Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady
The difference with Toronto is it is mostly post-war, even the central city is basically a giant suburb, mostly built for the car. In contrast, Montreal is a real city, older, built before the car, and maybe that is why Montreal is so charming. Toronto is often compared to other northern US cities like New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, but in reality it is Montreal that has more common with them, while Toronto is more like a Sunbelt city. Toronto is more akin to Los Angeles or Phoenix than to New York City or Chicago. This article explains it pretty well:
TORONTO: LOS ANGELES OF THE NORTH
http://demographia.com/rac-toronto.pdf |
Yes, when I'm walking along Queen Street, I can't help but notice the uncanny resemblance to Erin Mills
.
Although even Los Angeles isn't as suburban as the stereotype would suggest, there is a range between Boston/Montreal and Phoenix/Jacksonville. Yes, Toronto doesn't look like an East Coast or Quebecois city, but it's not 'new' like Edmonton or Charlotte are, and definitely acts more "urban" than even relatively old cities that once were very bustling (think Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, or St Louis). There's been a lot of postwar growth, which dwarfs the footprint of the pre-WWII city, but you could say the same thing about Washington, San Francisco, and even New York. Toronto has aesthetic similarities with Pittsburgh, Queens, London (UK), Hamilton, and yes, even Los Angeles to some extent, but you seem to suggest that even in the decently sized pre-war fabric, Toronto is basically Scottsdale at best. Like, I guess, if you're just in Mississauga lol.