Sheffield - city of rivers by Willie Miller

yellow book

sheffield

ci t y o f r i v e rs

sheffield waterways strategy group sheffield city council

final report

april 2008

yellow book 3 hill street edinburgh eh2 3jp t 0131 225 5757 f 0131 225 5750 mail@yellowbookltd.com

sheffield waterways strategy group sheffield city council

shef field city of rivers april 2008

yellow book wmud

21042008-id-01//wim

contents

shef field city of rivers

executive summary

i 1

section A

introduction

section B

the rivers and the city

section C

sheffield's rivers today

section D

developing the strategy - ideas and influences

section E

city of rivers - goals, priorities, vision

section F

making it happen

107

section G

conclusion

113

section H

annexes

117

introduction | section A

A introduction the study area

The brief This study was commissioned the Sheffield Waterways Strategy Group (SWSG). SWSG was set up in 2003 to promote the coordinated regeneration of Sheffield’s waterways. Group members include Sheffield City Council, the Environment Agency, British Waterways, Sheffield Groundwork, Sheffield Wildlife Trust, Yorkshire Water and a number of local environmental and amenity groups. The study has been undertaken at the request of Sheffield First for Environment. The strategy group has set out a 15-year vision for Sheffield’s waterways:  the waterway corridors will be attractive, safe and healthy places to live, work and visit  rich in wildlife and a superb leisure and recreational resource  a vibrant and exciting mix of community, leisure, office and residential development  a model of sustainability – social, economic and environmental  capitalising on industrial heritage to become a destination in Sheffield  part of a regional network of waterway corridors

sheffield - city of rivers | 1

april 2008 | yellow book

 raise public awareness of Sheffield’s rivers and encourage people to use them.

During the course of the study we have refined and developed this vision, but it has proved to be a useful and robust statement of aspirations.

With those objectives in mind, the group took the view that a good strategy would be:

The brief called for the development of an overarching strategy for Sheffield’s waterways which would:

 an accessible and inspirational advocacy document  focused on a small number of achievable outcomes  clear about delivery: what needs to be done, who is going to do it, by when?  connected to a wider policy agenda on regeneration, social inclusion, sustainability and biodiversity.

 establish a vision for waterways regeneration in the city  provide the justification for investment in terms of economic, social and environmental benefits  provide a framework for coordinating activity Early in the work programme the consultants met with the strategy group to discuss their aspirations and expectations for the study. The group concluded that, above all, they wanted the strategy to make a difference: to get things done that would not otherwise have happened, to do them better and faster, and in a more integrated way. The group stated that the strategy should:  show how investing in the waterways would improve the quality of life of the people of Sheffield  appeal to and influence the city’s politicians and senior decision makers  change the perceptions and behaviour of developers and investors 2

above: the River Don

below: the Sheffield and Tinsley Canal

Sheffield’s waterways inspire passionate interest among the “true believers” – the individuals and organisations represented on the Strategy Group. But the consultant team has stressed the importance of reaching a much wider audience, and of influencing decision makers who may not be aware of the potential of the city’s waterways. So our approach has been to focus on connecting Sheffield’s rivers to the wider city agenda. For example, the waterways strategy should help to make Sheffield the first green city in the UK, and the most sustainable. Similarly, by enhancing the quality of life in Sheffield, the revived waterways network will make the city more attractive and competitive and, to quote Creative Sheffield, “a desirable place to live and to visit”.

introduction | section A

An introduction to Sheffield’s waterways “…the Don which enters the area flowing in a southeasterly direction and at the old centre of the city changes its course at right angles to the north-east: the Sheaf which joins the Don at this point and which though comparatively insignificant has given its name to the town: the Rivelin and the Porter which flow in nearly parallel directions, the former to join the Don at Hillsborough and the latter to connect with the final subterranean course of the Sheaf. Whether the Loxley be a tributary of the Rivelin or vice versa is something of a geographical nicety comparable to the rival claims of the Mississippi and the Missouri: but if the Loxley is the principal, then its last mile within the Sheffield boundary adds another stream. “Beside these five principal rivers the grasp of whose courses is fundamental to a right understanding of the plan of the city, there are certain smaller brooks which are responsible for local features of additional interest… 1

Abercrombie’s concise description of Sheffield’s rivers (1924) goes a long way to defining the geographical 1 Abercrombie, op cit

City of Sheffield from Abercrombie’s Plan

the river Rother is a major tributary of the Don: as its name suggests, this is “Rotherham’s river” but stretches of the river form the eastern boundary of the city of Sheffield2

•

there are numerous brooks and streams throughout the city, for example: in the east, Shire Brook and Short Brook decant into the Rother; Blackburn Brook runs from Chapeltown to the Don at Meadowhall, through a largely industrialised zone under the M1; Hartley Brook Dike, Sheffield Lane Dike and the evocatively named Tongue Gutter weave through the housing estates in the north of the city; the Porter and Sheaf are fed by extensive networks of streams, some of great beauty; the Little Don enters the Don near Stocksbridge.

Sheffield is a city of rivers, and the waterways are – as Abercrombie says – “fundamental to a right understanding of the plan of the city”. In the following sections we will trace the profound impact of the waterways on the history of the city: from medieval times the fast-flowing rivers in the west provided ideal sites for small-scale metal-working industries, and access to water

scope of this study. As specified in the brief, we have focused primarily on the river Don and its principal tributaries - the Sheaf, Porter, Loxley and Rivelin – as well as the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal, which was opened in 1819 and is an important – though sometimes overlooked – element of the townscape of the Lower Don Valley. However, we have also taken account of other watercourses:

•

The Rother will be examined by the Rotherham Waterways Strategy, which is being commissioned jointly by Rotherham MBC and the Environment Agency; the strategy will be completed in spring 2008. sheffield - city of rivers | 3

april 2008 | yellow book

continued to be a key determinant of industrial location right through to the 20th century. It is no exaggeration to say that the rivers made Sheffield. In the post-industrial age, the intimate connection between the waterways and the working life of Sheffield has been broken. In its place Sheffield has slowly been forging a new relationship with its rivers. As early as the late-19th century there was a growing appreciation of the landscape and recreational value of the wooded western river valleys; in the late 20th century Sheffield began to recognise the architectural and cultural significance of its industrial heritage. Sheffield is ready to reconnect to its rivers; they in turn have the potential to help realise the vision of a successful, distinctive city of European significance. The rivers shaped the development of Sheffield as a great industrial city, and defined its topography. The extraordinary landscape setting of the city has had a profound effect on the distinctive character and personality of Sheffield, and its unique sense of place. Especially in the west, the river valleys form green corridors which break up the suburban sprawl. They give residents access to high quality open space and woodlands, and provide pedestrian and cycling links between the city and the national park. All this means 4

the River Don near Hillsborough

that “there is a richness and variety of space and of high quality landscape for the population to use and enjoy”. Sheffielders value this unique landscape very highly. The steep-sided valleys and fast-flowing rivers in the west are defining features of Sheffield, as is the historic wooded landscape of the upper Don, now reclaimed from industry. These are magical places which “bring the countryside into the city”, but elsewhere the relationship between city and rivers is more problematic. For at least 200 years, the Don from Middlewood to Tinsley, and the lower reaches of the Sheaf and Porter have been sites of

industry, used and abused, but not much valued. The small rivers are hidden gems, but (unlike, say, Nottingham’s Trent or Newcastle’s Tyne) Sheffield’s Don has never been a source of renown or civic pride. Up until the 1980s this was hardly surprising. The Don was first an open sewer and then a drain for industrial effluent. It was dirty, smelly and – to all intents and purposes – dead. However, in the past 30 years there has been a growing appreciation of both the value of the riverside’s industrial heritage and its potential as a site for recovery and regeneration.

introduction | section A

 Part E maps out the proposed vision and strategy for reinventing Sheffield as the city of rivers  Part F focuses on making it happen, including a headline action plan, a strategic appraisal of impacts and guidance on delivery  Part G draws together our conclusions and recommendations.

the Loxley Valley

Early evidence of changing attitudes included the opening of the industrial museum at Kelham Island, and the designation of a conservation area in recognition of that area’s special architectural and townscape value; the Five Weirs Walk provides access to previously inaccessible stretches of the lower Don. Improvements in water quality have also spurred an interest in the renewed ecological value of the river. In the 1970s and 1980s, the rehabilitation of the industrial Don was something of a pioneering enterprise, but the idea has begun to take hold that this long-neglected river could become a special place in its own right in the next 10-20 years.

