Amazon HQ2

[IluvATX]

Sorry if it's already been discussed, but is Austin's full HQ2 bid public? I've heard about the Domain, but it seems a downtown HQ (185 or 600 guad for example) would be much better in all aspects. The Domain seems too suburban, though I'd love to see more info about Catalyst and CBD potentials.

[abigdeal]

It’s not public. The Chamber submitted almost 50 possible sites. Only a few have been made public through other sources.

[We vs us]

Here's a fascinating article about incentives some cities are offering. They completely bypass the idea of flat tax abatement and reach down into the idea of self-governance entirely.

-- Chicago will let Amazon keep its own employees' income taxes.
-- Boston will set up an Amazon Task Force inside its municipal government, dedicated to Amazon's issues alone.
-- Fresno will set aside 85% of taxes paid by Amazon, and let a special board decide how to disburse that money (50% of seats on the board to be controlled by Amazon)

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/this-city-hall-brought-to-you-by-amazon/

[AustinGoesVertical]

While I understand that any municipal incentives are in a sense an investment into the ROI the locale expects to gain from having HQ2 as an economic engine, I still find it disconcerting that they even exist. Amazon has a $570B valuation and is swimming in nearly $20 billion in available cash. If he wanted, Bezos could buy a swath of land, incorporate it into a municipality called "Amazon" and build an entire city center from the ground up. I wish the decision criteria was limited to the features of the city (collegiate talent, public transportation, available land, culture, etc.)

Choose a state with lower income tax... sure.
Negotiate with the municipal government about improving transportation, land entitlements, etc... sure.

But give Amazon employee income taxes? If I'm an employee, I'm calculating that tax based on my original salary and asking Amazon to tack that onto my bonus compensation.

Put them on a board to decide how their own tax dollars are used? So Bezos gets to basically own whichever winning city because he doesn't want to put his fingers into his company's own cash reserve. He himself increased his own net worth by $2 billion on Black Friday. Could literally fund the whole thing out of his own bank account.

I get it.. never use your own money for an investment if you don't have to, just a little sad Amazon has that option. I wish that city money could be allocated to small businesses or budding entrepreneurs who actually need it. Not meant to be a political post at all, but I find it a little ridiculous.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by We vs us

-- Chicago will let Amazon keep its own employees' income taxes.

This definitely crosses the line with incentives for me. It would be reminiscent of the company towns of the 19th and early 20th centuries. This seems like a lawsuit in the making.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by IluvATX

Sorry if it's already been discussed, but is Austin's full HQ2 bid public? I've heard about the Domain, but it seems a downtown HQ (185 or 600 guad for example) would be much better in all aspects. The Domain seems too suburban, though I'd love to see more info about Catalyst and CBD potentials.

They are looking for more than just 1 building. They want up to 8 million sq feet of space which is a little more than the combined sq footage of the original 110 floor World Trade Center towers. It's also about 3.5 times the Empire State Building or 16 times the Frost Bank Tower.

There really aren't any sites suitable for Amazon's needs near downtown. Their RFP says they are looking for a 100 acre site which you can't get close to in the south shore (statesman) area. You can get to about 30 if you add the statesman and its two big neighboring lots.

You can get to almost that amount on the Catalyst Riverside tract at Pleasant Valley but that land is nowhere close to fitting their timeline unless they expand in the domain for the first 7 years while working on the Riverside project. You're talking about waiting for apartment leases to expire, demos, rezoning, massive utility work and then facility construction.

I think the Motorola plant is a good option if they partner with the region to get the Green Line up and going. That's easy access to downtown and many east austin neighborhoods.

Originally Posted by The ATX

This definitely crosses the line with incentives for me. It would be reminiscent of the company towns of the 19th and early 20th centuries. This seems like a lawsuit in the making.

I agree. It's a bit overboard. I do think the desperation that so many cities are going to shows how valuable the project is to a cities economy by the city staffs that manage all these factors that are being thrown around every day.

Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical

While I understand that any municipal incentives are in a sense an investment into the ROI the locale expects to gain from having HQ2 as an economic engine, I still find it disconcerting that they even exist. Amazon has a $570B valuation and is swimming in nearly $20 billion in available cash. If he wanted, Bezos could buy a swath of land, incorporate it into a municipality called "Amazon" and build an entire city center from the ground up. I wish the decision criteria was limited to the features of the city (collegiate talent, public transportation, available land, culture, etc.)

