Amazon HQ2 RFP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amazon's solicitation is caveated by its declaration that it may reject all of the bids, without consequence.

A true HQ2 only makes sense if Bezos intends splitting the company. Otherwise, the whole idea results in gross inefficiencies and dysfunctional, chaotic management. It would be like the Commonwealth deciding to have a second state capital in Springfield, with all the functions of the one in Boston.

So...............

My bet is that Amazon will select two, three, maybe four cities to be strategic, lead centers for certain functions. And the 50,000 new employees will be divided among the several 'winners', and not equally divided either.

Assuming the chatter is correct that Amazon is looking for an additional 1 million square feet in Boston, that's a clue, IMO, that there will likely be no single, big winner. One million square feet by Amazon's calculations is about 6500 new employees. Hard to believe that whatever key functions/programs these 6500 will be working one that these would not be part of the otherwise nebulous 50,000 mix.
 
tangent said:
Boston lost the Olympics 20 years ago when Menino and Kraft couldn't work out a stadium deal leaving Boston proper without a large open air privately financed stadium.

Likewise HQ2 will be won or lost because of planning and investments made in the last few decades and not something that may or may not be cobbled together in the next decade.
Click to expand...

Re: the Olympics, that's some top-shelf historic revisionism going on there.......

http://www.wcvb.com/article/boston-wins-usoc-bid-to-host-2024-olympic-games/8214886
Boston wins USOC bid to host 2024 Olympic Games
Gov. Baker calls decision 'great news'

Boston didn't "lose" the Olympics. Boston told the Olympics to take a hike.


But I agree re: Amazon H2Q - - Bezos will choose a city that doesn't foonf around. Austin, Port Covington/Baltimore, Atlanta, etc,. have the "ambition" that Rifleman was attributing to Boston. The very last adjective I would ever use for Boston is "ambitious". Boston is the intellectual women who doesn't care about being attractive and who doesn't even try, but is despite it all.
https://a.wattpad.com/cover/55018761-352-k315923.jpg
 
Last edited:
There's only 1 reason why Boston isn't winning this thing in a landslide. Because Boston lacks the leadership to just rise above the noise, propose to develop Downtown Boston closer to it's true potential, then hook up with East Cambride as the pusher locomotive.

We have this terrible proposal of Suffolk Downs because a bunch of fucking shitheads are pushing their extremist agenda with lethal force.... Everyone in the room knows Amazon should be taking up the lion's share in either the West End or South Station area. Why hasn't this plain fact even entered into the discussion by the City's bosses?

The current situation includes the lack of a Downtown "skyscraper plan" (that i called for in 2016)... But the sum total is a city drowning in cowardice, and logistically unprepared to adequately take on a monster like Amazon.

Boston is in need of a serious attitude adjustment if it hopes to find a brighter future and meet the needs of its residents.... Boston needs to grow up just a little bit to realize its potential and continue to lead.

The alternative is to watch inferior cities like Dallas, Seattle, Philadelphia and others begin leave Boston in the dust, with major institutions labeling Boston as a disfunctional city.

There is no official downtown proposal above a (possible) whisper -- because the lunatics are running the asylum of commercial development.

I could have chosen a pc word. But i took a fucking pass.
 
odurandina said:
There's only 1 reason why Boston isn't winning this thing in a landslide. Because Boston lacks the leadership to just rise above the noise, propose to develop Downtown Boston closer to it's true potential, then hook up with East Cambride as the pusher locomotive.

We have this terrible proposal of Suffolk Downs because a bunch of fucking shitheads are pushing their extremist agenda with lethal force.... Everyone in the room knows Amazon should be taking up the lion's share in either the West End or South Station area. Why hasn't this plain fact even entered into the discussion by the City's bosses?

The current situation includes the lack of a Downtown "skyscraper plan" (that i called for in 2016)... But the sum total is a city drowning in cowardice, and logistically unprepared to adequately take on a monster like Amazon.

Boston is in need of a serious attitude adjustment if it hopes to find a brighter future and meet the needs of its residents.... Boston needs to grow up just a little bit to realize its potential and continue to lead.

The alternative is to watch inferior cities like Dallas, Seattle, Philadelphia and others begin leave Boston in the dust, with major institutions labeling Boston as a disfunctional city.

