News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.3K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 383     0 

Toronto/Chicago comparisons

innsertnamehere said:
Toronto's CMA is smaller than it should be if you ask me anyway, which makes the difference smaller. Oshawa, Whitby, Bowmanville, and Burlington are firmly part of the GTA, but are excluded as they are parts of other CMAs that existed prior to Toronto growing to the size it is today.

Hamilton might be able to be included as well, but that's more murky. Waterdown is an easy inclusion if you ask me, but downtown Hamilton is a little tougher to justify.

Those additions spit out a CMA of about 7.1 million in 2019.. which while smaller than Chicago's urbanized area population of 8.6 million, isn't far behind.
Click to expand...

IMO if we want an apples to apples comparison, then you are looking at the entire Greater Golden Horseshoe (including Hamilton, Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge, Guelph/Wellington, Barrie/Simcoe, Peterborough, and Niagara Region).

That by my estimate is about 7.8 million people.
 
WislaHD said:
IMO if we want an apples to apples comparison, then you are looking at the entire Greater Golden Horseshoe (including Hamilton, Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge, Guelph/Wellington, Barrie/Simcoe, Peterborough, and Niagara Region).

That by my estimate is about 7.8 million people.
Click to expand...

I agree that the comparison is Chicagoland to GGH.

However, you have the population for the Golden Horseshoe, not the Greater Golden Horsesshoe.

The population of the GGH (as of 2019) is 9,970,000

1603913363455.png


From: https://www.hemson.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/HEMSON-Schedule-3-Forecasts-FINAL-16JUN20.pdf
 
The large difference is that Chicago's Urban area is contiguous, and operates more effectively as a single metro than the GGH does.

They are different cities with different characteristics, which makes them difficult to compare directly. However, at least for now, I believe Chicago is squarely still ahead of Toronto in population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
innsertnamehere said:
The large difference is that Chicago's Urban area is contiguous, and operates more effectively as a single metro than the GGH does.

They are different cities with different characteristics, which makes them difficult to compare directly. However, at least for now, I believe Chicago is squarely still ahead of Toronto in population.
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence in support of that position?

I'm not being argumentative, I'm just wondering if its something beyond supposition.

Chicagoland exists across 3 different U.S. states; given that different State laws would apply in Kenosha, Wi, and in Gary and Hammond, IN, I find it a curious assertion that these places function as one, more than the GGH, located entirely within Ontario.

If one looks at the County level you have 15 different counties in Chicagoland; worth noting, I count 15 regional governments in the GGH.

If we drop down a level, there are 1,550 municipalities in Chicagoland, the GGH is 110.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
The large difference is that Chicago's Urban area is contiguous, and operates more effectively as a single metro than the GGH does.

They are different cities with different characteristics, which makes them difficult to compare directly. However, at least for now, I believe Chicago is squarely still ahead of Toronto in population.
Click to expand...
Albeit, I am not sure if contiguous urban area is the best definition here to work with here.

Ontario has the Greenbelt as you know well, so we can't build out a contiguous urban area like Chicagoland, and I highly doubt we would desire to fill in our valuable green space with the low-density nearly exurban built-form that connects the urban centres in Chicagoland into a contiguous urban area.

Also using contiguous urban area as the working definition would end up excluding some urban conglomerates like the Randstad region in the Netherlands from metro area comparisons, which feels wrong.
 
To me it is more the extent they act as integrated economic units. I think it is fair to say that outlying parts of GGH (KW, Niagara) are pretty loosely connected to Toronto, but there is still a degree of connection. There are definitely people who commute both ways. People from KW or Niagara probably seldom venture into Toronto except for sports events, concerts, trade shows/conventions (auto show, home show, etc.). For a night out, pretty unlikely.
 
afransen said:
To me it is more the extent they act as integrated economic units. I think it is fair to say that outlying parts of GGH (KW, Niagara) are pretty loosely connected to Toronto, but there is still a degree of connection. There are definitely people who commute both ways. People from KW or Niagara probably seldom venture into Toronto except for sports events, concerts, trade shows/conventions (auto show, home show, etc.). For a night out, pretty unlikely.
Click to expand...

So, you got me curious, and I just googled to see what the travel times are like from the peripheral areas in each jurisdiction.

I assume these will be current to 8pm our time.

Google says Kenosha, Wi to Chicago's Loop is 1hr 15
Google says K-W to Downtown Toronto is 1hr 13

Google says Gary Indiana, to the Loop is 45 minutes
Google says St. Catharines to DT Toronto is 1hr 12

Google says Aurora, Ill to Chicago is 1hr
Google says Barrie to Toronto is 1hr 12

Hmmm, Toronto's travel times are mostly comparable, but just a bit longer in some cases.
 
Last edited:
Chicagoland's area is 28,120 sq. km. and population is 9.45 million
GGH's area is 31,561.57 sq. km. and population is 9.97 million

GGH is just slightly bigger in area and population than Chicagoland. There is no way Chiagoland can be more contiguous than GGH if both have same density (because both have same population and area).
 
Man, it's fun reading the early pages of some of these threads sometimes. The Fords pre cocaine and premiership, the Trump Tower, transit complaint (Crosstown still a year and a half away), waterfront (hey, finally got started on them Don Lands), downtown parking lots (getting more rare), etc.

While I am obviously not too versed on Chicago, I get the impression that most of the Chicagoland sprawl really is part of the Chicago economy. Meanwhile, from my temporary abode in Waterloo, I have to say that K-W (and Hamilton as well) is a seperate city that happens to have a GO connection to Union. And besides, a ridiculous amount of the GGHA area is straight up farmland.

Now as for Chicago, I've spent a few days there before on a trip in the winter. We were in a hotel just outside of Chinatown, and man Chicago is depressing. The Loop felt dead when we visited it (admittedly two days after Christmas, which is a interesting time). Based on our experience driving in from the South Side and stopping for various reasons, what people above have said about racial segregation in Chicago is really true; we have racial enclaves, but they are not nearly as segregated or disadvantaged. Chicago unfortunately follows the American pattern of a shining downtown surrounded by undesirable (read. Black) inner suburbs surrounded by commuter suburb.

To be continued when I have some more thoughts.
 
If you just go on Google Maps and measure the distances, you'll see that Chicago sprawl goes for 60-80km in all directions from the Loop, while Toronto's built up area ends at between 30-50km.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top