My response was to a comment about skyscrapers, not development in general. By range of heights I was referring to the 150m/200m/250m/300m or 500ft/600ft/700ft/800ft/900ft/1000ft plateaus for statisticians like me who are capable of doing the math and regaularly using both metrics 🤓
Canada and Australia have an almost identical number of buildings especially in the upper range whether looking at completed, u/c, proposals or all the above. Personally I find this unusual since Canada is about 50% larger by population and both are similarly developed. All in all we should be punching more above our weight, at least relative to them.
And yes I'm well aware that many people on here care not for such things. It's also not the only thing I care about, but that's all I was conversing about in that specific reply.
Except these cities do have skyscrapers propsed, not all of them, but lots of them have numerous proposals that break the 150m mark and esp the 100m mark. Niagara, Kitchener, Hamilton and Ottawa all have several skyscrapers U/C or proposed.
Additionally, I know this doesn't exactly go in line with what you're saying but crane counts are another great statistical indicator and there are an excessive amount in quite a few Canadian cities. For example K-W would be near the top if it were on the RBL index. Calagary has plenty of construction coming up as well.
So yes, there is a good deal more construction that doesnt quite reach skyscraper status but is still high density. There is also lots that does. Also, idk if you're doing this or not but lumping in places like VMC, Brampton, Richmond Hill etc with Toronto isnt super fair either. Those are really their own separate cities and cores hardly connected with Toronto proper. I doubt Australia has much development going on outside of downtown Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with the exception of the Gold Coast. Please correct me if I'm wrong!