But the temporary nature of these jobs meant that they rapidly decreased after the Olympics had gone, failing to maintain a sustainable legacy in terms of employment (Fedderson, 2010). Furthermore, there is no significant evidence that the suggests the Olympics influenced neither the employment in the retail and trade industry nor the overall employment across the state (Ji, 2015)
New & Existing Sporting Facilities
The construction and refurbishment of the sporting facilities required for the Olympics to take place in Atlanta, was supervised by the ACOG (French, 1997). However, modifications and expansions of the sports venues meant that designing and construction process was particularly challenging (Yarbrough, 2000)
In total, 400…show more content… Another important aim was to ensure that the poorest neighborhoods were also profiting from hosting the Games (French, 1997). CODA was in charge of the development of the neighborhoods around the main Olympic venues and were identified as primary benefactors of redevelopment (French, 1997)
A proposal by ACOG was made to restore various low-income housing projects, which would then be rented to Olympics athletes during the Summer Games (Vale, 2013). However, French (1997) points out that unfortunately, the funds secured by CODA for urban design projects were incomparable to the minute funds obtained to make necessary developments in low-income areas. Instead, profit orientated investors provided funding for projects like the Olympic Park.
According to French (1997), CODA raised an estimated 75 million dollars for the design of the Olympic Park and urban planning with the help of federal programs and private foundations, funding the redevelopment of inner city neighborhoods received less money and with the absence/divergence of public funding, residents in low-income areas reaped fewer benefits from the Olympic Games than anticipated
Nevertheless, the redevelopment of downtown neighborhoods earned an estimated sum of 100 million dollars.