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.
The first paragraph is almost entirely false. Yorkville is no more separated from downtown core than the Gold Coast. In fact, there is consistent dense development all the way down from Yorkville to Harborfront. No breaks in urban fabric, no SFHs, just consistent dense development.
And the fact that it’s near other neighborhoods that have SFHs to the north and west has no more relevance than the fact that the Gold Coast is near Cabrini Green and the Clybourn corridor.
Do you not get that just bordering any official CBD or downtown claim. Has nothing to do with worthy to be added?
FYI. Only two blocks or so into the Gold Coast. Met the city's criteria to add it. That includes your Rush St comment post. Again, the city's top hotels there and high-end boutiques like Dior and
Theta top tiered hotels like the Waldorf Astoria Chicago, Sofitel Chicago, the Park Hyatt ..... you can even by a Bentley on Rust St LOL.
It certainly looks the part.
Dior, Versace and I believe Gucci moved here too from on Michigan Ave.
Both of these cities' designated downtowns have a lot of "fluff" within their boundaries. In Toronto it comes via quiet, residential SFH blocks that have nothing "downtown-like" about them. In Chicago it comes via surface lots, vacant land, warehouses, rail yards, etc.
If we were to take just the heavily built up portions of each downtown, I would estimate that Toronto's is a bit larger. They are about the same distance north to south, but Toronto has much more depth going east to west. OTOH, while Chicago's downtown core is a bit smaller, it is much taller and grander.
As for Yorkville, it is absolutely 100% downtown Toronto. To suggest otherwise is like suggesting that Oak and Rush are not downtown Chicago.
Unproductive / unused lots in Chicago's downtown are very uncommon in the Loop proper and Streeterville / Village North though they exist a bit outside of such. However, a few surface lots also still exist in downtown Toronto and in areas that are fairly prominent like near the waterfront.
This isn't true. There is no consistent highrise density between Yorkville and the downtown core.
And this has nothing to do with "downtown". Downtown has nothing to do with highrises, it's due to activity centers. There's a big gap in activity between downtown Toronto and Yorkville.
None of what you're saying makes sense or is true. There is absolutely consistent highrise density between yorkville and the downtown core, yorkville's skyline is large and growing.
Yorkville is also a premier high end shopping part of downtown Toronto, with cobbled streets and wall to wall boutiques, to say it has no activity is flat out false.
Yorkville is an integral part of downtown Toronto and has been for decades.
This isn't true. There is no consistent highrise density between Yorkville and the downtown core.
And this has nothing to do with "downtown".
I never said anything about highrises, so why are you bringing them up -- just to argue with yourself? Obviously an area can be dense, urban and vibrant without any highrises; and conversely it can have plenty of highrises but be neither particularly dense nor vibrant. Yorkville, and everything south of it, happens to be both dense and vibrant and have plenty of highrises.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Downtown has nothing to do with highrises, it's due to activity centers. There's a big gap in activity between downtown Toronto and Yorkville.
I have no idea what this even means. Yorkville is one of the busiest areas of Toronto, home to some of its best hotels and high end shopping. And while it's true that the energy level ebbs and flows to some extent as you go from Yorkville south towards Dundas Square, that is completely normal for any downtown. Manhattan between 59th and Battery Park is also not all Times Square and Rockefeller Center. It has comparatively sedate neighborhoods like West Village and TriBeCa tucked throughout and in between. That does not mean that NYC's downtown core ends at 34th street or Union Square, or should be cut off on the sides. It is all one cohesive, dense and continuous activity center (like Central London or Paris proper) and therefore all appropriately considered part of NYC's downtown core even if there is some variation in energy level within. Same with Toronto between Yorkville and Harborfront.
Also I don't see what relevance it has that it was developed in the 60s. Much of Streeterville and Lakeshore East was developed in the 80s and 90s -- does that mean they are not part of Chicago's downtown core?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Why? Cabrini Green was highrise projects. What do highrise projects (a very urban form) have to do with quiet SFH neighborhoods (a very suburban form)?
