West side is the best side

[Docere]

Kingston has a sort of SW/NE split, with the West End (west of Queen's U.) being the most affluent and nice lakefront areas and the North End (north and east of Princess St.) being the poorer and most industrial part of town.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Docere

Or more SW/NE? The federal riding of Edmonton Griesbach (formerly Edmonton East) is the east end of the inner city.

Also, the "Jasper Place" suburbs to the west are more affluent than the "Beverly" suburbs to the east.

I'm glad Edmonton's been brought up, because it's a place I've wanted to ask about for a while. What's the general division of poor/affluent? Because it seems to me no matter what neighbourhood I read about, there's people that say it's super dangerous and you shouldn't live there. The only places people seem to be in agreement on being nice are the ones surrounding south Henday Drive...and I have a hard time believing that can be it. Any insight from anyone on a more detailed division of the city?

[vid]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Thunder Bay is a bit of a North-South thing, but with East-West divisions on both ends (though that's more an old-new division).

I'd say it's more east-west than north-south. Fort William is definitely poorer, but it has more industry. Port Arthur, aside from Intercity, has almost no real industry left. It never really had much to begin with—they only built their street railway in the first place to get their residents to Fort William for work.



http://www.northbynumbers.ca/

[J.OT13]

Reflecting a few other comments, there are huge class variations in small areas (Rockliffe and Vanier all the way south to Overbrook case-in-point) however, it is also well known that the western/south-western suburbs (Kanata, Barrhaven, Kemptville) are more expensive than the eastern suburb (Orleans, Rockland, Embrun, Castleman).

[Denscity]

This is yet another reason why Vancouvers prices are so high is that the west side is the ocean side.

[kel]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I'm glad Edmonton's been brought up, because it's a place I've wanted to ask about for a while. What's the general division of poor/affluent? Because it seems to me no matter what neighbourhood I read about, there's people that say it's super dangerous and you shouldn't live there. The only places people seem to be in agreement on being nice are the ones surrounding south Henday Drive...and I have a hard time believing that can be it. Any insight from anyone on a more detailed division of the city?

I don't think there is an area in Edmonton that would be considered super dangerous or even dangerous for that matter. Sure there are small sections maybe North of Downtown that I would not want to be walking alone in after dark but there are also parts of Vancouver and Calgary that I would not want to be walking in after dark. Having lived in Edmonton almost my whole life the only crime outside of speeding I have ever seen was a minor assault at a Mac store in the "affluent" Riverbend neighbourhood in the far South West.

[ssiguy]

Point of fact kids, the answer is quite easy.

Yes there are exceptions to every rule particularly dependent on the individual city's local topography but the answer is quite basic.............the progression of the railroads.

In NA, and even more so Canada} the history of industrialization can be ties to the history of our railroads and they were nearly always built east to west.

Our railroads were built and opened in sections connecting cities as they moved further west to open up new areas. When a city was connected to an existing major one it was mostly coming in from the east. This created railways that entered the city from the east. Industries and transportation link would build up around the railways corridor which by it's very nature meant the eastern side of the city.

The rich didn't want to live by industry and also didn't work there while the working class had to tolerate the exact opposite. As the railways continued to it's next destination it was going thru wealthier areas so industry was not allowed which is why you see railways going thru western parts of a city but not industry or low income housing around it.

This of course built upon itself and the wealthy politicians made very specific policy decisions to reinforce this urban growth form and hence all monies for parks, better roads, civic facilities, universities, museums, the arts etc ended up being in the downtown or western sections of the city.

In short, the railroad came from the east and stopped at the downtown. The rail yards and industry set up just east of the downtown and the urban planning of the city had been set.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Reflecting a few other comments, there are huge class variations in small areas (Rockliffe and Vanier all the way south to Overbrook case-in-point) however, it is also well known that the western/south-western suburbs (Kanata, Barrhaven, Kemptville) are more expensive than the eastern suburb (Orleans, Rockland, Embrun, Castleman).

Here's an income map for Ottawa:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ho...ap/ottawa.html

It's obvious where Rockcliffe Park is!

[vid]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Point of fact kids, the answer is quite easy.

Yes there are exceptions to every rule particularly dependent on the individual city's local topography but the answer is quite basic.............the progression of the railroads.

In NA, and even more so Canada} the history of industrialization can be ties to the history of our railroads and they were nearly always built east to west.

Our railroads were built and opened in sections connecting cities as they moved further west to open up new areas. When a city was connected to an existing major one it was mostly coming in from the east. This created railways that entered the city from the east. Industries and transportation link would build up around the railways corridor which by it's very nature meant the eastern side of the city.

The rich didn't want to live by industry and also didn't work there while the working class had to tolerate the exact opposite. As the railways continued to it's next destination it was going thru wealthier areas so industry was not allowed which is why you see railways going thru western parts of a city but not industry or low income housing around it.

This of course built upon itself and the wealthy politicians made very specific policy decisions to reinforce this urban growth form and hence all monies for parks, better roads, civic facilities, universities, museums, the arts etc ended up being in the downtown or western sections of the city.

In short, the railroad came from the east and stopped at the downtown. The rail yards and industry set up just east of the downtown and the urban planning of the city had been set.

Thunder Bay's railways came from the west...

[ssiguy]

I said there were some exceptions but generally rail lines were built from east to west.

[ue]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I'm glad Edmonton's been brought up, because it's a place I've wanted to ask about for a while. What's the general division of poor/affluent? Because it seems to me no matter what neighbourhood I read about, there's people that say it's super dangerous and you shouldn't live there. The only places people seem to be in agreement on being nice are the ones surrounding south Henday Drive...and I have a hard time believing that can be it. Any insight from anyone on a more detailed division of the city?

