What makes a city feel large?

[kool maudit]

This is on my mind following my considered (read: long-winded) reply to the skylines thread, in which I anatomized what to me appear as the failings of Montreal's gappy and overstretched downtown.

Obviously, there are elements of visible city size that correlate near-directly to population size. Halifax simply cannot provide, for instance, the human crush or built scale of Boston. It's just that much smaller.

Other elements, however, track real population less exactly. I have just moved to Stockholm from Copenhagen, for example, and despite near-identical populations, Stockholm feels quite a bit larger.

The crowds are the same. Two million people is two million people. But aspects of landscape and architectural style combine to make Stockholm appear much larger to me. This seems a little subjective, which is why I phrased the topic as a question; some people, like me, notice this difference. Others do not. Still others, it seems, feel the opposite.

Stockholm is located on an archipelago, so its central area is confined to one large peninsula and two nearby islands. As such, there is a bit of a 'Manhattan effect'. The lack of space has squeezed building sizes higher in the core, and your average Stockholm street has one or two extra storeys on each building as compared to its Danish neighbour.

Beyond the central area, Stockholm loses its 19th century feel less gradually than Copenhagen. You transition very abruptly across the bridges from "European wedding cake" to modern apartment blocks interspersed with either villas or townhouse complexes. Copenhagen, by contrast, meanders a little further with three-storey versions of the classic Euro high street surrounded by closely-packed houses.

The trick Stockholm plays on my eye is this: the centre is more grandiose, and the surrounding low-density sprawl goes much further due to the interruptions of the land (many islands, cliffs, waterways). Again due to the land, these low-density areas are connected by large-scale infrastructure like multi-level expressways, tunnels, big bridges, signage. This gives it a metropolitan feel, or the visible sense of connection to a major centre. Copenhagen sprawls more, travelling along modest main streets and losing its central steam over a greater distance.

In Canada, I was always surprised and dismayed by how much larger Toronto felt than Montreal, and this dates back to the early '90s when the population difference was much more minimal.

It seems I always fall for the same trick: Toronto has an astonishing core and a broad spread of lower-density areas linked by some heavy-duty machinery (the 401, for example). Montreal, by contrast, actually has a more substantial inner-city to this day, but the land means that things are always dipping out of view, meandering, tucking themselves away.

I have always wondered what the two cities seemed like in comparison c. 1980, when their populations were identical. Toronto would still have had those views -- downtown and the CN Tower from Queen East in the Beaches, those long glances down the arterials -- but Montreal would have been able to put together so many more "solid blocks", so many more corners without a disappointing lot or shitty duplex.

Canada has a really broad assortment of cities that might feel large or small in totally different ways. Quebec and Ottawa, Edmonton and Halifax, we border on apples/oranges, almost. Quebec tends to strike me as very imposing whereas for others it seems to appear as a mere town. Ottawa, contrastingly, never struck me as a large place despite its collection of crowds and gestures.

This is one of those weird threads produced after wandering around and taking in impressions. Curious to hear yours, based on whatever examples.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

I have always wondered what the two cities seemed like in comparison c. 1980, when their populations were identical. Toronto would still have had those views -- downtown and the CN Tower from Queen East in the Beaches, those long glances down the arterials -- but Montreal would have been able to put together so many more "solid blocks", so many more corners without a disappointing lot or shitty duplex.

.

What do you mean by this exactly? That Montreal would have felt more "complete" in 1980 than it does today? Less gappy? Fewer vacant lots and decrepit buildings?

[kool maudit]

Not that Montreal would have been more complete, but that TO would have been much less so. RIP Queens Hotel tho.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

Not that Montreal would have been more complete, but that TO would have been much less so. RIP Queens Hotel tho.

OK because Montreal around 1980 was kind of a the mid-point of a slow decline that bottomed out in the 1990s, before starting to rise up again towards the latter part of that decade.

I was a kid back (1980) then but had a good enough eye for things.

[Acajack]

I've mentioned before that when I was a kid I lived for a time just outside Ottawa in Eastern Ontario.

