Huh, I guess Toronto’s more like California than NYC, then.
I think you’re conflating
municipalities with what are referred to as
CMAs (or, census metropolitan areas) here in Canada, and
MSAs (or, metropolitan statistical areas), in the U.S.
L.A. developed the way it did, distinct from NYC, largely due to when a) the development came to be, and b) the principal means of conveyance for people to move from point to point when that development occurred.
L.A., as you observed, began as a series of small towns, which were later stitched together as one of the towns — Los Angeles — grew rapidly following the rise of the petroleum industry and, in short order, the entertainment industry.
NYC, not unlike older U.S. cities as Chicago and Boston, started as ports of entry/trade and were clustered around that key trading activity — all of it underway before the automobile emerged as a means for transportation. From ports and trading came commodities exchanges, which concentrated a lot of wealth in very tight clusters.
Toronto, given when it came into being, how it grew, and the manner it developed as an inland port city, shares a great deal in common with the economic development history of Chicago.
The LA Metro area has a number of satellite cities that have their own job base and major central business districts. While the NYC metro area kinda has that (Jersey City might be the best example), we don’t have it to nearly the same extent as LA (which is part of the reason LA is so car dependent). This would be like Newark becoming bigger than Chicago, I suppose.
The NYC-Newark-Jersey City area is an MSA — the largest, in fact. MSAs and CMAs are useful for regional planning objectives, such as mass transit (like PATH and LIRR), water infrastructure, and air quality management.