Amazon HQ2

[brando]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I like the facade designs. I think those are actually quite beautiful. And the angled roof on the one in the foreground in that last one is ok. The others are just modern boxes, with the exception of the tallest one.

I think it looks really coo. I like the idea on selling them on the Domain as a different "city core". It's just so far from the Airport. The best option will be down the 183 tollway but that highway is going to get congested as people start using it while I-35 is getting re-built. You'll still have to deal with 183 between mopac and 35 which easily backs up.

That's not to say that it eliminates it but I guess it depends on how heavy a factor that is for them and all the other factors play out. I'm guessing with a campus that big that they imagine they would have some amount of people flying in and out daily for various dealings. That might be especially true for higher level executives that want to live in Seattle and make a trip to their other HQ as casual as possible.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by brando

I think it looks really coo. I like the idea on selling them on the Domain as a different "city core". It's just so far from the Airport. The best option will be down the 183 tollway but that highway is going to get congested as people start using it while I-35 is getting re-built.

They're basically double/tripling the highway. I'm not sure it's going to get that congested. Especially not in the (hopefully short) term of I35 construction of the first decade of it's use.

Originally Posted by brando

You'll still have to deal with 183 between mopac and 35 which easily backs up.

Agreed. I'm actually somewhat surprised we haven't seen any plans/proposals for improving that section. It's rapidly becoming the chokepoint of the entire inner highway loop (if not the entire local highway system). It's 123 in the most recent list of most congested highway segments, but a bunch of the ones above it are being improved.

Though undoubtedly some of it's congestion is backup from other segments. Improving the 183 to SB 35 ramp should help some.


in the medium term, from the domain it may be faster to head down Mopac toll (once Mopac South toll is in) and then over on 71.

Originally Posted by brando

That's not to say that it eliminates it but I guess it depends on how heavy a factor that is for them and all the other factors play out. I'm guessing with a campus that big that they imagine they would have some amount of people flying in and out daily for various dealings. That might be especially true for higher level executives that want to live in Seattle and make a trip to their other HQ as casual as possible.

It may also depend on how much Amazon really walks their talk of transit. From Broadmore, it's down the Red Line to downtown and then the 20 (hopefully soon the 820 rapid) to the airport.

[brando]

Originally Posted by Novacek

They're basically double/tripling the highway. I'm not sure it's going to get that congested. Especially not in the (hopefully short) term of I35 construction of the first decade of it's use.

Oh man you're looking at 10 times the amount of capacity that 183 east can hold once it's done. There is even going to be less lights on the frontage roads and every intersection will have protected U-Turns. Still, people adjust their driving routes when new highways open and it's going to be a nightmare when they start to work on 35 in the central corridor. It won't just be natural growth for the area.

Hopefully you're right now and it'll be a long time before we see congestion. They did a great job designing that highway. It'll show people what you can do when you actually preserve land next to corridors instead of building right next to them.

Originally Posted by Novacek

Agreed. I'm actually somewhat surprised we haven't seen any plans/proposals for improving that section. It's rapidly becoming the chokepoint of the entire inner highway loop (if not the entire local highway system). It's 123 in the most recent list of most congested highway segments, but a bunch of the ones above it are being improved.

Though undoubtedly some of it's congestion is backup from other segments. Improving the 183 to SB 35 ramp should help some.

Yea, I've thought the same thing. Maybe they don't see a strong point until they've re-worked 35 and 183 North of Mopac. We see the problem with working too soon on a middle segment like the current mopac toll section.

I think the re-worked 35NB to 183NB might make congestion worse on 183 since you will have more constant merging as oppose to now where the curve forces people to separate themselves. Here is the work on 183 that is going to happen with the upcoming ramp work: https://image.ibb.co/k2FYfw/Indv_schematic_Runberg_290_East_C_copy.jpg

They are going to have to close that ramp for 3-6 months while they rebuild half of it (orange part) but I think they are going to build the SB35 to NB183 ramp and get people to go to Runberg and U-Turn.

