Downtown

[David A]

Honestly the dream scenario for the Quarters (for me) would be that it somehow turns into something like Flushing’s Chinatown in Queens. I feel like that fits the area more than East Village 2.0 Edmonton edition.

If there is some grand city vision of the Quarters having to be East Village 2.0 that is holding back other development right now, then I feel this really needs to change.

Perhaps this is where we get into trouble trying to blindly copy other cities because of their proximity and similar size, but really are not always good models for us to follow, because in important ways our situation is different.

 

[thommyjo]

I could imagine part of the “too big” idea also comes from the general population of the entire city vs the size of our downtown. (Not to mention whyte ave almost being like an extension of our central entertainment/Main Street/tourism/arts space).

Our core shouldn’t be 30 blocks east to west. It should be 12 for being a city of 1 million. Our downtown might fill in at 3mil in the entire city, but we started too big and spread out.

Even a simple, recent example: Epcor/stationlands where it is (I get why that land came available), but imagine those developments along 103ave or jasper from 104-108st. Way more helpful than skipping over a few more empty parking lots that we now need to await for significant proposals to fill.

 

[David A]

I could imagine part of the “too big” idea also comes from the general population of the entire city vs the size of our downtown. (Not to mention whyte ave almost being like an extension of our central entertainment/Main Street/tourism/arts space).

Our core shouldn’t be 30 blocks east to west. It should be 12 for being a city of 1 million. Our downtown might fill in at 3mil in the entire city, but we started too big and spread out.

Even a simple, recent example: Epcor/stationlands where it is (I get why that land came available), but imagine those developments along 103ave or jasper from 104-108st. Way more helpful than skipping over a few more empty parking lots that we now need to await for significant proposals to fill.

Our core isn't 30 blocks and Whyte Ave is not part of downtown. Perhaps this may not be clear to a casual visitor from a large US city .

The first misconception may stem from railway lands being mostly filled, so there is no clear border anymore between the primarily residential area west of 109 Street and the core area from 97 Street to 109 Street (12 blocks ).

 

[kcantor]

^

You’re correct that there are no clear borders
To Edmonton’s downtown. But, having said that, I don’t believe the issue is made better by artificially making it smaller.

The issue is as much perception than reality. Most people who live in Oliver, Central McDougall, Macaulay, Boyle Street, Riverdale and Rossdale consider themselves “inner city” residents. Include them all in downtown! They can retain their local characteristics just as the warehouse district and the government district and the financial district and the arts and entertainment district and the Quarters all have their own identities and characteristics.

In terms of reporting how many people live downtown and downtown’s density and “things to do downtown”, it would go a long way to improving the perception of downtown, particularly for those that rarely go there or for those from elsewhere looking at Edmonton.

 

[David A]

I really don't believe the issue is made better by artificially expanding and confusing it either. So I prefer to use the term downtown core to distinguish between the area of higher density commercial and residential space and other distinct areas.

When people say they are going downtown in Edmonton, they probably mean to this core area to go a concert, a hockey game, a business meeting or more in the past for retail shopping or to a movie. They probably do not mean Whyte Ave and although 95 Street is physically quite close to downtown, a rooming house there and a high rise office or residential tower several blocks away are worlds away.

 

[kcantor]

^

I’m not meaning to play word games but we are talking about semantics…

Firstly, you could still have your “downtown core” within a larger downtown area that would include what I listed above.

Secondly, “downtown” already includes all of the legislative grounds stretching south to the river and east to 105 Street so dense and/or zoned for density are not a criteria.

It also includes everything west of Bellamy Hill and south to 97th Avenue, an area that has historically - and still - included uses you say shouldn’t be included downtown because they’re “worlds away”.

Besides, planning and zoning and city building should accommodate what a city is trying to build, not what’s in place today, otherwise there would be no need for it…

 

[David A]

I referred to the downtown core as having higher density commercial and residential spaces, so that probably includes most of the Bellamy Hill area south to 97th Ave, although I realize there are still a few SFH's there.

My interpretation of what people usually mean or where they go when they refer to going downtown had specific examples but was not meant to be exhaustive or limiting. For instance, I didn't mention restaurants, bars or big hotels of which there are a number of downtown, but perhaps that all falls under the commercial spaces I referred to.

The original comments about our downtown being so big, I believe were specifically raised in a speaker in connection with the DBA, which mostly covers the core area. So while we can debate the exact boundaries, I feel I am interpreting them fairly accurately as being about the downtown core in this particular situation.

 

[kcantor]

^
Fair enough David…

If nothing else, I think we’ve demonstrated that boundaries are a little bit like statistics in that they can be set to make or facilitate almost any point or opinion one wants to make.

 

[archited]

OEG and MacU Student development partnership...

MacEwan University, Oilers Entertainment Group team up to assist students

www.macewan.ca

Note the lines on next phase developments for the ICE District and more facilities... "Signing the MOU with MacEwan is timely as OEG prepares for its next phase of development through the expansion of ICE District, focused on adding more housing for residents and more amenities for visitors to the city."

