Edmonton Renaissance - Page 3

Claeren · #41 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 5:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHOtime

yes, the southern route was to send a statement to the US that Canada had full intention of not lettimng the US expand north.

The connection the Klondike is vastly over estimated.

I would imagine that Edmonton being thge larger center up until the arrival of the RR was due to trading. The surrounding forest could support a much higher denisty of trapping thus you needed more support services. As a new settler from Europe given a plot of land it would make more sense to go to an area where more services existed, thus continueing the cycle. ....Just my theory.

Wasn't the 'old' Fort Edmonton used by fur trappers destroyed and located a considerable distance away?

I thought the 'new' Edmonton was more or less the same age as Calgary and built from scratch at that time, where-as Calgary had a very small but still existant fur trapper population base because it had not been destroyed? Maybe i am accelerating my timelines?

Claeren.

SHOFEAR · #42 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 5:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claeren

Wasn't the 'old' Fort Edmonton used by fur trappers destroyed and located a considerable distance away?

I thought the 'new' Edmonton was more or less the same age as Calgary and built from scratch at that time, where-as Calgary had a very small but still existant fur trapper population base because it had not been destroyed? Maybe i am accelerating my timelines?

Claeren.

As much as I would like to be that familar with the history of our cities, I'm not.

I would also imagine that the area surrounding Calgary was made up by ranching, where Edmonton was more about people working there quarter section of land. The latter would require less room, thus "higher" density and more services needed.

tuffyy · #43 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 5:47 AM**

Edmonton and Calgary are almost exactly the same in size,Calgary is ''slightly'' larger in population but not by a whole lot.Edmonton citys population is smaller but when you add Sherwood park,St.albert,etc we are on par.Sounds like the Shell move will happen from talk around work lately...Very exciting!!!

Xelebes · #44 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 6:02 AM**

Edmonton's first boom happened in 1899 - then called the Land Boom. The Klondike Gold Rush benefited Seattle, not Edmonton. The Alaska Highway and Blatchford Field, I think, brought confusion and let us assume that Edmonton was a Gateway to the North.

Rocket252 · #45 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 2:34 PM**

Why is it every topic in this forum eventually winds up as an Edmonton- Calgary comparison contest.

The basic fact today is that Calgary is doing very well for itself and is in the spotlight as far as name recognition, popularity and the place where the action is. Edmonton is gaining momentum but still needs to get its house in order. With the civic and business leadership in this city that will happen sooner then later.

Edmonton needs to promote itself far more because we have a "Calgary" in our province. That will take some time but I believe we can do it. Promote, Promote Promote

So lets see the comparison of the two cities for what it is right now and solve the problems in our own house.

freeweed · #46 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 3:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuffyy

Sounds like the Shell move will happen from talk around work lately...Very exciting!!!

Just out of curiosity... What Shell move?

Is this the idiotic "Shell is moving to Houston" rumour that refuses to die? Or is there now a rumour of Shell moving their head office to Edmonton?

Claeren · #47 Posted **Dec 29, 2006, 10:24 PM**

And why would it be a good thing for Edmonton?

What is bad for Calgary is bad for Alberta, and that means bad for Edmonton.

I wouldn't worry though, even if it did happen (it won't), few-to-none will actually move to Houston. A few hundred jobs would move but the employees will quit and stay and move into vacant positions elsewhere in Calgary and may even have a greater net benefit working in smaller growth companies then in a slower larger company like Shell.

Claeren.

ssiguy · #48 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 7:09 AM**

Calgary will continue to out perform Edmonton in population growth and national recognition.
The reality is that Edmonton is the city that gets no respect from the rest of the country...............in many ways its Canada's Rodney Dangerfield.
That may be changing but when you say Edmonton the first thing most in the rest of the country think of is WEM. The shopping centre that ate a city.
It is going to take a long time before downtown Edmonton regains it's prestige. Yes, the city's downtown populati is growing but there are more high rise condos/apt going up in London Ont than Edmonton right now.
All of this sounds glommy but Edmonton will be the city that will survive far better after the oil boom is gone.
Edmonton is a government, university, high-tech, medical city besides, of course, oil. Edmonton is not booming as much as Calgary because it is far more diversified. Its Edmonton's long-term strength and Calgary's possibly acheilles-heel.

Edmonchuck · #49 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 8:27 AM**

My wish for 2007 is to not see another stupid Ed vs Cal thread outside sports...

Calgary and Edmonton have been neck in neck for population their entire lives. Would it interest you capital city buffs that Athabasca was on the list?

Calgary was not bigger only to lose to Edmonton due to government jobs. That is bunk. The two cities just had different patterns that affected their growth. In fact, Calgary has had the seat of the premier more often than not, so one can argue, and prove especially in the past 33 years, that Calgary had the better political deal and that Edmonton got shafted.

The CPR knew that the Yellowhead route was the most efficient, but were "pursuaded" politically to do a southern route due to American expansion intentions. The Yellowhead is STILL the best route across the rockies.

Now, can we both get over the history and work together? The cities combined are still not as big as the GVA, and as for the GTA....yeah right....

spiritedenergy · #50 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 8:33 AM**

my supervisor told me that Edmonton is rather clueless and without a true personality, and advised me to skip it if (when) i'll do a trip to the west... is he right? Well, I guess you'll say no

CMD UW · #51 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 9:10 AM**

/\ If your supervisor is saying that, then I advise you to be cautious of his directions / advice because that statement proves that he has no clue.

