jason barr, rutgers, newark troy tassier, fordham eea 2011
TRANSCRIPT
Jason Barr, Rutgers, NewarkTroy Tassier, Fordham
EEA 2011
The Evolution of Land Use in Manhattan, 1861-1905
Two separate business districts in Manhattan.Why did they evolve separately? Why was
there a “jump” and why didn’t lower Manhattan just “creep” upwards?
Was it bedrock or underlying economic forces?
What came first “chicken” or “egg” (i.e. people or businesses)?
What were the early aspects of agglomeration? Did they contribute to two separate districts?
Motivation
The two districts are separated by a bedrock “barrier.”
In Barr, Tassier and Trendafilov (2010), we show evidence that bedrock did not impose a large cost on builders and that conventional wisdom appears to confuse correlation with causation.
Here we investigate the dynamic process by which the spatial dynamics of land use unfold to provide evidence on the rise of these two districts.
Conventional Wisdom
Causes of “suburbanization” and “sprawl”: Do jobs follow residences or residences follow jobs?
Thurton and Yezer (1994) , “We find very little support for the contention that jobs follow population into suburbs.”
Hoogstra, et. al. (2005): Meta-analysis shows that jobs follow people, people don’t follow jobs.
Edge City Hypothesis (Garreau, 1991 ) Office development emerges in suburbs near highway intersections.
“View from Space” (Burchfield, 2006): Sprawl affected geology, topography and climate
Related Literature
Manhattan Population, 1860-1910
1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 19100
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
North of 40th St South of 40th St
NYC Pop. and Metro Area Pop., 1885-2007
1885 1891 1897 1903 1909 1915 1921 1927 1933 1939 1945 1951 1957 1963 1969 1975 1981 1987 1993 1999 20050
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
POP_NYC NYC_MetroPop NYC/Total
%N
YC
/Total
Pop (M)
Skyscrapers, 1890-1901
Skyscrapers, 1890-1915
Trow’s NYC Directories: Employment Category, Job Address and Home Address.
Sample Selection IssueToday: Evidence from 1861, 1892,
1905 In process: 1861, 1876,1892, 1905
Jobs and Residences
Some Example Entries, 1861
Job Statistics, 1861Job Category Count PercentAgent 43 1.34Broker 109 3.39Clerk 72 2.24Commission 3 0.09Exchange 24 0.75FIRE 44 1.37Government 14 0.44Manufacturing 688 21.42Professional 326 10.15Sales 1678 52.24Service 90 2.80Transportation 32 1.00Total 3123
Job Statistics 1892Job Category Freq. Percent
Manufacturing 1,724 35.3Domestic service 667 13.7Transportation 582 11.9Clerk 577 11.8Sales 503 10.3Professional service 354 7.3Protection 154 3.2FIRE 98 2.0Agents and Collectors 87 1.8Peddlers 80 1.6Managers and Foreman 52 1.1Total 4,878 100
Work , 1861
Work and Residences, 1861
Work and Residences, 1905
Residences of Bankers and Insurance Workers
Residences of Bankers and Insurance Workers
Residences of Bankers and Insurance Workers
Work and Homes for Merchants, 1861
Work for Bankers and Insurance Workers, 1861 & 1905
Work Address for Professional Workers, 1905
Steady movement of Bankers and Insurance Workers northward.
Merchants in 1860 will living around Union and Madison Squares but were working downtown.
Jump was due to movement of residences and businesses to follow.
Do not see evidence of agglomeration story but rather “edge” city story, i.e. do not see agglomeration effects cause rise of skyscrapers in midtown.
Preliminary Conclusions