Alan2005

Generally down town Vancouver looks great when you aren't in it. The best views are from kits, lonsdale quay, the 9 o'clock gun on the seawall. I even like the view from hastings st after getting off the highway.

Once in it however, street level Vancouver doesn't really have that much going for it. Monolithic charmless tower blocks and rows of shops that could be anywhere. There are some parts that are ok, and the marine building does stand out, but generally the great views from within Vancouver are looking outwards.

It doesn't have to be this way. The London skyline changed a lot over the last 20 years, with the gherkin, canary wharf, the dome etc now being a post card skyline as well as tower bridge and st pauls. There was a chance to do something interesting with the convention centre - however, my view is that whilst it is ok in a formless utilitarian sense it lacks depth or character. A missed opportunity given the 800 million or so spent on it when it could easily have been Vancouvers sydney opera house. Still this is subjective, and other people may well love the style.

Aviator

Part of that is due to it having a green roof, which has to be relatively flat. A Sydney opera house style and all the plants would fall off and the greenies would be up in arms.

JonboyE

There aren't any restaurants on Davie or Denman are there?

Alan2005

ahem, I was talking figuratively (as I suspect you know).

JonboyE

A couple of years ago we visited some friends who live in Wapping. They took us to see Canary Wharf. My overriding impression was, "**** me, it's just like being in Vancouver."


I think Canada Place was always intended to be the iconic symbol of Vancouver, much in the way the SOH is for Sydney. If so, it makes sense for the new convention center to have a relatively low profile. Although I have walked around the new building several times I have not been in it. My impression from the outside is OK, nothing outstanding but it fits reasonably well in its setting and creates some good public areas. People who have been inside seem to have a similar opinion. The space works OK, it is a pleasant environment, without being anything particularly special.

dboy

I agree to a point, but i wonder if people come here and don't wander around teh older areas, such as pender and georgia, east of downtown. there are some nice street scapes and the areas are starting to become relevant than they have in the past. I do struggle from time to time at the lack of character of much of the LMD, but feel compentsated by its outward views.

The4BellsLondon

loads

Alan2005

There is something to this. Even east hastings has some character and some of the newly refurbished hotels look quite good - with more gentrification that area could be very distinctive.

What the Vancouver planners did get right was the corridor views. If you walk north along Burrard on a sunny day, you don't tend to look at the buildings - at least I don't.

Alan2005

I can see where you are coming from, but I tend to think there is more grandeur to Canada Place there than here

JonboyE

I have to say I am struggling to think where MarylandNed was if (s)he saw a sufficient number of gay couples to be worthy of comment, and yet couldn't find any restaurants.

The4BellsLondon

Denman street - that leads to English Bay - that and Davie is the gay are known as Gavie Village - loads of places on Denman .

MarylandNed

I lived in Vancouver for a month in a furnished apartment downtown - West End. My wife started work as a nurse at a hospital not too far away but my job fell through. The employer wanted to hire me, I wanted to work for them but the recruitment agency I used screwed everything up. My wife didn't like Vancouver either and so we returned to Toronto.

We travelled around a bit while in Vancouver. Saw all the sights of the city. Went to Gastown. Saw a few concerts. Went up the mountain. Drove around the suburbs. Travelled up the coast a bit. Went to Whistler. We even looked at apartments and almost signed a 1 year lease.

It's a beautiful part of the world - no question about it. At that time in my life I was looking for an exciting city where I could live downtown - but it just didn't seem to have as much going on as I expected. Maybe I was looking in the wrong places.

Now with kids, my interests are different and I'm sure Vancouver has a lot to offer in terms of recreational activities.

JonboyE

That makes a lot of sense. You were here long enough to exhaust tourist Vancouver but nowhere near long enough to learn how the city works.

I still disagree with your view of architecture. No argument about Paris being a beautiful city. Inside the peripherique at least, I think I'd prefer bland NA suburbs to some of the grittier places on the outskirts of Paris. However, I can't see baroque or rococo working in a setting such as Vancouver. Why go for a style that speaks of imperial grandeur and seeks to create the illusion of space and distance when grandeur, space and distance are all around you to start with.

IMO buildings and cities have a place in time and space. A building that is perfect in 17th century Paris could easily be plain ugly in 21st century North America.

MarylandNed

I guess my point is that I didn't have that same problem in other major cities. Whether I lived in them or visited them for a short time, I was able to find stuff fairly easily. It just didn't happen in Vancouver. Although now that I think of it, Ottawa is another city that I found to be a bit dull.

I understand your points about architecture. I think when people describe Vancouver as beautiful, they really are talking about the stunning setting(ocean, mountains, beaches, Stanley Park, etc) rather than the city infrastructure. That was the point I was trying to make there.

ExKiwilass

I can see what Maryland's saying as being true-ish for Van >6 years ago, but it's changed a lot.