To my friends and I (we were not generally Quebecers BTW) a place like Quebec City felt bigger than Ottawa because it had an NHL team, had TV shows set there like Lance et compte (He Shoots He Scores), had a bigger winter carnival that was much more fun - read booze available all over the place - and more international visitors, had more and bigger highways and bigger malls with midway rides inside them, a waterpark, cool winter activities other than skiing and skating like inner tube hills with loud pop music and discotheque style lighting, cuter more stylish girls who weren't as "square", better bars and nightlife and generally had more panache and style. They even had FM radio stations playing pop music which believe it or not Ottawa did not yet have!

At the time, the metro population difference between Quebec City and Ottawa(-Hull) was probably in the 200,000 range. Today it's almost in the 500,000 range, and Quebec City though still great has in most ways been left in the dust by Ottawa when it comes to how big either one feels relative to the other.

[someone123]

I think that the number of people in a metropolitan area creates a ceiling for how busy it can get but most North American cities are so far below this ceiling that the population doesn't matter much. Most people in metro Boston or Halifax are out in suburban areas, not walking around downtown at any given moment.

One aspect of city size that doesn't get brought up much is the type of shops and offices you find in a given area. A more vibrant city will have areas where space is at a premium and this means packed in major retailers along commercial streets. The opposite is when you've got a main street that consists of a Money Mart, Subway, pawn shop, and a bunch of empty storefronts.

There's also a subtle human aspect. Are people drawn to the place from a wide area, or do most who are born there end up leaving?

[begratto]

Originally Posted by Acajack

At the time, the metro population difference between Quebec City and Ottawa(-Hull) was probably in the 200,000 range. Today it's almost in the 500,000 range, and Quebec City though still great has in most ways been left in the dust by Ottawa when it comes to how big either one feels relative to the other.

Really?

Ottawa has a few things going for it : the newly-inaugurated O-Train definitely give it a bigger city feel. It is also helped by the the Rideau Centre's presence is in the city centre (Quebec City doesn't have a downtown mall) and the concentration of office towers downtown. Quebec City's are more spread out.

However, I find that Quebec has way more interesting "urban" areas than Ottawa, where one can walk, be surrounded by other pedestrians, and feel the urbanity.

Rideau st. feels more urban than rue St-Jean inside the walls, for sure, but for a shorter strech. But outside of Old Quebec, QC has way more neighbourhoods that you can explore on foot and not be the only one walking there : St-Jean-Baptiste, St-Roch, rue Cartier, rue Maguire, 3e avenue in Limoilou, Côte-du-Passage and rue Bégin in Lévis, to name the main ones.

Ottawa has some "main streets" which are somewhat comparable, like Bank in the Glebe, maybe even Wellington West, but still they have a more "suburbanish" feeling (to me at least) vs the Quebec streets I mentioned. I feel that they lack the pedestrian traffic that you find on Quebec City commercial streets. The Quebec City "main streets" generally also feel more polished, with better street furniture, wider sidewalks, more trees, buried electric wires, etc.

Even the Ste-Foy malls have a more urban vibe than their Ottawa equivalents, like Bayshore, St.Laurent, Promenades Gatineau, Place d'Orleans, which are more similar to Galeries de la Capitale. The Ste-Foy malls are closer to the main boulevards, not separated from transit by a sea of parking. And once boulevard Laurier is reconfigured for the LRT, I expect the area to densify and to have a more "urban" feel.

It's all subjective, but to this montrealer, there is no clear winner in terms of urbanity or big-city feeling between Ottawa and Quebec City.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by someone123

I think that the number of people in a metropolitan area creates a ceiling for how busy it can get but most North American cities are so far below this ceiling that the population doesn't matter much. Most people in metro Boston or Halifax are out in suburban areas, not walking around downtown at any given moment.

This is also my view. Some people such as kool maudit refer to the "human crush" of Toronto (I've read that many times on this forum from other people as well), but personally I have rarely experienced that human crush in any city in Canada and the US with the exception of NYC. Of course I am not counting special events such as festivals, otherwise I could say I have experienced a human crush in Kingston during the busker festival.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by begratto

Really?

