CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[bnk]

I still think the OPO is the best plug and play operation out there for Chicago's bid.


some renders in the link.

Here is an interesting link in the comments section about rail express access to the site and O'Hare. http://www.crossrailchicago.org/

http://www.crossrailchicago.org/airportexpress.shtml



https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/10/16/16482386/micheal-reese-hospital-burnham-lakefront

Chicago’s plan to attract Amazon to the old Michael Reese Hospital site breaks cover


The mixed-use plan is the fourth such development to break cover since Amazon began its HQ2 search

by Jay Koziarz Oct 16, 2017, 11:13am CDT


With Amazon’s October 19th deadline fast approaching, Chicago developers have officially taken the wraps off yet another site looking to lure the tech company’s coveted HQ2 second corporate headquarters to the Windy City. Dubbed the ‘Burnham Lakefront,’ the proposal provides the best look yet at the redevelopment plans for the former Michael Reese Hospital in the Bronzville neighborhood on Chicago’s Near South Side.

Vacant since the hospital was demolished in 2009, the lakefront property was purchased by the City of Chicago to serve as the Olympic village as part of Chicago’s unsuccessful bid for the 2016 summer games. ...

Though the city sale encompassed the 49-acre area occupied by the old hospital plus the 28-acre truck marshalling yards controlled by Chicago’s Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority, the future mixed-use campus has grown to 100 acres. The scope of the project also includes an additional connected housing opportunity of 144 acres (34 acres to the immediate north plus 110 acres adjacent to the south).


Initially expected to feature “more than 5 million square feet” of technology-oriented commercial spaces, retail, homes, and hotel rooms, the plan has been super-sized to include 8 million to 14 million square feet depending on tenant needs and overall market demand.


“If Amazon or some other large corporation wants to be there, it’s open land where we can build whatever fits their needs,” Farpoint Development founding principal Scott Goodman told Chicago Tribune reporter Ryan Ori.
Newly released renderings by Chicago-based architecture firm Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM) provide a glimpse ...

High-tech touches such as fiber optic data connections, on-site renewable energy generation, and dedicated traffic lanes for autonomous vehicles are reportedly on tap. The possibility of a new 31st Street train station is also still on the table.


Other recently-revealed prime Chicago HQ2 sites include the 37-acre River District from Tribune Media, Sterling Bay’s Lincoln Yards campus along the North Branch of the Chicago River, and 601 W Companies’ redevelopment of Chicago’s Old Post Office building. As with the other sites, the developers of the Burnham Lakefront plan to move forward with their plans—with or without Amazon as its anchor.

...

[marothisu]

LOL Just watched a clip of CNBC giving Chicago a D- for talent (but they kept just mentioning Illinois instead of Chicago). As a tech worker who's worked in Chicago and NYC and also in capacity in the Bay Area, I can't tell you how ridiculous that rating is. It's so wrong it's almost funny. And it's even more ridiculous if talking about just any work force talent. Peoples' idea about tech and where the talent is located is so often times inaccurate versus reality.

[the urban politician]

The whole world is full of silliness when it comes to this “the talent is here not there” BS.

Nonsense. Talent is truly rare. 99% of people are average, and most of the ones truly disrupting industry are either lucky, spending Mom and Dad’s money, or some combination of both.

[subterranean]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The whole world is full of silliness when it comes to this “the talent is here not there” BS.

Nonsense. Talent is truly rare. 99% of people are average, and most of the ones truly disrupting industry are either lucky, spending Mom and Dad’s money, or some combination of both.

It's posts like this that make me wish the forum had a 'like' button.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The whole world is full of silliness when it comes to this “the talent is here not there” BS.

Nonsense. Talent is truly rare. 99% of people are average, and most of the ones truly disrupting industry are either lucky, spending Mom and Dad’s money, or some combination of both.

I'm laughing out loud at this because it's so damn true. In software for example, there's tons of ways to accomplish one thing. Just because you can solve something doesn't mean the solution was good or smart. There's truly bad code out there. It works, but barely. Most developers are loud about their own skills, and usually the loudest ones are the ones who aren't the best. Let's just say there are a bunch of people in tech in various areas who are average at best, but because they live in certain places, they think they are automatically good and the media also buys into it. Most people in tech, whether they live in the bay area, NYC, Chicago, etc aren't above average. The ability to implement what you are told at most companies isn't difficult and doesn't mean anything. Most tech out there is pretty simple to actually create, but most people still suck at it even if they get a working product. I'd say 10-20% of this workforce actually knows what they're doing and make the other 80-90% look ok.