There is no official downtown proposal above a (possible) whisper -- because the lunatics are running the asylum of commercial development.

I could have chosen a pc word. But i took a fucking pass.
Click to expand...

Boston will never change and it's not worth getting worked up over. Just leave. You'll be so much happier. I know I am.
 
odurandina said:
There's only 1 reason why Boston isn't winning this thing in a landslide. Because Boston lacks the leadership to just rise above the noise, propose to develop Downtown Boston closer to it's true potential, then hook up with East Cambride as the pusher locomotive.

We have this terrible proposal of Suffolk Downs because a bunch of fucking shitheads are pushing their extremist agenda with lethal force.... Everyone in the room knows Amazon should be taking up the lion's share in either the West End or South Station area. Why hasn't this plain fact even entered into the discussion by the City's bosses?

The current situation includes the lack of a Downtown "skyscraper plan" (that i called for in 2016)... But the sum total is a city drowning in cowardice, and logistically unprepared to adequately take on a monster like Amazon.

Boston is in need of a serious attitude adjustment if it hopes to find a brighter future and meet the needs of its residents.... Boston needs to grow up just a little bit to realize its potential and continue to lead.

The alternative is to watch inferior cities like Dallas, Seattle, Philadelphia and others begin leave Boston in the dust, with major institutions labeling Boston as a disfunctional city.

There is no official downtown proposal above a (possible) whisper -- because the lunatics are running the asylum of commercial development.

I could have chosen a pc word. But i took a fucking pass.
Click to expand...
I can't wait until Seattle and Philly pass us if it pisses you off. Also can't wait until the mod closes this thread :)
 
Odurandia right.
Amazon is one of the largest companies in world with almost 600billion dollar market cap. Bezo is monopolizing the ordering and payment industry over the web to buy and sell from everywhere from anyone. Why wouldnt Boston roll out the red carpet it ---like it did for that dinosaur GE. GE is in a death spiral right now worth a quarter of what Amazon is worth 125Billion.

Our officials propose to amazon one of the largest and most innovative companies in the world they can locate at Suffolk downs in Revere? This is laughable. WTF is in Revere ma? (Close enough to the Kelly's roast beef innovation district)
All the action is in Cambridge, Boston, Somerville.

This is truly one of the worst proposals I have seen to attract a company of this caliber, that has dominated over the last 2 decades in the tech industry.

Boston has 3 above garages that could generate a 1 million extra square feet easy in the core of the city with instant MBTA access across all areas of the state.
Amazon in Revere would cause more traffic congestion than actually locating this company into core of the transit grid.

How can the city justify GE, liberty mutual, vertex, jpm, Millennial partners millions in tax dollars for building, relocating on prime time real estate and offer this type of proposal to amazon? Then you wonder why a hardworking families can't afford to live in or around Boston anymore. Our officials have given huge tax deals to these corporations and have made all the other areas in and around Boston unaffordable. Great job Mass politics at its best.
This proposal was a joke from the beginning.
 
Last edited:
My Globe proposal was a no brainer gleamed from yours all's suggestions on AB with a hotel plan added in.... i'm not close to as smart as the posters on this forum, but it was 70x better than Walsh's loser. The obnoxious one offered two basic, workable solutions to win Amazon, also catch up after being 4~5 years late on Downtown planning.... My plan focused on Downtown/ Cambridge/ Dot Ave would be tough, but strike a balance between our present and future office space and transit capacity.

My conspiracy theory; is that Walsh chose Suffolk Downs as the best plan for public consumption.

He gets to tell the Beacon Hill/ Zakim shitheads; "Hey, i tried to get them to pick Tom O'Brien's bedroom community parcels...." Then he unveils the real plan: for the South Station/ Dot Ave corridor.

The best plan is (still) to start with the Hub on Causeway and 1 Congress and the rest of (Tosh's Plan A) for the West End and East Cambridge.
 
Who are the leaders that actually proposed T. O'Brien specific development for Suffolk Downs over the 3 above parking garages that continue to be unbuilt or SST in the city?

How is having Amazon needs and overall growth better to have situated in Revere over Boston?
This logic does not sound healthy for the overall public concerning infrastructure needs to position Amazon into Revere over Boston.

Who is making these types of ridiculous proposals?
 
