| Abstract: | Inrecent years, a debate has brewed over whether the decentralization of employment has been beneficial from a regional standpoint. In this article, we focus on one aspect of the debate: how the relocation of office workers from a downtown to a suburban location affects commuting patterns and mode choice. From a survey of 320 former downtown San Francisco workers who now work in the suburbs, we found that the average distance traveled remained essentially unchanged and that the average commuting speed increased. The most dramatic change, however, was the switch from public transit to drive-alone commuting. In the aggregate, we estimate that the change in job location was associated with nearly a threefold increase in vehicle miles traveled to work. While from a personal standpoint, employees seemed better off since they got to work faster and more comfortably, from a larger social and environmental perspective, the costs could be significant. More detailed analyses of commuter submarkets revealed that the transportation impacts vary considerably depending on whether the original residence was in the suburbs or central city and whether relocated workers had moved their residences in recent years. In general, those who remained in San Francisco and became reverse commuters were worst off whereas those who moved their residences out of the city were much better off in terms of job access. The article concludes that road pricing would be the best way to force motorists to internalize the external costs of increased drive-alone commuting. Second-best options would be to introduce development impact fees or employer-based trip reduction regulations. |
