The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[caltrane74]

Lovely photos guys, but they are old, old, OLD!

No L Tower, ICE, or Cinema Tower.

[isaidso]

If its awesome quality photography I don't care if its not current.

[Nite]

[QUOTE=leftimage;5902185]

Originally Posted by lucci

^^ source?


Not to butt in, but doesn't having a link to photog's page at the bottom qualify as a source? I see my photos on here all the time, but as long as it links to my flickr I'm happy

Lucci was correct, I forgot the source on the initial post.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Correct. It was a sanitary issue for many cities 100 years ago. That said, my views on this are quite fixed. I've never adhered to something just because its politically correct or the popular wisdom of the day.

I'm very well aware of the backlash I'll receive, but I expect my nature highly controlled in the city centre and pristine elsewhere. If I want to trout fish, I'll do it 3 miles from downtown or further. Downtown, I want a stone walled river bank. I don't live in a city for the fishing, but for the built form.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion and preferences. I think you will agree, however, that these days most people prefer a more natural river.

The Bow isn’t perfect, I should add. I think someone said that it looks clean enough to drink from. It may look that way, but I wouldn’t do it. There is still agricultural runoff that flows into the Bow upstream of Calgary, and snow melt and storm water runoff from the streets of Calgary as well. It’s a beautiful river, however, and a real feature here in Calgary, along with the Elbow River.

[davidivivid]

The old dilemma between natural versus concrete banks!! The St-Charles river in Quebec City has seen it all: dirty industrial banks, concrete banks and finally naturalized banks. Honestly, since the banks of the river have been naturalized, the linear park along the river has been a huge success and a lot more citizens enjoy the river now then when the banks were in concrete...


Before:



http://www.quebecurbain.qc.ca/2006/05/09/une-saint-charles-de-moins-en-moins-betonnee/



http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/North_America/Canada/Central/Quebec/Quebec/photo87420.htm


After:



http://mtlunescodesigners.com/en/Groupe_IBIDAA



version2 par Climbadora, sur Flickr




Quebec City from the Park par merlinprincesse, sur Flickr




http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivi%C3%A8re_Saint-Charles



Pommetiers décoratifs par Madeleine Dubois, sur Flickr




http://blogue.monlimoilou.com/tag/riviere-saint-charles/page/2/


Here's a video about the transformation of the river over time.

• Video Link

[Nouvellecosse]

Looks better in the before pictures.

[Allan83]

I prefer the latter! I want to visit, again!

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Allan83

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion and preferences. I think you will agree, however, that these days most people prefer a more natural river.

The Bow isn’t perfect, I should add. I think someone said that it looks clean enough to drink from. It may look that way, but I wouldn’t do it. There is still agricultural runoff that flows into the Bow upstream of Calgary, and snow melt and storm water runoff from the streets of Calgary as well. It’s a beautiful river, however, and a real feature here in Calgary, along with the Elbow River.

Yes, I'm certainly going to be in the minority... especially in Canada. I like what Winnipeg did with there river front, but would prefer if they went a step further and used better materials. I also love the Rideau Canal in Ottawa. Calgary's is just not my cup of tea at all. I wrongly assumed that it was just a case of them not getting around to fixing it yet due to Calgary being a small city on the rise.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Looks better in the before pictures.

Agree and they didn't even use nice materials. Can you imagine how gorgeous that would have been if they got rid of the tarmac and put in stone? Got rid of the concrete and made that out of stone as well? Changed those light poles with something more opulent and cast iron? The problem with the QC river bank wasn't that it was walled, but the materials they used. They couldn't have made it more drab/uninviting if they tried. It still looked 100 times better than what it looks like now.

What a shame!

[kool maudit]

in pristina, they filled the vellusha river with so much garbage and offal that they just paved it over and made a street. bajram kelmendi street. my street.

you can really tell that this happened when it rains.

in short, your debate is decadent and luxurious

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Yes, I'm certainly going to be in the minority... especially in Canada. I like what Winnipeg did with there river front, but would prefer if they went a step further and used better materials. I also love the Rideau Canal in Ottawa. Calgary's is just not my cup of tea at all. I wrongly assumed that it was just a case of them not getting around to fixing it yet due to Calgary being a small city on the rise.

I haven’t been to Winnipeg in years but I very much like the Rideau Canal, but it’s a different kind of thing. It’s not supposed to be a living river. It’s meant to be narrow, deep, and navigable. Its appeal is mostly in its architectural features, the locks and associated buildings, the walls, railings, etc. I like the Rideau River sections better, because they’re more natural, but it’s really a different kind of thing. I guess in general I’d say I believe that paving paradise when you don’t have to is wrong, almost never as nice as nature, but when you have to build then build well.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by Doug

The Bow is still cleaner than almost any urban river. The amount of agricultural land upstream is very small and most of the Bow's watershed upstream of Calgary is provincial or national park. More important, the Bow gets cleaner ever year.

I agree, I was just saying that it's not perfect. There was the creosote issue as well back in the 80s(?), but all big cities have some of these issues. Overall it’s very clean. How many cities of over a million can say that they have world renowned trout fishing in their city limits? Not very many, and maybe only one.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Looks better in the before pictures.

Agreed. Looks like a city instead of a small town.

[SignalHillHiker]

Toronto cityscape by Songquan Deng, on Flickr

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

in pristina, they filled the vellusha river with so much garbage and offal that they just paved it over and made a street. bajram kelmendi street. my street.

you can really tell that this happened when it rains.

in short, your debate is decadent and luxurious

Don't let them do it in Prizren, even though they're dangerously close to filling their river with filth. Always was a prettier city than Prishtina anyway.

A lot of the towns and cities in the Balkans that really grew during the Ottoman era seem to be on the scrappiest little rivers. Sarajevo, Prizren, Mostar is an exception I guess but it's still not a navigable river.

Weird how that is.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Allan83

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion and preferences. I think you will agree, however, that these days most people prefer a more natural river.

The Bow isn’t perfect, I should add. I think someone said that it looks clean enough to drink from. It may look that way, but I wouldn’t do it. There is still agricultural runoff that flows into the Bow upstream of Calgary, and snow melt and storm water runoff from the streets of Calgary as well. It’s a beautiful river, however, and a real feature here in Calgary, along with the Elbow River.

The Bow is still cleaner than almost any urban river. The amount of agricultural land upstream is very small and most of the Bow's watershed upstream of Calgary is provincial or national park. More important, the Bow gets cleaner ever year.

[Martin Mtl]

By HomicidalSociopath on Flickr

[FrAnKs]

The skyline's changing ! Thanks god !!!

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

A lot of the towns and cities in the Balkans that really grew during the Ottoman era seem to be on the scrappiest little rivers. Sarajevo, Prizren, Mostar is an exception I guess but it's still not a navigable river.

this area is really not built to host massive populations. tirana, skopje, pristina... they're towns, really.

[vegeta_skyline]

Originally Posted by FrAnKs

The skyline's changing ! Thanks god !!!

lol someone's sure relieved.