You don't explain why. The Enfield jobs are mostly call center jobs, they already have a nice place worked out, the offices are. Why can't LEGO afford to be there? You also go on to say cities have been gutted because of telework... so why does it matter if the office is in a city or not.
You clearly never been to Boston if you think they have a decent transportation network. Rochester NY has a better bus system then Boston has a transportation system.
The gist boils down to employee preferences. Broad generalization alert: pretty much anyone younger than me (I'm 46, late Gen X) wants to be in vibrant urban places, wants to walk, wants to bike, is transit-savvy. The last place they want to be is suburbs and small towns - certainly not until they start families and need to find good schools for children.
When applied to call center work, call centers burn through employees like crazy, almost as quickly as Amazon warehouses do. You need a larger population of potential employees to be able to stay near full staffing complement. There's also a smaller factor at play that commercial buildings age rapidly. It's cheaper to buy a new building with modern wiring than to improve an older building that likely requires a full gut and replace of the entire wiring and telecom systems.
I saw the comments after the above post on fires in Boston's transit system. Half the transit systems in America are the same way; here around D.C., Metro has fires almost literally weekly somewhere in the system and they're pouring millions on millions into system upgrades. We're a Third World nation when it comes to infrastructure. But even with this in mind, there isn't a single large business that thinks it can thrive keeping operations and headquarters outside rail-served mixed-use locations. By the way, this is why ideas to relocate Federal agencies out to the heartland are just boondoggles and would waste billions in taxpayer money - every time someone tries to force a relocation, more than 3/4 of the current employees resign rather than relocate. Some would say this is the intent, but I'll just leave it at that.
Telework not only guts the cities, it guts the suburban offices that remain. Let's say the call center in Enfield decided not to relocate - it would be much cheaper for them in the long run to simply shift the call center operation to telework and close up the physical buildings. There's nothing one can do from a cube at a call center they can't do from a PC/VOIP at their home.
Everyone related to development is figuring out how to reverse the decline of office occupancy and loss of daytime population. The main solution boils down to trying to find innovative ways to add even more housing. That's not really viable outside the cities and transit locations because again, the youths simply don't want to live there.
- V Gundam likes this