"Urban" vs. "suburban"

[Eug]

I consider Leaside and The Beach etc. as urban, at least by Toronto standards. In fact, I don't think we really start to get more (at the risk in incurring the wrath of the grammarians) semi-suburban until we hit Etobicoke or Scarborough, or get much further north of Eglinton.

To put it another way, even though I lived downtown (near Front Street), I sometimes would shop near Yonge and Lawrence several times a month. In fact, during the summer I would not infrequently bike there. Yonge and Lawrence really isn't that far (9 km) from Yonge and Front on a bicycle, and perceptually it's even closer in a car, esp. for a region as large as the GTA. It's also quite convenient by subway.

As for Yonge and Eligible, to me it represents an integral portion of the "core" of Toronto in 2010. Maybe it wasn't in 1980, but the 80s are thankfully long gone.

 

[King of Kensington]

Here's another way of looking at the GTA (scroll down for an interesting map):

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=171211

 

[King of Kensington]

I created this thread, and I think the title is deceptive. It's obviously a matter of degree.

Of all Old City of Toronto neighborhoods, Lawrence Park feels the most suburban to me. And Toronto Life agrees! I guess that settles it

http://www.torontolife.com/guide/real-estate/central/lawrence-park-south/

 

[Eug]

Here's another way of looking at the GTA (scroll down for an interesting map):

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=171211

I'll steal his bandwidth:

Very astute observation. Yes, that does seem appropriate to me, more or less. Most of the areas I consider relatively "urban" for Toronto were built up before the 50s, with some of a neighbourhoods that I'm starting to think feel a bit more semi-surburban were built up to about the 50s-ish, a sort of transition period. Current residential neighbourhoods further from the core and mostly built up later than that feel suburban to me.

P.S. Most of the areas encircled in dark red are within 30 minutes of Union Station. In fact, when I decided to move out of downtown, my search area included many areas all over the city within that dark red line, and included no areas outside it.

You'll note that both Yonge & Lawrence and Leaside are inside that dark red line.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The older parts of Toronto used to have streets lined with houses, and just houses. In the rear of those homes was an alleyway which was lined with garages.

There are some developments returning to that design, with only pedestrian access is on the streetside.

Street lined with just houses, no garages.

Alleyway lined with garages or parking spaces.

After WWII, subdivisions were created without alleyways. Instead of putting the garages in back of the property, they were put out front. In a lot of cases, the street had become just an alleyway.

Garages out front, small entrance to the side and back.

Is this a street or an alleyway?

Yes, there are homes with big front porches or the garage hidden away, but usually they have big frontage sprawling along the street.

 

[Eug]

Where are these pictures from?

I do think this neighbourhood still does have a bit a suburban feel to it, if the picture is any indication, probably since the entirety of it looks so new and similar.

Nonetheless I like the concept, and maybe it's possible in 25 years it will start to feel more "urban", depending of course on its location and relation to the central core, and on surrounding areas.

 

[adma]

As for Yonge and Eligible, to me it represents an integral portion of the "core" of Toronto in 2010. Maybe it wasn't in 1980, but the 80s are thankfully long gone.

Personally, I don't think it's any more or less "integral" now than it was in 1980--heck, if anything, one can argue that the sociological momentum's been the other way over the past 30 years (cf. Cityplace, the Entertainment District, etc)

 

[W. K. Lis]

Where are these pictures from?

I do think this neighbourhood still does have a bit a suburban feel to it, if the picture is any indication, probably since the entirety of it looks so new and similar.

Nonetheless I like the concept, and maybe it's possible in 25 years it will start to feel more "urban", depending of course on its location and relation to the central core, and on surrounding areas.

There are "new" developments that are trying to copy the "old" look of the older parts of any town. The trees are still saplings, but it does have that more walkable look to it.

 

[Eug]

Personally, I don't think it's any more or less "integral" now than it was in 1980--heck, if anything, one can argue that the sociological momentum's been the other way over the past 30 years (cf. Cityplace, the Entertainment District, etc)

Well, so far, Cityplace seems almost like an industrial wasteland to me.

I used to live right beside there (close to Front and Bathurst), and found going to Yonge and Eglinton far more interesting than going to Cityplace.

ie. In a sense Cityplace is the bedroom community and other places, including Yonge and Eglinton, are destination neighbourhoods.

 

[T.O.Fanatic]

There are even parts of Scarborough with a more urban feel. I'm thinking of the Victoria Park and Kingston Road area, and the rest of Southwest Scarborough. You can actually get places without using a car, as opposed to say....McCowan and Steeles for example. In fact, using the level of pedestrian accessability has always been my marker of what is 'urban'. Of course such a method is completely non scientific!

 

[King of Kensington]

Re: these photos, Is this an example of what some planners refer to as the "New Urbanism"?

 

[adma]

ie. In a sense Cityplace is the bedroom community and other places, including Yonge and Eglinton, are destination neighbourhoods.

Though my point is more along the lines of Cityplace operating relative the the Entertainment District like the 60s/70s Yonge/Eg apartment towers operated relative to the singles joints...

 

[King of Kensington]

There are even parts of Scarborough with a more urban feel. I'm thinking of the Victoria Park and Kingston Road area, and the rest of Southwest Scarborough. You can actually get places without using a car, as opposed to say....McCowan and Steeles for example. In fact, using the level of pedestrian accessability has always been my marker of what is 'urban'. Of course such a method is completely non scientific!

I'm pretty sure that's included in the dark red zone.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Re: these photos, Is this an example of what some planners refer to as the "New Urbanism"?

Some developers are trying the "Transit Oriented Development", but there are still people who want a garage for each member of their family. In addition, without reliable transit within walking distance, it be doomed to failure.

 

[Archivist]

I like this discussion, and somewhere in my head I have a definition of these that I apply on a case-by-case basis.

There must be a broad literature on "urban" vs. "suburban" (vs. "exurban"). Could not one of our many Ryerson planning folk provide an overview of what these are generally meant to include.