Is open space a magnet for business? A spatial analysis of New York

References

• Altshuler AA, Luberoff D. 2003. Mega-projects: the changing politics of urban public investment. Washington (DC): Brookings Inst Press.
   Google Scholar
• Apparicio P, Cloutier M, Shearmur R. 2007. The case of Montreal’s missing food deserts: evaluation of accessibility to food supermarkets. Int J Health Geogr. 6:4.
   Google Scholar
• Beauregard RA. 1989. Atop the urban hierarchy. Lanham (MD): Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Bollinger CR, Ihlanfeldt KR, Bowes DR. 1998. Spatial variation in office rents within the Atlanta region. Urban Stud. 35:1097–1118.
   Google Scholar
• Boström M. 2012. The problematic social dimension of sustainable development: the case of the Forest Stewardship Council. Int J Sust Dev World. 19:3–15.
   Google Scholar
• Brash J. 2011. Bloomberg’s New York: class and governance in the luxury city. Athens (GA): University of Georgia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burrows EG, Wallace M. 1998. Gotham: a history of New York City to 1898. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cannaday RE, Kang HB. 1983. Estimation of market rent for office space. Office of Real Estate Research. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
   Google Scholar
• Clapp JM. 1980. The intrametropolitan location of office activities. J Reg Sci. 20:387–399.
   Google Scholar
• Clark TN. 2011. Urban amenities: lakes, opera, and juice bars – do they drive development? In: Clark TN, editor. The city as an entertainment machine. Lanham (MD): Lexington Books; p. 97–134.
   Google Scholar
• Cleary R. 1993. Edgar J. Kaufmann, Frank Lloyd Wright and the ‘Pittsburgh Point Park Coney Island in automobile scale’. JSAH. 52:139–158.
   Google Scholar
• Comber A, Brunsdon C, Green E. 2008. Using a GIS-based network analysis to determine urban greenspace accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups. Landscape Urban Plann. 86:103–114.
   Google Scholar
• Cranz G. 1982. The politics of park design: a history of urban parks in America. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crowley GJ. 2005. The politics of place: contentious urban redevelopment in Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh (PA): University of Pittsburgh Press.
   Google Scholar
• Currid E. 2006. New York as a global creative hub: a competitive analysis of four theories on world cities. Econ Dev Q. 20:330–350.
   Google Scholar
• Currid E, Williams S. 2010. The geography of buzz: art, culture and the social milieu in Los Angeles and New York. J Econ Geogr. 10:423–451.
   Google Scholar
• Cutler P. 1985. The public landscape of the New Deal. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DCP: Byte of the big apple. [Internet] c2013. New York: New York City department of city planning; [cited 2013 Jun 20]. Available from: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bytes/applbyte.shtml
   Google Scholar
• DPR: A timeline of New York City department of parks & recreation history. [Internet] c2013. New York: New York City department of parks & recreation; [cited 2013 Jun 20]. Available from: http://www.nycgovparks.org/about/history/timeline
   Google Scholar
• Deller SC, Tsai THS, Marcouiller DW, English DB. 2001. The role of amenities and quality of life in rural economic growth. Am J Agric Econ. 83:352–365.
   Google Scholar
• Ellison G, Glaeser EL. 1999. The geographic concentration of industry: does natural advantage explain agglomeration? Am Econ Rev. 89:311–316.
   Google Scholar
• Fainstein SS. 2007. Tourism and the commodification of urban culture. Urban Reinventors, Issue2.
   Google Scholar
• Florida R. 2002a. The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, life, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Florida R. 2002b. Bohemia and economic geography. J Econ Geogr. 2:55–71.
   Google Scholar
• Florida RL, Kenney M. 1988. Venture capital, high technology and regional development. Reg Stud. 22:33–48.
   Google Scholar
• Foglesong RE. 1986. Planning the capitalist city: the colonial era to the 1920s. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frieden BJ, Sagalyn LB. 1989. Downtown, inc.: how America rebuilds cities. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glaeser EL, Kolko J, Saiz A. 2001. Consumer city. J Eco Geogr. 1:27–50.
   Google Scholar
• Gottlieb PD. 1994. Amenities as an economic development tool: is there enough evidence? Econ Dev Q. 8:270–285.
   Google Scholar
• Green GP. 2001. Amenities and community economic development: strategies for sustainability. J Reg Anal Policy. 31:61–76.
