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.
If it is the campus ends up along the orange line that opens up Malden, Medford, Melrose which are all more affordable than the usual suspects (Boston, Cambridge, Somerville and Brookline) If the campus ends up at Suffolk Downs that opens up Lynn, Revere, East Boston, all with the same affordability qualities that their workers would be looking for. The Red/Blue Line connector was also mentioned as a transit upgrade that would be part of the incentive package.
The real estate options proposed in the Boston area are not terribly compelling. Suffolk Downs? Again, what's the point of locating in a vibrant, major metropolitan area if you're ending up in a secluded and glorified office park. Ditto with locating in relatively sleepy suburbs without the connection to the vibrant core. And that's not even considering the lack of existing infrastructure, which even though there may be a "commitment" from elected officials, would take at least a decade to construct. No exaggeration.
Again, this is where Chicago and Philadelphia are tops. Both are proposing prime spots in the thick of downtown, with transit connections that are second-to-none (in Philly's case, the major site being proposed is right next to 30th Street Station, the epicenter of the Northeast Corridor and is literally just blocks from an Ivy League school and a highly-regarded engineering school [Drexel]). Talent, affordable housing and infrastructure are all right there for the taking.
The commuter rail is in terms of ridership. But LA has good coverage.
Chicago’s heavy rail is more like LA in terms of riders per mile. LA is actually ahead and that gap will widen when LA finished the purple line in 7 years. Add in light rail and LA will probably pass Chicago in total riders by then.
Either way NYC is on another level with 10 times the ridership of Chicago. Chicago is much closer to LA in ridership.
That's a really silly metric. What % of commuters are taking transit in LA? Isn't it like 11%? Chicago is around 30%. Yes, NYC is the transit king of the US.
Very odd list. It makes me think that either Amazon has already chosen the location and just listed 19 random cities OR these cities and their respective states are throwing an insane amount of money and other perks at the company. Hopefully it works out for whoever is chosen.
The real estate options proposed in the Boston area are not terribly compelling. Suffolk Downs? Again, what's the point of locating in a vibrant, major metropolitan area if you're ending up in a secluded and glorified office park. Ditto with locating in relatively sleepy suburbs without the connection to the vibrant core. And that's not even considering the lack of existing infrastructure, which even though there may be a "commitment" from elected officials, would take at least a decade to construct. No exaggeration.
Again, this is where Chicago and Philadelphia are tops. Both are proposing prime spots in the thick of downtown, with transit connections that are second-to-none (in Philly's case, the major site being proposed is right next to 30th Street Station, the epicenter of the Northeast Corridor and is literally just blocks from an Ivy League school and a top engineering school [Drexel]). Talent, affordable housing and infrastructure are all right there for the taking.
Too much logic. Doesn't compute.
Not to mention how many more people can fit in Philadelphia and Chicago compared to the others. They're not operating on any real estate bubbles that will certainly limit any sort of growth Amazon seeks. It's counter intuitive, but of course these other cities are going to make the top 20. What else are they going to put? Boise, Idaho?? Then the answer is too obvious.
Are folks completely ignoring the fact that the very reason this effort was announced in the first place was the real phenomenon of Seattle being inundated with growth and much higher real estate/labor compensation costs?
Even with high-cost cities making the list, it's naive to think that COL wouldn't be a key factor. Even a very large corporation like Amazon is not immune to containing costs like labor and real estate. Cities like NYC, DC, and Boston have insanely high barriers to entry. And that's not just for companies, but also for a workforce that will mostly be young, recent graduates. The DC, NYC, Boston and LA metros have a frightening dearth of middle-class housing, which is becoming more and more of a disincentive for folks to locate in those areas.
If you can have the exact same success in a much cheaper location, and there's a proven track record for employee retention in said cheaper area (a nitty gritty kind of statistic that Amazon will absolutely be examining in each of the short-list cities), I think most business-savvy folks would go for that option.
I guess, but it seems odd that 7 of the 20 are some of the most expensive places in the country.
The real estate options proposed in the Boston area are not terribly compelling. Suffolk Downs? Again, what's the point of locating in a vibrant, major metropolitan area if you're ending up in a secluded and glorified office park. Ditto with locating in relatively sleepy suburbs without the connection to the vibrant core. And that's not even considering the lack of existing infrastructure, which even though there may be a "commitment" from elected officials, would take at least a decade to construct. No exaggeration.
Again, this is where Chicago and Philadelphia are tops. Both are proposing prime spots in the thick of downtown, with transit connections that are second-to-none (in Philly's case, the major site being proposed is right next to 30th Street Station, the epicenter of the Northeast Corridor and is literally just blocks from an Ivy League school and a highly-regarded engineering school [Drexel]). Talent, affordable housing and infrastructure are all right there for the taking.
I think Suffolk Downs was proposed mainly because you would only need to work with one developer and find all the space needed.
If Amazon chose Boston it is a pretty safe bet that it will be in the Seaport District. If they are closing in on 1m square feet which is the equivalent of what they are seeking for phase 1, then it makes sense to complete the remainder of the build out in the general area. They already have space in Fort Point, which means the South Station Tower, Winthrop Garage would be in play for the next phase. Then to complete the build out then you would move onto the Raymond Flynn Marine Industrial Park or the Mass Port owned parcels in the Seaport.
You can get to that space relatively easily if you are willing to coordinate it with multiple land owners/developers.
With all that said Chicago and Philly are great candidates, it is just that I am more familiar with the Real Estate in Boston vs those cities.
I like Indy and Columbus, but how did they make the list? Do not seem to check any boxes other than low col?
My guess is being home to Ohio State was attractive enough for Amazon to consider Columbus. Indianapolis is also close to Purdue and IU and draws talent from both those universities.
I live in Charlotte and am seeing/hearing people complain specifically about these two cities making the cut instead. Not having a major university either in or within proximity hurt Charlottes cause.
Last edited by Canes2006Champs; 01-19-2018 at 09:42 AM..
They wanted urban areas with mas transit. It comes with the territory.
I agree, I am saying that COL must not a big factor in the decision.
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.
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.