Structure of the report This report is in seven parts, including the introduction:  Part B describes the historical and cultural context for the study  Part C sets out a detailed analysis of aspects of the waterways system and an assessment of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats  Part D describes the development of the strategy, the ideas and influences that have shaped it, and the overarching goals sheffield - city of rivers | 5

april 2008 | yellow book

the rivers and the city | section B

B the rivers and the city Old Horse Dyke Culvert on the River Porter

Rivers and industry: an historical survey The metal trades were already established in the Sheffield region in the middle ages, attracted by the availability of iron ore, charcoal (later coal), sandstone for grindstones, and “the steeply falling rivers, which were harnessed for grinding, rolling and forging”.1 Pre-industrial Sheffield was a small township but the surrounding countryside was filling up with domestic scale industrial enterprises. By 1660, “at least 49 sites on the Rivers Don, Sheaf, Porter, Loxley and Rivelin, with a few others on the Blackburn Brook and the Moss Beck, had been dammed for the grinding of cutlery, the milling of corn, the forging of lead, and other industrial purposes. Two out of every three of these wheels were geared to the grinding of cutlery and edge tools”.2 From the very beginning, the geography of industry in Sheffield was shaped by its watercourses. Many of these early industrial sites were in rural and semi-rural locations by the fast-flowing tributaries of the Don: “water power was crucial in Sheffield’s development. No other place in Britain had such a concentration of sites”. Between 1660 and 1740 the

1 2

Nicola Wray, Bob Hawkins and Colum Giles, One Great Workshop: the buildings of the Sheffield metal trades (English Heritage & Sheffield City Council 2001) This historical overview is based primarily on David Hey, A History of Sheffield (Revised edition, Lancaster 2005) sheffield - city of rivers | 7

april 2008 | yellow book

number of grinding works of various kinds powered by Sheffield’s rivers almost doubled, from 49 to 90. Cutlery was the key industry, accounting for two-thirds of these enterprises.

3 8

Fairbank’s map of Sheffield - 1771

workshops. Sketches from the same decade show industrial development - still largely of domestic scale by the River Don at Hillsborough and Neepsend, and on the Sheaf at Heeley.

In the first half of the 18th century the population of Sheffield grew steadily, and the town began to develop as a centre of industry – becoming “one of the foulest towns in England”, according to Walpole, who nevertheless (like so many others since) noted Sheffield’s “most charming situation”. By 1736, the population of the parish had increased to 14,531; by 1801 it had trebled to 45,755. Fairbank’s map of 1771 shows the beginnings of an industrial town, with mills and forges ranged around the rivers among a landscape of orchards and fields. A channel (goit) was formed which ran parallel to the south bank of the Don, creating a series of islands – Kelham, Millsands, The Isle – which became important sites of industry, as did Ponds Forge by the Sheaf3.

By now the pace of change was accelerating, with industrial development concentrated in the Don Valley and around the lower reaches of the Sheaf and the Porter. The advent of modern industrial production, and especially the growth of the steel industry, was reflected in developments including “a new type of steam-powered integrated works producing steel, tools and cutlery on one site”.4 The Sheaf Works was established next to the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal in 1826; the Globe Works, close to the Don at Shalesmoor, at about the same time. The introduction of steam power meant that a new generation of factories no longer required immediate access to the water, although the river valleys – already dirty and polluted – continued to be key locations for industry.

Urbanisation was progressing rapidly, especially by the Don and the lower reaches of the Sheaf. Fairbank’s 1797 map shows the modern city taking shape: the Alsop Fields scheme laid out a grid of streets near the confluence of the Porter and the Sheaf which was soon filled with

The increase in the scale of industrial production in Sheffield coincided with, and was assisted by, the opening of the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal in 1819. The canal connected Sheffield to the sea for the first time, via the Don, Trent and Humber. This was the realisation of an ambition dating back to the 1690s, but the proposal had

The eponymous ponds are of medieval origin, but the area became intensively industrialised in the 18th century.

Ruth Harman and John Minnis, Pevsner Architectural Guides: Sheffield, New Haven and London 2004

the rivers and the city | section B

long been resisted by mill owners and, especially, the Dukes of Norfolk. The Don was made navigable as far as Tinsley (which became “the port of Sheffield”) by 1751; but until the Duke agreed to support a Canal Bill in 1815 all goods had to be hauled the last three miles between the city and the Don Navigation by road.5

storey factories such as Cornish Place Works (1851-54) and Green Lane Works (1860).

The canal was never a great commercial success. It opened in inauspicious economic circumstances and was soon superseded by the railways, but its opening marked the moment when the focus of industrial development shifted to the east end of the city – and especially the low-lying flood plain of the Lower Don Valley. Sheffield and Tinsley Canal circa 1890s

In the middle decades of the 19th century industry migrated down river, from the area around Lady’s Bridge and the canal basin, to Attercliffe, Brightside and beyond. This was the domain of the great steelworks founded by Charles Cammell, Thomas Firth & Sons, John Brown and others: huge factories and sheds that dwarfed the earlier sites of crucible steel production, tool making and cutlery. The heroic names of these factories - Cyclops, Atlas, Pluto, Aetna and the rest – reflected the scale of operations and they are still potent cultural icons. Small workshops were still the norm in the cutlery industry which remained in its traditional locations, but larger firms built grand 4-5 5

William Ibbitt’s sunlit South-East View of the Town of Sheffield, painted in 1854, provides a detailed, if somewhat sanitised, visual description of the town at this critical moment. At about the same time, Samuel Sidney’s Rides on Railways described Sheffield as “very ugly and gloomy; it is scarcely possible to say that there is a single good street, or an imposing or interesting public building, - shops, warehouses and factories, and mean houses run zig-zagging up and down the slopes of the tongues of land, or peninsulas, that extend into the rivers or rather streamlets, of the Porter, the Rivling [sic], the Loxley, the Sheaf and the Don”. A succession of visitors and commentators pursued these themes over the years, contrasting the dirt and noise of the growing town with its attractive and unspoilt natural setting. The population of the new borough of Sheffield had grown to 135,310 by 1851; by 1901 Sheffield was a city with more than 400,000 people living within its expanded boundaries. Steel was now Sheffield’s most important product, meeting the voracious demands of the railways and, later, the armaments industry. From the 1860s the introduction of the Bessemer converter revolutionised the industry. The first steelworks in the Lower Don Valley

Simon Ogden, The Sheffield and Tinsley Canal, Sheffield 1997 sheffield - city of rivers | 9

april 2008 | yellow book

Postcards recording the growth of Sheffield

above: Loxley Valley | below: Stepping Stones over the Rivelin

Niagara Weir, Sheffield

the rivers and the city | section B

Old Tower Wheel, Sheffield

above: Nursery Street, Sheffield | below: Endcliffe Park, Sheffield

shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 11

april 2008 | yellow book

were built in Brightside and many of the employees lived in the Wicker; Hey notes that Attercliffe was still a village in the late 1860s but it changed beyond recognition in the years that followed. The late 19th century was a time of technological advance which saw Sheffield become “the leading international centre for special steels”. The steel city fascinated and appalled contemporary observers. JS Fletcher’s 1899 account, quoted by Hey, is typical: “Under smoke and rain, Sheffield is suggestive of nothing so much as of the popular conception of the infernal regions…The aspect of the northern fringe of Sheffield on such a day is terrifying, the black heaps of refuse, the rows of cheerless-looking houses, the thousand and one signs of grinding industrial life, the inky waters of river and canal, the general darkness and dirt of the whole scene serves but to create feelings of repugnance and even horror”. Industrial expansion continued into the early 20th century. Utilitarian steel-framed sheds sprang up in the east end of the city, creating the characteristic “canyon” townscape, fragments of which survive in Brightside. These years represent the high-water mark of Sheffield’s industrial might: by the early 1920s, the city was 12

