Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That list was for suburban development, ie, everything outside the downtown center.
Again that was for suburban areas, SF does not have as large a suburban land mass as Phoenix. In addition the numbers for SF doe not include areas in Oakland for example.
I am curious about those too. tell me if you find them.
Sure:
Top 20 Largest Central Business Districts by Employment Population:
01. New York City: 1,736,900
02. Chicago: 541,500
03. Washington DC: 382,400
04. Bay Area: 305,600
05. Boston: 257,000
06. Philadelphia: 220,100
07. Seattle: 155,100
08. Houston: 153,400
09. Los Angeles: 143,700
10. Atlanta: 129,800
11. Denver: 126,000
12. Minneapolis-Saint Paul: 105,400
13. Cleveland: 100,300
14. Baltimore: 98,500
15. Miami: 98,000
16. Pittsburgh: 95,600
17. Columbus: 88,800
18. Austin: 86,000
19. New Orleans: 81,400
20. Dallas-Fort Worth: 79,900
Top 20 Largest Central Business Districts by Land Area:
01. New York City: 7.82 Square Miles
02. Chicago: 3.36 Square Miles
03. Miami: 2.91 Square Miles
04. Columbus: 2.47 Square Miles
05. Bay Area: 2.34 Square Miles
06. Washington DC: 2.30 Square Miles
07. Atlanta: 2.17 Square Miles
08. Philadelphia: 1.71 Square Miles
09. Austin: 1.59 Square Miles
10. Cleveland: 1.54 Square Miles
11. Houston: 1.53 Square Miles (Tie with Denver)
12. Denver: 1.53 Square Miles (Tie with Houston)
13. Seattle: 1.48 Square Miles
14. Los Angeles: 1.25 Square Miles
15. Boston: 1.23 Square Miles
16. Baltimore: 1.09 Square Miles
17. New Orleans: 1.06 Square Miles
18. Minneapolis-Saint Paul: 0.72 Square Miles
19. Dallas-Fort Worth: 0.67 Square Miles
20. Pittsburgh: 0.66 Square Miles
To Compare, here are the top CBD's again in terms of sf:
1. Midtown Manhattan- 213,818,31
2. CBD Chicago- 130,317,15
3. CBD DC- 107,337,31
4. DT Manhattan- 76,000,76
5. MT S Manhattan- 74,577,47
6. CBD Boston- 64,407,32
7. CBD SF- 45,176,67
8. CBD Philadelphia- 44,261,375
9. CBD Houston- 43,214,941
10. CBD LA- 32,159,55
11. Minneapolis- 28,299,243 (The report lists St P separately and then combines them in the end as one district)
12. Pittsburgh- 27,841,801 (they included fringe areas)
13. CBD Dallas- 26,890,00 (The report lists FW separately and then combines them in the end as one district)
14. Denver- 26,493,570
15. Cleveland- 21,969,702
16. Portland- 19,779,070
17. CBD Atlanta- 17,288,368
18. Phoenix- 15,779,714
19. Indianapolis- 14,709,070
20. Detroit- 13,187,372
21. Miami- 13,133,897
22. Milwaukee- 12,439,588
23. Columbus- 12,289,442
24. Cincinnati- 11,919,525
25. San Diego- 11,393,918
26. St Paul- 10,059,518
27. Fort Worth- 9,956,82
28. Austin- 8,490,93
29. San Jose- 8,355,347
Interesting, the top 8 for Office space and employment follow the almost identical order
1. NY
2. Chicago
3. DC
4,5 Boston and SF
6. Philly
7. Houston
8. LA
On this topic this list seems to make the most intuitive sense
ten largest US Metropolitan Area's ranked by asking rent per sf in the CBD
1. NY- $70 (average of the 3)
2. DC- $56 ($39 for metro)
3. Boston- $48 ($34 metro)
4. Miami- $42 ($36 Metro)
5. Houston- $36 ($29 Metro)
6. Chicago- $35 ($29 Metro)
7. Philadelphia- $28 ($29 Metro looks like the only one so far to have higher suburban rents)
8. Dallas- $22 ($22 Metro)
9. ATL- $21 ($23 Metro
10. LA- $3 ($3 metro) what the hell??????
SF- $40/40
SJ- $3/$3
Detroit $24/22
Seattle- $36/32
Phoenix- $25/24
Minneapolis- $23/$23
San Diego- $2/ $2
Boston and DC seem to kick butt in these lists.
Whats up with California??
^^^
Those figures for LA, SJ & SD are obviously wrong
I think that even apartments for rent in the worst neigborhoods will cost more than $2 per square feet
First off DC is a huge office center no doubt and it is very impressive for DC. But seriously saying companies like SAIC, Lockheed and Gen Dynamics, Titan etc. are not totally bloated by govt contracts is a little bit of stretch really. probably at least 50% of their employees in the DC area are directly billable to Govt contracts...
I mean seriously home many people working at these companies go through various Gov't security clearences just to stay employed. The Gov't IS the driver of the DC economy not the private industry which to be fair has increased but by no means is the majority.
That's still such a Moo point (like a cow's opinion... It doesn't matter. It's always "Moo")! It's a ridiculous argument. It's like complaining that "well, Vegas wouldn't have so many jobs if it weren't for the Casino industry" or "New York wouldn't have nearly so many offices if it weren't for the Finance Industry..." Most cities have a "driver of the economy" in that town. Why should the government being the driver in DC be held against them?
SO WHAT? That's someone's attempt to cut down the numbers, when no matter which way you cut it, no matter where the money comes from, a private business is exactly that... A private business... Period.
You can't try to hold the fact that those businesses bill the government against them and not hold "the business of the town" against companies from other cities. It's just the business of the town. In their case, the government is their client, no different than accounting firms having fortune 500 companies as clients in NYC.
It's an argument by someone who is obviously offended that their city fell below DC in sq numbers (which really isn't even the count that should matter. What should matter is the number of people working downtown). That's just typical of posters on C-D... "Let me make everyone recognize how greater MY city is then their cities..." and they get offended when people post numbers that say otherwise...
For example, someone is trying to add Wilmington, DE to Philly's numbers JUST TO boost their city more... "C'MON Son!" I know Wilmington is influenced by Philly and they get Philly news stations and all, but "C'MON Son!"
Last edited by Psykomonkee; 11-27-2011 at 09:32 AM..
^^^
Those figures for LA, SJ & SD are obviously wrong
I think that even apartments for rent in the worst neigborhoods will cost more than $2 per square feet
show us better numbers
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
