Toronto Urban Sprawl Compared to Other Cities

[ehlow]

There is also the difference between the likes of Chinatown and the likes of Markham.

What place is better for Chinese shoppers?

Great example. I've heard many people from China say that Markham, Richmond Hill and Scarborough are definitely the places to be for quality & quantity of Chinese food. For those who speak Chinese as their main language and want to be around friends & family who are also Chinese, it's clearly the place to be.

My impression is that Markham has way more of both Chinese stores and restaurants than either Chinatown downtown (Spadina and Broadview). I find the Spadina Chinatown the place I would personally prefer to visit, especially since Kensington Market is right beside it, but I can't argue with the amount of Chinese stores & restaurants up in Markham. I'm personally no expert on Chinese food, but some of the Chinese food I've had say near Highway 7 is damn good.

 

[diminutive]

Like the density comparison, you are cherry picking. I fully understand the attraction to cheaper rent, but let's not kid ourselves about the major difference between what sprawl has to offer and what urban Toronto has to offer. One is responsible for about 99% of what I'm talking about...guess which one?

I wasn't trying to cherry pick... I don't think you're right that suburban locations don't have specialty retail. On the other hand as well, large chunks of "urban toronto" are the same chains you'd find it Yorkdale. Pretty large stretches of Queen West are just Lululemons and FootLockers and Fred Perry, which is fine.

Religious cults are one phenomena that infiltrates any environment. As a person who does not believe in the supernatural, there's nothing positive about it.

It's great that you've found Richard Dawkins, but many of the institutions I was describing, if even formally religious, function as community nodes for various groups. Even a non-practicing Jew may, for instance, like to live at Bathurst and Lawrence because of the nearby dairies or whatever, or because his parents live there, or or or. For minority groups there's often no clean dividing line between religion, formally thought of, and broader secular-cultural institutions.

Even if that is true, it's hardly a walk down Queen West or Ped Sunday in Kensington, or Yorkville if you like upscale.

Most of the stores on Queen West and Yorkville are the same ones you'd find in Fairview for the love of god. Lululemon, how urban and original!

And these are the same people who wear their pyjamas to go shopping at Walmart. That's the "Canadian Dream" you are alluding to that the majority of our fabulous immigrants are coming here to experience. If life consists of procreating, feeding and clothing your offspring, and practising some sort of supernatural worship...KILL ME NOW!!!

This is just silly. People can be plenty happy with the retail and cultural options in the suburbs without being rubes who "wear their pyjamas to go shopping at Walmart."

You can construct the dichotomy of sophisticated, culturally rich 'urban' toronto vs. the boorish suburbanites but it really says a lot more about how you're trying to perceive yourself (obviously the first category). In reality there's a huge blur; people choose where they live and work for all sorts of reasons. Over the course of people's lives almost everyone will live, work and play in both the suburbs and the city.

It's great to advocate for walk-ability, reduced auto-dependence and urban amenities. There are good reasons to do so. This slagging of suburbanites though is more about vindicating you and your own life choices.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Pretty large stretches of Queen West are just Lululemons and FootLockers and Fred Perry, which is fine.

Actually, chain stores make up a very small percentage of Queen St retail. But let's not let a few facts facts stand in the way of your defence of sprawl.

It's great that you've found Richard Dawkins

Oh..are you one of those oddballs who consider atheism a "religion"? And I prefer the late, great Hitchens.

Even a non-practicing Jew may, for instance, like to live at Bathurst and Lawrence because of the nearby dairies or whatever, or because his parents live there, or or or.

Yea...except Bathurst & Lawrence isn't suburban Sprawl.

Most of the stores on Queen West and Yorkville are the same ones you'd find in Fairview for the love of god. Lululemon, how urban and original!

Ok, so according to you, one can get any urban experience (i.e. Queen St, Yorkville, etc) by simply visiting Fairview Mall. Please go with the men in the white coats...they won't hurt you.

You can construct the dichotomy of sophisticated, culturally rich 'urban' toronto vs. the boorish suburbanites but it really says a lot more about how you're trying to perceive yourself (obviously the first category). In reality there's a huge blur; people choose where they live and work for all sorts of reasons. Over the course of people's lives almost everyone will live, work and play in both the suburbs and the city.

How very wishy-washy.

Reality? Reality is there is a huge demographic of the inner city that is not "sophisticated" at all...the poor, the marginalized, the homeless, the mentally ill, the physically challenged, etc, etc. They live in the inner city because the narrow demographic of suburban sprawl does not accommodate them.

It's great to advocate for walk-ability, reduced auto-dependence and urban amenities. There are good reasons to do so. This slagging of suburbanites though is more about vindicating you and your own life choices.

How ironic you accuse me of trying to cultivate a false perception of myself, when suburban sprawl is where people try to hide from the realities of life I see every day as a resident of Parkdale. It's also where people pretend that bad urban planning is just "fine" and perfectly sustainable. Who else are we to "slag" for perpetuating the suburban sprawl lifestyle if not the suburbanites?????

BTW...I slag plenty of urbanites...just for different reasons

 

[howl]

This whole discussion has turned silly. Different people choose to live in different environments and anyone who make value judgements about people based on where they live is being prejudicial and immature.

