Dreaded Commute to the City Is Keeping Offices Mostly Empty

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Emprise du Lion

I'm going to have to agree with Obadno. I'm currently reverse commuting out of St. Louis for my job, and my drive time is far shorter than friends driving with the flow of traffic going a similar distance. In a perfect world my job would be in the city, and maybe down the line a different job will be, but I'd much rather have the city's amenities than living in the suburbs next to my job. I already tried that, and it wasn't for me.

It depends on the city. If cars are the primary mode of transportation in the region then it probably makes little difference. But in a city with a high percentage of transit commuters, reverse commuting doesn't really make sense. Housing costs will be more expensive in the city than the suburbs, and the commute will be longer than if you worked in the city (or lived in the burbs).

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Emprise du Lion

Chicagoland comprises some 2/3 of Illinois' total population. What will mess up your perspective of Illinois even more is that the next largest populated area in Illinois is the Metro East, which are St. Louis' suburbs in Illinois. The area is highly decentralized and not nearly as built up as the Missouri side of the river as well. It's a collection older historic cities, newer suburbs, flood plains, and urban decay all spread across multiple counties and with corn fields spread everywhere.

It's a shame that the IL side of metro st. Louis is as decentralized as it is. It'd likely be a much more desirable and interesting place if the East St. Louis core hadn't so thoroughly imploded and was more akin to the Kentucky side of Cincinnati.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

southern IN below Indy has some pretty large tracts of forest land, including brown county state park/yellowwood state forest, which together hold some 800 sq. miles of woodlands. and there are LOTS of other stands of woods down there, like hoosier national forest, interspersed with farmland.

A unique spot in Indiana is the gigantic Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuge, which is the former Jefferson Proving Ground, where the U.S. Army tested artillery from the 1940s through the 1990s. It's roughly 15 miles north/south and 2-3 miles east/west (almost the exact same size as the Great Smoky Mountain National Park) and fenced off permanently from surrounding farms:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bi...!4d-85.4148139

This is, by far, the largest contiguous area in the eastern half of the United States that is being allowed to return to its natural state, sort of like the Chernobyl exclusion zone.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It depends on the city. If cars are the primary mode of transportation in the region then it probably makes little difference. But in a city with a high percentage of transit commuters, reverse commuting doesn't really make sense. Housing costs will be more expensive in the city than the suburbs, and the commute will be longer than if you worked in the city (or lived in the burbs).

There are like 3 or 4 metros in the USA like this at most. Bay area, Chicago, NYC... DC kind of. Other than that US metros are spread out/multi nodal and/or don't have a robust transit system so its driving no matter what.

[Steely Dan]

^ Philly and Boston also have robust rapid transit and commuter rail systems, at least by US standards.

[Marshal]

I operate an architecture firm with offices in downtown Vancouver, 1/2 block from Skytrain.

Staff: 2 principals, 1 junior architect, 3 drafts-people, 1 building technologist, and 2 office staff + a bunch of periodic contract employees and 4 other partnering architectural firms.

The people who need to be in the office most are the project and design heads. Their work is collaborative and full of complex, sometimes time sensitive, decision making. There is no set hours/schedule, but the in-office time would be about 4 days of about 4 hours where they are all in together.

Likewise, drafts-people and bldg-techs need to be 'at hand' for instruction and feedback to facilitate a reasonable efficient document production.

The rest can work in as flexible a manner as works for their contributions.

As you might expect, the higher the position the more money, the higher likelihood of living in the central city and commuting by car. The lower the position the less money, and the higher likelihood of living further out and using transit to commute.

Members of the first group spend an average of 15-20 mins. one way in reasonable comfort. The second group spend an average of 50-70 mins. in heavy traffic or stuffed into a train car or a bouncing jerking bus. We subsidize the second group by paying for their transit passes, and offset their work hours so they avoid rush hours. We have always allowed an option for these people to arrive after rush hour and leave early and complete tasks at home. Most take us up on this. COVID has pushed this further, and we have adapted to become more efficient and effective in managing the work of each project team to ensure things get done properly while allowing employees to create their own commute related strategies. Happy employees make this possible - so, we treat people well, empower them, and pay them well.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Obadno

There are like 3 or 4 metros in the USA like this at most. Bay area, Chicago, NYC... DC kind of. Other than that US metros are spread out/multi nodal and/or don't have a robust transit system so its driving no matter what.

