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.
Toronto is the bigger city, it's not even close it's metro is close to 7.5 million vs almost 5 million for Boston
The point was city proper. Toronto was pe-70s a smaller city. In a day.... it became a much bigger Amalgamation of small cities into what its city-limits are today.
Like if Boston city had annexed its small ringing cities outward into one. I never said of insinuated Boson metro was bigger. But using its CSA .... then you have the added numbers to use vs the Super Golden Triangle of Toronto.
Fusion - sees US CSA's as bloated unreasonable aspects that has Boston's numbers..... being unfairly enlarged. Gives it numbers even higher then TO's whole Triangle to Boston by CSA then. He totally rejects using it as it reduced TO's region's stature vs a Boston CSA. Yet he said in the past posts .... that TO's Golden Triangle .... IS COMPARIBLE to US CSA's. Just apparently not if Boston's .... gives it overall by CSA. A larger population as recently its CSA was enlarged I believe.
My Point was not to argue for Boston as much as the dissing of US CSA's used. I really am not boosting either city really. I do like Boston .... and that US CSA's have warrant. I tire of arguing in threads TO is declared superior vs all US cities but NYC by posters. Some actually have out-right said that in CvC threads.
I like Boston's style of terraced row-housing. Though I'm in general. No fan of a whole blocks of common row-homes. I was raised with row-homes all around me. I also understand Boson's leaving row-housing in the mid to late 1800s for its Triple Decker varieties (some attached and all multi-residential that maintains density. They are unique to New England.
Chicago has its 2-3 flat homes that evolved for similar reasons . That being to supplement income to own a home. One floor the owner lived... and rented out the others to help pay the mortgage. Chicago has less them then Boston's Triple D's. But still whole blocks of them you find and part blocks among its Bungalow-belt.
The closest thing to a MSA for Toronto is the Greater Toronto and Hamilton urbanized area (perhaps more contiguous than a typical MSA).
Population 7.165 million in 2011 and around 7.5-8.0 million for 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greate..._Hamilton_Area
Fusion - sees US CSA's as bloated unreasonable aspects that has Boston's numbers..... being unfairly enlarged. Gives it numbers even higher then TO's whole Triangle to Boston by CSA then. He totally rejects using it as it reduced TO's region's stature vs a Boston CSA. Yet he said in the past posts .... that TO's Golden Triangle .... IS COMPARIBLE to US CSA's. Just apparently not if Boston's .... gives it overall by CSA. A larger population as recently its CSA was enlarged I believe.
.
huh? I've said before that CSA's have a function. That said, they are not contiguous urbanized areas. They are trading regions. The Boston-Worchester-Providence CSA as of 2017 estimate is 8.233 million people and is not as populated as the Golden Horseshoe.
I tire of arguing in threads TO is declared superior vs all US cities but NYC by posters. Some actually have out-right said that in CvC threads.
Who said that? Cite please.. Perhaps you misinterpret..
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
The point was city proper. Toronto was pe-70s a smaller city. In a day.... it became a much bigger Amalgamation of small cities into what its city-limits are today.
Those cities or boroughs largely functioned as one even before amalgamation. There was the Metropolitan Toronto Police and education was also metro Toronto. The cities or boroughs were and are completely contiguous with one another. It simply made sense to amalgamate them.
Fusion! Why do you even bother responding to his unintelligible trolling rants? It’s a losing battle! He obviously can’t comprehend basic points or information!
Fusion! Why do you even bother responding to his unintelligible trolling rants? It’s a losing battle! He obviously can’t comprehend basic points or information!
The only way Boston is bigger is economically and that's basically irrevent in this discussion.
Fusion! Why do you even bother responding to his unintelligible trolling rants? It’s a losing battle! He obviously can’t comprehend basic points or information!
When size of city proper are bought in for Boston vs Toronto. The Amalgamation is a reason TO got a much bigger city proper and Boston did not. The continuous factor is still relevant for Boston too. But no enlarging into a re-bordered city as Toronto did.
You again added nothing to the thread. You use to in past TO threads .... I wonder why?
When size of city proper are bought in for Boston vs Toronto. The Amalgamation is a reason TO got a much bigger city proper and Boston did not. The continuous factor is still relevant for Boston too. But no enlarging into a re-bordered city as Toronto did.
You again added nothing to the thread. You use to in past TO threads .... I wonder why?
Toronto is bigger not because of borders but because there are more people at every measurable level.
Toronto is bigger not because of borders but because there are more people at every measurable level.
NYC once had only Manhattan as its city limits. It combined Borough's into one much larger city. Before that Chicago had some years of higher population and growth... back in a day. But once NYC combined Borough's it was the larger city proper and of course ... region.
Metro to metro TO definitely has more people. The use of CSA gives Boston region a big bump that was argued as unfair because Boston region then jumps ahead of the TO Golden Triangle. High-rise living is clearly TO and scope of the city. But urbanity and density was also brought in.
Many thread posters say city proper borders are less significant for comparisons. But Boston's smaller border was a point made. Great cities ... but different urban forms to gain the densities they have attained.
NYC once had only Manhattan as its city limits. It combined Borough's into one much larger city. Before that Chicago had some years of higher population and growth... back in a day. But once NYC combined Borough's it was the larger city proper and of course ... region.
Metro to metro TO definitely has more people. The use of CSA gives Boston region a big bump that was argued as unfair because Boston region then jumps ahead of the TO Golden Triangle. High-rise living is clearly TO and scope of the city. But urbanity and density was also brought in.
Many thread posters say city proper borders are less significant for comparisons. But Boston's smaller border was a point made. Great cities ... but different urban forms to gain the densities they have attained.
Yes but Providence isn't Boston and is nowhere near the urban core, Canada doesn't have a statistical equvilant to the CSA.
One thing I’m learning about Toronto is that it really seems to be an interesting collage of different urban styles. Parts look like Chicago, the funkier parts remind me of San Francisco, parts look more like US east coast cities. Parts are hyper urban, while there are also parts that are more suburban looking residential areas closer to the core than you’d expect. It’s hard to put your finger on but no doubt overall it is a highly urban environment by North American standards.
Compared to cities with more uniform urban styles - like Boston, San Francisco, or even Montreal and Vancouver - it’s just harder to pin down.
This is a really good observation. It's pretty obvious but for some reason Toronto is rarely framed in this way.
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.
