in 2012, and 10.86% of tourists in Lisbon visited the
Science Museum in 2011. The Lisbon Oceanarium has been very successful among tourists, being visited by almost a third of all tourists in Lisbon, a historic European capital with more than 200 attractions, in 2012. The Science Museum has a percentage of visitors to the city that visit the structure that is slightly lower than that of Seville’s Isla Mágica. The Vasco da Gama
Tower serves no function other than that of being looked at, and is ranked low by travel advice 61 writers and by tourists. The (Gare de) Oriente Station was not intended to be a mega-event structure as a tourist attraction, but it has become a tourist attraction in Lisbon that is rated higher than the Vasco da Gama Tower.
Zaragoza
According to Zaragoza Turismo (2014), Zaragoza hosted 773,497 tourists in 2013, 799,011 in
2011, and 799,938 in 2010. Attendance figures for the Aquarium were around 60,000 in 2013
(Heraldo, 2014), 55,000, its lowest attendance numbers yet at that point (El Periódico de
Aragón, 2012), and 68,000 in 2010 (Aragón Digital, 2010). The percentage of tourists in
Zaragoza who visited the Aquarium was 7.76% in 2013, 6.88% in 2011, and 8.50% in 2010. In order to break even, attendance numbers for the Aquarium should be at least 85,000 per year (El
Periódico de Aragón, 2012). The Zaragoza Aquarium is the event structure that has the lowest percentage of visitors to the city visiting the attraction among the four event structures for which this kind of information was calculated. The structure is prominent in the municipal tourism website but it is ranked in the second quartile of attractions on Trip Advisor and it is completely ignored by travel advice writers. The Delicias Station was not intended to be a mega-event structure as a tourist attraction, and other than being ranked in the bottom half of attractions in
Zaragoza, but still considered a tourist attraction by tourists nonetheless, it is not considered as a tourist attraction by travel advice writers.
3.4. Conclusion
The study of the Mega-event Structures as Tourist Attractions (MESTAs) that were discussed in this chapter provides findings that are useful for planners and decision-makers that might be interesting in determining the potential tourism value of hosting a mega-event. 62
Tourists City/Visitors Structure x 35 100% 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Tourists City/Visitors Structure x 100%
Figure 3.4. Percentage of visitors to each city that visit each MESTA for which attendance records are kept.
63
In order to discuss the visitor potential of the event structures, Figure 3.4 shows the percentage of visitors to the city that visit the event structure.
The Lisbon Oceanarium stands out as an attraction that in 2012 was visited by almost one of every three visitors to a city that offers more than two hundred tourist attractions. For the other three MESTAs the numbers are more consistent, with between 7% and 11% of tourists in their cities visiting those attractions. The popularity of the Lisbon Oceanarium MESTA could be due to the contents of the aquarium itself. It could also be due to the fact that the MESTA is located inside the Park of Nations, in itself another popular tourist attraction. Though still relatively highly-rated, the Science Museum in Lisbon, also located inside the Park of Nations, receives only about one-third of the number of visitors that the Oceanarium receives. The lower attendance numbers could be explained by the contents of the museum itself, or it could be that the Science Museum is overshadowed by the more popular Oceanarium that is only a few meters away from the museum. Tourists in the Park of Nations might not have the financial and/or time resources to visit both the Oceanarium and the Science Museum.
The percentage of tourists to the MESTAs in Seville and Zaragoza is similar to that of
Lisbon’s Science Museum. This could mean that the high percentage of tourists in Lisbon visiting the Oceanarium could be an outlier and that a range of 7%-11% is the norm for
MESTAs. Or the numbers for Seville and Zaragoza could be explained that the MESTAs in
Seville are part of a privately-owned theme park that appears to have declining visitor numbers, and the MESTA in Zaragoza, though it is an aquarium, it contains only exhibits from river environments. This departure from the ordinary aquarium makes the Zaragoza Aquarium more unique, but it is not able to host the colorful and more impressive types of exhibits that most aquariums such as the Oceanarium do provide, and that visitors that have visited other aquariums 64 might expect to see even if they are aware that the exhibits in Zaragoza contain only river environments.
MESTAs are created for different purposes, at different times, and in different locations and although they are built with the expectation that they will become popular tourist attractions, they cannot be expected to all be equally successful. In terms of the role that the MESTAs play in municipal tourism websites for Seville, Lisbon, and Zaragoza, all three websites make sure that the MESTAs are easily identified as notable attractions and as part of the image of the city, in terms of urban landscapes and tourist experience potential, that the websites intend to provide for information seekers.
In terms of how travel advice websites and the website in which travelers rate the attractions value the MESTAs, there is a difference between the Lisbon MESTAs on one side and the
Seville and Zaragoza MESTAs on the other. Though Lisbon and Zaragoza have aquariums and
MESTAs, the Lisbon Oceanarium is much better regarded by advice writers and tourists than the
Zaragoza Aquarium is. The Oceanarium and the Science Museum in Lisbon are rated higher than
Seville’s Isla Mágica, but Isla Mágica rates higher than Lisbon’s Oriente Station and the Vasco da Gama Tower, and Zaragoza’s MESTAs which travel writers completely ignore. As far as ratings from tourists on Trip Advisor, Lisbon’s lowest-rated MESTA, the Vasco da Gama
Tower, matches or beats the ratings for the Seville and Zaragoza MESTAs.
The way in which the MESTAs in Seville are regarded and rated may be influenced by the fact that they are part of a private theme park instead of being part of an urban park or of an open-access part of Cartuja Island in the city. The fact that the most recently available attendance numbers indicate that attendance for 2013 was 500,000 below what the average attendance numbers would be over the existence of the park could indicate that the park is outdated or is 65 losing its appeal as a tourist attraction. For Lisbon, MESTAs that serve a function (aquarium, museum) are more highly-regarded and –rated than the unintended MESTA that has the function of intermodal public transit hub (Oriente Station), which in turn is more highly-regarded and – rated than the structure that serves no purpose other than that of being a visible icon in the Park of Nations, the Vasco da Gama Tower. In Zaragoza, the MESTA that serves a function, the aquarium, is more highly-regarded and highly-rated than the city’s unintended MESTA that also serves the function of intermodal transit hub (Delicias Station).
The next chapter focuses on Lisbon’s Park of Nations and its MESTAs and how the Expo ’98
World’s Fair intertwines a tourism legacy with an urban renewal legacy. This focus on Lisbon may help explain why Lisbon’s venue and MESTAs stand out among all of the venues and
MESTAs in the ten World’s Fair host cities that this dissertation has studied.
66
CHAPTER 4 – New Urbanism, Tourism, and Urban Regeneration in Eastern Lisbon, Portugal
4.1. Introduction
In 1998 the city of Lisbon, Portugal hosted a mega-event, the World’s Fair known as Expo
’98. A zone in the eastern part of the city along the Tagus River that contained mostly abandoned industrial and warehouse installations, as well as low-cost housing, was cleared and decontaminated in order to build the venue for the Expo. Adjacent to the venue the intermodal
Oriente station was built to facilitate the flow of visitors to the event. After the event, the venue took on a new role as a city park, the Parque das Nações, or Park of Nations. The Park includes attractions such as an Oceanarium and a Science and Discovery Museum, an arena for different types of events, a pavilion for expositions, a casino, restaurants, a cable car ride, green spaces, and paved spaces for strolling and running. The Oriente station remains an intermodal facility that links the Lisbon Metro (which extended its Red Line to link the station with a new stop at the Lisbon International Airport in 2012), urban, intercity, and international buses, commuter, interurban, and international rail service, as well as a taxi stand and underground parking for automobiles. Adjacent to the Park of Nations there is a shopping mall, and there are hotels, office and apartment buildings, shops and restaurants, public facilities, and a campus for the Lisbon court system. The Park of Nations and its surrounding area (Figure 1) have become what has been identified by visitlisboa.com as a ‘tourism zone’ (Turismo de Portugal, 2014).
The traditional tourism zones in Lisbon, the central/historical part of the city, and the collection of monuments that in the Lisbon parish of Belém, are now complemented by a new tourism zone that instead of being a tourism enclave blends tourism with activities for locals that are linked to leisure, recreation, entertainment and ordinary urban activities. Tourism is only one of many functions that are carried out in this new tourist zone. This blending of functions in an 67 urban space is the core of the New Urbanism movement. While there is no evidence that planners in Lisbon were using New Urbanism to guide their decision-making, this study uses the case study method, taking observations made by the author in the Park of Nations zone and information obtained from academic journals and online editions of printed media, and evaluating the observations and information within the context of the Charter of New
Urbanism’s Main Practices and the Charter’s Canons of Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism in order to determine the effects that ideas that are similar to those of New Urbanism have had on the recently-developed Park of Nations and its surrounding area in Lisbon.
4.2. Theory and Definition of New Urbanism
New Urbanism is a movement that provides guidelines for the redevelopment of urban and suburban land. With “roots in the neotraditional town planning of Andres Duany and Elizabeth
Plater-Zyberk and influenced by the transit-development concepts of Peter Calthorpe, New
Urbanism became veritable gospel in the 1990s” (Grant, 2002, p. 73, similarly stated by Knaap and Talen, 2005). These two influences account for two streams within New Urbanism. Duany and Plater-Zyberk’s stream is influenced by traditional neighborhood design (TDN), while transit-oriented development (TOD) advocates for “concentrated development in nodes associated with transit stations” (Grant, 2002, p. 74). “TOD supports urban infill and redevelopment approaches,” and it is preferred by advocates of urban sustainability, while “the
TND model works best with greenfield development on new suburban sites” with growth
“occurring at the urban edge” (Grant, 2002, p. 74).
New Urbanism is a departure from what had been the prevalent single-use urban zoning laws and practices. With New Urbanism, a city center or core is defined by space that can be considered public (De Villers, 1997). Mixed-use zones are at the core of New Urbanism, 68
although mixed use does not mean a random “jumble of uses” (Grant, 2002, p. 74). It does mean a compatible combination of spaces dedicated to residential, commercial, institutional, leisure, and entertainment uses as well as green spaces, all within a compact zone that facilitates pedestrian displacement and alternatives to automobile transportation. “The agenda of New
Urbanism is articulated in the charter of the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU), founded in
1993 by a coalition of architects, planners, and environmental advocates” (Knaap and Tallen,
2005, p. 109). The Charter of the New Urbanism’s Main Practices (The Congress for the New
Urbanism, 2001a) advocates for the following:
“Neighborhoods that are diverse in use and population”. These neighborhoods should be
compact and, with the mix of uses within them, should encourage all levels of interaction
and liveliness, and should house residents from all income levels. The public and the
private sector should be present in these neighborhoods.
“Designs that facilitate pedestrian traffic and public transportation as well as automobile
traffic”. These designs account for many walkable areas that are served by convenient
access to public transportation stops and facilities that help connect residents, employees,
shoppers, and visitors with their residences, businesses and service providers, institutions,
and open spaces and parks.
“Neighborhoods should include public spaces and public institutions”. Leisure and
entertainment are among the uses that should be given to land in the neighborhood, and
public green and park spaces should be available and placed within a walkable distance
and/or within easy reach of public transportation.
