Interesting Article: RIP Suburbs

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by LivingLikeAGradStudent

working from home will not become a viable trend in most of our lifetimes

Just looking on how much technology has made working remotely more feasible in the last decade alone, don't bet against it. Of course, many jobs will still require physical presence but many will not.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by LivingLikeAGradStudent

It's not high-rises vs. manicured cul-de-sacs in California. There are a lot of lightly urban places and neighborhoods that use up a lot fewer resources and leave a smaller footprint than bland tracts an hour from substantial jobs (and working from home will not become a viable trend in most of our lifetimes). It's kind of selfish in 2009 to think of one's ability to drink on the back patio as a land-use perspective.

we live in a service based society. almost any service that is handled by phone, fax, or internet can be handled at home. i work in a major multinational company that handles outsourced HR and Payroll and automotive dealer services. pretty much everyone that can be relocated home is being sent home as leases on buildings expire.

observing the trends of our competitors and other industries i am familiar with, it is happening more and more, depending on how proactive the leadership of the company is.

i imagine whole industries will be remote by the middle of the next decade, simply because its cheaper and more effective that way

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by LivingLikeAGradStudent

It's not high-rises vs. manicured cul-de-sacs in California. There are a lot of lightly urban places and neighborhoods that use up a lot fewer resources and leave a smaller footprint than bland tracts an hour from substantial jobs (and working from home will not become a viable trend in most of our lifetimes). It's kind of selfish in 2009 to think of one's ability to drink on the back patio as a land-use perspective.

working from home, telacommuting, you do not see that as a viable trend? I would disagree with you. It is becoming more popular every day. More and more people are going to the office only a few times a week...Conference calls are replacing some travel, we have the ability to do much of our work from home, even the part time business I am in, is mostly home based. It is so much easier to stay in contact with the world via email, faxing, phones, etc. Technology has changed our lives so much in the past 10 to 20 years..

There will always be need for the "main office" some will work daily away from home and be part of the commuting population, but this will be less and less as years go by.

Nita

[FresnoFacts]

Originally Posted by LivingLikeAGradStudent

It's not high-rises vs. manicured cul-de-sacs in California. There are a lot of lightly urban places and neighborhoods that use up a lot fewer resources and leave a smaller footprint than bland tracts an hour from substantial jobs (and working from home will not become a viable trend in most of our lifetimes). It's kind of selfish in 2009 to think of one's ability to drink on the back patio as a land-use perspective.

Not viable? That is what they used to say about diamond lanes and carpools.

Telecommuting is a very viable trend, just as teleconferencing is coming into play as corporations reduce business travel. Neither will completely replace the current behaviors but will make a large dent.

SCAG's 2002 study put the level of Southern California telecommuting at 3.2% of workers.

But only 2% of the Southern California workers use public transit so I would say that is already a significant number who telecommute.

Now in terms of being an hour from jobs, that is a totally different issue. As long as New Urbanists push that everyone live in urban settings, we miss out on the opportunity to relocate jobs closer to housing. That still accomplishes the goal of reducing transportation.

No reason why a lot of the lower pay jobs in companies cannot be in suburban area office parks or office towers instead of downtown. The company reduces its space costs and employees are close to home/work.

But the conversation is always on moving people into cities, not relocating jobs nearer to existing housing.