Toronto's population takes over Chicago: The Star (place, video)

[fusion2]

Hey it is what it is - i'm not sure what made you draw all these conclusions about me but if that makes you feel better by all means. I guess a good compromise is you see me as a glass is half full kind of guy - I see you as glass is half empty - when it comes to Toronto that is....

Originally Posted by johnathanc

Let me guess, a Canadian dollar above parity is good for this country too right? Have an open mind to other points of view and there's no need to "cry" or get defensive if someone has something to say that doesn't somehow fit into your personal view of things. Why don't you try being more balanced, less sensitive, take a global view, and come out of the box of conventional thinking for once.

[fusion2]

Lord have mercy have you seen all the cranes going up all around? Toronto has over 2000 highrise buildings - that is impressive in ANY global context. Toronto is tops in highrise development in the Western world. I'd say as far as MOST cities go Toronto is a vertical city and will become even more so.. Manhattan (a borough) and Hong Kong are on an entirely different side of the spectrum from the vast majority of cities. I'd say the DT core of Toronto is pretty tall as well by any measure...now if you're comparing Toronto to Coruscant than yes - we aren't vertical at all.

Even NYC has (not including Manhattan) primarily low rise urban form - its all about context and relative comparisons. I use planet Earth for comparitive purposes not fictional worlds... Toronto ranked 10th in the world... i'd say that qualifies as vertical for this sphere we call home.

List of cities with the most high-rise buildings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I had a friend from Chicago visit me not long ago and noted all of what i've said regarding an impressive stock of highrise buildings (not architecturally - but in terms of numbers) throughout and it is noticeable vs a city like Chicago outside DT cores.

Originally Posted by botticelli

I can hardly say Toronto is rising vertically. In fact, outside downtown and the Yonge subway line between Finch and Davisville, the entire city is extremely flat, with low rises completely dominant.

Low density housing will be be replaced by higher density housing as your suggested - I wish it would but that's not what's happening. All the highrise development is restricted in a very limited area, many streets in downtown are still predominantly low rise. For example, do you see many high rises on Queen, Dundas, College st? High rises Church, Jarvis, Parliament st? Bathust? No, all these streets are 90% low rises and it's not gonna change for a very long time.

Hong Kong is vertical. Manhattan is vertical. Toronto including its downtown is not. The only vertical part is probably areas south of Queen St near the lake and along the Yong/Bay st corridor. Even Yonge st is almost all low rises north of Dundas.

I feel funny everytime people use vertical to describle Toronto. To me, it is largely a flat city. 95% of the city is as flat as Taxas. Take a look at any photo of the city, not the traditional skyline from center island, but an aerial view and you will know what I am talking about.

[fusion2]

yes 100 posts all dedicated to bashing Toronto and being a troll against it.. and you talk about other people not having a life..... lalalalala

Originally Posted by TheTourist

I've around 100 posts on this forum over 3 years. Toronto is a dump along with your job and stocks there-- hope you won't drown in that ****. Tell me about how many degrees you have also.

[fusion2]

I find this list pretty decent as it accounts for contiguous urbanized areas.

List of metropolitan areas in the Americas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Greater Golden Horshoe vs Chicagoland have similar areas and not much of a difference population wise but Chicagoland is a far more contiguous expanse whereas the GGH has nodes of hyper dense population areas surrounded by green.

I dunno however, I guess my post is biased and closed minded and blindly boosts Toronto <rolls eyes>

Originally Posted by johnathanc

The whole problem with these population comparisions is that I don't think we have good comparable data. Yes, we know Chicagoland and Goldenhorseshoe are 9.7m and 8.8m. We know city propers (as defined by the cities) are 2.7m and 2.8m as well. But the most important measure is metro population = the city proper + surrounding suburbs. That's the real population size of a given city.

We also know what the GTA population is but what is the GTA-equivalent of Chicago? I don't know. Does anyone? To me, that's the real answer to this question. But I wouldn't be surprised if the Chicago burbs were bigger than Toronto's by just looking their their subway/train system, population patterns, and economic output figures.

According to wiki:

-Greater Toronto = 5.6m in 7,124 sq km. But we have to add some surrounding regions to get to 6.1m + x? km.

-Greater Chicago = ? A comporable stat is not published. At least I don't know where to look.
Wiki does refer to an urban Chicago population of 8.3m in 5,498 sq km, which implies they have bigger burbs. This is the best stat I can find.

