[lordmandeep]

True, but I have been to many cities with nice streets capes but you hardly see a soul walking around...

 

[junctionist]

One of Toronto's many strengths is its sheer variety of festivals. The major ones stir international interest like TIFF or Caribana, while others draw hundreds of thousands of locals like Doors Open or Nuit Blanche. And it seems that every neighbourhood in the old city has its own festival. It's easy to forget about these wonderful elements of life here because for the most part they're not permanent institutions.

The issue with the city is just how young it is. Other cities around the world which we frequently compare the city to have had many huge booms centuries before Toronto and today look quite sophisticated because of the sheer amount of time they've had to perfect their streetscapes, cultural institutions and collection of architecture.

 

[Northern Light]

Replies

Pie: On the subject of population. The City of Chicago (proper) is 2.8 M people, Toronto is 2.6M.

Chicago's growth rate in the City proper is negligible, Toronto is growing at 40,000-60,000 per year.

There is no challenge in this this comparison, unless of course, things really change, which does (but hopefully wont') happen just yet.

On Metropolitan Area:

You get into differences in how areas are calculated......

If Toronto uses Chicago's area in sq km......we would include Niagara to Peterborough to Barrie.


As it stands, Chicago is around 9.7M by metropolitan area while Toronto is around 6.7M

But if you you use the same sq. Km maximize for population, Toronto rises to 7.3M

Given current growth rates, and trends (which admittedly may change)....Toronto will rise to just over 9.8M in 20 years....)

But Chicago is barely growing.....

Using Stats Can's currents measures.....this would be more like 8M

**********

Now...

Golodhendil......

I would agree with you completely...based on 2008 aggregate statistics, however.....a 2009 review......may show something more like what I am suggesting....

As best I can figure 3 of Canada's Big 5 are now in the worlds' biggest 15 banks

All 5 are in the top 25

That makes for one hell of a share of Financial services.

Now...this wasn't true in early 2008.

But you must account for bankruptcy's and major contractions and asset depletion.

****

On parks....

Some of the examples you use are somewhat deceptive......I am sure unintentionally.

HK and Singapore are both in line with this....they are essentially big cities with very little parkland....then a large park occupying the remainder or the vast majority of what is left of their islands.

Using this method of calculation....why not just merge Ontario and Toronto....and then say Toronto's Greenspace is 86%.....

That of course would be misleading.....as the way i which the space is allocated.....is not useful to the majority of residents....

And NY, excluding Central Park is not remotely green, I have been there in person......

There are Cities that may rival us, in this respect, but these are not among them.

Which is not to knock HK, Singapore, or NY...which all have great attributes....but I think in this regard (parkspace) the stats are quite misleading...

 

[Mystic Point]

What makes Toronto Toronto? Ugly, shabby, degraded, and neglected public realms and streetscapes. Nobody does it better (or worse, depending on your outlook on these things). Lack of pride is our MO, period. I can go into voluminous detail, but all one need do is walk down most Toronto streets to get the point.

I'm with your Fiendish! Nobody does it better. Maybe suburban Romania.

 

[syn]

But sometimes I think that the way the region's going, it's going to turn into a Canadian Detroit, or is just going to be left behind.

It's hard to take the question seriously with comparisons like that. If Toronto is turning into a Canadian Detroit, I have no idea what the the other major cities in the country will turn into.

I agree Toronto isn't as bold as it used to be (or should be) with a lot of ideas. I think the main difference between Toronto and the cities listed is funding. Government support in those cities is far greater than it is here...hence the abbreviated subway system and half-done public spaces.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ I have edited the original question to censor out the terrible D-word. I don't get what the anger is. Toronto obviously isn't going to turn into Detroit, but I'm using Detroit as an example of a city that has currently turned out to be rather bad.

Also, I believe I said something along the lines of "once in a while I get a thought that Toronto could turn into a Canadian Detroit."
There's so many partial agreements there that by taking a two second look at that, one could conclude "Once every month or two, they have a little voice in the back of their head that says 'Toronto is going down in flames! Abandon ship!' Which is quickly squashed by common sense, but leaves them wondering what the future of the city really is"

Just to clarify

 

[golodhendil]

**********

Now...

Golodhendil......

I would agree with you completely...based on 2008 aggregate statistics, however.....a 2009 review......may show something more like what I am suggesting....

As best I can figure 3 of Canada's Big 5 are now in the worlds' biggest 15 banks

All 5 are in the top 25

That makes for one hell of a share of Financial services.

Now...this wasn't true in early 2008.

But you must account for bankruptcy's and major contractions and asset depletion.

