Let Us Have the Courage to Turn Back and Make the National Stadium a True Legacy
MORI Mayumi / Author
July 26, 2014
Japan's plan for a new National Stadium designed by architect Zaha Hadid is creating a major stir. Following a Diet decision to build a new stadium for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2020 - as well as the Rugby World Cup in 2019, the design was chosen through an international competition in 2012. The outcome was criticized by Pritzker Prize-winning architect Maki Fumihiko and others, citing inadequacies in the competition process, deviations from the planned site, lack of a sub-track and the possibility that the cost of construction will significantly exceed the budgeted amount of 130 billion yen and end up somewhere around 300 billion yen. In October last year, we formed a citizens' group to advocate retaining the Jingu Gaien (outer parks of the Meiji Jingu shrine) and the existing National Stadium for future generations , and have been considering the issue from various angles.
The 2020 Olympic Games are sponsored by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and hosted by the city of Tokyo, and will take place at the National Stadium. It is currently being promoted by the Japan Sport Council (JSC) under the supervision of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. However, despite the fact that the project is being paid by taxpayers and its client-users are the Japanese people, the JSC did not disclose what was being discussed by its expert committee or provide updates on the screening process for a long time.
When it declared its candidacy as host city, the Tokyo Metropolitan government said it will "aim for a compact and cost-efficient Olympics by making maximum use of the legacies of the 1964 Olympic Games." It was only natural, considering that many people in the Tohoku region remained homeless and unable to return to their homeland after the tsunami and nuclear accident that occurred on March 11, 2011. The Olympic Games must be a source of courage for the people of Tohoku.
However, the plan to construct the new National Stadium goes against this hope. At 290,000 square meters – or 220,000 square meters in its reduced version, the stadium will be three times the size of the Olympic stadium in London, and will cost a whopping 130 billion yen – 170 billion yen based on more recent estimates. Standing 75 meters in height, it will feature retractable roofs, movable seats and air conditioning systems – all of them massive electricity guzzlers. Planners optimistically estimate maintenance costs at 4.5 billion yen, which are to be covered by revenues of 5.0 billion yen.
By the time the basic plan was announced in May, it barely resembled the original design. Ms. Hadid must have been dismayed. Moreover, the plan made no mention of the sub-tracks or the residents of the Kasumigaoka municipal housing complexes who will be evicted. And the C-film, which is not in inflammable but generates dioxin when burned and deemed too dangerous to use as roofing, was explained away by calling it a “shield.” Calculations were based on a consumption tax rate of 5 percent. The entire plan consisted of stopgap measures arrived at by repeatedly bending logic and fabricating the facts.
Is the IOC aware of this plan? The IOC upholds the lofty ideals of the Olympic Charter as well as the Olympic Movement's Agenda 21, which was adopted in 1999 in response to the Rio environment summit. One wonders if the judges of the design competition were even aware of these principles.
The Agenda stipulates that "A special effort must be made to encourage the best possible use of existing sports facilities." Perhaps it was this clause that prompted the JSC to commission the design firm Kume Sekkei in 2011 to draw up a renovation plan for the existing stadium. Yet, the JSC did not disclose the conclusion of that report, which said that "remodeling was possible at a cost of 77.7 billion yen."
Even where the construction of a new stadium is inevitable, the Agenda says that "These facilities will have to comply with local legislation and be designed to fit in with the surrounding natural or man-made scenery." The planned site is a scenic zone that limits the height of buildings to 15 meters, so publicly seeking designs for a stadium with a maximum height of 75 meters was in violation of the Agenda to begin with. Furthermore, the planned stadium requires cutting down trees and leveling parks within the Jingu Gaien, and evicting residents of public housing complexes. It will destroy the scenic view by towering behind the Meiji Memorial Picture Gallery, a designated important cultural property. The Agenda also calls for information disclosure, consideration for the disadvantaged and consultation and cooperation with interested parties, without which "sustainable development" cannot be realized. Is the IOC prepared to accept the current plan, which so blatantly violates the Agenda? If so, it will leave a blemish in the history of the Olympic Games.
Let us have the courage to turn back. Let us call off the Hadid plan and instead renovate the stadium that reverberates with fond memories of the 1964 Tokyo Olympics into a beautiful and serviceable facility for the coming Olympics. Renowned architects such as Ito Toyoo – another recipient of the Pritzker Prize – say it is possible to increase the stadium's seating capacity to 80,000, implement seismic strengthening, expand the number of toilets, elevators and restaurants, and meet the latest media needs. It would even present us with a further option, of building a new, low-rise stadium with a simpler design.
