Hacker News Reader

Comment by cephaslr | Hacker News Reader

After reading these comments it makes me realize just how limiting transportation is and how big of a drag it is. Austin/Boston/DC/Atlanta/Denver/others are all great locations with transportation issues. Even some of the more rural locations such as RDU would quickly fill up with 50k new tech workers join the existing the two-lane highways. It seems like the best solution currently is the Apple/Google wifi buse with 90 minute 1-way commute part of your workday.

The highway system itself is an innovation from the 50's and (In My Humble Opinion) lack of continued innovation on the US transport system since has significantly contributed to the loss of US technical/economic leadership since then.

View on HN

It's too bad they dropped the Detroit area off the list. Hardly any traffic compared to these other cities. Fantastic airport with many direct flights to Europe and Asia. I am kind of glad though. We don't need the stress on our infrastructure or the rapid rise in real estate and salaries Amazon will bring.

Yeah, I was really hoping for Detroit. It's got a lot of really underutilized infrastructure at this point and could be really revitalized by a large tech company expanding its footprint there. Real estate prices would be relatively low, too.

I'm surprised to see a place like Boston on the list. Having lived there for ~15 years, I just can't imagine adding an additional 50,000 well paid tech workers and their families to that area. It's already densely populated and expensive.

In Atlanta, we now (because of the Amazon rfp) have a hope of the state funding our mass transit system (currently only funded by 3 counties and 1 city).

This is why I'm hoping it doesn't end up in Boston proper. Traffic is already unbearable for a large chunk of the state during rush hours.

Even for driving in for the evening, i.e. a reverse commute, Boston/Cambridge traffic has gotten sufficiently worse that I don't go in as much any longer. And the commuter rail I take on the sometimes occasions that I go in for a work day was standing room only starting at Waltham, 30 minutes outside the city, the last time I took it.

There's already the GE Headquarters and a large Amazon building going into the Seaport and building continues in Kendall Square. And this is a city that has a relatively good public transit system.

I'm not even sure how Boston wound up in the running.

I love the city, but it's experiencing a biotech boom and already has crazy expensive real estate, issues with crowding/traffic, all that jazz. The city would HATE it, even more than Seattle did. And let me tell you, the ostracization in Seattle is extremely painful. I don't think it would turn out to be a good working environment.

I guess it has a lot of educational institutions, but honestly, in its position, I'd sort of expect a company like Amazon to want to start getting more involved in educational outreach themselves.

The plot of land they are offering in Boston is Suffolk downs. So its outside of Boston proper, has a ton of space, is right on the T, and has easy access to Logan airport. Plus its proximity to schools you pointed out and its tech scene make it appealing.

I actually think Boston has a decent chance, along with Denver, Atlanta, and DC.

Huh, cool - I don't know much about their bid, so I guess I was sort of talking out my ass.

I still probably wouldn't move back if they got it, having experienced and possibly been broken by Seattle. But...I dunno, it'd probably be a net good for the area, so good luck to them.

Ah right. I don't live in the city so I hadn't really kept up with developments after the bid for a casino location there was rejected a few years ago. Presumably, if that was a legitimate bid at least someone thought you could move a lot of people in and out of the area. Traffic still isn't great around there but, yeah, you're right on the Blue Line (which is... OK I guess) and you're practically next door to the airport.

If it happened, good luck if you've been living in East Boston because it's relatively cheap, albeit somewhat gentrifying.

>I hadn't really kept up with developments after the bid for a casino location there was rejected a few years ago

That casino is actually now under active construction, and has been for about a year (if not longer). Though it's much further south in Everett.

Yeah, I meant the Suffolk Downs location bid, not the casino project overall. (Unfortunately.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com