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.
Height is only one aspect of this comparison. If you're actually in a city, density is much more relevant than height. As it has been shown previously, Houston's downtown isn't nearly as large Philadelphia, San Francisco, or Boston...and it's not even close in the case of SF and Bos when it comes to office space.
Hmmmm....i guess density would be more important. In that case i would put Philly(more height than SF)
SF(more dense than Philly, but not tall)
Houston(most height, least dense of of the 3)
Also, city-wise Houston is a lot more competitive when it comes to office space. Houstons got 3 skylines.
Besides Downtown,
theres Uptown, the 17th largest business district in the nation, and only 10-13% of Houston's office space.
And the TMC, which has more office space than Uptown, and is comparable to Downtown Dallas.
Houston has a lot of F500 companies that needs HQ's you know, i mean second to NYC.
^ If they are where people live how does that apply to the Central Business District, which is where people work not live? I think they only tell part of the story. I think if we had data stating the square footage of the CBD followed by vacancy rates that might be a better gauge of which one is densest.
Washington DC would follow Chicago in office space sq footage. But DC often gets overlooked in this aspect due to its low rise/more spread out nature.
Big drop
SF-Philly-Boston are all about the same size in regards to office space and vacancy rates in the cbd.
^ If they are where people live how does that apply to the Central Business District, which is where people work not live? I think they only tell part of the story. I think if we had data stating the square footage of the CBD followed by vacancy rates that might be a better gauge of which one is densest.
City: CBD Office Space; Vacancy Rate; Occupied Office Space
Houston: 35,345,454 sq ft; 11.9%; 31,137,924 sq ft
Philadelphia: 39,788,854 sq ft; 12.6%; 31,762,543 sq ft
Boston (not including Back Bay): 51,722,968 sq ft; 10.4%; 46,343,780 sq ft
San Francisco (Financial District, Jackson Square, Union Square, Yerba Buena, SOMA): 57,288,747; 14.1% in Fin District, 18.9% in other districts; 48,637,168 sq ft
By the way, here's how the two big boys look:
Chicago: 123,012,105 sq ft; 15.4%; 104,056,822 sq ft
Manhattan (doesn't include any other boroughs): 363,184,258 sq ft; 8.6%; 331,774,619 sq ft
Combining Houston, Philly, Boston, San Francisco, and Chicago would only create 307,158,128 sq ft haha...Simply incredible.
Hmmmm....i guess density would be more important. In that case i would put Philly(more height than SF)
SF(more dense than Philly, but not tall)
Houston(most height, least dense of of the 3)
Also, city-wise Houston is a lot more competitive when it comes to office space. Houstons got 3 skylines.
Besides Downtown,
theres Uptown, the 17th largest business district in the nation, and only 10-13% of Houston's office space.
And the TMC, which has more office space than Uptown, and is comparable to Downtown Dallas.
Houston has a lot of F500 companies that needs HQ's you know, i mean second to NYC.
That's all good and fun...but this is about the largest CBD.
City: CBD Office Space; Vacancy Rate; Occupied Office Space
Houston: 35,345,454 sq ft; 11.9%; 31,137,924 sq ft
Philadelphia: 39,788,854 sq ft; 12.6%; 31,762,543 sq ft
Boston (not including Back Bay): 51,722,968 sq ft; 10.4%; 46,343,780 sq ft
San Francisco (Financial District, Jackson Square, Union Square, Yerba Buena, SOMA): 57,288,747; 14.1% in Fin District, 18.9% in other districts; 48,637,168 sq ft
By the way, here's how the two big boys look:
Chicago: 123,012,105 sq ft; 15.4%; 104,056,822 sq ft
Manhattan (doesn't include any other boroughs): 363,184,258 sq ft; 8.6%; 331,774,619 sq ft
Combining Houston, Philly, Boston, San Francisco, and Chicago would only create 307,158,128 sq ft haha...Simply incredible.
All of the areas listed are not part of the CBD in each city. Union Square is not in the Central Business District of San Francisco.
All of the areas listed are not part of the CBD in each city. Union Square is not in the Central Business District of San Francisco.
I've heard San Franciscans say they feel Union Square is the heart of the downtown. If you look at the map from this (http://www.grubb-ellis.com/Research/Reports.aspx - broken link)link (just click California, scroll down to San Francisco--not San Francisco Peninsula), you'll see Union Square is basically apart of the financial district. I left out some of the further areas like North Waterfront, Mission Bay, and Civic Center/Van Ness.
I've heard San Franciscans say they feel Union Square is the heart of the downtown. If you look at the map from this (http://www.grubb-ellis.com/Research/Reports.aspx - broken link)link (just click California, scroll down to San Francisco--not San Francisco Peninsula), you'll see Union Square is basically apart of the financial district. I left out some of the further areas like North Waterfront, Mission Bay, and Civic Center/Van Ness.
That's all good and fun...but this is about the largest CBD.
I know, just thought i'd mentioned that the real world is composed of areas outside of the CBD before we go on making statements like Houston not being close to SF and Boston. But it was all good and fun.
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.