Is the corporate suburban stampede finally reversing? Photo: KevinCross-posted fr
Is
the corporate suburban stampede finally reversing?
Photo:
KevinCross-posted
from the
Natural Resources Defense Council.
In the late 1990s, when Don Chen, Matt Raimi, and I were researching
our book,
Once
There Were Greenfields, we lamented the flight of business from
America's central cities to increasingly outer suburbs and farmland. In
that book we frequently turned for data to metropolitan Chicago where,
for example, Ameritech had built a half-mile-long "landscraper" near
O'Hare Airport far from the Loop, Motorola had set up camp in Schaumberg,
and Sears had fled the iconic Sears Tower for Hoffman Estates.
Now, just as
the tide has turned against large-lot suburban residential subdivisions,
corporations are moving back into town (or, as in
the case of Dublin, Ohio, doing everything they can to make their
suburb more urban in character). The best and the brightest of the rising
labor force, it turns out, don't care to live and work in sprawl.
Writing in Crain's,
Eddie Baeb reports that the new trend is changing the face of greater
Chicago:
Companies seeking to tap a broader talent pool and get into the
flow of innovation are looking back to the urban core. Sara Lee is
only the latest suburban company to seek a new headquarters in
downtown Chicago. United Airlines made the move in the past decade,
as did Navteq Corp. and Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc. Some of
the most successful local companies of recent years, like Morningstar
Inc. and Accretive Health Inc., never left the city.
"The whole corporate campus seems a little dated," says Joe
Mansueto, chairman and CEO of Morningstar, who moved the company's
1,100 headquarters workers across the Loop to a new office tower at
22 W. Washington St. two years ago without even considering a move to
the suburbs. "We've always liked being in Chicago. It helps keep
employees on the pulse of what's happening in our society. It keeps
them current with cultural trends and possibly technological ones."
The change has the same far-reaching implications for the region
that the suburban stampede of the post-war era had on living and
working patterns around Chicago. Well-paying jobs are up in the city,
raising questions for the housing market in outer suburbia. New
transit challenges will arise as more workers ditch suburb-to-suburb
auto commuting and board trains and buses headed downtown.
Baeb's article also points out that central city locations help
recruiting efforts not only with young, urban professionals but also with
workers throughout the region: "For most people in greater Chicago, it's
easier to commute downtown than to a suburb on the other side of the
metropolitan area." That, of course, is a textbook illustration of what
transportation researchers call "regional (or "destination")
accessibility,"
the single most powerful indicator among land-use factors of how far
people will drive, on average, over the course of a year. Central
locations both facilitate transit access and reduce driving distances.
All this makes even more ridiculous
the recent decision of the federal General Services Administration
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to move EPA's regional
headquarters out of downtown Kansas City, Kan., and 20 miles away to a
completely automobile-dependent former (natch) corporate headquarters
campus across the road from a wheatfield. EPA, of course, is the agency
that's all about sustainable communities these days. Except when it's
not. Will that decision affect recruiting of bright, creative young
talent? Time will tell.
om the Natural Resources Defense Council.
In the late 1990s, when Don Chen, Matt Raimi, and I were researching our book, Once There Were Greenfields,
we lamented the flight of business from America's central cities to
increasingly outer suburbs and farmland. In that book we frequently
turned for data to metropolitan Chicago where, for example, Ameritech
had built a half-mile-long "landscraper" near O'Hare Airport far from
the Loop, Motorola had set up camp in Schaumberg, and Sears had fled the
iconic Sears Tower for Hoffman Estates.
Now, just as the tide has turned against large-lot suburban residential subdivisions, corporations are moving back into town (or, as in the case of Dublin, Ohio,
doing everything they can to make their suburb more urban in
character). The best and the brightest of the rising labor force, it
turns out, don't care to live and work in sprawl.
Writing in Crain's, Eddie Baeb reports that the new trend is changing the face of greater Chicago:
Companies seeking to tap a broader talent pool and get into the
flow of innovation are looking back to the urban core. Sara Lee is only
the latest suburban company to seek a new headquarters in downtown
Chicago. United Airlines made the move in the past decade, as did
Navteq Corp. and Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc. Some
of the most successful local companies of recent years, like
Morningstar Inc. and Accretive Health Inc., never left the city.
"The whole corporate campus seems a little dated," says Joe
Mansueto, chairman and CEO of Morningstar, who moved the company's 1,100
headquarters workers across the Loop to a new office tower at 22 W.
Washington St. two years ago without even considering a move to the
suburbs. "We've always liked being in Chicago. It helps keep employees
on the pulse of what's happening in our society. It keeps them current
with cultural trends and possibly technological ones."
The change has the same far-reaching implications for the region
that the suburban stampede of the post-war era had on living and
working patterns around Chicago. Well-paying jobs are up in the city,
raising questions for the housing market in outer suburbia. New transit
challenges will arise as more workers ditch suburb-to-suburb auto
commuting and board trains and buses headed downtown.
Baeb's article also points out that central city locations help
recruiting efforts not only with young, urban professionals but also
with workers throughout the region: "For most people in greater
Chicago, it's easier to commute downtown than to a suburb on the other
side of the metropolitan area." That, of course, is a textbook
illustration of what transportation researchers call "regional (or
"destination") accessibility," the single most powerful indicator among land-use factors of how far people will drive, on average, over
the course of a year. Central locations both facilitate transit access
and reduce driving distances.
All this makes even more ridiculous the recent decision of the federal General Services Administration and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to move EPA's regional headquarters out of downtown
Kansas City, Kan., and 20 miles away to a completely
automobile-dependent former (natch) corporate headquarters
campus across the road from a wheatfield. EPA, of course, is the agency
that's all about sustainable communities these days. Except when it's
not. Will that decision affect recruiting of bright, creative young
talent? Time will tell.