how long until toronto surpasses chicago on skyscrapers?

[Paclo]

Here's the breakdown according to my numbers (sourced from CTBUH).

Cities	Count of buildings >= 150 metres, current + construction + proposed
City of Toronto	138 (not including Christie's or East Harbour)
Toronto + Mississauga + Vaughan	149
Chicago	148

(Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe there are no 150m+ buildings in Chicagoland outside Chicago proper.)

Assuming all the current proposals are built with a latest possible completion year of 2028 (this is a horrible assumption but let's just run with it for now), then the GTA will pass Chicago in number of 150m+ buildings by one single building in that year, 2028.

Again some of these proposals will not be built by then, and some of them may even be chopped to a height under 150m, and new proposals will pop up for both cities in this timeframe as well. But given that East Harbour and Christie's are likely to include towers above 150m, and those projects have a timeline for the next decade, it is very reasonable to assume that Toronto will pass Chicago in this metric sometime between 2025-2030. If our cutoff is at 200 or 300 metres it's a different story however, it may take longer than that for Toronto to pass Chicago in the supertall race.

But we are closing that gap:

 

[allengeorge]

I understand that we're trying to forecast out, but I try to focus on completed/under-construction, and on that front Toronto has a ways to go.

Thanks for all the graphs and additional context tho!

 

[Paclo]

I understand that we're trying to forecast out, but I try to focus on completed/under-construction, and on that front Toronto has a ways to go.

Thanks for all the graphs and additional context tho!

I agree, proposals are always subject to change and much harder to forecast, and like I mentioned, they require more assumptions.
Under construction projects are very likely to be completed, and their completion dates are more predictable.

Here's how Toronto area stacks up against Chicago on the 150m front for just completed and construction:

---
And on the 200m+ front, it's closer than I expected:

* again treating topped out buildings as completed for both cities here.

 

[allengeorge]

Here's how Toronto area stacks up against Chicago on the 150m front for just completed and construction:

The numbers are for the GTA as a whole, correct? Vs. just Chicago the city? Seems like a surprising comparison?

 

[DirectionNorth]

The numbers are for the GTA as a whole, correct? Vs. just Chicago the city? Seems like a surprising comparison?

Quick scroll through the Wikipedia page for tallest buildings in Chicago, seems like most of them are in or around the Loop. Doesn't seem to have many skyscrapers in the suburbs.

 

[Paclo]

The numbers are for the GTA as a whole, correct? Vs. just Chicago the city? Seems like a surprising comparison?

Yep, as @DirectionNorth said it seems all of Chicago's skyscrapers are in what is considered "downtown Chicago" aka the loop or central lakefront/river area. If anyone knows of any in the greater Chicagoland area please let us know.

The "GTA" in this case is actually just Toronto, Mississauga and Vaughan which are the only municipalities with current and construction of 150m buildings

 

[Undead]

2150 Lakeshore (Christie's ) and East Harbour will be enough to overtake Chicago without Sauga and Vaughan. Adding the latter pushes us even further ahead.

 

[isaidso]

150m is what Americans use as a benchmark as it roughly equates to 500 feet. The rest of the planet is metric and, quite predictably, use 100m, 200m, 300m as measuring sticks. Personally speaking, 100m is a much better benchmark than 150m. 100-150m buildings may not be what one notices first in a skyline but they have a huge visual impact. Put another way, using 150m+ Vancouver only has 5 buildings in its entire skyline. That's a little absurd and hammers home why the American preference for 150m is far from optimal.

The following tables are for 100m+, 150m+, 200m+ buildings Built, Under Construction, and Proposed. As one can see, by 100m+ Toronto will zoom ahead of Chicago even if no proposals are ever realized. Toronto will likely be ahead of Chicago by this time next year. Whether one chooses 100m, 150m, or 200m will soon be moot. Toronto will surge ahead by the other 2 benchmarks too; it will just take a few more years.

It also bears mentioning that this doesn't include Mississauga, Vaughan, Brampton, or Markham which are all part of the Toronto CMA. By metro area, Toronto will surge even further ahead of Chicago as a substantial amount of high rise construction occurs beyond City of Toronto limits.


100m+ City of Chicago
Built: 339
U/C: 8
Proposed: 18

100m+ City of Toronto
Built: 301
U/C: 101
Proposed: 363


150m+ City of Chicago
Built: 132
U/C: 6
Proposed: 11

150m+ City of Toronto
Built: 78
U/C: 35
Proposed: 129


200m+ City of Chicago
Built: 34
U/C: 5
Proposed: 5

200m+ City of Toronto
Built: 23
U/C: 12
Proposed: 42

Diagrams - SkyscraperPage.com

SkyscraperPage's diagram system presents the world's tallest buildings to scale, all lined up in a row. Discover the world's skyscrapers right here.Skyscraper enthusiast website featuring buildings database, discussion forum and skyscraper diagrams.

skyscraperpage.com

 

[afransen]

That 360+ proposed 100m+ is pretty shocking!

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

It also bears mentioning that this doesn't include Mississauga, Vaughan, Brampton, or Markham which are all part of the Toronto CMA.

We have an interesting decade ahead. It isn't just those four suburbs with major proposals in the pipeline. Pretty much every municipality in the GTA will have its own skyline with a collection of tall buildings based on proposed development activity.

Even sleepy places like Bolton have proposals such as this: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...-32s-verdi-alliance-srn-architects-inc.32535/

 

[allengeorge]

That 360+ proposed 100m+ is pretty shocking!

Keep in mind that a lot of those proposals are fallow.

 

[Undead]

Keep in mind that a lot of those proposals are fallow.

I imagine as we run out of developable sites, many will be revived.

 

[UrbanDan]

That 360+ proposed 100m+ is pretty shocking!

I'm curious to see if inclusionary zoning will reduce this number, as profit margins might be impacted and some projects turn out to be unfeasible. This might impact the speed of Toronto catching up to Chicago...

Not against the IZ, but placing majority of the burden on the private sector, intuitively seems wrong to me.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I'm curious to see if inclusionary zoning will reduce this number, as profit margins might be impacted and some projects turn out to be unfeasible. This might impact the speed of Toronto catching up to Chicago...

Not against the IZ, but placing majority of the burden on the private sector, intuitively seems wrong to me.

There is still a need for housing and investment dollars wanting to be spend. I think the impact will be an acceleration of proposals in the 905, especially Mississauga.

 

[Northern Light]

There is still a need for housing and investment dollars wanting to be spend. I think the impact will be an acceleration of proposals in the 905, especially Mississauga.

If anything, I expect it will accelerate proposals in the City, in the short-term, because its phased in, with a rising percentage of units to be affordable over time.

There is a lot of land already banked for development that would be substantially less profitable in its current form, rather than being developed with a modest IZ quota imposed.

Better from a development perspective to get those developments in now or in the earliest days of any IZ program rather than at a full phase-in.