Yes, Amazon doesn't need these incentives to open a new HQ but it would not be economically feasible for them to expand as rapidly as they want to if they didn't get the tax breaks. They are essentially putting all of the money in tax incentives into the 5 billion of civil infrastructure improvement as growing an office faster than they need to. They are going to be taking in a lot of losses in building huge and trying to put together a whole operation of this size this quickly. There is a lot of lost cost.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

Their RFP says they are looking for a 100 acre site

Not strictly true. A 100 acre greenfield site was one possible option they proposed.

"Existing buildings of at least 500,000+ sq. ft., meeting the core requirements described
above and that are expandable or have additional options for developmentnearby.
2. A greenfield site of approximately 100 acres certified or pad ready, with utility infrastructure
in place. The sites do not have to be contiguous, but should be in proximity to each other to
foster a sense of place and be pedestrian-friendly.
3. Other infill, existing buildings, including opportunities for renovation/redevelopment and
greenfield sites, meeting the proximity and logistics requirements of the Project. This can
also be a combination of the above.
4
4. Please also consider the overall proximity of the buildings at full build-out as you are making
recommendations."


So if there are 16 500k buildings, in close proximity, they don't care if it's 100 acres or not.


https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/Anything/test/images/usa/RFP_3._V516043504_.pdf

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

I think the Motorola plant is a good option if they partner with the region to get the Green Line up and going. That's easy access to downtown and many east austin neighborhoods.

That's probably the same issues with the timeline. You're probably looking at 5-6-7 years for a green line to start running. Consider it look 6 years to get the red line operating.

[Maximusx1]

Statesman Site and TxDOT Buildings +++++River+++++ Waller Park Place and Villas on Town Lake and 99 Trinity and IHOP and Driskill Dirt Lot

Amazon could have its own River City

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by Maximusx1

Statesman Site and TxDOT Buildings +++++River+++++ Waller Park Place and Villas on Town Lake and 99 Trinity and IHOP and Driskill Dirt Lot

Amazon could have its own River City

Stop, I can only get so erect

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Maximusx1

Statesman Site and TxDOT Buildings +++++River+++++ Waller Park Place and Villas on Town Lake and 99 Trinity and IHOP and Driskill Dirt Lot

Amazon could have its own River City

That's it. perfect. nice work boys.

my wager still stands, any takers?

we can venmo the money to Kevin to hold.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

Stop, I can only get so erect

ewwwwwwww

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by the Genral

ewwwwwwww

[urbancore]

ABJ reported "no short list" this Friday. Possibly early next year.

Also mentioned, due to the anticipated upcoming site visits, leaks should be expected.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

That's probably the same issues with the timeline. You're probably looking at 5-6-7 years for a green line to start running. Consider it look 6 years to get the red line operating.

That's a good point although I would hope they learned enough about covering tracks for the metro train use so they won't have a 2 year delay like the Red Line but maybe that's assuming too much.

I also think (I could easily be wrong) the green line could take less construction time per mile of track because it has almost exclusive ROW with the exception of between where the Red Line splits away and 183. Just having simple elbow room gives greater flexibility and more productivity than when you guys guys that have to work on a lot of urban streets.

BUT this is Austin. Just assume it'll take longer than you think it should take unless it's being handled by the Airport.

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

ABJ reported "no short list" this Friday. Possibly early next year.
Also mentioned, due to the anticipated upcoming site visits, leaks should be expected.

That's disappointing but not surprising. The timeline seemed pretty tight considering it's related to one of their biggest longterm investments.

[freerover]

This is a good article about the transit challenges when trying to satisfy Amazon HQ needs as well as the apparent long time it takes to get building permits approved.

https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/20...on-hopes-hang-transit-permitting-issues/

While Amazon executives take the next few months or more to pick the location for a massive new second headquarters, Austin real estate and business leaders hope the national audition process has caused local leaders to think about much-needed improvements throughout the city.

That was one of the recurring discussion points at a panel organized by TeXchange technology advocacy group dedicated to the city’s strategy and the likelihood of landing the sought-after “HQ2” project. More than 200 cities in North America submitted proposals and the campus is expected to be more than 8 million square feet with 50,000 employees earning more than $100,000 each.

Outside analysis of contender cities has put Austin among a dozen or so likely winners, but the city’s lack of a comprehensive mass transit system is seen as its biggest weak spot.

