Nope it's not really any different. I've done both many many times and never noticed a difference. Plus like i said, if you're trying to get to the areas south of Vancouver it's much much more difficult from the North Shore.

North Shore is convenient for commuting to the North Shore and above.

Port Moody is a nice area. I like it there. It's about an hr commute to downtown (including parking, etc) and you get to drive through prostitute row to get there.

My only gripe with Port Moody is the fact that like the North Shore, it's next to the mountains so you get a higher rain fall.

Well worth a look if the house is in the right area though.

There's a 2 bed apartment going in my building right now for a similar price, if that suits. Perfect views of the water, city, and mountains through floor to cwiling windowns, nice sized balcony, and lots of green space nextdoor. Hubby would be able to walk to work in 20 minutes or take transit in 10. You're south of downtown so don't have as much traffic to deal with and Granville Island and parks are a short walk away.

Also if you're thinking North Shore, i like Deep Cove
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/nv...129234247.html

Port Moody is a nice area with some lovely family homes. Probably much better for children than an apartment in a city centre imo, but each to their own.

Whys that?

We live on the sea wall 5 mins from downtown, the beach, granville island, next to a few parks, 10 mins to Stanley park and aquarium, 25 mins to the ski hills, pedestrian only areas so no worries about cars, great day care and schools.

So I'm not sure what you mean?

It's not better, just different.

Granted everything is on your doorstep, but children especially if young like playing in the garden or with their friends which they are unable to do if they live in an apartment, especially one on a high floor. As I said this is just my opinion, each to their own, but in my view apartments are for young couples without children or the elderly, rather than families.

+ 1

Some very important advice to take on board, and has been mentioned a few times.

Although I completely understand why, you must make a mental shift away from the standing UK dilemma of more $ = better house in better area = better school.

It is simply not required in Canada and is one of the biggest 'relievers' that I believe parents would take away from their relocation.

Put the area before the house in your planing and the school will just follow by default...not school - area - must then find that house.

FROTSUK

I accept your view.

There are many thriving families around us with kids playing out and having fun. Our friends have their kids on the beach with friends in a matter of minutes or playing in the garden attached to the apartment. They all played boche this evening out there with a picnic after a wander around Science World just down the sea wall.

It's surprising how many kids are learning to ride bikes out here recently too. It's a perfect place for it.

We have lots of space in our apartments and tons of garden to play in.

I still don't agree with you but like you say, to each his own.

Completely agree here.

I realize I am generalizing, but the vast majority of Vancouver families don't choose where to live based on the school; they choose where to live based on whether they like the neighbourhood or not. What public school a child goes to in Vancouver does not influence their social status. The local public school (where the vast majority send their children) will be good; it will reflect the local neighbourhood demographics. The schools in the Shaughnessy neighbourhood aren't necessarily any better than the schools in Port Moody for example, but the school in Shaugnessy would certainly have more of an allure simply because students come from affluent families in the nearby houses (houses which most cannot afford). But my point is that the school is not the reason why families move to Shaugnessy; Shaugnessy is the reason why people move to Shaugnessy. The education in a Port Moody school will be equivalent to the education one gets in a Shaughnessy school, as all public schools follow the same curriculum as outlined by the BC Ministry of Education. What makes a school better than the other in Vancouver (and the Lower Mainland) is often marginal (one school may offer an advanced biology class that the other school does not), or may be superficial (newly-built school vs. old deteriorating school) - but it is rarely worth basing one's move around; the education children get in the public schools are fairly equal from one school to the next.

Not really - plenty of family amenities in the city - I have friends living in condos downtown with kids and they love it

I don't think this is true at all -sorry.

We have a garden and spawn rarely plays in it, with or without friends. Her idea of a good time is to go to the park to play with friends or play on her ipod touch. It aint the 80s anymore.

Lots of parks in the downtown area and loads of kids to play with in them. If they are steps from your building who cares? Children will enjoy wherever they live as long as they have access to the outdoors, which they do in spades in downtown vancouver. Hell I'd move there if the OH would let me.

+1

Real estate agents like to talk up the school thing - they love the fraser institute rankings for that reason too. It's just a sales tactic.

The irony is, that Shaugnessy school will have teachers employed by the same school board as that east side school in a poorer area. The teachers all belong to the same union with the same annoying union rules about seniority etc - which means you're not necessarily getting better teachers just because the school is in a wealthier area. Equal chance of getting shit ones actually.

Thats' what I see too when I visit my friends downtown.

Loads of kids around...

Just looking on the sea wall now and there's a group of toddlers making chalk drawings and loving it.

There's a couple of families in the gardens next to it sitting on blankets with a picnic and the kids are running like good'uns laughing their arses off.

The kids park I can see across the water is full of kids playing too.

The only benefit I see between living in a large house is you can pop to the other side onto a different floor if you need 5 minutes peace and quiet

We'll be bringing ours up here because it will give them better opportunities

I am glad we had a back garden when junior was younger. Boys in the 5-9 age range have a LOT of energy they need to burn off. Parks are OK but you have to supervise them. With a back garden you can send them out with a football to run around while you concentrate on more important things like watching TV and drinking beer.

That's true to an extent. Many apartments don't have gardens so you have to go off campus to greenspace. Many do though. Around us they all do. The families on the ground floor have a nice little garden that leads onto the main one. It's aces.

No doubt I'll eat my words in 5-9 yrs