Lady’s Bridge

experiencing a severe recession and unemployment in the steel industry remained high throughout the inter-war years. The cutlery industry was also feeling the effects of foreign competition, and many firms were slow to adapt. Despite these warning signs, manufacturing industry continued to dominate the economy (and define the image) of the city up to and beyond the second world war. After the war, the long decline of the cutlery and toolmaking industries continued. But in the steel industry, “Sheffield’s traditional advantages of technical knowledge, a vast pool of human skill, and a unique

Hillfoot Bridge

clustering of metal-working and engineering industries continued to give the city a competitive edge”. Investment poured into the industry in the 1950s and 60s, creating an illusory climate of confidence. 68,000 people were working in large steel works in the city in 1964, with many more employed in small enterprises. In 1960 Sheffield accounted for almost two-thirds of all UK alloy steel production; the city also produced about one-eighth of UK output of ingots and castings. The partial re-nationalisation of steel in 1967, followed by a collapse in world demand, had a severe impact.

the rivers and the city | section B

River Don at Neepsend

Employment in the South Yorkshire steel industry fell from 60,000 in 1971 to 43,000 in 1979. The 1980s were even worse, with employment down to 16,000 by 1987 and below 10,000 in the mid 1990s. The impact was particularly severe in the Lower Don Valley, where employment fell from 40,000 in 1975 to 13,000 in 1988. Elsewhere, cutlery and other traditional metal trades were decimated by foreign competition. In the steel industry the impact was more severe on jobs and communities than on output. Advanced technology and resulting increases in productivity mean that Sheffield is still a major producer of special steels. Remarkably, â&#x20AC;&#x153;more steel is now made in Sheffield than during the Second World Warâ&#x20AC;?. But the character and occupational profile of the city have changed profoundly, and the experience of the 1970s and 80s had a profound impact on confidence and morale. The physical impact of the rapid decline of the traditional Sheffield steel industry was greatest in the Lower Don Valley, where slum clearances and factory closures had depopulated the area and left large tracts of derelict and contaminated land. In response to this crisis (which was also being played out in many other industrial cities) the government set up the Sheffield Development Corporation to drive economic and physical regeneration in the Don Valley. sheffield - city of rivers | 13

april 2008 | yellow book

The Development Corporation (1988-1997) was the catalyst for the development of sports and leisure facilities including the Don Valley Stadium, the English Institute for Sport, iceSheffield, and the Hallam FM Arena, as well as commercial development, mostly warehouses and offices. Whatever the economic benefits of these developments (and of the Meadowhall Shopping Centre which opened in 1990) the late 20th century regeneration of the Lower Don Valley signally failed to create a sense of place: the raw drama of Brightside in its industrial heyday has been replaced by a drab, car-dominated prairie landscape. This survey has shown that Sheffield’s industrial history has always been intimately associated with its river valleys; over a 200-year period the geography of industry tracked across the city, from west to east. The metal trades began in the steep sided valleys of the western tributaries and the upper Don; as the factory system matured, industry migrated to sites close to the town itself (Kelham, Neepsend, the Wicker, Heeley and the lower Sheaf); from the mid 19th century gargantuan steelworks sprang up in the Lower Don Valley, from Brightside to Tinsley. As successive phases of industrial development swept across the city, they left behind a post-industrial legacy. 14

Contemporary photographs and postcards show that, by the late 19th century, the early sites of industry in the west were already being treated as picturesque survivals, and the lesser rivers were being incorporated into the city’s magnificent Victorian parks. Abercrombie’s 1924 Civic Survey and Development Plan highlighted the riverside parkway as a distinctive form of “open space which the natural conformation of Sheffield would be likely to induce”:

“The Porter Book Parkway, consisting as it does of a string of contiguous open spaces, is the finest example to be found in this country of a radial park strip, an elongated open space, leading from a built-up part of the city direct into the country”.

Abercrombie’s 1924 Riverside Parkway system

the rivers and the city | section B

below and bottom left: illustrations from Abercrombie’s 1924 Riverside Parkway system

Abercrombie contrasts traditional ornamental parks where the visitor, “as a squirrel in its cage…walks round and round”, with the Porter Brook, where “he is led onwards until the open country is reached. Doubtless the squirrel enjoys its kinetic exercise, but there would seem to be more potential pleasure in progressive locomotion”. By the late 20th century, the historic and townscape value of Sheffield’s early factories was being recognised: Kelham Island was designated a conservation area and Millsands had become a focus for urban regeneration. Even in the Lower Don, where the historic fabric is fragmented and overlaid by development of indifferent quality, the value of the river as a recreational and ecological asset has been rediscovered through the creation of the Five Weirs Walk.

shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 15

april 2008 | yellow book

How the rivers have evolved

Killicrankies Bridge, Middlewood

Chris Firth’s millennium history of the Don catchment describes the floodplain of the Sheffield Don in the 11th century: “…the river open[ed] out into a complex of open water and marshes which had been formed as a result of the converging flows of the river Don with that of tributaries such as the Loxley and Sheaf. This fluvial plain helped to dissipate the energy of the floods which bore down the steep valleys following heavy rain high in the catchment.

The history of water power on Sheffield’s rivers has been documented comprehensively by David Crossley, whose survey identifies a total of 137 mill sites on the Sheffield Don and its tributaries.7 Firth describes how, starting in the medieval period:

“The vegetation of this area probably consisted of reed beds, interspersed with willow carrs, enclosing shallow pools. These pools provided breeding and nursery areas to a range of coarse fish species which would have found rich feeding in the relatively warm, productive environment. The fish, in turn, would have supported a range of piscivorous birds such as herons, kingfishers and ospreys as well as mammalian predators such as otters”.

“…[i]n order to harness the power of the river’s flow, the millers built impoundments (weirs) across the channel to create the ‘head’ which they required, and directed the water they needed through a race or goit to the water wheel”. The late 17th century was the beginning of the “key period in the development of water-powered industry in the Sheffield area”. By the end of the 18th century “all available sites on the rivers had been developed” and a survey of 1794 shows “Sheffield’s water-mills at their zenith”. No new wheel sites were developed after

Above the fluvial plain, the Don had “the characteristics of a typical Pennine spate stream”, with woodlands – like those still to be seen at Wharncliffe – running down to the water’s edge.6 6

Christopher Firth, Domesday to the Dawn of the New Millennium: 900 years of the Don fishery (Environment Agency, 1997). Identified mills: Don 35, Loxley 27, Rivelin 21, Porter 20, Sheaf 34.

Firth describes how, in the centuries that followed, human activity has had a profound impact on the river Don. Three forms of human intervention have had a particular impact on Sheffield’s rivers: the impoundment of water to harness the power of the rivers for milling and later the metal trades; land drainage and reclamation; and, especially from the 19th century, chemical pollution.

David Crossley (ed), Water Power on the Sheffield Rivers (Sheffield 1989).

the rivers and the city | section B

William Ibbitt’s South-East View of the Town of Sheffield, painted in 1854

this date, although modernisation and improvements continued.8 Increasingly, rising land values made some of the historic sites attractive for new factories and other development.

an expansion site for the Hecla steelworks. Numerous such projects created the present canalised river contained within high retaining walls. As Firth notes:

Some of the weirs were substantial structures; Palmer’s 1722 survey states that Attercliffe Forge Dam was 5 yards high. In dry weather the entire flow of the river might be diverted into ponds or through goits, “leaving the river bed dry between the intake and the outfall”. Coarse fish populations were trapped in isolated sections of the river; to begin with, the weirs were relatively small and salmon could continue to make their way upstream, but as obstructions to the river grew in size and number the consequences were disastrous. By the mid 18th century there was no longer a self-sustaining salmon population in the upper Don and its tributaries, although there were “remnant populations” of brown trout and grayling.