TheRifleman said:
Who are the leaders that actually proposed T. O'Brien specific development for Suffolk Downs over the 3 above parking garages that continue to be unbuilt or SST in the city?

How is having Amazon needs and overall growth better to have situated in Revere over Boston?
This logic does not sound healthy for the overall public concerning infrastructure needs to position Amazon into Revere over Boston.

Who is making these types of ridiculous proposals?
Click to expand...

Obviously, not you.

You overlook one little bitty factor; Amazon apparently wants to own the buildings that will comprise HQ2. The only site Boston was able to come up with where the owners would allow Amazon to do that is Suffolk Downs. The owners of Suffolk Downs said they would execute a ground lease, and Amazon would build and own the buildings.

If I'm Don Chiofaro, I may not want to sell my HT garage to Amazon, and Amazon is not interested in leasing space in a Don Chiofaro built tower. And why would Amazon pay Chiofaro a premium to build a tower that Amazon would then buy from him?

That's the problem with Somerville's bid. There is no commitment by the owners of key properties that are part of that bid to do anything with respect to Amazon. For Amazon, as I read the specs, that's a non-starter. Amazon wants a bird in the hand, not the two in the bush.
 
The hub on Causeway, Bulfinch Crossing, and South Station tower are all office towers that are either u/c or will be soon with no anchor tenants. Hell spreading Amazon across all 3 would give them all encompassing commuter rail access from Worcester, Framingham, Providence and everything in between at South Station plus red and silver, every other commuter rail line up through Nh at North station with orange and green, and then green orange and a short walk from blue at a centrally located main office at Bullfinch Crossing. Spreading through all 3 locations would give them access to literally every transit option in Boston as well as 93 and the pike. They could even substitute South Station for the pike parcel 13 tower and you would be able to ride the green line between all 3 offices, commuter rail from the west, and the pike. I think something along these lines would be ideal.

That being said I dont think Northpoint is that bad as a second or 3rd option. Suffolk downs I thought was decent for shear scale allowable and they could have their own entire campus but I understand peoples qualms about it. I think the bayside expo center site is kind of crappy at the moment but with some work this or widette circle could be viable. That being said the 3 mentioned are major office towers going up without anchor tenants so I have no idea why this wasnt the main proposal off the bat.

Edit: If they absolutely must own the buildings that makes it much more complicated and probably why the proposals that were offered were in the first place. Its never as easy as it seems and we most definitrly dont have all the information or answers here. I wonder if they would make a concession though to be able to be downtown, because leasing is probably the only way theyre going to get there unless they find a new parcel and sell it to them soon. Northpoint would not be a bad option if this is the case and they get a transit stop at their front door and access to 93.
 
stick n move said:
......
Edit: If they absolutely must own the buildings that makes it much more complicated and probably why the proposals that were offered were in the first place. Its never as easy as it seems and we most definitrly dont have all the information or answers here. I wonder if they would make a concession though to be able to be downtown, because leasing is probably the only way theyre going to get there unless they find a new parcel and sell it to them soon. Northpoint would not be a bad option if this is the case and they get a transit stop at their front door and access to 93.
Click to expand...

100 acres close to a city's urban center with mass transit is very hard to come by. Philadelphia proposed the Navy Yard, ---and if someone thinks Suffolk Downs is remote. San Francisco is offering part of its former Navy Yard, which is even further afield from its downtown core than the Philadelphia Navy Yard is. Brooklyn's bid apparently includes part of its former Navy Yard.

Unless a city is in terminal decay, the only sites, with very few exceptions, offering 100 acres are former government installations, abandoned industrial wastelands, or properties ready to be converted to another use (e.g., railroad yards, race tracks). An example of such a conversion would be Harvard's acquisition of Beacon Yards and all the trucking and warehousing property between Cambridge St. and Western Ave.

One exception to what I wrote above is downtown San Jose.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/03/google-scoops-up-downtown-san-jose-transit-village-property/

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/29/exclusive-microsoft-buys-north-san-jose-land-campus-eyed/

http://sjdowntown.com/wp_2016/wp-co...Campus-for-20000-to-Rise-in-San-Jose-CPDR.pdf

And San Jose, after all that, still has acres to spare.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/19/bay-area-cities-join-together-in-bid-for-amazon-headquarters/
 
Why wouldn't Boston try to negotiate and propose the SST Tower or a similar tower in the first place?
-TRANSIT Dream-
--Location---

Try to make a lucrative deal with Hines or another developer to lease with the option to sell the tower to Amazon for a very generous premium if Amazon sees the value.