   Google Scholar
• Harnik P. 2010. Urban green: innovative parks for resurgent cities. Washington (DC): Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helpman E, Krugman PR. 1985. Market structure and foreign trade: increasing returns, imperfect competition, and the international economy. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson Yard: Public Investment. [Internet]. c2013. New York: Hudson Yards; [cited 2013 Jun 20]. Available from: http://www.hudsonyardsnewyork.com/the-story/new-west-side/public-investment
   Google Scholar
• Ihlanfeldt KR, Raper MD. 1990. The intrametropolitan location of new office firms. Land Econ. 66:182–198.
   Google Scholar
• Jain P, Jain P. 2013. Sustainability assessment index: a strong sustainability approach to measure sustainable human development. Int J Sust Dev World. 20:116–122.
   Google Scholar
• Kasarda JD, Irwin MD. 1991. National business cycles and community competition for jobs. Soc Forces. 69:733–761.
   Google Scholar
• Kotkin J. 2002. The new geography: how the digital revolution is reshaping the American landscape. New York (NY): Random House Digital.
   Google Scholar
• Laverne RJ, Winson Geideman K. 2003. The influence of trees and landscaping on rental rates at office buildings. J Arboricult. 29:281–290.
   Google Scholar
• Lopate P. 2008. Waterfront: a walk around Manhattan. New York: Anchor.
   Google Scholar
• Malecki EJ. 1987. The R&D location decision of the firm and ‘creative’ regions – a survey. Technovation. 6:205–222.
   Google Scholar
• McDonogh GW, Peterson M, editors. 2012. Global downtowns. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muller EK. 2006. Renaissance and renewal. In: Joseph LS, Kevin JP, editors. Pittsburgh and the appalachians. Pittsburgh (PA): University of Pittsburgh Press; p. 7–20.
   Google Scholar
• Musterd S, Murie A. 2010. Making competitive cities. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• New York City Commission. 2013. East midtown rezoning and related actions, draft environmental impact statement. New York: City of New York, City Planning Commission (US). (No. 13DCP011M).
   Google Scholar
• Okada Co: Okada & Company Annual Report. 2011. [Internet] c2013. New York: Okada & company; [cited 2013 Jun 15]. Available from: http://www.okadaco.com/news.asp?rec_id=100050
   Google Scholar
• Platt RH. 2009. The humane megacity. Environ Sci Policy Sust Dev. 51:46–59.
   Google Scholar
• Reitano JR. 2010. The restless city: a short history of New York from colonial times to the present. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal SS, Strange WC. 2001. The determinants of agglomeration. J Urban Econ. 50:191–229.
   Google Scholar
• Scott AJ. 2006. Entrepreneurship, innovation and industrial development: geography and the creative field revisited. Small Bus Econ. 26:1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Segal NS. 1986. Universities and technological entrepreneurship in Britain: some implications of the Cambridge phenomenon. Technovation. 4:189–204.
   Google Scholar
• Sivitanidou R. 1995. Urban spatial variations in office-commercial rents: the role of spatial amenities and commercial zoning. J Urban Econ. 38:23–49.
   Google Scholar
• Smoyer Tomic KE, Hewko JN, Hodgson MJ. 2004. Spatial accessibility and equity of playgrounds in Edmonton, Canada. Can Geogr. 48:287–302.
   Google Scholar
• Strom E. 2002. Converting pork into porcelain cultural institutions and downtown development. Urban Aff Rev. 38:3–21.
   Google Scholar
• Talen E, Anselin L. 1998. Assessing spatial equity: an evaluation of measures of accessibility to public playgrounds. Environ Plann A. 30:595–614
   Google Scholar
• Thompson JW, HannaOlin Ltd. 1997. The rebirth of New York City’s Bryant Park. Washington (DC): Spacemaker Press.
   Google Scholar
• US Census Bureau: North American industry classification system [Internet]. c2010. United States Census Bureau; [cited 2013 Jun 20]. Available from: http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/
   Google Scholar
• US Census Bureau: American fact finder [Internet]. c2012. United States Census Bureau; [cited 2013 Jun 18]. Available from: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
   Google Scholar
• WNYC: Bloomberg’s final state of the city address [Internet]. c2013. New York: WNYC News Blog; [cited 2013 Sept 5]. Available from: http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/wnyc-news-blog/2013/feb/14/text-bloombergs-final-state-city-address/
   Google Scholar
• Witten K, Exeter D, Field A. 2003. The quality of urban environments: mapping variation in access to community resources. Urban Stud. 40:161–177.
   Google Scholar
• Zucker LG, Darby MR, Armstrong J. 1998. Geographically localized knowledge: spillovers or markets? Econ Inq. 36:65–86.
   Google Scholar