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.
No not really. NYC, D.C., and Chicago are way ahead of everyone in centralized office space and train ridership. For the other cities, that amount of office space can manage without a train system so it doesn't correlate for everyone. Take Philly for instance, they have way more office space in the suburbs. I'm talking about the huge amount of office space that is present in the tier 1 cities.
No not really. NYC, D.C., and Chicago are way ahead of everyone in centralized office space and train ridership. For the other cities, that amount of office space can manage without a train system so it doesn't correlate for everyone. Take Philly for instance, they have way more office space in the suburbs. I'm talking about the huge amount of office space that is present in the tier 1 cities.
While office space and PT ridership are aspects by no means do they define an all encompassing view of tier 1 so to speak. By no means is DC at the level of NYC, and honestly dont see it at the level of Chicago overall even it punches at the DT office wieght
And even on the PT metric you could argue PT rail usage in Philly is better per sq foot of office space than is DC, there are many ways to skin a cat
600K/44 mil
vs
1,000K/100 mil
Correlation on your point, yes. Direct relationship, no
While office space and PT ridership are aspects by no means do they define an all encompassing view of tier 1 so to speak. By no means is DC at the level of NYC, and honestly dont see it at the level of Chicago overall even it punches at the DT office wieght
And even on the PT metric you could argue PT rail usage in Philly is better per sq foot of office space than is DC, there are many ways to skin a cat
600K/44 mil
vs
1,000K/100 mil
Correlation on your point, yes. Direct relationship, no
No not really. NYC, D.C., and Chicago are way ahead of everyone in centralized office space and train ridership. For the other cities, that amount of office space can manage without a train system so it doesn't correlate for everyone. Take Philly for instance, they have way more office space in the suburbs. I'm talking about the huge amount of office space that is present in the tier 1 cities.
you were speaking rather generally for a slim relationship that seem to apply to two or three cities.
Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor on the Orange Line extending from downtown D.C. has 28 million sq. feet of office space and 5 metro stops. Here is the Susan Weaver, Weaver Research and Consulting Group report:
you were speaking rather generally for a slim relationship that seem to apply to two or three cities.
That is true. I was just making an observation on how to move that amount of people in an out of the city efficiently and what would be needed to do that. It was all about capacity.
That is true. I was just making an observation on how to move that amount of people in an out of the city efficiently and what would be needed to do that.
I agree to a great extent, especially scalability in a large and concentrated sense. Sadly Philly probably has the least well used rail transit infrastructure (at least to its capacity) among major cities. An example where capacity and centrality could not overcome poor tax consequences in the CBD.
Philly actually has tremendous Regional rail direct connectivity to the whole of the CBD with all lines providing directing CBD linkage with 3 stops in the core and vastly under utilized capacity that already exisits
The regional rail system probably only operates at 33% of capacity today, the subway sytem though could be larger does move a respectable 14K ppm
That is true. I was just making an observation on how to move that amount of people in an out of the city efficiently and what would be needed to do that. It was all about capacity.
no you were not you were trying to prove DC's prominence in office market space based on the ridership of its rail system.
A rather weak correlation that makes little sense when you take into account the attraction tourists have to certain downtowns. Think how many museums, and the variety of cultural activities in NY, Chicago and DC. applying all riders on Public Transport to number of square feet in a business district is really shifty statistics
no you were not you were trying to prove DC's prominence in office market space based on the ridership of its rail system.
A rather weak correlation that makes little sense when you take into account the attraction tourists have to certain downtowns. Think how many museums, and the variety of cultural activities in NY, Chicago and DC. applying all riders on Public Transport to number of square feet in a business district is really shifty statistics
It isn't; but funny tho. DC has really high ridership, I would have used that angle to if I thought I could get away with it.
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.
