Winnipeg or Québec - 1 Million

[urbandreamer]

The north end of Brantford is exactly 17km to the south end of Cambridge; the Eastern edge of Brantford is 18km to the western tip of Ancaster, a Hamilton suburb.

On Hwy 7, the newest Breslau suburb is 7km to Guelph Honda. The Ford government has just approved another extension to Breslau which gets it within 5km of Guelph. In 1960s GTA, Etobicoke and Mississauga were similar distance apart.

While Guelph and Breslau and Hespeler will one day be continuous suburban sprawl, there's also a chance South Galt and Brantford could sprawl into each other.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by thewave46

In the context of winning an arbitrary race to 1 million, yeah, edge to Winnipeg.

In the context of the city being a 'great city' as in what the locals want, not so sure there. In the SSP fashion, statistics are the easy points to argue.

So, if we're doing the statistics game, sure, one can make a case for Winnipeg. Here ya go:
NHL teams: Winnipeg = 1, Quebec City = 0.
There it is, folks, statistically proven. Winnipeg>Quebec City.

In the more arbitrary sense, is Winnipeg leveraging the growth it is getting to make a better city for its inhabitants? Or is Quebec doing a better job there, despite lower growth? Is growth unto itself what makes a city great? Is Phoenix, AZ a great city because of its rapid growth?

Greatness - to myself, at least - seems to be a measure of the holistic nature of a city. Does it feel like a place like has a centre, a direction, the infrastructure to make that happen, and the willingness to invest for the future? History is harder to pin down, but longer-lived cities have an edge there that younger ones don't.

So, in the sense of Quebec City, I get more the sense of a city trying more for the goal of greatness versus just growth. It's the depth of the planning for transit, the preservation of its centre, how its culture is steeped into it, the undeniable advantage of the long history of place. It has a sense of who it is, what it wants to be, and is trying to get there.

Alas, Winnipeg doesn't give that same vibe. It's been a long while since I've been, but the current state of affairs more portends a 'growth with less vision to greatness' angle. It has potential, but that potential seems unrealized. There's fits and spurts, but never a sustained momentum. Which is a shame, because mid-sized Canadian cities always did pretty well at the infrastructure bit - Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa had transit systems befitting cities of their stature as they grew to cities of a million. Sure, the former had the oil boom and the latter being the national capital, but I think Winnipeg could be something if it wanted to be.

Yes those are excellent points. Greatness is something many people have a strong intuitive sense of, but they have difficulty identifying its specific elements. And people who can provide a specific set of criteria for it are unlikely to agree with the criteria chosen by others.

And I agree that growth definitely doesn't guarantee it. Growth is sort of like money in that it's hard to build a great city without any, but cities with it can invest it wisely and use it to build something amazing... or completely squander it.

[esquire]

In fairness, the question wasn't "which city will be the first to decisively attain the hallmarks of an ideal metropolis". It was which city will hit a million residents first.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by esquire

In fairness, the question wasn't "which city will be the first to decisively attain the hallmarks of an ideal metropolis". It was which city will hit a million residents first.

I answered that in my first line. To expound a bit more, Winnipeg probably has more ideal conditions to maintain a high rate of growth than Quebec City.

The thread that halrs pulled at was this:

Originally Posted by harls

Same. Places don't need to grow to become 'great'.

*awaits ssp bombardment*

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

But "become great" implies fairly significant change, and change has to be powered by something.

This is true in the "great cities of the world" sense but there are also some cities out there that aren't growing much yet improve themselves without adding population and are great examples of, say, a small or medium city. They gradually restore old buildings, they build new infrastructure, and they build some nice new buildings that replace older structures or just expand the amenities per person as they increase their capital. Cities don't have to have the kind of strained infrastructure problems we have here. They're often great places to live.

I think there are different kinds of cities as well and they have different ideal sizes and activity levels. They can be undersized or oversized (given natural or artificial constraints), and some gain a lot from growth while others don't.

An example of a constrained city is Singapore. As far as this thread goes, Quebec City I'd say is an interesting example where part of the city is basically a heritage snow globe and there are challenges to either building infill or integrating with new construction. Saint John NB is an example of a town that's undersized and would be better with more population (true in all of the Maritimes, but most true there and in Sydney). Empty land, lots of historic buildings that could use maintenance, and the limited population in the region reduces the amenities that are available. The old parts of Quebec City are already "great" (an exemplary old colonial core) and uptown SJ could be like that too but needs more investment.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by harls

I wasn't looking for Southern Ontario to jump into this discussion. Will Winnipeg or Québec reach 1 million first... that was all.

Dangit, Skyscraperpage.