Mikami Takehiko, a climatology professor at Teikyo University, says the grounds of the Imperial Palace, Meiji Iingu shrine, Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden and Crown Prince's Palace serve as a pathway for the southerly winds that prevent the heat island effect in metropolitan Tokyo. We must avoid constructing a "gigantic greenhouse" in this path. I call on host city Tokyo to conduct a stringent environmental assessment. Construction work must not start until a full-scale assessment has been completed, and the demolition of the existing stadium should be put on hold .
It is said that "Japanese society has an axel, but not a brake." There is no stopping a project once it is approved at the Diet and cabinet level, even when it is discovered to be wrong. The bureaucrats will rush ahead to realize the predetermined plan. That is how large-scale development projects such as airports, dams and nuclear power plants were completed, despite the lack of public support. By pursuing this latest plan for a new National Stadium, we will no doubt be sowing the seeds of trouble for generations to come. The Jingu area will be occupied by a white elephant used only for fifty days, and the Gaien Nishi-Dori (Western Avenue) will become a darkened valley sitting between artificial foundations.
According to an opinion poll conducted by the Nihon Keizai newspaper, 70% of respondents say the plan is "too costly" and over 60% favor "renovation." Let us then have the courage to turn back. An honorable retreat is no cause for shame. I firmly believe that communicating the "mottainai (don't let it go to waste)" mentality is the path Japan should take if it is to gain respect in the world in this era of environmental awareness and maturity.
Mayumi Mori is a writer and editor. She serves on the board of the Japan National Trust and is a former member of the Council for Cultural Affairs of Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs.
The 2020 Olympic Games are sponsored by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and hosted by the city of Tokyo, and will take place at the National Stadium. It is currently being promoted by the Japan Sport Council (JSC) under the supervision of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. However, despite the fact that the project is being paid by taxpayers and its client-users are the Japanese people, the JSC did not disclose what was being discussed by its expert committee or provide updates on the screening process for a long time.
When it declared its candidacy as host city, the Tokyo Metropolitan government said it will "aim for a compact and cost-efficient Olympics by making maximum use of the legacies of the 1964 Olympic Games." It was only natural, considering that many people in the Tohoku region remained homeless and unable to return to their homeland after the tsunami and nuclear accident that occurred on March 11, 2011. The Olympic Games must be a source of courage for the people of Tohoku.
However, the plan to construct the new National Stadium goes against this hope. At 290,000 square meters – or 220,000 square meters in its reduced version, the stadium will be three times the size of the Olympic stadium in London, and will cost a whopping 130 billion yen – 170 billion yen based on more recent estimates. Standing 75 meters in height, it will feature retractable roofs, movable seats and air conditioning systems – all of them massive electricity guzzlers. Planners optimistically estimate maintenance costs at 4.5 billion yen, which are to be covered by revenues of 5.0 billion yen.
By the time the basic plan was announced in May, it barely resembled the original design. Ms. Hadid must have been dismayed. Moreover, the plan made no mention of the sub-tracks or the residents of the Kasumigaoka municipal housing complexes who will be evicted. And the C-film, which is not in inflammable but generates dioxin when burned and deemed too dangerous to use as roofing, was explained away by calling it a “shield.” Calculations were based on a consumption tax rate of 5 percent. The entire plan consisted of stopgap measures arrived at by repeatedly bending logic and fabricating the facts.
Is the IOC aware of this plan? The IOC upholds the lofty ideals of the Olympic Charter as well as the Olympic Movement's Agenda 21, which was adopted in 1999 in response to the Rio environment summit. One wonders if the judges of the design competition were even aware of these principles.
The Agenda stipulates that "A special effort must be made to encourage the best possible use of existing sports facilities." Perhaps it was this clause that prompted the JSC to commission the design firm Kume Sekkei in 2011 to draw up a renovation plan for the existing stadium. Yet, the JSC did not disclose the conclusion of that report, which said that "remodeling was possible at a cost of 77.7 billion yen."
