Urban Core Rankings: Boston, San Francisco, Toronto, DC, Minneapolis

[Trafalgar Law]

Originally Posted by Nn2036

Multiple photos of the same few blocks. Walk to the next street and it is a jungle of depressing grey brick.

A few things;

1. You said Montreal "lacks of large cohesive historic district." You were dismissed there by means of Old Montreal, the oldest section of the city, founded in the mid-1600s and built up to its current boundary by 1725 which is in every sense the city's premier historic district.

2. Now that you've (seemingly and finally) accepted that there is in fact a "large cohesive historic district" you're inaccurately portraying it to be smaller and uglier than it is, it's not ugly at all nor is it small.

3. Speaking of making it out to be smaller than it is, you realize that those photos that I posted in my response to you are of more than just "same few blocks", right? I'd know, I hand selected them to post. Try multiple different streets all over the district in Old Montreal; Rue Notre-Dame, Rue Saint-Paul, Rue Saint-Antoine, Rue Saint Vincent, Rue Saint-Claude, and others. Try all over the district, from one end to the other, and not just "within a few of the same blocks."

4. Speaking of the district, it's actually a very large historic district. It is bounded by Montreal's CBD on one side and the Saint Lawrence River on the other with a park to buffer between the river banks and the district itself, so your comment of going a block over and seeing "depressing grey" is a completely asinine statement given that if you leave the district and go a block over in one direction you land in a park and then the watery banks of the river and the docks along the riverfront, and in the other direction you enter the CBD and top commercial zones in Montreal, as well as neighboring districts like Chinatown. None of which are "depressing" or "grey".

The exact boundaries of Old Montreal (Montreal's top historic district and one of the very best in all of North America) have been the same since the 1700s when it was initially settled and founded:

(Then - historical context from the 1700s):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...treal_1725.jpg

(Now - the area inside the red lines are Old Montreal):


Old Montreal is not just the historic foundations of the city but also a highly active commercial zone in its own right, with amenities galore in the sense of shops, restaurants, hotels, and many other various day-to-day uses. The architecture of the district in conjunction with its well maintained look to go with the personalized human scaled build make it one of North America's absolute best overall historic districts. All of those things are labeled in the three-dimensional template of Old Montreal here, by way of my Apple device, really, it just speaks for itself:

(First one without amenities labeled in Old Montreal - a flyover aerial of the Old Montreal Historic District):



(Now with amenities labeled and three-dimensional graphics of the Old Montreal Historic District that outlines the density, urbanity, architecture, amenities, and human scaled build):






You're batting 0-3, you haven't been able to get a single thing right so far. Maybe wave the white flag now and move on to another topic. LOL, comical, really.

[Natnasci]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't often say this on here but you're totally clueless.


Montreal doesn't have historic areas on the scale of some European cities but it certainly has more than Toronto does. (Which is a function of its age of course.)


And BTW those photos aren't all of the same block.

Sigh. Do you think they have even been? Mind you, that may not be a good criteria. I've known people to visit Vancouver and think the city is an island.

[Ne999]

Did you say NYC can match? Toronoto isn't a pimple on NYC's backside. Be happy you're winning your poll. Youre with the right competition. Cities and urban cores are more than skylines. Much much more. In fact on a list of what makes an urban core great a skyline is somewhere near the bottom.

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by bostonkid123

I think we can all agree that it's best to ignore Mr. Burns henceforth (nothing against him personally).

I live in Toronto and can barely read his posts with a straight face Most Torontonians I know, at least those who are relatively well-traveled, are well aware of the fact that Toronto doesn't hold a candle to NYC, and it has a long journey ahead in terms of transit infrastructure and urban (midrise) density development before it reaches the level of other global cities. The reality is that, at the moment and for the next 1-2 decades, Toronto is and will be very much a city in transition - you will see areas with highly developed density, vibrancy, and transit infrastructure, but you will also find areas of growth that are complete suburban sprawls.

.