Winnipeg all the way!
I want to see it grow quick enough that they build LRT before I expire

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Winnipeg all the way!
I want to see it grow quick enough that they build LRT before I expire

You better start exercising lots, eating right and wearing sunscreen if you want there to be any chance of that happening

[MonkeyRonin]

Quebec is well poised to benefit from the increasing unaffordability of Montreal - it's cheaper, it's nearby, and it's a very attractive city; which makes it a viable alternative for many Quebecois.

Winnipeg on the other hand will be able to siphon off people priced out of the increasingly unaffordable entirety of Anglo Canada - but it's comparatively less well positioned to do so. It's remote, has a harsher climate than any other major city, and has...a few other factors that makes it not the most appealing place to live.

In other words, Winnipeg has a larger pool of people to draw from, but is going to have a harder time attracting them than Quebec will from its smaller pool. I think it's a toss-up as to which hits a million first - though from a purely statistical standpoint, Quebec does also have a more populated rural hinterland which could conceivably be pulled into its CMA even with lower growth.

[thenoflyzone]

Both cities will hit 1 million on the exact same day !

[Innsertnamehere]

I mean is Quebecs climate all that different than Winnipeg? Both are extremely cold.

[thenoflyzone]

^
The climate at both is the same, yes (humid Continental), but Winnipeg sees colder temps than Quebec City, on average. It snows less in Winnipeg also. Quebec City sees a lot of snow in winter.

[niwell]

I would imagine QC's summer is a bit more pleasant than Winnipeg due to location on the St. Lawrence? I haven't spent a lot of time in Winnipeg during summer but friends from there have all complained about it (though not as much as winter).

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by niwell

I would imagine QC's summer is a bit more pleasant than Winnipeg due to location on the St. Lawrence? I haven't spent a lot of time in Winnipeg during summer but friends from there have all complained about it (though not as much as winter).

Summers in Winnipeg are actually slightly warmer on average than in Quebec City. I've heard people complain about the bugs in summer in Winnipeg. Not so much about the temperatures.

Quebec City has bugs too of course, but it's not really that different in this respect from Montreal or southern Ontario. Winnipeg seems to be on another level.

Both cities have short summers of course, but I suppose like central-eastern Canada in general compared to the Prairies the autumn cool down arrives later there and is less abrupt than in Winnipeg.

Quebec City to me is the northeasternmost point of the classic "corridor" summer weather where most summer evenings can be spent comfortably outside in shorts and a t-shirt on a terrasse. Beyond Quebec City that summertime delight is more hit and miss and something "special" as opposed to being "routine".

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Just realized that I was offering to add to the poll and title, not realizing that you are also a moderator. Not only that, but the moderator who got me the moderating powers

Yes, Winnipeg v. Quebec City, I believe Winnipeg will get there first. I want Winnipeg to get there first.

Quebec City is already pretty much perfection. There's no level of urban growth in the urban area that would improve the city a whole lot (maybe even hurt it). Wall to wall heritage. One or two new modern towers would be nice, but I can't even begin to identify good sites. I would almost want to preserve the central area in amber, and just focus on suburban stretches of the tramway, which would be nice, but not super interesting.

Winnipeg has huge untapped potential. It already have great bones with the Exchange, Union Station, a very spread out Downtown and many parking lots that are begging to be redeveloped. You could grow the skyline with dozens of interesting new buildings, creating even more contrast between old and new, similar to Montreal. As for the lack of a solid transit plan for the future, Ottawa didn't get rail (real, electric, high-capacity rail, not a diesel choo-choo) until after we hit the 1 million mark. Before that, we only had Transitways like Winnipeg.

Aside from getting their NHL team back, I don't hear much from Quebec City and its citizens about wanting to "grow" the city into a much bigger deal than it already is. It's mostly about improving upon what's already there.

I would suppose that outside of SSP geeks there aren't many people in Winnipeg (or even Toronto or Calgary) that preoccupied with population growth either, and wanting more of it so their city can hit some form of big time.

Though I think that given the nature and culture of the places we are discussing, even if a minority there are probably more people in Winnipeg pining for more population growth so that the city can (re)affirm its place among Canada's biggest cities a bit more.

At least in the Canadian context, unlike Winnipeg, Quebec City doesn't have a sense that it has something to prove or to prove itself. Quebec City does have this sentiment big time relative to Montreal, but size doesn't enter into the matrix because things are so disproportionate between the two.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Aside from getting their NHL team back, I don't hear much from Quebec City and its citizens about wanting to "grow" the city into a much bigger deal than it already is. It's mostly about improving upon what's already there.

I would suppose that outside of SSP geeks there aren't many people in Winnipeg (or even Toronto or Calgary) that preoccupied with population growth either, and wanting more of it so their city can hit some form of big time.

Though I think that given the nature and culture of the places we are discussing, even if a minority there are probably more people in Winnipeg pining for more population growth so that the city can (re)affirm its place among Canada's biggest cities a bit more.

At least in the Canadian context, unlike Winnipeg, Quebec City doesn't have a sense that it has something to prove or to prove itself. Quebec City does have this sentiment big time relative to Montreal, but size doesn't enter into the matrix because things are so disproportionate between the two.

Speaking for myself here, but I certainly would have agreed with that sentiment 10-15 years ago when Winnipeg had stagnated in terms of population growth and there was some concern that the city might start hollowing out in the manner of a decaying rust belt city.

That never happened, the city got back on track in terms of population growth and over the years it has been able to do the Sim City thing and level up in a few ways. The NHL team being perhaps one of the most prominent examples of the ways that Winnipeg has reaffirmed its place as a significant North American city.

That said, I think what is more important for Winnipeg than population growth now is improving the level of infrastructure in the city, and improving the overall quality of life for residents through improved educational, recreational and economic opportunities, improved health care, etc. You probably need some population growth to sustain that, but it's not like Winnipeg needs to chase massive population growth for its own sake. So in that sense, I think it is largely immaterial whether Winnipeg hits one million although it will likely happen either way in the not too distant future.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Aside from getting their NHL team back, I don't hear much from Quebec City and its citizens about wanting to "grow" the city into a much bigger deal than it already is. It's mostly about improving upon what's already there.

I would suppose that outside of SSP geeks there aren't many people in Winnipeg (or even Toronto or Calgary) that preoccupied with population growth either, and wanting more of it so their city can hit some form of big time.

Though I think that given the nature and culture of the places we are discussing, even if a minority there are probably more people in Winnipeg pining for more population growth so that the city can (re)affirm its place among Canada's biggest cities a bit more.

At least in the Canadian context, unlike Winnipeg, Quebec City doesn't have a sense that it has something to prove or to prove itself. Quebec City does have this sentiment big time relative to Montreal, but size doesn't enter into the matrix because things are so disproportionate between the two.

It’s true that Quebec city’s population are really not obsessed about growing more. In fact, most of them despise Montreal for being « too big ». Citizens of Quebec city mostly see their town as being perfect, to the point of being obnoxious sometimes, especially, again, in regards to Montreal. The Montreal bashing in the province is really something and I don’t think it has any equivalent elsewhere in the country. Do citizens of Victoria dislike Vancouver ?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

It’s true that Quebec city’s population are really not obsessed about growing more. In fact, most of them despise Montreal for being « too big ». Citizens of Quebec city mostly see their town as being perfect, to the point of being obnoxious sometimes, especially, again, in regards to Montreal. The Montreal bashing in the province is really something and I don’t think it has any equivalent elsewhere in the country. Do citizens of Victoria dislike Vancouver ?

There is lots of hate for Toronto outside of the GTA and Golden Horseshoe, or even within the GTA itself but some distance from the city core.

I think dislike of the big city by the hinterlands is a generalized human phenomenon.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is lots of hate for Toronto outside of the GTA and Golden Horseshoe, or even within the GTA itself but some distance from the city core.

I think dislike of the big city by the hinterlands is a generalized human phenomenon.

Agreed. I think the hatred for Toronto is universal.

Don't know about Quebec City's views of Montreal, but I feel like Gatineau residents view Montreal fondly. I might even go as far as saying many Gatineau residents feel more at home with Montreal than Ottawa.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think dislike of the big city by the hinterlands is a generalized human phenomenon.

It is common in many places but the magnitude isn't the same everywhere. It is pretty mild in BC and Atlantic Canada at least used to have a mega version of this sort of sentiment that would dominate a lot of discussions in the media, politics, etc.

In Quebec it seems to go both ways as, yes, there is the Quebec City vs. Montreal stuff, but also acceptance that there is a metropolis in the province. I'm not sure about the Prairies.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

It is common in many places but the magnitude isn't the same everywhere. It is pretty mild in BC and Atlantic Canada at least used to have a mega version of this sort of sentiment that would dominate a lot of discussions in the media, politics, etc.

In Quebec it seems to go both ways as, yes, there is the Quebec City vs. Montreal stuff, but also acceptance that there is a metropolis in the province. I'm not sure about the Prairies.

Paris vs la province is pretty intense.

London vs the rest definitely registers too.

I already mentioned Toronto.

Interestingly enough NYC vs the rest of the US isn't too bad, even though their country's polarization is quite intense but it's mostly framed in generalities like Heartland America vs Liberal Cities. Certain places are of course poster children for one's nemesis, but the tensions don't tend to focus on a single geographic point.

And we won't even talk about Caraquet vs the rest of the Acadian Peninsula!