Amazon HQ2 thread

[mello]

Size definitely matters especially to Metra.... Sounds like a gay pop star or something Or at least what some instagram model would name her dog.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Doady

If Chicago was really so transit-friendly, if it had so many transit-friendly neighbhourhoods everywhere, it would have more riders per capita. Simple as that. Like Montreal, NYC, Toronto, Vancouver have 3 times more ridership per capita than Chicago. Washington 2 times more.

Chicago's transit system, right now, is just very poor compared to most of its peers. I don't see how a system with such lackluster ridership could be a selling point for the city.

I think the point here is that Chicago's transit system is punching below its weight. We have a lot of legacy transit lines that are surrounded by urban and basically walkable neighborhoods, but aren't being used to capacity. Sure, the Red, Blue, Brown Lines are jam-packed with commuters but that's only maybe 30-40% of the whole CTA system. The other lines just don't get strong ridership right now, largely because the people who live around those lines don't work professional jobs and don't commute downtown except for shopping and leisure time.

The other cities you mentioned don't have a large underclass living right along their rail lines to the extent that Chicago does, and don't have anywhere near the disinvestment that Chicago does. The good thing is, these neighborhoods are still full of well-built, handsome buildings that can be renovated in short order to bring more transit-accessible housing online. In the medium term, plenty of vacant lots that can be built upon as well. 50,000 new Amazon workers (hypothetically) living in Bronzeville or East Garfield Park or McKinley Park or Little Village and commuting on the Green, Orange, Red, and Pink Lines will not strain Chicago's transit system, they will merely use excess capacity that is currently unused.

Metra is a whole other thing, it too has oodles of unused capacity that it wastes because the entire idea of American commuter rail is hugely flawed. Every city Amazon is considering (except Toronto) will have a similar problem if it has a commuter rail system. Given a little more resources and a different mindset, it too could elbow freight out of the way on the tracks it owns, and run frequent service approaching or exceeding the capacity of a CTA line. Heck, on Metra Electric the hard work was already done 100 years ago to make it into proper urban transit but Metra insists on running it like an commuter train from yesteryear with infrequent service and fancy uniformed conductors because, well, they're just used to it that way and refuse to change.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by Doady

Chicago system served more riders simply because it has larger population, not because it performed better. Hence ridership per capita.

By your standard, LA also has one of the best transit systems in the country, with close to 500 million riders in 2017, beating Washington, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia and so on.

Los Angeles County MTA 397,489,400
Orange County TA 41,299,500
Long Beach Transit 24,418,400
Big Blue Bus 13,488,400
Foothill Transit 12,887,700
Torrance Transit System 3,775,300
Santa Clarita Transit 2,790,400

http://ti.org/pdfs/2017-Q4-Ridership-APTA.pdf

I don't know what you mean by "performed better"? What point are you arguing? It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about...I mean, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if your opinion is Seattle and Chicago have equal transit systems, I don't know what to tell you.


What does per capita ridership prove? Let me spin it another way...Chicago which is multiple times larger than Seattle, has the same per capita ridership as a much smaller "boutique city".

Let me spin it yet another way:
City A has a population density of 15,000 ppsm with an area of 100 sq miles
City B has a population density of 15,000 ppsm with an area of 350 sq miles

While they have the same density, City B would be more impressive because it is carried over a larger area.

The Chicago EL has more train stations than any city in the US outside NYC
The Chicago EL has more train lines than any city in the US outside NYC
The Chicago Metra has more Stations than any commuter rail outside any city in the US outside NYC
The Chicago Transit Authority is the only transit authority to operate multiple 24/7 lines in the US outside NYC

[dc_denizen]

Also, there are plenty of high density neighborhoods in chicago with low transit ridership. Hell, queens has 25000/sq mile census tracts with transit ridership that is per capita less than Calgary. Transit ridership is not the only characteristic of an urban neighborhood. Unless you want to argue that Calgary is less suburban than queens.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Doady

If Chicago was really so transit-friendly, if it had so many transit-friendly neighbhourhoods everywhere, it would have more riders per capita. Simple as that. Like Montreal, NYC, Toronto, Vancouver have 3 times more ridership per capita than Chicago. Washington 2 times more.

Chicago's transit system, right now, is just very poor compared to most of its peers. I don't see how a system with such lackluster ridership could be a selling point for the city.

Chicago offers the memory or the promise of great transit, but in that way it's no different from Seattle.



What possible reason could have I to lie to everyone? If you think I am liar, provide evidence, back up your statement. I provided hard statistics you have provided absolutely nothing.

CTA 479,435,200
Metra 70,923,300
Pace 35,537,600
South Shore Line 3,455,800

http://ti.org/pdfs/2017-Q4-Ridership-APTA.pdf

I don’t think you’re lying to anyone. I just don’t think you know how to interpret data, nor have the ability to think critically about it.

[10023]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I think the point here is that Chicago's transit system is punching below its weight. We have a lot of legacy transit lines that are surrounded by urban and basically walkable neighborhoods, but aren't being used to capacity.

