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 only reason Toronto isn't about the same population wise as Chicagoland is now is because of the greenbelt. The Golden Horseshoe isn't as contiguous as Chicagoland but its almost as populated. The dispersal of the cities are just more nodal and dense. When the GTA does overtake Chicagoland in population in a few decades it will simply be a far more dense urban area and will feel substantially bigger because of that density. It will also be substantially more vertical.
I agree that Greater Toronto will eventually overtake Chicagoland in population.
I agree that Greater Toronto will eventually overtake Chicagoland in population.
What people don't realize about the GTA is that it is surrounded by some of the most arable land in Canada. You can't just sprawl over that with senseless development and sprawl. That is part of the reason Toronto has the building boom its having - Development to accommodate growth is forced into a smaller and more dense footprint. If not for the greenbelt Toronto would actually be a whole lot more suburban and sprawled out and would actually be linked to other CMA's in the Golden Horseshoe. It would essentially be as populated as Chicagoland is right now. That said, you wouldn't want to roll over the greenbelt just to become bigger than another urban area. Its far better to concentrate that growth in a more compact and dense fashion and protect valuable greenspace.
What people don't realize about the GTA is that it is surrounded by some of the most arable land in Canada. You can't just sprawl over that with senseless development and sprawl. That is part of the reason Toronto has the building boom its having - Development to accommodate growth is forced into a smaller and more dense footprint. If not for the greenbelt Toronto would actually be a whole lot more suburban and sprawled out and would actually be linked to other CMA's in the Golden Horseshoe. It would essentially be as populated as Chicagoland is right now. That said, you wouldn't want to roll over the greenbelt just to become bigger than another urban area. Its far better to concentrate that growth in a more compact and dense fashion and protect valuable greenspace.
I agree, the land around Toronto is far more valuable as cropland than urban development. It would make more sense for Montreal/Quebec City to sprawl north into the Canadian Shield than for Toronto to sprawl into the farmland. Hopefully density will be the way it achieves growth.
The land around Chicago is arable as well, some of the best farmland in the country, but the damage is already done there.
I agree, the land around Toronto is far more valuable as cropland than urban development. It would make more sense for Montreal/Quebec City to sprawl north into the Canadian Shield than for Toronto to sprawl into the farmland. Hopefully density will be the way it achieves growth.
The land around Chicago is arable as well, some of the best farmland in the country, but the damage is already done there.
I think there will come a time when major American cities will become more like the GTA in terms of focussing growth in a more urban and compact footprint. Its a more difficult sell for sure. Americans typically like their space and aren't as hip to live in a midrise or highrise building as Canadians are.
I think there will come a time when major American cities will become more like the GTA in terms of focussing growth in a more urban and compact footprint. Its a more difficult sell for sure. Americans typically like their space and aren't as hip to live in a midrise or highrise building as Canadians are.
Among millennials there is a desire to live downtown in highrises even in the states.
Among millennials there is a desire to live downtown in highrises even in the states.
Yeah and that is a good shift. Live close to where you work and where the action is sort of thing. That is what has been happening very strongly in Toronto since 2006 and the DT core alone is growing by 12K per year.
You might find this article interesting. While its great to have a thriving and busy DT core - that also comes with its own set of challenges. Toronto is getting the growth thing much better than dealing with all the challenges ie infrastructure, transit, civic spaces required that are associated with that growth.
Go to the Tripadvisor website and read some of the comments on Toronto reviews, tons of people come from many other countries just to see Toronto.
Well its no surprise that a city that has the second largest international airport in N.A is going to reap the benefits of that. As Toronto grows and as its airport grows that will become even more pronounced. As I've said in some of my more lengthy posts, you can't have all these airlines serving Toronto and not have a certain percentage coming for tourism. Its not like Newark where obviously you fly into Liberty as a tourist but are really going to NYC which is but a few miles away. Newark simply gets lost in its gravitation - let alone its not large city to draw such traffic to begin with. I should be able to grab some data for YYZ in terms of how many pax that are not transiting who are O/D that are coming to Toronto specifically for leisure purposes and not linked to family visitation or business. Yes, you'll get the normal protests from the normal players in here with an agenda that simply don't accept the reality that Toronto does indeed get leisure tourism.
