Amazon HQ2 thread

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

I too am shocked that USA Today strayed from their usual hard hitting investigative journalism when they sat down to write this clickbait list.



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.

I'm getting to be where a few other posters are with this whole thing. Literally like 4 places qualify yet the list has 20. Amazon must be looking for the biggest subsidy it can get is my guess.

I mean, Indy? It has terrible education demographics, a small population, is a sprawling mess with no transit, a bright and shiny new airport that goes nowhere. It is freaking cheap though.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

Chicago deep dish is good but overrated.

Bite your tongue!

[McBane]

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

Interesting but if that's the thinking, then how did Northern VA and Montgomery County MD make the list? Yea, these areas have their make believe cities but by and large, these two locales are auto-centric and sprawly. Other cities (e.g., Indy, Raleigh) are nowhere near the level of Seattle in terms size or density.

However, if this is accurate, then it will be tricky for Amazon to find a location that is both dense/urban AND offers enough space to accommodate their growth. My expectation/assumption is that most city's downtowns are built out and cities had to offer locations a bit off the beaten path. Austin for example, pitched Broadmoore which has plenty of space but it's essentially a new urbanist "town center" type of development 10 miles north of downtown Austin.* Playing around on Googlemaps, it seems to be a far cry from where Amazon's Seattle HQ is located.

Philadelphia is in a unique position, I think. It offered Schuylkill Yards, a large blank canvas right next to 30th Street Station and across the river from Center City. It can fully support Amazon's build out while also being right in the heart of Philadelphia.

Other than that, I really don't know much about Broadmoor or the sites offered by other cities. I'd love to learn more about the competition, so perhaps some of you can share info specific to the site(s) offered by your home city?

*I didn't mean to pick on Austin - I'm just familiar with this project since Brandywine is also the lead developer for Schuylkill Yards.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by McBane

Interesting but if that's the thinking, then how did Northern VA and Montgomery County MD make the list? Yea, these areas have their make believe cities but by and large, these two locales are auto-centric and sprawly. Other cities (e.g., Indy, Raleigh) are nowhere near the level of Seattle in terms size or density.

However, if this is accurate, then it will be tricky for Amazon to find a location that is both dense/urban AND offers enough space to accommodate their growth. My expectation/assumption is that most city's downtowns are built out and cities had to offer locations a bit off the beaten path. Austin for example, pitched Broadmoore which has plenty of space but it's essentially a new urbanist "town center" type of development 10 miles north of downtown Austin.* Playing around on Googlemaps, it seems to be a far cry from where Amazon's Seattle HQ is located.

Philadelphia is in a unique position, I think. It offered Schuylkill Yards, a large blank canvas right next to 30th Street Station and across the river from Center City. It can fully support Amazon's build out while also being right in the heart of Philadelphia.

Other than that, I really don't know much about Broadmoor or the sites offered by other cities. I'd love to learn more about the competition, so perhaps some of you can share info specific to the site(s) offered by your home city?

*I didn't mean to pick on Austin - I'm just familiar with this project since Brandywine is also the lead developer for Schuylkill Yards.

Oh I agree. That's why I'm beginning to think the whole thing is just a shake down. Only Philadelphia and Chicago really meet the most of the criteria. Chicago has massive amounts of available land and even a building (the Old Post Office that is currently under renovation) that easily get what they are looking for. But then the final 20 list is filled with cities that don't meet most of the criteria. Just strange. It's definitely a shake down.

[SteveD]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Oh I agree. That's why I'm beginning to think the whole thing is just a shake down. Only Philadelphia and Chicago really meet the most of the criteria. Chicago has massive amounts of available land and even a building (the Old Post Office that is currently under renovation) that easily get what they are looking for. But then the final 20 list is filled with cities that don't meet most of the criteria. Just strange. It's definitely a shake down.

Atlanta is pitching, among other sites, the "Gulch", which is smack dab in the middle of downtown, within walking distance of multiple heavy rail MARTA stations, and can accommodate many millions of SF of development.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by SteveD

Atlanta is pitching, among other sites, the "Gulch", which is smack dab in the middle of downtown, within walking distance of multiple heavy rail MARTA stations, and can accommodate many millions of SF of development.

Yeah, but that area is gross and Marta is horrible, it is hardly a useful transit system. That being said, I'm sure all it will take is multiple billions in subsidies.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by McBane

Philadelphia is in a unique position, I think. It offered Schuylkill Yards, a large blank canvas right next to 30th Street Station and across the river from Center City. It can fully support Amazon's build out while also being right in the heart of Philadelphia

One of the best things about SY is that it was announced as a speculative development before the Amazon thing ever happened, meaning that it will likely go forward with or without them. Obviously it would be better for Amazon to be the prime tenant, as this would speed things up considerably. This has to be attractive to Amazon; the development is not dependent on them, it was strong enough to go ahead on spec. I don't know how many of the other proposals were shovel-ready, or how many were proposed specifically for Amazon.
The 30th District, to the north of 30th Street Station, must also be attractive to Amazon. They must see that the area is so strong and ripe for development that any other city proposing a city within a city is really proposing an "Amazon Island" within their city. Not so for SY combined with the 30th Street District. They would truly be integrated within an innovative and vibrant district, with the best transit connections of any other proposal, adjacent to 2 major universities and within reasonable distance of dozens of others, etc., etc., ....

[SteveD]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yeah, but that area is gross and Marta is horrible.

Excellent response. Point is, Atlanta has everything they are looking for, in addition to the two cities you cited.