Distill3d · #52 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 5:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiritedenergy

my supervisor told me that Edmonton is rather clueless and without a true personality, and advised me to skip it if (when) i'll do a trip to the west... is he right? Well, I guess you'll say no

someone once told me that when i was living in Vancouver. then i had a 12 hour layover there on my way to Grande Prairie. I fell in love with the city and almost didn't want to leave Edmonton. I ended up having a short stay in GP and moving to Edmonton for over a year.

though quiet nationally (aside from the sports teams), Edmonton is a diverse place. if you do go, make sure to go in mid - late july theres loads to do in the city that give it a very distinct personality.

Distill3d · #53 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 5:16 PM**

and for the record:

Calgary has less personality then Edmonton. Calgary is much like the western Canadian Toronto...(i know thats gonna start an arguement). Its kinda funny to watch and live in.

Compairing Edmonton and Calgary is like Compairing Jasper and Banff. Banff is this big time tourista corporate whore that tries hard to be Canada's version of Aspen. Jasper is a secret that you only find out about and fall in love with after you've been there.

Doug · #54 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 6:14 PM**

Curiously, Edmonton seems older than Calgary even though it isn't. Sure it was established a hundred years earlier, but in terms of growth and development both cities have followed similar profiles. Maybe Edmonton feels more mature because it is better rounded.

Boris2k7 · #55 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Distill3d

and for the record:

Calgary has less personality then Edmonton. Calgary is much like the western Canadian Toronto...(i know thats gonna start an arguement). Its kinda funny to watch and live in.

I don't know about that one. Have lived in both cities and visit Edmonton often, and I wouldn't say that Calgary has any less personality than Edmonton, or more for that matter. I think they are both pretty distinct. It's like arguments over "culture," as if the term was limited to the number and age of museums in a town... Unless you are totally out of it, it seems impossible to mistake Edmonton for Winnipeg and Montreal, or Calgary for Vancouver and Toronto.

Quote:

Compairing Edmonton and Calgary is like Compairing Jasper and Banff. Banff is this big time tourista corporate whore that tries hard to be Canada's version of Aspen. Jasper is a secret that you only find out about and fall in love with after you've been there.

Personally, I like Banff far more than I like Jasper. Sure Jasper is nice, but it is WAAAY too quiet. I like the hustle and bustle of Banff streets, and I think the vitality of the town really adds to the range of activities that one can do in a day. But I see your point, not that many people have ever been to Jasper and it is something that you have to find out about on your own. I blame weak marketing.

Coldrsx · #56 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiritedenergy

my supervisor told me that Edmonton is rather clueless and without a true personality, and advised me to skip it if (when) i'll do a trip to the west... is he right? Well, I guess you'll say no

my supervisor told me you are an idiot.

feepa · #57 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boris550

Personally, I like Banff far more than I like Jasper. Sure Jasper is nice, but it is WAAAY too quiet. I like the hustle and bustle of Banff streets, and I think the vitality of the town really adds to the range of activities that one can do in a day. But I see your point, not that many people have ever been to Jasper and it is something that you have to find out about on your own. I blame weak marketing.

Not to say anything against Banff (or jasper), but if I wanted an urban holiday, I would visit a city, not a national PARK. Isnt a park about wildlife, and not hustle and bustle and cars and streets and buildings and city life? Also, I think the original post was about the actual parks themselves, and not the towns in the parks, but thats just me

Distill3d · #58 Posted **Dec 31, 2006, 10:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boris550

...Unless you are totally out of it, it seems impossible to mistake Edmonton for Winnipeg and Montreal, or Calgary for Vancouver and Toronto.

where as i don't totally disagree with you, the comparison was just done broadly. if anything, Edmonton is more like Vancouver (Vancouver is the most canadian of all the major Canadian cities i've been in, they don't even have a WalMart in the city of Vancouver..) and Calgary is more of a Toronto of the west. Everyone, their dog, and their nieces comes to Calgary and everyone forgets Edmonton. which, in my opinion is a good thing. I like Edmonton's big small town atmosphere. even the little holes in the walls in Edmonton (like Nikita's on Rice Howard Way) are by far more friendly and open then the wholes in the walls (like The House in Kengsington) Calgary has.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boris550

Personally, I like Banff far more than I like Jasper. Sure Jasper is nice, but it is WAAAY too quiet. I like the hustle and bustle of Banff streets, and I think the vitality of the town really adds to the range of activities that one can do in a day. But I see your point, not that many people have ever been to Jasper and it is something that you have to find out about on your own. I blame weak marketing.

peace and quiet are what i look for when i leave the city. in any case i prefer Waterton and Jasper to Banff. i agree that perhaps its poor marketing.

spiritedenergy · #59 Posted **Jan 2, 2007, 2:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

my supervisor told me you are an idiot.

well, judging from your smart edmontonian reply, i think he's right. Go back to the mall, kid.

feepa · #60 Posted **Jan 2, 2007, 5:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiritedenergy

well, judging from your smart edmontonian reply, i think he's right. Go back to the mall, kid.

Geez, a guy joins the SSP in Dec 2006 (spiritedenergy), post 20+ posts, and for the most part, seems to be just to incite flame wars. Now hes telling one of the more respected members of this forum community to go back to a mall, and calling him a kid?

Thats irony if I ever saw/read it