Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingViking
Proof please.
You keep trotting this out, but from what I've read the lower city was largely forested, crossed by a few trails (one of which became King St., hence its odd path across the city that tends to be diagonal to the street grid at certain parts) with many streams that were covered over or relegated to being sewers.
The harbour was filled in. Majority? Not sure about that one... between a quarter and a third, based on what I've seen in historical references. It's unfortunate, but also a big reason why Hamilton is as important as it is today.
What you say may have happened in specific places, but "all of"? I don't think so.
|
The images for marshland for hamilton would predate any photography unfortunately. And yes there were trails as well - it wasn't say marsh all the way up to the escarpment but would have been along the rivers that cut their way through before they were concreted over.
And perhaps majority is an exaggeration - but if they hadn't stepped in the majority of it WOULD have been - it was a big scandal involving the city and some unscrupulous people and good ol pierre trudeau himself if memory serves correctly.. they said if they had developed any more of the harbour its ability to renew itself would have been permanently destroyed and would have resulted in stagnant water. Whether that has already happened is a matter for debate I suppose..
even the maps themselves are hard to find ones from the 1700s or 1800s, most are from the 1900s.. either way we have transformed the area quite a bit over the past 200-300 years.