Ryan Bohls, managing director of the real estate services firm Newmark Knight Frank, said transportation issues and a widely acknowledged as slow approval process for building permits are likely to cause Austin to lose out when the winning city is announced next year. Bohls told the Austin Monitor that he spent 16 months helping to negotiate Amazon’s 78,000-square-foot location at the Domain and that the city’s slow approval process for building improvements and finish-out caused a six-month delay on the company’s move-in date.

“A wait like that is not something that factors in well for them, and one of the things they think about is the time to get into the facility,” Bohls said. “There’s already a limited amount of permitting staff and this is going to go from 500,000 to eventually 8 million square feet. The current staff couldn’t handle that without causing substantial delays on all other projects.”

Bohls expects either Baltimore or Pittsburgh to beat out Austin in the selection, but said Austin leaders should begin examining the city’s infrastructure shortcomings to prepare for other potentially large economic development opportunities in the future.

“Transportation infrastructure is the first, last and most important consideration and it’s the biggest reason why companies have Austin fall by the wayside,” he said. “We have no meaningful public transit here and those systems are items that you can’t quickly scale. The business community continues to see that as the city’s number one priority.”

Tina Cannon, senior director of government relations for the Austin Chamber of Commerce, said the Amazon project has captured the imagination of the general public, in part because of the large hiring and salary numbers. And the highly public nature of the process is a big departure from what is more often a confidential and quiet vetting by companies looking for a combination of hiring talent, available real estate, economic incentives packages and more.

“There are six folks in economic development working on more than 100 opportunities at any one time, and they’re always talking to prospects,” she said. “Most companies tell you what they’re looking for but you don’t even get their name at first, so this is a very unique situation to have everything be so public.”

Cannon said the city’s current economic incentives package is designed for attracting large-campus projects for technology companies with hundreds of jobs or more, but she’s looking forward to the coming expansion of incentives to help recruit and grow smaller businesses.

Dan Graham, co-founder of BuildASign and the new Notley incubator, said the best hope for Austin to land the Amazon project is for city government officials to stay out of the process until a selection is made. Graham said that if Austin is chosen, then all levels of city government will need to work with the company to help them fit into the area chosen to build.

Graham said attendees at last week’s session saw the Domain or a stretch of fast-growing East Austin as the most suitable possible areas for Amazon to pick if Austin is chosen.

“There’s actions (City Council has) taken like trying to renege on the contract for the Domain or enacting policy that drove away companies like Uber and Lyft, and so the best thing would be to not take things to a negative place,” he said. “If it gets to the point where it’s actually happening, then they have to work on the infrastructure side to run all the scenarios for different locations and what things will look like in year five, year 10 and year 20. How does the area around (Amazon) develop, and how do they interact with the city as a whole are some of the important questions that will need to be answered.”

[drummer]

That is a great article. Thanks for sharing.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

This is a good article about the transit challenges when trying to satisfy Amazon HQ needs as well as the apparent long time it takes to get building permits approved.

https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/20...on-hopes-hang-transit-permitting-issues/

I don't find it a very informative article at all.

"“A wait like that is not something that factors in well for them, and one of the things they think about is the time to get into the facility,” Bohls said. “There’s already a limited amount of permitting staff and this is going to go from 500,000 to eventually 8 million square feet. The current staff couldn’t handle that without causing substantial delays on all other projects.”"

He doesn't think, that maybe, just maybe the city might hire a few more staff between now and 10 years from now?

Phase 3, that 8 million square feet (maybe, maybe never that big) is beyond 2027.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/Anything/test/images/usa/RFP_3._V516043504_.pdf


I've said it before. Austin may get it, it may not. We might be up there in the selection, we may not.

But is it too much to ask for those writing these "news" articles and their experts to have a basic understanding of Amazon's RFC and the timeline?

[Novacek]

"Bohls expects either Baltimore or Pittsburgh to beat out Austin in the selection,"


Baltimore (municipally) is 2/3 Austin's size, and has been shrinking for the past _60_ years. How big a planning department can they have?

[Novacek]

"There’s actions (City Council has) taken like trying to renege on the contract for the Domain "

Really, when did that happen? When did the _City Council_ try to renege on the contract?

As far as I know, Pool made a comment once. I'll damn her for that, but as far as I know that's as far as it got.

The Domain is something of a special case, anyway, since it's less of a "contract" and technically "optional incentives".