[Ladies Mile]

The TSB was built by a Toronto firm, Chapman and Oxley who built many other beloved Toronto buildings/structures including the Toronto Harbour Commission, The Sunnyside Bathing Pavilion, the Palais Royale and the Princess Gate among others. To deny that these buildings make the city better for them is ludicrous, whether you loathe this sort of architectural pastiche or not. I'm not suggesting the TSB is or isn't more important than FCP, only that you should not discount it quite as dismissively as you do.





The facade was a failure and has been replaced, and as to it being an 'excellent' neighbour to the TDC or contributing well at street-level at Bay and King one could argue that the attributes of the TSB may have performed better in both accounts in offering a sharp aesthetic contrast to the TD Centre and in offering a more human scaled mixed-use scheme at street level.

I don't deny it was a fine building, but it was hardly innovative. The contrast you speak of is rather admirably provided by the original portion of Scotia Plaza and, even more so, the truly magnificent commerce Court Building.

To me the cool white of the hovering plane of FCP in contrast with the crisp silver of Pei's building and the warm black of Mies's masterpiece is one of the great unapologetic moments of the International School.

 

[Urban Shocker]

And there are similarities. The Great Lakes build/architecture, the lakes themselves, the historic second *cityness* etc.

But they feel very different, notwithstanding they have very different population make-ups. Chicago is a very attractive city, Toronto is attractive in areas -overall though I prefer the *feel* of Toronto. Chicago actually feels like the New York of the Midwest. Toronto, despite all efforts to pigeonhole it and give it a comparative description actually just feels like Toronto. It's way more unique in the Americas than it gets credit for.

When I visited Chicago a quarter of a century ago what surprised me most of all was that, for a "Second City" in a country with a population ten times that of Canada, the place was pretty dull compared to Toronto. Full of lovely early skyscrapers but lacking in the sort of street culture one would expect. I think our trajectory since then has been much more impressively upwards.

 

[Ladies Mile]

When I visited Chicago a quarter of a century ago what surprised me most of all was that, for a "Second City" in a country with a population ten times that of Canada, the place was pretty dull compared to Toronto. Full of lovely early skyscrapers but lacking in the sort of street culture one would expect. I think our trajectory since then has been much more impressively upwards.

When I visited the Word Trade Center 25 years ago, it consisted of two buildings designed by Yamasaki.

Things change.

 

[Tewder]

I don't deny it was a fine building, but it was hardly innovative. The contrast you speak of is rather admirably provided by the original portion of Scotia Plaza and, even more so, the truly magnificent commerce Court Building.

To me the cool white of the hovering plane of FCP in contrast with the crisp silver of Pei's building and the warm black of Mies's masterpiece is one of the great unapologetic moments of the International School.

I don't disagree... but my points still stand. It's all pretty subjective really. Besides, FCP might have replaced something else less 'saveable' than the TSB and still have achieved its powerful statement on the skyline, no? The TSB was only 20-odd floors and its detraction from the interaction of the TDC and FCP would have been minimal... gosh, it'd be interesting to fantasize where the FCP building might have gone instead and render it in with the old TSB still in place!

 

[freshcutgrass]

I have been learning over the past few years why our American cousins find Torontonians insufferably smug.

I doubt many Americans have any perception of what Torontonians are or aren't to decipher that. My experience has taught me that Americans would rather write anything off as "smug", than deal with the fact that they might be right. And yes, I know being smug has nothing to do with being right or wrong....but I'm not being smug about anything, but any negative attitude about America would be more accurately described as contempt...not smugness.

If Chicago has been in decline for the past 50 years, please tell me where all those amazing mid-century through contemporary buildings, parks and art works have been coming from. Maybe this is some sort of Beezarro-world decay where things improve as they get worse?

The post-war big corporate Chicago continued to build impressive projects during this period (Chicago has never been shy when it comes to big buildings), but I certainly don't think this changes the fact of the decline.

Chicago's population loss during this period is 1 million, while Toronto has gained 1.5 million. Chicago, like all American cities experienced serious urban decay, while Toronto saw huge growth. The tremendous crime, ghettos and racial problems of Chicago cannot be swept away because John Hancock and Sears towers were built.

During this period, Toronto went from being probably the least cosmopolitan/multicultural city on the planet...to probably the most cosmopolitan/multicultural city on the planet, while seemingly avoiding any of the crime/racial problems associated with such huge growth.

