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.
Whst do you mean by less diversity? Toronto is the most multicultural city in the world.
THIS is what I think of when I think of Toronto: how its residents keep on boasting about how "multicultural" and "diverse" it is. It's like a fetish with some of you all, it seems.
Otherwise, I don't think of Toronto much at all. I drove through it once, on my way to somewhere else, and unfortunately I didn't even have time to stop and pay a visit. I'm hoping to get back and actually check it out for myself, just to see what it's like.
You know, I like Toronto. I've been there multiple times on business and for fun. So count me in as a fan of the city.
That being said, I just can't quite put it in the same category as a Chicago, let alone New York. New York really is only comparable to other megacities such as London, Tokyo, and Shanghai. I would instead compare it to cities such as Atlanta and Seattle in terms of size, amenities, etc. Now, in terms of livability, it puts Atlanta to shame, but I'm not so sure about cities such as Seattle.
If you pressed me for a knock on Toronto, I would have to say the generic nature of the architecture. With the exception of the CN Tower, there really seems to be a lack of any iconic buildings in the city skyline. That's the thing that always strikes me during my visits.
Toronto is twice the size of Seattle, and much more dense and urban than Atlanta. It's unquestionably in the same category as Chicago.
As for iconic buildings, how many cities have even one iconic building? I'd say the CN Tower is iconic on a worldwide scale, which is a lot more than most cities can boast.
Toronto is twice the size of Seattle, and much more dense and urban than Atlanta. It's unquestionably in the same category as Chicago.
As for iconic buildings, how many cities have even one iconic building? I'd say the CN Tower is iconic on a worldwide scale, which is a lot more than most cities can boast.
Yeah right...
From Wiki..
Seattle : • Metro - 8,186 sq mi (21,202 km2)
Toronto: • Metro - 5,905.71 km2 (2,280.21 sq mi)
Metro areas usually follow county borders and include lots of rural land, and the fact that Seattle's metro has a larger area than Toronto's but with a smaller population isn't exactly a good thing for Seattle.
According to Demographia's World Urban Areas 2015 Edition, which calculates only the urbanized portion of the two metros you get this:
Toronto - 6,456,000 people in 883 sq. miles.
Seattle - 3,218,000 people in 1,010 sq. miles
Metro areas usually follow county borders and include lots of rural land, and the fact that Seattle's metro has a larger area than Toronto's but with a smaller population isn't exactly a good thing for Seattle.
According to Demographia's World Urban Areas 2015 Edition, which calculates only the urbanized portion of the two metros you get this:
Toronto - 6,456,000 people in 883 sq. miles.
Seattle - 3,218,000 people in 1,010 sq. miles
I've been to both cities a lot. I don't care how much you game the statistics, Toronto is about the same size as Atlanta in population. And Chicago has roughly 50% more population. So no way, no how, are Toronto and Chicago in the same league. Not trying to harsh on Toronto because I like the city a great deal, but the numbers don't lie.
You know, when I wrote that, I knew some citizen would get his hackles up. It's just nowhere close to the size or feel of a Chicago.
I've been to both cities a lot. I don't care how much you game the statistics, Toronto is about the same size as Atlanta in population. And Chicago has roughly 50% more population. So no way, no how, are Toronto and Chicago in the same league. Not trying to harsh on Toronto because I like the city a great deal, but the numbers don't lie.
You know, when I wrote that, I knew some citizen would get his hackles up. It's just nowhere close to the size or feel of a Chicago.
Well I would say it depends on how you look at population measures..
1) Toronto is in Canada not in the U.S so we don't have CSA/MSA measures.. If we did use these measures, Toronto would be larger in population than the 6.5 million that is commonly cited.
2) Toronto's urban area is quite a bit more dense than every American metro except for New york, L.A, and Chicago..
3) Chicagoland sprawls out a lot more than Toronto so while it anchors a larger region - the most urbanized parts of both cities are surpringly similar in population and density. There are geographical reasons why Toronto doesn't sprawl as much as Chicagoland but there are actually nodal cities connected to the GTA that are very populous thus the Golden Horsehoe isn't that much less populated than Chicagoland covering about the same area.
