Amazon HQ2 RFP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some might recall my gloomy post in the Globe from several weeks ago after the joke/ Suffolk Downs bid was announced.

There are signs that clearly indicate that Boston and the State seems to be well into a retreat from the ability to shape its future. Its inability to produce much greater improvements to Transit, do virtually any serious highrise planning, and foster an environment such that these projects break ground in a reasonable timeframe ....and that we're not landing Amazon in a rout are three clear signs.

Despite all the great things about Boston, we could be in for a very stagnant future -- or worse.
 
^ your waaaaay too doom and gloom. Were in the biggest building boom in history and the city is amazing today. The Hub on Causeway and the whole Bulfinch triangle is almost complete, the hole in DTX was filled, central artery sank, new seaport neighborhood, congress st garage is going away, fenway redeveloped, Winthrop Square and SST going up and on and on and on. Yes we need to do better to woo Amazon-and are in the place to do it as one of the hottest cities in the country, so by saying Boston is failing, losing and all that other bs is ridiculous. I know you get excited and once you get rolling you kinda keep goin and goin until you go too far before reeling it back in and this is one of those cases. Relax. Reports is Boston is one of if not the front running city. We didnt get there by failing and losing.

Step back for a second. I shouldnt even need to write a couple common knowledge paragraphs but were an architecture forum we get a little over excited. Boston today is in the best place its ever been with the city repaired, booming, and still with crucial room to grow. South station is going to expand, maaaybe nsrl, green line is extending, all new red green orange cars coming soon, possssible DMU's, theres lots going on. Thats on top of the most extensive transit system for a city of our small size. Sometimes we get too wrapped up in individual things and lose the bigger picture. Yes Amazon is huge but Boston has been just fine before Amazon and well be just fine after. The city is absolutely amazing today and one of the most pedestrian friendly and scaled cities in North America. Relax on the doom and gloom Boston is juuuuust fine right where she is and the fact that our little 650k population and no supertalls is mentioned up there with the major players is testament to the fact. I get it we want Amazon here and should be in the position to land them, but like I said Boston was just fine before Amazon and itll be just fine after whether they come here or not.
 
stick n move said:
^ your waaaaay too doom and gloom. Were in the biggest building boom in history and the city is amazing today. The Hub on Causeway and the whole Bulfinch triangle is almost complete, the hole in DTX was filled, central artery sank, new seaport neighborhood, congress st garage is going away, fenway redeveloped, Winthrop Square and SST going up and on and on and on. Yes we need to do better to woo Amazon-and are in the place to do it as one of the hottest cities in the country, so by saying Boston is failing, losing and all that other bs is ridiculous. I know you get excited and once you get rolling you kinda keep goin and goin until you go too far before reeling it back in and this is one of those cases. Relax. Reports is Boston is one of if not the front running city. We didnt get there by failing and losing.

Step back for a second. I shouldnt even need to write a couple common knowledge paragraphs but were an architecture forum we get a little over excited. Boston today is in the best place its ever been with the city repaired, booming, and still with crucial room to grow. South station is going to expand, maaaybe nsrl, green line is extending, all new red green orange cars coming soon, possssible DMU's, theres lots going on. Thats on top of the most extensive transit system for a city of our small size. Sometimes we get too wrapped up in individual things and lose the bigger picture. Yes Amazon is huge but Boston has been just fine before Amazon and well be just fine after. The city is absolutely amazing today and one of the most pedestrian friendly and scaled cities in North America. Relax on the doom and gloom Boston is juuuuust fine right where she is and the fact that our little 650k population and no supertalls is mentioned up there with the major players is testament to the fact. I get it we want Amazon here and should be in the position to land them, but like I said Boston was just fine before Amazon and itll be just fine after whether they come here or not.
Click to expand...
I know it's veering off topic but you cant see boston as a city of 650k, especially saying 'Thats on top of the most extensive transit system for a city of our small size.' It's a transit system for a population of over 4 million. For Boston to truly reach it's full potential, we have to start thinking of metro Boston as the city and not Boston/Brookline/Newton/Cambridge/Somerville/Medford etc...
 
