Amazon HQ2 thread

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Are they allowed to resubmit a sweetened bid now?

In theory, Amazon can go back to their shortlist of cities and say "Ok *X* city, *Y* city is offering such and such amount. Why should we choose you over them?"

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by mhays

The time isn't the point. It's the uncertainties and variables.

I don't see the uncertainties and variables you're seeing, other than the difference in progress / time.

Chicago and Philadelphia may well be further along with making their sites shovel ready, but my point is there's nothing stopping Atlanta (or any other city) from clearing the same hurdles if they were selected either.

[themaguffin]

I highly doubt that it will be so close that shovel ready will be the deciding factor... Many cities have at least one good option for them.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by themaguffin

I highly doubt that it will be so close that shovel ready will be the deciding factor... Many cities have at least one good option for them.

This factor wasn't even listed as a requirement in Amazon's RFQ.

Like the HRT directly to the airport, it's one of those things that may be nice to have, but it won't be a determining factor.

[C.]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

In theory, Amazon can go back to their shortlist of cities and say "Ok *X* city, *Y* city is offering such and such amount. Why should we choose you over them?"

This is exactly what will happen. Why not?

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by CIA

This is exactly what will happen. Why not?

I was just answering another poster's question concerning whether cities would be given the opportunity to modify. It's ultimately up to Amazon to decide, but more than likely the answer is yes and it would play out in the way I described.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I was just answering another poster's question concerning whether cities would be given the opportunity to modify. It's ultimately up to Amazon to decide, but more than likely the answer is yes and it would play out in the way I described.

I read your post to mean that a city could modify it's bid now.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I read your post to mean that a city could modify it's bid now.

That I'm not sure of.

But it is possible (I would say more than likely)that Amazon would give cities a chance to modify their bids if they go back to them after reviewing their initial bid.

[C.]

Top 5 posters in this thread:

skyscraperpage17 117
10023 70
Pedestrian 69
CIA 63
mhays 57

The above forum members need a hobby to dedicate such amount of time on this frivolous thread, especially the user skyscraperpage as 17 117 posts are very impressive! The rest of y'all need to pick up the slack

[cannedairspray]

But I don't have anything really to say.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

This factor wasn't even listed as a requirement in Amazon's RFQ.

Like the HRT directly to the airport, it's one of those things that may be nice to have, but it won't be a determining factor.

I'll say it again...lesson #1 about a proposal response in the development world and anywhere else is understanding your client beyond what's in the RFP.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by mhays

I believe some are much further along, having planned similar-scaled developments long before Amazon. Philly's University City and at least one site in Chicago come to mind.

Chicago has multiple mega-projects that are backed by big time developers that already control land, are working on or have entitlements, or are already under construction. There is a big difference between that and a city saying "oh hey, we could possibly do X some day". Here's the summary of shovel ready or under construction sites in Chicago's bid:

1. Post Office, 2.5 million square foot existing building with zoning for 5.5 million square feet of new construction. Already owned by developer 601 West and partway through a massive $500 million restoration. Fully entitled for 8 million square feet of total development.

2. Tribune site, huge multi square block development site along Chicago River North Branch, Riverside Development already has control of the site and is working on planning and entitlements.

3. Finkl Steel, several hundred acre site already controlled by Chicago's premier industrial redeveloper Sterling Bay. They have the ability to build an entire neighborhood from scratch and are already building one large office building here and prepping the site for the next phases.

4. The 78, the old rail yards south of Roosevelt. Again, already controlled by possibly the world's premier developer, Related. This site will be redeveloped, the only question is whether Amazon will be the anchor tenant.


There are only a handful of sites I've heard of in other cities so far that are in as advanced of planning phases as these. I know Philly has at least one, what other cities have mega projects like these already in the pipeline? At the end of the day this is probably not going to be some visionary civic dream, but a serious project headed by a serious developer with a track record of delivering.

[Domer2019]

^ 5. Michael Reese site

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

6. (not an Amazon proposal, ignore) - whatever the heck happens to the US Steel site

https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/31/14445698/chicago-south-works-us-steel-new-development-plan

[10023]

Originally Posted by Domer2019

^ 5. Michael Reese site

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

6. (not an Amazon proposal, ignore) - whatever the heck happens to the US Steel site

https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/1/31/14445698/chicago-south-works-us-steel-new-development-plan

Michael Reese isn’t really in advanced stages, nor does it seem that compelling at this point. They’ve got a long way to go, and need to improve/redevelop/gentrify surrounding neighborhoods as part of the plan.

[bnk]

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news...ops-in-study-of-flight-connectivity.html

Chicago scores top mark in new study of flight connectivity





By Lewis Lazare  –  Reporter, Chicago Business Journal
4 hours ago

Chicago's O'Hare International Airport and Midway International Airport are a fearsome combo when it comes to the flight connectivity they offer travelers in the Chicago market.

That's the top finding in a new study of the quality of air ....

