ABSTRACT
Much has been said about the evolution of port cities, from the perspectives of planners, architects, sociologists, economists, historians, and geographers alike, especially in terms of changing urban landscape, port morphology, and other interactions between port and city. Although the definition of the port city concept itself has remained blurred (Ducruet, 2011), most studies converged around the idea that large cities will ultimately get rid of their port activity so as to diversify their economy, prevent their citizens from environmental degradation, be more creative and knowledge-based. Various forms of waterfront redevelopment strategies have emerged since the 1950s to value the city’s maritime culture and atmosphere for other uses than cargo handling operations and related industries. At the same time, transport chain actors, of which the port was one, increasingly saw the city as a constraint to infrastructure expansion, which was required to encourage growth and improved fluidity/movement of traffic. As a result, modern terminals were often developed outside the city’s jurisdiction, where suitable and sufficient land was available, together with better accessibility both by sea and by land.
