News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1.1K     5 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 863     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.7K     0 

how long until toronto surpasses chicago on skyscrapers?

Northern Light said:
If anything, I expect it will accelerate proposals in the City, in the short-term, because its phased in, with a rising percentage of units to be affordable over time.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, that is certainly true in the immediate short-term. I am sure some of those 'fallow' proposals will return to the active pipeline for that reason too.
 
I don't know where to put this, but I have to share it.

https://www.blogto.com/real-estate-...ld-vision-105-storey-wood-skyscraper-toronto/

This is the most Toronto render I have ever seen! Let's build literally the tallest skyscraper in the Western Hemisphere next to single family homes...

I love this image so much, I can't.

ezgif-1-9a5c28700f.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's kinda cool but in fairness to those single-family homes, that tower (and the TTC parking, which is rendered a park here) are both in the middle of a hydro corridor. So, that's what those homes abut.
As a think-piece, it's definitely cool but, timber or not, I'm not sure how you build anything taller than the existing bus terminal there.
Anyway, this is the best image in the pack:
1665494094588.png
 
It's been over a year since we've had some numbers to look at. I figured I'd chip in with a few...

Toronto still hasn't caught up yet, but it's still getting closer year after year.

Total towers over 150 metres, Built and U/C:

Toronto - 120 (82+38) https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=99486267

Chicago - 138 (134+4) https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=99486276

Toronto is out-building Chicago 38 to 4...

Lets look at proposals now:

Toronto - 197 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=99486431

Chicago - 12 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=99486341

Toronto has 16 times as many proposals as Chicago has...

If (and that's a mighty big if) things carry on, it wont be too long before Toronto surpasses Chicago in the number of skyscrapers.
 
Last edited:
Time for another look at the numbers.

After my last post on Xmas eve. I realized that I forgot to include the suburbs. In Chicago all of the highrises are clustered around the downtown core and along the lakeshore, but in Toronto they are scattered all over the city. The suburbs are also filled with highrises. When they are added in, the overall picture begins to look different .

Total number of 150+ metre towers Built and U/C:

Toronto - 121 (85 + 36) https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100562873

Mississauga and Vaughan - 22 (7 + 15) https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100562897
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Total - 143 towers, 92 built and 51 U/C


Chicago - 138 (136 + 2) https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100562947
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Total - 138 towers, 136 built and 2 U/C


Now a look at proposals:

Toronto - 211 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100563148

Suburbs - 110 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100563068
(Mississauga, Oakville, Brampton, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Markham, Ajax, Pickering)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Total - 321 towers

Chicago - 12 https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=100563048


So, it's clear that Toronto is ahead of Chicago when the suburbs are included.
 
Koops65 said:
After my last post on Xmas eve. I realized that I forgot to include the suburbs. In Chicago all of the highrises are clustered around the downtown core and along the lakeshore, but in Toronto they are scattered all over the city.
Click to expand...
I think this is moving the goalposts. I’d agree with you if you were only counting the inner suburbs, but I definitely draw the line at including York Region or Peel Region.
 
York Region isn't an inner suburb? Apples should be compared to apples, I agree but I guess it's a simple question: How far out from downtown Chicago do you go before they aren't building any highrises at all?
It sounds like Chicago has nothing whatsoever outside of downtown, across its metro area, whereas the GTA has very significant density clusters in the 906. If Chicago doesn't in its 905 equivalent, that's a fundamental and significant difference between our two regions.
 
All 3 (416, 905 and GGH) tell an interesting story, but I would argue that the least important one should be the 416, as those lines are more arbitrarily drawn, whereas the 905 and GGH are more in line where people are clustering (choose to live).

In international ratings, especially in Asia, it is very common to viview the number of skyscrapers in a metro area, which is usually quite large! Comparing Toronto's 416 to those cities is like apples to elephants :)

It would definitely make more sense to compare GGH to those cities, as an example. Comparing against the US cities, because of differeces in urbanisam, 905 might be a more obvious choice.

However, It would be really nice to be able to have the ability to see all 3 metrics, so everyone can choose the one that makes most sense to them in a given context.

We are all different people, with different beliefs and ideas after all :)
 
UrbanDan said:
It would definitely make more sense to compare GGH to those cities, as an example. Comparing against the US cities, because of differeces in urbanisam, 905 might be a more obvious choice.
Click to expand...
I’m curious why you say that. What differences in urbanism would cause the 416+905 to be the obvious Toronto region to compare Chicago, Philadelphia, New York proper to?
WislaHD said:
The two fair comparisons IMO are either:

Toronto (416 region) vs. Chicago

or

Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) vs Chicagoland
Click to expand...
This positioning makes the most sense. No line on a map is going to be perfect or reflect where people live, but this compares administrative boundary to administrative boundary and CMA to CMA.
 
allengeorge said:
No, it is not.

The inner suburbs of Toronto are the old, preamalgamation municipalities. Where have you seen (links appreciated) York municipalities referred to as inner suburbs?
Click to expand...

Lemme see...
Oh right - the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horsehoe (20016, 2017, 2019 and 2020 versions) identitifes it as Inner Ring. I think it's online so perhaps I can provide a link, as requested.

1678592099947.png

But, I mean, that's just 15-year-old policy document so maybe it doesn't count for much?

People who live in "Metro Toronto" might define the non-Old Toronto munis as "the inner suburbs" but that's not a singular, agreed-upon or dictionary definiotion. I grew up in North York and have always thought of Peel/Durham/York as the "inner suburbs" and if you or others feel otherwise, that's grand for you all.
 
Ok everyone; lets not take questions and disagreements of a subjective nature too seriously.

The essential idea being discussed was to compare 'apples to apples'.

Which is not, in my judgement about municipal boundaries; though some may vary.

Its about a comparable area/population. But if we all disagree on how to make the comparison, its all good. There are things to get worked up over; this is not one of those.
 
I grew up in North York too and saw the 416 as the inner suburbs, the 905 as outer. Not being snarky, just sharing a different view.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top