“As well as the loss of habitat associated with the draining of shallow pools etc, constraining the river’s flow within banks would have destroyed the naturally energy dissipating effects of this flood plain. The inevitable result would have been a far less stable environment for fish, with regular damage to both habitat and populations as the energy of floods carried on down river”.

An expanse of wetland by the confluence of the Sheaf and the Don was probably the site of the earliest attempt at land drainage in the Don catchment. The 12th century Sheffield Castle was built on land reclaimed from the marsh. Much later, in the 19th century, the Don at Attercliffe was diverted and canalised in order to create 8

However, Crossley records that after the 1864 flood damaged or destroyed most of the wheels in the Loxley valley, most (though not all) were re-built and returned to production.

Apart from the localised effects of mining, water quality in the Don catchment had remained relatively good until the beginning of the 19th century. But, thereafter, sewage and industrial pollution took their toll. The rapidly growing industrial town had no effective means of treating or disposing of human waste: the streets became open drains which flushed into the town’s gullies, streams and rivers. The Don became a sewer, “black and foul smelling”. Nominal powers to control pollution were ignored because Sheffield simply did not have the infrastructure to apply them. It was not until 1886 that a “very basic” treatment facility opened at Blackburn Meadows.

shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 17

april 2008 | yellow book

Industry also continued to discharge waste into the rivers. This practice continued well into the 20th century:

agitation of detergents were formed as the water tumbled over weirs. Often these banks covered the river’s surface to a depth of several feet, and in windy conditions clouds of foam were lifted from the water and carried through the air for hundreds of yards.

“…The steel industry created thermal pollution problems which raised the ambient temperature of the river reducing dissolved oxygen concentrations, discharged acids from pickling processes and coated the river surface with oil from quenching and lubricating. “Coal mining and its associated industries produced gross solids which coated the bed of the river and streams, discharged highly toxic heavy metals, arsenic, cyanides and phenols and contaminated adjacent land with tar liquors.

“The combination of all these and many other forms of pollution from a range of industrial activity served to create for the River Don the well deserved but unenviable title of one of Europe’s filthiest rivers. A title which it retained well into the 1980s”.9 The rehabilitation of the Don catchment can be traced back to the 1960s, when local angling groups began to reintroduce coarse fish into disused dams on the upper Don. In the 1980s a combination of factory closures, more stringent environmental legislation and the development of the Don Valley trunk sewer resulted in a marked improvement in water quality. The recovery of the river was reflected in growing populations of minnows, roach, perch and gudgeon. By 1990 “a self sustaining coarse fish population was becoming well established” in the Don throughout Sheffield.

weirs, bridges and pollution

“In combination with this miasma of destruction was the organic pollution created by the human population of South Yorkshire. Inadequately treated sewage raised BOD and lowered dissolved oxygen levels. It created ammonia concentrations well in excess of that which could sustain fish life and produced the phosphates which encouraged algal development and destroyed natural in-stream flora. “Foam, created by the use of non-biodegradable detergents, became perhaps the most visibly obvious indicator of the river’s condition in the 1950s and 60s. Huge banks of grey brown bubbles created by the re-

It was a measure of the dramatic improvement in the condition of the Don when, in 1992, the river achieved 9

Christopher Firth, op cit

the rivers and the city | section B

is predicated on the need to re-connect the citizens of Sheffield to their rivers: that would not have been an attractive prospect a generation ago.

its River Quality Objective (RQO). Better water quality and growing fish populations have encouraged the return of species such as kingfishers, herons and otters. The Don has become “a popular coarse fishery in its lower and middle reaches… [with] excellent trout and grayling fishing in the upper reaches”; salmon have returned to the river between Sheffield and Doncaster10.

Much of the improvement described here has been a windfall benefit of the decline of Sheffield’s traditional industries, which has removed major sources of pollution. The change has been complemented and accelerated by investment in drainage and sewerage infrastructure as well as by a tighter regulatory regime. However, there is still a lot to be done, and the urban Don and the lower reaches of its tributaries still bear the marks of their industrial past in the form of “[w]eirs, walled banks, culverting and canalisation”.

This transformation has been reflected in the condition of the tributary rivers, some of which have been the subject of recent studies. The Environment Agency reports that the river Sheaf “has made a remarkable recovery in recent years, with brown trout, native crayfish and bullhead having re-colonised much of its length”11. A report on the same river by the Sheffield Wildlife Trust and Heeley Development Trust describes “a dynamic and diverse biosystem” with “a surprising wealth” of fish, flora and mammals12.

Sheffield is a modern city and there can be no going back to the rivers in their natural state of a millennium ago; the aspiration now must be to introduce a more environmentally sympathetic river management regime which strikes a better balance between the demands of development and biodiversity. 13

The recovery of rivers which were biologically dead only a few decades ago has been a remarkable success story. Its significance for the present study is that it has opened up opportunities – for development, recreation and nature conservation – which would not have been available if the Don had continued to be an open sewer. Our brief 10 Environment Agency, A River Don Fish Pass Proposal (undated) 11 Environment Agency, River Sheaf Restoration Project (undated) 12 Sheffield Wildlife Trust & Heeley Development Trust, River Sheaf Corridor Study (September 2001)

the rivers today - above: the Porter valley | below: Shirebrook Valley

Sheffield Wildlife Trust & Heeley Development Trust, op cit shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 19

april 2008 | yellow book

Old Abyssinia Bridge

Sheffield: spirit of place Famous observers of modern Sheffield include two eminent but contrasting 20th century writers. George Orwell, in The Road to Wigan Pier, said that Sheffield “could justly claim to be called the ugliest town in the Old World”, and noted tartly that “its inhabitants, who want it to be pre-eminent in everything, very likely do make that claim for it”.14 Orwell was describing the Don Valley where “[if] at rare moments you stop smelling sulphur it is because you have begun smelling gas”. In 1961 John Betjeman described the very different world of Broomhill, “the prettiest suburb in England” where “in winding tree-shaded roads” he found the “handsome mansions of the Victorian industrialists who made their pile from steel and cutlery in the crowded mills below”. The view from these privileged heights was celebrated in Betjeman’s famous poem, “An Edwardian Sunday, Broomhill, Sheffield”: …Strange Hallamshire, County Of dearth and bounty, Of brown tumbling water And furnace and mill.

