File talk:G17 Assignment3 01.jpg

Case Study A

The Case study sounds well. Picture: China has huge rivers, but the picture shows more a creek? So is it really a river? - If you want to find out, what plants should be planted and how you want to plant them, then add the timescale, because later on, the new river bank need other plants then if you start to reconstruct it. In Nepal also, we have lots of rivers, rivers running through the urban spaces. The riverside architecture is also an issue here. I think to create small seating areas at certain intervals is a good idea but to concrete the whole of the riverbed is not such a good idea. It definitely affects the ground water and may cause natural disasters after a period of time. So, it’s a good case you have presented.

Case Study B

Case Study sounds interesting, Go further on please. So, is it good or bad? What has been done, or intervened in this case has caused it to become more noticeable? It is a nice approach to keep something of great value not intervened and also it has its own dynamics with the natural process of growth.

Case Study C

Very well. Really good. You have said that the site itself was changed not because of human intervention but because of natural disaster-landslide. What else has change after the natural change? And now why is there a need to use the river as energy source and also building a highway? What kind of artificial modification has been done? Development cannot be stopped but if something is of that great a value, some other alternatives has to be considered.