adjasi

Hm... I will try to nominate two cities for the "trophy"... LARGE CITY: Los Angeles, CA. Freeways everywhere. Lack of mass transit. And, in a larger socioeconomic sense, they haven't re-adjusted to the changing population of their area or the fact that they're now surrounded by about 30 miles of suburbs in every direction that now contain the middle classes that USED to reside closer to LA around 40 years ago. Physically, it still looks the same as it did in the early 80s except for parts in the direct "Downtown" area... which, compared to Vancouver or Boston or SF, isn't really even a downtown.... and even then, it's all just dense commercial skyscrapers. There are few areas that have any sort of density AND are built for people other than immigrants. And, while the gigantic port of Long Beach and the similarly large LAX should be utilized for the region's continued growth products, they've both been somewhat neglected. Plus all the crime and unemployment at the moment. I would compare the situation to what was plaguing NYC in the 70's and 80's. The problem is, Los Angeles may not have the same "natural benefits" of history, mass transit, parks, and major corporations that helped drive NYC's renaissance. SMALL CITY: Albany, NY. (I would recommend having Google Maps open for this one.) This is a quite biased entry, considering I used to live in the area. And, today the future there looks brighter... that is, compared to everywhere else in the country. So, really, this is based on its history: namely, the projects in the downtown Albany area and those planned for the downtown area in the 60's and 70's. Albany has held the capital of NY for quite some time, usually occupying a comfortable position as the center of eastern Upstate NY near the confluence of the Erie and Champlain Canals with the Hudson River. It's never been the biggest city, but by the 1950's it was comfortably large and had a remarkably vibrant downtown. However, that changed when a succession of mayors, governors, and politicians decided that Albany needed to "appear" bigger, or grow further from its roots, or something. First: The Empire State Plaza. I would suggest that it is the best example of the ideas of "urban renewal" as they stood in about 1970. They basically demolished about 30 blocks of ethnic neighborhoods just south of the city center to build a concrete-and-high-rise version of the National Mall to hold most of the government offices for New York State. Legend has it that it was inspired by Governor Rockefeller's woe at having an unimpressive city for the Duchess of Something or Other's visit. And THEN... they built an expressway (South Mall Artery) from its parking garages to the elevated riverfront expressway (I-787, in itself a poor idea for the fact that it is a 30-foot tall concrete wall between Albany and the Hudson) and a large bridge across to Rensselaer; which was GOING to have an extension of that highway bisecting it as well despite being a town of about 10,000 at its height. In addition to that plan, there were also plans for a "Mid-Crosstown Arterial" providing a route from the intersection of I-90 and US-9 to US-9W near Hoffman Park less than a mile west of I-787 and less than two miles east of a semi-expressway, NY-85, that was constructed. Also, another access road for the downtown, I-687, would have cut through some of the older suburbs nearer to the city. Also, some projects at SUNY-Albany and at the State Office Complex had clear "urban renewal" goals, along with the construction of some actual public housing in the city itself. So, Albany is an emblem of the idea of urban renewal through large expressways accentuated through the 50s-through-70s ideals of a "Model City" and Capital for New York. Almost needless to say, it failed. And Albany has only recently begun to recover... Ironically, its economy held stable through government jobs...