Amazon HQ2

[hotdogPi]

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

LIC and Crystal City had links to heavy rail and commuter rail, so probably something similar, yeah.

Does the current Seattle headquarters have any rail transit service?

Yes.

[abefroman329]

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

LIC and Crystal City had links to heavy rail and commuter rail, so probably something similar, yeah.

Does the current Seattle headquarters have any rail transit service?

It looks like the campus is served by light rail.

[Beltway]

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

LIC and Crystal City had links to heavy rail and commuter rail, so probably something similar, yeah.

Does the current Seattle headquarters have any rail transit service?

Yes.

How close, what type (I know they don't have heavy rail transit in that metro), and what level of capacity?

[jakeroot]

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

LIC and Crystal City had links to heavy rail and commuter rail, so probably something similar, yeah.

Does the current Seattle headquarters have any rail transit service?

In several forms. Sounder commuter rail to the north and south. LINK light rail (mostly grade-separated) running 22 miles across 22 stations (eventually 116 miles across 59 stations). Plus a very robust bus and BRT network. Most downtown Seattle commuters use transit (only 25% drive alone).

[JMoses24]

Why would it have to go to Louisville? 
Why not the Kentucky suburbs of Cincinnati?

Cincinnati itself tried to land HQ2, but the current state of public transit in the city pretty much killed that idea. I doubt northern Kentucky would have any more success.

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

It wasn't so much the type. There are concerns about the state of funding for the Cincinnati Metro bus system. So much so, a local grassroots organization called the Better Bus Coalition is organizing a petition drive to raise Cincinnati's city earnings tax.

(FULL DISCLOSURE: I have been involved with the Better Bus Coalition, but not as much now with my move to Oklahoma in late 2017.)

[Beltway]

Cincinnati itself tried to land HQ2, but the current state of public transit in the city pretty much killed that idea. I doubt northern Kentucky would have any more success.

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

It wasn't so much the type. There are concerns about the state of funding for the Cincinnati Metro bus system. So much so, a local grassroots organization called the Better Bus Coalition is organizing a petition drive to raise Cincinnati's city earnings tax.

Then how about Atlanta (MARTA heavy rail transit system and robust bus system), or Dallas (DART 92-mile light rail transit system and robust bus system)?  Extensive urban freeway systems as well.

[briantroutman]

^ Amazon has no plans to go back to the finalists for another HQ2:

In its statement, Amazon said it has no plans to "reopen the HQ2 search at this time." Instead, it plans to move forward with its office expansions in Virginia as well as Nashville, where it is building a new hub expected to employ 5,000 people.

[kevinb1994]

RIP split HQ2. It was nice knowing that there was going to be two HQ2 locations plus the mini HQ2 in Nashville, but then NYC politics got in the way of that happening. Oh well, the south wins on this deal.

Judging by the number of protesters, there's a fair number of people in NYC who also feel they won.

Yeah but let's face it: they think they won only because they protested something that would've happened otherwise.

[Bruce]

So how much public transit does Amazon want ... a full-blown heavy rail transit metro system?

LIC and Crystal City had links to heavy rail and commuter rail, so probably something similar, yeah.

Does the current Seattle headquarters have any rail transit service?

It is served directly by the South Lake Union Streetcar, and is only a few blocks from Westlake Station, where the light rail and monorail systems intersect. The light rail system in Seattle is growing and is being built as a light metro, with long stretches of grade-separated ROW (tunnels and viaducts), and the Amazon campus is slated to get another station in 2030. There's also plenty of bus service, including Amazon's own shuttles that go around the offices spread around Seattle, as well as larger shuttles to the suburbs.

Amazon also made a little noise today about "cancelling" further growth in Seattle, but then rescinded its comments. The betting man says that they're targeting growth in the suburbs around Seattle, particularly Bellevue in Microsoft territory (where they have a single high-rise). Plenty of new high-rise towers are planned in Bellevue already, so it could make the market there very interesting.

[Duke87]

One of the complaints I saw about Amazon is the possible gentrification in the area. I've never understood why gentrification is considered to be a bad thing, unless people are happy living in crappy neighborhoods and don't want to see them improved. It's awful if someone buys up a bunch of dilapidated houses and apartments and fixes them up into something nicer. Just horrible.

Rents.  While rising property values are good for homeowners, for people who rent apartments, they drive people out who can't afford (or don't want to pay) the increased rent.

Not that tons of gentrification in Long Island City isn't already happening anyway. It's inevitable trend that didn't require Amazon to drive it.

Valerie is on the money with why it's contentious though - gentrification does not improve life for the people who are residents of the neighborhood when the process starts. It inconveniences them greatly by forcing them to move to another neighborhood that they can still afford. The beneficiaries of the process are newcomers to the neighborhood moving in from elsewhere (and, of course, real estate developers).