Ottawa has a few things going for it : the newly-inaugurated O-Train definitely give it a bigger city feel. It is also helped by the the Rideau Centre's presence is in the city centre (Quebec City doesn't have a downtown mall) and the concentration of office towers downtown. Quebec City's are more spread out.

However, I find that Quebec has way more interesting "urban" areas than Ottawa, where one can walk, be surrounded by other pedestrians, and feel the urbanity.

Rideau st. feels more urban than rue St-Jean inside the walls, for sure, but for a shorter strech. But outside of Old Quebec, QC has way more neighbourhoods that you can explore on foot and not be the only one walking there : St-Jean-Baptiste, St-Roch, rue Cartier, rue Maguire, 3e avenue in Limoilou, Côte-du-Passage and rue Bégin in Lévis, to name the main ones.

Ottawa has some "main streets" which are somewhat comparable, like Bank in the Glebe, maybe even Wellington West, but still they have a more "suburbanish" feeling (to me at least) vs the Quebec streets I mentioned. I feel that they lack the pedestrian traffic that you find on Quebec City commercial streets. The Quebec City "main streets" generally also feel more polished, with better street furniture, wider sidewalks, more trees, buried electric wires, etc.

Even the Ste-Foy malls have a more urban vibe than their Ottawa equivalents, like Bayshore, St.Laurent, Promenades Gatineau, Place d'Orleans, which are more similar to Galeries de la Capitale. The Ste-Foy malls are closer to the main boulevards, not separated from transit by a sea of parking. And once boulevard Laurier is reconfigured for the LRT, I expect the area to densify and to have a more "urban" feel.

It's all subjective, but to this montrealer, there is no clear winner in terms of urbanity or big-city feeling between Ottawa and Quebec City.

In general, I would say that both Ottawa and Quebec City are seen as mostly suburban cities with a denser, old historic core and some mature inner neighbourhoods. I don't go to Quebec City often enough to compare them though. But based on my visits here and there, from my experience they feel -kinda- similar. I still get the feeling that Ottawa feels larger though, but perhaps not considerably. Ottawa's CBD does not really have an equivalent in Q.C. as Ste-Foy is still underbuilt. It is one of the few areas in the city where one can think it "feels big".

[savevp]

To me, what makes Toronto feel massive is the forest of suburban skyscrapers. Driving along the 401 and passing through wave after wave of 40+ storey towers without ever going near the city centre, or the 403 through Mississauga, is mindboggling. Vancouver feels large by the same token, though it's CBD feels (and is) significantly smaller.

The original point about the transition from centre to suburbs, basically, is interesting. Calgary and Edmonton maybe feel a bit smaller to me because of how quickly you're into mid-century low rise development - Calgary especially when heading north across the river.

Calgary however feels bigger because of its huge office tower density; something Vancouver doesn't have. The relative overemphasis on residential towers there does maybe make Vancouver feel smaller. I think office towers have a bigger-city feel than just about any condo.

There's also the factor of cultural impact - is Toronto a bigger feeling city because it's a huge player in global film and music? Probably.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by begratto

Really?

Ottawa has a few things going for it : the newly-inaugurated O-Train definitely give it a bigger city feel. It is also helped by the the Rideau Centre's presence is in the city centre (Quebec City doesn't have a downtown mall) and the concentration of office towers downtown. Quebec City's are more spread out.

However, I find that Quebec has way more interesting "urban" areas than Ottawa, where one can walk, be surrounded by other pedestrians, and feel the urbanity.

Rideau st. feels more urban than rue St-Jean inside the walls, for sure, but for a shorter strech. But outside of Old Quebec, QC has way more neighbourhoods that you can explore on foot and not be the only one walking there : St-Jean-Baptiste, St-Roch, rue Cartier, rue Maguire, 3e avenue in Limoilou, Côte-du-Passage and rue Bégin in Lévis, to name the main ones.

Ottawa has some "main streets" which are somewhat comparable, like Bank in the Glebe, maybe even Wellington West, but still they have a more "suburbanish" feeling (to me at least) vs the Quebec streets I mentioned. I feel that they lack the pedestrian traffic that you find on Quebec City commercial streets. The Quebec City "main streets" generally also feel more polished, with better street furniture, wider sidewalks, more trees, buried electric wires, etc.