[IrishIllini]

Anyone have any scoops on the Amazon HQ2 bid? I'm feeling we're more of a contender than most media outlets are insinuating. I would love to get a look at the bid just to see what we're pitching.

It'd be great for Chicago for a number of reasons, but I am excited by the idea of some posters (Crawford) losing their mind over Chicago landing the HQ2. If the HQ2 does come, I do have concerns about being able to afford a larger place in the future. I guess that's progress

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Anyone have any scoops on the Amazon HQ2 bid? I'm feeling we're more of a contender than most media outlets are insinuating. I would love to get a look at the bid just to see what we're pitching.

It'd be great for Chicago for a number of reasons, but I am excited by the idea of some posters (Crawford) losing their mind over Chicago landing the HQ2. If the HQ2 does come, I do have concerns about being able to afford a larger place in the future. I guess that's progress

Yeah--we ain't gettin Amazon.

Fuck Amazon. Fuck tech. Fuck everything about this process.

I'm tired of Bezos. He's a douche bag and we should tell him to eat our shorts. We aren't giving him a damn thing, Chicago is awesome, Atlanta can have it, and he's basically running Walmart and we don't want Walmart's cheap ass around here anyhow.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah--we ain't gettin Amazon.

Fuck Amazon. Fuck tech. Fuck everything about this process.

I'm tired of Bezos. He's a douche bag and we should tell him to eat our shorts. We aren't giving him a damn thing, Chicago is awesome, Atlanta can have it, and he's basically running Walmart and we don't want Walmart's cheap ass around here anyhow.

I figured this would be your reaction

I do have concerns about Amazon, but I'd definitely be willing to look the other way for 50,000+ high paying jobs. It'd also reinforce to corporate America that Chicago is here to do business.

[k1052]

Walgreens is doubling its city tech operations, adding 300 jobs

Walgreens Boots Alliance is doubling down on Chicago. Company executives and Mayor Rahm Emanuel are announcing this afternoon that the drugstore chain is adding approximately 300 full-time technology positions to its office in the Sullivan Center in the Loop, doubling the unit's headcount.

The 300 jobs—some will be filled by new hires while others will be moved from Walgreens' headquarters in Deerfield—all support the tech side of the company's pharmaceutical sales, its single largest line of business. They'll join current tech workers who handle the company's digital and mobile commerce units, and social media.

The company set up operations in the Sullivan Center, in what had been a Carson Pirie Scott department store at 1 S. State St., in 2010. A company spokesman said some tech workers would remain in Deerfield, but could not immediately say how many.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/2...its-city-tech-operations-adding-300-jobs

[left of center]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

. If the HQ2 does come, I do have concerns about being able to afford a larger place in the future. I guess that's progress

I wouldn't be too worried. Chicago has a massive supply of neglected and struggling neighborhoods that prices wont ever truly become unaffordable. Once one neighborhood hits critical, then development moves on to the surrounding neighborhoods were land can be bought cheap. That's basically been the strategy along the blue line, starting with Noble Sq/West Town in the 90s, and progressing northwest to Wicker, then Bucktown, then Logan, and now Avondale.

Now if 10 Amazons were moving into Chicago, then I might start getting concerned.

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah--we ain't gettin Amazon.

Fuck Amazon. Fuck tech. Fuck everything about this process.

I'm tired of Bezos. He's a douche bag and we should tell him to eat our shorts. We aren't giving him a damn thing, Chicago is awesome, Atlanta can have it, and he's basically running Walmart and we don't want Walmart's cheap ass around here anyhow.

You're very anti-Amazon. Almost to a strange degree. Somehow I think maybe you're convincing yourself of this to soften the blow if and when Chicago doesn't get it.

But seriously, I think Chicago has a good of a shot as any city. All of these media outlets suggesting Chicago isn't in the running haven't done the same kind of in depth analysis that Amazon will do. They're not going to be swayed by MSNBC or any other biased east coast based media outlet. We have a solid chance. Don't give up so quickly.