4) Go ahead and compare the urban areas of Toronto with the likes of Atlanta, Houston, Dallas etc.. You'll see it is far more dense and compact thus giving it a bigger feel than those cities. As a matter of fact - Toronto's boroughs and even cities in the GTA like Mississauga are more dense than found in Chicago outside its core.
5) Toronto is indeed a slightly larger city proper than Chicago with both city propers covering the same area. Pretty much every other city in the U.S other than NYC, L.A and Chicago have to sprawl out considerably more to match the rather dense city proper/metro that is Toronto. I mean once you get passed a certain level of density and urbanity even you have to look at the arbitrary nature of city boundaries and say - am I really 'connected' to a city.. The U.S has some of the most expansive measures of cities of any country in the world. I suggest you acquaint yourself with Atticman's source - Demographia and look at how much more area and how much more American cities sprawl compared to other nations city's in the world including Canada.
Essentially - I think you need to look at what and how cities are being measured..
Well I would say it depends on how you look at population measures..
1) Toronto is in Canada not in the U.S so we don't have CSA/MSA measures.. If we did use these measures, Toronto would be larger in population than the 6.5 million that is commonly cited.
2) Toronto's urban area is quite a bit more dense than every American metro except for New york, L.A, and Chicago..
3) Chicagoland sprawls out a lot more than Toronto so while it anchors a larger region - the most urbanized parts of both cities are surpringly similar in population and density. There are geographical reasons why Toronto doesn't sprawl as much as Chicagoland but there are actually nodal cities connected to the GTA that are very populous thus the Golden Horsehoe isn't that much less populated than Chicagoland covering about the same area.
4) Go ahead and compare the urban areas of Toronto with the likes of Atlanta, Houston, Dallas etc.. You'll see it is far more dense and compact thus giving it a bigger feel than those cities. As a matter of fact - Toronto's boroughs and even cities in the GTA like Mississauga are more dense than found in Chicago outside its core.
5) Toronto is indeed a slightly larger city proper than Chicago with both city propers covering the same area. Pretty much every other city in the U.S other than NYC, L.A and Chicago have to sprawl out considerably more to match the rather dense city proper/metro that is Toronto.
Essentially - I think you need to look at what is being measured..
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,255,511 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
Well you can dismiss it all you want.. It is your perogative.. I know when I'm having a discussion with the wall lol...
I JUST DON'T GET HOW DENSITY IS HOW TO RATE ANY CITY? I mean.... Philly for example. Is North Americas "Row Home" city with 300,000 Row homes . So it has density but lacks the High-Rise living of Toronto, Vancouver, Chicago or NYC. Some say that adds Vibrancy? But as a Pennsylvanian. I'm not fond of Row homes.
LA is thought of as Sprawl central? But it is a ICONIC American city in its own right. It still has density too. No one questions Manhattan's density. But as many know... my favorite Big city is Chicago. It still maintained density with a FULL alley system throughout the city. A wider street grid then many other cities. And all neighborhoods have green space in front and tree-lined. It has its Bungalow home belt too. Of single homes built between 1910 and 1940. Someone called "QUASI-SUBURBAN". Because it has all with front grass lawns. Tree-lined and back yards with garages most chose to build. All power lines are through this alleyway system. So fronts Need not have ugly Poles. Yet it maintained density despite it.... and city lots of fairly close homes. But still some of the city has even WIDER GAPS BETWEEN HOMES DATING TO THE 1800S. Then it has empty lots on its Southside cleared of decay of past decades of radical strife.... returning to prairie. But IT STILL HAS DENSITY OVERALL?. I think it has every variety of density on could want short of acres of land.
Yet people ARGUE DENITY ALONE? POINTS TO DEGREE OF VIBRANCE? I DISAGREE IT IS THAT ALONE TO BOAST.
Toronto had become Canada's premier city. Its NYC or London. But it has the most BOASTING ON C-D? and need to say WE ARRIVED ACCEPT IT. To have such a thread ONLY AS TO ARGUE?????
Last edited by steeps; 05-13-2015 at 09:13 PM..
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.
. So it has density but lacks the High-Rise living of Toronto, Vancouver, Chicago or NYC. Some say that adds Vibrancy? But as a Pennsylvanian. I'm not fond of Row homes. 
