Downtown Canada

[kwoldtimer]

Av 9 de julio. Paseo de la Reforma. Av des Champs Elysees. Broad streets that turned the cores of BA, Mexico City, and Paris into desolate wastelands .....

[kool maudit]

In Copenhagen, the old town (within the former walls and gates at Vesterport, Nørreport, and Østerport) remains the centre but it is a bit touristy. In terms of major commercial activity, it is the 19th-century area immediately surrounding the gates, and particularly around the old Vesterport, that is the focus of most peoples' commutes, for example.

A lot of office activity is now focused on rebuilt areas outside of the immediate centre like Nordhavn, Tuborg Havn, Kalvebod Brygge etc.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Av 9 de julio. Paseo de la Reforma. Av des Champs Elysees. Broad streets that turned the cores of BA, Mexico City, and Paris into desolate wastelands .....

You're quite right, but it's a very delicate balance to achieve.

Do you really trust a North American suburban municipality like Vaughan to make that happen?

[niwell]

Those wide historic urban boulevards are quite spectacular, but they can still be fairly hostile to the pedestrian in some ways. While fine to walk down, activities will be more limited to one side of the street simply by the fact you can't cross over midblock like you can in a more narrow setting. The areas remain lively due to critical mass, and almost in spite of the street width.

I wouldn't trust any contemporary "grand boulevard", and that includes anything done in Europe.

[megadude]

Reading up a little on Mississauga, and when they amalgamated in the mid '70s, they chose a building at Hurontario and Dundas for city hall. And as this was when Square One was just a mall, and Hurontario and Dundas had a bunch of stores on all corners, I guess we could say that was Downtown.

Later on, they moved city hall to SQ1 area and of course built a new one that actually looks like a city hall in 90s. And SQ1 area is surrounded by condos and small office buildings so that's Downtown now as the city itself has stated. Basically shifted up one major road north to Burnhanthorpe. However, no one in Sauga actually says "I'm going to Downtown Mississauga". They might say "I'm going to Square One" even if they don't intend to go to the mall.

It's like that in Vaughan, Caledon, Halton Hills, Pickering and Ajax. There's no downtown. Though in these places the city hasn't specifically said there actually is a downtown like they have in Sauga.


insauga.com


adiseshan shankar / Alamy Stock Photo


http://www.squareonecondos.ca/


This is what Hurontario and Dundas looks like now. Sketchy is a good word to sum it up. Used to play pool around here a lot and you will still see plenty of sketchy people hanging around. And up until a few years ago, there was also a trailer park just to the west of there, hidden behind some businesses. Lease was up and they had to get the hell out of town. Thankfully plans are in the works for re-development of the neighbourhood. Condos will slowly be going up. It makes so much sense with Cooksville GO station being right there.


Rob Beintema/Metroland


Tony Bock Getty Images



This so called downtown may have the city hall and tall buildings, but lacks the charming main street lined with quaint stores on a water setting like neighbouring Oakville and Burlington, also on Lake Ontario.

Mississauga does have that neighbourhood in Port Credit at Hurontario and Lakeshore, where the Credit River meets Lake O. And Streetsville has the same thing but upstream on the Credit River.

But, with a population nearing 800k, downtown might as well be where the tall buildings are. It's just unconventional for a big city's downtown to not be on the water.



James Hackland / Alamy Stock Photo


https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/st...-st-mississauga-dezen-6x3-7x7-3x8.13599/

[megadude]

Personally I don't like wide boulevards, but when surrounded by charming, historic buildings, the area can still look nice. But I'd still rather see a narrower street. The wide thoroughfare still sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

A wide boulevard lined by modern towers won't look nice IMO.

[Beedok]

I don't think Hamilton's really ever moved much.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You're quite right, but it's a very delicate balance to achieve.

Do you really trust a North American suburban municipality like Vaughan to make that happen?

Totally not (in fact, I wouldn't have much hope in Vaughn's case even if the main drag were proposed as a two lane pedestrianized transitway), but my point was that there is much more involved than the breadth of a street.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I don't think Hamilton's really ever moved much.

Hamilton's is in kind of an odd location if that's where the city was first founded (Gore Park area), being kind of close to but not actually on any body of water. The North End would presumably be the more likely place to start a town, yet doesn't seem to be as old as points to the south. Any particular reason why Hamilton was built were it was?

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by speedog

The 1886 fires actually occurred where the current downtown is - Calgary was never incorporated until 1884 and at that time it's downtown was already where it currently is. Yes, the settlement of Calgary was originally east of the Elbow River in what is now called Inglewood but when Calgary officially became a place it was situated where downtown now is.

Correct. Just to give a visual, around the same time that the "Old downtown" looked like this (1883)




The "New downtown" looked like this (1884)




And by 1885 it had grown considerably






But then a fire burned down 14-18 buildings in 1886, and the law was put into place that new buildings must be built of stone, brick, concrete, or brick veneer.


