2019 Population Estimate of Canadian Metropolitan Areas

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Handro

Ah ok, you used Mississauga in your example which is certainly more analogous to Evanston than Schaumburg, but that’s pretty cool if bus ridership is stays consistent even out in the farther sprawl suburbs.

Mississauga, if anything, is newer than Schamburg. It isn't remotely similar to Evanston. Functionally, though, it's more or less Schaumburg. In terms of development timespan, probably more like a Naperville.

Here's Missisauga in the 1970's, when the Square One Mall was built. Mostly farmland. No way did Cook County have extensive farmland in the 70's.

https://www.insauga.com/a-look-back-...e-40-years-ago

[park123]

The main difference between Toronto and Chicago, more so than bus ridership in suburbs, is population growth, and behind that, immigration. Canada has a 2-3 x immigration rate compared to the USA, which was masked until recently by high Latino birth rates in the USA. Now with the drop in those birthdates below replacement, and “make America great again” politics slamming the procedural door on even legal immigration, 2nd-3rd tier immigration destinations like Chicago find themselves with a straight-up declining metro population. So how can urban Chicago grow like Toronto? It’s just impossible. Even the sunbelt will start stagnating if Trump wins again. For demographic reasons.

[park123]

Canada also doesn’t have a sun belt or warm weather belt (why not BC??), so there’s not that drain on Toronto vs NY or Chicago. But NY is a good example of being able to still grow the urban area despite sunbelt leakage. But how much longer? If there isn’t a large stream of fresh immigrants coming in?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

So Frisco has multifamily % close to Vaughn but vastly different transit ridership

Both has similar built form of ugly large arterials and single family developments

Vaughn has concentrated commercial and industrial workplaces (Dallas is not an industrial city)

Vaughn is populated by predominantly East Asian immigrants, Frisco (I assume) rust belt transplants and some immigrants

Vaughan is way more Italian than East Asian.

[Mister F]

Vaughan isn't primarily populated by immigrants of any kind. 52% of its population was born in Canada. About 25,000 immigrants are from Italy and 12,000 are from East Asia. These numbers are easy to find online, no need to make stuff up.

Originally Posted by park123

I think people get defensive because there is a definite undertone of "America sucks at cities yay! Canada is better at that like its better at everything" in a lot of the comments on this forum.

American cities and urban areas tend to be less dense, less transit oriented, more segregated, have have more problems with crime and urban decline than cities in other industrialized countries. This is well understood and accepted by people who study cities. The existence of New York and other exceptions doesn't change that.

Originally Posted by park123

This again sounds like "America sucks at cities" to me. But my lying eyes tell me that urban Boston is as extensive as urban Montreal (not to mention a lot richer and more polished), and that urban Chicago is as extensive as urban Toronto. Statistics tell me that NYC (an American city, last time I checked), has a larger urban population than the entire country of Canada.

Kind of a big caveat. "America sucks at cities compared to Canada, except for the city which is larger than the entire urban population of Canada, and that is the largest city in the entire Western world"

New York's urban area population is 19 million. Canada's urban population is 31 million. So that line you keep repeating is obviously untrue. But even if true, it's irrelevant. New York's size doesn't change the dominant urban development patterns across America.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

again, you continue to quote US urban area numbers that are reduced by the existence of a low-density fringe housing (in most cases, except atlanta) a small portion of the total population.

and vaughn looks exactly like the inland empire, CA or maybe the south bay. frisco lots sizes are a bit bigger and there is a bit less multifamily, but cmon otherwise the resemblance is painfully obvious

(btw 18% of frisco housing units are multifamily, vs in vaughn around 9800 units are in >5 story buildings; 61000 out of 91000 vaughn units are single family homes and another 17000 are townhouses/semi detached).

so similar type of housing, similar built environment, but much greater (I assume) bus transit share in vaughn.

vaughn multifamily:



frisco multifamily

So density numbers don't mean anything unless you ignore all the low density areas. How convenient.

