I definitely have mixed feelings.
I'm a YIMBY - you don't have to tell me office and retail development are a good thing - I was initially excited when I saw the headline. But I look at these things a little closer. I suppose I should have been more precise with my wording. One of my concerns is with the effects of Amazon and big tech
growing fast in Boston, and accepting these jobs as growth being a good thing solely for the sake of growth without looking at their consequences. I applaud them for adding 3,000 jobs in Boston - it's a sign of our strength and standing at a national level, but looking at Amazon historically, as well as the recent announcements they have made regarding their efforts in all of the areas Boston does exceptionally well - robotics, AI/voice recognition (Alexa's success is credited greatly from the Boston team), and pharmaceuticals, implies they aren't close to being done hiring in Boston, and they'll make more announcements for thousands more as quickly as they need them. That's cause for concern for me - consistent growth is great, fast growth is a little more of a slippery slope with multiple consequences, much of what I already outlined - COL inflation, unhealthy/unsustainable competition for employees, etc. I've welcomed previous announcements from Facebook, Apple, and Google for adding hundreds of jobs over several years recently, but can't see Amazon at that small of a scale - they jump on opportunities they see fit at any cost so long as they are first and/or the best by brute force/numbers/money.
My primary concerns, though, as a Boston architecture and urban planning enthusiast, surround the effects on the urban environment, specifically the
types of retail we get after adding several/tens of thousands more FAANG + similar workers on top of what's already here, and sprinkle them across the city over the next 10+ years, at Suffolk Downs, Dot. Ave, Exchange South End, Harvard/Allston, Union Sq., etc., and I worry that a large amount of the remaining culture, retail/bars, and small businesses, that we treasure across the city, not just in the Seaport, are going to have a hard time keeping up with the new trendy shops and cafes that these types of employees like to go to. It's been difficult seeing small businesses close their doors the past few months; we should be treasuring the remaining ones, not leaving them in the dust and letting chains and overly expensive shops and cafes take their place.
In my opinion, the urban life and culture of the Seaport is already pretty sterile and somewhat 'forced,' for lack of a better term. Despite this, I've been a fan of the Seaport - it's what the people that live there want, and the developers are making cash that's incentivizing this machine to keep moving forward, continuously bringing revenue to the city, more jobs for less-skilled workers, as you note, and keeping Boston as a whole afloat in the midst of an economic slowdown.
Amazon's own PR piece today indicated that with their hires here, they've also indirectly added 13,400 jobs in other sectors so far, namely construction, logistics, healthcare, and professional services. I hope they can maintain that kind of scale with each job they add going forward, but I'm doubtful. I also question how they calculate their final numbers, but accept that, regardless, they are adding thousands of indirect jobs for less well-off residents.
I wonder how it will feel if the authenticity/charm that these local businesses and even buildings bring to neighborhoods that makes them attractive to local people keeps getting chipped at on its edges. I've visited Silicon Valley/San Fran multiple times, and something about the place doesn't sit right with me (although Santana Row seemed nice to me the first time, that was about it). Seattle sounds like its undergone the same kind of sterilization wherever Amazon exists, though I can't confirm myself. (Seattle's up there on my list)
"People-wise"/socially, I'm a little concerned, too. Related to your last point about "Amazon employment is bad," change is certainly not bad, but not all of it is good. From my view, we don't have the same workplace culture as Seattle, Si Valley, etc., and that's a good thing - that's one thing I hope doesn't change. I think FAANG creates a much more different kind of culture and workforce than what Boston has created and become accustomed to. From the select few people I know and from what I've read online, most of them are miserable, relative to regular/established tech, biotech, and even startups. The dynamics at play in these offices eliminate any hopes of work-life balance and healthy career decisions. This can easily leak into the established job market we already have here with a few years of turnover and job hopping. We're on a smaller scale here than Amazon in Seattle, but it's something to keep an eye out for. Like I said, I've been reading a bit about tipping points lately - this is mirroring the case studies and hypothetical examples pretty well.
I should have noted, also, that I'm not entirely worried about keeping recent grads here. I welcome it and hope it happens with or without Amazon/big tech jobs. That said, there has to be reason(s) we have hundreds of thousands of students here that just leave after graduation - a big part of that is likely due to the lack of excitement Boston and its night life hold for a 20 something. I hope a shift like this brings more night-life into an otherwise dead city after 9pm. I just wonder how it will pan out - what those restaurants, bars, and clubs will look like, where they will be, and how the city will react, etc. It's difficult as it is with today's NIMBY's, as I recall the Insomnia Cookies at Downtown Boston getting pushback for its 3am closing time, and that's just for late-night cookies. I also wonder how the rental market will fare with grads that have lived in their college-level-quality apartments maybe opting to stay in and around those neighborhoods for a few years to save up and pay off their debt, or because it's what they're used to, and changing how rentals work in these primarily quick turnaround, cheap, and competitive neighborhoods.
Again, with this 3,000 job announcement, likely next to nothing noticeable will happen, but these small additions and changes can add up. When they add up quickly, we reach tipping points that are hard to come back from if it goes wrong, and it's something we should keep an eye on. I don't have solutions ready, and I don't think anybody has a golden solution that brings in thousands of well-paying jobs and revenue without gentrifying cities, but there are questions that are worth asking such that we can maybe begin to develop solutions when we set out on major neighborhood and city planning initiatives.