The Eno Center for Transportation, a transportation think tank, ranked the quality of Chicago's air service highest among all 47 cities because of the level of flight connectivity travelers are afforded at both O'Hare and Midway. 
In the Eno Center study, Chicago notched a score of 94. The next highest-ranked market was Denver (79) followed by Los Angeles (78). Dallas, New York City and Atlanta each had scores of 76.

At a time when Chicago wants to stay in the competition to land Amazon's second headquarters, any study of airport connectivity that paints Chicago in a flattering light is going to get Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's attention. 
Noted Emanuel: "Being home to the most connected and competitive airports in the country is another strong asset for Chicago residents, businesses and visitors to this great city."

Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) has stated that an airport with great connectivity is one feature it is looking for in the city eventually selected for HQ2.
Chicago Department of Aviation commissioner Ginger Evans said of Chicago's top ranking in the Eno study: "Chicago's connectivity will only get stronger as we continue to modernize and improve O'Hare and Midway airports, making them best-in-class aviation facilities for travelers in Chicago and worldwide."
Chicago's high flight connectivity ranking was due in no small measure to the fact that both United Airlines (NYSE: UAL) and American Airlines (NASDAQ: AAL) have major hubs at O'Hare, a unique aspect of that airport. And Midway is Southwest Airlines' (NYSE: LUV) largest hub.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by bnk

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news...ops-in-study-of-flight-connectivity.html

Chicago scores top mark in new study of flight connectivity

... but you still need to fly through O'Hare. 6 straight years in a row, my annual late September / early October trip back to Boston from Narita via O'Hare was delayed between 2-7 hours. Every. Single. Time. O'Hare is my least-favorite major American airport.

Now we just use Newark instead. No delays.

[denizen467]

^ Either you don't have enough data points with EWR yet or else your ORD experiences are out of date, one could argue.

Presumably it was usually the domestic outbound leg, rather than the international return leg, that got delayed?

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

This factor wasn't even listed as a requirement in Amazon's RFQ.

Shovel ready and timing most definitely was listed. There were talking about needing a 500,000 SF block of space by end of 2018 early 2019 or something. There are not many blocks that size even in a big CBD like Chicago, I can't imagine what it's like in tighter markets or smaller cities to try to find a space that big, let alone negotiate a big deal when the landlord knows they are one of the few blocks that size. You can't build a 500,000+SF office building from scratch in a year or less, so I think a city having supply that can accommodate that need is very much an important consideration.

Originally Posted by Shawn

... but you still need to fly through O'Hare. 6 straight years in a row, my annual late September / early October trip back to Boston from Narita via O'Hare was delayed between 2-7 hours. Every. Single. Time. O'Hare is my least-favorite major American airport.

Now we just use Newark instead. No delays.

I've literally never had a delay out of O'Hare and I've lived off the Blue Line for 10 years. I think what happens at O'Hare is that many connecting flights pass through there and are invariably delayed due to some weather along their route or at their destination and these flights end up getting stuck there. I feel like most people I know who fly out of O'Hare don't usually have these problems because the flight is usually originating here with maybe a connection someplace else. I almost always fly direct, but that's because I am a 20 min train ride from the most central airport in the world. I'm sure if I were flying to Asia a lot I would learn to hate Tokyo or LAX after getting hung up there with a bad layover a few times.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by denizen467

^ Either you don't have enough data points with EWR yet or else your ORD experiences are out of date, one could argue.

Presumably it was usually the domestic outbound leg, rather than the international return leg, that got delayed?

Right, O'Hare to Narita was always late to leave. Might be a time of year thing too, seems like weather was the usual culprit.

The nice thing about Newark for us is that for whatever reason, the gates we land at and depart from are almost next to each other. Logan-to-Newark, it takes 5 minutes to get from our landing gate to the departure gate. At O'Hare, they're in entirely different terminals and we need to ride a train and pray our 30 minute transfer window is enough time.

Newark might be horrible in general, but for this specific Tokyo flight (originating from Logan), it's just about perfect.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Shawn

At O'Hare, they're in entirely different terminals and we need to ride a train and pray our 30 minute transfer window is enough time.

yes, international to domestic connections at ORD can be a pain in the ass because T5 (international terminal) is so far removed from the main domestic terminals.

however, plans are currently being drawn up to replace T2 with a brand new international gateway terminal for star alliance and one world that would sit directly in between united's and american's main domestic terminals (T1 & T3). then delta and its skyteam partners, along with the LCC's, would all be moved out to T5. this new scheme, if implemented, would TREMENDOUSLY ease international/domestic connections for the big airline alliances at ORD.

that said, for people who fly in and out of ORD as their home airport (as would be the case for the thousands of amazon employees should they choose to locate HQ2 in the windy city), the current connections headaches at ORD are a complete and total non-factor. it sucks that you've had negative experiences with them transferring through from tokyo to boston, but i don't think it will even be a hint of a factor in amazon's considerations of ORD.

the fact that ORD is such a phenomenally connected airport, both globally and domestically, is a very strong feather in chicago's cap in this contest, not a liability.