“Architecture and landscape designs that reflect local history, climate, ecology, and
building practice” 69
The Charter also includes Principles and Canons (The Congress for the New Urbanism,
2001b) that help provide more guidelines for the main practices in the Charter, and they provide other types of guidelines as well. Below are the ones that are relevant to this study and which are not directly linked to the practices:
Principles:
For infill development or development of marginal or abandoned areas, there should be
economic investment that maintain social fabric and conserves environmental resources
(Principle 4)
“Development of underutilized, poorly-developed, or already-developed land, preferably
infill areas” (Canons, The Neighborhood, Town, and City, 2)
Redevelopment of brownfields, including decontamination (Canons, The Neighborhood,
Town, and City, 6)
Sustainable practices should be encouraged, such as the protection of bodies of water
(Canons, The Neighborhood, Town, and City, 7; Regions, 7) and the use of renewable
energy sources (Canons, Building and Infrastructure, 7).
The fact that not all principles and canons are listed here confirms that this study does not mean to state that the legacy of the mega-event which was the Expo ’98 World’s Fair, the Park of Nations and its surrounding area, labeled in this study as the Park of Nations zone, is the result of implementing all of the principles and canons in the Charter for the New Urbanism. What this study seeks to do is, using the case study method, to demonstrate that some New Urbanism ideas, or ideas that are identical to them, were indeed taken into account in the planning process of what became the Park of Nations zone and the implementation of these ideas has resulted in the emergence of a successful new downtown as well as a successful new tourism zone in Lisbon. 70
4.3. Pre- and Post-Expo ‘98
In terms of the literature and commentary that was produced before Expo ’98 took place, as well as what has been produced after the event, many topics that reflect guidelines similar to those encouraged by New Urbanism are discussed.
Among the reasons why city planners seek to be awarded the hosting of special events are the regeneration of a city (Bramwell, 1997; Burbank, Andranovich and Heying, 2002; del Romero and Trudelle, 2011), and as an investment in the tourist sector (Bramwell, 1997; Burbank,
Andranovich and Heying, 2002; and Getz, 2008). Lisbon applied to host Expo ’98 in order to commemorate in 1998 “the 500th anniversary of Vasco da Gama’s discovery of a sea route to
India” (Expo Museum, 2015). By seeking to host the ocean-themed (Expo Museum, 2015) Expo, planners sought to redevelop the eastern part of the city (McArthur, 1997; Carrière and
Demazière 2002; and García, 2010), “to strengthen the image and competitiveness of the city”
(Carrière and Demazière, 2002, p.71), “to integrate the eastern part of the city into the Lisbon
Metro area” (Carrière and Demazière, 2002, p. 74), to “alleviate the shortage of office and hotel space” (McArthur, 1997, p. 35), and “to re-establish a relationship between the city and the river” (Loures and Panagopoulos, 2007, p. 183) by incorporating the waterfront into the redevelopment plan (Garcia, 2010).
The idea to organize Expo ’98 first emerged in 1989. In 1991 a Bid Committee was formed, and Lisbon was awarded the hosting of the Expo in 1992 (Parque Expo, 2015a). After the city was awarded the mega-event, a brownfield site in northeastern Lisbon (White, 1996) that is frequently described as a run-down industrial zone (McArthur, 1997; Spier, 1998; Bacon, 2002;
Carrière and Demazière, 2002; Loures and Panagopoulos, 2007; Pereira and Nofre, 2011) was chosen as the site to decontaminate and redevelop, first as the venue for the World’s Fair, Expo 71
’98, and then as an urban park and tourist attraction, now known as the Park of Nations, and, around the perimeter of the park, a new neighborhood in Lisbon. The redevelopment was done by a public-private partnership operated by the Parque Expo (Pereira and Nofre, 2011) corporation. This corporation operates as a private enterprise (Parque Expo, 2015a), but its stakeholders are 100 percent public with the Republic of Portugal owning 99.78% of shares and
Cámara Municipal de Lisboa owning 0.22%. (Jornal de Negócios, 2014a). After Expo ’98,
Parque Expo organized events throughout Portugal, as well as in places such as southern Europe,
Balkan states, the Maghreb, and Portuguese-speaking African nations (Parque Expo, 2015b).
More recently, in 2014, it was announced that, as planned earlier, and no later than 2016, the corporation will be dissolved because of accumulated deficits and because the goal of redevelopment of the Park of Nations zone had been achieved in its entirety (Diário de Notícias,
2011; Jornal de Negócios, 2014a).
There were high expectations for how the area around the perimeter of the Park of Nations would develop. Even before the Expo took place, it was expected that this area would develop buildings, facilities, and infrastructure that would facilitate a multitude of uses within the zone, such as residences, hotels, shopping and restaurant facilities, leisure spaces, parks, offices, hospitals, government facilities, and facilities in support of the tourism industry (White, 1996;
Anonymous, 1998; Reina, 1998; Mendes, 2001/2002; Bacon, 2002; Goodspeed, 2007; Loures and Panagopoulos, 2007; Duarte Gil, 2009). The expectations came true as the Park of Nations, as well as the surrounding newly-developed area, the Park of Nations zone, developed to become what has been described as ‘new city’, ‘new city core’, ‘new center’, and ‘new downtown’, in terms of the new economic activity and foot traffic that developed (Mendes, 2001/2002;
Serdoura and Nunes da Silva, 2006; Aelbrecht. 2010; Garcia, 2010; Pereira and Nofre, 2011), 72 with Bacon (2002) stating that the area has been described as an invented city, which went from being an industrial wasteland to being a futuristic neighborhood with spectacular architecture. It should be noted that in the literature and in the commentary that discuss Lisbon’s new downtown there is no mention of the emergence of this new downtown as having come at the expense of more established city centers elsewhere in Lisbon. The Expo-related redevelopment was not without controversy. Pereira and Nofre (2011) make reference to the about 1,000 residents that were displaced in order to redevelop this land. The residents in this run-down area lived in low- cost housing. The forced relocation of these residents was controversial, even in spite of the fact that the cost of the relocation was covered entirely by the Portuguese government and the guarantee that those who lived in government-subsidized housing would keep their housing subsidies.
Though Lisbon is located along the northern bank of the Tagus River, historically the city had very limited open views of the river, mostly a stretch that in length roughly equaled the width of
Comércio Square. One of the aims of the development of the Park of Nations zone was to open up Tagus River frontage and to preserve it permanently (Bacon, 2002; Loures and Panagopoulos,
2007; Garcia, 2010). This type of river frontage creation is an integral part of the Park of Nations as it dominates the views in the Park. More recently, the opening up of river frontage has continued, specifically in central Lisbon where the river frontage was expanded from Comércio
Square westward (Cámara Municipal de Lisboa, 2014).
The 1990s marked the beginning of a “new urbanistic” mentality in Lisbon (Serdoura and
Nunes da Silva, 2006) that sought to create with would be, “for lack of a better term, a post- modern type of city” (Mendes, 2001/2002, p.87), and it was in the 1990s that the Park of Nations zone was in its planning stages. The development of the Park of Nations zone is indeed an 73 example of in-fill, Transit-Oriented Development rather than suburban Traditional Neighborhood
Design. Accessibility to public transport was guaranteed though a well-developed transport system, with the intermodal Oriente Station included, and planning for walkability was also an integral part of the development of the Park of Nations zone (Anonymous, 1998; Mendes,
2001/2002; Goodspeed, 2007; Loures and Panagopoulos, 2007; Duarte Gil, 2009; Garcia, 2010).
Along the river, the Park of Nations is a pedestrians-only strip. The first street that runs parallel to the river that allows for automobile traffic has four lanes, and the next street over has eight lanes (Loures and Panagopoulos, 2007; Garcia 2010) but space for pedestrians is always available regardless of the amount of automobile lanes that are available, making the Park of
Nations zone pedestrian-friendly. Two studies (Serdoura and Nunes da Silva, 2006; Duarte Gil
2009) have observed foot traffic in and near the Park of Nations. Both studies point to significant pedestrian activity throughout the day that seems to include all age groups and all sectors of the population, locals and likely tourists that make the Park of Nations zone their home.
The literature and commentary on the Park of Nations zone includes impressions and interpretations of the architecture and of the zone in general. Santos (2008) sees this space as the product of urban marketing and the production of culture. Mendes (2001/2002) sees it as a post- modern city that is identified by the importance of the service sector over the manufacturing sector, where leisure and tourism activities make Lisbon competitive globally. Others see this zone as a city of make-believe, like a movie or television show. The discontinuity of the architecture with the rest of the city is criticized and seen as taking value away from the newly- developed zone (Mendes 2001/2002). Pereira and Nofre (2011) explain that adjectives such as
Disneyized, McDonaldized, and Fantasy City are used to describe the development in and around the Park of Nations. The maritime/naval theme, with futuristic overtones, is very obvious 74 in the architecture and in place names. This type of thematic architecture helps to provide an interpretation of the landscape, but also helps to differentiate from other waterfront developments elsewhere. The zone is seen by some as a collection of “entertainment and cultural venues, businesses, stores and services take advantage of this common theme and adapt it to their purposes to attract visitors and most of all consumers” (Pereira and Nofre, 2011, p. 672).
The Park of Nations zone is not the only manifestation of the type of urban redevelopment that has been studied. Taggart (1998) discusses urban regeneration along the George Waterway in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. For the overall development Taggart (1998) explains that this redevelopment “seems destined to become the kind of vibrant post-industrial community which will draw people back to the city” (p. 24). Waterfront redevelopment is described by
Taggart (1998) as being “devoted to public uses, with retail and recreational interspersed with public parks” (p. 26), reflecting the multi-use development that is encouraged by the New
Urbanism movement and that has taken place in Lisbon more recently. Taggart (1998) describes the architecture along the George Waterway in a way that could also be used to describe the architecture in the Park of Nations zone. Rather than using traditional ways of designs, this development in Victoria, B.C. has embraced modern architectural features, shunning the imitation of history or the embellishment of features. This is an expression of “humane modernity” (p. 26).
Chang and Huang (2011) provide a different interpretation of riverside redevelopment and the architecture that was used along the Singapore River. According to them, development along
Singapore River shuns local history and provides more of a global appeal. They conclude that
“worldly themes, not local history, enchant the masses” that visit this redeveloped zone (p. 75
2093). Locals love it, but visitors point out that waterfronts are starting to look all alike with their cafes and shops and with attention-grabbing architecture.
4.4. Discussion
Similarities with New Urbanism
Lisbon’s Park of Nations is the anchor of a zone that went from being an industrial wasteland to being a thriving new downtown that has also become a new tourism zone. Although there is a limited number of references that link the development of the Park of Nations and its surrounding area, the Park of Nations zone, to New Urbanism ideas specifically, it is evident that the development of that zone has taken place with planning and actions that reflect similarities with the Practices and Canons that are part of the Charter for the New Urbanism and its companion Canons of Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism.
The mixed-use nature of the Park of Nations zone is its most outstanding feature. In the zone there are residential spaces, offices, hotels, shops, restaurants and bars, hospitals, schools, government buildings such as a campus for Lisbon’s court system, schools, a casino, an arena, exhibition halls, a museum, an aquarium, an intermodal transportation hub, parks and green spaces, and spaces for leisure and walking and running activities. New Urbanism guidelines call for a diversity of functionalities within a neighborhood that facilitate the transformation of a neighborhood into a micro-city within a city. This diversity of functionalities is present in the
Park of Nations zone and accounts for its vibrancy and its status of new downtown in an area that less than twenty years ago was derelict and run down.