I get it that wasnt the point at all of my post. I know the metro area and I know the city population. The subway only reaches the immediate city, which is small in size compared to other North American cities and its extensive here. People already think of it as the metro theres no people need to do anything. Wasnt the point of the post thats why I didnt go into extended detail on every single subject. I could have described every project that still has to be built to finish the Bulfinch triangle- but none of that was the point. The City is not failing theres a reason why were even debating WHERE Amazon should go in the first place vs why they skipped over us like hundreds of other American cities were.
 
Google just called us and said they are interested relocating in Boston.
500,000 Square feet potential

Lets send them a proposal in LYNN ----Right off the LYNNWAY--

Waterfront Access
Blueline accessibility.
Innovation (NorthShore Community College)

The Amazon proposal is lunacy for the mentally challenged.
 
If Amazon asks for X, why do some posters insist on giving them Y?

Amazon was very clear: it wants a site that is free of ownership issues, zoning issues, permitting issues, with infrastructure in place. It does not want a site where it has to spend three years, five years, ten years, working out issues and details and getting all the parties on-board. In the parlance of Obama's stimulus package, it wants 'shovel-ready' sites.

So what do we have? Posters persistently committing properties to Amazon that they do not own, simply because said properties fit within their preferred scheme of things. Even if their scheme is non-responsive to Amazon's specs. I have yet to meet a successful business owner who has succeeded because he/she was consistently non-responsive to
clients/customers. And, IMO, someone who persists in touting their non-responsive schemes is either a dilettante or a troll.
_____________________

As for lease versus ownership. Jeff Bezos' residence in Washington is a relatively short distance from a Whole Foods store. The Whole foods store was shut down for health violations. Whole Foods decided the only remedy was to gut and remodel the store. The store was leased space, and Whole Food supposedly spent a million dollars gutting the building. The landlord called a halt before renovation could start, declared Whole Foods to be in violation of the lease, and now wants them out. (This fiasco began before Whole Foods was acquired by Amazon, but continues to this hour.)

I can assure you that Jeff Bezos has enough friggin' money that he doesn't and won't put up with any crap from landlords who would own his HQ2 campus. He is not about to negotiate with Don Chiofaro eight years into his Amazon lease about changing office space, or adding or subtracting amenities. And Bezos isn't going to pay Chiofaro what Chiofaro paid for the HT garage.
 
Have to agree with a lot of this ^^^^

Its nice for cities, be it Boston or elsewhere, to promise to do stuff like deck over a railway yard or clean up a toxic waste site or run a new subway/commuter line but I tend to agree that moving those sort of mountains might not be something that Amazon wants to bother with. Especially when the local pols are probably promising to do all that in 6 months time.

IF we are to take Amazon at their word, a single owner contiguous parcel of land which will eventually house 50,000 workers and is on transit is a rare thing no matter where you are. The sprawly cities with tons of land don't have transit, and the cities that do are too crowded to have that kind of space readily available, except for a place like Suffolk Downs.

Having said all that, I agree with the mayor of San Antonio who declined to send in a bid, saying that a company like Amazon most likely already knows where it wants to be. If Amazon likes Boston, it'll get the city to meet its needs be it at Suffolk Downs or elsewhere. If we aren't already on the short list, none of our bleating will matter anyhow. ;)
 
Your missing the entire point. This is not just about Amazon or some developers that own garages.
Its about what is best for the overall PUBLIC along with the surrounding areas of roads and infrastructure around Boston.

*Plopping Amazon at Suffolk Downs with minimal road infrastructure upgrades will only continue to stress out the public with Traffic problems.

Our city & state reps need to focus on the CORE of the Boston where all majority of transit leads too with major corporations like this.

Building outside the core like WYNN casino development or Amazon at Suffolk without major massive investments in Road or upgradable MBTA services will only continue to clog the small roads and highways outside the core of Boston.

That is my point. Amazon is not healthy for the Public infrastructure at Suffolk downs.
Either BUILD in the CORE of the city or address the TRANSIT ISSUES in around Boston.

Traffic is one of the major issues in Boston now.
That is why I ASKED who the fuck is making these ridiculous proposals?
 
These traffic arguments drive me nuts. Every article in the business section is populated with these loons who want to go back to an agrarian society.

People the ship has already sailed. We're in gridlock 20 hours a day already. If Amazon comes, are you really that worried about being in 21 hours a day of gridlock? The transit lines already exist, and as shitty as the T is, people already have the choice of riding it to commute into the city for a like a 50 mile radius outside the city. If traffic gets bad enough, people will make the choice to switch to public transit. Or bike. Or power walk. Or telecommute. Whatever. You can't force corporations to locate where you want them to. Yes it would be nice if Kendall and the Seaport weren't so crowded but if taxpaying businesses want to set up shop there, so be it. If cheap available land and an easy commute were the end all be all of economic activity, wouldn't Detroit be the hottest place to locate a business right now?
 
I have 3 thoughts.

1. It's two pages back, but I want to mention about the Olympics because it was used as an example of our dysfunction because it was shut down. So you're saying the right move was to keep moving ahead? Considering how many people screamed against it, this is a first. The death of it was the right move. Killing it was the "functional" move, the original proposal and plan was the dysfunction. Now unlike some of the protestors, I will say that it didn't had to be dysfunctional. I also have to say a lot of Nolympics people was not against it on a rational basis which is symbolic of our dysfunction despite it worked out in this case. The plan of building at Widett Circle with all the engineering complexities with no leveraging of the universities to save costs would meant a way too high a chance of a Montreal-style hangover rather than a LA-style victory. Killing it was the right move and thus citing it as our failures is a terrible example. If you want to point at anything wrong at it, blame the horrid bid that was put together in the first place.

2. I am a bit confused about the timing of this discussion. It was revealed that the proposal is Suffolk Downs weeks ago. Why is the bashing only happening now rather than the day it was revealed. I remember distinctly I was surprised no one was attacking it back then. It fit exactly to the line back in the first page that they proposed Suffolk Downs would be "Old Boston" yet I don't recalls posts like this back then. So why it is only spilling over now?

3. Finally, as people already pointed out. Didn't their specs basically ask for something like Suffolk Downs? They wanted "Shovel ready", be able to be owners of the building, huge amount of Sq footage, near a major transit line, near the airport and all that stuff. So if the specs really asks for that, then why no one is arguing analyzing it? Are you saying the specs is not really what they want? Are you saying eminent domain so Amazon can own the building? Or there's a way to meet Amazon's specs in South Station?
 
1. The Olympics---NO THANKS the corruption and the bill they are sticking to all the cities after they roll into town basically bankrupting them was not worth it in my opinion.

2. Suffolk Downs is in Revere and this is why East Boston residents fought so hard to keep the casino out of Eastie and Revere. They just don't have the infrastructure to deal with the volume of cars.

3. Shovel ready could be anything. Why couldn't Amazon have the option to buy their building if the developer was open minded to an option to sell to get the development done. Never take anything by eminent domain.

What I'm saying is our dumb political leaders need to focus developments at the CORE of the city instead of the outskirts which is creating a gridlock mess because we continue to ignore that the city of Boston and the surrounding areas are not built for this type of traffic volume.

The morons that drummed up the worst deal in history to propose Suffolk Downs. This was a loser from the start for everybody. Who wrote this proposal the Squire Management team.
 
During World War II, over 50,000 civilians went to work each day at the Boston Naval Shipyard. How did they ever manage to get to and from? Over 20,000 worked at the River Works in Lynn. Gas was rationed. The only real road connection between East Boston and downtown was a single tube, two-way tunnel.
 
stellarfun said:
During World War II, over 50,000 civilians went to work each day at the Boston Naval Shipyard. How did they ever manage to get to and from? Over 20,000 worked at the River Works in Lynn. Gas was rationed. The only real road connection between East Boston and downtown was a single tube, two-way tunnel.
Click to expand...

During WWII Boston and the surrounding areas didn't have 4-5 Cars per household. You would be lucky to have one car per household. That is the difference.

The roads and the infrastructure is not suited for this type of volume. Plain and simple. Our elected leaders are creating a chaos situation with Traffic.

BUILD IN THE CORE of the CITY---HIGHER and address the much needed infrastructure.
 
TheRifleman said:
During WWII Boston and the surrounding areas didn't have 4-5 Cars per household. You would be lucky to have one car per household. That is the difference.

The roads and the infrastructure is not suited for this type of volume. Plain and simple. Our elected leaders are creating a chaos situation with Traffic.

BUILD IN THE CORE of the CITY---HIGHER and address the much needed infrastructure.
Click to expand...

With gas rationing, the practical effect for most households was no cars, even for those households who owned one.

125,000 passengers a day used South Station in Boston during WW II.
 
My family apparently had a Packard sedan and a Buick coupe. These went up on blocks December through March to conserve fuel and the tires. My parents got around by streetcar whenever they could. Why wouldn't they? I think you could go to Worcester on a street car! (I still own a Packard. Rotten in the snow.)
 
stick n move said:
^ your waaaaay too doom and gloom. Were in the biggest building boom in history and the city is amazing.....
Click to expand...

You just got done increasing the US population by 90M people. A few thousand moved here. Compared to the rest of the country, this is a modest infill boom... With parcels fillling in.

*This is the boom of the unbuilt skyscraper.....

the list of towers over 300' either approved and unbuilt, or under review going past many years is a legitimate cause for concern imo.....

Blank out everything approved but unbuilt or proposed but unbuilt; Boston is making strides in midrise construction; Are we on par with say, San Jose?

proposed, rooftop heights;
*(Boston or mass.gov spearheading projects)

1. 1 Bromfield St/Midwood Investment 59 stories 709' (latest design sent back by the BCDC)
2. Harbor Garage Tower/Central Wharf 48 stories 600'
3. *Air Rights Parcel 15 Tower #1/Back Bay/Weiner Ventures w/ Prudential 34 Stories stories 535'
4. 45 Worthington St/Equity Residential 35 stories 390' (highrise sacked after neighborhood pushback).
5. 2 Charlesgate West/Transnational 30 stories 367'
6. *Parcel P12 Chinatown development plan rfp 348-360'
7. 51 High Street 29 stories 360'
8. *Back Bay Station tower #3 26 stories 325'.
9. 15 Harrison Avenue/Drago and Toscano/Chinatown hotel 26 stories 325'.
10. *Rio Grande/Dudley Square mixed use incl 211 units 293,193 sq ft 25 stories 313'
11. 436 Atlantic Ave/J Hook tower 24 stories 305'.
12. 533 Washington St 29 stories 303'
13. 560 Commonwealth Ave hotel/Kenmore Sq/Fenway 388 rooms/ 24-stories 300'
14. Assembly Row (Block 8) tower 20 stories 273' 500 units
15. 655 Beacon St hotel/Kenmore Square/Fenway 375 rooms 19 stories 270'

approved, +/- construction, topped, +/- cladding or completed;
*(year = year project completed, construction = under construction).

black ink denotes not yet u/c.....

