Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan
i'm always a bit amazed at suburban toronto's appetite for tall towers. you have so many areas of SFH's and then there will be a cluster of 30+ story towers looming over the houses at the end of the street.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7708...7i16384!8i8192
that kinda things would just not ever fly in suburban chicago. i don't understand how there isn't more NIMBY push-back against it in toronto. in 99% of suburban chicagoland, highrise/skyscraper proposals are so unilaterally DOA that they are hardly ever even proposed in the first place.
across the thousands of sq. miles that constitute suburban chicagoland, there are only like 20 buildings that rise above 200', and most of those are clustered in a small handful of places like downtown evanston and schaumburg, whereas in suburban toronto you have hundreds upon hundreds (perhaps thousands?) of such buildings.
it's a really interesting phenomenon from my perspective.
|
It is very unique from a North American perspective (Vancouver as well). Sure there are a lot of factors, but one thing to remember is that demographics are a lot different than Chicago. Multi-generational Canadians, especially wealthy ones, remained a lot closer to the Downtown than many American cities. As immigration picked up rapidly, the massive amount of Chinese and South Asians that migrated settled in the next ring of available land, being Mississauga, Brampton, Markham, etc. So the burbs end up being dominated by demographics who are more accustomed to high-rises and density than perhaps a comparable neighbourhood in Chicago that arose out of white flight. The staunchest NIMBY neighbourhoods in Toronto are those inner-city "yellow-belt" areas like the Danforth, St. Clair, The Annex, etc. that are comprised of long-term, probably third-generation plus Canadians who like the character of a SFH neighbourhood with the proximity to downtown.
The biggest administrative difference in Toronto is the presence of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) which is effectively a tribunal for local planning disputes. It allows the province to balance something like implementing the green belt, with pro-development decisions that force density on local municipalities, willing or not. You'll find many criticism of the OMB, but they are effective in pushing along these monster proposals.
Lastly, highway connectivity is abysmal in Toronto compared to Chicago. The major highways have a complete East-West focus along the 401 Corridor. All that greenfield you see to the North of the city might as well be in Narnia when it comes to driving into Downtown. Pull up Google Maps and compare Toronto's setup to the amount of yellow freeway that snakes out in all directions from Chicago. We may not like freeways but it helps for housing affordability to open up those far-flung areas. I wouldn't be surprised if an equidistant exurban location in the two cities took 30 minutes longer in Toronto.
This again puts greater emphasis on being around the terminus of the subway lines, like North York's large skyline, and Vaughan's rapidly growing one. GO stations are some of the hottest commodities. I personally would consider a larger suburban condo near a GO station compared to a SFH in Caledon or something.