And like most big American cities, the 1990's, Chicago saw a bit of a comeback to their downtown, and seemed to have acquired a large amount of Mexican immigrants. But that blip appears to be over. Meanwhile, Toronto continues on its continuous upward trajectory. Chicago is still a big, alpha city, but it has been losing its standing both within the USA, as well as globally. Toronto may still not be ranked as high as Chicago in some things, but it has been, and continues to improve its position, both domestically and globally.

writing off the Midwest as a hicksville when it is arguably the most creative place in the US is exactly the sort of thing a hick would do.

You wrongly assume that I associate the Midwest with "hicks". At worst I would say they are more "blue collar" on average than Toronto. You'd have to explain why you consider it the most creative place in the USA.

Toronto is a film town...a literary town...a theatre town...a publishing town...a media town...an advertising town. Chicago isn't. Of course it has those things, as any huge metropolis would. But there's a difference. That's why just looking at raw data doesn't tell the whole story.

 

[adma]

I appreciate the sarcasm. However, as I mentioned several times, old doesn't mean "character", "history" etc. Paris is full of old buildings and few highrises in the core but the city is gorgeous. I would prefer a Paris-like Toronto where walking downtown is like wandering in history. But Toronto will never stand a chance of being anything close to that, will it?

Anyone can see the old Toronto star building looks like crap now (but nothing to do with the word "historic" whatsoever). It needs a lot of work on it. If decide between the current building and another FCP, yes, I definitely prefer a FCP since it is such a big eyesore right now and FCP is at least not that ugly. Pretending it holds any historic value or charm is pure fantasy. Remember, no matter how many old buildings we try to keep, few of which are worth keeping, Toronto will never be anything close to a Paris or Rome. It has no history, no real distinctive culture (not the cliche "diversity" thing). You on the other hand, seems to be in the illusion that if we maintain all those hideous 100 year old buildings, Toronto will look classy and "historic". I have been to many real historic cities (Beijing, Edinburgh, Rome etc), where a 400 year old building is not considered as "old" so Toronto will never stand a chance. It sounds funny to me when people mention something built in 1890 solemnly as if it is a big deal.

And you think the historic/heritage/preservation realm in Chicago would share your sentiment? Au contraire: they'd regard you as being as amateurishly ignorant and obtuse as their counterparts in Toronto or most anyplace else in the free world would.

To express that kind of "heritage sentiment" in 2011 is like expressing "a woman's place is in the home" sentiment in 2011.

Into the corner you go.

(Although btw/kkgg7 and Ladies Mile, in their distinct ways, we have a reminder of how these here interweb message boards can become the realm of hostile ignoramuses, quacks, and Log Cabin Republicans who'd otherwise be massacred for their views)

 

[adma]

Oh and regarding this

It sounds funny to me when people mention something built in 1890 solemnly as if it is a big deal.

Curiously enough, in Chicago,

this building from 1976(!!) made it to the National Trust for Historic Preservation's 11 Most Endangered list this year.

Of course, I don't expect kkgg7 to know, or care.

 

[freshcutgrass]

You on the other hand, seems to be in the illusion that if we maintain all those hideous 100 year old buildings, Toronto will look classy and "historic". I have been to many real historic cities (Beijing, Edinburgh, Rome etc), where a 400 year old building is not considered as "old" so Toronto will never stand a chance.

I have no clue what this means....if it's not ancient Rome, it isn't considered "historic"?

I guess London and Paris are in the same boat as Toronto then....the majority of the "historic" built form in those cities are from the same era as Toronto...the 19th century.

 

[Torontovibe]

Those guys are from here. Most of that list is true. In no way is Toronto better at anything than New York City.


When I go to station, I am paying fare waiting for the next train. Not running an HGTV special.

i have to disagree. Toronto is less segregated than New York. (and of course, Chicago too) We have the best ethnically and possibly, socially, mixed city in North America and maybe the world. I'n my world travels, I've never seen any city with as fine a mix, as Toronto. Give Toronto some credit, when it's due.

http://clutchmagonline.com/2011/04/ten-most-segregated-cities-in-america-is-your-city-on-the-list/

Ten Most Segregated Cities In America: Is Your City On The List?

THURSDAY APR 7, 2011 – BY LESLIE PITTERSON

Separate but equal?

Well, more than fifty years since Brown v. Board, it seems America’s cities are still stuck on the “separate” part of the phrase.

