Quote:
Originally Posted by AviationGuy
Can't believe the USA article didn't mention Austin's infamous traffic congestion and poor mass transit as cons.
|
I too am shocked that USA Today strayed from their usual hard hitting investigative journalism when they sat down to write this clickbait list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlajos
Found this interesting. Not sure how some of the cities in the 20 final could be included.
"John Schoettler, who oversees Amazon’s real estate, provided a few clues while speaking at an event Friday in Seattle. The comments could be interpreted to mean Amazon prefers a more condensed, urban setting similar to what it has in its ever-expanding Seattle offices.
Amazon envisions “a combination of buildings and facilities probably within walking proximity to one another,” Schoettler said at the event, according to a Jan. 19 story in the Puget Sound Business Journal. Schoettler also expressed an aversion to bids that propose spreading 8 million square feet of offices onto several sites, unless those sites can be expanded or somehow connected.
He also indicated Amazon would heavily weigh factors such as availability and cost of housing and proximity to public transportation. “We look forward to cities that are also progressive and are thinking forward and long-term in terms of affordable housing and mass transportation and being able to move people around,” Schoettler said, according to the business journal."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/c...und-chicago-ryan-ori-20180124-story.html
|
In other words, everyone who has been saying "where did we get the idea that Amazon prefers an urban location with low housing costs" now has their answer: from the fact that Amazon keeps saying that's what they want.
I am not going to be super disappointed if this doesn't land in Chicago, but frankly I think Amazon is totally moronic if they don't go to Chicago or Philly. If we assume housing costs, urban environment, and transit end up being the deciding factors then:
-DC, NYC, LA, Boston, Toronto, Denver, and Austin are all eliminated based on availability and/or cost of housing. These cities are all already in the boat that Seattle is in. Some would be even worse than Seattle in this regard, jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
- Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Indy, Nashville, and, Raleigh are all eliminated on urban/transit ground.
- This basically leaves Chicago and Philly with a few smaller dark horses (which might also fall into the "couldn't provide enough workers and housing if they tried" category) like Columbus and Pittsburgh.