I'd say Edmonton has both south/north and west/east divides, but the south/north divide is much more pronounced. The west end is north of the river, but is more similar and connected to the southside. Because of the way the North Saskatchewan River bends southwest from downtown, much of the residential west end is still as far south as the southside is. The west end residential portion is also siphoned from the northside by industrial areas, whereas they are seamlessly connected with southwest communities aside from the river splitting things.

The northside is definitely much more blue collar and really lacks the affluence of the south and west sides. If you want to see affluence north of the Yellowhead, you'd best go to the bedroom community of St. Albert. The only northside (or eastside, depending on your definition) neighbourhood I'd describe as affluent is the Highlands, a 1920s streetcar suburb. The northside is also overall much more matured than other sides and has less greenfield development. Even neighbourhoods hugging the river, where most of Edmonton's affluent neighbourhoods are in the south and west, are much more middle class in the northeast, due to them directly facing Refinery Row on the other side of the river in Strathcona County. There are many middle class and upper middle class areas on the northside, just not very many very affluent areas aside from the Highlands.

The west end has the Jasper Place environs, Callingwood, Mayfield, etc for areas that are more lower income. And the southside has Mill Woods. So it's not like there is a particular "side" of Edmonton that is wholly affluent or better off, but overall the south and west are better off, with the edge given to the south, and the lower income areas on these sides of Edmonton aren't as rough around the edge as northside equivalents, overall.

Unsurprisingly, the most affluent area of Edmonton is where the south and west converge in the southwest, along the river valley as well as Whitemud Creek.

[SignalHillHiker]

Edmonton sounds as confusing as us.

This is how St. John's is oriented in people's minds:



The West End is left, the East End is right, the Southside Hills across from the downtown and at the bottom, and so on. All of the references we make to cardinal direction would be correct if the city was actually oriented as depicted above.

But in reality it's oriented this way:

[Pinion]

Vancouver doesn't have any industry on the west side. It all starts east of the Lions Gate bridge/Canada Place, and the winds always go east.

e.g. I ruled out living at Seylynn Village, the tower at the top of this image, in large part because of the stuff in the foreground to the west



That's a huge pile of open air coal in case it isn't clear.

Another good shot of the most expensive area in the country (British Properties) looking down on the industry to the east:



When I worked at the port my car was covered in a thick layer of soot every day, something you might not still expect in the 21st century.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

Not just Canada. Almost every major city in the US also follows this trend. The prevailing winds theory makes a lot of sense.

In many cities in the US, the north side is more affluent and the south side much less so...most noticeable in Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles and Washington DC.

Detroit is probably an exception, since the entire city is impoverished.

[north 42]

For Windsor, the west side is the worst side, because it borders the industrial areas of both Detroit and Windsor, while the south side is the most desirable and the east side is also good.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

In many cities in the US, the north side is more affluent and the south side much less so...most noticeable in Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles and Washington DC.

Detroit is probably an exception, since the entire city is impoverished.

Probably just happenstance. I don't think the Bronx is more affluent than Lower Manhattan and the SW parts of Brooklyn, for example.

East-west in our hemisphere, there's a good reason for that (prevailing winds). North-south, I don't see it.

[Spring2008]

Originally Posted by Docere

Or more SW/NE? The federal riding of Edmonton Griesbach (formerly Edmonton East) is the east end of the inner city.

Also, the "Jasper Place" suburbs to the west are more affluent than the "Beverly" suburbs to the east.

I would agree with the north/south edm split with north being very impoverished in large areas. Most of the inner-city surrounding the downtown(north and east particularly plus Jasper place to the west) look straight out of a zombie movie. Impoverished, deteriorating, with little to no redevelopment over the past few decades. Spills into downtown too, but not nearly as bad. Always can't wait to get out of there. South of the river, Whyte ave area is a lot better, but the surrounding residential stock still looks mostly old and run-down. Kind of surprised there hasn't been a lot more development in those hoods being close to the best strip in the city.

[yaletown_fella]

I think of Toronto as a north/south city, with the bulk of the wealth concentrated in the North end (Midtown, York Mills, Thornhill etc)

[Docere]

Toronto doesn't have a "south" though - that would be Lake Ontario. It's true though that the city's most affluent neighborhoods are clustered north of downtown. West and east ends of the Old City are about the same socioeconomically (traditionally working class but having seen much gentrification). However the western suburbs more affluent and expensive than the eastern suburbs overall.

[Xelebes]

The problem with Edmonton is that has an amalgamation of towns that result in many east-ends. Traditional Edmonton East End is East Jasper and that place is bombed out. East End of Old Jasper Place (151st street to 156 Street) is pretty run down. East End of Old Beverly has troubles with poorer housing options there.

East Strathcona (East of Gateway) has some run down building and some vacant lots but has the advantage of Whyte Avenue development creeping down it. Strathcona traditionally has the Ontarioan money, so it was pretty well off compared to Edmonton. The problem with Strathcona is that it did not have access to the Yellowhead CN Rail line, a much more lucrative rail line than the C&E Rail line between Edmonton and Calgary so it allowed itself to be amalgamated with Edmonton.

Old Duggan was scarcely built up when it amalgamated. I have seen some relics of the old town but not enough to say that it exists anymore. All the hosing there is pretty much new.

Old Bruderfeld has no traces remaining as far as I can tell. Old North Edmonton has a lock of old working class stock. A lot of coal mining was done there. Old Calder is another area of working class stock that is getting old, highly connected to the Yellowhead.