Quote:
Originally Posted by ciudad_del_norte
Some good points here. Not sure I would agree with all of it, but overall a good assessment. I think there are a lot of similarities between Edmonton and Winnipeg, but they are more cultural than city form and infrastructure. Edmonton and Saskatoon are probably have the closest parallels on that front. They are also probably the most similar in terms of geography and vegetation. As it's been said by others Edmonton and Calgary have a lot of similarities generally but I also find in terms of parallel areas/infrastructure they are pretty different, but you see the impacts of being the same size(ish) and being in the same province. There are some projects like the Jubilee Auditoriums or hospitals in both cities where the same design was used in each.
|
There's a lot of cultural similarities for sure, but I found that to be more true 15 years ago. Edmonton spent the 2010s getting back its mojo and feels a lot more dynamic, bigger, and energetic. In some ways, that means it's less "cool" than Winnipeg now, but there's still similar "feels" between the two. I think if you injected Winnipeg with a bunch of oil money it would probably act almost identically to Edmonton.
One other aspect to Edmonton is that it's very utilitarian and value-engineered, perhaps more obviously than any other major Canadian city. This has both good and bad aspects. For example, the city is very straightforward to get around, much more so than Winnipeg, but on the other hand, it's quite ugly when you take away the natural beauty of the river valley. You could chalk this up to being more city form/infrastructure, but I think it's also a reflection of the culture of both cities. Edmonton swings and misses because Edmontonians tend to have poor taste and prioritize convenience and efficiency, which means getting around is probably the easiest in Canada for >500,000 cities. Winnipeggers are marred by a status quo inertia but because of various legacies, tend to have significantly better aesthetic considerations than Edmonton. The most notable example of this is that you don't have as much cheap, value-engineered architecture as Edmonton, particularly in prominent locations.
I agree with you about Edmonton and Calgary. They're actually pretty different, but still share a lot due to proximity and politics. Peter Lougheed/Grey Nuns is another fun doppelganger. Calgarians act differently than Edmontonians, even if the latter seem to be aspiring to the former, it doesn't change the nature of each group. 17th Ave and Whyte Ave have had some cross-pollination of businesses too, but they look and feel different. Edmonton put all its eggs in one basket with Whyte, whereas Calgary has boosted main streets all around quite well, and now has vibrant urban areas with 17th/4th, Kensington, Inglewood, and Stephen. Bridgeland is getting there too. In Edmonton, 124th Street is still underwhelming, 20 years later. Calgary is a lot flashier and a lot more successful when it makes an attempt than Edmonton, but feels a lot more shallow too. The geography and vegetation is also totally different -- Edmonton's vegetation is closer to Winnipeg's actually.
Edit: I also wanted to say I changed some of my original post you quoted at the top of the last page. I thought about it some more and clarified my thoughts more regarding some cultural distinctions as I don't think I was as clear as I could have been. There's a fair amount of cultural similarities between Edmonton and Winnipeg, but if you spend enough time in both cities, there's certain things that are
just a bit more prominent in one vs the other in the local culture, which is I think what I'm picking up on.
Prev
Kinda depressing to keep that slogan when you haven't won a major sporting event in decades. I think they actually voted to remove it because it was being mocked. The new sign should have said "Edmonton: City of Mullets". Or perhaps "Edmonton: A City" or even better "Edmonton: Stuccoland".
Linear Mode