Part of the success of the Park of Nations zone as a new city center is explained by its walkability and transit oriented development, as witnessed during the author’s field work. The area along the river, the Park of Nations itself, is pedestrian-only. Running parallel to the river 76 and the Park of Nations, the first street that is open to automobile traffic forces traffic to move at a slow pace by placing either steel poles on both sides of the traffic lane, or steel poles on one side and tall concrete blocks on the other. This slow movement of automobile traffic makes street crossings by pedestrians an easy and safe endeavor. Something else that can be seen is bicycle lanes that are of the same width as automobile lanes. In portions of the four-lane street two of the four lanes are restricted to bicycle traffic only. In the closest parking spaces to the Park, only automobiles with electric engines are allowed to park, and these parking spaces are equipped with electric engine charging stations. Pedestrians walk short distances to find public transportation stops and the intermodal transportation hub at Oriente Station. This hub connects nation-wide and international rail service, commuter rail service for the Lisbon region (3 stations in the Park of Nations zone, Google, 2015), nation-wide and international bus service, bus service serving metropolitan Lisbon (19 stops that are served by at least one of 13 different routes, Google, 2015), the Lisbon metro (3 stops that are served by one metro line, Google,
2015) which, as of July, 2012 connects to the Lisbon International Airport, providing the public with five different modes of public transportation, and a taxi stand, in addition to underground automobile parking spaces. The Park of Nations zone is walkable and has access to public transportation within the zone itself, but it is not just a feature within an enclave. The zone is well connected through public transportation to the rest of the city of Lisbon and to points beyond close and far. This type of transit oriented development has made the Park of Nations zone a success story not only as a self-contained neighborhood, but also as a point that links to other parts of the city and to the rest of Portugal.
The Park of Nations itself, as the heart of the zone, also reflects the New Urbanism guidelines for public spaces that include parklands, as well as for landscape design. The Park includes green 77 spaces that are part of the space that is designed exclusively for pedestrians, runners, and leisure bicycle riders. Space that provides uninterrupted river frontage and views is part of the design that incorporates and enhances the existing local ecology and helps protect the environment, including the body of water that he helped define and shape the city of Lisbon.
The Park of Nations, along with its surrounding neighborhood, has also become a new tourism zone, a fact that is acknowledged by Turismo de Portugal-Lisboa (2014). Lisbon’s two traditional tourism zones are central Lisbon, where the city’s oldest neighborhoods are located, and the parish of Belém, where there is a cluster of monuments and museums. The Park of
Nations has become Lisbon’s third tourism zone, and New Urbanism ideas helped shape the Park and its surrounding area, and may account for its high level of popularity. The Park, along with its Oceanarium and its Science and Knowledge Museum, are among Lisbon’s highest-ranked attractions among those who participate in forums of websites such as Trip Advisor. The intermodal Oriente Station has been identified as a well-regarded tourist attraction, even though it was never intended to be one. By following New Urbanism guidelines, such as building a zone that, instead of being an urban tourist enclave, combines different functions for locals and tourists alike and allows for the interaction of tourists and locals, the Park of Nations zone was able to become an important tourist magnet. With ample and safe space for walking, within walking distance to multiple modes of public transport, with green spaces and ample views of the river, and with shops and leisure and entertainment spaces that are easily accessible by foot and by public transport, as well as with tourist attractions within the park and tourist infrastructure around the park, this new tourist zone has become very popular. 78
New Urbanism and Public Transit Connectedness – Lisbon’s Park of Nations and World’s Fair
Venues in Seattle, New York, Montreal, San Antonio, Spokane, Knoxville, Vancouver, Seville, and Zaragoza
The degree of connectedness of the Park of Nations to Lisbon’s public transportation network will be compared to those in the other nine cities in this study. This comparison helps bring the transit-oriented development linked to the Park of Nations into the context of other World’s Fairs host cities. The tables and figures below illustrate how public transit connectedness to Lisbon’s
Park of Nations compares to the venues in the other cities in the study. The information for
Lisbon and the Park of Nations is highlighted in each table. Table 1 presents a summary of the public transit options that are located either inside the venues for each city, or bordering on the perimeter of the venues. Detailed results for each city are presented in the Appendix for this chapter. Table 4.2 and Figure 4.1 show the number of different transit modes for each city/venue.
Of the ten cities, Lisbon has the venue with the highest number of public transportation modes that link the venue to the rest of the city, and in this particular case, the venue is linked to the rest of Portugal and beyond to Spain, France, and the rest of Europe by means of long- distance trains and buses. Table 3 and Figure 2 show the number of bus stops that are located within the venues or bordering their perimeters, and the number of different routes that are served by those bus stops, and Table 4.4 and Figure 4.3 show the number of stops for tall transit modes, other than buses, for each venue. The Park of Nations has neither the highest number of bus stops within the venue or bordering on the perimeter of the venue nor the highest number of bus routes that serve those bus stops, but of the ten cities, Lisbon ranks second in terms of bus stops and third in terms of bus routes, providing the Park of Nations with a high degree of city bus connectedness with the rest of the city. 79
City & Venue Public Transit Options Seattle – Seattle Center Bus 8 stops; 16 routes monorail 1 stop New York – Flushing Meadows/ Corona Park Bus Metro 15 stops, 14 routes Commuter Train 1 stops, 2 routes 1 station, 1 route Montreal – St. Helen’s and Notre Dame Islands 7 stops, 3 routes Bus 1 stop, 1 route Metro San Antonio – Hemisfair Park Bus 12 stops, 18 routes Spokane – Riverfront Park Bus 10 stops, 6 routes Knoxville – World’s Fair Park Bus 6 stops; 2 routes Vancouver – Canada Place Bus 1 stops, 3 routes Train (Commuter Only) 1 stop, 4 routes Ferry 1 stop, 2 routes Seville – Isla Mágica Bus 6 stops, 2 routes Lisbon – Park of Nations Bus 19 stops, 13 routes Metro 1 stop, 1 route Commuter Train 3 stops LD Buses 1 stop LD Trains 1 stops Zaragoza – Recinto Expo Bus (City) 22 stops, 10 routes Bus (Long Distance) 1 stop Commuter Trains 1 stop Long Distance Train 1 stop Table 4.1. Summary of rapid transit connectivity to each city’s venue, showing the number of routes for each type of transit mode.
80
City – Venue Number of public transit mode options Seattle – Seattle Center 2 New York – Flushing Meadows/Corona Park 3 Montreal – St. Helen’s and Notre Dame 2 Islands San Antonio – Hemisfair Park 1 Spokane – Riverfront Park 1 Knoxville – World’s Fair Park 1 Vancouver – Canada Place 3 Seville – Isla Mágica 1 Lisbon – Park of Nations 5 Zaragoza – Recinto Expo 4 Table 4.2. Number of different public transit modes for the venues in each city.
Number of public transit mode options 6 4 2 Number of public 0 transit mode options
Figure 4.1. Number of different public transit modes for the venues in each city.
81
City – Venue Number of bus stops Number of bus routes Seattle – Seattle Center 8 16 New York – Flushing 15 14 Meadows/Corona Park Montreal – St. Helen’s and Notre 7 3 Dame Islands San Antonio – Hemisfair Park 12 18 Spokane – Riverfront Park 10 6 Knoxville – World’s Fair Park 6 2 Vancouver – Canada Place 1 3 Seville – Isla Mágica 6 2 Lisbon – Park of Nations 19 13 Zaragoza – Recinto Expo 22 10 Table 4.3. Number of bus stops and bus routes for each venue.
25
20
15
10 Number of bus stops Number of bus routes 5
0
Figure 4.2. Number of bus stops and bus routes for each venue.
82
City – Venue Number of stops for all modes except buses Seattle – Seattle Center 1 New York – Flushing Meadows/Corona Park 2 Montreal – St. Helen’s and Notre Dame 1 Islands San Antonio – Hemisfair Park 0 Spokane – Riverfront Park 0 Knoxville – World’s Fair Park 0 Vancouver – Canada Place 2 Seville – Isla Mágica 0 Lisbon – Park of Nations 6 Zaragoza – Recinto Expo 3 Table 4.4. Number of stops for all transit modes except buses
Number of stops for all modes except buses 7 6 5 4 3 2 Number of stops for all 1 modes except buses 0
Figure 4.3. Number of stops for all transit modes except buses
83
Though city buses tend to dominate the ten cities’ public transportation supply, it is also worth noting the amount of stops for public transit modes that are available for each city beyond the stops that are available for the buses mode. In this category, Lisbon once again has the highest amount of mode-other-than-bus stops bordering on the perimeter of its venue, the Park of
Nations. The venue has twice as many stops as the venue in the city that came in second place in this category, Zaragoza.
Table 4.5 and Figure 4.4 show the total number of stops for all transit modes combined.
The Park of Nations venue ties for first place with the venue in Zaragoza when the total number for all modes of transportation is added up. The high level of public transit connectedness that links the Park of Nations to the rest of Lisbon and that has led to the Park of
Nations zone to become a successful redeveloped urban area and a successful new tourism zone in Lisbon compares favorably to the level of connectedness of the other nine venues to their respective city. The Park of Nations’ public transit connectedness to the city of Lisbon already looks extensive when discussing how the Park of Nations zone has evolved, but comparing that connectedness to that of the other nine venues makes the Park of Nations connectedness an even more of successful adherence to one of the main guidelines of New Urbanism, that of the extensive availability of public transit in the landscape of a redeveloped urban zone.
Digressions from New Urbanism Guidelines
Residential spaces were never meant to be a set of options for all income levels. Free market forces were allowed to prevail, and the residents in the zone are upper-middle class. This important departure from New Urbanism guidelines was planned from the very beginning of the planning process that led to the redevelopment of the Park of Nations zone. The architecture that was developed for the zone helped achieve the goal of redevelopment that would appeal to upper 84
City – Venue Total number of stops Seattle – Seattle Center 9 New York – Flushing Meadows/Corona Park 17 Montreal – St. Helen’s and Notre Dame 8 Islands San Antonio – Hemisfair Park 12 Spokane – Riverfront Park 10 Knoxville – World’s Fair Park 6 Vancouver – Canada Place 3 Seville – Isla Mágica 6 Lisbon – Park of Nations 25 Zaragoza – Recinto Expo 25 Table 4.5. Total number for stops for all transit modes combined.
Total number of stops 30 25 20 15
10 Total number of stops 5 0
Figure 4.4. Total number for stops for all transit modes combined.
85 middle class people. In May of 2014 it was reported that The Park of Nations is the among the top three zones in Lisbon in terms of rental costs per square meter for residential units (Jornal de
Negócios, 2014b), and in September of 2014 it was reported that the zone had the most expensive real estate for sale in the city, also in terms of cost per square meter (Jornal de
Negócios, 2014c).
The development of architecture in the zone is also a departure from New Urbanism goals.
The labels of Disneyized, McDonaldized, and Fantasy City that have been bestowed on the Park of Nations zone are not meant to be flattering. They are meant to reflect opinions of this zone as being contrived, manufactured for the purpose of consumption, and having low aesthetic and social value, in which street names, such as Alameda dos Oceanos, Rua Caribe, Avenida do
Pacífico, also reflect the architectural theme. New Urbanism values would require the new development around the Park of Nations to be an architectural extension of either central Lisbon, at least with the facades of the buildings, with which the Park of Nations does not have proximity or continuity, or that the architecture reflects the traditional architecture of the zone before it was redeveloped. The latter would mean an integrated, multi-purpose zone in which the architecture would resemble the dominant type of architecture before the zone was redeveloped, which would be the architecture of the rundown industrial facilities that were torn down. The zone does have two themes: maritime and post-modernist architecture. While some see this as a manufactured identity meant for consumption, the author interprets this type of themed architecture as a tool for zonal cohesion and identity, which would help achieve the New Urbanism goal of an integrated neighborhood. This type of architecture and zonal cohesion, while going against the designs of New Urbanism, does facilitate the visualization of the neighborhood as a zone that is meant to attract tourists among its many functions. 86
The Park of Nations zone’s importance was recognized when, in a time when the city of
Lisbon shrank the number of its freguesias, or city parishes or districts from 53 to 24 through a process of consolidation, the Park of Nations zone became its own freguesia by separating the zone from and existing freguesia and by incorporating land from the neighboring municipality of
Loures (Jornal de Negócios, 2012). This recognition was unforeseen by planners in Lisbon and is not stated as a goal of new urbanism.
