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.
How dense are the inner 47 square miles of Toronto? Is this basically taking Old Toronto and York together?
I don't know exact #s but SF benefits from being small in land area. There are definitely suburban parts of Toronto. Less so for SF proper. I'd be willing to bet the inner 47 sq miles are at least comparable to, if not more dense, than SF.
Old Toronto + York = 46.45 sq/miles @ 18,732 ppsm (2011 numbers)
SF = 46.87 sq/miles @ 17,180 ppsm (2010 numbers)
Both are growing fast, so I'm not sure how the numbers align at this point.
^
SF is now at 18,451 ppsm( 2015 Census)
The city has jumped 1,271 ppsm in 5 years. WOW.
Also, for all the downtalking in this thread, I would have thought that Toronto's most dense 47 sq miles was at least 30K ppsm, but alas no we're both talking about areas in the 18K-19K range.
Also, for all the downtalking in this thread, I would have thought that Toronto's most dense 47 sq miles was at least 30K ppsm, but alas no we're both talking about areas in the 18K-19K range.
Im not the one claiming a density advantage tho. A few hundred people more is weak and lacks conviction-you people arent NYC, get over it.
I didn't bring up density and I voted for SF. I'm just saying it's a bit out of line to call Toronto weak for having an average density within it's core similar to the density of SF.
I didn't bring up density and I voted for SF. I'm just saying it's a bit out of line to call Toronto weak for having an average density within it's core similar to the density of SF.
Im not really talking about you per se, but this constant narrative when it comes to SF and density-it would all be different if these 'densest 47 sq miles' were way greater than SF---but no these urban kings cant muster much more than SFs current density. I just find it laughable.
Last edited by 18Montclair; 10-03-2016 at 03:27 PM..
Also, for all the downtalking in this thread, I would have thought that Toronto's most dense 47 sq miles was at least 30K ppsm, but alas no we're both talking about areas in the 18K-19K range.
That's weak TO.
Not suprising really. SF has strong growth and small boundaries/population comparatively. The City of Toronto grew by 9.2% (470,000) in 5 years from 2006 - 2011. It will be interesting to see what the population is over the next year.
What's more impressive IMO, rather than peak densities, is Greater Toronto's core area (equivalent of urban area):
7,005,486 in 3,898 sq miles
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.
+ 1.
