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 is pretty ridiculous. The surrounded by Los Angeles part less so, but the Vienna part is. Vienna is an amazing and historic city and the core of Toronto which most people who have visited, including myself, bears almost no resemblance. You can talk about transit (not even close), historic structures (also not close given the history of Vienna and to the extent it was kept), and urban makeup (dense in the center is the only thing in common, but not in the same sort of the structure and far more akin to what you might see in Latin American or East and Southeast Asian cities).
I think Toronto is a lot closer to a Los Angeles which was a decade or two more advanced in urban planning as it stands now.
I agree the Vienna part is problematic especially if taken too literally, though this was used in planning circles in the past. It was just meant to mean large dense vibrant core + fairly dense suburbia.
There is a huge misconception on this site about Canadian and American urban areas and that they sprawl the same.... NOT TRUE. Canadian urban areas may look the same but they are more dense and compact... Canadian cities have a lot of residential units in their downtown's and even in their suburbs.
Most Americans don't like that kind of environment, our main growth happens in subdivision in the burbs.
Do new housing developments in most US metros still have larger lot sizes than postwar suburbia? In the Toronto area there's limits to growth (the Greenbelt) and it seems most of our suburban SFH development has shifted towards more McMansions and more townhouses. There are few relatively modest houses on spacious lots anymore.
There are a few estate-type exurban areas, like King Township and to some extent Aurora, but this is a very small percentage of the GTA.
Most Americans don't like that kind of environment, our main growth happens in subdivision in the burbs.
I'd qualify that and say most older Americans don't like that kind of environment. I know my parents don't want to live in cities, although they like visiting them. But I'm in my mid-30s, grew up in a suburban area outside Philadelphia, and can tell you that hardly any of my graduating high school class stuck around. We all departed for Philly, NYC, DC, SF, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, etc.
I'm not disputing that most of the growth in the US over the past 60 or 70 years has been in the suburbs, but I'm saying that its clearly changing as preferences have changed. As a result, we have things like gentrification, a huge uptick in infill projects, demographic shifts in city centers, etc.
At the same time, our suburbs are getting denser and more urban. So no, I don't think we can simply say that Americans don't like urban environments. Change is afoot, and has been for 20 years.
I'd qualify that and say most older Americans don't like that kind of environment. I know my parents don't want to live in cities, although they like visiting them. But I'm in my mid-30s, grew up in a suburban area outside Philadelphia, and can tell you that hardly any of my graduating high school class stuck around. We all departed for Philly, NYC, DC, SF, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, etc.
I'm not disputing that most of the growth in the US over the past 60 or 70 years has been in the suburbs, but I'm saying that its clearly changing as preferences have changed. As a result, we have things like gentrification, a huge uptick in infill projects, demographic shifts in city centers, etc.
At the same time, our suburbs are getting denser and more urban. So no, I don't think we can simply say that Americans don't like urban environments. Change is afoot, and has been for 20 years.
Its funny because I read an article about the massive condo development in Toronto and a lot of what is driving growth are SINKS and DINKS under 35 and believe it or not Retirees.. For the under 35 group, it appeals to them living close to work and not having to commute with a car.. For both younger and older groups, they like living in an urban environment where there are a lot of leisure opportunities close at hand, without having to worry about the upkeep you would find in a house. For the retirees, they have the flexibility to travel and for an extended period of time with a condo and not have to worry about watering the lawn or shoveling the driveway in the winter. It also helps that the kids are all grown up and gone so they don't need a big house can downsize and just enjoy their life - shopping by day, theatre by night all within walking distance.
At the same time, our suburbs are getting denser and more urban. So no, I don't think we can simply say that Americans don't like urban environments. Change is afoot, and has been for 20 years.
Is that true of new suburbs or are you referring more to the urbanization and densification of mature inner ring suburbs?
I'd qualify that and say most older Americans don't like that kind of environment. I know my parents don't want to live in cities, although they like visiting them. But I'm in my mid-30s, grew up in a suburban area outside Philadelphia, and can tell you that hardly any of my graduating high school class stuck around. We all departed for Philly, NYC, DC, SF, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, etc.
I'm not disputing that most of the growth in the US over the past 60 or 70 years has been in the suburbs, but I'm saying that its clearly changing as preferences have changed. As a result, we have things like gentrification, a huge uptick in infill projects, demographic shifts in city centers, etc.
At the same time, our suburbs are getting denser and more urban. So no, I don't think we can simply say that Americans don't like urban environments. Change is afoot, and has been for 20 years.
A very small change, there really isn't a huge trend of Americans moving into cities... In most urban areas, the cities aren't seeing as big as a population growth as some of their suburbs.
Former mayor John Sewell says Los Angeles and that seems more apt to me and I think there is something to be said for Toronto's suburbs, at least in the 905 belt, resembling L.A. suburbs. Phoenix is a lot less dense than L.A.
A very small change, there really isn't a huge trend of Americans moving into cities... In most urban areas, the cities aren't seeing as big as a population growth as some of their suburbs.
Part of it is urban infill is hard. No space available, and zoning laws often restrict denser development.
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.