Even where the construction of a new stadium is inevitable, the Agenda says that "These facilities will have to comply with local legislation and be designed to fit in with the surrounding natural or man-made scenery." The planned site is a scenic zone that limits the height of buildings to 15 meters, so publicly seeking designs for a stadium with a maximum height of 75 meters was in violation of the Agenda to begin with. Furthermore, the planned stadium requires cutting down trees and leveling parks within the Jingu Gaien, and evicting residents of public housing complexes. It will destroy the scenic view by towering behind the Meiji Memorial Picture Gallery, a designated important cultural property. The Agenda also calls for information disclosure, consideration for the disadvantaged and consultation and cooperation with interested parties, without which "sustainable development" cannot be realized. Is the IOC prepared to accept the current plan, which so blatantly violates the Agenda? If so, it will leave a blemish in the history of the Olympic Games.
Let us have the courage to turn back. Let us call off the Hadid plan and instead renovate the stadium that reverberates with fond memories of the 1964 Tokyo Olympics into a beautiful and serviceable facility for the coming Olympics. Renowned architects such as Ito Toyoo – another recipient of the Pritzker Prize – say it is possible to increase the stadium's seating capacity to 80,000, implement seismic strengthening, expand the number of toilets, elevators and restaurants, and meet the latest media needs. It would even present us with a further option, of building a new, low-rise stadium with a simpler design.
Mikami Takehiko, a climatology professor at Teikyo University, says the grounds of the Imperial Palace, Meiji Iingu shrine, Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden and Crown Prince's Palace serve as a pathway for the southerly winds that prevent the heat island effect in metropolitan Tokyo. We must avoid constructing a "gigantic greenhouse" in this path. I call on host city Tokyo to conduct a stringent environmental assessment. Construction work must not start until a full-scale assessment has been completed, and the demolition of the existing stadium should be put on hold .