I talked about high-rise construction, you say it doesn't mean anything, and then you brought up density, and now you say density doesn't mean anything. If you want to believe density numbers, high-rise construction numbers, transit ridership numbers all don't mean anything, it's all fake news, Toronto is the Dallas of the North, then go ahead. I find it weird, but maybe I should have been expecting it somehow.

Originally Posted by park123

This again sounds like "America sucks at cities" to me. But my lying eyes tell me that urban Boston is as extensive as urban Montreal (not to mention a lot richer and more polished), and that urban Chicago is as extensive as urban Toronto. Statistics tell me that NYC (an American city, last time I checked), has a larger urban population than the entire country of Canada.

Kind of a big caveat. "America sucks at cities compared to Canada, except for the city which is larger than the entire urban population of Canada, and that is the largest city in the entire Western world"

USA is better at cities than Canada because of New York? C'mon.

I spent so much time to make photothreads here to criticize sprawl in Canada with no objections from anyone, but the minute I write anything to criticize sprawl in USA, suddenly people get all up in arms.

Again, if you and dc_denizen just want to compare USA and Canada in superficial way, if you want to say they are the same, no difference between them, just based what you see with your eyes at a glance at cherrypicked examples, and ignore the broader and more in-depth picture including all of the data from the US and Canadian Censuses, the SSP database, APTA ridership reports that all suggest otherwise, then more power to you. Even with almost twice the population, Chicago urban area is no more extensive than Toronto's? Chicago is twice as dense as Toronto, as dense a European urban area? C'mon.

I don't come here to put Canada up on a pedestal. I think that is clear from my threads of Mississauga in the photo section, like: Snout Houses, Orlando Corporation's Heartland Business Community, Mississauga's Heartland (Town Centre), and more. I have tried to find things that sprawl here has in common with that of USA, things that the mostly American userbase here can relate to. But I don't see why pretend Mississauga is just another American suburb either. The city of Mississauga, incorporated in 1974, is top 20 in North America in high-rises complete, and its MiWay bus system has similar ridership total as the entire Dallas Area Rapid Transit system, close to 60 million boardings annually, or 200,000 per weekday. I can cherry pick with my photography, but looking at the bigger picture, what is going on in Mississauga is overall just very different from what is going on in the post-war US. And unlike NYC, Mississauga is not much an outlier for its country.

[dc_denizen]

Pure (unweighted) density is not as important since few people live in the low density areas, yes. Los Angeles and New York Have similar amounts of people living at an average of ~7000/sq mile despite New York’s much lower density urban area in aggregate

If 100,000 people live at 1000/square mile in an otherwise dense urban area, does this make the urban area not dense from the average inhabitants experience ?

A better guide than looking at highrise stats is total multifamily growth. Canada has high high net worth immigration rates and more real estate safe haven demand , as well as a legacy of suburban highrise living yielding more highrises than midrises

Transit ridership in locations with similar density and multifamily numbers in the us and Canada can be very different , likely due to concentration of jobs, better bus frequency, lack of stigma on transit ridership in Canada

[park123]

Originally Posted by Mister F

Vaughan isn't primarily populated by immigrants of any kind. 52% of its population was born in Canada. About 25,000 immigrants are from Italy and 12,000 are from East Asia. These numbers are easy to find online, no need to make stuff up.


American cities and urban areas tend to be less dense, less transit oriented, more segregated, have have more problems with crime and urban decline than cities in other industrialized countries. This is well understood and accepted by people who study cities. The existence of New York and other exceptions doesn't change that.


New York's urban area population is 19 million. Canada's urban population is 31 million. So that line you keep repeating is obviously untrue. But even if true, it's irrelevant. New York's size doesn't change the dominant urban development patterns across America.

Lol I'm not talking about auto-oriented suburbs that make up the great bulk of "urban" areas even in Canada. I'm talking about pedestrian oriented urban areas, you know, real cities. NY has more people living in that sort of environment than all of Canada.

NYC has more than 8 million people living at an average population density of 27,000 people per square mile. And that density includes a large, underpopulated suburban borough called Staten Island, and two of the largest airports in North America within city limits. How many people in Canada live at 27,000 people per square mile? How big is every metro system in Canada combined compared to the NYC subway?

Like I said elsewhere, I wouldn't be surprised if freaking NJ has more people living at 20,000 + people per square mile than the GTA.

American cities tend to be less dense, less urban oriented... blah blah blah American cities suck and my country and city are better. Homer!

[park123]

Originally Posted by Doady

So density numbers don't mean anything unless you ignore all the low density areas. How convenient.

I talked about high-rise construction, you say it doesn't mean anything, and then you brought up density, and now you say density doesn't mean anything. If you want to believe density numbers, high-rise construction numbers, transit ridership numbers all don't mean anything, it's all fake news, Toronto is the Dallas of the North, then go ahead. I find it weird, but maybe I should have been expecting it somehow.



USA is better at cities than Canada because of New York? C'mon.

I spent so much time to make photothreads here to criticize sprawl in Canada with no objections from anyone, but the minute I write anything to criticize sprawl in USA, suddenly people get all up in arms.

Again, if you and dc_denizen just want to compare USA and Canada in superficial way, if you want to say they are the same, no difference between them, just based what you see with your eyes at a glance at cherrypicked examples, and ignore the broader and more in-depth picture including all of the data from the US and Canadian Censuses, the SSP database, APTA ridership reports that all suggest otherwise, then more power to you. Even with almost twice the population, Chicago urban area is no more extensive than Toronto's? Chicago is twice as dense as Toronto, as dense a European urban area? C'mon.

I don't come here to put Canada up on a pedestal. I think that is clear from my threads of Mississauga in the photo section, like: Snout Houses, Orlando Corporation's Heartland Business Community, Mississauga's Heartland (Town Centre), and more. I have tried to find things that sprawl here has in common with that of USA, things that the mostly American userbase here can relate to. But I don't see why pretend Mississauga is just another American suburb either. The city of Mississauga, incorporated in 1974, is top 20 in North America in high-rises complete, and its MiWay bus system has similar ridership total as the entire Dallas Area Rapid Transit system, close to 60 million boardings annually, or 200,000 per weekday. I can cherry pick with my photography, but looking at the bigger picture, what is going on in Mississauga is overall just very different from what is going on in the post-war US. And unlike NYC, Mississauga is not much an outlier for its country.

Everyone keeps talking about NYC as an outlier, implying that it doesn't count. Just an exception. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! That outlier has a bigger urban population (not suburban, but urban) than your entire country!

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by park123

The main difference between Toronto and Chicago, more so than bus ridership in suburbs, is population growth, and behind that, immigration.

This is true, but all interrelated. Immigration is a major factor in Toronto's sprawl bus ridership. Chicago doesn't have tons of transit-dependent working class immigrants living in multifamily on the fringe.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Mister F

Vaughan isn't primarily populated by immigrants of any kind. 52% of its population was born in Canada.

Um, what? A city that is half immigrant isn't a heavily immigrant community?

14.4% of the U.S. population consists of immigrants. 21.9% of the Canadian population consists of immigrants. So, yeah, a half-immigrant city is a major outlier.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Um, what? A city that is half immigrant isn't a heavily immigrant community?

14.4% of the U.S. population consists of immigrants. 21.9% of the Canadian population consists of immigrants. So, yeah, a half-immigrant city is a major outlier.

Not in the GTA it isn't.

That said, the initial comment was that Vaughan was primarily East Asian.

It isn't.

Vaughan is mostly known for being a suburb where Italian-Canadians (either born in Italy, or first, second and third generation Canadians) move to from Toronto after they've "made it". They are stereotyped for building palatial, often kitschy, McMansions in Vaughan.

The biggest East Asian suburb in Toronto is Markham, which is on the northeastern side of Toronto's northern suburbs. Vaughan is on the northwestern side.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not in the GTA it isn't.

We aren't comparing bus ridership within the GTA. We're comparing bus ridership in the GTA to other sprawly metros. Mississauga is extremely immigrant-heavy for North American standards.