3-4 years later it was transformed into this






A number of these buildings still remain






All photos from http://ww2.glenbow.org/search/archivesPhotosSearch.aspx

[240glt]

^ Calgary really did a fantastic job with 8th Avenue. Keeping the frontage to ~3 stories really opens up the street and showcases those old buildings

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Av 9 de julio. Paseo de la Reforma. Av des Champs Elysees. Broad streets that turned the cores of BA, Mexico City, and Paris into desolate wastelands .....

Right, and Vaughan fits in with those cities how exactly? For every Champs Elysees there's ten Highway 7s running through downtowns that are nowhere near exciting or fun places to be.

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by niwell

Those wide historic urban boulevards are quite spectacular, but they can still be fairly hostile to the pedestrian in some ways. While fine to walk down, activities will be more limited to one side of the street simply by the fact you can't cross over midblock like you can in a more narrow setting. The areas remain lively due to critical mass, and almost in spite of the street width.

I wouldn't trust any contemporary "grand boulevard", and that includes anything done in Europe.

I'd agree with that. Take Berlin's early GDR-era Karl-Marx-Allee, for example: While it's quite impressive for a host of reasons (its history, its architecture, its monumentality), it's hardly a hive for pedestrian activity.

[SteelTown]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Hamilton's is in kind of an odd location if that's where the city was first founded (Gore Park area), being kind of close to but not actually on any body of water. The North End would presumably be the more likely place to start a town, yet doesn't seem to be as old as points to the south. Any particular reason why Hamilton was built were it was?

George Hamilton as a private town developer that owned all of the land that's presently downtown. He was a shrewd developer, he worked with land owners such as James Durand and Nathaniel Hughson to benefit himself. James Durand owned the land from outside downtown to the waterfront and basically didn't keep up with George Hamilton, he managed to get a new courthouse, the Gore Park, jailhouse, new police department, etc. George Hamilton built the city to benefit his private fortunes.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

George Hamilton as a private town developer that owned all of the land that's presently downtown. He was a shrewd developer, he worked with land owners such as James Durand and Nathaniel Hughson to benefit himself. James Durand owned the land from outside downtown to the waterfront and basically didn't keep up with George Hamilton, he managed to get a new courthouse, the Gore Park, jailhouse, new police department, etc. George Hamilton built the city to benefit his private fortunes.

Interesting. I've always wondered about the odd remove of downtown Hamilton from the waterfront.

[Docere]

Starting with Toronto, though this can be done for other cities as well. Which of the following are and are not downtown?

The Annex
The Beaches
Cabbagetown
Casa Loma
Church-Wellesley
The Danforth
The Drake and the Gladstone
The Grange
Harbourfront
High Park
Kensington Market
Parkdale
Riverside
Rosedale
Trinity Bellwoods Park
University of Toronto - St. George campus
Yonge and Eglinton
Yorkville

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Docere

Starting with Toronto, though this can be done for other cities as well. Which of the following are and are not downtown?

The Annex
The Beaches
Cabbagetown
Casa Loma
Church-Wellesley
The Danforth
The Drake and the Gladstone
The Grange
Harbourfront
High Park
Kensington Market
Parkdale
Riverside
Rosedale
Trinity Bellwoods Park
University of Toronto - St. George campus
Yonge and Eglinton
Yorkville

Downtown: The Annex, Cabbagetown, Church-Wellesley, Kensington, Yorkville, Harbourfront, U of T St. George, The Grange.

Not downtown: Yonge and Eg, Trinity Bellwoods, Rosedale, Parkdale, High Park, Drake/Gladstone, Danforth, Beaches, Casa Loma.

Page 77 of this Toronto planning document shows the city's officlally decreed downtown borders, and I've never heard any good rationale as to why it should be changed.

If anything I'd be more open to shrinking the borders, rather than expanding (to University or Spadina at the west side, and Sherbourne or Parliament to the east).

But the city's definition seems fine by me...

[Coldrsx]

Edmonton:

Downtown - actual name of the CBD
Oliver
Grandin
Rossdale
Central McDougall
Queen Mary Park
Chinatown
Whyte?

Boyle Street

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Downtown: The Annex, Cabbagetown, Church-Wellesley, Kensington, Yorkville, Harbourfront, U of T St. George, The Grange.

Not downtown: Yonge and Eg, Trinity Bellwoods, Rosedale, Parkdale, High Park, Drake/Gladstone, Danforth, Beaches, Casa Loma.

Page 77 of this Toronto planning document shows the city's officlally decreed downtown borders, and I've never heard any good rationale as to why it should be changed.

If anything I'd be more open to shrinking the borders, rather than expanding (to University or Spadina at the west side, and Sherbourne or Parliament to the east).

But the city's definition seems fine by me...

Forgot a none of the above option.

[MonkeyRonin]

The official designation is one thing, but the actual colloquial use of "downtown" in Toronto is a little more abstract (part geographical, part directional) - and which, depending on context can mean pretty much everything from High Park to Riverdale, south of Bloor; or just the immediate core.

I live around College & Ossington, which is not technically downtown, yet in a non-inner Toronto setting I'd still say I live downtown. But if I have to go to the Eaton Centre or something I'd say I'm going downtown. And if I'm headed home then I'm leaving downtown.

So, I'd accept either answer for most of those neighbourhoods with no real argument one way or the other.