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yeah, but that area is gross and Marta is horrible, it is hardly a useful transit system. That being said, I'm sure all it will take is multiple billions in subsidies.

that area is going to change more than any other in the city over the next decade. underground has a complete redevelopment underway, and half of south downtown was bought up by a german developer (newport) not long after mercedes took naming rights on the stadium. and its a developer from LA who wants to build 10 or so million square feet of office space at the gulch.

so spare us the snobbery.

[Pemgin]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yeah, but that area is gross and Marta is horrible, it is hardly a useful transit system. That being said, I'm sure all it will take is multiple billions in subsidies.

MARTA is clean and efficient, and while lacking the extensiveness of most other subway systems, it covers the city of Atlanta pretty well. It's not horrible. The area around the Gulch is hardly "gross." It's certainly rough around the edges, but so was South Lake Union before Amazon.

I think the Gulch in Atlanta and Schuylkill Yards in Philadelphia are the top two sites, overall.

[BnaBreaker]

My money has always been on Philadelphia to be Amazon's choice, as it seemingly check every box for them. Now if only that wasn't just a figure of speech and I had put actually money on it...

[Pemgin]

Originally Posted by cabasse

that area is going to change more than any other in the city over the next decade. underground has a complete redevelopment underway, and half of south downtown was bought up by a german developer (newport) not long after mercedes took naming rights on the stadium. and its a developer from LA who wants to build 10 or so million square feet of office space at the gulch.

so spare us the snobbery.

Exactly. There's already a lot of major projects in the pipeline in downtown Atlanta before Amazon made their HQ2 announcement. If Amazon comes, they're adding to an already active area.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by BnaBreaker

My money has always been on Philadelphia to be Amazon's choice, as it seemingly check every box for them. Now if only that wasn't just a figure of speech and I had put actually money on it...

There's still time. Paddy Power currently giving 11/1 odds for Philadelphia.
http://www.paddypower.com/bet?action=go_...ss_id=45&ev_type_id=22711&ev_id=13023353

[M II A II R II K]

Maybe Atlanta given it being a major domestic and international air hub.

[Kngkyle]

For those interested in reading a high level overview of the sites Chicago is pitching, this is a pretty good summary (scroll past the article):

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/o...ions-handicapped-20171020-htmlstory.html

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

For those interested in reading a high level overview of the sites Chicago is pitching, this is a pretty good summary (scroll past the article):

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/o...ions-handicapped-20171020-htmlstory.html

i love how even that article acknowledges how silly the oak brook and schaumburg site suggestions are.

it's like "if you really want suburban, amazon, chicagoland can out-suburban anyone, so here are two laughably unlikely token sites out in the burbs".

[Pedestrian]

‘Unprecedented’ Hiring Could Make The Amazon HQ2 Shortlist Much Shorter
January 24, 2018
Cameron Sperance, Bisnow Boston FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint

Amazon’s HQ2 bidding process has advanced to a shortlist of 20 locations. That narrowing field has some questioning how feasible creating a 50,000-person office from scratch will be for smaller contenders not known for their tech base.

Perry Brokerage research noted the larger the city, the better the odds of advancing in the race for Amazon HQ2. “When this first came out, our reaction was: ‘Holy cow. That’s big, and it’s quick. Can they do it?’” Everest Group Managing Partner Eric Simonson said.

Amazon's aggressive HQ2 building plans, coupled with its desire to hire 50,000 employees, would be a difficult task for any city to fulfill, Simonson said — but particularly those smaller markets like Columbus, Ohio; Raleigh, North Carolina; Nashville, Tennessee; and Indianapolis. An Everest Group report on HQ2 bidders said Amazon is going to struggle with filling seats if it considers regions with populations of less than 4 million people.

“Scaling technology workers is very hard and, outside a few places in Asia, getting the facilities that have even five-, 10- or even 15,000 people is quite unusual,” Simonson said.

Even building a ground-up second headquarters half the size of HQ2’s specifications would be unprecedented, per Everest's report.

Everest came up with its own shortlist of six cities and a wild card for being the best HQ2 incubators: Boston, Chicago, Dallas, New York, Washington, D.C., and the wild card of Toronto. “Talent is going to drive this,” Simonson said.


https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/oth...morningbrief&be=bsthomas%40ix.netcom.com

Read more at: https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/oth...?utm_source=CopyShare&utm_medium=Browser

[JManc]

Why do I get the feeling that whoever and wherever this winds up...it won't be 50,000 employees? ExxonMobil has a massive complex (largest construction project in the US at the time) here in Houston and that "only" accommodates 10,000 or so people.

A huge monster of a building like the Sears Tower accommodates about 12,000 workers.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by JManc

Why do I get the feeling that whoever and wherever this winds up...it won't be 50,000 employees? ExxonMobil has a massive complex (largest construction project in the US at the time) here in Houston and that "only" accommodates 10,000 or so people.

A huge monster of a building like the Sears Tower accommodates about 12,000 workers.

So the winning city just builds 4 Sears-size buildings plus a smaller one or two. What's so hard to understand?

[AbortedWalrus]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Read more at: https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/oth...?utm_source=CopyShare&utm_medium=Browser

I am really scratching my head as to why they entirely left Philadelphia out of this analysis. Also, the use of CSAs as a measure of recruiting area sort of boggles too. A CSA like Dallas Fort Worth is double the area of one like Philadelphia. If you overlayed that CSA over the Philadelphia region it would encompass major parts of the NY CSA. Dallas based firm making sure Dallas/Fort Worth gets good press?