Since the economic crisis of the mid-1970s, urban governments in the United States and Great Britain have used programs to stimulate office development as their main vehicle for encouraging economic growth. Two cases of government-sponsored redevelopment are compared: Spitalfields in East London and downtown Brooklyn, New York. Both are in impoverished peripheral areas and involve the creation of large projects that require a transformation of land uses; each involves the activity of a public-private partnership. Despite some differences in types of governmental activity that result from different ideological and institutional traditions, the elements of the two projects are strikingly alike.
References
1.
AltermanRKaydenJ S, 1988, “Developer provisions of public benefits: Toward a consensus vocabulary”, in Private Supply of Public Services Ed. AltermanR (New York University Press, New York) pp 22–32
2.
BarnekovTBoyleRRichD, 1989Privatism and Urban Policy in Britain and the United States (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
3.
BreznickA, 1991, “Forest City will join big Brooklyn project”Grain's New York Business 18 February, pages 3, 22
4.
ChurchA, 1988, “Urban regeneration in London Docklands: A five-year policy review”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy6187–208
5.
COTY 2000, 1987, “New York ascendant”, Commission on the Year 2000, New York; copy available from the author
6.
DunlapD W, 1991, “How developers and city hall retain big tenants”The New York Times 16 June
7.
FainsteinS S, 1991, “Promoting economic development: Urban planning in the United States and Great Britain”Journal of the American Planning Association57 (Winter) 22–33
8.
FainsteinS S, 1993The City Builders (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
9.
FainsteinS SYoungK, 1992, “Politics and state policy in economic restructuring”, in Divided Cities Eds FainsteinS SGordonIHarloeM (Basil Blackwell, Oxford) pp 203–235
10.
Forest City Ratner, 1992, “MetroTech Center fact sheet”, February; MetroTech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201
11.
FormanC, 1989Spitalfields: A Battle for Land (Hilary Shipman, London)
12.
GlueckGGardnerP, 1991Brooklyn: People and Places, Past and Present (Harry N Abrams, New York)
13.
HambletonR, 1989, “Urban government under Thatcher and Reagan”Urban Affairs Quarterly24359–388
14.
HoulderV, 1992, “Two projects in the City come nearer to fruition”Financial Times 28–29 March
15.
LPAC, 1991, “London: World city”, London Planning Advisory Committee, Eastern House, 8–10 Eastern Road, Romford RM1 3PN
16.
LueckT J, 1988, “New York gives a bank a break; the return is uncertain”The New York Times 13 November
17.
MitchellA, 1992, “Brooklyn office project gets long-term tenant”The New York Times 26 February
18.
MyersS L, 1992The New York Times 15 May
19.
O'NeillHMossM L, 1991, “Reinventing New York”, Urban Research Center, Robert F Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, New York University, New York
20.
OserA S, 1988, “Lease gives impetus to Brooklyn project”The New York Times 3 April
21.
RetkwaR, 1992, “MetroTech a boon for Brooklyn environs”Crain's New York Business 20 April, page 33
