yep...vantaa is nothing but suburbs, but it´s concidered a city! It´s unbeliveable, Vantaa is more like a suburb of Helsinki...
That's true, Vantaa is very green. Most of the major residental areas here were built in the middle of forests and where no roads or houses was built forest was left untouched. Looking at this picture of Havukoski suburb shows pretty well how the houses are standing in the middle of the forest:Kuesel said:I was very surprised how GREEN Vantaa is in spite of all the commieblocks it has and as one of the biggest cities in the country...
It's true that a large part of the city is suburbs, but... uhh... :sleepy: It's officially a city even if it's just a bordertown of Helsinki, it's the fourth largest in Finland, has a job self-sufficiency of over 100%, the largest airport in Finland and the largest retail areas, it's the logistic center of the nation and has the fastest growing business area in Finland. Keep in mind how young Vantaa is, it's grown from 15 000 inhabitants in 1950's to 190 000 today. It's far more unbelievable that some small villages on the countryside have decleared themselves as towns. Sorry, I'm very biased when it comes to VantaaSuomiPoika said:yep...vantaa is nothing but suburbs, but it´s concidered a city! It´s unbeliveable, Vantaa is more like a suburb of Helsinki...
The new area of Vantaa looks like some upper middle-class suburb--- it's much better than Havukoski. And it looks like another sort of newer type of commieblocks with German/Swiss influence.PC said:new area under construction:
![]()
The airport also covers a huge part of the city.
![]()
as you can see, one suburb doesn't represent the whole city. Vantaa is far from poorly planned, it's not beautiful, but it's just very young and hasn't had the time to develop a good city structure.
Are you saying those buildings are in a bad condition? Aside from their ugly looks and a few graffiti sketches, those buildings seem to be in excellent condition.Xäntårx said:From the above pic, Vantaa is more like the poorest-planned city in Finland. Despite the presence of vegetation, the blocks are not maintained well and filled with mostly lower-middle class Finns and immigrants.
With this I agree. It's basically like a huge suburb with no city center. But one must understand that it became a city (population wise) in the 60' and the 70's and I don't know any european country that had a good city planning in those days. Google Earth reveals this quite handsomely.Vantaa is more like the poorest-planned city in Finland.
I don't think that's sad, but I think American sprawls usually "looks more comfortable" than European commieblocks in the suburb. Yet Commieblock itself, it's a different type of architecture, and it's beautiful, if it's well-maintained and well-designed. In smaller Finnish cities with commieblocks, generally the social status of commieblock districts are a bit better than Helsinki or Tampere. And in Oulu the commieblock neighbourhood are rather nice. Tampere is one of the better Finnish city, when compared with Greater Helsinki (Not the core of Helsinki!), and it's very industrial. Rovaniemi? I've never been there but it looks like some sort of modern-planned city up Lappland. (Is that called Lappland architecture? I don't know anything about Lappland, though I personally fond of it)Kuesel said:The sad thing: On one of my visits I met an old German couple complaining about the boring modern Finnish cities and that there is no Old Towns remaining... omg, that's sad - they were old enough to know the historical background. And at least there is still Rauma
Rovaniemi
![]()
What do you mean? There are probably more SSC members than foreigners in Finnlandaplz said:Ahh..first time I've ever seen a Finnish ghetto.
There are some parts of Espoo, Vantaa, Helsinki or Tampere has serious graffiti and crime problems--- but Ethnic Ghettos is rare --- even from its neighbouring Russia or Estonia--- they simply live together in the city, not separating each other, very much like the situation in Switzerland or some cities in Canada. And, generally Finnish cities are very safe when compared to Russian or American cities.Kuesel said:What do you mean? There are probably more SSC members than foreigners in FinnlandThere are probably no Ethnic Ghettos in this country. And if you mean "slum" I have to disappoint you - The finnish cities are very clean and even sterile even in the outskirts. But the architecture is indeed a bit boring - apart from some unique structures (I love Alvar Aalto for example
).
The story about Rovaniemi (and the rest of the Finnish Lapland) is that the German army burnt and razed northern Finland after the Finnish-Soviet peace in late 1944. Wehrmacht did however let the civilian population escape to Sweden, the German motive was just a way to inflict as much material damage to their former allied as possible. The Finns were also hemmed by the fact that they couldn´t send their own army to Lapland because of a disarmament clause in the treaty with Soviet so they had to send new younger recruits to the front, which meant it took a very long time for the Finns to pursuit the Germans across the border to Norway.628.8m♣TV mast;8723521 said:I don't think that's sad, but I think American sprawls usually "looks more comfortable" than European commieblocks in the suburb. Yet Commieblock itself, it's a different type of architecture, and it's beautiful, if it's well-maintained and well-designed. In smaller Finnish cities with commieblocks, generally the social status of commieblock districts are a bit better than Helsinki or Tampere. And in Oulu the commieblock neighbourhood are rather nice. Tampere is one of the better Finnish city, when compared with Greater Helsinki (Not the core of Helsinki!), and it's very industrial. Rovaniemi? I've never been there but it looks like some sort of modern-planned city up Lappland. (Is that called Lappland architecture? I don't know anything about Lappland, though I personally fond of it)