U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2015, 12:33 PM
 
1,319 posts, read 1,072,876 times
Reputation: 683

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Facebook
Apple
Microsoft
Boeing

They far outnumber Twitter or Zendesk.
I'll echo what others have said here. When you're as big and influential as Facebook, Apple, Microsoft and Boeing, you could move to Antarctica and young recruits would still trip over themselves to work for you. And it's a good thing too, because it's almost impossible to set up a million square foot office that matches your vision in an established urban area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2015, 01:21 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,030 posts, read 102,707,476 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwiksell View Post
I'm looking for resources to support (or refute) the hypothesis that corporations looking to recruit top young talent must seriously consider locating their offices in walkable urban neighborhoods. Does anyone have any data, or at least anecdotal evidence, along these lines?

I see a lot of companies (especially in the midwest) re-locating to office parks in the 'burbs, and still expecting to attract lots of bright millenial college grads. However, my theory is that this type of location is a major turnoff to that generation.

What do you think?
In this economy, a person's mental capacity would be called into question if they turned down a good job simply because they couldn't walk to work. It's not like the 90s, where you might think "there will always be another job offer".

In Denver, the four big job "nodes" are downtown, Denver Tech Center, US 36 Corridor, and Boulder. Downtown and Boulder are walkable for some people. The others drive or take transit, in that order. The other two are accessible by public transit, but a lot of people drive there as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
4,839 posts, read 1,995,739 times
Reputation: 5278
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwiksell View Post
I'm looking for resources to support (or refute) the hypothesis that corporations looking to recruit top young talent must seriously consider locating their offices in walkable urban neighborhoods. Does anyone have any data, or at least anecdotal evidence, along these lines?

I see a lot of companies (especially in the midwest) re-locating to office parks in the 'burbs, and still expecting to attract lots of bright millenial college grads. However, my theory is that this type of location is a major turnoff to that generation.

What do you think?
The cost of maintaining a major facility downtown can be much more expensive than an office park in the burbs. I remember how mainframe jobs left NYC in droves after 9/11. Cheaper maintenance, higher likelihood of being missed by a terror attack in the burbs. If I was calling the shots that's where I would go. Suburbs are also better maintained and the crime rate is lower.

Major companies must maintain a small presence in the major cities as meeting places for foreign subsidiaries to gather. Chicago, Atlanta, NYC, LA, all have their charms except for Boston's Red Socks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 02:22 PM
 
10,630 posts, read 23,435,147 times
Reputation: 6703
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallsAngel View Post
In this economy, a person's mental capacity would be called into question if they turned down a good job simply because they couldn't walk to work. It's not like the 90s, where you might think "there will always be another job offer".

In Denver, the four big job "nodes" are downtown, Denver Tech Center, US 36 Corridor, and Boulder. Downtown and Boulder are walkable for some people. The others drive or take transit, in that order. The other two are accessible by public transit, but a lot of people drive there as well.
The economy is improving, and I think the idea is more about attracting "top" talent rather than anyone who can fill the job -- i.e. people who do have options and who are geographically mobile.

In Minneapolis, my understanding is that the competition isn't so much between the company located in the suburban office park versus the company in a hot neighborhood downtown, but Minneapolis versus NYC, San Francisco, etc. Or, among peer cities, versus Austin, Denver, etc. People ARE willing to work in undesirable locations for the right job or right company, but for a certain demographic it's a whole lot easier to attract and retain quality employees if you're located in a desirable location.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 02:46 PM
 
3,946 posts, read 4,051,852 times
Reputation: 4427
Quote:
but Minneapolis versus NYC, San Francisco
I honestly don't think so. The small number of companies that want to locate in NYC and SF aren't cross shopping anywhere else, not for talent or anything else.

But for most companies, they are prefectly willing to locate to any other city if they think it will be advantageous or for subsidies. So the 'walkableness' is just another factor and even for the few that are predomiant NYC/SF, they still have satellite offices in other major cities.

The four listed above (Facebook, et al) have offices in many major cities and suburbs.

And I also think that instead of being interested in attracting 'top talent' (all that takes is money) I think most companies are more interested in attracting young talent at cheap prices. Witness Toyota leaving CA and MB leaving NJ, both of which are building walkable developments as part of their new HQs. I'm pretty sure the 'top talent' was left behind in both of these cases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 03:52 PM
 
1,319 posts, read 1,072,876 times
Reputation: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallsAngel View Post
In this economy, a person's mental capacity would be called into question if they turned down a good job simply because they couldn't walk to work. It's not like the 90s, where you might think "there will always be another job offer".
Do you even know what walkability means? www.walkscore.com | www.walkable.org

Walkability doesn't have anything to do with walking to work. Maybe that's a small part of it, but nothing more. It has a lot more to do with transit options, and the character of the environs. What is your commute like? Will you be forced to own a vehicle, and get in and out of it to fight traffic three times a day? Or will you have access to shops and dining options nearby for errands, power lunches and happy hours?

