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.
Comparing Chicago to Toronto, in terms of metro populations, is apples to apples, since they are both compact, walking cities where a large portion of people walk and/or take public transit.
A city like LA has no relevance to the discussion, since it is a sprawling, driving city where virtually no one walks and/or takes public transit.
A sprawling city, no matter how big, will always have poor foot traffic.
I’ve been to both SF and Toronto. The foot traffic is significantly greater in Toronto.
So have I. I, have been to San Francisco and Toronto on several occasions and anecdotally, neither Toronto nor San Francisco have a the foot traffic nor the vibrancy of DT Chicago. They just don't. San Francisco, even while small, does not even have comparable foot traffic on its much smaller footprint. I have also been underwhelmed by the activity in Toronto. Quite simply, it's NYC as no. 1, Chicago no. 2, then down apace, SF, Toronto, DC and Philly. Frankly, certain parts of DC (though certain areas, not on the whole) have more activity than Toronto.
So have I. I, have been to San Francisco and Toronto on several occasions and anecdotally, neither Toronto nor San Francisco have a the foot traffic nor the vibrancy of DT Chicago. They just don't. San Francisco, even while small, does not even have comparable foot traffic on its much smaller footprint. I have also been underwhelmed by the activity in Toronto. Quite simply, it's NYC as no. 1, Chicago no. 2, then down apace, SF, Toronto, DC and Philly. Frankly, certain parts of DC (though certain areas, not on the whole) have more activity than Toronto.
Out of curiosity, which areas of Toronto have you visited? I assume you were primarily around downtown, financial district, CN tower? If yes, then it's not surprising, as those areas tend to be more quiet outside of business hours.
I fly to work on a weekly basis for client projects, and have similar impressions at first until I ventured outside of downtown.
Out of curiosity, which areas of Toronto have you visited? I assume you were primarily around downtown, financial district, CN tower? If yes, then it's not surprising, as those areas tend to be more quiet outside of business hours.
I fly to work on a weekly basis for client projects, and have similar impressions at first until I ventured outside of downtown.
Another question is when did the visit occur. A decade ago vs the present is a BIG difference in a city with the development Toronto is going through. I don't think a lot of people really appreciate the insane population growth (for a N.A city) that is happening in the DT core of Toronto.
I have also been underwhelmed by the activity in Toronto. Quite simply, it's NYC as no. 1, Chicago no. 2, then down apace, SF, Toronto, DC and Philly. Frankly, certain parts of DC (though certain areas, not on the whole) have more activity than Toronto.
Quite simply, you're mistaken. Central Toronto has just as much if not more foot traffic than Chicago and SF. IMO it's second only to NYC in the U.S. and Canada.
The Finance industry (of which is more than just banking) is only one industry. As the population of the Toronto CMA started getting larger than Montreal CMA and as the strategic location of Montreal started to diminish, many companies would have naturally moved to Toronto anyway. There are STILL large corporations HQ'd in Montreal CMA btw including the parent company of Bell, The nations flag airline, The nations largest Transportation company and a host of others so no, Toronto did not get all the 'prizes' but yes, Toronto CMA is the most important economy in the country due to a variety of factors. You are zeroing in on just a limited number of things. It is far more than what you are portraying.
And again, Chicago's core is still booming and building.
Yes it is good to see the core has a sizable amount of development going on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
Again, Toronto was chosen and continues in its primed direction. Super-growth by educated professionals as a big key, international investment that many US cities share that piece till some get crumbs and regional climate plays little if any factor. That IS a factor for the US Midwest and Northeast in having much more mild winter regions that are preferred in climate alone have high-growth over their regions.
Yeah sometimes reality sucks and isn't fair. It is the real world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
So even if I agree I should not add reasons that include being in different nations and a Nations preferences in locations alone, or reasons for becoming the primed premier city of a nation? Growth by high immigration?
I don't get this.. Did you take one of your wife's happy pills when writing this Dave - be honest lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
On the tread topic alone.... I did not disagree. Only where so called downtown, CBD or core lines are drawn for population boast. It's pretty clear still if Chicago has the same 6.5 sq/miles drawn? A similar population is met. But I agree overall.... Toronto's direction of CORE growth can surely outpace and pass Chicago's even if Chicago remains with its booming core and expanding areas from there. But Toronto selects high-rises still preferred and zoned for .... not merely if allowed.