 

[itom987]

Filling in those vacant lots should be our top priority. This will be easier to accomplish given how tough the battle was to remove the height limit.

 

[thommyjo]

Our core isn't 30 blocks and Whyte Ave is not part of downtown. Perhaps this may not be clear to a casual visitor from a large US city .

The first misconception may stem from railway lands being mostly filled, so there is no clear border anymore between the primarily residential area west of 109 Street and the core area from 97 Street to 109 Street (12 blocks ).

I’m not suggesting whyte ave is “downtown”. I’m suggesting for a city of our size, having a vibrant, commercial, entertainment, arts street like whyte ave be seperate from our proper downtown spreads out the places people go. Same with 124th, brewery district, and Oliver. Anejo, cactus, local, developments like Citizen and the Pearl, etc. all could be concentrated closer together and create a very vibrant 12 block downtown. But instead, they’re spread out beyond a walkable distance.

So some people are on whyte, some near 109st garneau, others RHW, some Ice District or 104th. Other on jasper ave in Oliver, or 124th, or brewery district bars. It’s just too many areas that aren’t continuous.

If those all existed 109st to 97st, 104ave to the valley edge, we would have a BUMPIN downtown.

 

[Offworld]

Our core shouldn’t be 30 blocks east to west. It should be 12 for being a city of 1 million. Our downtown might fill in at 3mil in the entire city, but we started too big and spread out.

Perhaps that's where part of the too big argument falls apart: consider everything west of 109th Street the sister of Calgary's Beltline. The Beltline is not "downtown".

Put some geographic boundaries on what is truly downtown, and then we have a setting to distill the discussion to its purest form.

 

[northlands]

Perhaps that's where part of the too big argument falls apart: consider everything west of 109th Street the sister of Calgary's Beltline. The Beltline is not "downtown".

Put some geographic boundaries on what is truly downtown, and then we have a setting to distill the discussion to its purest form.

Kind of a tricky comparison considering there's a massive rail ROW that clearly establishes the ~15 block delineation of Downtown from the Beltline. If 109th was a similar rail corridor, we'd probably see a lot more clear distinction of what is really "downtown" in Edmonton to the average person rather than the conflation of Wihkwentowin being basically downtown (how many times have you spoke to someone who says they live "downtown" but are actually at like 121st and Jasper??). Ironically I think changing the name from Oliver will probably drive more folks to just call it downtown also out of simplicity.

Also doesn't help that Google Maps puts the 'Downtown" label for Edmonton right at 109 and Jasper...

 

[archited]

The "Bumpin" downtown is on its way -- to quote a line from TV's "Kung Fu"... "patience grasshopper". What are the downtown generative elements that are on the way? Rapid expansions of two Universities -- MacU and NorQuest, Development of ICE District Phase 2, Expansion of Stationlands, Development of 3 Westrich projects on 104th Street, tower development of ICE District Phase I, second phases of both Falcon and Parks, and Student Housing project aligned with Maclab and Norquest on 108th Street. We already have evidence that downtown Restaurant crowds are expansive and frequent and that the Arena is generating a lot of buzz. Once these "known projects" kick into gear it will be "gold rush" time akin to downtown in the 21st Century-teens. Still hoped for -- a new downtown stadium, development of the 101st and 102nd street property, the Shift and other Warehouse-District-Park-encircling apartments, and a ton of other not yet divulged developments. Also the West Leg of the LRT will be completed in the next couple of years and 102nd Avenue will face pressure to "pedestrianize". The short-term future is so bright it is time to invest in sunglasses No need to "manage" development -- this will all happen organically.

 

[erudyk_29]

Everyone is going to have a different way of dividing up the centre of the city and this is super subjective but for me it goes a bit like this:

These are the official boundaries of the Neighbourhood considered Downtown. I personally find it hard to consider anything west of 105th st truly downtown, and I think this is where the "too big" sentiment comes from.

I would cut this area up into a few different districts personally:

- The CBD with ICE District being sort of a sub district within it and being the core of Downtown plus The Arts District which are fully in located within downtown proper

and then a couple more areas which sort of straddle the line between Downtown and not downtown imo:
- MacEwen
- Warehouse District
- Capital / Leg District

I would draw the line of "Downtown" and "not Downtown" here personally:

Everyone is going to have a different definition but as of right now I would have it like this:

Everything that's on the Tablelands or right on the edge of them between 105th st to the West, 97th st to the East, 105th Ave to the North and 97th Ave to the south. Which coincidentally is 8 blocks north-south and east-west.

This is fluid however, and as the Warehouse District expands westward with projects like The Parks and the Warehouse District Park I think I would extend it maybe as far as 109th St. Once again this is just my opinion and I know everyone is going to think differently. I also struggle to draw a definitive line, which as some have pointed out leads to some people thinking downtown is bigger than it is, but I think is a good thing and adds a layer of complexity that's sorely lacking in much of the city.