Either way, it's interesting to know from a factoid perspective but what difference does it really make? Headcount alone doesn't make a company or city any better by itself. There are many more important factors to consider. Many cities in the world have bigger headcounts than Toronto but everyone would agree they do not measure up as a city.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by BIMBAM

As far as English-French relations goes, Quebecois don't actually have a problem with English Canadians in other provinces so much, the hate is directed primarily at Anglos from Quebec. This community resents Toronto for several reasons. The main issue, lots of Anglos left when the PQ came to power and before each referendum, so those who remain saw their communities decimated and their friends all leaving for Toronto, where they were gradually assimilated. The separatists want to push the local Anglos out, and the place they'd go basically is Toronto. Putting down Toronto is basically a cultural survival mechanism, to put down 'going down the road' is to show commitment and loyalty to the culture, that you're not going to jump ship and become one of them. Anglo Montrealers all have to make a choice to stay Montrealers, and if they like Toronto too much, they'll go there, so alot of those who remain don't like it there. And for good reason! There's lots of legitimate criticisms to be aimed at Toronto, which is why most Canadians do criticize it. I no longer live in Montreal but I'd still never live in Toronto, I try to like the place but I just can't see myself in that city, it just doesn't appeal to me.

To add onto this pretty accurate post.

There is nothing wrong with Toronto but it and Montreal are two very different cities. Especially for an English-speaking person. Choosing Montreal is something of an "iconoclastic" choice for them and they constantly have to convince themselves that it is the right choice.

Put yourself in an Anglo-Montrealer's place: if you grew up there probably three quarters or more of your high school graduating class is now living elsewhere. Probably a good chunk of your family as well. Every time you talk to any of them they say there is stuff they miss but also underline how happy they are to have gotten out. Multiply that by 10 every time something like Pastagate or Bill 14 ends up in the news.

Toronto is the main temptation that has to be resisted in order to justify remaining in Montreal. They just have to find faults with it - as BIMBAM said it's a defence mechanism.

For francophones it is completely different: there is simply no other big city that is "theirs" other than Montreal.

Toronto may not require a passport and work permit and your kids may still be able to go to French school but psyschologically it's not really different for them than moving to New York or Boston.

[botticelli]

^ very well put Acajack, especially the "They just have to find faults with it (Toronto)" part.
Such a weird mentality actually applies to many people who decided to move to another country/city. They have to convince themselves they made the right decision, sometimes in deliberately looking for faults with the old place and keep an blind eye to the good stuff. It often works.

[TOkidd]

Originally Posted by fusion2

I'd say the DT core of Toronto is pretty tall as well by any measure...now if you're comparing Toronto to Coruscant than yes - we aren't vertical at all.

Coruscant? Took me a minute to remember that place. Another fan of KOTOR?

[TOkidd]

Originally Posted by johnathanc

I would agree that the best neighborhoods in Toronto are all low to mid-rise. Nobody would tout areas like City Place or Liberty Village as great neighborhoods and I hope we don't keep building communities like this. IMO, the best neighborhoods in Chicago, Montreal, Boston, DC, Philly, LA, San Fran and other great cities on this continent and in Europe are all low to mid-rise. There is a certain "neighborhood feeling" that just gets lost in a collection of bland, tall glass and concrete condos so I do have a preference for the older neighborhoods. I will agree with bottecilli though that not "all" areas with low/mid rises constitute unique neighborhoods and revamping them with new taller buldings is not a bad thing when done with the right urban planning (and I don't have full confidence in the city planners when it comes to this). I would actually prefer to see more buildings go up for "business" purposes so that I know we are actually creating value. So we should be unwavering in our protection of whatever history we do have left but deciding what is "worth keeping" becomes the real question.

