An overview of all challenges for Los Angeles and Paris according to the Report of the IOC 2024 Evaluation Commission. (link)
Venue Masterplan (page 17)
Track Cycling: Extensive planned upgrades at existing Velodrome to remove inside pillars and increase seating capacity would require further discussions between all relevant parties (OCOG, IOC, Olympic Broadcasting Services, International Cycling Union) to find the most cost-effective solution with the best legacy outcome.
Venue Funding (page 22)
Venue owner committed to deliver and finance the IBC by August 2022 as the construction of these studios is considered part of the long-term investment plan. However, there is no confirmed amount of investment for the IBC at this stage.
Spectator Experience (page 29)
Strong public transport plans would be needed to facilitate spectator travel between Sports Parks.
Paralympic Games (page 31)
The awareness of Paralympic sport in the US needs to be further developed.
Certain areas within the Paralympic Village would be difficult for wheelchair users due to steep gradients.
Paralympic Joint Marketing Programme Agreement (PJMPA) has not been received and agreed yet. LA 2024 committed to submit the PJMPA as soon as the Joint Marketing Programme Agreement (JMPA) is finalised.
Sports Development (page 34)
At this stage, no targets set for increased sports participation, which would make it difficult to measure achievements.
Sustainability (page 35)
‘Energy Positive Games’ commitment could prove complex to deliver and monitor because it relies on a number of third parties.
Sustainability management systems approach needs to be further developed.
Sports Expertise (page 39)
For a number of less popular sports in the US, in particular those using temporary venues, a carefully planned test event schedule would need to be established.
Transport (page 40)
Successful implementation of the Games transport strategy including the Olympic Route Network would require significant efforts to manage and reduce traffic.
Limited public transport capacity and network coverage to South Bay Sports Park and Valley Sports Park.
OCOG Budget (page 44)
Some venue-use agreements are based on revenue or cost-recovery arrangements, where the amount payable is not fixed, creating some financial and operational risk to the OCOG. However, this is somewhat mitigated by the availability of other existing venues.
Legal Matters and Guarantees (page 46)
Further clarification needed regarding conditions and procedures for work permits, and the application of labour laws to Olympic-related personnel.
Further clarification needed as to what measures will be implemented to comply with tax-related HCC requirements and avoid impact on the OCOG budget.
Governance Structure Games & Legacy Delivery (page 47)
No official structure in place for interface between OCOG and public authorities at regional, state and national levels to coordinate government services.
Venue Masterplan (page 53)
Creating a special Olympic atmosphere at the Grand Paris Zone would be more challenging as the venues are spread over a larger area with no central celebration site in
Triathlon / marathon swimming: The City of Paris has declared its intention to clean up the River Seine by 2024. Water quality could be a challenge if targets are not achieved. However, a backup solution exists that ensures that athletes would compete in good conditions.
Volleyball: Extensive temporary construction for a secondary Volleyball venue does not seem necessary and would require further discussion with the International Volleyball Federation (FIVB) and IOC regarding the potential to save costs
Venue Funding (page 58)
All funding guarantees refer to specific amounts. A renegotiation process would need to take place to determine who would cover any cost overruns that exceed contingencies
Olympic Village(s) (page 62)
Land acquisition from private owners is incomplete (30% of land still to be acquired) but public authorities are empowered to acquire it under an accelerated process (project of public interest).
Village delivery: refer to “Venue Funding” chapter
Paralympic Games (page 67)
Proposed timing of the Games after school holidays would increase traffic, putting pressure on the Games’ transport operations.
Metro not yet fully accessible.
Legacy Use of New Permanent Venues (page 67)
A detailed financial and operational model would need to be established for the Media Village.
Sports Development (page 70)
Difficulty of achieving goal of 80% sports participation.
Sustainability (page 71)
Coordination of the sustainability programme given its broad scope and number of parties involved.
Some specific targets are very ambitious (e.g. green building standards, carbon management, zero waste and food)
Impact on the Natural Environment, Cultural Heritage and Communities (page 72)
Managing concerns of local stakeholders regarding the planned Media Village at Le Bourget.
Transport (page 76)
Effective traffic management measures including travel demand management and the implementation of the Olympic Route Network would be critical elements for successful transport operations.
OCOG Budget (page 80)
Security, overlay and temporary infrastructure costs may be understated, but could be offse by potential expenditure reductions in other areas
Legal Matters and Guarantees (page 82)
Legislative measures would be required to implement a number of guarantees (e.g. taxes, shortfall guarantee). In some areas, this would be facilitated by the foreseen Olympic and Paralympic Law that would empower the Government to act through executive orders. These legislative and executive measures should be pre-submitted to the IOC for review Labour legislation could have some impact on budgets (e.g. increased staffing needs due to maximum working hours)
Governance Structure Games & Legacy Delivery (page 83)
As there is no hierarchical structure between the different Games-related entities, it would be important to clearly define the detailed roles and responsibilities in the multi-party agreements