[marothisu]

^ Was having this discussion at work today and ultimately I think one of the reasons (but not only reason) they have a 1+ million MSA constraint is so they don't completely mess up the housing market. However, I still think if they went to a smaller metro area like Birmingham, AL that they would end up doing that anyway.

I think if Amazon came to Chicago and picked the city for the site, the prices downtown would rise as well as areas like Lakeview, Lincoln Park, Wicker Park, etc etc. Along with more development downtown for residential/mixed use, I would bet that you'd see either
a) Proposals but bigger housing in the usual suspect areas
b) Other areas start to gentrify or gentrify more. I'd bet that places like Bronzeville, Pilsen, McKinley Park, etc would gentrify even more and probably areas like Albany Park, Irving Park, etc.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yeah--we ain't gettin Amazon.

Fuck Amazon. Fuck tech. Fuck everything about this process.

I'm tired of Bezos. He's a douche bag and we should tell him to eat our shorts. We aren't giving him a damn thing, Chicago is awesome, Atlanta can have it, and he's basically running Walmart and we don't want Walmart's cheap ass around here anyhow.

Why would as a land owner not like 50,000 jobs [ average pay over 100K that will create even more jobs supporting Amazon as a problem. If fully played out we are talking like a half of a million people moving into the region in the next 10-15 years, and this is bad why for you?

TUP are you being serious or tongue in cheek check here?

As a Pilsen landlord [ back in the good Times Era " slumlord " ]

Just kidding about that


Wouldn't you benefit the most from gentrification and increase in land and property values post an Amazon HQ2 relocation?


I don't understand your angst unless you are just kidding.

Bucco bucks, like doubling your rental units could happen if it happens.

Anyway I still think Chicago is positioned in the top 5 markets for this sort of site selection by Amazon.

I mean they almost described the Chicagoland area when they posted their desired needs.


At this point I firmly believe that this is Chicago's to lose at this point.


But I usually have an exaggerated opinion about our hometown.

Yes I would be disappointed if we were not chosen but it would not be the death nail, Chicagoland is doing quite well on the location and relocations of HQ's and buildings regardless of the loss of population in the hoods.

[the urban politician]

My annoyance about Amazon is precisely that we’re putting so much hope in a winner-take-all affair that I think is a long shot for Chicago, but more importantly it sheds light on all of the insecurities of local civic boosters.

“We HAVE to win Amazon if we’re going to have a future” type nonsense that you hear in the local media. It’s silly. You never become a trend setter by praying to high heaven that some big company chooses you to put their second office.

It’s not so much that I don’t see the huge economic benefit to this, it’s more about the sad desperation that it reveals. What really concerns me is the almost inevitable doom and gloom you’re going to hear from the local pundits if/when Amazon doesn’t choose Chicago. The whole “were getting left behind” or “are we a second tier city?” sky-is-falling nonsense that I will have to read through for weeks after the decision comes down.

[marothisu]

Chicago will be fine with or without Amazon. I don't think it's a long shot at all, but as a tech worker, what do I know? Anyway, it wouldn't hurt to get up to 50K new high paying jobs like this.

It's not just Chicago though - it's pretty much every city. You are just paying too close attention to the local news. There's been a lot of coverage everywhere, but you are absolutely right about the doom and gloom if Chicago doesn't win. That's one of the most annoying things in the world - like when GE didn't pick Chicago it was the end of the world at Crains for awhile. The only thing is that it wasn't between Chicago and Boston. It was Chicago, Boston, and many other cities. Why they were so doom and gloom was so pathetic.

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

My annoyance about Amazon is precisely that we’re putting so much hope in a winner-take-all affair that I think is a long shot for Chicago, but more importantly it sheds light on all of the insecurities of local civic boosters.

“We HAVE to win Amazon if we’re going to have a future” type nonsense that you hear in the local media. It’s silly. You never become a trend setter by praying to high heaven that some big company chooses you to put their second office.

It’s not so much that I don’t see the huge economic benefit to this, it’s more about the sad desperation that it reveals. What really concerns me is the almost inevitable doom and gloom you’re going to hear from the local pundits if/when Amazon doesn’t choose Chicago. The whole “were getting left behind” or “are we a second tier city?” sky-is-falling nonsense that I will have to read through for weeks after the decision comes down.

Hyperbole much?