But that’s bad. That was my point.

Driving many miles every day is fucking stupid. It’s an enormous waste of time.

In a city, at least you can live near to work, and if you change jobs (or apartments), still be near to work. Suburbs don’t work this way - if you leave a job in one godforsaken office park to work for a different company in a different godforsaken office park, it’s very unlikely that they will be right next door. Taking Chicago as an example, if you leave a job in Northbrook and take one in Naperville, your choices are adding 45 minutes (each way) to your commute, or moving your entire family. It’s really stupid.

But yes, American cities are built that way. And that’s why I think WFH should and will be normalized, because if people want to live in a suburb it just doesn’t make sense for them to go to work in an office.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by 10023

But that’s bad. That was my point.

Driving many miles every day is fucking stupid. It’s an enormous waste of time.

.

Well I am of the opinion that the amount of individual freedom and mobility afforded to the average person due to automobiles outweighs the negatives, mainly cities not being as nice and urban as they could be.

[mrnyc]

only a quarter of the workforce at best is even able to wfh, so ...

[10023]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Well I am of the opinion that the amount of individual freedom and mobility afforded to the average person due to automobiles outweighs the negatives, mainly cities not being as nice and urban as they could be.

Commuting is not freedom. I love renting cars on vacation, and take them for the day sometimes when I leave London (Virtuo, like Zipcar but with Teslas ). Road trips are great. But driving an hour and a half or two hours back and forth each day, on the same roads, in traffic? Fuck that.

Europeans have cars too. They’re usually nicer on average than American cars. They just didn’t destroy their cities to make them easier to drive around. Cars are for the countryside, or getting from town to town.

It would have been much better if the interstate highway system stopped at the urban edge (or what was the urban edge c.1950) with a ring road around the city, rather than having plowed right into downtown. The only city where this kind of happened is New York (minus the ring road).

[eschaton]

I'm very happy that over the 16 years I have lived in Pittsburgh, I can count on two hands the number of times I had to commute by car downtown to the office (all of them were cases where I had a flight later on in the day).

When the weather is nice, I bike. In the cold season (roughly November through early April) and when it rains, I ride the bus.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by 10023

Commuting is not freedom. I love renting cars on vacation, and take them for the day sometimes when I leave London (Virtuo, like Zipcar but with Teslas ).

That is an extremely privileged point of view. If you don't have a lot of money and you dont live in an one of the few areas of the USA that has mass public transit you are doomed to live along unreliable bus lines? Not everyone has the money to rent cars.

Maybe its just because you come from London and dont have experience living in a very different environment like... the rural south or small midwestern towns having a car can open op immense opportunity to you that no amount of biking or ZIP cars (If they even exist in your town which they probably don't) or you aren't a college educated person who can write emails doing WFH what are you going to do?

If I didn't have a car I could barely do my Job and I'm not a low class worker I just don't live in one of the 5 urban centers with high density and effective mass transit.

The Ability to hop in a crappy car and drive yourself to a new local with more opportunity is a staple of the American experience and something many of us have done especially when you are young.

Im not exactly sure how people expect the USA, which is still largely empty and with extremely low population density for a developed and even developing country, can simply give up on cars or all move to urban centers.

they cant.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Obadno

That is an extremely privileged point of view. If you don't have a lot of money and you dont live in an one of the few areas of the USA that has mass public transit you are doomed to live along unreliable bus lines? Not everyone has the money to rent cars.

Maybe its just because you come from London and dont have experience living in a very different environment like... the rural south or small midwestern towns having a car can open op immense opportunity to you that no amount of biking or ZIP cars (If they even exist in your town which they probably don't) or you aren't a college educated person who can write emails doing WFH what are you going to do?

If I didn't have a car I could barely do my Job and I'm not a low class worker I just don't live in one of the 5 urban centers with high density and effective mass transit.

The Ability to hop in a crappy car and drive yourself to a new local with more opportunity is a staple of the American experience and something many of us have done especially when you are young.

Im not exactly sure how people expect the USA, which is still largely empty and with extremely low population density for a developed and even developing country, can simply give up on cars or all move to urban centers.

they cant.