I find it ridiculous that some people refuse to believe that Toronto could be attractive to visit as a tourist, there's so much to see and do, and it's only getting better.
Sometimes the hate that the city sees on here at times is shocking to me. Have these people actually been to the city? Honestly, I feel that a lot of it is pure jealousy and that the city is easily dismissed because it's in Canada.
What people don't realize about the GTA is that it is surrounded by some of the most arable land in Canada. You can't just sprawl over that with senseless development and sprawl. That is part of the reason Toronto has the building boom its having - Development to accommodate growth is forced into a smaller and more dense footprint. If not for the greenbelt Toronto would actually be a whole lot more suburban and sprawled out and would actually be linked to other CMA's in the Golden Horseshoe. It would essentially be as populated as Chicagoland is right now. That said, you wouldn't want to roll over the greenbelt just to become bigger than another urban area. Its far better to concentrate that growth in a more compact and dense fashion and protect valuable greenspace.
What about the vast empty lots in Mississauga and the suburbs? Not exactly sure what they are meant for but they certain don't look green to me and are mostly reserved for vast single family home McMansion developments, judging by the development ads and for-sale signs put up by the city. Like a previous poster pointed out, while there've been positive developments within the city of Toronto towards high density transit oriented development, the moment you step into Markham, Scarborough, Mississauga and the other GTA municipalities, it's nothing but your typical NA suburban sprawl with a few isolated pockets of high rise condos dotted here and there. I've driven past places like Square One, Sherway, and not only is it not transit or pedestrian friendly, the current expansion of parking lots and vast isolated shopping malls is only taking these places further in a backward direction. 10 years from now our future generations are going to ask why on earth there happens to be a 1000 car lot next to an isolated condo high rise next to a vast lot of suburban McMansion look alikes along Hurontario, one of the busiest traffic corridors in the GTA.
As for Toronto city proper, I think the predominant reason for high density development in and around downtown is poor transit coverage. It's not a surprise why the most densely populated areas in Toronto happen to be around the Yonge and Bloor subway lines, while vast areas of Downtown East, Downtown West, Lakeshore East and West, and Etobicoke are relatively low density. Yes there are street cars, but when people look for places to move, they are mainly concerned with rapid transit availability. And this unfortunate reality won't change for Toronto for many years to come thanks to the idiots on city council who keep flip flopping back and forth on existing transit plans, happening before our eyes as we speak:
While Smart Track gets another downgrade from previous promises, from an initial 22-stop rapid transit line last year, to 13 additional stops in 2015, to 8 stops in January 2016, to 7 stops in June, to 6 stops in July. The constant flip flopping and political interference is staggering and nauseating to say the least, to the point where no one at this point really knows what Smart Track really is:
The only reason Toronto isn't about the same population wise as Chicagoland is now is because of the greenbelt.
That's complete nonsense. A greenbelt has nothing to do with commuting patterns or MSA/CSA calculations.
There is zero reason there would be millions more people living in Toronto if there were less green space. And Chicago basically has a greenbelt too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
When the GTA (which is not a CSA or MSA) does overtake Chicagoland in population in a few decades it will simply be a far more dense urban area and will feel substantially bigger because of that density.
If, not when. You are assuming population trends in the two metros stay constant for a half century. Highly unlikely, as population trends are highly variable by year, to say nothing of decade.
And, in first world cities, it's typical that vast growing metros like Toronto begin to slow down once they reach a certain population plateau. Eventually population outpaces infrastructure, and additional population leads to net decrease in quality of life. That's why LA grew like Dubai for a century, and, at some point in the 70's or 80's, massively slowed down, as it was just too big to make much sense. Similarly, Toronto, with a limited road/rail network, strained services, and in a country with many attractive, desirable cities, you will likely see a slowdown at some point.
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.
