You can view the page at http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2010/09/quick-pic-what-happens-if-you-overlay-manhattan-top-toronto
|
|
|
- Thread starter Edward Skira
- Start date
UrbanFervour
Active Member
It's amazing how small manhattan is geographically. This really puts it into perspective. According to this, I live in the hudson river somewhere off the west village.
Redroom Studios
Senior Member
great idea, I've always wanted to try something like this... and Big Daddy is already getting more requests for other cities to be overlaid.
Conrad Black
Senior Member
The daytime population of that part of Manhattan probably reached upwards of 2 million people. Toronto's population, the entire city, is 2.5 million. Amazing density!
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
I could imagine Toronto having a similar density. South of Eglinton really has potential to be a huge downtown strip like Manhattan, and you could also get a big urbanized strip along the western lakeshore all the way from the Don to the end of Humber Bay. The city might have to work towards it, but it'd be nice to bridge Y-E, Yonge and St. Clair, and B-Y with higher density neighbourhoods. Maybe not right down along Yonge, but in the area
Before we get Manhattan densities we need Manhattan's subway network: about 8 more lines.
steveve
Senior Member
Manhattan is a crazy city. it has the largest subway line in the world (it makes toronto's look like a joke). 
Internets
New Member
Fuck... I live in Jersey
I think he should overlay the New York subway map with Toronto's
I think he should overlay the New York subway map with Toronto's
MileHigh
Active Member
^^^
great idea about the subway maps... I need a good laugh.
I'm really surprised about the geographical differences... walking from west 14th to the east side always seemed long, but this overlay makes it look shorter.
great idea about the subway maps... I need a good laugh.
I'm really surprised about the geographical differences... walking from west 14th to the east side always seemed long, but this overlay makes it look shorter.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Manhattan would basically stretch all the way from the lake to Hwy 7, though. Certainly serendipitous in terms of subway expansion...
Central Park would eat up everything between Eglinton, Yonge, York Mills, and Mount Pleasant. If we took just the land between Bathurst and Bayview, from the Lake up to Finch, we'd pretty much be just like Manhattan...but without 3/4 of all the stuff.
It'd be an interesting series...overlays of big cities and big subway networks on top of Toronto. Hong Kong, London, Houston...lots of interesting comparisons are possible.
Central Park would eat up everything between Eglinton, Yonge, York Mills, and Mount Pleasant. If we took just the land between Bathurst and Bayview, from the Lake up to Finch, we'd pretty much be just like Manhattan...but without 3/4 of all the stuff.
It'd be an interesting series...overlays of big cities and big subway networks on top of Toronto. Hong Kong, London, Houston...lots of interesting comparisons are possible.
Translude15
Frank the Tank
Los Angeles should be done as well. That way people would stop griping about Toronto's "urban sprawl".
Calrissian
Active Member
More like Steeles... which the new YUS extension will go past... so.. considering it would span from VCC to Union to Finch.. its of Big City calibre... unfortunately, aside from the BD line, that's about all we got.
Chuck
Senior Member
Previous comments have not successfully captured the true magnitude of New York.
In terms of subways, imagine 5 subway tunnels containing 4 tracks each, all running within 500m of Yonge on either side. These subway tunnels would eventually branch off into 17 unique lines farther out in the suburbs. Commuter rail would include two hubs each larger than Union Station, and all trackage would run underneath perhaps a vastly more developed University rather than in a dedicated rail corridor. For roads, there would be about 12 one way avenues each 4-7 lanes wide running parallel between Bathurst and Jarvis.
Previous comments about density are way underestimated as well. A density similar to St. Jamestown, though with smaller but more compact buildings, would exist all the way from the lakeshore to about Steeles, between Bathurst and Mt. Pleasant, save a narrow sliver for Central Park. There would be two CBDs each many multiples larger than our own, with one centred on Front and the second between St. Clair and Eglinton. The remainder of Toronto proper is similar in area to the other 4 boroughs. Most of that land would carry an average density greater than the old City of Toronto, though an area corresponding to perhaps Scarborough (representing Staten Island) would be quite suburban in nature. The City of Toronto would include over 400 subway stations in its borders.
When all is said and done, about 8 million people would live in the area currently housing 2.5 million. The rest of the developed GTA would double or triple in size, and house another 12 million people.
In terms of subways, imagine 5 subway tunnels containing 4 tracks each, all running within 500m of Yonge on either side. These subway tunnels would eventually branch off into 17 unique lines farther out in the suburbs. Commuter rail would include two hubs each larger than Union Station, and all trackage would run underneath perhaps a vastly more developed University rather than in a dedicated rail corridor. For roads, there would be about 12 one way avenues each 4-7 lanes wide running parallel between Bathurst and Jarvis.
Previous comments about density are way underestimated as well. A density similar to St. Jamestown, though with smaller but more compact buildings, would exist all the way from the lakeshore to about Steeles, between Bathurst and Mt. Pleasant, save a narrow sliver for Central Park. There would be two CBDs each many multiples larger than our own, with one centred on Front and the second between St. Clair and Eglinton. The remainder of Toronto proper is similar in area to the other 4 boroughs. Most of that land would carry an average density greater than the old City of Toronto, though an area corresponding to perhaps Scarborough (representing Staten Island) would be quite suburban in nature. The City of Toronto would include over 400 subway stations in its borders.
When all is said and done, about 8 million people would live in the area currently housing 2.5 million. The rest of the developed GTA would double or triple in size, and house another 12 million people.
Last edited:
PUTOTO
Active Member
You should try to overlay Manhattan on top of Toronto from west to east.
Put Central Park on top of High Park, and Lower Manhattan near the portland.
Put Central Park on top of High Park, and Lower Manhattan near the portland.
Last edited:
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
No, it's Hwy 7. Why bother trying to correct something that isn't wrong? Manhattan is over 21km long, but Steeles is less than 18km from the Lake, which you didn't know until now. 'Steeles' in New York would leave you dozens of blocks and the Harlem River short of the subway terminus...an almost Hillcrest Mall-type trek.
Not mine...I said take the Yonge and Bathurst corridors, including all of downtown and a good chunk of our suburban density, and quadruple the stuff. Considering small buildings would need to be razed to make way for larger buildings, neighbourhoods like Yonge & Eglinton and North York Centre would need to have like 8 times as much stuff.