4.5. Conclusion
Not all mega-events are the same, and not all have the same kind of impact on host cities.
Recent Olympic events, such as the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia (Daily Mail 2015), and the Summer Olympics in 2008 Beijing (City Lab, 2012) and in 2004 in Athens (The
Guardian, 2012; Business Insider, 2012) have led to a legacy of facilities that are abandoned and may be in ruins. The case of Lisbon’s Park of Nations zone presents a more favorable legacy for an event like a World’s Fair in terms of the post-event state and use of the grounds and structures. Though the development of Lisbon’s Park of Nations and its surrounding area never claimed to be the product of putting into practice all of New Urbanism’s Practices and Canons, it is evident that many of those Practices and Canons were put into practice when that area was targeted for redevelopment for Expo ’98 and for after the event.
The implementation of these ideas that are similar to those of New Urbanism have provided the Park of Nations zone with certain landscape, multi-use, social, and pedestrian- and transit- friendly characteristics that turned the zone into a new downtown and a new tourism zone in
Lisbon without affecting negatively other downtowns and other tourist zones. This zone has developed not only because of its inherent characteristics, but also because of its connectivity and integration with the rest of Lisbon and with the rest of Portugal, which was made possible by 87 the adoption of these ideas in the planning process and in the redevelopment of the neighborhood. These policies help create spaces and zones that are lively, attractive, accessible, useful, and convenient for all types of individual’s and group’s needs and preferences. These neighborhoods are vibrant and successful because of what they have to offer to residents, to the private and public sectors, and to tourists.
The case study of the Park of Nations zone in Lisbon shows the effects of the implementation of New Urbanism policies in a brownfield area that was redeveloped after its buildings were removed and it was decontaminated. New Urbanism provided an imprint for what became a successful new downtown in Lisbon. New Urbanism policies, or policies identical to them, offer useful guidelines for urban redevelopment, which is the intention of those policies.
An intended consequence of the creation of the Park of Nations and its surrounding zone was that tourists were expected to visit the zone, although it was impossible to forecast the exact number of potential tourists. What may have been an unintended consequence of New Urbanism is that its policies also proved to be useful in not only attracting tourists, but in the creation of an entire new urban tourism zone in a city as ancient as Lisbon, Portugal. The Park of Nations zone can be seen as an example of a tourism zone that accommodates a diversity of other functions for local residents, and as a revitalized neighborhood that includes a set of tourist attractions and facilities as one of the many functions for which the restored neighborhood was planned. The blurring of the distinction between a new downtown and a new tourism zone is a city like
Lisbon, made in part possible by the implementation of policies that resemble those of New
Urbanism, may provide guidelines for future urban redevelopment projects as well as for future plans for development or growth in the urban tourism sector for all kinds of cities. The designation of the Park of Nations zone as a new freguesia demonstrates the success and the 88 impact that this type of urban renewal can have in a city that aggressively seeks to regenerate its neighborhoods.
89
CHAPTER 5 – Conclusion to the Study
As stated in the Introduction, the research questions that this study sought to address were the following:
What is the current use of venues and structures that were built for the World’s Fairs?
What role does tourism play in the current use of the venues and structures that were built
for the World’s Fairs?
The main research question of this study is whether or not the venues of World Fairs in
their aftermath have become successful sites of tourism and recreational activities only
when they have been able to be integrated spatially and functionally into larger urban
landscapes.
This chapter will address the way in which this study’s findings answer the research questions and the hypothesis. This discussion will, in turn, be used to explain how this study has added features to parts of the existing Framework for Understanding and Creating Knowledge about
Event Tourism (Getz, 2007; 2008 p. 413) appearing in Appendix A, that were explained in the
Introduction:
Long Term Effects as an addition of Temporal Patterns that link Personal Antecedents
and Choices and Planning and Managing Event Tourism
Additions to Spatial Patterns and Knowledge Creation linking Patterns and Processes,
Temporal Patterns that link Personal Antecedents and Choices, and Outcomes and the
Impacted.
o Venues and Mega-event Structures
o Zone Bordering on the Perimeter of the Venue
o Type and Extent of Tourist and Recreational Activity 90
Research Questions
What is the current use of venues and structures that were built for the World’s Fairs?
In all of the North American cities in this study, as well as in Lisbon, Portugal, the venues now serve as urban parks. The two venues in Spain, Seville and Zaragoza, are the only ones that now serve other purposes, with the Seville venue being a struggling, private theme park and
Zaragoza’s Recinto (Campus) Expo being a planned office park that that has yet to materialize as such. As an urban park that serves the recreation needs of locals and visitors alike, the venue in
Lisbon, the Park of Nations has more in common with those in North America than in those located elsewhere in the Iberian Peninsula. The Lisbon venue is unique because it also the core of a redeveloped neighborhood in Lisbon that mixes residential, office/commercial, government, and tourism uses. This type of mega-event venue-generated urban redevelopment is unique among the ten cities that were analyzed in this study, and it has had such an impact in the city of
Lisbon that at the time when the city reduced the number of freguesias, or city districts, from 53 to 24 by consolidating existing freguesias, the regenerated Park of Nations zone was designated as a separate freguesia that included the incorporation of land from the bordering city of Loures.
The mega-event structures that remain in the Iberian Peninsula play four specific roles: visitor attractions that educate and entertain the visitors in the form of aquariums and a science museum in Lisbon and Zaragoza; a tower that serves only as visual icon in Lisbon; a set of structures that form part of a private theme park in Seville; and intermodal public transit hubs in Lisbon and
Zaragoza. The aquariums, science museum, and the public transit hubs retain the same role that they had during their respective World’s Fairs. During Expo ’98 and through October, 2004, when the tower became just an iconic building, the Vasco da Gama Tower had an observation deck and a restaurant (Geocaching, 2015). 91
What role does tourism play in the current use of the venues and structures that were built for the World’s Fairs?
With the exception of Zaragoza’s former venue, the venues and the structures are widely recognized and used as tourist attractions, with varying degrees of perception and popularity as such. With the aforementioned exception of Zaragoza, and with Seville turning the venue and some structures into a private enterprise in the form of a theme park, the modifications that were done to urban zones in order to host World’s Fairs in them have resulted in the permanent use of these zones as recreational public urban parks and as feasible tourist attractions. As with the discussion above about the uses of venues and structures, the observations and conclusions about the tourism role of venues and structures in Spain differ from those of the other cities in Portugal and in North America. The venues and structures in Portugal and in North America, and their current status as urban parks and as tourist attractions indicate that World’s Fairs can successfully transition from the roles that they play during the event to post-event locations that are useful and attractive to locals as well as visitors. Zaragoza and Seville are examples of the fact that transitioning from venues and structures to facilities that are used for the event to venues and structures that are transferred to the private sector may result in endeavors that may not perform as well as expected and may even be unsuccessful as private enterprises and as tourist attractions. Venues and structures have been more successful as tourist attractions when they have remained public goods and public facilities than as facilities that have access that is restricted to those who are willing to pay theme park admission prices or that have uses that are tailored to those of commercial endeavors. 92
The main research question of this study is whether or not the venues of World Fairs in their aftermath have become successful sites of tourism and recreational activities only when they have been able to be integrated spatially and functionally into larger urban landscapes.
Taking all ten cities that were analyzed for this study into account as a single set of cities, the discussion above, regarding the tourism and recreational roles that these facilities play currently, helps confirm the hypothesis that venues and structures are more successful when they are integrated functionally into the larger urban landscapes of their cities as public goods. Publicly owned, open-access standalone urban parks and urban parks that contain mega-event structures as tourist attractions that are the legacies of World’s Fairs in the ten cities that were studied have proven to be spaces and structures that are well-regarded and appealing for recreational and tourism purposes. Taking into account the venue and structures in Lisbon specifically, where the venue and structures stood out by being rated at the top or near the top of all categories of discussion (municipal websites, travel advice writers’ recommendations, visitor rating, and number of hotels built either inside the venue or bordering on the perimeter), the hypothesis is proven correct once again and more convincingly. The functional integration that intertwined the venue with multi-use buildings and multi-use facilities and open spaces in a redeveloped zone made the Park of Nations the engine that led to the redevelopment of what became a new city district, and this redevelopment engine was fueled in part by the success of the tourism activity in that zone, which in turn became a whole new tourism zone in the city whose two oldest tourist zones revolved around the historic center of Lisbon and the concentration of monuments in the district of Belém.
In all ten cities the spatial integration refers to the how accessible and connected the venues are to the rest of the city, and in this study spatial integration was measured by how well- 93 connected the venues and structures are to the rest of the city by means of public transit modes and routes. The venues in all ten cities are connected to varying degrees to the rest of their respective cities by public transit, although public transit connectivity does not seem to help
Seville and Zaragoza overcome their venues’ and structures’ relative shortcomings. It is once again the specific case of the city of Lisbon that illustrates more convincingly that spatial connectivity, in terms of public transit connectivity and access of the Park of Nations to the rest of the city, contributes to an overall successful urban park and set of tourist attractions. The Park of Nations is connected to not only the rest of Lisbon but literally to points beyond Portugal by long-distance and commuter trains, long-distance and city buses, as well as a metro line that is only two stops away from the system’s stop at Lisbon’s Portela International Airport. Apart from public transportation spatial connectivity, providers of double-decker bus tours of Lisbon have added to the venue and the structures’ degree of connectivity to the rest of the city. The two private companies that offer hop-on hop-off bus tours of Lisbon, City Sightseeing (2015) and
Gray Line (2015), as well as the public company that offers the same service, Yellow Bus
Carristur (2015), all have routes that take tourists to the Park of Nations zone.
Though Lisbon’s Park of Nations zone/district is the example in the study that best confirms the hypothesis to be true, the North American venues and structures in the North American cities in the study also served to confirm the hypothesis. Seville and Zaragoza’s venues and structures have developed a tourist and recreation legacy that is different from that of the other cities, and the examples from those two cities do not offer strong evidence in support of the hypothesis.
The Framework for Understanding and Creating Knowledge about Event Tourism: What This
Study Has Added
This study provides additions to elements in this framework, which are discussed below. 94
Figure 5.1. Modifications from Getz’s 2008 Framework for Understanding and Creating Knowledge about Event Tourism, based on the portions of the framework that are relevant to this study.
95
Long Term Effects as an addition of Temporal Patterns that link Personal Choices and Planning and Managing Event Tourism
Other than data showing that the venues from the most recent five World’s Fairs have a slightly more prominent presence in municipal tourism websites, this study showed evidence that the tourism and recreational legacy of World’s Fairs is long-lasting, with the earliest World’s
Fair that was studied took place in Seattle in 1962. This conclusion is useful to those looking to past World’s Fairs as a reference when considering whether or not to host a World’s Fair if one of the benefits that is expected is that of a long tourist and recreational legacy, as well as to those who plan the event with the same legacy goals in mind. The long-term effects of other mega- events, especially those related to sporting events, could be different from the effects seen in this study for World’s Fairs.