Imagine, for example, that a bunch of wealthy Wall Street types and people of similar means decided that your town in Kentucky was a great place to retire to. They start buying up property in and around the town left and right and building McMansions. Before you know what's happening the value of the property you live on has tripled in value... but now imagine you rent your home rather than owning it (often the norm in cities). So rather than you being able to sell the property and cash in for a huge payday, you find instead that your landlord is demanding triple the rent the next time your lease is up for renewal. You can't afford that, so you have to pack up the home you've lived in for decades and move to another town that's more affordable and the quality of life is no different than it was in the place you let before the Wall Street types started moving in. They get what was your home, you get nothing and no say in the matter.
This is gentrification.

[Bruce]

One of the complaints I saw about Amazon is the possible gentrification in the area. I've never understood why gentrification is considered to be a bad thing, unless people are happy living in crappy neighborhoods and don't want to see them improved. It's awful if someone buys up a bunch of dilapidated houses and apartments and fixes them up into something nicer. Just horrible.

At any rate, if Amazon wants to abandon NYC, then I'd love to see them locate in Kentucky. We'll take the jobs NYC apparently doesn't want.

Adding on to what Duke said, gentrification also strikes communities of color particularly hard. In cities where the number of non-whites are dwindling (because they're pushed out to less-expensive suburbs without the social support structures they've grown used to in the cities), it can worsen racial income disparity.

While the redevelopment is needed in order to increase density and create enough room for new residents, it often times is pushed towards communities that won't put up much of a fight over zoning changes. The vast tracts of single-family only zoning in cities like Seattle are left untouched because the homeowners there organize and fight kicking and screaming at every council meeting and every public hearing. The city just gets sick of it and skirts the issue while placing more burdens on other areas.

[abefroman329]

RIP split HQ2. It was nice knowing that there was going to be two HQ2 locations plus the mini HQ2 in Nashville, but then NYC politics got in the way of that happening. Oh well, the south wins on this deal.

Judging by the number of protesters, there's a fair number of people in NYC who also feel they won.

Yeah but let's face it: they think they won only because they protested something that would've happened otherwise.

Are you suggesting that they shouldn't be celebrating the fact that they achieved their goal?

[kalvado]

Meanwhile in other news:

Amazon To Pay $0 In Federal Taxes In 2019

[jeffandnicole]

Meanwhile in other news:

Amazon To Pay $0 In Federal Taxes In 2019

I find that hard to believe.  Not the fact that they're paying $0 in Fed Taxes, but that an international business knows their enter tax position just 45 days into the year.

Oh, and they have paid federal taxes all year long - payroll taxes. 

[nexus73]

One of the complaints I saw about Amazon is the possible gentrification in the area. I've never understood why gentrification is considered to be a bad thing, unless people are happy living in crappy neighborhoods and don't want to see them improved. It's awful if someone buys up a bunch of dilapidated houses and apartments and fixes them up into something nicer. Just horrible.

Rents.  While rising property values are good for homeowners, for people who rent apartments, they drive people out who can't afford (or don't want to pay) the increased rent.

Not that tons of gentrification in Long Island City isn't already happening anyway. It's inevitable trend that didn't require Amazon to drive it.

Valerie is on the money with why it's contentious though - gentrification does not improve life for the people who are residents of the neighborhood when the process starts. It inconveniences them greatly by forcing them to move to another neighborhood that they can still afford. The beneficiaries of the process are newcomers to the neighborhood moving in from elsewhere (and, of course, real estate developers).

Imagine, for example, that a bunch of wealthy Wall Street types and people of similar means decided that your town in Kentucky was a great place to retire to. They start buying up property in and around the town left and right and building McMansions. Before you know what's happening the value of the property you live on has tripled in value... but now imagine you rent your home rather than owning it (often the norm in cities). So rather than you being able to sell the property and cash in for a huge payday, you find instead that your landlord is demanding triple the rent the next time your lease is up for renewal. You can't afford that, so you have to pack up the home you've lived in for decades and move to another town that's more affordable and the quality of life is no different than it was in the place you let before the Wall Street types started moving in. They get what was your home, you get nothing and no say in the matter.
This is gentrification.

Ever watch "Grapes Of Wrath" Duke?  People had to move.  Why?  The Dust Bowl happened!  Sometimes prosperity causes population shifts, other times it is poverty brought about by the conditions.  People are on the move all the time.  I would rather see a city gentrified than turn into a slum disaster like Detroit did for so long.  Either way, people have to move but if you are going to move, at least let something good come from it. 

