U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Best Urban Core?
Boston 25 15.63%
San Francisco 44 27.50%
Toronto 70 43.75%
DC 15 9.38%
Minneapolis 6 3.75%
Voters: 160. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-20-2017, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Miami-Jax
5,787 posts, read 6,342,595 times
Reputation: 3118

Advertisements

IMO:

Toronto
DC/SF
Boston
MSP
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2017, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Windsor Ontario
1,455 posts, read 1,209,307 times
Reputation: 1621
What does city proper have to do with anything? Urban cores are much more reflective of their metro populations. City proper is pretty meaningless in this case!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2017, 08:17 PM
 
43 posts, read 29,029 times
Reputation: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enean View Post
I would definitely say not Minneapolis. Their downtown is not terribly vibrant. Most of the people downtown are waiting at the bus stops. Otherwise, it's awfully quiet.
it's actually no where near these other cities but to say it's quiet tells me you don't know what you're talking about AT ALL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2017, 09:21 PM
 
1,415 posts, read 677,802 times
Reputation: 1882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apparel View Post
it's actually no where near these other cities but to say it's quiet tells me you don't know what you're talking about AT ALL.
Then I will correct myself. EVERY TIME I've been there, it's been dead...except for the crowded bus stops. How's that? Maybe it's crowded ALL the rest of the time, just not when I'm there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 08:26 AM
 
2,470 posts, read 1,997,300 times
Reputation: 1669
As other posters have already mentioned, Minneapolis should really not be on this list. At all.

The other cities are all a mismatch as well - Boston and DC have very little in common with SF and TO. And SF and Toronto also have very little in common, within and outside of their urban cores.

In terms of vibrancy, Toronto is the clear winner, both in sheer size, the availability of different levels of vibrancy, and the general diversity of those options, by a wide margin (Toronto city proper has at least 5 major CBD-like cores with high intensity urbanization: Waterfront/South Core, Financial District, Dundas Square, Yonge-Bloor, and Eglinton Midtown - you could easily spot them in a north-south skyline shot by the density and height of buildings, as each peak represents its own "CBD Core").
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 07:19 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 6,673,025 times
Reputation: 9775
Minneapolis should not be in the conversation.

And I have no clue why Toronto is leading the polling. SF and DC definitely have better cores, and Boston probably has a better core.

Toronto was a small city until recently, so doesn't have particularly good urban bones. SF, DC and Bos have much better urban streetscapes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 07:47 PM
 
3,579 posts, read 2,019,864 times
Reputation: 3314
I voted for Toronto. Only SF can argue that it's on a similar scale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 07:56 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 6,673,025 times
Reputation: 9775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays25 View Post
I voted for Toronto. Only SF can argue that it's on a similar scale.
IMO Toronto isn't even in the same ballpark as SF.

Toronto was like smaller than Buffalo 50 years ago. It doesn't really have much of a prewar streetscape. It has single family homes, with yards, right in the city center. It has almost no historic highrises of note, no iconic places.

Toronto has a TON of condo towers, That would be its major asset. But they tend to be banal, and scattered about the metro. Besides condo construction, I can't think of any other way Toronto would even be close to SF, which has much older, tighter, denser, more urban core built form.

And DC probably has the second most iconic core in the Americas, after NYC. DC is like packed with iconic urban attractions.

Boston probably has one of the top three downtowns in the U.S. in terms of quality and cohesiveness. Really only NYC and Philly have higher quality, more cohesive cores.

This is the best part of the premiere street in Toronto. It's like the 5th Ave/57th Street of Canada. Note the banal appearance. The narrow sidewalks, brutalist highrises, weak streetscape.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6695...7i13312!8i6656

This is just blocks from the downtown core. It looks like a wealthy U.S. suburb, far from the center, but you're easy walking distance from the busiest subway hub in the city.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6747...7i13312!8i6656

Now compare the first pic to Newbury Ave. or Boyleston St.in Boston, CT or PA Ave in DC or Market Street in DC. Then compare the second pic to Back Bay or Beacon Hill in Boston, Nob Hill or Russian Hill or Pacific Heights in SF or Dupont Circle or Georgetown in DC .

These would be apples-to-apples comparisons, and I don't think Toronto looks particularly good compared to the others. It's too young, too raw, too banal.

Last edited by NOLA101; 06-21-2017 at 08:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 11:02 PM
 
3,579 posts, read 2,019,864 times
Reputation: 3314
I give it credit for the hundreds of new/newish residential highrises, and having a lot of very good retail streets. They do a good job concentrating retail on strong corridors vs. having it everywhere. San Francisco, while I love it, relies too much on lowrises on the DT periphery. It also has a pretty boring office core north of Market, and is pretty sterile all around south of Market with oversized blocks. SF is an awesome city but not perfect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2017, 12:18 AM
 
150 posts, read 131,994 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
IMO Toronto isn't even in the same ballpark as SF.

Toronto was like smaller than Buffalo 50 years ago. It doesn't really have much of a prewar streetscape. It has single family homes, with yards, right in the city center. It has almost no historic highrises of note, no iconic places.

Toronto has a TON of condo towers, That would be its major asset. But they tend to be banal, and scattered about the metro. Besides condo construction, I can't think of any other way Toronto would even be close to SF, which has much older, tighter, denser, more urban core built form.

And DC probably has the second most iconic core in the Americas, after NYC. DC is like packed with iconic urban attractions.

Boston probably has one of the top three downtowns in the U.S. in terms of quality and cohesiveness. Really only NYC and Philly have higher quality, more cohesive cores.

This is the best part of the premiere street in Toronto. It's like the 5th Ave/57th Street of Canada. Note the banal appearance. The narrow sidewalks, brutalist highrises, weak streetscape.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6695...7i13312!8i6656

This is just blocks from the downtown core. It looks like a wealthy U.S. suburb, far from the center, but you're easy walking distance from the busiest subway hub in the city.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6747...7i13312!8i6656

Now compare the first pic to Newbury Ave. or Boyleston St.in Boston, CT or PA Ave in DC or Market Street in DC. Then compare the second pic to Back Bay or Beacon Hill in Boston, Nob Hill or Russian Hill or Pacific Heights in SF or Dupont Circle or Georgetown in DC .

These would be apples-to-apples comparisons, and I don't think Toronto looks particularly good compared to the others. It's too young, too raw, too banal.
lol

Yorkville is in behind those banal buildings, and those homes in Rosedale are over $4 million on average because that's the price for buying 2200 square feet with a backyard in the downtown core of Toronto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top