Originally Posted by Novacek

in the medium term, from the domain it may be faster to head down Mopac toll (once Mopac South toll is in) and then over on 71.

The problem is that route won't be any better until the Mopac South project is finished. That one was delayed by a year because of a lawsuit. It's resumed but it's still in the design phase. 183 South would be done by the time Amazon is setting up shop.

Originally Posted by Novacek

It may also depend on how much Amazon really walks their talk of transit. From Broadmore, it's down the Red Line to downtown and then the 20 (hopefully soon the 820 rapid) to the airport.

Very true. Who knows how serious they are about what. I don't think I could see them taking the trail to downtown and then a bus. I think they would just Uber.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by brando

I'm guessing with a campus that big that they imagine they would have some amount of people flying in and out daily for various dealings. That might be especially true for higher level executives that want to live in Seattle and make a trip to their other HQ as casual as possible.

Another thing to remember is that the HQ2 proposal is a staged rollout (according to the RFC). By the time the campus is so large that executives are flying daily (10-15 years), a lot of these projects we're talking about will be done. I35 construction will have it's inevitable delays, of course, but I think 10 years from now, worst case. Mopac South even sooner.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by brando

Yea, I've thought the same thing. Maybe they don't see a strong point until they've re-worked 35 and 183 North of Mopac. We see the problem with working too soon on a middle segment like the current mopac toll section.

My fear is that TxDot backed themselves into a corner with that segment of 183. Most of that section is elevated over the frontage roads. Maybe they planned ahead and built the supports strong enough to support another lane or two inside/outside, but if not there's not really any way I can see to expand it. And there's not sufficient political capital to go the I35 route and bury it (or a chance for it to be worth the cost, honestly).


Probably better for the transportation thread.

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Another thing to remember is that the HQ2 proposal is a staged rollout (according to the RFC). By the time the campus is so large that executives are flying daily (10-15 years), a lot of these projects we're talking about will be done. I35 construction will have it's inevitable delays, of course, but I think 10 years from now, worst case. Mopac South even sooner.

I think this is probably one of the most important things to keep in mind. 50,000 new workers won't just plunk down instantaneously in the middle of the city at the selection date. The ramp up will probably take a decade or more.

This is one of the primary reasons I've kept faith in the Austin option -- we're certainly not a perfect location in 2017, but by 2027 it's feasible we'd be an entirely different urban environment.

[undergroundman]

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/...sses-the-cut-in-new-ranking-of-best.html

Austin was apparently not up to snuff in a new study that ranks the top 25 U.S. metros likely to land Amazon.com’s $5 billion second headquarters project.

The study, by real estate research firm Reis Inc. (Nasdaq: REIS), even included New Orleans (No. 7), Syracuse, N.Y. (No. 17) and Chattanooga, Tennessee (No. 25).

Sad.

What's more, betting website Paddy Power, that initially had Austin at 3-to-1 odds to land HQ2, now puts Atlanta’s odds of landing Amazon’s 'HQ2' at 3-to-1, beating Austin and Boston (both at 7-to-1). New York has 14-1 odds.

This is what happens when you offer Merck incentives to bring 600 jobs to town but offer Amazon zilch to bring 50k jobs. In lieu of incentives, the mayor turns the table on Amazon and asks what they can do for Austin if they chose to come here. What a slap in the face. Austin really needs to get over itself.

The city needs the jobs more than Amazon needs to be in this city. We may not need it now, but there will most certainly come a time when jobs will become scarce. You might feel secure in your jobs and don't give two shits about whether they come here or not, but think of those who are not so secure in theirs.

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by undergroundman

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/...sses-the-cut-in-new-ranking-of-best.html





Sad.