I dunno... the only local media outlet I've seen act like that is Crain's. And Crain's is so frequently anti-Chicago to begin with; so much so that I wonder if they're owned by Sinclair media, and instructed to torpedo any self confidence the city may have. Also, hanging around these forums too much (particularly the city discussions) may give you a false impression as to any city's respect level.

Chicago may be getting hammered from the Nation on it's shooting stats, but overall, this city is very self assured. In no way do I think most people are hanging all their hopes on Amazon "saving us."

And again, statistically speaking, we're unlikely to get HQ2. But still, we have a great shot. And Bezos isn't as much of a prick as you let on. I've seen interviews with the guy. His being from Seattle and (seemingly) liberal makes our chances slightly better when compared to sunbelt conservative states. For instance, being a sanctuary city may make your average Fox News watcher hate Chicago, but we get points for that with Bezos.

We're fine with or without Amazon. But a boost of 50k jobs would be great. Keep your fingers crossed, and your expectations realistic.

[IrishIllini]

Doubt it'll happen if we don't win the HQ2, but I'd love to see what we offered.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by rgolch

the only local media outlet I've seen act like that is Crain's. And Crain's is so frequently anti-Chicago to begin with; so much so that I wonder if they're owned by Sinclair media, and instructed to torpedo any self confidence the city may have

Which paper are you reading? Most of the reporting is pretty impartial, but with the volume of articles they run about new developments and corporate expansions it's laughable to argue that they're "anti-Chicago". They don't go out of their way to feature bad news, and they certainly don't praise other cities or the suburbs.

That doesn't mean they don't attack certain politicians or institutions in their editorials, but there's a literal shit-ton of valid critiques to be leveled at the city and state leadership who are often corrupt, misguided or both.

DNAInfo, I feel, is a lot more harmful to the city. They often run feel-good neighborhood stories, but they're also a beacon for NIMBYs. More coverage of (potentially controversial) new development equals more page views. Sometimes they even seem to manufacture controversy where none exists, at a time when this city really needs consensus.

And don't get me started on clowns like John Kass... talk about anti-Chicago.

[bnk]

And don't get me started on clowns like John Kass... talk about anti-Chicago.

Thanks for mentioning that ass clown who should be run out of the entire area on a rail.


He's no Mike Royko that he seems to want to emulate but instead be an antithesis of. He has no charm, humor, or whit about him. He is a fraud of an editorialist and I cannot fathom why the Tribune co. even have let him spew his bile for as long as he has been doing for a very long time.

Nothing coming out of his pie hole is positive. The guy is a monster and a total detriment to the entire state.



Exhibit below. I called him a Royko want to be before I found this link.


https://www.reddit.com/r/chicago/comments/2er60w/this_morning_i_got_to_tell_john_kass_that_hes_an/

What I hate more than anything about him, more than his get off my lawn I'm ascared of change politics and rhetoric, is that dude really fucking thinks he's the new Royko. No. There will only ever be one Mike Royko. He had more talent in the lint of his taint than you have. So quit trying to emulate him and be him. Chumbolinis and shit and your little fucking nods to him. Its sad. "Bah bikes are stupid I'm scared where's my metamusil bah!"

...

One time I thought I had an epiphany: "Oh, I get it! John Kass...like Jack Kass. That's such a clever fake name for a perennial jerk!" But no, just an appropriate coincidence it seems.

...

Kass has been the worst columnist in Chicago since Jay Mariotti left town.

...

The Kasshole is a 6th-rate Royko, yes. And you can't be dumber than when you wave your fist at bikes...


...

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Which paper are you reading? Most of the reporting is pretty impartial, but with the volume of articles they run about new developments and corporate expansions it's laughable to argue that they're "anti-Chicago". They don't go out of their way to feature bad news, and they certainly don't praise other cities or the suburbs.

That doesn't mean they don't attack certain politicians or institutions in their editorials, but there's a literal shit-ton of valid critiques to be leveled at the city and state leadership who are often corrupt, misguided or both.

DNAInfo, I feel, is a lot more harmful to the city. They often run feel-good neighborhood stories, but they're also a beacon for NIMBYs. More coverage of (potentially controversial) new development equals more page views. Sometimes they even seem to manufacture controversy where none exists, at a time when this city really needs consensus.

And don't get me started on clowns like John Kass... talk about anti-Chicago.

Gotta agree about Crains. I think they are fair