Toronto's DT core is about 6.5 square miles with approximately 250K people. I don't know what the size of Chicago's DT core is or what its population is. With the population growth occurring within the DT core of T.O - I don't think there will be any doubt which city will have the second largest DT core in the U.S and Canada either now or in the not too distant future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
I do not get why saying zoned for... is seen as demeaning if the wording says exactly that. I never said town-housing is not allowed in the city and region... I CLEARLY MEANT THE CORE zoned high-rises and surrounding areas that became zone high-rises and even mid-rises as worded .... less likely. I never bring in the Metro Horseshoe. It probably helps some older buildings saved more to house more of its retail/commercial in corridors clearly seen among the mass building of high-rises to house this growing immigration that passed 50% of the city.
The DT core of Toronto in terms of new development definitely is mostly highrise. There are old buildings being turned to lofts and some mid-rise stuff going up near the lakeshore but yeah, In the DT core most new dev is highrise. In Old Toronto or the city of T.O you get much more of a mix.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
Both these city's will continue to have differing factored in its housing choices and parts of their cities getting high-rises of not. Chicago's will be centered far more in its core and lakefront. Elsewhere neighborhoods will be protected but for more main commercial corridors getting new high-rise replacements while the inner-blocks will be protected from any. Certainly, I'm not saying Toronto is just randomly re-zoning neighborhoods replaced by high-rises. Clearly, reasons as in as needed and debated before rezoned. Including Chicago where Commercial areas of former warehousing and manufacturing get rezoned for residential and IF High-rises are allowed.
I've said before and will say again, Toronto isn't just building highrises - there is mixed development all over the city. Yes the DT core is most highrises but that is just a sliver of the city.
An ex lover lived in this place.. Nice lofts! Nice times!! And showing you that Toronto isn't just highrise condo development. There is low-mid rise dev and redev too https://www.getwhatyouwant.ca/toront.../foundry-lofts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
Videos to show high-rises long Toronto's expressway more prevalent is true. Just not where Chicago gets them desired or allowed. On the fringe of the city will be ones as offices and hotels over residential. Of course there is some. Just people choose suburbs for a reason that isn't sought for high-rise living in Chicagoland.
The main spine of T.O's skyline is perpendicular to the lakeshore. Chicago's skyline is much more development along the lakeshore than Toronto.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
The reason it's time for more Toronto vs Tokyo and Hong Kong, Sydney and New York is in every post is surpassed Chicago ..... or surpassing and soooo soon it's already fact. So these vs Chicago threads have become just much of the same. Time for new NON-US cities as most posting on Toronto's growth see it as passed Chicago in levels and the world needs to take notice more. So threads taking on the World's cities it is time for.
I don't think Toronto has 'passed' Chicago actually. In some ways yes in some ways no. In some areas Toronto will never have what Chicago has and vice versa. They share some interesting similarities but also a lot of real differences. Some day I hope you get up hear Dave! If you do i'll be happy to pass on some recommendations based on your interests!! In terms of comparisons Chicago and Toronto and more comparable than New York which is clearly tiered above them. Sydney and Toronto is actually a great vs and has been done in the world forum I believe. I'd take part in such a thread though I haven't been to Sydney. Hong Kong is not in a primarily anglo country like Toronto, Australian and U.S cities are - it would be an odd vs imo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
I use to think a Toronto vs Houston thread might be a interesting one? But I see it would be a bloodbath and probably end up closed. IMO.
Actually interesting comparison cities. Similar sized metro populations and heavy population growth. Toronto is like a sunbelt city in terms of growth but in the north. I'd take on Houston in a vs.. Though Houston will always have better steaks and weather hands down
Wow, not an attractive city from this view at all. And whats with all the poorly dressed people in SF? I would agree it is vibrant, but compared to Chicago's dt and Michigan Ave, no comparison as to attractiveness. Sorry.
The main spine of T.O's skyline is perpendicular to the lakeshore. Chicago's skyline is much more development along the lakeshore than Toronto.