Even the Ste-Foy malls have a more urban vibe than their Ottawa equivalents, like Bayshore, St.Laurent, Promenades Gatineau, Place d'Orleans, which are more similar to Galeries de la Capitale. The Ste-Foy malls are closer to the main boulevards, not separated from transit by a sea of parking. And once boulevard Laurier is reconfigured for the LRT, I expect the area to densify and to have a more "urban" feel.

It's all subjective, but to this montrealer, there is no clear winner in terms of urbanity or big-city feeling between Ottawa and Quebec City.

These are excellent points. If I were going to make a case for Quebec City feeling as big as Ottawa, these are exactly the examples I would use.

I agree also that Quebec City is now doing "capital grandeur" better than Ottawa over a substantially larger portion of the city. This has been quite noticeable since the era of Jean-Paul L'Allier. In Ottawa the municipal government basically lets the National Capital Commission take care of that stuff, and they're only active in a limited number of targeted areas (where they actually do a nice job). But everything the City of Ottawa does tends to very bare-bones.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by savevp

There's also the factor of cultural impact - is Toronto a bigger feeling city because it's a huge player in global film and music? Probably.

I'd argue that that impression is not that evident once you are outside of the GTA's immediate sphere of influence.

Yes, there is lots of stuff going on in Toronto in these areas but this is also true of a lot of other places. I don't think people globally recognize it as a global film hub anymore than they do places like Chicago, Atlanta or Miami.

Sure it has TIFF but other cities also have film festivals and as a result are synonymous with the cinematic industry: Cannes, Venice and even Berlin.

If I ask my kids and their friends (who are Canadian) off-the-cuff to name a film festival, they'll almost certainly answer Cannes and not Toronto. (Even though TIFF is bigger than Cannes now, I realize.)

[someone123]

Originally Posted by le calmar

This is also my view. Some people such as kool maudit refer to the "human crush" of Toronto (I've read that many times on this forum from other people as well), but personally I have rarely experienced that human crush in any city in Canada and the US with the exception of NYC. Of course I am not counting special events such as festivals, otherwise I could say I have experienced a human crush in Kingston during the busker festival.

This is my experience too. And Halifax actually does have busy areas but they are small. There's a 4 block stretch of Spring Garden Road that would be considered respectably busy in a much larger North American city. A big city might have a major commercial district that runs for 3 or 4 km while in Halifax it's 500 m.

I am not very familiar with Boston but Halifax has in recent decades clearly operated far below its potential. It's probably 50% busier in the urban core than it was in 2000, if not more. Since that time the metropolitan population has grown by much less.

One observation I have about Boston is that it has lots of complete heritage streetscapes. But it has also been trapped in amber. Halifax has actually had more highrise construction than Boston in recent years. In Halifax, average people can afford to live in a modern downtown apartment, and tons of those are being built all the time. Halifax might have felt like a mini Boston in 1970 but the two cities are really going to diverge over the next 10-20 years if they continue on their current path. Boston's typical downtown housing stock will be ultra-expensive gentrified medium sized 19th century apartments and Halifax will have affordable 20 storey apartment buildings.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by savevp

To me, what makes Toronto feel massive is the forest of suburban skyscrapers. Driving along the 401 and passing through wave after wave of 40+ storey towers without ever going near the city centre, or the 403 through Mississauga, is mindboggling. Vancouver feels large by the same token, though it's CBD feels (and is) significantly smaller.

The original point about the transition from centre to suburbs, basically, is interesting. Calgary and Edmonton maybe feel a bit smaller to me because of how quickly you're into mid-century low rise development - Calgary especially when heading north across the river.

Calgary however feels bigger because of its huge office tower density; something Vancouver doesn't have. The relative overemphasis on residential towers there does maybe make Vancouver feel smaller. I think office towers have a bigger-city feel than just about any condo.

There's also the factor of cultural impact - is Toronto a bigger feeling city because it's a huge player in global film and music? Probably.

