ABSTRACT The historical timing and spatial configuration of industrialization shape urban development. While early industrial cities such as Manchester and Chicago integrated industrial districts into their metropolitan form during the initial stages of urban growth, cities like Bursa encountered industrialization later, producing distinct spatial outcomes. This study compares these three cases to examine how industrial zones influence urban growth. A mixed‐method approach was employed, combining qualitative analysis of historical and planning documents with quantitative assessments, including a time‐series evaluation of industrial district change and segment‐based space syntax integration. The findings show that although industrial districts increased in number across all cities, their spatial impacts diverge. Manchester and Chicago, having completed industrialization earlier, exhibit cohesive, highly integrated urban structures in which industrial areas have transitioned into post‐industrial, multifunctional zones. Bursa, however, represents ongoing industrial expansion and a dual‐core spatial pattern, with its Organized Industrial Zone (OIZ) forming a new integration center separate from the historic core. These results indicate that industrial districts can generate different forms of urban change depending on their temporal and spatial alignment within the city. Accordingly, the study proposes an interpretive framework that explains how industrial zones may contribute to urban harmony in some contexts while producing urban disharmony in others.
Gokkaya et al. (Thu,) studied this question.