Amazon New HQ (50k jobs), MA? (Boston, Somerville: credit, beach, suburb)

[tysmith95]

Suffolk downs is a dumb location for the proposal. In Seattle Amazon has a collection of buildings downtown. That's the type of thing I'd expect if they move here. Eastie/Revere is hard to get to unless you live nearby. The blue line is nice but it's way too short and not connected to any commuter rail terminals.

[mmyk72]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

Suffolk downs is a dumb location for the proposal. In Seattle Amazon has a collection of buildings downtown. That's the type of thing I'd expect if they move here. Eastie/Revere is hard to get to unless you live nearby. The blue line is nice but it's way too short and not connected to any commuter rail terminals.

I agree. Would have thought a suburb close to 495 makes more sense. There's available land for AMZ to build a campus. Employees can live outside 495 for affordability or inside 495 for better access to Boston, and the extra headcounts won't add to the horrible traffic burden that's already unbearable. Both Worcester and Logan airports are accessible. Plus, the new revenue and investment can make a larger part of the state desirable, as opposed to the current stigma that devalues towns outside 25-30 miles from Boston.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by mmyk72

I agree. Would have thought a suburb close to 495 makes more sense. There's available land for AMZ to build a campus. Employees can live outside 495 for affordability or inside 495 for better access to Boston, and the extra headcounts won't add to the horrible traffic burden that's already unbearable. Both Worcester and Logan airports are accessible. Plus, the new revenue and investment can make a larger part of the state desirable, as opposed to the current stigma that devalues towns outside 25-30 miles from Boston.

You're answering the question if Amazon were definitely moving to Massachusetts, where would be best for the people already there. On that point you make a lot of sense. That's not what's happening, though. Amazon is choosing somewhere in North America. All the way on 495 negates almost all the advantages of Boston. If they want somewhere with lots of trees and open space and almost no public transit, there are much cheaper Southern and Midwestern cities to consider. I see the only way they chose Boston is if they want to be in The Boston/Cambridge area that most other parts of the country don't have a good equivalent.

Of course, anywhere that isn't at least partly in the City of Boston would never be proposed by the Mayor of Boston.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Alewife

Can you imagine Amazon trying to get approval, in Boston, for a 2nd Phase after the first building is (eventually) up?

"Why does it have to be so bi-i-g?" "I can see it from [location]!" "But it looks sort of like the first one. N-o-o." "It doesn't have bricks. Where are the bricks?" "It's too tall."

Can you imagine execs bracing themselves for regular 6 hour transcontinental flights to Seattle from an airport with connections to nowhere?

That's a lot of triple deckers. Where do the locals live?

Connections to no where? I go direct anywhere I can think of from Logan, including Seattle.

Originally Posted by tysmith95

Suffolk downs is a dumb location for the proposal. In Seattle Amazon has a collection of buildings downtown. That's the type of thing I'd expect if they move here. Eastie/Revere is hard to get to unless you live nearby. The blue line is nice but it's way too short and not connected to any commuter rail terminals.

Um, this is part of the proposal.

[alidmc]

The expansion of Boston/Cambridge and the surrounding areas is happening with or without Amazon. Look at the Seaport- about a dozen large new buildings that went up in the past few years. There are several large new buildings in Kendall that will employ thousands of people. Not to mention Assembly Row and the new Wynn Casino (I only mention these because I see the progress everyday). If Amazon doesn't select Suffolk Downs, I wouldn't be surprised if another large employer scooped it up pretty quickly.

I am somewhat indifferent as to whether Amazon comes here. In some ways, I think it would be cool because maybe we may see some innovative solutions to some of the problems we are dealing with (red to blue line connection, north-south rail link, infrastructure improvement in general). Also, the start-up culture of these youngish tech companies are the kick in the pants that Boston needs to see some real improvements. It will happen even without Amazon, just at a slower pace.

The cons of Amazon coming here will be the potential increase of real estate prices, but I think that will be mitigated somewhat by new construction. Much of the housing stock surrounding Suffolk Downs are older multi-families and I can't see that being attractive to the younger techie workforce. The newer buildings on Revere Beach are a start. However, there is plenty of room to build large, shiny LEED Platinum rated buildings for the employees.

[BPt111]

Amazon is going to Dallas, Atlanta, Houston, Chicago. The northeast state only Boston has chance

[CaseyB]

https://www.thestreet.com/story/1435...econsider.html

Amazon HQ2: Why Some Cities May Not Want to Land Its New Headquarters

[Alewife]

Not happening. Washington state has no income tax, and Amazon workers aren't about to labor over more more paperwork every year, moreover to some self-important commonwealth that breathes its own exhaust.

GE's limited, leadership presence is in MA because it's little different than CT--but Connecticut is now a collapsed state (Illinois's and California's mine canary). Anything an Amazon employee cares about is ephemeral in Mass., only just attending grad school as a transient. Housing is just as difficult to find and afford as Seattle.

[Alewife]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Amazon is going to Dallas, Atlanta, Houston, Chicago. The northeast state only Boston has chance

Energy is in Houston because of the Gulf. Amazon doesn't need Houston's logistics crippling, and other time and resource sapping, sometime drainage issues.

Atlanta is the dark horse. Very competitive, but like Boston, who's going to want to gird themselves for semi-regular 6 hour flights across 3 other time zones? And more tax collection schemes.

Chicago is a leftist government petri dish that is falling to disfunction and violence. And has Illinois, so it's out of the running.

[Alewife]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Connections to no where? I go direct anywhere I can think of from Logan, including Seattle.

How many times a day does that route serve?

And what if they want to go somewhere besides Seattle, Lisbon, Dublin, or Sao Paulo?