Financial report context:
item 2 . properties a summary of our significant locations at december 31 , 2007 is shown in the following table . all facilities are leased , except for 166000 square feet of our office in alpharetta , georgia . square footage amounts are net of space that has been sublet or part of a facility restructuring. .

Financial table:
location: alpharetta georgia; approximate square footage: 219000
location: arlington virginia; approximate square footage: 196000
location: jersey city new jersey; approximate square footage: 107000
location: charlotte north carolina; approximate square footage: 83000
location: menlo park california; approximate square footage: 79000
location: sandy utah; approximate square footage: 77000
location: toronto canada; approximate square footage: 75000
location: new york new york; approximate square footage: 60000
location: chicago illinois; approximate square footage: 29000

Additional report context:
all of our facilities are used by both our retail and institutional segments . in addition to the significant facilities above , we also lease all of our 27 e*trade financial branches , ranging in space from 2500 to 13000 square feet . all other leased facilities with space of less than 25000 square feet are not listed by location . we believe our facilities space is adequate to meet our needs in 2008 . item 3 . legal proceedings in june 2002 , the company acquired from marketxt holdings , inc . ( formerly known as 201ctradescape corporation 201d ) the following entities : tradescape securities , llc ; tradescape technologies , llc ; and momentum securities , llc . disputes subsequently arose between the parties regarding the responsibility for liabilities that first became known to the company after the sale . on april 8 , 2004 , marketxt filed a complaint in the united states district court for the southern district of new york against the company , certain of its officers and directors , and other third parties , including softbank investment corporation ( 201csbi 201d ) and softbank corporation , alleging that defendants were preventing plaintiffs from obtaining certain contingent payments allegedly due , and as a result , claiming damages of $ 1.5 billion . on april 9 , 2004 , the company filed a complaint in the united states district court for the southern district of new york against certain directors and officers of marketxt seeking declaratory relief and unspecified monetary damages for defendants 2019 fraud in connection with the 2002 sale , including , but not limited to , having presented the company with fraudulent financial statements regarding the condition of momentum securities , llc during the due diligence process . subsequently , marketxt was placed into bankruptcy , and the company filed an adversary proceeding against marketxt and others in january 2005 , seeking declaratory relief , compensatory and punitive damages , in those chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in the united states bankruptcy court for the southern district of new york entitled , 201cin re marketxt holdings corp. , debtor . 201d in that same court , the company filed a separate adversary proceeding against omar amanat in those chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings entitled , 201cin re amanat , omar shariff . 201d in october 2005 , marketxt answered the company 2019s adversary proceeding and asserted its counterclaims , subsequently amending its claims in 2006 to add a $ 326.0 million claim for 201cpromissory estoppel 201d in which market xt alleged , for the first time , that the company breached a prior promise to purchase the acquired entities in 1999-2000 . in april 2006 , omar amanat answered the company 2019s separate adversary proceeding against him and asserted his counterclaims . in separate motions before the bankruptcy court , the company has moved to dismiss certain counterclaims brought by marketxt including those described above , as well as certain counterclaims brought by mr . amanat . in a ruling dated september 29 , 2006 , the bankruptcy court in the marketxt case granted the company 2019s motion to dismiss four of the six bases upon which marketxt asserts its fraud claims against the company ; its conversion claim ; and its demand for punitive damages . in the same ruling , the bankruptcy court denied in its entirety marketxt 2019s competing motion to dismiss the company 2019s claims against it . on october 26 , 2006 , the bankruptcy court subsequently dismissed marketxt 2019s 201cpromissory estoppel 201d claim . by order dated december 18 , 2007 , the united states bankruptcy .

Question: as of december 2007 what was the ratio of the square footage in alpharetta georgia to charlotte north carolina
Answer: 2.64