As the results of the Census continue to roll out, the picture of the make up of America’s cities is being evaluated and as the numbers show, progress is slow and hard earned.

In their new report, “The Persistence of Segregation in the Metropolis,” Brown University professor John Logan and Florida State University professor Brian Stults looked at the trend in housing across the U.S. Using the 2010 Census, the pair found that despite increased racial and ethnic diversity, efforts to integrate American cities has slowed and in some places come to a dead halt.

The Most Segregated Cities in America

Detroit, Michigan
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
New York, New York
Newark, New Jersey
Chicago, Illinois
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Miami, Florida
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Missouri
Nassau-Suffolk, New York
Logan expressed his disappointment with the results telling USA Today:

 

[adma]

I have no clue what this means....if it's not ancient Rome, it isn't considered "historic"?

I guess London and Paris are in the same boat as Toronto then....the majority of the "historic" built form in those cities are from the same era as Toronto...the 19th century.

And I suppose this--which would have turned 100 last year--was worth sacrificing. And presumably, Asian boomburgs wouldn't (at least in kkgg7's estimation) give in to the sentimentality on behalf of such old, obsolete, impediment-to-progress crocks...

 

[ladyscraper]

They found that NYC is more segregated than Chicago? Having been to both places and practically living in NYC for a while, I find that very hard to believe.
Maybe in NYC, people live segregated but do things together? I don't know how else to explain that result since it contradicts what I saw.

 

[kkgg7]

Cities don't have to be in a specific way to be great. For example, diversity is something some cities have and some don't, yet it doesn't mean homogeneous cities are not good. For example, Tokyo and Seoul are both world class cities but both are extremely homogenous.

The same goes for "segregation". Why most seem to be convinced that be segregated is simply a bad thing? the Whites, blacks and Asian have different cultures and traditions. It is very natural they don't mingle that much. There is nothing wrong with that. For example, someone from Asia may have few or no white or black friends, not because he hates the whites and blacks, but simply because they don't have much in common and there is little to talk about. Chicago is racially segregated, so the whites and the blacks don't go to the same parties, big deal. They have their own life and choose the lifestyle they are most comfortable with and avoid being associated with people they don't feel comfortable with, so what? It may work better for them than being integrated. Honestly, let me ask the Caucasians here, while seemingly embrace diversity, what percentages of your close friends are non-whites?

Is Toronto that racially integrated? I don't thinks so. Walk around UofT campus for example, you will see most Asian students hang out with mostly Asians and white boys mostly have their white clubs. Not so much integration at all. If you walk in Rosedale, or Lawrence Park, how many black folks do you see? Let's not kid ourselves.

 

[Torontovibe]

They found that NYC is more segregated than Chicago? Having been to both places and practically living in NYC for a while, I find that very hard to believe.
Maybe in NYC, people live segregated but do things together? I don't know how else to explain that result since it contradicts what I saw.

Have you been to Brooklyn & The Bronx? You can walk for miles and only see one race. Of course, Manhattan is a different story.

 

[ladyscraper]

Have you been to Brooklyn & The Bronx? You can walk for miles and only see one race. Of course, Manhattan is a different story.

Yes, I lived in Brooklyn with my wife. Now that I think about it, we were the only white people there. I guess I just didn't notice it that much at the time.

 

[edwara18]

I just wanted to put in my two cents quickly. After reading the 'Toronto/ Chicago Comparison' as well as the 'Toronto/ Boston Comparisons' threads I have realized that the people of Toronto, or rather the Torontonians on this thread are a very insecure group of people. While I feel that it is important to look to other cities and examine what it is that they do well in comparison to us, I feel that many on here are simply unable to give Toronto any king of credit at all. This goes beyond being a humble Canadian, this has now become us being self-deprecating Canadians.
I have recently graduated from University and what I have noticed from my generation is something that everyone here should aspire to. The young 20-somethings are so proud of this city it's unreal. The love they have for this place is inspiring. It's an almost blind sort of love, wherein Toronto can do nothing wrong.
Toronto might not be as big as NYC or as architecturally 'beautiful' as Chicago, but I think we all need to recognize how great this city and how far it has come. We all live here for a reason. Toronto is a great city. At 22 I know this, and I don't need the world to validate what I have already known for a long time. I feel that many of you wait for Americans and other nationalities to praise the city. Who cares?! Some will love it, some will hate it. At the end of the day, you live here, and that tells me that you love this city. Isn't that enough?