It is said that "Japanese society has an axel, but not a brake." There is no stopping a project once it is approved at the Diet and cabinet level, even when it is discovered to be wrong. The bureaucrats will rush ahead to realize the predetermined plan. That is how large-scale development projects such as airports, dams and nuclear power plants were completed, despite the lack of public support. By pursuing this latest plan for a new National Stadium, we will no doubt be sowing the seeds of trouble for generations to come. The Jingu area will be occupied by a white elephant used only for fifty days, and the Gaien Nishi-Dori (Western Avenue) will become a darkened valley sitting between artificial foundations.
According to an opinion poll conducted by the Nihon Keizai newspaper, 70% of respondents say the plan is "too costly" and over 60% favor "renovation." Let us then have the courage to turn back. An honorable retreat is no cause for shame. I firmly believe that communicating the "mottainai (don't let it go to waste)" mentality is the path Japan should take if it is to gain respect in the world in this era of environmental awareness and maturity.
Mayumi Mori is a writer and editor. She serves on the board of the Japan National Trust and is a former member of the Council for Cultural Affairs of Japan’s Agency for Cultural Affairs.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
引き返す勇気を持とうーー国立競技場を本当のレガシーに
森 まゆみ / 作家
2014年 7月 26日
ザハ・ハディッド氏デザインの新国立競技場が揺れている。２０２０年のオリンピック・パラリンピック（２０１９年のラグビーワールドカップ）で使う競技場を新築すると国会が決議し、２０１２年開催の国際コンクールで選ばれた。これに対しコンクール設営の不備、敷地の逸脱、サブトラックがないこと、予算１３００億円を大幅に上回り３０００億円かかるのではないか、と建築家の槙文彦さん（プリッカー賞受賞者）をはじめとする批判があった。私たちは昨年10月市民団体「神宮外苑と国立競技場を未来へ手渡す会」を結成、さまざまな角度からこの競技場を検討してきた。
オリンピックは主催者はＩＯＣ、招致都市は東京、競技場は国立で、文科省が独立法人日本スポーツ振興センター（以下ＪＳＣ）を監督しながら進めている。しかし税金を用い、ユーザークライアントは国民であるのに、ＪＳＣは有識者会議の発言内容、審査の過程などをながらく公表してこなかった。
都は招致に当たって「１９６４年オリンピックのレガシー（遺産）を最大限活用し、コンパクトで安上がりなオリンピックを目指す」と言ったはずだ。これは２０１１年３月１１日の津波と原発事故のあと、東北の人々が今も家を失い、ふるさとを失っていることを考えれば当然の姿勢である。オリンピックは東北を勇気づけるものでなくてはならない。
新国立競技場計画はこれに逆行する。29万平米（縮小して22万）というロンドン会場の３倍の大きさ、１３００億（現在１７００億）という桁違いの費用、75メートルという高さ、電動屋根、電動可動席、空調とすべてが電気多用型、45億の維持費とそれを上回る50億を稼ぐという甘い予測。
５月末に発表された基本計画では、当初案とは似ても似つかぬ形になっていた。設計者のザハ・ハディッド氏も不本意だろう。そこにはサブトラックの事も、霞ヶ丘都営住宅の人々を追いだすことも書かれていない。屋根としては使えない危険なｃ膜（不燃とは言えず燃やすとダイオキシンが出る）も「遮蔽膜」と言いくるめた。消費税は５パーセントで計算。無理を重ね、ごまかし、弥縫策に終始したものである。
この計画をＩＯＣは知っているのだろうか？ ＩＯＣには高邁な「オリンピック憲章」とリオの環境サミットをふまえて１９９９年に採択された「オリンピックムーブメンツ・アジェンダ21」がある。コンクールの審査員たちはそもそもその存在を知らなかったのではないか？
これには「既存の競技施設を最大限使うこと」とある。それだからかＪＳＣ自身、コンクールの前の２０１１年に久米設計に依頼して改修計画を検討させたが、その「７７７億で改修可能」という報告も公表しなかった。
アジェンダはやむを得ず新築する場合でも「地域にある制限に従わなくてはならず、また、まわりの自然や景観を損なうことなく設計されねばならない」としている。15メートル制限の風致地区で70メートルまでよいとする案を募集したこと自体、アジェンダ違反。しかも、神宮外苑の木を切り、公園を潰し、都営住宅の人々を移転させ、重要文化財聖徳記念絵画館の左上に大きくそびえて景観を破壊する。情報公開、弱者への配慮、利害関係者との協議・協調もまたアジェンダの求めるところであり、「持続可能な開発」はそれなくては不可能である。ＩＯＣはこれだけアジェンダを蹂躙する現計画を認めるのか？そうであればオリンピックの歴史に汚点を残すことになろう。
