Development of Heritage Neighborhoods (Granville, Yaletown, Chinatown, etc.) - Page 13

GenWhy? · #**241** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 12:56 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

I hope I've successfully made the case that Boundary Bay Airport must receive a heritage designation and never be expanded or redeveloped!

One funny thing I've noticed is that every historical conservation conservative has come out of the woodwork to say that the Dunsmuir Hotel was a place of great opulence, but I've yet to see a single photograph of the so-called opulence of the inside. Guess it wasn't worth taking any pictures, huh?

You joke, but they did this successfully in Edmonton with their City Centre Airport, which is now a mixed-use community - although they are having a hard time preserving a 1940s airplane hangar.

Walking along the street seeing rowhomes and a red and white control tower next to a playground is dang cool.

chowhou · #**242** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 1:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

You joke, but they did this successfully in Edmonton with their City Centre Airport, which is now a mixed-use community - although they are having a hard time preserving a 1940s airplane hangar.

Walking along the street seeing rowhomes and a red and white control tower next to a playground is dang cool.

Funny how crappy old buildings tend to fall apart huh?

Regardless, you say that but the old Edmonton Airport actually is getting redeveloped. If you want to know about a real tragedy of conservative preservationists winning look up Tempelhof Field in Berlin...

jollyburger · #**243** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 2:58 AM**

Who knew the streetfront actually used to be nice (I assume until the Salvation Army took it over)

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/dunsmuir-hotel-vancouver-b-c

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/dunsmuir-hotel-502-dunsmuir-street-vancouver-b-c

Here's the lobby.. looks more utilitarian than opulent

https://open.library.ubc.ca/viewer/langmann/1.0432468#p0z-5r0f:

https://lib-islandora4.lib.sfu.ca/bcp-5274/main-lobby-hotel-dunsmuir-vancouver-bc

officedweller · #**244** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 4:01 AM**

The lobby looks opulent enough for the day.
It reminds me of the 1915 Bank of Montreal on Granville St. that's now part of SFU.
But you are right in that it is a far cry from the Royal Bank Tower banking hall/lobby on Hastings.

https://merrickarch.com/work/sfu-segal-graduate-school-business/

chowhou · #**245** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 5:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

The lobby looks opulent enough for the day.
It reminds me of the 1915 Bank of Montreal on Granville St. that's now part of SFU.
But you are right in that it is a far cry from the Royal Bank Tower banking hall/lobby on Hastings.

My impression of opulence back in those days is to see what they've done with the ceiling. Compare the Royal Bank Tower ceiling to the Dunsmuir hotel ceiling.

Migrant_Coconut · #**246** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 5:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

- snip -

You've already lost if you're quoting the Tyee.

Jack Deighton's original saloon was "grand" once upon a time, but even just a few decades later that was no longer the case. Ditto the old U-Hill Secondary (where Gordon Campbell went to school, now defunct), Sea Island Station (where many RCAF pilots learned to fly, now defunct)... and this hotel.

officedweller · #**247** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 5:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

My impression of opulence back in those days is to see what they've done with the ceiling. Compare the Royal Bank Tower ceiling to the Dunsmuir hotel ceiling.

Yeah, agreed, my thinking is that for the average person of the day, it would have been opulent "enough" (i.e. versus a lodge).
Even Waterfront Station (CP Station) or Pacific Central Station aren't all that opulent.
The Royal Bank Tower is probably at the top.

Side note - came across historical pics of the 3rd Hotel Vancouver at its website showing the Art Moderne design when it opened in 1939 (ground floor was art moderne, upper level was classical), as well as the 1960s renovation by Hilton.

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/

Specific pages with galleries:

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/1939-decor/

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/1960s-and-70s-decor/

chowhou · #**248** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 6:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yeah, agreed, my thinking is that for the average person of the day, it would have been opulent "enough" (i.e. versus a lodge).
Even Waterfront Station (CP Station) isn't all that opulent.
The Royal Bank Tower is probably at the top.

Side note - came across historical pics of the 3rd Hotel Vancouver at its website showing the Art Moderne design when it opened in 1939 (ground floor was art moderne, upper level was classical), as well as the 1960s renovation by Hilton.

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/

Specific pages with galleries:

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/1939-decor/

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/design/1960s-and-70s-decor/

From the 1939 decor site, look at these ceilings!

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/e010862233-v8-807x1024.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-co...Photo-2019-04-24-4-29-15-PM-1024x819.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-co...to-2019-04-26-10-45-56-AM-1-1024x800.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Photo-2011-02-25-11-02-08-AM.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-co...hoto-2019-04-26-11-06-52-AM-1024x800.jpg

And you say that Waterfront isn't that opulent, but compare its ceiling to Dunsmuir house:

Migrant_Coconut · #**249** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 6:14 AM**

"Gateway to the Pacific" and all that - no way CP wouldn't put in some effort.

