"The Eroding Legacy of the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta" by Rembert Browne (condos, moving)

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by Tyler_Jolie-Pitt

In other words, Atlanta simply wasn't ready to host the Olympic games at that time, yes?

No, that had nothing to do with what we're talking about. The Mayor basically turned all public right of way into a flea market.

The venues were great, MARTA performed wonderfully and the general atmosphere was very festive.

[Iconographer]

Do I smell a leading question here ?

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by Tyler_Jolie-Pitt

In other words, Atlanta simply wasn't ready to host the Olympic games at that time, yes?

Not at all.

No offense, but your leading question shows quite a bit of short-sightedness...especially off such a small detail. The reason is we did host the games quite successfully.

Like any other places there are multiple political entities involved:

Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games

US Olympic Committee

Atlanta (city proper)

Other various cities involved in the area and throughout the state

Other facilities (ie. Stone Mountain Park, which was actually briefly considered for awhile to be main site of the games)

And then facilities for various sports throughout different states that held some of the competitions


So the thing is the city government isn't the central creator of the olympics and things go far beyond them and their borders, however they have to play along and do their part.

It was ACOG that developed contracts with hundreds of difference entities, did ticket sales, media sales, among many other things to actually put on the production of the games.... not the city.

The city plays a key part in zoning, some staffing (obvious there are lots of police, traffic, special permits, it built new parks, played a key role in moving some public housing and cleaning up some rather decayed neighborhoods, etc...


So basically we are criticizing of one single thing the city government did. They handed out one-time street vendor permits. Almost anyone could get them, they were very cheap, there was little to no control of who could get them, and the permitted areas of operation were pretty much right in the thick of things.... everywhere.

The problem is, not unlike lots of parts Chicago or many other cities, there were significantly impoverished areas in parts of the city. In the early 90s, compared to today, it was far far worse. So basically, we had a bunch of less well off, disorganized people vending for just the cost of a cheap wholesale box of goods and a cheap permit.

It would have worked much better if they organized locations better, limited permits (but enough to ensure competition and a healthy degree of differentiation), and created a bidding scheme on who got the permits. That would have generated higher quality vendors.

[bryantm3]

wasn't the torch lit in atlanta-fulton county stadium?

[bryantm3]

i have a lot of positive memories of the olympics. it was amazing. i was only 6 at the time, but i remember almost everything. it was a blast. there were some pretty stupid moments, though, which lend some credence to the commercialism criticism. the at&t stage was manned by announcers trying to sell pagers and phone service, and there was this giant structure erected with the swatch watch logo on it. it had this conveyor belt running through it, which seemed really exciting, until you got on board and went through it and it was just a big watch gallery... and then you got out at the end and people tried to sell you watches.

riding MARTA was amazing... there were people from all over the world, it truly felt like atlanta was an international city. i daresay to a six year old, it may have well have been new york city. streets were full of people, atlanta was thriving.

afterwards, the city became quiet and it was like old atlanta again. part of the reason that i am going into urban planning is probably that whole experience. i believe that atlanta one day has a chance to become as full of life as it did that summer.

[cwkimbro]

nope. You can see it in this picture. That is where it was for the games.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by HayateWind

We'd be the first host city to completely tear down it's principal summer oplympic stadia since London tore down the stadium they used in the Olympics in 1948.

You are implying that that's a bad thing, when the reality is that it is simply neither bad nor good. A stadium is a venue, not a monument. There can (and for all we know would) still be a monument, assuming the stadium is removed. Ask yourself why would the stadium would be removed? If it would be because its maintenance was neglected and therefore it became unsafe, then perhaps what you're saying would be of concern, but even then probably not. In the scenario discussed generally where the stadium is removed it would be specifically because the land it is on is of more value used in some other way. That's the sign of a thriving city. A moderately-sized monument would be more than sufficient to support your need for "sacred places". A humongous, under-utilized stadium is not necessary nor an appropriate use of valuable urban space. The United States has numerous sporting venues. The idea that every single venue of the Olympic Games, including lesser venues build nearby because that's the way an Olympic Games works, should be forever retained as the premiere venues in the nation for their respective sports is preposterous - a conceit effectively implying that since the last Olympic Games in the country were held here that all sports should be focused here. Instead, we are a large nation and it is natural that many cities participate in that aspect of our society, thereby rendering it wasteful to support dozens of world-class sporting venues in any one city. (The same logic can be made within Europe, crossing national boundaries.)

I think the point is that there is no need for the legacy of the games to be what the author implies it should be - that what the author implies the legacy should be is an overreach.

[arjay57]

It really does seem like the legacy of the Olympics has sort of melted away, especially since the Ted will soon be coming down. Makes me a little wistful.

Nonetheless it was a great thing for the city.

[Tyler_Jolie-Pitt]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

Do I smell a leading question here ?

My apologies. It certainly wasn't my intention to lead anyone, and I think it's awesome that Atlanta had the opportunity to host the Olympics. Whether or not it was the right choice is of course the topic up for debate.

[Saintmarks]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It really does seem like the legacy of the Olympics has sort of melted away, especially since the Ted will soon be coming down. Makes me a little wistful.

Nonetheless it was a great thing for the city.

But we have Centennial Olympic Park. The whole west side of downtown has been forever transformed. This, if nothing else is a lasting legacy.

I was a young father with three small kids and not in a financial place to attend a lot of events, but we went as often as we could to the park just to soak up the atmosphere. It was electric. Yes, the vendors wre a bit over the top but in no way spoi8led the overall ambiance. The worst thing to mar the experience was the bombing. It made me so angry that one idiot could attempt to ruin our Olympics. That they carried on is a testament to the city coming together and weathering this ridulcousness.

Not even going to read the article. Samaranch's snub still smarts. It was totally undeserved. Atlanta is not flailing in debt like Greece, taxpayers aren't holding the bil as in other countries. We put on a great Olympics, had top notch facilities, got people around easily and had a blast as a city and above it all, it was paid for. That is the lasting legacy.