Park Hyatt (1128 W Georgia) | 197m | 62 fl | Completed - Page 46

vanman · #**901** Posted **Feb 14, 2008, 6:06 PM**

Those are some nice shots towerguy.

SFUVancouver · #**902** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 7:27 PM**

A guy on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bsoleil/) took some amazing shots of downtown from a sea plane.

I think this is one of my favourites for downtown Vancouver and the Shangri-La. I love the cloudy haze.

Source

A long lens shot of the Shangri-La's oblique angle.

Source

Lastly, a shot of downtown with the Shangri-La barely noticeable against the background mass of towers. At the lower left of the frame is a nice bonus aerial view of the Olympic Village under construction.

Source

vansky · #**903** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 7:44 PM**

not bad, though it still doesn't speak much for a landmark. a tower shoudl really be above 200 to have an effect from ground level. Still, van is not on the canadian list for height compare to others, which is ironic since this city is capable for so much more. and vancouver seems to never change, but things should really change, i vote for obama.

excel · #**904** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 7:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vansky

not bad, though it still doesn't speak much for a landmark. a tower shoudl really be above 200 to have an effect from ground level. Still, van is not on the canadian list for height compare to others, which is ironic since this city is capable for so much more. and vancouver seems to never change, but things should really change, i vote for obama.

how does it not change.

Yume-sama · #**905** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vansky

not bad, though it still doesn't speak much for a landmark. a tower shoudl really be above 200 to have an effect from ground level. Still, van is not on the canadian list for height compare to others, which is ironic since this city is capable for so much more. and vancouver seems to never change, but things should really change, i vote for obama.

Yes we can have tall buildings, yes we can.

canucks23 · #**906** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 8:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vansky

vancouver seems to never change

You have me stumped

Architype · #**907** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 10:13 PM**

Some things change but stay the same. Vancouver never stops changing, so that is always the same.

SFUVancouver · #**908** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 10:51 PM**

Yep, Vancouver never changes:

1986

source

alta-bc · #**909** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 11:26 PM**

Actually, I prefer this picture to show the contrast. No Cambie Street bridge, no Expo, lots of lumber yards and some log booms... even BC Place Stadium isn't fully inflated yet.

alta-bc · #**910** Posted **Feb 15, 2008, 11:34 PM**

Another area that has seen "no change"

YVR 1986

Jacques · #**911** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 1:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alta-bc

Actually, I prefer this picture to show the contrast. No Cambie Street bridge, no Expo, lots of lumber yards and some log booms... even BC Place Stadium isn't fully inflated yet.

I remember when the wood planks on the sidewalk bridge were falling apart right under our feet, still it was a neat bridge, then came the new one and on the first day of its official opening I nearly got a traffic ticket from a cop while speeding on the ramp, I had just purchased my first motorbike , I was young and foolish.
Thanks for sharing a great photos that reminds me of great memories

vansky · #**912** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 2:25 AM**

we really have to be modest about yaletown. say, compare to places having 7% + GDP growth, such as calgary a few yrs ago. our change seems small. especially during the 90s. that is mainly what i refer to. van had lots of change from 1930s onward, especially during the 60s and 70s, skyscrapers that are standing in downtown today went up mainly during the 70s. Lots happened during pre expo. but that was the 70s and 80s. calgary seems to be newer, taller and more energetic, as van is getting old. to be honest, calgary is what's been hurting van's confidence for the past few years, and still remain as van's hot rival in economic performance. look at the bow as it is growing up rapidly. and where's the long forgotten fringe towers. we need taller buildings to boost up the city's confidence.

Hong Kongese · #**913** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 3:55 AM**

Yes, we need some big tall office towers like those in Toronto and Calgary.

excel · #**914** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 3:56 AM**

^personal preference clearly, taller buildings do help but i do not agree with you when you say vancouver is getting old. way outa line with that comment considering half the buildings in the city are no more than 10 years old.

Architype · #**915** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 4:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Yep, Vancouver never changes:

1986

source

I know, I've lived here since the 80's when Downtown South, Coal Hr, False Creek did not exist as we know it. I mean it keeps changing = that's what doesn't change.

vansky · #**916** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 5:48 AM**

this city has a good number of highrises 10floors above. but still, that gives it a city feel but not quite a "city" feel. like chicago, singapore or other global cities. say toronto, really huge buildings. it's either super wide, or super tall, that's the feeling i got from t.o. but then van's natural infrastructure is unmatchable. even NYC's towers would look small if u put them in this setting.

ckkelley · #**917** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 5:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alta-bc

Another area that has seen "no change"

YVR 1986

Wow, it's nearly unrecognizable!

vanman · #**918** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 8:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vansky

this city has a good number of highrises 10floors above. but still, that gives it a city feel but not quite a "city" feel. like chicago, singapore or other global cities. say toronto, really huge buildings. it's either super wide, or super tall, that's the feeling i got from t.o. but then van's natural infrastructure is unmatchable. even NYC's towers would look small if u put them in this setting.

And how old/ populous are the cities of Chicago, Singapore, and Toronto? How are they even comparable. For city only a 100 plus years old with just over 2 million people Vancouver is in a class all its own to which no other similar sized city in NA can compare to.

canucks23 · #**919** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 8:56 AM**

After seeing those really old pictures of Vancouver, its really refreshing to scroll up and see what it looks like now. Some one really needs to create some kind of video or something that compares old and new Vancouver pictures with similar angles.

Hong Kongese · #**920** Posted **Feb 16, 2008, 9:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanman

And how old/ populous are the cities of Chicago, Singapore, and Toronto? How are they even comparable. For city only a 100 plus years old with just over 2 million people Vancouver is in a class all its own to which no other similar sized city in NA can compare to.

Seattle is as old as Van and has a population slightly more than us. Calgary is younger and has only a million people. But both cities look and feel much bigger than Vancouver with all those hugh tall office buildings and freeways.