This is what happens when you offer Merck incentives to bring 600 jobs to town but offer Amazon zilch to bring 50k jobs. In lieu of incentives, the mayor turns the table on Amazon and asks what they can do for Austin if they chose to come here. What a slap in the face. Austin really needs to get over itself.

The city needs the jobs more than Amazon needs to be in this city. We may not need it now, but there will most certainly come a time when jobs will become scarce. You might feel secure in your jobs and don't give two shits about whether they come here or not, but think of those who are not so secure in theirs.

Seriously all these guessing games need to be taken with heaps of salt. The ones that do include Austin, the ones that don't. Austin has ranked relatively high for the most part but these guessing games are really all over the place and they will continue to be.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Seriously all these guessing games need to be taken with heaps of salt. The ones that do include Austin, the ones that don't. Austin has ranked relatively high for the most part but these guessing games are really all over the place and they will continue to be.

Any ranking that includes dying Syracuse (who doesn't even reach the minimum population requirements of the RFC) higher than Austin isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on.


Oh, and Syracuse hasn't published any local incentives (only state), so that can't be the reason for the ranking.

[urbancore]

The biggest incentive for my money is, Austin is where their employees will want to go. That will matter more than anything.

[Novacek]

Here's the "report"

https://www.reis.com/amazon-hq-2

From what I can tell, they didn't even look at Austin. It's not a top 25 list, it's a ranking of the 25 areas they looked at (many from NY, because that's where they're located).

[IluvATX]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Any ranking that includes dying Syracuse (who doesn't even reach the minimum population requirements of the RFC) higher than Austin isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on.


Oh, and Syracuse hasn't published any local incentives (only state), so that can't be the reason for the ranking.

Agreed. These lists are no different than the "top 10 places to retire" or "best cities for millennials" or whatever that goes around on Yahoo and such. They are just Buzzfeed type lists with no merit. I don't believe incentives have anything to do with the city Amazon picks, as I think they already knew where it would go.

Also Emporis released a list with Austin as #1.

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Here's the "report"

https://www.reis.com/amazon-hq-2

From what I can tell, they didn't even look at Austin. It's not a top 25 list, it's a ranking of the 25 areas they looked at (many from NY, because that's where they're located).

Interesting. Atlanta and Dallas are noticeably absent as well.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by undergroundman

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/...sses-the-cut-in-new-ranking-of-best.html





Sad.




This is what happens when you offer Merck incentives to bring 600 jobs to town but offer Amazon zilch to bring 50k jobs. In lieu of incentives, the mayor turns the table on Amazon and asks what they can do for Austin if they chose to come here. What a slap in the face. Austin really needs to get over itself.

The city needs the jobs more than Amazon needs to be in this city. We may not need it now, but there will most certainly come a time when jobs will become scarce. You might feel secure in your jobs and don't give two shits about whether they come here or not, but think of those who are not so secure in theirs.

Never trust a list where their Top 3 locales are three of the most expensive metros in the U.S. (in both doing business and cost of living) AND where Austin is not ranked at all. Purely laughable!

Even though I believe Austin is a long shot for winning Amazon's HQ2; they still have to be considered a solid Top 20 possible locale - in Amazon's eyes.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Interesting. Atlanta and Dallas are noticeably absent as well.

Some of the cities that are listed in that report are completely ridiculous. HQ2 is going to eventually have 50k employees. The vast majority of which will be in software engineering and related jobs. Finding general tech talent is a different ball of wax than hiring talented software engineers.

There are very few cities that Amazon can move to that have a base of software engineering talent to hire workers from within *and* can also attract software engineering talent in. It kills me that people don't see just how important that requirement is. I see no way that it is not the #1 requirement on Amazon's list that needs to be fulfilled.

The more that I think about it, the only cities that really fit into that requirement are Austin, DC, and Boston.

Some big cities have a fair amount of "tech talent" because they are big, but they don't already have a lot of software engineer type work that fits what Amazon is likely looking for and/or those cities aren't as adept at attracting that type of talent/work. Dallas, Atlanta, Chicago, etc are a good examples of that.

