The Greater Minneapolis-Saint Paul region ranks fifth nationally in accessibility to jobs by car, following much larger metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Chicago, according to a study we recently completed at the University of Minnesota. The region is punching above its weight following a boxing metaphor. Why?
Accessibility is the product of speed and destinations. The more destinations I can reach in less time, the more accessibility I have.
As noted previously, at 72 km/h the region has one of the fastest street networks in the United States (which has an average of 65 km/h across all 51 metros in the study).
Our circuity (the ratio of network to Euclidean distance) has increased by about 10% over this period, from 1.34 to 1.37 (note the minimum circuity is 1.00, so a 0.03 change over 0.34 is about 10%), meaning the routes are on average less direct. We can attribute this largely to suburbanization, suburban street networks in newly developed areas are more circuitous than networks built in earlier decades. National trends have been similar but more modest, increasing by about 3% to 1.37
Looking at this over time, accessibility has increased about 20% in the metro area from 1990, though it has dropped about 4% since 2000. Overall, the region had the fourth largest increase in accessibility rank between 1990 and 2010, following only Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Jacksonville (To be clear, other cities had larger increases in overall accessibility, but Minneapolis move the most places up the standings.).
The small changes in accessibility from 2000 to 2010 is due to the decrease in employment between 2000 and 2010, following a sharp rise from 1990 to 2000. This also mirrors national trends. There are many reasons for the decrease in employment, including changing demographics, labor force participation rates, and the Great Recession, among others, but the fewer jobs the lower the accessibility. While employment drops, speeds increase (fewer cars on the road) so these effects are somewhat offsetting, though I think most people would trade some congestion for more employment.