****

The 03/09 GFCI already took into account the brunt of the financial crisis in late 2008 - hence the significant drop in ranking for places like Tokyo and Sydney. But other than the obvious fact that London and NY are still the two hubs, none of the major Swiss banks went under, and while HK and Singapore's economies were affected they were relatively unscathed compared to the West, so the top 6 positions are already stable and accounted for. The past half a year has not seen significant worsening of conditions in these places, so it's doubtful that Toronto would have any chance of climbing to the top 5, even if we do surpass cities like Boston and Frankfurt. The 09/09 GFCI should be coming out in a couple of weeks, so we will see who's right.

On parks....

Some of the examples you use are somewhat deceptive......I am sure unintentionally.

HK and Singapore are both in line with this....they are essentially big cities with very little parkland....then a large park occupying the remainder or the vast majority of what is left of their islands.

Using this method of calculation....why not just merge Ontario and Toronto....and then say Toronto's Greenspace is 86%.....

That of course would be misleading.....as the way i which the space is allocated.....is not useful to the majority of residents....

And NY, excluding Central Park is not remotely green, I have been there in person......

There are Cities that may rival us, in this respect, but these are not among them.

Which is not to knock HK, Singapore, or NY...which all have great attributes....but I think in this regard (parkspace) the stats are quite misleading...

Why exclude Central Park from NY's count? It's smack in the centre of the urban area, served by multiple subway lines and bus routes, and well used. In that case why don't we exclude High Park, the Islands and Don Valley from Toronto's count?

And no, the stats for HK and Singapore are not misleading. To count Ontario with Toronto, we would have to at least count the entire Guangdong province with HK, and the Malay Peninsula (and perhaps part of the Archipelago) with Singapore. These are not urban bubbles surrounded by a single large park, they are cities with extremely strict land use restrictions that limit urban development to the core and clusters of "new towns" in the countryside with clearly demarcated boundaries. To take HK as an example, there are strings of new towns connected by highways and railways to the urban core (all of which, btw, have significant urban parks in the middle of the town/city areas); but closely juxtaposed to these urban areas are already readily accessible parklands and subtropical forests crisscrossed by paved and well-lit trails (some of the most well-used trails and densely-forested parks around Victoria Peak are literally minutes away from one of the world's densest and largest financial centres). The majority of the countryside is divided into country parks that have ample facilities (picnic/bbq areas, campsites) and over 300 km of hiking trails that make these parks every bit as accessible, and probably more well used, than Toronto's ravines and parks. Packed beaches, wetlands of global importance, marine parks and reserves that even harbour coral reefs (popular for snorkelling and scuba-diving), geological formations of international significance - all within no more than a 10-min train ride, a ferry ride or a half-an-hour bus/car trip from the urban area. And all of these in an area no larger than the inner GTA (T, Ma, V, RH, Mi, B) - that's why I would agree with adding these areas to Toronto's count, but what we gain would mostly be fields and farms that are of even less use to the general population.

HK and S'pore have a lot of things that are worse than Toronto (political system, diversity/tolerance, education), but parks and open spaces are not one of them.

 

[timeo]

For me, the strength of the city is that it acts as a neutral medium within which I can arrange my life as I wish with the least interference. Repeated on a larger scale, the Toronto ethos is one that allows people to opt into whatever they want to opt into - rather than one which imposes some sort of ghastly "melting pot" sameness on them.

Nailed it. I've been living abroad for the past while, and whenever I think about Toronto and why I like it even though there's lots to dislike, it usually comes down to this. It's a perfect place to be whoever you want to be, and to do whatever you want to do. There's generally not too much social pressure to conform, people are polite and respect your privacy, there's always a variety of options to choose from, and it's generally possible to act however you want to. It's not a sexy response, but I don't think there are that many places or cities that can replicate this to such a great extent. The fact that Toronto hasn't had a very illustrious or heavy-bearing history (like in NYC or London) only adds to the feeling of owning this city. It's pretty liberating when you think about it.

 

[golodhendil]

With regards to the OP's question - I do not really have an answer, because this is the same question I have been grappling with since I went abroad from Toronto, which ironically is also when I started paying much more attention to Toronto's development as a city and gained somewhat of an renewed sense of being a Torontonian.

I agree with most everyone here that diversity is certainly a mark of Toronto - but can diversity really be the "identity" of a city? More importantly, diversity is not necessarily something that will stay exclusive. There's no question that European cities are predominantly "white" and Asian cities are predominantly, well, "Asian", and American cities are still largely plagued by segregation to some extent. However, increasing diversity is a hallmark of any global city. NY's diversity in many ways rivals Toronto's and its segregational barriers are slowly coming part. Diversity in cities like London and Singapore are still lower than Toronto's, but is on the rise. Other cities, like Boston, have a level of diversity that is hidden from censuses - a significant population of foreign-born, ethnically diverse population of students, scholars and workers who are not "resident" in the city but nonetheless contribute to the demographic fabric of their respective cities. Then there are also places like HK which, despite being largely monoethnic, are able to "replicate" the global diversity to a certain extent through exploring their culture, food etc. Toronto might well remain the "most" diverse city for a while, but what's next?