14 George Orwell, op cit 20

Your own Ebenezer15 Looks down from his height On back street and alley And chemical valley Laid out in the light; On ugly and pretty Where industry thrives In this hill-shadowed city Of razors and knives16. This duality – the favoured western suburbs, with their fresh air, open space and views, and the polluted environment of the east end – runs through every account of Sheffield in the modern era. Abercrombie’s Survey mapped a “smoke zone” extending from the city centre to the boundary with Rotherham: he reported that in an average year Attercliffe had 25% less sunshine than Weston Park. The geography of privilege and exclusion is an enduring feature of Sheffield life and one of the defining themes of this report. Writing in 1961, Ian Nairn called Sheffield “this exciting, exasperating city”; when he returned in 1967 he found that “Sheffield has at long last found itself as a personality…If this is tomorrow’s Britain, it will be 15 The Rotherham-born poet, Ebenezer Elliott (1781-1849), the Corn Law Rhymer 16 John Betjeman, op cit

the rivers and the city | section B

all right”.17 Not all the projects praised by Nairn have stood the test of time, but overall his judgement has been vindicated. Like other observers Nairn found that Sheffield – though one of England’s biggest cities – had little to show in the way of fine architecture or civic display: “the old buildings are something of a joke”. According to Orwell, Sheffield “has a population of half a million and it contains fewer decent buildings than the average East Anglian village of five hundred”. It has to be acknowledged that for a city of its size Sheffield has very few buildings of real quality. The reasons for this are rooted in its history; Sheffield was always an industrial city, not a centre of trade or commerce like Manchester and Leeds. In 1924 Abercrombie noted that “it is in no sense the metropolis of a region… [its] simple aim is to be a successful manufacturing community and everything must tend directly to that end”. Sheffield was one of the powerhouses of the industrial revolution but the architectural legacy –civic, commercial and ecclesiastical buildings – was generally undistinguished. Arguably, the Park Hill flats (1955-61) were the first buildings of international significance that the city had produced, though they remain highly controversial. 17 Ian Nairn, Britain’s Changing Towns, BBC, London, 1967

unmatched. Everywhere there are striking views: into the city, out of the city and across the city. The steep sided valleys of the upper Don, the Sheaf, Porter, Rivelin and Loxley bring fingers of woodland and open space deep into the city, and connect it to the Peak District. The contrast between the sublime, even “terrifying”, aspect of the industrial east end and the city’s “golden frame” has been noted by visitors for 200 years.

Park Hill flats by Gollins, Melville and Ward 1955-61

A number of modern buildings – among them the University Arts Tower18, the Winter Garden and Millennium Galleries19 and Persistence Works20 - have raised the standard, but the quality of Sheffield’s architecture undeniably modest. If this is the case, how can we account for Sheffield’s powerful and enduring appeal and the deep affection it commands among its citizens? Partly, of course, it is a matter of the landscape: Sheffield’s natural setting is 18 Gollins, Melville & Ward, 1961-65 19 Both by Pringle Richards Sharratt, 1995-2002 20 Fielden Clegg Bradley, 1998-2001

Paradoxically, the lack of architectural splendour which has embarrassed Sheffield in the past now looks like a source of distinctiveness – something that makes Sheffield special. This is captured in the 2004 Pevsner Architectural Guide by Ruth Harman and John Minnis21. Harman and Minnis catalogue and celebrate the city’s industrial heritage, its fine public parks and arcadian suburbs; its unsigned vernacular buildings and dedicated local architects; as well as the flawed but heroic municipal projects of the 1950s and 1960s. Sheffield is as prone to sentimentality and selfcongratulation as the next city, but the feeling persists that – in the age of the clone town – it is not like everywhere else. Describing Sheffield as a city of villages is in danger of becoming a cliché, but Sheffielders know that there is an element of truth in it: the small towns 21 Ruth Harman and John Minnis, Pevsner Architectural Guides: Sheffield, Yale University Press, 2004. sheffield - city of rivers | 21

april 2008 | yellow book

and villages subsumed into the city in past 150 years still retain something of their individual personality. The city has many special places, some cherished by the citizens of Sheffield, some still little known. They include the affluent western suburbs; the hilltop campus of the University of Sheffield; a set of superb historic parks, gardens and open spaces; the rich industrial townscape of Neepsend and Kelham Island; characterful local centres like Crookes and Hillsborough; the iconic cooling towers forming a memorable and somehow appropriate gateway to Sheffield at Tinsley. Sheffield’s townscape and topography are distinctive, but so are its history and culture. The defining narratives of Sheffield’s past relate to the metal trades: cutlery and the little mesters, tool making and the heroic grandeur of steel manufacture. It is easy to be sentimental about what were hard and often dangerous industries, and distance lends black-and-white images of the smogbound city a spurious air of romance. Even Orwell admitted that, at night, “Sheffield assumes a kind of sinister magnificence”. The reality was tough and often unpleasant, but there is no doubt that the business of making and manipulating metal defined the city’s self-image – and established a Sheffield brand which until relatively recently enjoyed genuine international recognition. 22

In the modern era Sheffield has acquired new associations: the 1980s experiment with municipal socialism and subsidised, low-cost public transport; sport - especially boxing and snooker (the latter is synonymous with the city); challenging theatre and music. Jarvis

Sheffield is a city with a strong personality and a distinctive identity. These are seen – rightly – as positive assets, but there are negative features as well. Especially in the north and east, some neighbourhoods are plagued by persistent poverty and exclusion, often compounded

Cocker, a contemporary renaissance man, is now probably Sheffield’s most famous son, and Richard Hawley22 and the Arctic Monkeys continue the tradition of literate, very English songs rooted in the urban (and often specifically Sheffield) experience.

by drab – or even hostile – urban environments. Although investment has flowed into the centre of the city there are still large tracts of derelict and underused land, and the quality of some recent development – notably in the Lower Don Valley and central riverside – has been depressingly poor. It is a generalisation, but still broadly accurate to say that opportunity, amenity and quality of life remain polarised between the privileged west and the excluded east of the city.

Hawley’s passion for his home city is legendary: his last three album titles are Low Edges, Coles Corner and Lady’s Bridge.

the rivers and the city | section B

the Gold Route: Howard Street

The city’s almost exclusively industrial tradition has presented huge challenges in the past 30-40 years. It has proved much easier for regional capitals like Manchester or Leeds to make the transition from a manufacturing to a service economy than industrial towns like Sheffield. The change has come but only after a lot of pain, and public sector intervention is still required to tackle market failure; the city strategy recognises that Sheffield needs to be weaned off subsidies. Knowledge-based sectors like financial, professional and business services are still under-represented. The net result is that (to paraphrase Creative Sheffield) UK and international demand for Sheffield is still relatively weak. Sheffield’s urban renaissance is still a partial and incomplete work in progress, but a striking feature of this study has been the evidence of a growing sense of confidence and optimism in the city which is reflected in the hugely successful regeneration projects that have transformed the heart of the city in the past decade. The successful implementation of the City Centre Masterplan 2000 was recognised when Sheffield City Council was named Local Authority of the Year 2007 in the first Regeneration & Renewal Awards.

pedestrians on the Gold Route from the Sheaf Valley to the University of Sheffield move through a series of attractive, lively, safe and well-maintained public and semi-public spaces. The private sector has responded positively, and new investment is rippling through the city. Elsewhere, the restoration of the Botanical Gardens has been a triumph, and the Weston Park Museum has been completely reinvented. These projects have transformed the quality of public life in Sheffield. Collectively, they can be seen as the city’s gift to itself. One of the defining features of these great public works is the use of water: Sheffield’s experience has confounded the conventional wisdom that water in public spaces inevitably means trouble. Instead, water features have helped to create public spaces that are already well-loved and a magnet for people; an excellent management regime helps, but these projects have shown that busy places are largely self-policing. They confirm the symbolic significance of water in the life of the city, but Sheaf Square, the new public space in front of the Midland station, offers an immediate link to Sheffield’s waterways: while an ornamental cascade drops down the slope towards the station, the Sheaf flows through a tunnel below.

Not so long ago, the walk from the Midland Station to the city centre to was a dispiriting experience. Now sheffield - city of rivers | 23

april 2008 | yellow book

Kelham Island Conservation Area

Sheffield is a special place, and much of the value of these 21st century public works lies in the way in which they add to the distinctive character and quality of the city. They are new, but they add up to something that is unmistakably Sheffield – they bear the city’s signature. It is vitally important that the regeneration of the city’s waterways responds to Sheffield’s spirit of place. The early signs have not been altogether promising: much of the recent development in the central riverside area has been disappointing: these were run-down places in need of renewal, but most of the new schemes are bland, anodyne and anonymous. The re-use of historic buildings in the Kelham Island conservation area has set a much happier precedent: now we need new architecture of appropriate quality and scale. Later in this report we set out a vision and strategy for the future of Sheffield’s waterways, and we also map out the guiding principles of our recommended approach. At the heart of these principles is the challenge of maintaining, developing and celebrating the Sheffield signature: the qualities of place and culture that make Sheffield so special.

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

C sheffield’s rivers today Fig 7-1 rivers and landform

Spatial analysis Sheffield is a complex and multi-layered place. To reach a better understanding of the relationship between the city and its rivers, we have undertaken a spatial analysis which has embraced a variety of elements and a wide range of data sources, including:  topography, watercourses and physical fabric  landscape and townscape, visual qualities, views and landmarks  the geography of communities  places, local centres and ‘towns’ and ‘villages’ within the city  land use: distribution and relationships  greenspace, parks, designed landscapes and playing fields  habitats and wildlife, SSSIs and SINCs, Local Nature Reserves and Natural England designated areas  culture and history, industrial archaeology and time landscapes  networks and connections. This analysis is presented in the form of the datascapes in the following pages (Figures 7-1 to 7-7). The headline findings can be summarised as follows:

sheffield - city of rivers | 25

april 2008 | yellow book

Fig 7-2 rivers, landform and built up areas

 there is a strong and enduring relationship between rivers, landform and industry which has determined the shape of the city and the distribution of land uses  while industry needed water to provide power and take away effluent, the commercial, retail, administrative and cultural life of the city centre occupied higher ground above the river valleys  there are a number of suburban riverside towns Hillsborough, Heeley and Attercliffe – located by rivers but not well connected to them  other local centres are generally disconnected from the rivers and most are not within easy walking distance west Sheffield - high quality residential environment

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Fig 7-3 rivers, landform, built up areas, business and industry

 the topography of the city is defined by rivers and valleys which create dramatic rural and urban scenery, with landmarks and viewpoints, stunning panoramas and long views  in the west, the intermediate zones between rural, suburban and urban areas are primarily residential areas with high quality environments  the transitional zones between central Sheffield and the old industrial areas – the time landscapes of the city – are characterised by derelict land and buildings but they offer opportunities for change  the rivers provide a connected network of rich wildlife corridors which can be improved, expanded and connected to traditional parks and open spaces rich wildlife corridors

sheffield - city of rivers | 27

april 2008 | yellow book

Fig 7-4 rivers, riverside towns, local and neighbourhood centres

 wildlife sites are concentrated in the arcadian sections of the Upper Don, Loxley, Rivelin, Sheaf and Porter as well as in the east of the Lower Don; there is a strong relationship between these sites and the rivers  most of the river corridors have footpath systems either built or proposed. These form the spine of a citywide network of paths and circular walks  a number of formal parks are located in river corridors, notably at Endcliffe, Millhouses and Rivelin Glen. Functionally and experientially, Sheffield has a variable relationship with its rivers:

open space near Hillsborough

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Fig 7-5 rivers and parks

 in some areas – for example, the woodlands and riverside parks on the upper and middle reaches of the Don tributaries – they are cherished places which enrich the quality of life and are valued assets for local communities and users from other parts of the city  by contrast, the lower reaches of the same rivers are largely hidden places; the rivers are often confined to culverts and artificial channels as they weave through residential, industrial and commercial areas on the fringes of the city centre; local centres like Hillsborough, Heeley and Attercliffe grew up as riverside industrial towns but the waterways no Rivelin Glen Park

sheffield - city of rivers | 29

april 2008 | yellow book

Fig 7-6 rivers, natural and built heritage

longer register except as an obscure and enigmatic presence  this sense of disengagement also applies to the city centre: the Don (and the canal basin) are nearby without being part of it: the poet Chris Jones describes the way that the river “elbows the city centre”; current plans aim to regenerate the riverside and tackle the problem of severance but designated quarters such as Kelham and the Riverside are still edge of centre locations with weak connections to the vibrant heart of the city; the next 5-10 years will be determine whether real links can be forged  large tracts of the city do not have access to attractive rivers: Sheffield’s natural assets are not distributed equitably and many people living in the north and east of the city have to be content with a network of small waterways, some of doubtful appeal; however, projects such as the restoration of Shire Brook and Hartley Brook Dike have shown the potential to reclaim the streams as valued community assets  the long-term depopulation of the Lower Don Valley means that this section of the Don and the canal are effectively waterways without communities; however, there are signs that people are beginning to reclaim the waterways: the Five Weirs Walk aims to encourage citizens to rediscover the history 30

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Fig 7-7 rivers, linkage and centres

and wildlife of the Don; the canal is popular with anglers and there is a boating community at Tinsley Locks; the nature reserve at Blackburn Meadows is a valuable new resource, especially for school children. Our analysis confirms the views of many of our consultees. The western rivers are much-loved and highly valued, but the urban rivers and canal are still underused and disregarded despite some seeds of recovery. A key issue here is amenity: perceptions of the Lower Don Valley and the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal are coloured by endemic problems of litter, vandalism and dereliction. Whatever their intrinsic value they do not appear to be safe or pleasant places to be, unlike the fine parks and idyllic woodlands in the west. This “east-west divide” may be an over-simplification, but it has been a recurring theme in Sheffield since the start of the industrial era. It has also been a defining issue for the present study: the recovery and beautification of Sheffield’s forgotten urban waterways can play a key part in regenerating under-performing areas and in creating a more equitable and inclusive society.

sheffield - city of rivers | 31

april 2008 | yellow book

Fig 8.1 river and waterway character zones

River typology The scale and scope of the study defeats any attempt at neat categorisation, but we have identified a typology of eight river types/character zones (see Figure 8-1):  Rural: the headwaters of the Don and its tributaries are found in the outstanding hill and moorland landscapes west and north of the city, including the National Park. Woodlands are a feature of the river valleys as they descend towards the city; significant areas of woodland – often of high nature conservation value – are found within 3-4 miles of the city centre, sometimes linking rural areas to the arcadian suburbs.  Arcadian suburbs: the areas west and south-west of the city centre have always been favoured places to live, with an outstanding natural setting and (in the industrial era) cleaner air; the classic arcadian suburb of Endcliffe extended into the Porter valley, where Endcliffe Park was created in the late 1880s.1 These low density residential areas are characterised by trees, informal open space and parks, providing a variety of habitats and a high quality environment. Sheffield’s linear parks are defining features of the arcadian suburbs.

1 32

Harman and Minnis, op cit

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Fig 8.2 river and waterway types

 Riverside towns: the development of substantial secondary centres in large cities was a feature of urbanisation during the industrial era; in Sheffield, a group of “riverside towns” emerged – Heeley, Attercliffe and Hillsborough – which were important service centres for the people who lived and worked in the new industrial areas on the edge of the city. In the early part of the industrial era workers’ housing tended to be co-located with industry in areas like the lower Sheaf and Porter valleys; later these mixed neighbourhoods gave way to a greater separation of homes and factories and, in the 20th century, to the planned depopulation – through slum clearance – of areas including the Lower Don Valley.  Historic sites of industry: despite generations of structural economic change, some riverside areas, especially by the Don, are still unmistakably industrial in character and appearance. Kelham, Neepsend and Nursery Street developed as important industrial areas in the early 19th century: their built form was high density and fine-grained and – despite significant shifts in the economic base – they are still industrial locations, albeit of an increasingly mixed character. Sections of the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal have a similar character. Strong townscapes and good utilitarian architecture, sheffield - city of rivers | 33

april 2008 | yellow book

with trees and scrub usually limited to gap sites and riverbanks.  Transitional zones: in various sites on the fringes of the city centre – and especially in the east end – the decline of industry has been more rapid, resulting in the fragmentation of the traditional industrial landscape, and extensive areas of derelict land and buildings. These areas have seen the emergence of a spontaneous landscape of scrub woodland, sometimes creating important new habitats (as at Salmon Pastures). Transitional zones may also contain industrial monuments of archaeological and townscape value which, like the wildlife habitats, may be at risk from new development  Late 20th century regeneration areas: in the 1980s and 1990s the distinctive but degraded townscape of the Lower Don Valley was transformed by a series of flagship projects including major sports and leisure facilities; new offices and apartments in the Exchange district are typical examples of early 21st century urban regeneration – but sadly not of best practice.  Urban waterfront: the essentially industrial character of Sheffield’s waterways means that the city has 34

Hillsborough riverside town

Kelham Island - historic site of industry

never had a true urban waterfront where the river is an integral and high profile part of the urban fabric. Development around the Central Riverside is still a work in progress, but the aim is to reclaim the river Don for the city and to make it a focal point for business, leisure and cultural activities as well as valued place to live.  Community rivers: while rivers and streams in the favoured western suburbs have long been cherished assets, those in the less privileged north and east of the city have often been neglected. In recent years a number of these have watercourses have been reclaimed as valued community assets; notable examples include Shire Brook, which has been restored as the heart of a new nature reserve, and Hartley Brook Dike and the other streams that create a green corridor through residential areas in the north of the city. Underpinning this analysis is another key feature: the distinctive and sometimes enigmatic character of Sheffield’s waterways and their relationship to the life of the city. We have been struck by the elusive, even secretive nature of the waterways network. Sheffield’s rivers are often difficult to find, hidden behind walls or properties and hard to reach. Once discovered they reveal secluded, atmospheric places with a strong presence,

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

rich in wildlife and industrial remains, sometimes with a hint of the mysterious or even sinister.

Victoria Quays

In urban areas the rivers are often inaccessible: they flow through stone and concrete channels, usually well below street level, so that they can only be viewed from above, often over walls. The lower reaches of the Porter and the Sheaf run through deep culverts and underground tunnels. By contrast, the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal is, for the most part, a more attractive waterway with visual consistency, wildlife interest, good access and an active waterspace. Its key features include:  a one-sided hard towpath with a complementary soft wildlife reserve on the opposite bank  traditional canal architecture: bridges, locks, winding holes and basins  the British Waterways black and white colour scheme  active use of the water for boating, houseboats and angling  buildings and vegetation defining the visual limits of the canal corridor  authenticity of the canal landscape. All of this presents a major challenge for planners and policy makers. Sheffield’s waterways are rightly seen as key sites for regeneration, and the Don Valley corridor has

authentic and active - the Sheffield and Tinsley Canal

a vital role to play, both in connecting the life of the city to the river and providing strategic sites for commercial and residential development. The question is: how is this to be achieved without compromising the special character of the city and erasing its cultural memory? The whole length of the urban Don – from Middlewood to Tinsley – needs to change in the next 15-20 years in order to restore a sense of purpose and pride, recreate community and revive the economy. But it is important to remember that there is much here of value – historic, cultural, architectural and ecological – and it will be vital to ensure that the new riverside retains, protects and celebrates some of the essential qualities of the old. Some of these concepts have been explored by the Materialising Sheffield project led by the University of Sheffield’s Humanities Research Institute which aims: “…to explore Sheffield’s identity in relation to its material culture and physical presence…by looking at the ways in which histories and identities are variously remembered and forgotten, and the extent to which they can be retrieved through exploration of material remains…and at how the city’s material culture might be re-presented and re-shaped in the future”. The project has produced an e-book which includes a sheffield - city of rivers | 35

april 2008 | yellow book

chapter by Cathy Dee on Found Landscape, Sheffield Rivers, a photo essay on Sheffield’s “intimate, hidden river landscapes”.2 Celebrating the culture of the city and valuing the terrain vague3 of post-industrial transitional areas have been keynotes of the regeneration of the Emscher Park in Germany’s Ruhrgebeit, which is arguably the most appropriate and inspirational model in Europe for the regeneration of Sheffield’s waterways. As well as achieving high quality, environmentally sensitive new development, this former heartland of coal and steel has found new uses for industrial buildings, consolidated others as heritage sites and landscape features, and treated its spontaneous landscapes as valuable urban woodlands and wildlife havens. The benefits of this approach include:  incorporating industrial and natural heritage can add to the intrinsic and market value of new developments without compromising contemporary design  it confers quality and authenticity which could not otherwise be achieved at an affordable price 2 3

www.hrionline.ac.uk/matshef/index.html Jean-Francois Cheverier, Terrain vague or territorial intimacy, video lecture at the Berlage Institute, 1999.

 it protects the community’s collective memory  it establishes a strong sense of place: the city’s signature  in contrast to the bland uniformity of conventional regeneration practice, it produces an urban environment rich in layers of history and ideas. Sheffield Forgemasters

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

flood damage at Club Mill Bridge

Urban waterways: assets and liabilities This study addresses the relationship between Sheffield and its waterways, the spaces and places around the rivers, and the opportunities for regeneration and investment that they represent. But at the core of the study are the waterways themselves, their quality, condition and appeal. These issues are often overlooked. It has become a received wisdom in contemporary regeneration practice that riverside locations are by definition attractive, but this is simply not the case. Some urban waterfronts in the UK (for example, Newcastle and Bristol) have become prime business and residential locations, achieving premium land values and rents. But waterfronts may also present (real and perceived) constraints as well as opportunities; these constraints may relate to:  aesthetics: is the waterspace clean and attractive?  risks: is the area prone to flooding?  viability: do waterfront sites represent additional risks and uncertainty, and will they require additional infrastructure or design costs?

sheffield - city of rivers | 37

april 2008 | yellow book

flood debris in the lower Don valley

10.

Aesthetics and amenity

local businesses paying an annual service charge.

Aesthetic appeal is a key factor influencing investment decisions on riverside and canalside sites in Sheffield. The Don and the canal have long suffered from a negative image. For the most part, these urban waterways are not conventionally attractive: they flow between high walls – often in a state of disrepair – which make the water hard to see or to approach; the river banks are strewn with litter and detritus; some sections are used by rough drinkers and drug addicts; many riverside properties are derelict and neglected and many turn their backs on the water. There is much of interest and value to discover, but first impressions of the lower Don in particular can be daunting, and it can seem an unwelcoming and even threatening environment.

The creation of the Five Weirs Walk and increasing leisure use of the canal have helped to raise awareness of the distinctive character and rich heritage of the Lower Don Valley. Despite wholesale demolitions, there are still memorable industrial landscapes, with factory walls rising sheer from the water and the eponymous weirs (Walk Mill, Burton, Sanderson’s, Brightside and Hadfields) are dramatic features. However, the intimate scale of development around the river at Kelham and Neepsend is more immediately appealing than the Lower Don, and this helps to explain why the regeneration process has moved further and faster on the west side of the city

A new social enterprise, the River Don Stewardship Company, was launched in 2007 to improve the amenity of the Don riverside4. RDSC will operate in a pilot area between Kelham and Tinsley in the first instance. A team of river stewards will carry out a programme of clean-ups, respond to fly-tipping and vandalism incidents, patrol the riverbank, carry out basic maintenance and remove invasive vegetation. This service will be funded in part by 4

The company is supported by Groundwork Sheffield, Sheffield Wildlife Trust, the Environment Agency, Five Weirs Walk Trust, Upper Don Walk Trust and Sheffield City Council

The Sheffield Development Corporation projects of the 1980s and 1990s treated the river Don and the canal as liabilities to be ignored rather than opportunities to be seized. Bland, low-rise office pavilions stand back from the riverside behind surface car parks; there are some cosmetic gestures towards the river but no convincing sense of engagement. Overall, the area’s distinctive, if somewhat intimidating, sense of place has been compromised and the new, post-industrial landscape is pallid and anonymous.

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

11.

