The Ugly Canada Thread

[MolsonExport]

Ugliness metastasizes across the land in the form of cookie-cutter (big box) power-centres:

bruntonarchitects.com

Even uglier from the air. Here is one near my home in London:

callowayreit.com

You can almost hear the shrill intercom system of the super Walmart ("CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE NEEDED IN THE FURNITURE AISLE!!")

The wretched sameness plaguing the landscape fringes of large and medium-sized cites.

[MolsonExport]

theonion

[SignalHillHiker]

Tried to make this one a little funny...

It's the drive from my house at the edge of downtown St. John's to my parents' place in the suburban city of Mount Pearl.

But, instead of taking the highway as I usually do, I cut straight through the wasteland of suburban sprawl that is Kenmount Road... and, for once, the traffic wasn't half bad.

• Video Link

[caltrane74]

Yes guys it may be ugly, but remember this.

If there is no suburbanization of rural land, then there is no urbanization period.

Gotta start somewhere..

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Yes guys it may be ugly, but remember this.

If there is no suburbanization of rural land, then there is no urbanization period.

Gotta start somewhere..

Today's urban neighbourhoods started looking like compact small towns, though. 19th-century Trinity-Spadina wasn't full of eight-lane arterials and power centres, nor was downtown St. John's once upon a time like Mount Pearl. The crummy way we've built new suburbs discourages urbanization and redevelopment.

[caltrane74]

Yes you are right.


But something like North York Centre was created from post 1950's suburban sprawl and it continues to get better and more urban. MCC, SCC, and Burnaby are all trying to do the same thing with endless suburban sprawl. Even the nasty big box parking lot concept has been turned on its head with new Outdoor Malls in Don Mills and Vancouver with plans down the line to remove all surface parking from those sites with future large scale development.

[MTLskyline]

Not 100% sure where these were taken, but I think they might be from Villeray


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr

[PhilippeMtl]

the first one is Iberville/Rachel.

[harls]

Who would throw away a perfectly good Batman costume?

ps.. I used to live around there (3e ave/Holt)

[theman23]

Originally Posted by MTLskyline

Not 100% sure where these were taken, but I think they might be from Villeray
...
[/url]
Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr

I hope someone managed to snag that. It looks like its been barely used.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by MTLskyline

Not 100% sure where these were taken, but I think they might be from Villeray


Montreal by samuel.eckert, on Flickr

I've always hated that type of sickly beige brick. It looks like poverty to me even the building doesn't appear on the verge of collapse. And when they try to gussy it up by pairing it with stone, it actually looks even worse! Not only does it looks poor, sickly, and depressing, but then it also looks busy, tacky, and dated!

For some reason I just can't stop looking at it.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I've always hated that type of sickly beige brick. It looks like poverty to me even the building doesn't appear on the verge of collapse. And when they try to gussy it up by pairing it with stone, it actually looks even worse! Not only does it looks poor, sickly, and depressing, but then it also looks busy, tacky, and dated!

For some reason I just can't stop looking at it.

Man... That is one ghetto building lol

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Yes guys it may be ugly, but remember this.

If there is no suburbanization of rural land, then there is no urbanization period.

Gotta start somewhere..

They needn't be so horribly designed though - let alone ugly. While they may have used the same awful low-density, auto-centric planning principles as suburbs today, at least the first wave of post-war suburban sprawl built between 1950s and 70s had a strong aesthetic consideration and made use of what was then fashionable, contemporary architecture - including some of the best examples in home design of the time, along with half-decent workmanship. None of the tacky, cheap, plastic caricatures of vaguely historic architectural styles that plague present-day suburbia.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Yes you are right.


But something like North York Centre was created from post 1950's suburban sprawl and it continues to get better and more urban. MCC, SCC, and Burnaby are all trying to do the same thing with endless suburban sprawl. Even the nasty big box parking lot concept has been turned on its head with new Outdoor Malls in Don Mills and Vancouver with plans down the line to remove all surface parking from those sites with future large scale development.

The trouble is, in mid-size cities like London, these suburban developments never evolve into anything better. The former Oakridge Mall, not far from MolsonExport's area, was redeveloped into a pedestrian-unfriendly wasteland less than 10 years ago. These big box developments are still the big thing in London, and city council wants more.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Yes you are right.


But something like North York Centre was created from post 1950's suburban sprawl and it continues to get better and more urban. MCC, SCC, and Burnaby are all trying to do the same thing with endless suburban sprawl. Even the nasty big box parking lot concept has been turned on its head with new Outdoor Malls in Don Mills and Vancouver with plans down the line to remove all surface parking from those sites with future large scale development.

The trouble is, in mid-size cities like London or Kingston, these suburban developments never evolve into anything better. Like other North American cities, these cities got suburban malls built in the 60s, but when they got redeveloped about 8-9 years ago, they were converted into big box wastelands with tons of parking and very few sidewalks. Kingston is going over a proposal for another Walmart big box development on the outskirts, while London's city council seems determined to allow even more big box development in the southwest.

I just don't get it.

[MolsonExport]

the city is addicted to the development fees and the mayor, to ribbon-cutting ceremonies.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

The trouble is, in mid-size cities like London, these suburban developments never evolve into anything better. The former Oakridge Mall, not far from MolsonExport's area, was redeveloped into a pedestrian-unfriendly wasteland less than 10 years ago. These big box developments are still the big thing in London, and city council wants more.

Indeed. Walk at your own peril. The place is so bad, the backs of the stores face the street. 100% auto-oriented. Despite there being a fair bit of high-density residential in walking distance.

Something that London seems to constantly replicate. Hyde Park has been completely ruined, despite the Liver & Onions.

[MolsonExport]

Love/hate the Montreal grit shots. Keep 'em coming. Rubbernecking quality.

[O-tacular]

I finally saw the Venetian in Edmonton in person. Photos don't do it justice.

[O-tacular]

Not to pick on Edmonton, but in spite of some very nice new proposals I saw some serious ugly. This PoMo crap some architect half digested and excreted onto the landscape is one such building. It's not done yet, but the corner it's on is so prominent and it's such a shame this is what will occupy it in the not too distant future.