Additions to ‘Spatial Patterns’ and ‘Knowledge Creation’ linking Personal Choices and
Planning, Managing Event Tourism, and Outcomes and Impacts of the Events
Within the Getz framework there is no distinction between venues in general and mega-event structures as tourist attractions in particular. While venues have proven to be popular as urban parks for the recreational benefit of residents and visitors, it is the structures that have proven to be more popular than venues as tourist attractions. The particular example of Lisbon’s Park of
Nations zone/district provides evidence that the development of the zone bordering on the perimeter of the venue, in Lisbon’s case a redeveloped multi-use zone that keeps architectural harmony with the venue enhances the tourism legacy of a venue and its structures, which is also not addressed in Getz’s framework. The framework also makes no mention of the type and extent of tourist activity related to the venues. This study demonstrates the importance of keeping venues available as public park spaces, and of providing mega-event structures with a 96 post-event function that allows tourists to have a level of interaction with the contents of the structures that require more than just at staring at the outside of the structure. Though the Getz framework provides a useful model that helps create knowledge about event tourism, this study provided empirical evidence other elements, such as the ones that this study has delineated, need to be added to the model to further enhance the creation of knowledge about tourism.
Limitations and Lessons Learned From This Study
The observations made in this study represent only a particular time period, and some of the categories of information sought are subject to short-term changes. Specifically, the information that municipal tourism websites contain is likely to be changed according factors that could be human and technological as well as factors having to do with tourism planning and the perception of what potential or returning tourists need to be informed about. The researcher has accessed these websites after the original data gathering dates and has noticed that some changes have already taken place in how and where some of the information is made available. Traveler opinion ranking of venues and mega-event structures can change very quickly, but increases and decreases in ranking tend to be small enough, at least over the short term, that data gathering about rankings is still reliable. The opinions of travel advice writers and the number of hotels that develop tend to be less-changeable in the short term, contributing to the reliability of the observations.
The results of the study indicate that overall a mega-event such as a World’s Fair can have a long-lasting positive tourism and recreational legacy if plans are made to have venues become easily-accessed urban parks after the event has ended, and if mega-event structures as tourist attractions serve a function instead of just being visible iconic structures. The strongest tourism and recreation legacy in the study was observed in Lisbon, Portugal, where the post-Expo ’98 97 venue was at the heart of a multi-use-zone urban regeneration project that included tourism and recreation among the many uses for the redeveloped zone.
Questions about Possible Future Implications of this Study
Does this study show that a city’s tourism sector can only be enhanced by a mega-event? Not necessarily. Urban redevelopment and improvements in a city’s tourism sector may happen without any type of special event. Still, a mega-event can help gain the approval of the local population and help trigger the mechanisms that lead to improvements in urban landscapes and in the local tourism industry based on the short- and long-term effects that hosting the mega- event is expected to have.
Do urban renewal and mega-event-hosting schemes guarantee improvements in a city’s tourism sector? The different tourism legacies that have been observed in the ten cities that were studied do not indicate that schemes that combine urban renewal and the hosting of mega-events guarantee positive changes in a city’s tourism sector. Less popular host cities remained less popular tourist destinations, while cities with many attractions now count the former venues and structures as attractions like any other in those cities. Only in Lisbon was the legacy of the event one that went to the extent of creating of a whole new tourism zone in the city.
Is Lisbon’s Park of Nations zone an example of an emerging type of tourist space that reflects the changing tastes of modern-day tourists? While traditional tourist spaces such as beaches, mountains, and cultural/historic cities remain popular, the tastes and preferences of tourists keep evolving and non-traditional tourist spaces, called ‘emerging tourist spaces’ in this study, continue to develop, thanks to tourists such as experiential tourists. The types of tourists known as experiential tourists do not like to just look at things as spectators. They like to connect with their destination, to reach a level of participation and immersion within the location that they’re 98 visiting (WHL Group, 2011; Charlotte: The Official Travel Source, 2015; Nature and Outdoor
Tourism Ontario, 2015; Tourism Northern Ireland, 2015). For experiential tourists, travel is not just about sightseeing anymore (Charlotte: The Official Travel Source, 2015), travel now is also about doing and experiencing what their location allows them to do and experience. Emerging tourist spaces that cater to experiential tourists tend to be usually rural but are also urban spaces where tourists are able to sample the local gastronomy and drinks, learn to do traditional arts and crafts or autochthonous agricultural practices, engage in nature-based active and sport tourism, learn about local history and culture, and/or feel like a local who can blend in rather than be an outsider who is just a spectator. The author of this study believes that Lisbon’s Park of Nations zone’s popularity and important role in Lisbon’s tourism scene can be explained by its combination of multi-use zoning, its spaces for tourist activities, and by the restoration of open
Tagus River riverfront views.
The three factors on figure 5.2 that converge to form the Park of Nations zone provide the kinds of characteristics that can be created in a redeveloped urban zone that can become emerging tourist spaces that make experiential tourists feel like they blend in among the many users of the redeveloped area while admiring a riverfront landscape and while being able to be catered to as tourists. The fact that a redeveloped urban zone can reveal itself to have become an emerging tourist space for experiential and other tourists is an important discovery, even if this discovery is only an indirect one that emerged from the original research questions that were addressed in this study. This discovery deserves as much attention in the future as the findings of the original research questions are.
100
REFERENCES – Chapter 1
Andranovich, G., M. Burbank and C. H. Heying (2001). Olympic Cities: Lessons Learned from Mega-event Politics. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23, 113-131.
Andranovich, G. and M. J. Burbank (2011), Contextualizing Olympic Legacies. Urban Geography, 32(6), 823-844.
Baade, R. A. and V. A. Matheson (2004). The Quest for the Cup: Assessing the Economic Impact of the World Cup. Regional Studies, 38, 343-354.
Bramwell, B. (1997). Strategic Planning Before and After a Mega-Event. Tourism Management, 18(3), 167-176.
Burbank, M. J., G. Andranovivh and C. H. Heying (2002). Mega-Events, Urban Development, and Public Policy. The Review of Policy Research, 19(3), 179-201.
Chalip, L. & C. A. Costa (2005). Sport Event Tourism and the Destination Brand: Towards a General Theory. Sport in Society, 8, 218-237.
Coaffee, J. (2007). Urban Regeneration and Renewal in Olympic Cities: City Agendas, Planning, and the World Games, 1896-2016, Gold, John R. and Gold, Margaret M. (Eds.), London and New York: Routledge.
Del Romero R. and C. Trudelle (2011). Mega-Events and Urban Conflicts in Valencia, Spain: Contesting the new Urban Modernity. Urban Studies Research, 2011, 1-12.
Deng, Y. (2013). Conceptualizing Mega-Event Flagships – A Case Study of China Pavilion of Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2, 107-115.
Deng, Y. and S.W. Poon (2013), Positioning Mega-Event Flagships – From performing Arts Center of Expo 2010 to Mercedes Benz Arena. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2013, 1-18.
El País (2013). Las Siete Vidas de los Nuevos Edificios. Retrieved from http://sociedad.elpais.com/sociedad/2013/05/26/actualidad/1369599691_246644.html
Findling, J. E. and K. D. Pelle (2008). Encyclopedia of World’s Fairs and Expositions, Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company.
Fourie, J. and M. Santana-Gallego (2011). The Impact of Mega-Events on Tourist Arrivals. Tourism Management, 32, 1364-1370.
Furlough, E. (1998). Making Mass Vacations: Tourism and Consumer Culture in France, 1930s to 1970s. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 40(2), 247-286. 101
Getz, D. (2005). Event Management and Event Tourism (2nd ed.), New York: Cognizant.
Getz, D. (2007). Event Studies: Theory, Research and Policy for Planned Events, Oxford: Elsevier.
Getz, D. (2008). Event Tourism: Definition, Evolution, and Research. Tourism Management, 29, 403-428.
Gold, J. R. and M. M. Gold (Eds.) (2007) Olympic Cities: City Agendas, Planning, and the World Games, 1896-2016, London and New York: Routledge.
González Loscertales, V. (2008). Foreword in Encyclopedia of World’s Fairs and Expositions, Findling, J. E. and K. D. Pelle (Eds.), Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, 1-3.
Google (2014). Retrieved from http://www.google.com
Greene, S. (2003). Staged Cities: Mega-events, Slum Clearance, and Global Capital. Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal, 4, 161-187.
Hall, C. M. (2006). Urban Entrepreneurship, Corporate Interests and Sports Mega-events: the Thin Policies of Competitiveness within the Hard Outcomes of Neoliberalism. The Sociological Review, 54, 59-70.
Hiller, H. H. (2000). Mega-events, Urban Boosterism and Growth Strategies: an Analysis of the Objectives and Legitimations of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic Bid. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24, 449-458.
Levine, M. (2003). Tourism-based Development and the Fiscal Case of the City: the Case of Montreal. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 12(1), 102-123.
Paton, K., G. Mooney, and K. McKee (2012). Class, Citizenship, and Regeneration: Glasgow and the Commonwealth Games 2014. Antipode, 44(2), 1470-1489.
Pillay, U. and O. Bass (2008). Mega-events as a Response to Poverty Reduction: The 2010 FIFA World Cup and its Urban Development Implications. Urban Forum, 19, 329-346.
Roche, M. (2000). Mega-events and Modernity: Olympics and Expos in the Growth of Global Culture, London and New York: Routledge.
Rydell, R. W., J. E. Findling, and K. Pelle (2000). Fair America, Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution.
Short, J. R. (2008). Globalization, Cities and the Summer Olympics. City, 12, 321-340.
Smith, A. and T. Fox (2007). From 'Event-led' to 'Event-themed' Regeneration: the 2002 Commonwealth Games Legacy Programme. Urban Studies, 44, 1125-1143. 102
Smith, A. (2012). Events and Urban Regeneration: The Strategic Use of Events to Revitalise Cities, London and New York: Routledge.
Spier, S. (1998). Redefining Expo. The Architectural Review, 204(1217), 26.