In terms of other things: Toronto is an increasingly important financial centre, but still some way from being among the most important; Toronto has a thriving art and culture scene, but will it ever be at par with NY, LA and London (in terms of international importance), or with HK and Tokyo in terms of regional significance? Toronto is a growing research, tech and biomed hub, but it still pales significantly in comparison with the likes of Boston and SF. So Toronto is good at many things but best in none - perhaps such is Toronto's identity, something for everyone? Perhaps Toronto is "young" (but not really that much younger than many American, and certainly many Asian cities) and still needs time to realize all these potentials?

 

[greenleaf]

Toronto: Everything is above average, but nothing is necessarily fantastic.

-----

I think Toronto's time has yet to come. It's still growing and getting its identity sorted out. Good things come to those who wait.

 

[Mystic Point]

It's hard to take the question seriously with comparisons like that. If Toronto is turning into a Canadian Detroit, I have no idea what the the other major cities in the country will turn into.

I agree Toronto isn't as bold as it used to be (or should be) with a lot of ideas. I think the main difference between Toronto and the cities listed is funding. Government support in those cities is far greater than it is here...hence the abbreviated subway system and half-done public spaces.

When you live in Toronto, why would you care about the fate of other " major " cities in Canada? It's not like they care about us. If shabby old run down apathetic dysfunctional Toronto was blown off the face of the map, I imagine the Canadians would stand up and cheer.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Nailed it. I've been living abroad for the past while, and whenever I think about Toronto and why I like it even though there's lots to dislike, it usually comes down to this. It's a perfect place to be whoever you want to be, and to do whatever you want to do. There's generally not too much social pressure to conform, people are polite and respect your privacy, there's always a variety of options to choose from, and it's generally possible to act however you want to. It's not a sexy response, but I don't think there are that many places or cities that can replicate this to such a great extent. The fact that Toronto hasn't had a very illustrious or heavy-bearing history (like in NYC or London) only adds to the feeling of owning this city. It's pretty liberating when you think about it.

Indeed. And - with the exception of a few marquee foreign starchitects who touch down here briefly between flights to tell us ( Alsop is particularly fond of doing this ... ) that things are soooo much better in our dull little burg since they started building here - our better local designers understand this; they've kept the faith with a practical Modernist mode of building that perfectly represents those same values.

 

[bleeepbluuup]

Nailed it. I've been living abroad for the past while, and whenever I think about Toronto and why I like it even though there's lots to dislike, it usually comes down to this. It's a perfect place to be whoever you want to be, and to do whatever you want to do. There's generally not too much social pressure to conform, people are polite and respect your privacy, there's always a variety of options to choose from, and it's generally possible to act however you want to. It's not a sexy response, but I don't think there are that many places or cities that can replicate this to such a great extent. The fact that Toronto hasn't had a very illustrious or heavy-bearing history (like in NYC or London) only adds to the feeling of owning this city. It's pretty liberating when you think about it.

Yes. Live and let live. Here, you can't really spot someone on the street and mark them as an outsider. Chances are, that person HAS recently come from somewhere else, but it doesn't really matter to anyone.

 

[Mystic Point]

Yes. Live and let live. Here, you can't really spot someone on the street and mark them as an outsider. Chances are, that person HAS recently come from somewhere else, but it doesn't really matter to anyone.

You can usually spot an outsider by their shoes and hairstyles. Outsiders often wear fanny packs and wear cell phones on their belts. And they're always looking up at the buildings.

I can't believe you can't tell the difference between a townie and an outsider.

 

[salvius]

Why exclude Central Park from NY's count? It's smack in the centre of the urban area, served by multiple subway lines and bus routes, and well used. In that case why don't we exclude High Park, the Islands and Don Valley from Toronto's count?

I must say I also don't find New York green in the slightest. A trip to a park that is more than just a cobblestone square surrounded by a few trees -- or alternatively, that is more than just a path with some fenced off grass -- generally requires quite a walk.

That's the problem -- yes, it has Prospect Park, Central Park, Bronx Park, Jamaica Bay, etc. (all large tracts of land) but it does not do medium-sized and small urban parks nearly as well. I consider it one of the more glaring flaws of the city, in fact.