1. 1 Dalton Street/Four Seasons/Back Bay 61 stories 742' (20th level)
2. 111 Federal Street/Downtown 52 Stories 702' (site demo setting up)
3. Millennium Tower/Downtown Crossing 60 stories 685' (2016)
4. South Station Tower; 51 stories 677' (construction 2018)
5. Govt Center office tower/Downtown 43 stories + tall mech screen 647' tip (awaiting tenant)
6. Copley Place Tower/Back Bay 52 stories 625' (indefinitely on hold)
7. Govt Center residential tower/Downtown 45 stories 547' (construction)
8. TD Garden office tower/West End 525,000 sq ft ~21 stories over the podium ~505' rooftip (awaiting tenant).
9. Residential tower on MIT's 10 acre Volpe site 30 stories 500'
10. TD Garden resident tower/West End 45 stories 495' (construction)
11. Garden Garage Tower/West End 44 stories 485' (construction delayed until 2018 or later)
12. Avalon North Station/West End 38 stories 449' (2016)
13. 40 Trinity Place/Back Bay 33 stories 446' (construction early 2018)
14. Atlantic Wharf 32 stories 436' (2011)
15. Columbus Center; 34 stories 420' (approved/cancelled)
16. *Back Bay Station tower #1 (residences) 34 stories ~413' (approved Nov 16, 2017)
17. The Huntington/Fenway 32 stories 400' (approval expected Dec 14, 2017)
18. 145 Broadway resident tower/Kendall Sq/Cambridge 33 Stories 392' (construction)
19, *Back Bay Station tower #2 (offices) 24 stories 391' (approved Nov 16, 2017)
20. 380 Stewart Street/JHT #3/Back Bay 26 stories 390' (on hold)
21. 260-290 Main Street/Kendall Sq/Cambridge SOMA Dorm Tower 28 stories 381' (construction)
22. DOT Research tower on MIT's Volpe Sq development site ~380'
23. The Pierce/Fenway 30 stories 378' (opening soon)
22. Wynn Casino & Tower/Everett 700 rooms 2.1M sq ft 27 stories 371' (6 levels)
23. 45 Province Street 31 Stories 367' (2009)
24. The Clarendon/Back Bay 32 stories 339' (2010)
25. Avalon Exeter 28 stories 336' (2014)
26. South Station #2 (residential) 28 stories 332' (phase 2)
27. StuVi2/33 Harry Agganis Way/BU 26 stories 331' (2010)
28. *Back Bay Station tower #3 26 stories 325' (approved Nov 16, 2017)
29. 45 Stewart St/AVA Theater District 29 stories ~310' (2015)
30. 30 Dalton St 26 stories 307' (2016)
31. Fenway Center main tower 27 stories 305' w/ 3 mid-rise towers, 1.1M sq ft (questionable if the decking + tower ever gets built)
32. 100 Stewart Street/W Boston Hotel & Residences 26 Stories 301' (2010)
33. 145 Broadway/Kendall Sq offices 19 stories 300' (construction)
34. MIT East Campus "NoMa Building 1"/ Kendal Square/Cambridge 300' (construction)
35. The Kensington Apts 27 stories ~300' (2013)
36. Radian 26 stories 291' (2014)
37. 88 Ames St (Cambridge) 23 stories 290' (21st level)
38. 157 Berkeley Street/Liberty Mutual 22 stories 290' (2013)


it's an asston of infill and not much skyfill.
 
Last edited:
Did my brain just broke? I'm trying to read the last few comments and I can't comprehend wtf am I reading.
 
ant8904 said:
Did my brain just broke? I'm trying to read the last few comments and I can't comprehend wtf am I reading.
Click to expand...

My whole point is why wasn't the Amazon proposal more geared towards the downtown area instead of Revere.

And who is making these decisions? Who in their right mind would believe
Amazon is better off in Revere over Boston.

Amazon choose Boston to make a proposal. So for some insane reason they proposed Suffolk downs in Revere MA? Think about that.
Why not multiple proposals?

We continue to have many undeveloped garages in the core of downtown.
3 Garages
Winthrop
Congress
Harbor

What about South Station?
Why not try to work out a deal with these groups before choosing Revere ma or have multiple offers for Amazon to choose from in different locations?

EPIC failure by our leaders concerning this proposal.
Maybe Amazon chooses Revere Ma but this will not be good for the PUBLIC and car traffic scenario in my opinion.

Amazon needs to be focused into the core of Boston.
 
Suffolk Downs is within the city limits of Boston.... Out on a filled in tidal marsh.

btw, i have never posted an opinion on this site regarding anything about the failed Olympiad bid... nor would i ever insinuate that this somehow contributes to Boston's disfunction or possible future economic problems.

i do happen to believe that there is a significant risk of economic trouble or malaise for (Boston and Massachusetts) down the road.

We are succeeding, seeminly miraculously in spite of our politics... and in the few places where we might be benefitting from them, it is minimal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top