The World’s Fair Museum (2014). Retrieved from www.expomuseum.com
Turismo de Portugal-Lisboa (2014). Retrieved from www.visitlisboa.com
United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) (2013a). Why Tourism? Retrieved from http://www2.unwto.org/en/content/why-tourism
United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) (2013b). Methodological Notes. Retrieved from http://www.unwto.org/facts/menu.html
REFERENCES – Chapter 2
ABC (2001). Trabajadores de Isla Mágica piden a administraciones y empresarios que “aclaern el future del parquet”. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/hemeroteca/historico-04-11- 2001/sevilla/Ultima/trabajadores-de-isla-magica-piden-a-administraciones-y-empresarios-que- aclaren-el-futuro-del-parque_24007.html
ABC (2002). Isla Mágica cerrará si los bancos no cancelan el 80 por ciento de su deuda. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/hemeroteca/historico-14-02-2002/sevilla/Sevilla/isla-magica- cerrara-si-los-bancos-no-cancelan-el-80-por-ciento-de-su-deuda_37726.html
ABC (2008). Isla Mágica, al borde del precipicio. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/hemeroteca/historico-07-06-2008/sevilla/Home/isla-magica-al-borde-del- precipicio_1641917246734.html
ABC (2009). La Expo se “ahoga” en el olvido. Retrieved from http://www.abc.es/hemeroteca/historico-31-07-2009/abc/Nacional/la-expo-se-ahoga-en-el- olvido_922979874673.html
ABC (2010). Isla Mágica descarta salir de la Cartuja. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/20100918/sevilla/isla-magica-descarta-salir-201009180825.html
ABC (2011a). Amenazan con “respuestas contundentes” si Cierra Isla Mágica. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/20110607/sevilla/sevp-amenazan-respuestas-contundentes-cierra- 20110607.html
ABC (2011b). El futuro de la isla de Sevilla. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/20110717/economia/sevp-futuro-isla-sevilla-20110717.html
103
ABC (2012). Isla Mágica suspende la venta de pases para la temporada 2013. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/sevilla/20121212/sevi-isla-magica-pases-201212121407.html
ABC (2013). Isla Mágica abrirá este año 134 días, 12 menos que en 2012. Retrieved from http://sevilla.abc.es/sevilla/20130121/sevi-isla-magica-abrira-201301211237.html
ABC (2014). El agujero de la Expo de Zaragoza de 2008 roza ya los 700 millones de euros. Retrieved from http://www.abc.es/local-aragon/20141006/abci-perdidas-expo-zaragoza-rozan- 201410060931.html
Canada Place (2015). History. Retrieved from http://www.canadaplace.ca/About_Us/History
El País (1996). Isla Mágica, nuevo parque temático en Sevilla. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/1996/11/29/sociedad/849222013_850215.html
El País (1997). El Rey inaugura el único parque temático urbano en el mundo. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/1997/06/29/espana/867535217_850215.html
El País (2004a). parques sin atracción. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/2004/08/22/negocio/1093181788_850215.html
El País (2004b). El ICO condona el 80% de la deuda de Isla Mágica y salva el parque de atracciones. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/2004/10/21/andalucia/1098310939_850215.html
El País (2007). Poca diversión en los parques de ocio. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/2007/02/11/negocio/1171204587_850215.html
El País (2008a). Más de 5.6 millones de personas visitaron la Expo de Zaragoza. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/elpais/2008/09/15/actualidad/1221466620_850215.html
El País (2008b). La Expo del agua se cambia de traje. Retrieved from http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2008/10/17/actualidad/1224228775_850215.html
El País (2013). Isla Mágica cierra sus puertas sin fecha para la próxima apertura. Retrieved from http://ccaa.elpais.com/ccaa/2013/01/04/andalucia/1357323379_259852.html
El País (2014). Parques temáticos de alto riesgo. Retrieved from http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2014/10/20/actualidad/1413828642_793314.html
ExpoMuseum.com (2015). 1982 Knoxville. Retrieved from http://www.expomuseum.com/1982/
Diario de Notícias (2005). Euro 2004 encoubriu estagnação. Retrieved from http://www.dn.pt/Inicio/interior.aspx?content_id=601086
Diario de Notícias (2007). Hotel de luxo avança na Torre Vasco da Gama. Retrieved from http://www.dn.pt/Inicio/interior.aspx?content_id=661845 104
Fodor’s Travel (2014). Retrieved from www.fodors.com
Frommer’s (2014). Retrieved from www.frommers.com
Google Maps (2014). Retrieved from maps.google.com
Hemisfair ’68 Online (2015). Building Hemisfair. Retrieved from http://www.worldsfair68.info/
Lonely Planet (2014). Retrieved from www.lonelyplanet.com
New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (2015). Flushing Meadows Corona Park World’s Fair Legacy. Retrieved from http://www.nycgovparks.org/highlights/fmcp-worlds-fairs
NYC The Official Guide (2014). Rertieved from www.nygo.com
Riverfront Park Master Plan 2014 (2015). History. Retrieved from http://riverfrontparkmasterplan.org/about/history/
Seattle.gov (2015). Century 21. Retrieved from http://www.seattle.gov/cityarchives/exhibits-and- education/digital-document-libraries/century-21-worlds-fair
The Montreal Gazette (2009). What’s it called – gondola! Plan to link Montreal’s old port and Jean Drapeau Park dead over water? Retrieved from http://montrealgazette.com/news/local- news/whats-it-called-gondola-plan-to-link-montreals-old-port-and-jean-drapeau-park-dead-over- the-water
The Montreal Gazette (2014). Île Ste-Hélène to get facelift. Retrieved from http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/ile-ste-helene-to-get-facelift
The New York Times (2006). We Have Seen the Future, and It Is Rusting. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/nyregion/11about.html?_r=0
The New York Times (2012a). In Queens, an Oasis Neglected by the City. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/nyregion/in-queens-an-oasis-neglected-by-the- city.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A16%22}
The New York Times (2012b). For protectors of Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, and Unlikely Ally. Retrieved from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/08/for-protectors-of-flushing- meadows-corona-park-an-unlikely- ally/?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A16%22}
The New York Times (2013). Securing Help for a Park at Site of World’s Fairs. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/30/nyregion/securing-help-for-a-park-at-site-of-worlds- fairs.html?pagewanted=all&module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%222%22%3A%2 2RI%3A16%22}
105
The New York Times (2014a). Putting Queens on the tourist Map. Retrieved from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/putting-queens-on-the-tourism- map/?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A16%22}
The New York Times (2014b). New York State Pavilion Receives 5.8 Million for Restoration. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/08/nyregion/new-york-state-pavilion-receives- 5-8-million-for-restoration.html
The San Antonio Express-News (2011). HemisFair Park merits use of city bond funds. Retrieved from http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/article/HemisFair-Park-merits-use-of-city-bond- funds-1744393.php
The San Antonio Express-News (2013a). HemisFair bill now allows for hotel. Retrieved from http://www.mysanantonio.com/default/article/HemisFair-bill-now-allows-for-hotel-4425048.php
The San Antonio Express-News (2013b). HemisFair Park to grow. Retrieved from http://www.mysanantonio.com/world classm/default/article/HemisFair-Park-to-grow- 5039561.php
The Seattle Times (2008). A look at the history and future of Spokane’s Riverfront Park. Retrieved from http://seattletimes.com/html/travel/2008101240_trspokanepark10.html
The Seattle Times (2006). One day in Seattle: How to see the top spots. Retrieved from http://seattletimes.com/html/travel/2002970245_seattledayplans07.html
The Spokesman-Review (1995). Spokane Reaches Crossroads in Effort to Save Downtown. Retrieved from http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1995/apr/30/spokane-reaches-crossroad-in- effort-to-save/
The Spokesman-Review (2014). Spokane voters willing to pay to fix streets, park. Retrieved from http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/nov/05/spokane-voters-willing-to-pay-to-fix-streets- park/
The Tennessean (2014). World’s Fair leaves lasting legacy in Spokane. Retrieved from http://www.tennessean.com/story/life/2014/08/01/worlds-fair-leaves-lasting-legacy- spokane/13429577/
Tourism Vancouver (2014). Retrieved from www.tourismvancouver.com
Tourisme Montreal (2014). Expo 67 Then and Now. Retrieved from http://www.tourisme- montreal.org/blog/expo-67-then-and-now/
Trip Advisor (2014). Retrieved from www.tripadvisor.com
Turismo de Portugal-Lisboa (2014). Retrieved from www.visitlisboa.com
106
Turismo de Zaragoza (2014). Rerieved from www.zaragoza.es/turismo/
Visit Knoxville (2015). Retrieved from www.visitknoxville.com
Visit San Antonio, Texas (2014). Retrieved from http://visitsanantonio.com
Visit Seattle (2014). Retrieved from www.visitseattle.org
Visit Spokane (2014). Retrieved from www.visitspokane.com
Visita Sevilla (2014). Retrieved from www.visitasevilla.es
White, D. (1996). ‘Lisbon Hopes Expo Will Revitalize City’, The Financial Post (Toronto), 11/28/1996, 62.
REFERENCES – Chapter 3
Aragón Digital (2011). El número de visitantes del Acuario aumenta un 10% en el primer cuatrimestre de 2011. Retrieved from http://www.aragondigital.es/noticia.asp?notid=82753
Ayuntamiento de Sevilla (2014). Balance Anual de 2013 del Turismo de Sevilla, Seville: Ayuntamiento de Sevilla.
El Correo de Andalucía (2013). Las visitas a Isla Mágica caen un 18% en el año de la venta al grupo francés. Retrieved from http://elcorreoweb.es/2013/12/21/las-visitas-a-isla-magica-caen- un-18-en-el-ano-de-la-venta-al-grupo-frances/
El País (2007). Poca diversión en los parques de ocio. Retrieved from http://elpais.com/diario/2007/02/11/negocio/1171204587_850215.html
Fodor’s Travel (2014). Retrieved from www.fodors.com
El Periódico de Aragón (2012). El acuario registra su peor cifra con 55,000 visitas. Retrieved from http://www.elperiodicodearagon.com/noticias/aragon/acuario-registra-peor-cifra-55-000- visitas_726087.html
Frommer’s (2014). Retrieved from www.frommers.com
Heraldo (2014). Más especies y más visitantes en el Acuario. Retrieved from http://www.heraldo.es/noticias/aragon/zaragoza_provincia/zaragoza/2014/04/21/mas_especies_ mas_visitantes_acuario_283488_301.html
Instituto Nacional de Estatística/ Statistics Portugal (2014). Anuário Estatístico da Região de Lisboa 2013, Lisbon: Instituto Nacional de Estatística, 245-252.
107
Lonely Planet (2014). Retrieved from www.lonelyplanet.com
Oceanário de Lisboa (2014). Oceanário recebe visitante 18 milhões. Retrieved from http://www.oceanario.pt/cms/1394/?news=1748
SIC Notícias (2013). Oceanário recebeu menos turistas em 2012, mas mais visitantes portugueses. Retrieved from http://sicnoticias.sapo.pt/arquivo/2013-01-12-oceanario-recebeu- menos-turistas-em-2012-mas-mais-visitantes-portugueses
Trip Advisor (2014). Retrieved from www.tripadvisor.com
Turismo de Portugal Lisboa (2014). Retrieved from www.visitlisboa.com
Turismo de Zaragoza (2014). Retrieved from www.zaragoza.es/turismo/
TV Ciência (2011). Parabéns Pavilhão do Conhecimento-Ciência Viva. Retrieved from http://www.tvciencia.pt/tvcnot/pagnot/tvcnot03.asp?codpub=26&codnot=38
Visita Sevilla (2014). Retrieved from www.visitasevilla.es
Zaragoza Turismo (2014). Informe Annual 2013, Zaragoza: Zaragoza Turismo.
REFERENCES – Chapter 4
Aelbrecht, P. (2010). Rethinking Urban Design for a Changed Public Life. Journal of Place Management and Development, 3.2, 113-129.
Anonymous (1998). World’s Fair Sparks Economic Development in Portugal. Area Development Site and Facility Planning, 33(7), 18.
Bacon, P. (2002). Lisbon, the Uninvented City. Birmingham Post, 3/23/2002, 56, 1-4.
Bramwell, B. (1997). Strategic Planning Before and After a Mega-Event. Tourism Management, 18.3, 167-176.
Burbank, M.J., G. Andranovich, and C.H. Heying (2002). Mega-Events, Urban Development, and Public Policy. The Review of Policy Research, 19.3, 179-201.
Business Insider (2012). Abandoned Venues from the 2004 Athens Olympics [Photos]. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/2004-athens-olympics-venues-abandoned- today-photos-2012-8
Cámara Municipal de Lisboa (2014). Ribeira das Naus Requalificada com Passeio Ribeirinho. Retrieved from http://www.cm-lisboa.pt/noticias/detalhe/article/ribeira-das-naus-requalificada- com-passeio-ribeirinho 108
Carrière, J. and C. Demazière (2002). Urban Planning and Flagship Projects: Lessons From Expo ’98 Lisbon. Planning Practice & Research, 17(1), 69-79.