If we're talking about college recruiting, then we're talking about convincing young people, not just to join your company, but to move to your city. So you have to be able to sell your city as well as your company. Maybe your city is awesome, but if your office location is not representative of your city, your sales job just got harder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 04:23 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,030 posts, read 102,707,476 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwiksell View Post
Do you even know what walkability means? www.walkscore.com | www.walkable.org

Walkability doesn't have anything to do with walking to work. Maybe that's a small part of it, but nothing more. It has a lot more to do with transit options, and the character of the environs. What is your commute like? Will you be forced to own a vehicle, and get in and out of it to fight traffic three times a day? Or will you have access to shops and dining options nearby for errands, power lunches and happy hours?

If we're talking about college recruiting, then we're talking about convincing young people, not just to join your company, but to move to your city. So you have to be able to sell your city as well as your company. Maybe your city is awesome, but if your office location is not representative of your city, your sales job just got harder.
I almost snorted my soda out onto the screen reading that! "Walkable doesn't have anything to do with walking to work"!!?? I know lots of people on here like to define words to mean whatever they want. Why, here's a quote that showed up on the Pittsburgh forum yesterday:

""When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

—Humpty Dumpty, Alice in Wonderland"

So go ahead, decide walkable means anything you want it to mean. I reserve the right to disagree. And "power lunches", seriously? Happy hours, yes, I know that according to this board, millennials generally like to drink, a lot.

And just who are these millennials, anyway? Depending on the source you read, they're everyone born between 1980 and 2004. Millennials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
At that rate, many of them are still in middle/high school. The youngest of them just started turning 11 years old 19 days ago! The last high school class, the class of 2014, was born in 1995-96. The last college class, assuming 5 years to get through college as is common these days, was born in 1990-91. Now I know not everyone goes to college, and fewer graduate, but a huge hunk of this millennial generation is still in school, anywhere from 5th grade to grad school.

So these people born in the 1980s-the oldest will be 35 this year; the youngest will be 26 by year's end. Most are just getting started in their careers; many haven't bought houses yet. Once one buys a house, it limits one's ability to move every time one changes jobs, so that one can walk to work, or even take transit sometimes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 04:28 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,030 posts, read 102,707,476 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist View Post
The economy is improving, and I think the idea is more about attracting "top" talent rather than anyone who can fill the job -- i.e. people who do have options and who are geographically mobile.

In Minneapolis, my understanding is that the competition isn't so much between the company located in the suburban office park versus the company in a hot neighborhood downtown, but Minneapolis versus NYC, San Francisco, etc. Or, among peer cities, versus Austin, Denver, etc. People ARE willing to work in undesirable locations for the right job or right company, but for a certain demographic it's a whole lot easier to attract and retain quality employees if you're located in a desirable location.
As far as the economy improving, the majority of the new jobs added are low-wage.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/bu...ones.html?_r=0 " Recovery Has Created Far More Low-Wage Jobs Than Better-Paid Ones"
People in those jobs can't be so picky. My daughter spent 6 months looking for a job in your fair city, in public health, a field where you are supposedly a "mecca". The job she finally landed does not require a master's degree, which she has. Yes, she drives to work. As I understand it, Minneapolis' public transit is not that great. FWIW, it doesn't work for her, anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,463,702 times
Reputation: 15684
The urban minded are still very much the minority. The history of high tech companies in Silicon Valley is one where technical innovation & communication is enhanced by the random chance meetings in hallways in 1- and 2- story sprawling office buildings. When you have a meeting in the XYZ conference room way on the other side of the building, and it takes 10 minutes to walk there, along the way you will bump into & engage with many people by random chance.

In the glory days of Hewlett Packard (in the '80s), this was called MBWA -- "Management By Wandering Around."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2015, 09:24 PM
 
10,630 posts, read 23,435,147 times
Reputation: 6703
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOverdog View Post
I honestly don't think so. The small number of companies that want to locate in NYC and SF aren't cross shopping anywhere else, not for talent or anything else. ...
I meant in terms of recruiting employees, not so much companies. Minneapolis and other similar cities want employees to choose to come/stay here, and not take off for NYC or the like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top