Amazon HQ2 RFP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arlington said:
?? While big budget, Boston has no projects on its plate anywhere near as disruptive as the Big Dig. Not even close.
Click to expand...

That was my point... that we aren't going to do projects at that level again and that is probably a good thing.

Seemed that there was some lamenting going on in the thread that we needed bigger projects at the Big Dig level to take us to the next level as a city. Even taken altogether, the projects on that list are not nearly as disruptive or maybe even as expensive as the Big Dig (at least in inflation adjusted dollars).

Even the reference to LA with " LA passed Measure M in 2016 which approves spending $120B over the next 40 years to vastly expand the metro system. It's a huge project and a huge win for the region."

Sounds like a lot of money for transit expansion until you actually read the plan (and I see $30 Billion just directly as a result of measure M in 2015 dollars so the equivalent of an extra $750 million per year and not just on transit expansion) and it looks a lot like a list of the relatively modest projects over a long period of time similar to what Massachusetts is planning for in proportion to our population and needs... and we already had a sales tax increase in 2009 a lot of which went towards transportation. Way ahead of when LA Metro increased their taxes to accelerate transportation projects.

The timing of individual projects aside and whether we should do some of those sooner rather than later, it seems Boston is very competitive with other big cities in improving transportation.
 
Now that I've thought about it, why shouldn't Baltimore be a top contender? The port Covington proposal gives them the acres, they have public transit, ample housing, one of the most highly educated workforces in the country (top ten with boston), proximity to 2 major international airports, and (important one) proximity to dc for lobbying, wapo, and bezos' second home. Who cares about crime if you're building a whole neighborhood from scratch.

I bet they've offered decent incentives too.
 
Rover said:
Not to nitpick because I'm happy to see these projects funded, but few of this has actually been built. Not directed at you, but its funny that on a different thread people are going berserk that West Station will be delayed in 2040, when at the same time I read your articles many of these projects are projected to go on line the same year.

So, to keep this an apples to apples comparison, which was my original question to shmessy in response to his PTSD comment, what city has done anything like the Big Dig in the 15 years since it was by and large completed? I'd answer none, with the additional comment that two cities (LA and Seattle) are in the planning stages of doing something similar over the next 20 years if all goes well (famous last words).

Also I'd personally support a gas tax hike, but the money would have to be earmarked towards actual projects and not personnel costs. State transportation dept has to rebuild credibility with the public regarding graft and corruption before voters start approving more funding.
Click to expand...

LA is not only funding but currently constructing transportation projects that likely are as large and as transformative as the big dig. I believe the regional connector underneath downtown just finished tunneling (it adds 3 new underground metro stations downtown and better connects the existing lines). The Purple line extension to Westwood was just fasttracked (AHEAD of schedule) and both phases of the extension will open together about 2021. That's another 6 new metro stations traversing West LA. Then of course there is the Crenshaw light rail extension to LAX and all the airport improvements they are undertaking to connect the terminals to the metro via a people mover. That opens in 2019. The Gold line out to the eastern burbs is also u/c. The Expo light rail from downtown to Santa Monica opened in 2016.
 
Well, we need it. It's the 50 year storm today, and traffic on the 405 at Sunset is at a standstill.
 
Ive said it before. Amazon should be paying cities for the privilege of fucking things up
 
I can only imagine what the coverage of Motown would have looked like if we had today's media environment 70 years ago. Or Hollywood...
 
From the BI link: "For those wondering what their city may look like should Amazon choose it, the company's current home in Seattle is a cautionary tale. Locals point to snarled traffic, soaring housing prices, never-ending construction, and accelerated gentrification."

Boston is ready for Amazon, since locals are quite accustomed to complaining about these things already.
 
HalcyonEra said:
Interesting take on being careful for what you wish for. It's pretty whiney but has some good points:


One walk through Seattle's 'Amazonia' neighborhood made me very uneasy for whatever city gets HQ2

http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq-photo-tour-seattle-make-any-city-wary-of-amazon-hq2-2017-12
Click to expand...

Something I found notable was the claim that AMZN occupies 20% of the office space in Seattle. That is astronomical.

Boston plus Cambridge (arguably inseparable as a CBD) has about 82 million sq feet of combined class A and B office space today. If Amazon added 8 million square feet over the next 20 years (and nothing else was built in that time), we would total 90 million square feet of which Amazon would occupy about 9%. Of course, there are several million square feet under construction and in the development pipeline today. In addition, inevitably more office space than just Amazon's will be added over the next 20 years. Therefore, Boston/Cambridge will most likely have greater than 90 million sq ft and Amazon will certainly occupy less than 9% of that. It is also my personal opinion that Amazon will never build out the entire 8 million square feet stated in the RFP, further driving that percentage down.

In summary, it is extraordinarily unlikely that an Amazon-injected Boston of the future would in any way resemble the Seattle of today. The only conceivable scenario in which Amazon approaches 20% of our office market is if there is some major catastrophe that guts the Boston economy, but doesn't affect Amazon. In that unlikely scenario, we'll be counting our blessings and kissing Amazon's ass.
 
JumboBuc said:
I can only imagine what the coverage of Motown would have looked like if we had today's media environment 70 years ago. Or Hollywood...
Click to expand...

Mo-town is probably a good comparison with its over-reliance on the auto industry. Hollywood is a much smaller segment of the overall LA economy and the entertainment industry has many aspects to it which are not entirely dependent on one-another. Of course, in both scenarios you are talking about industries, not one company.

I saw a couple of key takeaways as this:

"Amazon has about 20% of Seattle's prime office real estate, more than any other employer in a major US city. It occupies more square feet than the next 40 largest employers in the city combined."

"The neighborhood seemed to move to the rhythms of Amazon. At lunchtime, the streets were bustling. In the hours after, they were practically empty, save for a couple people grabbing coffee."

Obviously both scenarios would take a long time to develop in a diverse market like Boston, but this should be a larger concern for other cities. Of course, that is dependent on whether or not HQ2 is ever fully built out. History is littered with seemingly indestructible mega corps that have a nice long dominate run and then implode and either fade away, get sold off in pieces or simply become a shell of their former selves. The key for any region is not be fully dependent on said company.
 
Everything described there just sounds like a quasi-gentrified corporate-oriented downtown of a prosperous american city circa 2017. Busy at lunch? Sparse at night? High end new construction for yuppies? Ambiguous quasi-private ‘public space with over zealous private security guards?

Nothing about that is amazon specific.....this is a narrative looking for a story....
 
Amazon at Suffolk Downs would be its own distinct neighborhood, separated from other Boston/Cambridge neighborhoods. That's not what happened in Seattle.
_______________________

My guess is that for any city which already has a significant Amazon presence (e.g., Austin. Boston) the 50,000 jobs is not 50,000 additional, but 50,000 minus what's already there or committed. Other than a few very large cities, the labor market becomes very inefficient for an Amazon with 60,000-70,000 local employees. These are not factory floor production jobs; Boston was able to employ over 50,000 at the shipyard even with many males in the workforce off in the military.
_________________________

And Amazon will be looking for certain, specific skill sets for HQ2, perhaps like people who have experience in voice recognition. Because that's where the future is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...50bc3300042_story.html?utm_term=.fb125747cb29

And which bidding city is a world leader in voice recognition technologies?

As for AI, assuming HQ2 has a major AI program, cost of living is largely immaterial to AI engineers given their compensation levels.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/5/16737224/global-ai-talent-shortfall-tencent-report
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top