The Clybourn corridor is around a mile away from the Gold Coast and vastly busier than the Toronto neighborhoods north of Bloor. There's lots of pedestrian activity around North/Clybourn, street level retail and a subway stop.
The Toronto neighborhoods look like Scarsdale or Larchmont (or, in Chicago's case, Wilmette). Places like Forest Hill are the North Shore or Westchester/Connecticut of Toronto, which is bizarre they're considered to be "downtown", or even downtown-adjacent.
This is all nonsense. The stretch of Yonge between Bloor and Davenport, and the adjacent shopping blocks of Yorkville, are vastly more bustling than anywhere in Chicago outside of downtown, let alone Clybourn. In fact there is no decrease in pedestrian traffic at all as you walk on Yonge north across Bloor. If you don't think so then you obviously haven't been there.
As for Cabrini Green, yes there is some new development there but it is still surrounded by an ocean of vacant land and abandonement that wouldn't look out of place in Detroit. My point -- in the context of comparing the Gold Coast with Yorkville -- was that if Gold Coast can still be part of Chicago's downtown core despite being a stone throw away from these bombed out areas, why cant Yorkville be considered part of Toronto's downtown core because it is adjacent to SFH areas?
So quiet suburban SFH neigborhoods with big yards can be part of "downtown"?
Ok, then, "downtown NY" easily has a population of 24 million. "Downtown Tokyo" has nearly 40 million.
That's one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, it's literally part of a core that's rapidly expanding. You have multiple subway stations, supertalls being built and it's near the busiest intersection in Canada. You clearly have no idea about downtown Toronto and go with the "oh if it's SFH with yards, then it's not downtown" yet it's located in downtown.
That's one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard, it's literally part of a core that's rapidly expanding. You have multiple subway stations, supertalls being built and it's near the busiest intersection in Canada. You clearly have no idea about downtown Toronto and go with the "oh if it's SFH with yards, then it's not downtown" yet it's located in downtown.
There are single family homes near Carlton and Sherbourne and also near College and Spadina. I guess these areas are no longer a part of downtown Toronto lol.
None of what you're saying makes sense or is true. There is absolutely consistent highrise density between yorkville and the downtown core, yorkville's skyline is large and growing.
Yorkville is also a premier high end shopping part of downtown Toronto, with cobbled streets and wall to wall boutiques, to say it has no activity is flat out false.
Yorkville is an integral part of downtown Toronto and has been for decades.
Of course there is. Don't even pay attention to her. Her Toronto-related negative post history speaks for itself.
Anyways, here is a recent massive Toronto skyline shot (courtesy of Reddit).
Unproductive / unused lots in Chicago's downtown are very uncommon in the Loop proper and Streeterville / Village North though they exist a bit outside of such. However, a few surface lots also still exist in downtown Toronto and in areas that are fairly prominent like near the waterfront.
I wasn't suggesting that Loop proper (by which I assume you mean the rail Loop) has a lot of surface lots. Instead what I was suggesting was that both Toronto and Chicago have inflated downtown boundaries that include peripheral areas that look nothing like downtown. Toronto's downtown, as defined, has more of those areas but it also has more square mileage of dense and vibrant urbanity as well.
Is this like oppositeland? So if super-suburban areas are actually Toronto's downtown core, I guess we can say that the Bay Street financial district and Yonge/Dundas are Toronto's exurban sprawl? [/quote]
You're right. If it's auto-oriented SFH with yards and minimal walkability, it isn't downtown.
If you say it's downtown, then anything can be downtown, and the term is meaningless. It's just a line on a map, with zero context. NYC's downtown has 24 million people (or 0 people, for that matter, it's meaningless if downtown doesn't actually refer to the city's commercial core).
There are single family homes near Carlton and Sherbourne and also near College and Spadina. I guess these areas are no longer a part of downtown Toronto lol.
Are they neighborhoods of suburban, auto-era SFH with yards, like Rosedale? Then yeah, not downtown.
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.