The thing is, this kind of job mobility was normal say around 1900. Work conditions were poor, and workers jumped between jobs quite often. Multiple large employers tended to be within walking distance of your home - or if not a short streetcar ride away. It's one reason why the "company town" model became common around this area - it was an attempt to have a captive workforce within a single smaller city, rather than rely upon urban mills where the workers had more bargaining power, since they could switch employers at will.

The decentralization of jobs only happened decades after the decentralization of housing began - particularly with the post-WW2 decision to distribute the military-industrial economy across the country and in areas away from urban centers. Many downtown areas even in the Rust Belt stayed robust for decades however, and the old-line urban manufacturing employment base declined slowly through the mid-to-late 20th century.

Regardless, we only lack freedom when we don't have a car in regards to job choices because we've let an infrastructure which is car reliant build up over the last 70 years. Things could clearly be built another way, as they do elsewhere in the world.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by 10023

Commuting is not freedom. I love renting cars on vacation, and take them for the day sometimes when I leave London (Virtuo, like Zipcar but with Teslas ). Road trips are great. But driving an hour and a half or two hours back and forth each day, on the same roads, in traffic? Fuck that.

Europeans have cars too. They’re usually nicer on average than American cars. They just didn’t destroy their cities to make them easier to drive around. Cars are for the countryside, or getting from town to town.

It would have been much better if the interstate highway system stopped at the urban edge (or what was the urban edge c.1950) with a ring road around the city, rather than having plowed right into downtown. The only city where this kind of happened is New York (minus the ring road).

I don't own a car. That really shocks my coworkers (they are a very different type of people than my Downtown friends). In big metropolises, cars are a nuisance and at least down here, very expensive to keep (insurance, maintenance, parking, taxes) and to acquire (lots of taxes). When you need one, you can just rent one, choose your favourite, and go to the beach, to the countryside.

I guess if I lived in other cities aside São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, I'd probably missed cars. My hometown Londrina, while I find it a very pleasant place, cars are more useful. As I enjoy my car-free lifestyle, I don't intend to leave São Paulo inner city in any case.

[10023]

I grew up in Chicago and I went to college in Madison, WI (where I used a scooter).

My whole point is that all sizeable American cities should have good public transit networks. The fact that they don’t is the problem.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by 10023

I grew up in Chicago and I went to college in Madison, WI (where I used a scooter).

My whole point is that all sizeable American cities should have good public transit networks. The fact that they don’t is the problem.

Weather they should or shouldn't. they don't. I would argue we have seen a huge improvement to 25 years ago but we have a very very long way to go.

Even with concerted effort its a generational process that will require massive investment, huge behavior and culture changes and the cycle of 75 years of building stock.

And all the incentives I see with (Electric cars, self driving, WFH etc) isnt pushing Americans towards urbanization.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Obadno

And all the incentives I see with (Electric cars, self driving, WFH etc) isnt pushing Americans towards urbanization.

I don't think that's true. Public transit in the U.S. is overall better today than it was 20 years ago.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Obadno

Weather they should or shouldn't. they don't. I would argue we have seen a huge improvement to 25 years ago but we have a very very long way to go.

Even with concerted effort its a generational process that will require massive investment, huge behavior and culture changes and the cycle of 75 years of building stock.

And all the incentives I see with (Electric cars, self driving, WFH etc) isnt pushing Americans towards urbanization.

I suppose I should remind you that my original comment was to say that it’s no wonder these people want to work from home, rather than going back to the office, because commuting long distances by car is such a shitty way to live. It’s worse than commuting by train into the city, where you also have the benefit of doing stuff after work.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Obadno

And all the incentives I see with (Electric cars, self driving, WFH etc) isnt pushing Americans towards urbanization.

That's not accurate. For the first time since ever, 2020 Census showed cities grew faster than suburbs for the first time.

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Minneapolis, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, you name it. All growing faster than the surrounding counties.

And for the city whose city boundaries are larger (Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc.), the inner city also grew much faster than the metro area.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by Yuri

That's not accurate. For the first time since ever, 2020 Census showed cities grew faster than suburbs for the first time.

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Minneapolis, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, you name it. All growing faster than the surrounding counties.

And for the city whose city boundaries are larger (Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc.), the inner city also grew much faster than the metro area.

The Trends I'm talking about would not have been apparent in the 2020 census, that is still the, well known and lauded, urbanization we saw between 2006-2020

Not to mention City growth vs Suburban city growth =/= Urban vs suburban,

There are some very urban suburbs and very suburban cities. its not an even division.