Why Amazon HQ2 Shouldn’t Call Austin Home
Since September 2017, Amazon, the world’s largest online retailer, has been searching for the perfect North American city to host its new headquarters. Dubbed “Amazon HQ2” this new corporate campus would represent an immense investment in the host city and would mean new high-paying jobs and stimulus to the local economy. On January 18, 2018, Austin, Texas was one of twenty shortlisted cities to make the cut as a finalist in Amazon’s consideration. Other Amazon HQ2 finalists include areas around Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and Toronto. With other tech giants like Apple, Google, and Dell holding a large presence in the city, Austin seems like a natural choice for Amazon’s second headquarters. However appealing Austin may be, though, there are some key reasons why we believe that it’s not the right choice for Amazon HQ2.
Traffic
Austin Traffic is among the worst in the country. The two north-south corridors that feed millions of workers into the city each day are woefully undersized. Highway 1, commonly referred to as MOPAC because it follows the course of the old Missouri-Pacific railroad line, is currently undergoing a major, multi-year renovation. This has slowed an already lethargic artery to a crawl. When it reopens, it will be only marginally better and the benefit will be a toll lane that theoretically will move more quickly. IH-35 is a daily disaster and there is no reprieve in sight. Meanwhile, the east-west corridors are almost all small roads that are completely flooded during rush hour.
Employees at an Austin-based Amazon HQ2 would likely choose to drive to work, alongside many of their fellow Austinites. If their cars are not up to the challenge of sweltering Austin summers, the daily commute could be at best very uncomfortable and at worst a dangerous endeavor.
Public Transport
Building off of the last reason, Austin may not suit Amazon HQ2 because of the city’s subpar public transportation system. The transport network is composed entirely of bus routes, with the exception of one commuter light rail line that starts in Leander and ends at the convention center downtown. The vast majority of Amazon HQ2 commuters would have to use the bus system on their commute. While Cap Metro buses are fairly reliable, the Austin public transport system leaves much to be desired when compared to those of other Amazon HQ2 finalist cities like Boston, Philadelphia, and New York.
Moreover, Austin’s airport is a liability in its competition to host Amazon HQ2. The Austin-Bergstrom International Airport is a relatively small airport and largely qualifies as “international” because of flights to tourist destinations in Mexico. It boasts only two parallel runways, as opposed to the airports in cities like Dallas, New York, and Toronto, which are considerably more extensive. The majority of trips made by Amazon HQ2 employees would be routed through a hub like Houston, Dallas, or Washington DC.
It’s Too Small
Seattle, the home of the existing Amazon headquarters, barely merits the 20 largest cities in the United States. It’s not a stretch to expect that Amazon may try to capture the benefits of opening a headquarters in a larger city, which include a larger talent pool and improved customer relations with the residents of that area. Moreover, most large cities in North America have far better public transportation, better hospitals, and better schools. Austin’s population that fails to clear 1 million pales in comparison to the 8.5 million residents of the greater New York area, or the nearly 3 million residents of Toronto. As only the 11th-largest city in the United States, it is hard to see how Austin can compete with massive metropolitan areas that also occupy the finalist list, even if it has grown 20% since 2010.
It’s Too Similar to Seattle
In many ways, Austin is a sister city to Seattle. Both are notable for their laid-back, coffee-drinking hipster cultures. Both have a distinctive culture that makes residents proud to be from their city. The two cities both have outdoorsy character, and also host sizeable high-tech industries. There’s room to argue that Amazon HQ2 should be located in a city that is significantly different from Seattle, in order to capture employee and industry benefits of different places. For example, employees located at an Amazon office in New York would most likely be faster-paced lives and come from very different backgrounds than those in an Austin-based Amazon HQ2. Any company benefits from having a diversity of viewpoints in its employees, and the similarity between Austin and Seattle could be a hindrance.
It’s Not Washington, D.C.
One of the key considerations in Amazon’s deliberation over the new host of Amazon HQ2 is flight times to Seattle and to the nation’s capital. Amazon is reshaping entire industries, including retail, entertainment, and with its acquisition of Whole Foods Market will alter the way we all do our grocery shopping. Some of these revolutions do not work properly in today’s regulatory environment, and Amazon seems to be aware that it will need to have a growing presence in Washington in the coming years. To locate Amazon HQ2 in the DC area would greatly facilitate the company’s access to the legislators to whom they will have to lobby their interests.
Let us know if you’re for or against Amazon hosting its new headquarters in Austin?