Toronto's skyline is T shaped, there is development along the lake (cityplace, east bayfront) and there is development along Yonge. There is also development all over downtown.
Chicago seems rather sterile in its core, every building is meticulously put on display as if in a museum. It lacks that...something.
Toronto's skyline is T shaped, there is development along the lake (cityplace, east bayfront) and there is development along Yonge. There is also development all over downtown.
Chicago seems rather sterile in its core, every building is meticulously put on display as if in a museum. It lacks that...something.
I know it is T shaped, but the core line is running perpendicular to the lake along Yonge. The best vantage point for the T.O skyline is looking east or west of it (particularly on Broadview at Riverdale Park) - not south from the lake like classical skyline pics represent. In comparison to Chicago, Toronto's lakefront skyline isn't as developed. You can tell that as Chicago developed, Lakefront was top of their mind. Toronto's lakefront has been historically much more industrial and thus not as much highrise though that is changing rapidly now and lakefront development is happening at a rapid clip. Both have a large CBD's but Chicago's is larger whereas Toronto's core has more residential infill intermixed with Commercial/Office within the core. I'd say if you look at core buildup between the too there is about the same amount of infil but Chicago's skews taller and more commercial in nature.
Toronto's core seems to have a lot more variation in height. You also get quite a spattering of smaller type development. You can be walking along Yonge street and see all kinds of highrises/scrapers and then turn left and immediately be surrounded by old Vic's on streets bisecting it. I have not seen such an intimate connection between commercial and residential in Chicago so close to such major arterials within the DT core. Toronto's DT core has an understated variety of built form within it and actually within Old Toronto in general. It is why I think it is such a wonderful core to walk and explore - there isn't an omnipresent urban design to it and it is very quirky.
On the flipside, Chicago's core is far more stately and elegant. I don't know if sterile is the word but visually it isn't as 'messy' and varied as Toronto's. Sure the architecture is more grand - particular pre WWII highrise stock but the overall composition could be considered more banal on the whole vs Toronto's more messy core urbanism.
Anyone who says Chicago has more ped vibrancy in its core that isn't the 9-5 type who are really just in and out for work is as blind as a bat imo. I think Chicago's ped vibrancy is most interesting in its many nabes outside the CBD. Of course, that is where Toronto shines as well and i'd argue that Toronto urban core at large has more vibrant and busy arterials throughout.
Chicago seems rather sterile in its core, every building is meticulously put on display as if in a museum. It lacks that...something.
What an odd, not particularly germane comment...and one that is often tossed at Toronto, especially w.r.t. lacking that je ne sais quoi (although I'd argue Vancouver is the poster-child for this kind of development).
Toronto's skyline is T shaped, there is development along the lake (cityplace, east bayfront) and there is development along Yonge. There is also development all over downtown.
Chicago seems rather sterile in its core, every building is meticulously put on display as if in a museum. It lacks that...something.
You might have intended this as demeaning, and lessening to Chicago... but it is far more a complement. Grandeur, Class, sophistication and Elegance is more of what the city strives for. If that's a negative? I definitely will take it. Though its planters for greens and flowers to sidewalk restaurant tables can become obstacles with crowds.
Polished older past grit is not a bad thing. Clean vs grit is NOT sterile. Grand core Parks to plazas for events over closing a street are a better idea and Chicago's Lakefront Parks showcase it all well.
Spare me the usual --- Toronto has ALL that and more and getting more by the minute reply. I said nothing to lessen Toronto. You did to try to Chicago. I'd say it fails. No use replying on Chicago's developments in the South Loop, West Loop and all around and in the Core. Replies will be Toronto has still more. Growing more ect. and ect. With any differences mentioned... gain a but we have all that too ....
Just mentioning more TV screens tacked on buildings in Toronto is more like a Asian city or NYC is what you do not see in Chicago. Of course to mention it demeans..... maybe Chicago needs more for excitement it might lack to you? But then it's Toronto that HAS EVERYTHING and Canada in general the better side.
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.
I said nothing to lessen Toronto. You did to try to Chicago. 
I'd say it fails. No use replying on Chicago's developments in the South Loop, West Loop and all around and in the Core. Replies will be Toronto has still more. Growing more ect. and ect. With any differences mentioned... gain a but we have all that too ....