Chang, T.C. and S. Huang (2011). Reclaiming the City: Waterfront Development in Singapore. Urban Studies, 48(10), 2085-2100.
City Lab (2012). Beijing’s Olympic Ruins. Retrieved from http://www.citylab.com/work/2012/07/beijings-olympic-ruins/2499/
Daily Mail (2015). A $51 billion ghetto. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2941216/Extraordinary-images-Vladimir-Putin-s- Sochi-Olympic-park-lying-desolate-abandoned.html
De Villers, P. (1997). New Urbanism. Australian Planner, 34(1), 30-34. del Romero, R. and C. Trudelle (2011). Mega-Events and Urban Conflicts in Valencia, Spain: Contesting the new Urban Modernity. Urban Studies Research, 2011, 1-12.
Diário de Notícias (2011). Governo extingue Parque Expo e admiote despedimentos. Retrieved from http://www.dn.pt/inicio/portugal/interior.aspx?content_id=1955764
Duarte Gil, B. E. (2009). Mobilidade Pedonal no Espaço Público: Caso de Estudo e Aplicaçao ao Projecto em Sete Rios, Master’s Thesis, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, 1-58.
ExpoMuseum (2015). 1998 Lisbon. Retrieved from http://www.expomuseum.com/1998/
Garcia, P. (2010). Os Espaços Públicos Na Reconversão da Zona da Expo ’98. Revista Lusófona de Aqrtitectura e Educação, 4/2010, 107-138.
Getz, D. (2008). Event Tourism: Definition, Evolution, and Research. Tourism Management, 29, 403-428.
Goodspeed, R. (2007). Lisbon Urban Form Analysis. Unknown, 1-10.
Google Maps (2015). Retrieved from www.maps.google.com
Grant, J. (2002). Mixed Use in Theory and Practice: Canadian Experience with Implementing a Planning Principle. Journal of American Planning Association, 68.1, 71-84.
Jornal de Negócios (2014a). Parque Expo vai finalmente ser extinta após nomeação de comissão liquidatária. Retrieved from http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/empresas/detalhe/parque_expo_vai_finalmente_ser_extinta_apos _nomeacao_de_comissao_liquidataria.html
109
Jornal de Negócios (2014b). Preço das casas arrendadas em Lisboa recuou 11,4% desde 2010. Retrieved from http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/economia/impostos/detalhe/preco_das_casas_arrendadas_em_lis boa_recuou_114_desde_2010.html
Jornal de Negócios (2014c). Viver em Lisboa: Conheça as zonas mais caras, jovens e com maior densidade populacional. Jornal de Negócios. Retrieved from http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/empresas/imobiliario/detalhe/viver_em_lisboa_conheca_as_zona s_mais_caras_jovens_e_com_maior_densidade_populacional.html
Jornal de Negócios (2012). Lisboa começa a desenhar novo mapa dentro de cinco dias. Retrieved from http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/economia/autarquias/detalhe/lisboa_comeccedila_a_desenhar_n ovo_mapa_dentro_de_cinco_dias.html
Knaap, G. and E. Talen (2005). New Urbanism and Smart Growth: a Few Words from the Academy. International Regional Science Review, 28(2), 107-118.
Loures, L. and T. Panagopoulos (2007). From Derelict Industrial Areas to Towards Multifunctional Landscapes and Urban Renaissance. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development, 10(3), 181-188.
McArthur, S. (1997). Taking it to the River. Europe, 11/1997(371), 34.
Mendes, L. (2001/02). O Lazer e o Recreo No Parque das Nações: O Consumo, O Lúdico e Estético na Produção Na Cidade Pós-Moderna. Inforgeo, 16/17, 81-108.
Parque Expo (2015a). World Expo ’98. Retrieved from http://www.parqueexpo.pt/conteudo.aspx?lang=ing&id_object=692&name=World- EXPO%E2%80%9998-
Parque Expo (2015b). Who we are. Retrieved from http://www.parqueexpo.pt/conteudo.aspx?lang=ing&id_class=328&name=Who-we-are-
Pereira, P. and J. Nofre (2011). Rebuilding Urban Morphology: New Centralities and Urban Inequalities in Southern European Cities. Sociologia Online, 2, 655-684.
Reina, P. (1998). Ghost Town Fears Underlie Lisbon Fair Development. Engineering News- Record, 240(4), 105.
Santos, S. (2008). Imagens da Cidade Planejada: A Diversidade Cultural e o Pensamento Estratégico Urbano de Lisboa. Socioligia, Problemas e Práticas, 57, 131-151.
Serdoura, F. and F. Nunes da Silva (2006). Espaço Público, Lugar de Vida Urbana. Engenharia Civil, 27, 5-16.
110
Spier, S. (1998). Redefining Expo. The Architectural Review. 204(1217), 26.
Taggart, J. (1998). New Urbanism’s Modern Guise. The Canadian Architect, 43.4, 24-27.
The Congress for the New Urbanism (2001). Charter for the New Urbanism.
The Congress for the New Urbanism (2001). Canons of Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism: A Companion to the Charter of the New Urbanism.
The Guardian (2012). Athens 2004 Olympics: what happened after the athletes went home? Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/may/09/athens-2004-olympics-athletes- home
Turismo de Portugal (2014). Home page. Retrieved from www.visitlisboa.com
White, D. (1996). Lisbon Hopes Expo Will Revitalize City. The Financial Post (Toronto), 11/28/1996, 62.
REFERENCES – Chapter 5
Charlotte: The Official Travel Resource (2015). Experiential Tourism: More than Just Sightseeing. Retrieved from http://www.charlottesgotalot.com/articles/experiential-tourism- more-just-sightseeing
City Sightseeeing (2015). City Sightseeing Lisbon. Retrieved from http://www.city- sightseeing.com/tours/portugal/lisbon.htm
Geocaching (2015). Vasco da Gama Tower. Retrieved from http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC2KAMM_vasco-da-gama-tower?guid=46a4a6d6- a863-4d27-a130-399bf5c4048e
Getz, Donald (2007). Event Studies: Theory, Research and Policy for Planned Events, Oxford: Elsevier.
Getz, Donald (2008). Event Tourism: Definition, Evolution, and Research. Tourism Management, 29, 403-428.
Gray Line (2015). Lisbon Sightseeing Hop On Hop Off. http://www.grayline.com/tours/lisbon/lisbon-sightseeing-hop-on-hop-off-combo-2lines-for- 2days-bel-m-plus-1line-at-your-choice-5876_68/
Nature and Outdoor Tourism Ontario (2015). Experiential Tourism. Retrieved from http://noto.ca/info_for_your_business/experiential_tourism 111
Tourism Northern Ireland (2015). Creating Experiences: A Toolkit for the N.I. Tourism Industry. Retrieved from http://www.nitb.com/BusinessSupport/GrowYourBusiness/CreatingGreatExperiences/PracticalG uidestoExperientialTourism.aspx
WHL Group (2011), What is Experiential Travel? This is What We Think. Retrieved from http://www.thetravelword.com/2012/06/11/what-is-experiential-travel-heres-what-we-think/
Yellow Bus Carristur (2015). Lisbon Tours. Retrieved from https://www.yellowbustours.com/en/cities/lisbon/
112
Appendix 1
A1.1. World’s Fairs since the End of World War II – Sites, Attendance, and Profits/Losses. Bold font indicates host cities that are located in countries in which English, Spanish, or Portuguese are official languages.
Site and Year Attendance Profits or (Losses) (thousands) Not adjusted for inflation 1949-50 – Port –au-Prince N/A N/A 1958 – Brussels 51,454 (BF 3 billion) 1962 – Seattle 9,640 N/A 1964-65 – New York (not 1964-27,148 officially sanctioned) 1965-24,459 ($21 million) 1967 – Montreal 54,992 (CAD$274 million) 1968 – San Antonio 6,384 ($5.5 million) 1970 – Osaka 64,219 $146 million 1974 – Spokane 5,600 $47 million 1975-76 – Okinawa 3,480 N/A 1982 – Knoxville 11,150 (unspecified loss) 1984 – New Orleans 7,300 ($212 million) 1985 – Tsukuba, Japan 20,335 N/A 1986 – Vancouver 22,000 (CAD$336 million) 1988 – Brisbane 15,760 N/A 1992 – Genoa 1,000 N/A 1992 – Seville 41,815 Ptas. 25.605 billion 1993 – Taejon, South Korea 14,005 N/A 1998 - Lisbon 11,000 ($1.32 billion) 2000 – Hanover, Germany 18,100 ($1.2 billion) 2005 – Aichi, Japan 22,049 $109 million 2008 – Zaragoza, Spain 5,000 N/A 2010 – Shanghai 73,000 N/A 2012 – Yeosu, South Korea 8,000 N/A Table 1.1. Information about World’s Fairs that have taken place since World War II. (Source: Findling and Pelle, 2008; The World’s Fair Museum, 2014).
113
2. Tourism Websites for Cities Hosting World’s Fairs since the End of World War II in countries in which English, Spanish, and Portuguese and official languages.
Site and Year Tourism Website 1962 – Seattle www.visitseattle.org 1964-65 – New York www.nycgo.com 1967 – Montreal www.tourisme-montreal.org 1968 – San Antonio visitsanantonio.com 1974 – Spokane www.visitspokane.com 1982 – Knoxville www.visitknoxville.com 1984 – New Orleans www.neworleansonline.com 1986 – Vancouver www.tourismvancouver.com 1988 – Brisbane www.visitbrisbane.com.au/Travel/Default.aspx 1992 – Seville www.visitasevilla.es 1998 – Lisbon www.visitlisboa.com 2008 – Zaragoza, Spain www.zaragoza.es/turismo/ Table A1.2. Web addresses of municipal tourism websites for the cities in this study. (Source: Google, 2014).
114
Appendix 2 – Full Text of Compilation Tables 2.1. Municipal Websites
Information Seattle NYC Montreal San Antonio Spokane Sought Photographic No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 reference on homepage? Written No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 reference on homepage? How many 3; 2 points 4; 1 point 2; 3 points 3; 2 points 4; 1 points clicks from homepage? Weblinks to Yes - 1 Yes - 1 No venue/ yes Yes - 1 Yes - 1 venues & structure, 0, 1 structures? Mention of SCW (Seattle Yes - 2 Yes - 2 2 clicks - 1 no, yes on location Center park's website within city? Website), on "About Us" - 1 Explanation SCW, on Yes ("get Yes - 2 2 clicks - 1 no, yes on of how to get "About Us" - directions"; park's website there? 1 NYC parks - 1 website) - 1 Reference to No on No on city On buildings' Yes - 2 Yes - 2 mega-event in Municipal, tourism websites - 1 description of yes on website; Yes former venue Center's on NYC or of website - 1 Parks website structure? - 1 Table A2.1a. Full report of observations from municipal websites.
115
Information Knoxville Vancouver Seville Lisbon Zaragoza Sought Photographic No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 Yes - 1 Yes - 1 reference on homepage? Written No - 0 No - 0 No - 0 Yes Yes - 1 reference on (identified as homepage? a tourism zone) How many 3, 2 2, 3 3, 2 1, 4 HP, 5 clicks from homepage? Weblinks to Yes - 1 Yes - 1 Yes - 1 Yes - 1 Yes (non- venues & functioning) - structures? 1 Mention of Yes - 2 Yes - 2 Yes - 2 not on Yes - 2 location municipal within city? website; yes on individual website - 1 Explanation on Park's Yes - 2 Yes - 2 not on No - 0 of how to get website - 1 municipal there? website; yes on individual website - 1 Reference to In name of No; yes on Yes; most Yes - 2 Yes - 2 mega-event in park - 2 website - 1 structures description of were former venue dismantled - 2 or of structure? Table A2.1b. Full report of observations from municipal websites, continued.