RE: Toronto..Yes exactly. Everything you emphasized+ all the urban neighborhoods to explore..As far as the Montreal comparison from earlier posts, I will say this. I still remember visiting both Toronto and Montreal in the middle of the summer literally a week apart, and I also remember thinking to myself that Montreal had the same energy and crush of people on Saint Catherine as what I felt the week earlier on Yonge Street..Same type of typical beautiful summer day. There were lots of Buskers, and little festivals off to the sides in parks near downtown..Old Montreal, where we had dinner, was also real lively..I found that people in both cities celebrate "going out for dinner". I noticed that people from all age groups were dressed real well at restaurants as well as just on the streets in both Montreal and Toronto. This makes a place feel more big city to me. I guess you can call that the culture and attitude of a city. Even the fashion eclecticness and the amount of sub cultures a city has adds to it's overall dynamic. Ottawa, is definitely more casual overall in the fashion department.. You can even go further, and a city's Neon signs stock a la' Dundas square also adds to the "bigness" feel of a city.

The newly minted Light rail Ottawa definitely raised Ottawa's big city game a little bit though.Riding it, especially in the tunnel portion, reminded me of being in Toronto for a few minutes with the underground stations, the map showing the line, etc. Another thing that makes cities feel big, is having large built up boroughs/nodes. For example, metro Toronto has both Mississauga + Scarborough which are just two. It makes me wonder that if Ottawa is where Toronto was in the early 50's, will both Kanata and Orleans morph into something similar if Ottawa ever gets really large?

[svlt]

Another example where population doesn't tell the whole story: Regina and Victoria. Victoria's metro population is about 400,000, Regina's 250,000 but walk through the CBD of both and you would get the sense that Regina is the bigger city thanks to the concentration of towers and offices in the center.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I'd argue that that impression is not that evident once you are outside of the GTA's immediate sphere of influence.

Yes, there is lots of stuff going on in Toronto in these areas but this is also true of a lot of other places. I don't think people globally recognize it as a global film hub anymore than they do places like Chicago, Atlanta or Miami.

Sure it has TIFF but other cities also have film festivals and as a result are synonymous with the cinematic industry: Cannes, Venice and even Berlin.

If I ask my kids and their friends (who are Canadian) off-the-cuff to name a film festival, they'll almost certainly answer Cannes and not Toronto. (Even though TIFF is bigger than Cannes now, I realize.)

Yeah, I think people tend to overestimate what people elsewhere know or think about their city. People in Toronto may think they are a big global player in the film industry, as savevp mentioned, but Toronto isn't even the biggest film industry in Canada, everybody there just assumes they are.

[softee]

This video does a pretty good job at conveying some of that "human crush" feeling that downtown Toronto demonstrates at certain times of the day.

• Video Link

[logan5]

Originally Posted by svlt

Another example where population doesn't tell the whole story: Regina and Victoria. Victoria's metro population is about 400,000, Regina's 250,000 but walk through the CBD of both and you would get the sense that Regina is the bigger city thanks to the concentration of towers and offices in the center.

I don't know about that. There is a small handful of office towers in Regina (which reminds me, while I was there, they were billing this office tower they were building downtown as "the tallest building between Winnipeg and Calgary. I thought that was funny), but it feels very desolate to me, whereas Victoria is densely populated downtown and is far more walk-able than Regina. (imo).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by softee

This video does a pretty good job at conveying some of that "human crush" feeling that downtown Toronto demonstrates at certain times of the day.

• Video Link

That's not really a human crush to me. It's busy for sure but that's par for the course for a city of Toronto's size.

Not exactly Times Square or Oxford Street in London...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by logan5

I don't know about that. There is a small handful of office towers in Regina (which reminds me, while I was there, they were billing this office tower they were building downtown as "the tallest building between Winnipeg and Calgary. I thought that was funny), but it feels very desolate to me, whereas Victoria is densely populated downtown and is far more walk-able than Regina. (imo).

I feel the same way. Victoria for me in spite of Regina's trappings like actual skyscrapers and a pretty neat football stadium...

All of which is pretty much a metaphor for the age-old question of whether skyscrapers make the city.

My answer for that one leans to "sometimes, but not always".