Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
I'd add Chicago and Toronto as a pairing.
|
People often like to compare Toronto to much older, historic US cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, New York City, especially Canadians trying to hype up Toronto. But I've always argued that Toronto shouldn't be compared to those cities, because in reality Toronto is not historic, it is a much newer city built largely in the automobile era. Even the City of Toronto proper is mostly car-dependent, post-war sprawl - just cul-de-sacs and strip malls everywhere and little rail access. Even before considering the 100% sprawl of neighbhouring Mississauga, Vaughan, Markham, etc., just considering the city proper, the City of Toronto has more in common with the City of Naperville than it does with the City of Chicago. Considering the metropolitan area as a whole, Toronto is much more akin to Sunbelt cities like Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix than it is to Chicago and any northeastern US metropolitan areas.
Here is what most of the City of Toronto looks like:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7585...7i16384!8i8192
Naperville:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7540...4!8i8192?hl=en
See also:
TORONTO: LOS ANGELES OF THE NORTH
The pre war, inner city of Boston:
Philadelphia:
Chicago:
Toronto: