Helsinki could not have timed one of their biggest pieces of city infrastructure any better. A small city with big city thinking.

Photo gallery below

Helsinki is small as far as world capitals go. But it’s different than other typical European cities. It has a high proportion of sprawl. Something that North American cities now understand links to health, economic, and cost of living decline. Yet Helsinki has not experienced the negative aspects of sprawl to a level of other cities with similar make-up. In fact, it is considered to be one of the most livable cities in the world. A list primarily made up of compact urban areas. So what do they have that other small, car dependent, less livable cities don’t?

Helsinki Sprawl

Less than 1.5 million people live in Helsinki. While the central part of the city is dense, more than half live in outlying (or suburban) areas with spread out development patterns. Unlike many other European cities that are models for western urban planning policy, Helsinki is quite sprawled.

Suburban Population Boom

The city was a late bloomer. Following World War 2, the population doubled to just over half a million before 1970. Afterwards, population growth continued to soar. However, with Helsinki getting crowded, people started to move to outlying areas like Espoo and Vantaa. Today, there are several outlying suburban communities that exist.

Big Events mean aggressive planning

Still a small city, Helsinki was set to host the Summer Olympics in 1940. While they didn’t actually host until 1952 (due to World War 2), it was the smallest host of the games. The immediate previous hosts were London, Tokyo, Los Angeles, and Berlin just to give context. To some extent, the Games necessitate a more aggressive city planning paradigm. At least for a short period of time. Following the Olympics, the city experienced unprecedented growth. A rate of expansion that would cement the Olympic style planning culture.

Good Timing of Major Transit improvement

Like many North American cities, Helsinki’s growth had focused in suburbs that are laden with convoluted street networks and sparse land use patterns. Luckily the city managed to open a modern Metro (subway) system in the early 80s. The timing of it may have been key to today’s city success. With car ownership still low at the time, they managed to fight a growing culture of driving before it became problematic. The subway system being a key feature. Today, less than half of the population use cars in a city that has a density and urban fabric similar to more car friendly places. While it took just over 25 years to plan and build the subway system, consider how long it has taken / is taking other small cities to accomplish lesser feats (i.e. bus rapid transit or light rail). Furthermore, bus rapid transit and light rail are much more economical choices and are just as effective with small cities (500k or less population).

Big and small at the same time

Helsinki’s bike culture continues to grow

Thanks to aggressive planning and a pre-established public acceptance of planning ‘big’, Helsinki has managed to collect accomplishments comparable to much larger cities. Cities also in regions more strategically advantageous. Quiet, yet vibrant, this city has the balance of big city benefits while limiting the negative aspects. While perhaps far fetched, they are even considering building a tunnel across the Gulf of Finland to link with mainland Europe. Other cities take note – thinking big (even when you are small) could reap benefits.

Helsinki Video – Vibrant Baltic City

Helsinki Photos

[Sources: HKL, Wikipedia]