Boston is heavy in medical technology. DC is heavy in government related software jobs. Austin is the most diverse of the three, so it may have the edge in that respect.

[clubtokyo]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Some of the cities that are listed in that report are completely ridiculous. HQ2 is going to eventually have 50k employees. The vast majority of which will be in software engineering and related jobs. Finding general tech talent is a different ball of wax than hiring talented software engineers.

There are very few cities that Amazon can move to that have a base of software engineering talent to hire workers from within *and* can also attract software engineering talent in. It kills me that people don't see just how important that requirement is. I see no way that it is not the #1 requirement on Amazon's list that needs to be fulfilled.

The more that I think about it, the only cities that really fit into that requirement are Austin, DC, and Boston.

Some big cities have a fair amount of "tech talent" because they are big, but they don't already have a lot of software engineer type work that fits what Amazon is likely looking for and/or those cities aren't as adept at attracting that type of talent/work. Dallas, Atlanta, Chicago, etc are a good examples of that.

Boston is heavy in medical technology. DC is heavy in government related software jobs. Austin is the most diverse of the three, so it may have the edge in that respect.

Totally agree!

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by brando

I think it looks really coo. I like the idea on selling them on the Domain as a different "city core". It's just so far from the Airport. The best option will be down the 183 tollway but that highway is going to get congested as people start using it while I-35 is getting re-built. You'll still have to deal with 183 between mopac and 35 which easily backs up.

That's not to say that it eliminates it but I guess it depends on how heavy a factor that is for them and all the other factors play out. I'm guessing with a campus that big that they imagine they would have some amount of people flying in and out daily for various dealings. That might be especially true for higher level executives that want to live in Seattle and make a trip to their other HQ as casual as possible.

My other gripe on the design is the layout. It should be on a grid system (straight streets) and short blocks. Not doing so doesn't favor walkability.

[undergroundman]

Originally Posted by paul78701

There are very few cities that Amazon can move to that have a base of software engineering talent to hire workers from within *and* can also attract softwaree engineering talent in. It kills me that people don't see just how important that requirement is. I see no way that it is not the #1 requirement on Amazon's list that needs to be fulfilled.

Austin, at one point, was not a tech city full of engineering professionals. Then Dell planted itself in Round Rock. Eventually, small to medium size tech companies starting moving here or organically grew from Dell employees leaving to start their own companies. Then before you knew it, Austin was crawling with tech workers. Tech workers will follow where the jobs are.

Millenials will move on a moments notice if the opportunity is right. Single with no kids, I would say $100k income is a nice opportunity for a young professional, especially if the locale has a low cost of living and the culture is decent.

Yes, it would cost Amazon more to start from scratch in a city with a small talent pool. They would have to pay out a little more in relocation packages to get people to move, but that cost should go into their calculus whether to move to that city or not. To relocate 50k employees with a $10k relo pkg, it would cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $500M over 10-15 years. $50M a year is peanuts. That's worst case. Ideally a good number of the talent will come from surrounding universities with students who already live there.

Also, just because Austin has a good size talent pool doesn't mean that it's available. Austin has something like 3% unemployment. There's not a whole lot of available talent out there. My feeling is thst even if Amazon plans to raid the smaller local companies for their talent, there's only so much dissatisfied talent they can squeeze out of these small companies before they need to import from out of town.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by undergroundman

Austin, at one point, was not a tech city full of engineering professionals. Then Dell planted itself in Round Rock.

Yeah...no.

If you said IBM. Or MCC. Maybe.

[KevinFromTexas]

No kidding. IBM opened an office in Austin in 1937 and had a factory here by 1967, as did Texas Instruments. Motorola came in 1974, MCC in 1983 along with 3M. Dell didn't come until 1984 after all of those. Austin's been a "tech city" however you want to define that for half a century, which is pretty amazing when you think about it.