Now this is a real problem, and comes down to the fact that a ton of Chicago’s transit infrastructure runs through largely abandoned low income areas, while the lines through the more prosperous parts of town are bursting at the seams.

Chicago needs to be investing in new lines and more capacity in its more affluent neighborhoods, but you know that would just invite a lot of unjustified bitching from certain political elements.

[pico44]

I tend to agree with everyone else regarding New York. It is, by far, the most qualified city but probably too expensive. Bezos is just too much of a cheapskate to buck up for the land and employee compensation needed to settle here. But you have to admit, it'd be a baller move to pick Gotham. An announcement to the world: "We ain't Walmart. We ain't Sears. We ain't Borders. We're Standard Oil. We're JP Morgan. We're Ma fuggen Bell." No way Bezos has the stones to make that kind of statement.

[mhays]

What business value would that statement have? Why would he do it?

[pico44]

Originally Posted by mhays

What business value would that statement have? Why would he do it?

Great question and I'm glad you asked it

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by 10023

Now this is a real problem, and comes down to the fact that a ton of Chicago’s transit infrastructure runs through largely abandoned low income areas, while the lines through the more prosperous parts of town are bursting at the seams.

Chicago needs to be investing in new lines and more capacity in its more affluent neighborhoods, but you know that would just invite a lot of unjustified bitching from certain political elements.

This isn't even really true though. Some sections of some lines pass through largely disinvested, abandoned areas and have low ridership. Other lines pass through ultra dense immigrant communities that have seen maybe 3-5% of the buildings demolished over 130 years and still have dismal ridership. Of course part of the bellyaching about gentrification is that these "vulnerable communities" need access to transit. Yet you look at the Pink Line and it's running 4 car trains, operating at half capacity. That will change eventually, but it's staggering that a neighborhood like Little Village which features 30k/sqmi density along the Pink Line just 10-20 min from the loop can't fill up trains more than that. That kind of density actually continues along the Pink Line into North Lawndale (which is has seen much more disinvestment) and all the way out into Cicero to Berwyn.

That's just one line, not even discussing the West leg of the Blue Line, the entire Green Line, the Orange Line, etc. Chicago has sooooo much capacity for growth, Amazon is stupid if they go anywhere else. That's assuming that they actually care about cost of living, urban layout, space to grow, etc.

[10023]

^ Do those people just work in the neighborhood? Not work? All heavy rail is mostly for commuters, that’s who urban mass transit was built for, so if people in these neighborhoods aren’t commuting into the Loop then they really don’t need to be near the L.

[the urban politician]

^ Thats because other than the people who work in service jobs, most of the people living in those communities don’t need to commute downtown. That’s why these areas need to gentrify so that the rents can bump them out and people working in higher paying downtown jobs can live there

I only own one property west of Damen in Pilsen and it’s frustrating how low the rents are down there. People are such complainers in Chicago, really they are—bargain basement rents and they still bitch about affordability. We have the second most F1000 companies in the US but that prosperity still sits snug on the north side and the burbs, meanwhile our city leaders are whores for low income people concentrated on the south side, while the burbs shrewdly keep affordable housing to a minimum. It’s a shame. Our L lines are a treasure and should be used to their capacity—so if you live near one, the real estate you occupy should be expensive, whether you’re on the north, south, or west sides of the city.

[skyscraperpage17]

In an attempt to actually bring the discussion back on topic...

I'm not sure if it was posted, but apparently, Detroit offered Amazon a very generous $4 Billion in incentives.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/645400002

From what we know, given that majority (if not most) of the finalists didn't offer that much, we now know it wasn't the lack of money that led to Detroit being rejected.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

- The EL served more annual rides than any city in the US outside NYC

Actually, DC's Metro is #2 in U.S. heavy rail ridership. Chicago's CTA is #3.

[the urban politician]

^ Correct. Chicago makes up the difference with Metra + South Shore though

[skyscraperpage17]

Also, regardless of whether they win the contest, Philadelphia has been getting a ton of attention for other business interests beyond Amazon HQ2 after simply making the shortlist.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2018/05/17/philadelphia-amazon-hq2-business/

So none of the remaining cities may "lose," per se, when it's all said and done.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Correct. Chicago makes up the difference with Metra + South Shore though

Yes, Chicago is #2 in total rail ridership (urban rail + commuter rail). DC would be #3.

[Eightball]

Nah CTA heavy rail passed WMATA's heavy rail ridership earlier in the year. And WMATA has continued to sink
https://ggwash.org/view/66466/metrorail-...iest-rapid-transit-system-in-the-country

You Chicago guys are way too optimistic tho. Chicago would be shoo in if it didn't have insanely high taxes (which they are talking about increasing further) and wasn't located in the state with the worst credit rating of any in the US. Both Chicago and Illinois need to get it over with, declare bankruptcy and clear out their creditors and pensions. Ala Detroit. So they can start growing again.

[skyscraperpage17]

Cleveland (which also didn't make the short list) also didn't offer much in incentives (only a little over $120 million)...

https://gizmodo.com/clevelands-rejected-proposal-for-amazons-hq2-has-just-a-1825944034

[JMKeynes]

DC looks like a shoe in.