Northern Light
Superstar
To whom would you be addressing that comment?
|
|
|
- Thread starter CITY_LOVER
- Start date
To whom would you be addressing that comment?
Filip
Senior Member
Anyone who seems deluded into thinking Toronto somehow 'trumps' Chicago.
Toronto does better than Chicago on quite a few metrics - but aesthetics, culture, grandeur and architecture we are nowhere close. Nowhere even vaguely close.
Toronto does better than Chicago on quite a few metrics - but aesthetics, culture, grandeur and architecture we are nowhere close. Nowhere even vaguely close.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
And that's where I was coming from. I don't know how anyone could disagree.
old boy
Senior Member
I guess it's just the constant comparing that gets tiring . Toronto is it's own beast, for better and worse. But, quantify and qualify if you must.
jje1000
Senior Member
It is an aesthetic dump in the best and worst sort of way- kind of a second city in the Dominion that was never large enough to accumulate enough grand buildings, a proper city plan, and societal elements (museums, operas, traditions, etc) needed to make it feel significant (the Anglos in Montreal hoarded those for their city until they were kicked out).
At the same time, Toronto also possesses a 'frontier-eque' sort of feeling of a large modern city growing over a city planned at probably a quarter of the size (and not really planned to begin with). As a result, you get skyscrapers rubbing elbows with old bay-and-gables, utility poles that seemingly outlast the buildings they were built for, the worst street grid of any Great Lakes city, and even streetcars (where other cities got rid of them when it was fashionable to do so).
It's definitely has this air that makes it unique in very subtle ways.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Work that is always in progress feel.
AoD
AoD
jje1000
Senior Member
It means that there's always something to improve.
Chicago has an air of prosperity masking serious issues brought around by 50 years of corporatist-democrat rule. Rahm is no exception to that, in my opinion.
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
People go on about the whole waterfront campus concept but I soured on it the last time I was in Chicago in 2017. The integration of the central waterfront features with the City is I feel not particularly good and in parts actually as bad or worse than in Toronto. Say I'm nuts but walk from Michigan Avenue to the Navy Pier. Walk from the Field's Museum to Millennium park by the water. Walk down State Street south to the Museum Campus from the Loop. While there are exceptional elements in there from the wall of deco era buildings fronting the South West section of the Park campus, showy but excellent examples of programming like "the bean" to a simple plaza of American Sycamores well executed. I'm not sold on the vision and don't find it superior city building at all with the exception of specific elements. There are also frustrating grade changes and points where pedestrian access is cut off. We were constantly finding ourselves unable to get from point A to point B by foot facing the prospects of doubling back or a wide detour.
One shout out that we loved was the Daley? Children's playground park West of Millennium Park. I was actually more impressed with this than Millennium park itself. It however in a way may be symbolic of the pride and shame of Chicago in my opinion, as children were bused there to play from other areas of the City who were basically as much tourists in their own city as we were. Basically a beautifully programmed space that we could only dream of here in Toronto funded by monies we can't come up with, plunked in the middle-of-no-where where probably no children live, where children come to play because there own neighbourhoods are forgotten.
One shout out that we loved was the Daley? Children's playground park West of Millennium Park. I was actually more impressed with this than Millennium park itself. It however in a way may be symbolic of the pride and shame of Chicago in my opinion, as children were bused there to play from other areas of the City who were basically as much tourists in their own city as we were. Basically a beautifully programmed space that we could only dream of here in Toronto funded by monies we can't come up with, plunked in the middle-of-no-where where probably no children live, where children come to play because there own neighbourhoods are forgotten.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
The Maggie Daley Park playscape? We’re in luck - the firm behind that - MVVA - is handling the upcoming Promenade Park design as part of their Don Mouth master plan.
AoD
Last edited:
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Chicago: better tourist city
Toronto: better resident city
Chicago's Chinatown at Cermak and Wentworth has an impressive gate, but during the night, it becomes practically a ghost town.
Toronto's Chinatown at Spadina and Dundas doesn't have a gate, but it's much livelier (to be fair, Toronto's East Chinatown has a gate, but it leads to a parking lot).
Toronto: better resident city
Chicago's Chinatown at Cermak and Wentworth has an impressive gate, but during the night, it becomes practically a ghost town.
Toronto's Chinatown at Spadina and Dundas doesn't have a gate, but it's much livelier (to be fair, Toronto's East Chinatown has a gate, but it leads to a parking lot).
Northern Light
Superstar
This is from 2016, its a Chicago Tribune piece that compares transit in both cities.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-toronto-transit-getting-around-20160619-column.html
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-toronto-transit-getting-around-20160619-column.html
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
This place is the world's biggest airport terminal.
It's a mass of new-come piled onto old-build.
The aesthetic is an obvious joke. (I hope it is, else...fuuuuuuu)
Dude, we just rebuilt the main train station and we kept the piece of shit train shed! Pardon me, but that speaks as so: "Fuck it".
It's stuck with it's old provincial town feel. That's kinda what I love about the place where I grew up.
Bun Chicago.
Last edited:
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Anyone mind posting a map of Chicago’s train system and coverage vs Toronto’s?
rbt
Senior Member
Those types of maps need some modifier to show actual usefulness (service frequencies or seats per hour at various times of day). Metro running trains evening trains every 20 minutes (pink line) and every 5 minutes (Red Line) are very different experiences for the rider despite being presented the same on most maps. We find the same with commuter service where peak-only lines like Milton often have the same presentation as UPX with all-day 15 minute frequencies.
Anyone making such maps can find the shape files for North America here (see "Download Data" link) https://www.thetransportpolitic.com/transitexplorer/#11/43.6251/-79.4239
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
As far as Chicago comparisons, the central Metra electric station rebuilt as part of Millennium park and their Union Station (Amtrak portion) are both rather unpleasant experiences at track level. I think Penn Station with super-low ceilings, over crowding, and minimal light beats them both.
GO transit can do a lot better but it's not going to learn much looking at Chicago commuter rail despite Chicago's remarkably high corridor coverage. GO is far better off looking outside North America for railway inspiration; even Grand Central is a pretty terrible track-level experience.
That said, the South Shore lines integration with the South Bend airport has always interested me. South Bend airport has roughly the same number of commercial flights as Hamilton airport (both less than 20 departures).
Last edited: