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.
keep in mind Melbourne has a metro of 4.4 million...clearly it blows American cities of a similar size like Phoenix out of the water, and bigger cities like Houston and Dallas.
Metro size isn't the full story though... I think when a city has a certain size and density regardless of how big its metro is - magic just seems to happen. Houston and Dallas for example are about the same size as Toronto (a bit smaller) in official metro counts, yet Toronto packs a lot more people into that metro in a much smaller area than those cities which makes it feel bigger more bustling.
Melbourne is presumable more densely populated than Pheonix, Dallas and Houston as well even though its metro population is comparable to Pheonix and smaller than D and H.
The 1998 amalgamation really hurt Toronto's urban credibility. Most just don't see it as a top 3-4 contender anymore.
The amalgamation didn't change anything other than boundaries to be honest. If anything since amalgamation the city has densified considerably and subsequent to amalgamation, the places that grow act really propelled urban densification - particularly in Downtown Toronto. Most don't see it as top 3-4 lol.. is this based on scientific methodology or density measurements?
The 1998 amalgamation really hurt Toronto's urban credibility. Most just don't see it as a top 3-4 contender anymore.
Sorry, but that's just silly. All that happened in 1998 was that Toronto went from being a two-tiered 240 sq. mi municipality of 6 boroughs called Metropolitan Toronto to being a single tier municipality called the City of Toronto. The municipal borders, density and population were exactly the same the day before and after the amalgamation. The current density of the 240 square mile city is roughly equal to the density of the city of Chicago.
I'm sorry but it doesn't seem like you have been to the areas I've mentioned.
No, it's just that you're a homer. That's all there is to it. Toronto was a small city prior to WWII, so doesn't have extensive urban fabric. Places like Cleveland and St. Louis and Cincy and Baltimore were considerably larger.
And, no, none of these cities have neighborhoods of detached homes with yards right next to downtown.
Where are these neighborhoods in SF? In Philly? In Boston?
Every single person on this thread, excepting one or two Toronto homers, is saying that there's no way in hell Toronto is anywhere close to the 2nd most urban city in North America.
Metro size isn't the full story though... I think when a city has a certain size and density regardless of how big its metro is - magic just seems to happen. Houston and Dallas for example are about the same size as Toronto (a bit smaller) in official metro counts, yet Toronto packs a lot more people into that metro in a much smaller area than those cities which makes it feel bigger more bustling.
Melbourne is presumable more densely populated than Pheonix, Dallas and Houston as well even though its metro population is comparable to Pheonix and smaller than D and H.
Hmmm we drove through Houston and it was a shameful sprawlfest, everything that is wrong with America in a city. No surprise it's one of the most car dependent, fuel-hogging (fuel used per person per year), low density cities in the world. Seriously, Oxford in the UK with 140,000 has a more lively downtown than Houston.
Hmmm we drove through Houston and it was a shameful sprawlfest, everything that is wrong with America in a city. No surprise it's one of the most car dependent, fuel-hogging (fuel used per person per year), low density cities in the world. Seriously, Oxford in the UK with 140,000 has a more lively downtown than Houston.
It's a regional characteristic. The American Sunbelt characteristic. There's no urbanity in the hustle-bustle-sense in any of the Sunbelt cities. There is road rage on the 10-lane freeways of Houston, LA, Dallas & Atlanta- but that's how the bustle takes form down here. Take that as one of the regional differences in the country rather than comparing to cities in completely different parts of the world.
No, it's just that you're a homer. That's all there is to it. Toronto was a small city prior to WWII, so doesn't have extensive urban fabric.
Every single person on this thread, excepting one or two Toronto homers, is saying that there's no way in hell Toronto is anywhere close to the 2nd most urban city in North America.
Instead of engaging in a meaningful discussion you just get nasty and personal (Odd since I was actually very gracious to you in providing you with recommendations of places to eat on your next visit in which you didn't even respond with a Thanks!). Anyway, you still didn't come up with anything meaningful to counter the fact that a city like S.F was also smaller prior to WWII than Cleveland and Buffalo yet I don't think anyone on any thread anywhere would claim that Buffalo and Cleveland have a more urban fabric than S.F.....so much for your conclusive logic
Nor do I think you have actually visited Old Toronto's extensive urban fabric. Perhaps you've been to bits and pieces but instead of talking about places you've been and answering, you just say you've walked throughout it on foot.. You must've had very sore feet!
Btw I never said Toronto was Number 2.. I said it ranked highly on the urban scale with reference to Old Toronto - the 'borough's' like North York and Scarborough for eg. while dense are far from being models of urbanity and I would admit that... I'm such a homer
It's a regional characteristic. The American Sunbelt characteristic. There's no urbanity in the hustle-bustle-sense in any of the Sunbelt cities. There is road rage on the 10-lane freeways of Houston, LA, Dallas & Atlanta- but that's how the bustle takes form down here. Take that as one of the regional differences in the country rather than comparing to cities in completely different parts of the world.
Well I'm more talking about pedestrian activity and concentrations of shops, residential density. I think the fact these cities don't have proper metros is also pretty crazy.
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.