But yeah, if you wanted to compare within the GTA, I bet you the more immigrant-heavy sprawl, all things equal, has significantly higher bus ridership than more native-born areas.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Crawford

We aren't comparing bus ridership within the GTA. We're comparing bus ridership in the GTA to other sprawly metros. Mississauga is extremely immigrant-heavy for North American standards.

But yeah, if you wanted to compare within the GTA, I bet you the more immigrant-heavy sprawl, all things equal, has significantly higher bus ridership than more native-born areas.

That would be interesting to check out. Suburbs to the east like Ajax-Pickering-Whitby have fewer immigrants by GTA standards, but their built form is similar to the rest of the GTA.

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by park123

Everyone keeps talking about NYC as an outlier, implying that it doesn't count. Just an exception. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! That outlier has a bigger urban population (not suburban, but urban) than your entire country!

Saying that New York is not American is about as insulting and philistine as saying Montreal is not Canadian, yet you never hear this kind of statement made round here. Hmm

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not in the GTA it isn't.

That said, the initial comment was that Vaughan was primarily East Asian.

It isn't.

Vaughan is mostly known for being a suburb where Italian-Canadians (either born in Italy, or first, second and third generation Canadians) move to from Toronto after they've "made it". They are stereotyped for building palatial, often kitschy, McMansions in Vaughan.

The biggest East Asian suburb in Toronto is Markham, which is on the northeastern side of Toronto's northern suburbs. Vaughan is on the northwestern side.

Sadly North American Italians are some of the most exuberant sprawl-favorers

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by Crawford

We aren't comparing bus ridership within the GTA. We're comparing bus ridership in the GTA to other sprawly metros. Mississauga is extremely immigrant-heavy for North American standards.

But yeah, if you wanted to compare within the GTA, I bet you the more immigrant-heavy sprawl, all things equal, has significantly higher bus ridership than more native-born areas.

I would to know what percentage old stock (white) Canadians live in high rises, vs immigrants. Is there a major difference?

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Sadly North American Italians are some of the most exuberant sprawl-favorers

Not just any sprawl. Advanced, stage 4, unicorn statue sprawl.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Saying that New York is not American is about as insulting and philistine as saying Montreal is not Canadian, yet you never hear this kind of statement made round here. Hmm

Weeeeeeelllll

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Um, what? A city that is half immigrant isn't a heavily immigrant community?

14.4% of the U.S. population consists of immigrants. 21.9% of the Canadian population consists of immigrants. So, yeah, a half-immigrant city is a major outlier.

What I said was that Vaughan is not primarily populated by immigrants, which is true. And despite your assertion, those immigrants aren't predominantly East Asian. Let's stick with the facts here.

In any case, immigration has nothing to do with bus ridership in the GTA.

Originally Posted by park123

Lol I'm not talking about auto-oriented suburbs that make up the great bulk of "urban" areas even in Canada. I'm talking about pedestrian oriented urban areas, you know, real cities. NY has more people living in that sort of environment than all of Canada.

NYC has more than 8 million people living at an average population density of 27,000 people per square mile. And that density includes a large, underpopulated suburban borough called Staten Island, and two of the largest airports in North America within city limits. How many people in Canada live at 27,000 people per square mile? How big is every metro system in Canada combined compared to the NYC subway?

Like I said elsewhere, I wouldn't be surprised if freaking NJ has more people living at 20,000 + people per square mile than the GTA.

Irrelevant. New York has more people than all of Sweden but that doesn't change the fact that Swedish cities tend to be denser and more transit oriented than their American equivalents. I'm not sure why you're so offended by this, it's simply the way American cities are set up for the most part. Again, the existence of New York doesn't change that.

Originally Posted by park123

American cities tend to be less dense, less urban oriented... blah blah blah American cities suck and my country and city are better. Homer!

How old are you?

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

I would to know what percentage old stock (white) Canadians live in high rises, vs immigrants. Is there a major difference?

No.