The problem with Suffolk Downs and the rest of these areas that are not centrally located is the outdated INFRASTRUCTURE that is creating gridlocking on our roads.
You can't keep building without actually expanding or creating solutions for TRANSIT scenario around the area.
The Suffolk Downs proposal is bad for the overall Public transit scenario.

StellarFun they teach you that type of logic in dummy school?
 
TheRifleman said:
The problem with Suffolk Downs and the rest of these areas that are not centrally located is the outdated INFRASTRUCTURE that is creating gridlocking on our roads.
You can't keep building without actually expanding or creating solutions for TRANSIT scenario around the area.
The Suffolk Downs proposal is bad for the overall Public transit scenario.
Click to expand...

I highly recommend you review MBTA Blue Book data for ridership statistics before blindly citing "outdated infrastructure" or that Boston isn't "creating solutions for transit scenarios around the area."

MBTA's Blue Line not only has fully modernized stations and heavy rail vehicles; it also has the capacity for ridership growth, and a lot of it! Suffolk Downs & Beachmont Stations jointly saw about 4,000 ridership entries per weekday in 2014. Heavy rail subway stations like those have the capacity for as many as 12,000 to 15,000 riders... EACH. That means Suffolk Downs has the transit capacity for an additional 20,000 to 25,000 commuters, with minimal (if any) additional funds needed on the transit front for this subway line.

Please name a single other site in the City of Boston proper that presents that kind of capacity for transit rider absorption, a 100-acre+ parcel under single ownership, and readily develop-able land that doesn't present costly engineering/legal challenges (such as decking or displacement/relocation).
 
The blue line is probably the only rail transit line in Boston that can easily handle more riders and if capacity did become an issue an easy solution is to start running the trains more frequently.
 
We'll need Suffolk Downs for future housing capacity, and the Blue Line will accomodate the transit.... Amazon needs to be located in the core, with infrastructure stretched closer to the limit to make it work.

Boston's current assets vs liabilities, current makeup vs politics is close to a 'loser.' People should be extremely concerned that a company with the economic clout of Amazon will likely pass Boston over for no reason other than its self imposed disfunction.

Boston needs something more than dink startups.
 
odurandina said:
We'll need Suffolk Downs for future housing capacity, and the Blue Line will accomodate the transit.... Amazon needs to be located in the core, with infrastructure stretched closer to the limit to make it work.

Boston's current assets vs liabilities, current makeup vs politics is close to a 'loser.' People should be extremely concerned that a company with the economic clout of Amazon will likely pass Boston over for no reason other than its self imposed disfunction.

Boston needs something more than dink startups.
Click to expand...

+100 This makes a lot of sense.

I'm not saying anything is possible but why in HELL would Amazon choose Suffolk Downs in Revere MA. Possibly the worst proposal I have ever seen.

There is nothing over there but the BEACH, Kelly's Roast Beef, The Squire and Cluster fuck of car traffic.

This proposal goes down as one of the worst proposals in history trying to recruit possibly one of the most powerful companies in the world.
Let's Give GE another tax break for being completely incompetent.
 
I don't understand the schizophrenia of some of you posters. For example:

We're told that Atlanta is an ambitious city. I've spent a lot of time down there (in-laws live there) and happen to like the city, but it has to be one of the worst planned cities in the United States and easily the one with the most unplanned sprawl this side of the Mississippi. Zero commuter rail. One subway line that goes nowhere (anecdotally I've heard its because the wealthy communities don't want to be linked to the inner city). Tax payers shelling out money for new sports stadiums every few years. A dead downtown and office parks ringing the entire metro area causing everybody to take a 20 lane highway to work. This is what Boston should aspire to? Okaaayy....:confused:

Next, we see cities like Philly and Baltimore held up as paragons of political harmony. Baltimore? Really?

If encouraging sprawl is the mark of innovation and ambition, then yes clearly Boston ranks behind happening places like Jacksonville, Houston, Austin, Atlanta and Charlotte and won't win the 2nd Amazon HQ if that's what Bezos prizes. Not sure that's going to be his criteria however...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top