The issue of suburban vs. urban isn't about the types of people who live in different locations, or the types of shops that serve them. The issue is the ability of a neighbourhood to respond to changes. Should a neighbourhood be static or should it evolve? I believe that as technology, the economy and social trends change so must our neighbourhoods. Some neighbourhoods are very flexible and can change easily. Others are inflexible because they have the technology and standards of their time built into them - in particular with regard to transportation. However there is no reason why a new neighbourhood built on the edge of a city can't be designed to be flexible. And there is no reason why the cool kids can't happily live there.

 

[freshcutgrass]

The issue of suburban vs. urban isn't about the types of people who live in different locations

Of course it involves the "people". Bad urban planning happens because "people" choose to support it. And we all have to pay for it. So yes...I can make that value judgement and feel quite confident about it. And these "people" who make poor choices tend to follow a pattern...that's why they wear pj's to shop at Walmart and vote for politicians who perpetuate this problem (Harris, Ford, etc).

The issue is the ability of a neighbourhood to respond to changes. Should a neighbourhood be static or should it evolve?

I don't agree. A neighbourhood can remain static and still adhere to good urban planning principals if it was designed that way in the first place.


But we have lost the topic. It isn't about the 905 vs the 416....or the Old Toronto vs the old boroughs. It's about Toronto's sprawl vs sprawl elsewhere.

Sprawl is bad period. But if we are going to gauge the different levels of bad, then I suppose Toronto sprawl has more redeeming qualities than most, and stands the best chance in NA of reversing the worst effects and becoming at least a tad livable. But it was badly designed, and the only way to fix it properly, is to bulldoze it completely and start over...or preferably...turn it back into farmland, as good urban planning does not require all that land in the first place.

 

[Tewder]

Sprawl is bad period. But if we are going to gauge the different levels of bad, then I suppose Toronto sprawl has more redeeming qualities than most, and stands the best chance in NA of reversing the worst effects and becoming at least a tad livable. But it was badly designed, and the only way to fix it properly, is to bulldoze it completely and start over...or preferably...turn it back into farmland, as good urban planning does not require all that land in the first place.

Your point has its analogue in the 905 too, i.e. much of the western corridor to Hamilton (south of the QEW) does have the sort of redeeming qualities you talk of, which is to say enormous urban potential (compared to newer suburban tracts north of the QEW for example), given the right planning decisions and infrastructure developments. It's already happening, by the way, it may just be hard to see given the overwhelming awfulness of much of the area.

 

[spider]

Sprawl is bad period. But if we are going to gauge the different levels of bad, then I suppose Toronto sprawl has more redeeming qualities than most, and stands the best chance in NA of reversing the worst effects and becoming at least a tad livable. But it was badly designed, and the only way to fix it properly, is to bulldoze it completely and start over...or preferably...turn it back into farmland, as good urban planning does not require all that land in the first place.

One man's sprawl could be another man's growth. Maybe your bulldozer operator should be dropping the blade in Parkdale.

 

[Transportfan]

Meanwhile, in Miami, at this link:

Cue the USS Yankee. What country am I living in here? Seriously; twice on the same page?

 

[Transportfan]

One man's sprawl could be another man's growth. Maybe your bulldozer operator should be dropping the blade in Parkdale.

Yup. And who does he think is going to want to take up farming there?

 

[detroitbootybass]

This whole discussion has turned silly. Different people choose to live in different environments and anyone who make value judgements about people based on where they live is being prejudicial and immature.

The issue of suburban vs. urban isn't about the types of people who live in different locations, or the types of shops that serve them. The issue is the ability of a neighbourhood to respond to changes. Should a neighbourhood be static or should it evolve? I believe that as technology, the economy and social trends change so must our neighbourhoods. Some neighbourhoods are very flexible and can change easily. Others are inflexible because they have the technology and standards of their time built into them - in particular with regard to transportation. However there is no reason why a new neighbourhood built on the edge of a city can't be designed to be flexible. And there is no reason why the cool kids can't happily live there.

I totally agree.

 

[salsa]

I think this Neptis Foundation poster puts things into perspective.View attachment 24926

Do you have a higher resolution of this poster, that's more readable?

 

[bAuHaUs]

I have it in print as a poster (bought it from Neptis a few years ago)...go here to downlaod a high-res version.
http://www.neptis.org/publications/metropolitan-indicators-poster

 

[Johnny Au]

I also have that poster (Paul Hess from the University of Toronto's Geography Department has a few).

 

[doady]

That poster is kinda inaccurate. It uses the stats just for Toronto's urban area but the map also includes Hamilton and Oshawa urban areas. And plus it's missing the development in Oak Ridges in Richmond Hill, and that huge industrial area and Castlemore in Brampton. Which are kinda suprising mistakes to make for an organization based in Toronto... still a cool poster though...

 

[gabe]

A lot of the suburbs require you to commute just to get a loaf of bread. Sprawl doesn't have a lot of options at all. And there's more to life than going to, and coming back from work.

Any subdivision built in the last 20 years or so is like that. They used to build subdivisions with small strip malls within a short walking distance. But now they build those sprawling Smart Centers which are not at all pedestrian friendly.

It happens. That is why I always go into the establishment first, then go next door. Got a parking ticket at one time for using the LCBO parking lot and then going into a next door real estate office. Towing has happened to others that I know.

Yes. I was told once by a TD security guard i wasn't allowed to walk across to the next plaza to get something to eat. So i had to drive over to the next plaza. it was about a 10 second drive. It's nice to know my banking fees are going towards paying security to keep Subway customers out of their parking lot.