引き返す勇気を保とう。ザハ案を白紙撤回し、１９６４年東京五輪の思い出の詰まった競技場を美しく、使いやすく改修して次の五輪を迎えたい。８万人収容に増やすこともできるし、耐震補強から、トイレ、エレベーター、レストランの増設、最新メディア対応まで可能だと伊東豊雄（プリッカー賞受賞者）らベテランの建築家は行っている。あるいは高さを押さえたシンプルな競技場の新築だって選択肢にはいって来る。
三上岳彦教授（帝京大学・都市気候学）は「皇居、神宮、新宿御苑、東宮御所などの都心の緑がヒートアイランドを防ぐ南風の道となっている」という。そこに「巨大な温室」を置くことは避けなければいけない。招致都市の東京には厳格な環境アセスメントの遂行を求めたい。本格的なアセスが終わらないうちには事業に着手してはならず、解体は中止すべきだろう。
「日本社会にはアクセルはあるがブレーキはない」といわれる。国会決議、閣議決定され、いったん走り出すと間違っていてもとまらない。官僚たちは既定路線の実現に走る。空港、ダム、原発、いままでもこうして国民に支持されない巨大開発が行なわれて来た。新国立競技場計画も計画はまちがいなく将来世代のつけとなり、禍根を残す。50日しか使われないホワイト・エレファントが神宮に居座る。外苑西通りは人工地盤の下の暗い谷間となる。
日経新聞のアンケートでも70パーセントが「高すぎる」といい、60パーセント超が「改修」を望んでいる。引き返す勇気を持とう。名誉ある撤退は恥ではない。それこそレガシーを尊重し、日本の「もったいない」の気質を世界に発信し、環境と成熟の時代に尊敬される道だと私は信じている。
（筆者は作家・編集者・日本ナショナルトラスト理事・元文化庁文化審議会委員。）
オリンピックは主催者はＩＯＣ、招致都市は東京、競技場は国立で、文科省が独立法人日本スポーツ振興センター（以下ＪＳＣ）を監督しながら進めている。しかし税金を用い、ユーザークライアントは国民であるのに、ＪＳＣは有識者会議の発言内容、審査の過程などをながらく公表してこなかった。
都は招致に当たって「１９６４年オリンピックのレガシー（遺産）を最大限活用し、コンパクトで安上がりなオリンピックを目指す」と言ったはずだ。これは２０１１年３月１１日の津波と原発事故のあと、東北の人々が今も家を失い、ふるさとを失っていることを考えれば当然の姿勢である。オリンピックは東北を勇気づけるものでなくてはならない。
新国立競技場計画はこれに逆行する。29万平米（縮小して22万）というロンドン会場の３倍の大きさ、１３００億（現在１７００億）という桁違いの費用、75メートルという高さ、電動屋根、電動可動席、空調とすべてが電気多用型、45億の維持費とそれを上回る50億を稼ぐという甘い予測。
５月末に発表された基本計画では、当初案とは似ても似つかぬ形になっていた。設計者のザハ・ハディッド氏も不本意だろう。そこにはサブトラックの事も、霞ヶ丘都営住宅の人々を追いだすことも書かれていない。屋根としては使えない危険なｃ膜（不燃とは言えず燃やすとダイオキシンが出る）も「遮蔽膜」と言いくるめた。消費税は５パーセントで計算。無理を重ね、ごまかし、弥縫策に終始したものである。
この計画をＩＯＣは知っているのだろうか？ ＩＯＣには高邁な「オリンピック憲章」とリオの環境サミットをふまえて１９９９年に採択された「オリンピックムーブメンツ・アジェンダ21」がある。コンクールの審査員たちはそもそもその存在を知らなかったのではないか？
これには「既存の競技施設を最大限使うこと」とある。それだからかＪＳＣ自身、コンクールの前の２０１１年に久米設計に依頼して改修計画を検討させたが、その「７７７億で改修可能」という報告も公表しなかった。
アジェンダはやむを得ず新築する場合でも「地域にある制限に従わなくてはならず、また、まわりの自然や景観を損なうことなく設計されねばならない」としている。15メートル制限の風致地区で70メートルまでよいとする案を募集したこと自体、アジェンダ違反。しかも、神宮外苑の木を切り、公園を潰し、都営住宅の人々を移転させ、重要文化財聖徳記念絵画館の左上に大きくそびえて景観を破壊する。情報公開、弱者への配慮、利害関係者との協議・協調もまたアジェンダの求めるところであり、「持続可能な開発」はそれなくては不可能である。ＩＯＣはこれだけアジェンダを蹂躙する現計画を認めるのか？そうであればオリンピックの歴史に汚点を残すことになろう。
引き返す勇気を保とう。ザハ案を白紙撤回し、１９６４年東京五輪の思い出の詰まった競技場を美しく、使いやすく改修して次の五輪を迎えたい。８万人収容に増やすこともできるし、耐震補強から、トイレ、エレベーター、レストランの増設、最新メディア対応まで可能だと伊東豊雄（プリッカー賞受賞者）らベテランの建築家は行っている。あるいは高さを押さえたシンプルな競技場の新築だって選択肢にはいって来る。
三上岳彦教授（帝京大学・都市気候学）は「皇居、神宮、新宿御苑、東宮御所などの都心の緑がヒートアイランドを防ぐ南風の道となっている」という。そこに「巨大な温室」を置くことは避けなければいけない。招致都市の東京には厳格な環境アセスメントの遂行を求めたい。本格的なアセスが終わらないうちには事業に着手してはならず、解体は中止すべきだろう。
「日本社会にはアクセルはあるがブレーキはない」といわれる。国会決議、閣議決定され、いったん走り出すと間違っていてもとまらない。官僚たちは既定路線の実現に走る。空港、ダム、原発、いままでもこうして国民に支持されない巨大開発が行なわれて来た。新国立競技場計画も計画はまちがいなく将来世代のつけとなり、禍根を残す。50日しか使われないホワイト・エレファントが神宮に居座る。外苑西通りは人工地盤の下の暗い谷間となる。
日経新聞のアンケートでも70パーセントが「高すぎる」といい、60パーセント超が「改修」を望んでいる。引き返す勇気を持とう。名誉ある撤退は恥ではない。それこそレガシーを尊重し、日本の「もったいない」の気質を世界に発信し、環境と成熟の時代に尊敬される道だと私は信じている。
（筆者は作家・編集者・日本ナショナルトラスト理事・元文化庁文化審議会委員。）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