A Look at the Streetscapes of Toronto
Architecturally Toronto streets are rather plain compared to St. Louis. However, the sidewalks and shops are constantly busy. Shop signage is big, bold and in many cases, garish. None would seem to comply with St. Louis’ more conservative sign ordinances which basically promote uniform small lettering on the edges of awnings.
Almost without exception the older areas were full of life whereas the newer developments were devoid of activity. In time this may change as the newer buildings get some age on them and they change and evolve. Note all the bike racks, cyclists and pedestrians.
I have assembled 140 pictures of Toronto streetscapes to help communicate the overall character and feel of their commercial and residential streets. Most were taken in their downtown area with a few exceptions. Click here to view the slideshow on Flickr. So take a look at the images (5-12 minutes depending upon the speed of the slideshow) and come back and share your perceptions based on the images.
– Steve
Thanks for the images…
I like the big bold signage, it reflects the personality and creativity of the business owners and employees. I don’t know who has authority over signage here in St. Louis, but individual business districts should be allowed to craft their own ordinances. So a place like CWE might be more refined and conservative, but a place like S. Grand might be more exuberant, like some of the signs in your pictures.
“Almost without exception the older areas were full of life whereas the newer developments were devoid of activity.”
This is also what I’ve noticed in St. Louis and would seem to back up what Jane Jacobs had to say about urban development. The older places have a range of building ages and types and support a wide range of activities. Whereas large-scale new construction is largely sterile, until it’s had time to go through a building cycle or two. My favorite places in St. Louis are the ones that have been relatively untouched by development schemes in the past 80 years, while downtown, which has had billions poured into it since the 60’s, remains largely dead on weekends.
btw, did you get a sense as to whether Toronto has any high-rise public housing developments, and whether they work any better than their American counterparts?
[REPLY Toronto does have very similar public housing, including x-plan mid-rise buildings of say 12 floors. I walked along a main street with public housing on both sides and they all seemed OK but not great. – SLP]
I’m a transplanted Torontonian living in St Louis, so these posts by Steve this week have pulled on some heart strings. Toronto is such a great city. It’s perhaps the most multicultural place I’ve ever lived, and the streatscapes reflect that ethinicity. Those views from the CN tower bring back some memories! But one thing I thing Toronto doesn’t have that St Louis has in spades is SOUL. I lived in toronto for 30 some odd years and I’ve only been in St Louis for a little over 2, but there’s something about the character of this city that Toronto and all of its glory can not match. Steve, keep the posts coming!! I’m not homesick, but I certainly feel you’re enthusiasm!!
“Almost without exception the older areas were full of life whereas the newer developments were devoid of activity.”
Of course, what the urbanist means when he says “full of life” is “full of pedestrians, sidewalk dining, and bicycles”. All of those are nice things and I prefer to live out my life in such areas. But Steve might be a bit biased towards failing to see “life” in newer, more suburban places where vibrant life most surely exists–just in a different form.
Examples? Harpos, Brio, Westpost Plaza (I know, not my cup of tea either), The Village Bar, the area around Crate & Barrel, etc.
[REPLY Craig I’m afraid you might decide that I-270 & Hwy 40 are full of life simply by the existance of many people at 5pm. The Boulevard (with Crate & Barrel) is a reasonable attempt at creating a good setting for human life relative to block-long monolithic projects both here and in Toronto where life literally does not exist although it may pass by on the sidewalk occassionally.
Great to see your tour of Toronto.
I saw that you have discredited Toronto’s architecture in the first sentence when compared with St. Louis. However, through your picture slideshow one can find many victorians of Second Empire, Queen Anne, and Richardson Romanesque architecture that both cities contain. I admit St. Louis has a great architectural history with major building booms from 1860-1920s, but when was Toronto built up eras?
Does Toronto have a early French settlement area and may it be as small as St. Charles’s Frenchtown?
SMS – It may seem that Steve’s comments are contradictory, but I got the same impression of Toronto. It is a wonderful city that could be held as an example for North American cities in many ways. But, in my opinion, the older buildings of St. Louis are more interesting. This does not mean that Toronto is ugly, without style, or is without historic buildings. After seeing Toronto a couple of years ago, it reminded me that the potential of St. Louis is incredible and the potential is often neglected. Even at its lowest points, St. Louis is visually stimulating.
My biggest disappointment in Toronto was the disconnect between downtown and the riverfront developments due to a big highway. One could walk or take a streetcar, but the connection needs improvement. Also, the riverfront developments look good from a boat, but seem cold, disconnected, and overpowering at street level.
Toronto left me with a good impression. It is a city that I would live in without hesitation. The longer I was there, the more I liked it. It started to sink in how well it all works. A very civilized and livable city.