Amazon New HQ (50k jobs), MA? (Boston: renting, buyers, luxury)

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

Am I the only one who doesn't see this millennial obsession with public transportation? Especially ones who make money (as they would at Amazon). I don't see that putting them on a train line helps at all.

Public transportation is by far the most efficient way to move large volumes of people in a dense area. This has been proven worldwide. Not everyone can drive and not everyone wants to. Most older cities (like Boston) can't sustain everyone driving (could you imagine hundreds of thousands MORE cars on the road?). There's simply no place for the cars to go.

And to call it a "millennial obsession" is to completely disregard the history of transportation beyond the past few decades. If anything, cars and auto-centric suburbs are a post-war/baby boomer obsession - the real outlying trend. The current "millennial obsession" is just trending back towards normal. Everyone driving individual automobiles is not sustainable, and you can't possibly continue build roadway infrastructure to accommodate continued population growth.

Besides, it doesn't really matter what you see. Amazon has said they want transit. I think they know their workforce better than you do. I also think you're significantly undervaluing the benefits of having a good public transit network. The absolute worst case scenario is that you have more choices. Many people, regardless of their income, prefer not to sit in traffic if they don't have to.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Public transportation is by far the most efficient way to move large volumes of people in a dense area. This has been proven worldwide. Not everyone can drive and not everyone wants to. Most older cities (like Boston) can't sustain everyone driving (could you imagine hundreds of thousands MORE cars on the road?). There's simply no place for the cars to go.

And to call it a "millennial obsession" is to completely disregard the history of transportation beyond the past few decades. If anything, cars and auto-centric suburbs are a post-war/baby boomer obsession - the real outlying trend. The current "millennial obsession" is just trending back towards normal. Everyone driving individual automobiles is not sustainable, and you can't possibly continue build roadway infrastructure to accommodate continued population growth.

Besides, it doesn't really matter what you see. Amazon has said they want transit. I think they know their workforce better than you do. I also think you're significantly undervaluing the benefits of having a good public transit network. The absolute worst case scenario is that you have more choices. Many people, regardless of their income, prefer not to sit in traffic if they don't have to.

I wasn't commenting on efficiency. But if you want to go that route, don't use the MBTA as an example. In an alternate Boston without the MBTA, do you know for a fact hundreds of thousands more cars would be on the road? Don't you think some other option might emerge? Don't you think living patterns might have evolved differently? I'm not claiming I know what it would look like at all, but this is just a common assumption people make. Maybe, but maybe not.

I calle it a millennial obsession because another poster said that transit is the most important thing to millennial workers. I was questioning that statement along with what I believe is a widely held belief. So to focus on that phrase is to miss the actual point.

Again, you're assuming you know what I think already: that I want more cars and no trains. That is not what I said, not in the least. At all. I'm saying that the MBTA, the specific system serving us now at this moment as currently constructed, is not good. I have used systems that are better, public and private. You're assuming way more than you know here. I don't know how you got the idea that I must be opposed to all forms of non-car transit, or that people love traffic and driving. I have never owned a car. Not in anywhere I've lived. I don't think I believe that for one second, actually.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

I wasn't commenting on efficiency. But if you want to go that route, don't use the MBTA as an example. In an alternate Boston without the MBTA, do you know for a fact hundreds of thousands more cars would be on the road? Don't you think some other option might emerge? Don't you think living patterns might have evolved differently? I'm not claiming I know what it would look like at all, but this is just a common assumption people make. Maybe, but maybe not.

Boston had 250+ years of high density growth before there was a subway. In fact, when it opened in 1897, Boston's population was similar to what it was nearly 100 years later in 1990 (about 550k in the city limits). So I can't imagine what other option would emerge. You're still contending with a dense core that grew over 250 years. And with the advent of automobiles and no MBTA, you'd still have a major problem (a bigger one than we currently have as there would be no trains in this alternate Boston) with congestion in a city that just did't evolve for cars. Istanbul is comparable in that regard. It's an old (ancient) city that really didn't invest in public transit heavily until recently. It's a traffic nightmare.

I calle it a millennial obsession because another poster said that transit is the most important thing to millennial workers. I was questioning that statement along with what I believe is a widely held belief. So to focus on that phrase is to miss the actual point.

Fair enough. I don't know that it's the "most important" either. But I do think it's very important to a growing number of people of all ages. Lots of empty nesters and a growing number of retirees are moving back into denser urban areas because they want to downsize the homes, have amenities nearby, and drive less.

Again, you're assuming you know what I think already: that I want more cars and no trains. That is not what I said, not in the least. At all. I'm saying that the MBTA, the specific system serving us now at this moment as currently constructed, is not good. I have used systems that are better, public and private. You're assuming way more than you know here. I don't know how you got the idea that I must be opposed to all forms of non-car transit, or that people love traffic and driving. I have never owned a car. Not in anywhere I've lived. I don't think I believe that for one second, actually.

I apologize if I missed something. I read your post as very anti-transit. I guess I misinterpreted it. I don't disagree with you about the MBTA being in rough shape. Years of deferred maintenance and neglect will do that. But it's still a better system than all but maybe 3 or 4 in the country (specifically, New York, Chicago, and DC- though recently it's not much better). Still, it needs to improve and I think we're seeing some investment now. For instance, by 2021 we should have the following:

• 152 New Orange Line Trains
• 252 New Red Line Trains
• 24 New Green Line Trains
• GLX completed
• Signal Priority improvement
• New AFC 2.0 implemented with pertinent benefits of all-doors boarding and integrated fare system with ferries and the commuter rail
• Signal upgrades.

Those improvements will add capacity, improve headways, increase speeds (especially green line above ground), and make boarding and transfers far, far more efficent (which improves speeds and schedules as well). That's very near future. And once that's complete, we can have real conversations about expansions like Blue Line to Lynn, Red/Blue connector, NSRL, Urban Ring, etc. We're OK for now, we're going to be better soon, and we're in MUCH better shape than the bulk of cities in this country which have to start from scratch and are working with lower density to begin with.

[bugelrex]

Hopefully by 2021, we will have affordable driverless cars, imagine how cheap an autonomous uber ride would be. You could also drive to nearest mass transit and have the car drive back home and pick u back up after work...

An uber bus might be better then waiting for mbta

[mdovell]

Maybe it's just me but it seems like we keep having transit conversation on this board..maybe there should be a sub board for it?

Might be a tad OT but one of the annoyances I see in Springfield just has to deal with people that demand free on street parking. $100 for a garage spot for a month is hardly anything. Yet at the same point Union station is $20 :-o If you go further south the CT rail line stops are $2. Yes $2 a day vs $20 a day.

On the MBTA I'm not sure if the green line rail was up for bid yet. Orange and red sure but not green. I'm not doubting that CRRC can do it but to be honest with you Boston isn't the only one looking for new rail cars. With orders from Chicago, LA, Philly it adds up. There isn't that many rail car makers vs the past. I think we could very well see a large MTA order delaying the MBTA from getting cars. Remember you can't put a bid out without the funds to pay it with.

The MTA R211 currently has just two potential companies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R211_(...ity_Subway_car) I don't know if that's enough competition to satisfy the FTA.

A potential GE spinoff in a few years could also change everything. GE looks to sell or spin off Chicago-based transportation division - Chicago Tribune Given the current president I doubt the feds would want a foreign company to buy it but who knows.

Driverless cars would be a public/private hybrid. Think on demand cars for some flat rate of say $800 a year. The redevelopment of parking/parking garages would be huge.

[bugelrex]

More clues to Boston

Amazon Renting More Space in Boston Amid HQ2 Search | Fortune

They are leasing up to 1M sqft in Boston with or without HQ2

[Brave Stranger]

Originally Posted by bugelrex

More clues to Boston

Amazon Renting More Space in Boston Amid HQ2 Search | Fortune

They are leasing up to 1M sqft in Boston with or without HQ2

Interesting. Even if they do not pick Boston their footprint here is getting larger.

[bugelrex]

Originally Posted by Brave Stranger

Interesting. Even if they do not pick Boston their footprint here is getting larger.

if enough tech employees work in the Boston area, I envision these folks living in affluent inner suburbs and taking stress-free self driving cars or an uber mini-bus to work, a cheap autonomous uber to drop them off at the rail station and back...

I just don't see an 6 figure engineer with children wanting to live in Chelsea or Revere for a quick commute

[Brave Stranger]

Originally Posted by bugelrex

if enough tech employees work in the Boston area, I envision these folks living in affluent inner suburbs and taking stress-free self driving cars or an uber mini-bus to work, a cheap autonomous uber to drop them off at the rail station and back...

I just don't see an 6 figure engineer with children wanting to live in Chelsea or Revere for a quick commute

I suppose the new Green-Line tram being built in Somerville & Medford qualify for your vision.

[bugelrex]

Originally Posted by Brave Stranger

I suppose the new Green-Line tram being built in Somerville & Medford qualify for your vision.

Based on hq2 footprint of 8m sqrt, this separate deal of up to 1m sqft will bring in 5000 high paying jobs of at least 100k average. Up to now, Boston has been made up of small startups and a handful of mid sized public companies or very small satellite offices..

Wonder if Facebook, Google, Microsoft will follow with sizable investments here.. .