One could argue that it's nothing special compared to Union or Grand Central, but since that same one would also be hyping up the Dunsmuir Hotel, that just ends up creating some nasty mental gymnastics.

officedweller · #**250** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 6:18 AM**

Yeah, when I say Waterfront isn't "that" opulent, I mean compared to Toronto Union Station, Washington Union Station, Winnipeg Union Station, etc.
I guess the trigger for "opulence" for me would be a soaring domed or arched ceiling of some kind.

https://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/sites/unionstation.shtml

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

From the 1939 decor site, look at these ceilings!

https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/e010862233-v8-807x1024.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-co...Photo-2019-04-24-4-29-15-PM-1024x819.jpg
https://www.yourhotelvancouver.com/wp-co...to-2019-04-26-10-45-56-AM-1-1024x800.jpg

The ceiling above the Grand Staircase (Burrard side) and most of the second floor ceilings are intact.
I think the Pacific Ballroom is still the same, but it looks like some of the relief has been painted over so it's not as visible.
The BC Ballroom is the one that was expanded in the 60s/70s - they pushed it out to the south, so the whole ceiling of beams was redone with coffered squares.

See the virtual tour here:
https://www.fairmont-hotel-vancouver.com/gather/venues/

PS - I don't understand the choice of incredibly gaudy carpets.

jollyburger · #**251** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 6:55 AM**

The Hotel Georgia lobby was quite nice as well.

officedweller · #**252** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 7:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jollyburger

The Hotel Georgia lobby was quite nice as well.

Hotel Georgia just renovated the lobby to add a bar and more dining areas.
It's a bit cramped, but has a nice, dark, sophisticated atmosphere.

... and their 2nd floor space and the Spanish Ballroom is really nice too.
When the condo tower was added and it rebranded as the Rosewood, they demo'd a bunch of partition walls that had broken up the 2nd floor space into small meeting rooms, restoring the large open function space.
So that's sort of the opposite of what the Hotel Vancouver seems to have done, where it created a warren of small meeting rooms.

chowhou · #**253** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 7:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

PS - I don't understand the choice of incredibly gaudy carpets.

You must understand that they're heritage carpets.

officedweller · #**254** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 7:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

You must understand that they're heritage carpets.

I think that they are pretty new (i.e. 2000s?)
They expanded the Discovery Floor recently.

chowhou · #**255** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 8:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think that they are pretty new (i.e. 2000s?)
They expanded the Discovery Floor recently.

Carpet facadism, then.

The carpets in the 1939 photos are pretty ugly too if you ask me. They're just preserving the character of the carpet.

officedweller · #**256** Posted **Jan 4, 2025, 8:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

Carpet facadism, then.

The carpets in the 1939 photos are pretty ugly too if you ask me. They're just preserving the character of the carpet.

It struck me as a "Buckingham Palace" theme, but on an exaggerated scale and over the top.

Vin · #**257** Posted **Jan 10, 2025, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You've already lost if you're quoting the Tyee.

Jack Deighton's original saloon was "grand" once upon a time, but even just a few decades later that was no longer the case. Ditto the old U-Hill Secondary (where Gordon Campbell went to school, now defunct), Sea Island Station (where many RCAF pilots learned to fly, now defunct)... and this hotel.

You're the one who's lost when you can't even say what's wrong with this Tyee article.

So what if all the heritage properties you mentioned became degraded due to lousy folks managing them. Fact is, we should be bringing back what used to be the pride of Vancouver whenever possible, and that is what preserving heritage is all about.

Vin · #**258** Posted **Jan 10, 2025, 9:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Atkin is likely referring to the 1st Vancouver Hotel, which resembles many "frontier" hotels of the late 1800s. The Dunsmuir was likely "grand" from 1909 until about 1916 when it was dwarfed by the 2nd Hotel Vancouver, or just before 1939, when it was converted to basically a rooming house for the rest of its life, the same year the 3rd Vancouver Hotel opened.

It was so out of date that it was gutted in the mid 20th century and there is little grandness left well before Holborn bought it.

For a backwater, Dunsmuir Hotel was luxurious enough for travellers because there was nothing really better then. Period.

See this regarding lost hotels:
https://evelazarus.com/our-missing-hotel-heritage-what-were-we-thinking-part-eight/

More about the Dunsmuir Hotel: Make Holborn pay.
https://themainlander.com/2024/12/23/op-ed-make-holborn-pay-for-loss-of-the-dunsmuir-hotel/
Interesting how the article mentioned the beautiful Pantages Theatre was also conveniently gotten rid of with purposeful negligence.

GenWhy? · #**259** Posted **Jan 10, 2025, 9:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

For a backwater, Dunsmuir Hotel was luxurious enough for travellers because other than Hotel Vancouver there was nothing really better then. Period.

Yes it had unchallenged style for about 7 years likely from 1909-1916. I can agree on that. However that was gutted decades ago.

WarrenC12 · #**260** Posted **Jan 10, 2025, 9:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Yes it had unchallenged style for about 7 years likely from 1909-1916. I can agree on that. However that was gutted decades ago.

Come on, hardly more than a century ago!