Abstract

Large scale events such as Olympic Games are an embodiment of the key dilemma in the contemporary strategy for urban planning. They can change city image and activate local community, but they can also destroy the existing city life of a neighbourhood. The myths and dangers involved in organizing the games have been discussed for years, but there has never been a shortage of those actually dreaming about the event, either. Disproportionally large funds allocated for a disproportionally short time when the Olympics take place and for extremely specialised buildings could lead to very unsustainable architecture in every sense. This ‘festivalisation’ of urban design is, however, a double edged sword. Many historical examples of Olympic Games presented in this article prove that all too often they turn into an economic disaster. It is worth noting that the Greek economic crisis could be traced back exactly to 2004 Olympic Games, on which the Greeks spent 10% of the total budget of this small country.

London Olympics have been greeted by Terry Farrell as an opportunity to take a comprehensive look at the capital, which had been fragmented and divided for too long. On the other hand, Anna Minton claims in ‘Ground Control’ that these events become an excuse for privatisation and commercialisation of areas which would otherwise belong to the public.

London Olympics should be a different type of design philosophy. Sustainable design has been high on the agenda from an early stage of design. The article discusses individual Olympic buildings and the sustainable potential of various approaches.