2.2. Detailed Information for Trip Advisor observations and scores
Trip Advisor collects ratings and opinions from tourists. The observations for these tables were made 11/30/2014.
Numbers A (NA) 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Ranked 31 or lower 2 = Ranked 21-30 3 = Ranked 11-20 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5 116
Numbers B (NB) 0 = not mentioned 1 = Ranked Third or Fourth Quartile 2 = Ranked Second Quartile 3 = Ranked Top Quartile 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
City NA NB Venue & MESTAs Seattle 1 3 Seattle Center: 37/212; 4.0 2 3 Space Needle: 29/212; 4.0 New York 0, 5 0, 5 Flushing Meadows/Corona Park: NM/859; 1/11 for Queens, 4.0 Montreal 1, 1 3, 2 Ile Sainte Helene 42/242; 4.0; Ile Notre Dame 86/242; 4.0 1 3 Biosphere, 48/242; 4.0 San Antonio 1 2 Hemisfair Park: 75/202; 4.0 Spokane 5 5 Riverfront Park: 3/42; 4.5 Knoxville 3 2 World’s Fair Park: 15/51; 4.0 Vancouver 1 2 Canada Place: 39/184; 4.0 Seville 0 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM/133; 1 2 Isla Mágica Park: 63/133; 3.5 Lisbon 2 3 Park of Nations: 27/242; 4.5 5 5 Oceanarium: 5/224; 4.5 3 3 Science Museum: 19/242; 4.5 1 3 Oriente Staion: 61/224; 4.0 1 2 Vasco da Gama Tower: 102/224; 4.0 Zaragoza 0 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM/82 2 2 River Aquarium: 22/82; 4.0 1 1 Zaragoza Delicias Station: 72/82; 3.0 Table A2.2. Full report of observations from Trip Advisor.
Appendix 3 Trip Advisor collects ratings and opinions from tourists. The observations for these tables were made 11/30/2014.
Trip Advisor Scores A, by ranking 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Ranked 31 or lower 2 = Ranked 21-30 3 = Ranked 11-20 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5 117
Trip Advisor Numbers B, by ranking (1-10) and by quartile 0 = Not Mentioned (NM) 1 = Ranked Third or Fourth Quartile 2 = Ranked Second Quartile 3 = Ranked Top Quartile but Not in Top 10 4 = Ranked 6-10 5 = Ranked Top 5
City NA NB Venue & MESTAs Seville 0 0 Isla de La Cartuja: NM/133; 1 2 Isla Mágica Park: 63/133; 3.5 Lisbon 2 3 Park of Nations: 27/242; 4.5 5 5 Oceanarium: 5/224; 4.5 3 3 Science Museum: 19/242; 4.5 1 3 Oriente Staion: 61/224; 4.0 1 2 Vasco da Gama Tower: 102/224; 4.0 Zaragoza 0 0 Recinto Expo Zaragoza: NM/82 2 2 River Aquarium: 22/82; 4.0 1 1 Zaragoza Delicias Station: 72/82; 3.0 Table A3. Full report of observations from Trip Advisor. (Source: Trip Advisor, 2014).
Appendix 4: Public Transit Data Observations, for Inside Venue or Bordering on the Perimeter, for Each City in the Study. Except for the city of Knoxville (Knoxville Area Transit 2015), the source of all the observations is Google Maps (2015).
City: Seattle – Seattle Center
Information Routes 1st Avenue & Mercer Street 2, 13, 29 5th Avenue N and Mercer St. 3, 4, 82 5th Avenue N and Republican St. 3, 4, 82 Monorail 5th Avenue N and Broad Street 3, 4, 82 Denny Way and Broad St. 8 Denny Way and Warren Place 8, 15, 17, 18, 19, 24, 33 1st Avenue and Denny Way 1, 2, 8, 13, D Line 1st Ave N and Republican St 1, 2, 8, 13, 32, D Line Table A4.1. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Seattle Center. (Source: Google Maps, 2015).
118
City: New York – Flushing Meadows/ Corona Park
Information Routes CR – Mets-Willets Point Port Washington College PT Bl/ 57 Rd Q58 College PT Bl/ Van Wyck Ey Exit Q58 College PT Bl/ 58 Ave Q58 College PT Bl/59 Ave Q58 Horace Harding Exp/ College PT Bl (E) Q88 College PT Bl/ Horace Harding Exp Q58 Horace Harding Exp/ College PT Bl (W) Q88 Jewel Ave/ Park Dr E Q64, QM4 Union TP/ Queens Bl Q46 Queens Bl/ Union TP Q60 Queens Bl/ 80 Rd Q10, Q60 Kew Gardens Rd/ 80 Rd Q10 M – Kew Gardens/ Union TP E, F Queens Bll/ Union TP Q60, QM18 Queens Bl/ 78CR Q46 Queens Bl/ 78 Ave (W) X63, X64, X68 Table A4.2. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Flushing Meadows/Corona Park. (Source: Google Maps, 2015).
City: Montreal, St. Helen’s and Notre Dame Islands
Information Routes St. Helen’s Island La Ronde (W) 769 La Ronde (E) 767 Ile Saint-Helene / du Tour-de-l’Isle 769 La Ronde/ du Tour-de-l’Isle 769 M – Station Jean-Drapeau 4 Station Jean-Drapeau (N) 767 Station Jean-Drapeau (S) 777
Notre Dame Island Casino de Montreal 777 Table A4.3. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around St. Helen’s and Notre Dame Islands. (Source: Google Maps, 2015).
119
City: San Antonio – Hemisfair Park
Information Routes Market and Alamo – 150 ft W 110, 222, 225, 301, 305 Market/ Front of Conv. Ctr. 17, 21, 22, 100, 222, 225 Cesar Chavez and Hemis ViewVillage 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 230 Cesar Chavez Opp Victoria CTS #412 26, 30, 225 Cesar Chavez Bl & Indianola 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 230 Cesar Chavez Opposite Indianola 26, 30, 225 Cesar Chavez Bl Opp J.H. Wood Bldg 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 48, 64, 225, 230 S Alamo & Cesar Chavez Bl 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 225, 230 S Alamo & Arciniega 54, 305 S Alamo & Nueva 26, 225, 301, 305 S Alamo Opp Hislton Hotel 305 Alamo and Market 300 ft S 26, 225 Table A4.4.. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Hemisfair Park. (Source: Google Maps, 2015).
City: Spokane – Riverfront Park
Information Routes Broadway @ Lincoln 1 Post @ Mallon 1 Mallon @ Flour Mill 1 Washington @ North River Drive 1, 27, 39 Division @ Spokane Falls Bl 25, 26, 28 Washington @ Spokane Falls Bl 25, 27, 39 Spokane Falls Bl 2 Bernard 25 Stevens @ Spokane Falls Bl 1, 27, 39 Spokane Falls Bl @ Wall 25 Spokane Falls @ Post 1, 25 Table A4.5. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Riverfront Park. (Source: Google Maps, 2015).
City: Knoxville – World’s Fair Park
Information Routes 2 stops Route 10 4 stops (2 tops x both directions) Route 42 Table A4.6. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around World’s Fair Park. Source: Knoxville Area Transit (2015).
120
City: Vancouver – Canada Place
Information Routes Intermodal - .12 miles Intermodal - Train 980, 996, 997, 998 Intermodal - Ferry 998 Intermodal - Ferry Harbour Lynx Intermodal - Bus 044, 105, 210 WB w Hastings St NS Granville St (.17 m) 135, 160, 190 EB w Hastings St NS Granville St (.16 m) 135, 160, 190 EB w Hastings St NS Hornby St (.14 m) 135, 160, 190, N22 EB w Pender St FS Burrard St (.20 m) N6, 005, 019, 022, 032, 044, 209, 210, 211, 214, N24 WB Pender St FS Burrard St (.21 miles) 019 EB w Pender St NS Granville St (.23 m) N6, 005, 019, 022, 044, 209, 210, 211, 214, N24 WB w Pender St NS Howe St (.16 m) N8, 005, N20, N22, N35 SB Howe St FS w Pender St Bay 2 (.18 m) 014, 016, 050, N17 WB w Pender St NS Granville St (.24 m) N6, 004, 005, 006, 007, 010, 019, 022, 209, 210, 211, 214, N19, N22, N24 NB Granville St NS w Pender St (.23 m) 004, 006, 007, 010, 014, 016, 017, 020, 050 Table A4.7. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Canada Place. Source: Google Maps 2015.
City: Seville – Isla Mágica
Information Routes Juan Bautista Muñoz (Esc. De Ingenieros) (W) C1 Juan Bautista Muñoz (Esc. De Ingenieros) (E) C2 José De Gálvez (Teatro Central) (W) C1 José de Gálvez (Teatro Central) (E) C2 José de Gálvez (Pabellón de Andalucía) C2 Puente La Barqueta C1 Table A4.8. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Isla Mágica. Source: Google Maps 2015.
121
City: LISBON – PARK OF NATIONS
Information Routes Parque Das Nacoes Norte (2) 708 Sacavém (Train) Rua Tibre 708 Passeio Heroes do Mar 708 Passeio Tejo 708 Passeio das Garças 400 Rua de Moscavide 400 Rua Ilha dos Amores 400 Rossio de Levante 400, 708 Moscavide (Train) Ave da Boa Esparança 208, 400, 705, 708, 725, 744, 759, 782 Ave Dom João II 208, 400, 705, 708, 725, 744, 759, 782 Oriente Intermodal Station Metro - Oriente Estaçao Oriente 208, 210, 400, 705, 708, 725, 728, 744, 750, 759, 782, 794 Lisboa Oriente (train) Rua do Caribe 400, 728 Ave do Mediterrâneo 400, 728 Oceanário de Lisboa 400, 728 Ave Fernando Pessoa 400 Passeio Adamastor 728 Hospital das Descobertas (2) 400 Parque Das Nacoes Sul 400, 728 Gás de Portugal 210, 728, 781 Table A4.9. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Park of Nations. Source: Google Maps 2015.
122
City: Zaragoza – Recinto Expo
Information Routes Ronda del Rabal/ Palacio de los Congresos Ci1 Torre del Agua Ci2 Ronda del Rabal Ci1 Ronda del Rabal/ Plaza Las Banderas Ci2 Ronda del Rabal/ Pabellón de Aragón Ci1 Av Ranillas/ Ciudad Justicia 23 Av Ranillas/ Parque del Respeto 23 Av Ranillas/ Juzgados 23 Av Ranillas/ Clara Campoamor 23 Pablo Gargallo 34 Av Francia 34 Rotonda Pablo Gargallo (E) Ci1 Rotonda Pablo Gargallo (W) Ci2 Estación Delicias Salidas (S) 34, 51, Ci2 (329) Intermodal Delicias 501, 603 Estación Delicias Salidas (N) 34, 41, Ci1 T – Zaragoza Delicias Estación Delicias Autobuses 34, 51, Ci1 Long Distance Buses – Estación de Autobuses de Zaragoza (056) – Est. Intermodal J Estación Delicias Llegadas 34, 51, Ci1 (302) Estación Delicias Llegadas 501 Ronda del Rabal/ Frente al Parque Ci1 Ronda del Rabal/ Parque Ci2 Table A4.10. Public transit stops, modes, and routes in and around Recinto Expo. Source: Google Maps 2015.