Canadian vs. Nordic large cities (best cities, place to live, transport)
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.
And to add: we are in the position that the Nordic capitals are growing more than housing is constructed, while in NA cities are losing population, because the inner city areas aren't lucrative. The tide has turned here.
Not true. New York City has 8.3 million people in the city, Los Angeles 3.8 million and tons of other cities that have millions of people.
Lots of young people prefer living in cities than suburbs now as well. Keep in mind that many suburbs in North America are almost like urban areas in Scandinavia.
And to add: we are in the position that the Nordic capitals are growing more than housing is constructed, while in NA cities are losing population, because the inner city areas aren't lucrative. The tide has turned here.
Since this thread is about Canada vs. the Nordics, it's worth noting that none of the major cities in Canada are experiencing population declines in their central cities.
Also, in the cities where I know real estate the most (Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa), the most expensive parts of the cities are in the central part of the city: places like Plateau Mont-Royal, Westmount, Outremont and Ville Mont-Royal in Montreal, Rosedale, Forest Hill, Bridle Path and the Beaches in Toronto, and Rockcliffe Park, the Glebe and the Golden Triangle in Ottawa.
Many of the suburban areas are considered nice as well of course but housing there is almost always cheaper unless you are talking about a super-huge mansion. There is generally no "location premium" for any of the specific suburbs in Canadian metro areas. But there is for all nice areas in the central cities and even for some of the not-so-nice areas.
hobbesdj, I understand completely the difference in the US. Commercial downtown centre = well off. Inner city = poor. Suburbs = rich.
But wasn't the whole idea of CITIES, not suburbs? Here, the closer the city centre you go, the more expensive the areas get. It was not about Ellicott City near Baltimore, but Helsinki right here:
I think I may be misunderstanding your English. That's exactly what cities look like, including Baltimore. The picture you are showing looks exactly like a below average area of any city. May I ask what exactly you think cities look like? Either something is being lost in translation, or you have a wildly skewed image of what cities look like. I suspect the former. And why do you keep talking about Baltimore?
Since this thread is about Canada vs. the Nordics, it's worth noting that none of the major cities in Canada are experiencing population declines in their central cities.
Also, in the cities where I know real estate the most (Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa), the most expensive parts of the cities are in the central part of the city: places like Plateau Mont-Royal, Westmount, Outremont and Ville Mont-Royal in Montreal, Rosedale, Forest Hill, Bridle Path and the Beaches in Toronto, and Rockcliffe Park, the Glebe and the Golden Triangle in Ottawa.
Many of the suburban areas are considered nice as well of course but housing there is almost always cheaper unless you are talking about a super-huge mansion. There is generally no "location premium" for any of the specific suburbs in Canadian metro areas. But there is for all nice areas in the central cities and even for some of the not-so-nice areas.
Either way just looking at the pictures being provided, Canadian cities namely MTL and TO and Vancouver blow these places out of the water. I am actually a bit surprised because I thought it would be more similar.
This type of urbanism exists in Canadian cities as well. The architecture is different but certainly the central areas of the larger Canadian cities have a lot of this. You can pick a view that shows a highway access point to the downtown if you want to disprove me, but most downtowns in Canada are not highway-choked. And almost every city in the world has these highway access roads in its downtown, even central Paris:
Access is not the problem. We have highways as well! Stockholm has tolls for entrance, and all of the capitals are emplying the'less cars the better' policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivierad
Not true. New York City has 8.3 million people in the city, Los Angeles 3.8 million and tons of other cities that have millions of people.
Access is not the problem. We have highways as well! Stockholm has tolls for entrance, and all of the capitals are emplying the'less cars the better' policy.
What I meant was that you can find ugly, human-hostile car-centric streets and roads in the centre of any major city in the world.
Either way just looking at the pictures being provided, Canadian cities namely MTL and TO and Vancouver blow these places out of the water. I am actually a bit surprised because I thought it would be more similar.
.
I've actually been going out of my way to not show the most desirable areas of the cities, but now, if I don't hold back... then I'll start posting stuff like this:
Access is not the problem. We have highways as well! Stockholm has tolls for entrance, and all of the capitals are emplying the'less cars the better' policy.
It is quite apparent that you have no idea what you are talking about when you say places like Pittsburgh are among the least desirable places to live in the US. Pittsburgh is regularly rated among the most liveable major cities in America, and often takes the cake. You seem misinformed. Parts of some of those other cities are undesirable and other parts are considered highly desirable. Real estate prices reflect this. I have a feeling you are unfamiliar with these places beyond some movie stereotypes and exaggerated rumors.
When it comes to Canadian cities, they tend to the attributes that you are boosting for Nordic cities, while also sharing the best attributes of American cities. Your arguments for American cities being undesirable don't hold much water in Canada. Honestly, none of your pictures look like any below average or even average. Nothing to write home about, that's for sure. But we can look at attributes in Canadian cities that are non-existent in Nordic cities. There simply isn't a Toronto of the Nordic countries. There is nothing approaching the financial status of Toronto, and Nordic cities are nowhere near as diverse and cosmopolitan as the three major Canadian cities.
Access is not the problem. We have highways as well! Stockholm has tolls for entrance, and all of the capitals are emplying the'less cars the better' policy.
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.