You know the sad thing about Liberty Village is that its western portion - the original Liberty Village - used to be a really cool, unique neighbourhood made up mostly of old warehouses and factories that would have been torn down had all the artists and other young people not found them desirable and started buying up loft spaces in them. At first, Liberty Village really was something different and special, because it was mostly made up of preserved low-rise industrial architecture from the early 20th Century, very little of which remains in the Old City, especially so much concentrated such a small space. Of course, when the realtors and property development companies saw the popularity of LV, and the demand for real estate in the area, they came in and expanded the neighbourhood to the east, building ugly condos and townhouse complexes that had no architectural connection to the original LV, but which they advertised as LV because of the geographical connection. Now Liberty Village is a perfect example of how gentrification works in Toronto - how young, middle-income residents who often work in the arts and culture sector move into a formerly undesirable neighbourhood, improving the image of the neighbourhood, attracting businesses, and eventually making the place "desirable" for higher income individuals and families who want to live in a hip, cool, artsy neighbourhood hoping that some of its "coolness" will rub off on them. When this happens, rents and property values rise, forcing many of the people who originally made the neighbourhood desirable to leave. But that doesn't matter. By this point, property developers have become aware of the new demand for housing in the neighbourhood, so they begin building cheap, generic housing in an adjacent parcel of land while realtors start calling the new adjacent area Liberty Village, and by repeating it often enough make it true, even if the new area has very little in common with the original Liberty Village. Upwardly mobile people looking to live in a cool up & coming area buy up the new condos and townhouses, telling everyone they now live in Liberty Village.

This is a classic example of something that is happening all over Toronto, and is an especially popular tactic in New York. In this way, parts of Bushwick become East Williamsburg, parts of Crown Heights become Prospect Heights, Hell's Kitchen becomes Clinton and the South Bronx becomes SoBro.

The latest victim of this collusion between greedy realtors and property developers is in the Dundas / Queen St. and Ossington area. As the area becomes more and more popular among young artists and hipsters, property values soar and any building that can be sacrificed without too much protest (like the Museum of Contemporary Canadian Art) is levelled to make room for condo towers. Pretty soon, this area which was considered undesirable not long ago will become the next Liberty Village. I'm sure it's not long before the same thing happens in the East Downtown, where developers have traditionally feared to tread.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for development. But I like smart development; development that creates better neighbourhoods, not just tracts of ugly, indistinguishable condos. If you look at the massive tract of land that runs parallel to the Gardiner, west of Spadina, there was enormous potential to build a brand new mixed-use, mid-rise, high-density neighbourhood that could become a model for modern urban development in Toronto and beyond. What have we gotten instead? More tracts of high-rise condos with zero architectural merit and very little if any amenities at street level for the tens of thousands of residents who will come to live there over the next decade.

In the rush to make profits, collect development fees and new property taxes, the city and the developers have forgotten that the goal is to build livable spaces that add more than just people and concrete/glass to the city. We don't even have sufficient infrastructure and transit to accommodate the residents of all these new condo towers, and the developers have made it worse by building these condo tracts in the suburban model - that is, not as a self-contained neighbourhood with shops, restaurants and cafes, banks and other businesses. Instead these new developments are almost purely residential, forcing residents to pour into adjacent neighbourhoods for amenities. By the time the pressures of these new pseudo-neighbourhoods becomes evident to the average Toronto resident, it will be too late to do anything, and no one will be held to account.

Perhaps this post belongs in the Urban Planning forum, but it seems to fit with the previous posts about the scale of Toronto's growth. There is no doubt that the scale is high - the highest in the Western World as some have pointed out. But if all the growth is going to be haphazard, and ignorant of the city's character and heritage (as most of it is), then I would prefer that none of it happen and that it all grinds to a halt until some department is set up to ensure that the development is smart and well-planned, designed to make the city better, to create and expand neighbourhoods, not just erect tracts of buildings with nothing interesting at street level. I mean, you'd think a city of Toronto's size and stature would already have something like this...the fact that the development is occurring the way it is proves that the only thing that matters to the city and the developers is the money that the building will generate. And we'll have to live with this ugly crap for generations.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by botticelli

^ very well put Acajack, especially the "They just have to find faults with it (Toronto)" part.
Such a weird mentality actually applies to many people who decided to move to another country/city. They have to convince themselves they made the right decision, sometimes in deliberately looking for faults with the old place and keep an blind eye to the good stuff. It often works.

Yup. Seems to be a normal human behaviour. What's even more surprising is that probably 95% of people eventually end up convincing *themselves* that the new place is better, regardless of whether it truly is or not.

Most of us are like trees I guess - if we stay in one place long enough eventually those roots will start growing into the ground.

[fusion2]

kind of a sci-fi geek in general..more a trekker - but hey Coruscant was the best parallel I could find. Toronto isn't there yet - but soon enough

Originally Posted by TOkidd

Coruscant? Took me a minute to remember that place. Another fan of KOTOR?