Rick

[abefroman329]

Meanwhile in other news:

Amazon To Pay $0 In Federal Taxes In 2019

I find that hard to believe.  Not the fact that they're paying $0 in Fed Taxes, but that an international business knows their enter tax position just 45 days into the year.

Oh, and they have paid federal taxes all year long - payroll taxes.

They're expected to pay $0 in 2019.  They received a $129 million dollar refund in 2018; if that isn't already offset against payroll taxes, it probably offsets them rather nicely.

[kevinb1994]

RIP split HQ2. It was nice knowing that there was going to be two HQ2 locations plus the mini HQ2 in Nashville, but then NYC politics got in the way of that happening. Oh well, the south wins on this deal.

Judging by the number of protesters, there's a fair number of people in NYC who also feel they won.

Yeah but let's face it: they think they won only because they protested something that would've happened otherwise.

Are you suggesting that they shouldn't be celebrating the fact that they achieved their goal?

Nah just wondering what the other outcome would've been.

[jeffandnicole]

RIP split HQ2. It was nice knowing that there was going to be two HQ2 locations plus the mini HQ2 in Nashville, but then NYC politics got in the way of that happening. Oh well, the south wins on this deal.

Judging by the number of protesters, there's a fair number of people in NYC who also feel they won.

Yeah but let’s face it: they think they won only because they protested something that would’ve happened otherwise.

Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t be celebrating the fact that they achieved their goal?

Nah just wondering what the other outcome would’ve been.

Not that I've been following this very closely, but I think people were worried housing prices would go thru the roof.  But if they're already living there, they would make a lot more money when it came time to sell.  So it would've been a win for those already living there.

[abefroman329]

Not that I've been following this very closely, but I think people were worried housing prices would go thru the roof.  But if they're already living there, they would make a lot more money when it came time to sell.  So it would've been a win for those already living there.

You appear to have omitted a significant category of people from this statement.

[kevinb1994]

Not that I've been following this very closely, but I think people were worried housing prices would go thru the roof.  But if they're already living there, they would make a lot more money when it came time to sell.  So it would've been a win for those already living there.

You appear to have omitted a significant category of people from this statement.

That's what she said. 

[Big John]

RIP split HQ2. It was nice knowing that there was going to be two HQ2 locations plus the mini HQ2 in Nashville, but then NYC politics got in the way of that happening. Oh well, the south wins on this deal.

Judging by the number of protesters, there's a fair number of people in NYC who also feel they won.

Yeah but let’s face it: they think they won only because they protested something that would’ve happened otherwise.

Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t be celebrating the fact that they achieved their goal?

Nah just wondering what the other outcome would’ve been.

Not that I've been following this very closely, but I think people were worried housing prices would go thru the roof.  But if they're already living there, they would make a lot more money when it came time to sell.  So it would've been a win for those already living there.

If you chose to remain living there, would't you property taxes really go up as the property value skyrocketed?

[vdeane]

Yeah, even homeowners are hurt by gentrification.  The only people who benefit are newcomers, developers, and homeowners who cash out on the increased property value and move.

It's amazing how some treat moving like it's nothing.  People naturally form an emotional attachment to where they live, their lives are based around that, and moving is a hassle.  When I look for a place to live, I don't think "I'll live here until the next move", I look for a place where I might spend the rest of my life, as long as I'm not forced otherwise.  I've never moved absent a significant life change (job changes, mainly).

[hbelkins]

When I think of companies moving to Kentucky, I don't think about Louisville or the Cincinnati suburbs, or mass transit or anything like that. I think about communities where unemployment is still a big problem, and those places don't qualify. I think about smaller communities with plenty of cheap land (many with already-developed industrial parks that have vacant property available, if not vacant buildings or unused spec buildings), lower costs of living and lower tax rates, and a workforce that would love to see some decent-paying jobs come into the area.

[vdeane]

Trouble is, companies these days aren't looking to hire unemployed locals, train them, and keep them around until they retire.  They're looking to poach their competitor's top employees, keeping them around only for however long they're needed or until they get poached again, whichever comes first.  Hence the tendency of employers to concentrate in the largest cities, where the poaching supply is plentiful.

[abefroman329]

Trouble is, companies these days aren't looking to hire unemployed locals, train them, and keep them around until they retire.

I've now worked for two financial services companies with significant call center operations in parts of the country where both land and labor are cheap (one had a significant presence in Owensboro, KY), and they're absolutely willing to hire and train unemployed locals (and keep them on the payroll as long as employee and employer are happy, including, but not limited to, retirement).  None of this is altruistic, of course, but it's pretty damn close.

However, by and large, the senior management that supervises them and their supervisors are in headquarters.