This is disappointing, but it has to be acknowledged that the historic legacy, especially in the Lower Don Valley, presents major challenges. While the early 19th century factories at Kelham Island lend themselves readily to adaptation, re-use and gentrification, the gargantuan scale and primitive forms of the later steelworks present intractable problems; the long decline of the workshops and smaller factories around Attercliffe means that many of these buildings are past saving. It is typical of Sheffield’s geography of privilege and exclusion that, while the urban Don has been one of the most abused and misused of Britain’s urban rivers, its upper reaches and (especially) its western tributaries are among the best things in the city. For much of their length the Sheaf, Porter, Rivelin and Loxley are attractive and sometimes idyllic small rivers, flowing from the surrounding hills, through woodlands and parks before entering the city. By definition, these are protected environments with very limited development capacity, but – as they converge with the Don – the minor rivers enter a transitional zone. The rivers decline from a more or less “natural” condition to a highly artificial state, enclosed between stone or concrete walls, and even (in the case of the Sheaf and the Porter) descending into tunnels. We will return later to plans to restore and expose parts of these rivers: the Porter Brook (currently confined to a

Flood risk management The disastrous events of June 2007 were a reminder that Sheffield has a long history of flooding. The short, steep descent from the moors means that a fast, high flow can quickly become established: the Don and its tributaries are flashy rivers, prone to sudden spates. A 1992 report noted that the Sheaf had flooded 10 times in the previous 70 years; there have been several floods since then with major events in 1958 (Sheaf and Don), 1973 and 1991, when blocked debris screens caused the Sheaf and Porter to overflow. The Environment Agency reports that: “Watercourses in Sheffield drain the southern Pennines and tend to respond very quickly to rainfall…More than 5,700 properties within the floodplain are at risk from a 0.1% AEP flood event (1:1000 years). To the north of Sheffield communities in Stocksbridge, Wharncliffe and Oughtibridge are at risk from the Little Don and the Don, and Chapeltown and Ecclesfield on Blackburn Brook. In and around the city of Sheffield major watercourses such as the rivers Don, Rivelin, Loxley, Sheaf and Porter Brook contribute to the flood risk.”5

management challenges: the lower Loxley

miserable channel) could become an attractive feature of the Cultural Industries Quarter, but an opportunity to regenerate the urban Sheaf has already been wasted by a dreary development at Broadfield.

Topography and climate mean that the city is prone to 5

Environment Agency, State of the Environment Report, op cit sheffield - city of rivers | 39

april 2008 | yellow book

flooding, but the problem now is, at least in part, manmade. A recent study of Britain’s urban rivers highlighted the two principal causes of increased flood risks in inland areas as:

culverts can become blocked, especially where they are fitted with entrance and exit grids…Once obstructions… begin to gather at the entrance to a culvert, flooding upstream is inevitable.”

 failure of the urban drainage network to remove rainfall fast enough, resulting in accumulations, and  flooding of adjacent rivers as a result of rainfall in the catchment upstream.6

As a result of these factors, the modern urban environment is characterised by extremes of water flow. Nowhere is immune from these risks, and climate change means that the frequency of flood events is likely to increase. Sheffield is especially vulnerable to flash floods compounded by surface water run-off and blockages caused by debris.

When these events coincide, severe flooding can occur: “The urban landscape, with its roofs, asphalt roads and paved and concrete surfaces, is designed to shed rainfall into the nearest drain as quickly as possible. This water is then piped directly to the nearest stream, causing a very rapid increase in flow and corresponding rise in water levels…Surface water drains typically have no spare capacity when the flow exceeds the design amount. Whereas a natural river may expand onto the flood plain, a surface-water drain can only overflow onto the streets. The problem…may be further exacerbated by debris and litter that collect in the drains, impeding the flow. “Because of the high density of roads in urban areas, the storm drainage system involves frequent culverts. These 6

Geoff Petts, John Heathcote and Dave Martin (eds), Urban Rivers: Our Inheritance and Future, IWA Publishing & the Environment Agency, 2002

A major flood risk assessment was carried out for the City Council in 2006 by JE Jacobs, the first stage of the Council’s response to Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25: Development and Flood Risk.7 The report notes that a number of areas, including parts of the city centre, are subject to a “high probability” of flooding, with the Don, Sheaf and Porter Brook corridors particularly affected. Detailed analysis at small area level shows that the risk of flooding extending into business and residential areas (and affecting transport infrastructure) is particularly acute in the following areas: 7

JE Jacobs, Sheffield City Council: Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, December 2006

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

 River Don: the entire length of the urban river, from Wadsley Bridge to Meadowhall  River Sheaf: the lower reaches below Norton Hammer, and especially Heeley, Lowfield, Highfield and Pond’s Forge  Porter Brook: the lower reaches below Hunter’s Bar, and especially the culverted sections in the city centre before the Porter Brook enters the Sheaf  River Loxley: from Malin Bridge, through Hillsborough, to the Don at Owlerton. These risks were confirmed only a few months after the publication of this report when, in June 2007, Sheffield experienced a disastrous flood – the most serious for more than a century - which resulted in loss of life as well as extensive damage to infrastructure, homes and businesses. This was followed by the long drawn-out immersion of low-lying areas further down river.

cope with severe weather leading to an increased risk of flooding. The recent floods have thrown these issues into sharp relief, as well as confirming the need for a response at the regional (catchment) level. The problems contributing to flood risks are complex and systemic and it is beyond the scope of this study to examine them in detail. But it is clear that there is little point in devising local solutions: channel improvements or flood barriers might offer Sheffield more protection but at the price of compounding problems further downstream.

At this stage it is hard to gauge the long-term effects of the 2007 floods on developer confidence in Sheffield. This was the first significant flooding event since the regeneration of the urban riverside got under way, and one of the most serious ever experienced by the city. Key regeneration sites between Kelham Island and Lady’s Bridge were affected, as well as large parts of the Lower Don Valley: the Meadowhall shopping centre was flooded and forced to close for several days.

the River Don near Meadowhall

Over many decades the conventional approach to urban rivers has been to treat water in cities as a problem and a threat, and to substitute highly engineered drainage, sewerage and flood prevention measures for the natural water cycle. This approach has conferred significant benefits: water quality has improved dramatically and health risks reduced. But the downside, as we have seen, has been a reduction in the capacity of urban areas to sheffield - city of rivers | 41

april 2008 | yellow book

There is a risk that floods will discourage investment in the Don riverside, at least in the short term. Developers may conclude that the waterfront is a high-risk location and that the risk-reward ratio is unacceptable, especially in some of the more challenging sites. Potential purchasers and occupiers may also be more cautious about investing in riverside property so soon after this salutary reminder of the destructive power of the Don. Insurers may be unwilling to provide cover for waterfront properties – or premiums may be unacceptably high. flood damage to river banks on the lower Don

Experience suggests that, if demand remains firm and development sites are sufficiently attractive in other respects, developers and occupiers will overcome their risk-aversion relatively quickly. The problem for Sheffield is that, with the exception of some relatively well-established areas like Kelham Island, the principal waterfront sites are still perceived to be unproven development locations, low amenity areas isolated from the city centre. Moving to these new locations already required something of a leap of faith; the floods have simply added to the perceived risks. Sheffield has ambitious plans for its urban rivers, and

This report aims to set out an exciting vision for the future. We are confident that this vision can and will be realised, but it would be naïve to pretend that the floods have not added a degree of difficulty to the task, at least in the short term. There is no realistic alternative to continuing development in the Don Valley in particular, although careful consideration needs to be given to form, density and environmental design. As the Jacobs report notes, “the river corridors are key topographic features of strategic areas of the city”; prohibiting or severely restricting future development in these would be “likely to have a detrimental impact upon the economic and social welfare of the existing community”. Sheffield needs to reduce the risk of similarly destructive flooding in the future. If, as a result of climate change, flooding becomes a more regular event, the implications for the economy of the city could be enormous, not least because the Don Valley continues to be a prime location for new business and industrial development. However, the type of flood prevention strategy that the city chooses to adopt will be vitally important. A crude, knee-jerk defensive strategy designed to keep the water out at all costs might be superficially attractive, but it would also have serious negative consequences for the amenity and environmental value of the rivers.

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

fishing on the lower Don

Raising flood defences or carrying out channel improvements to improve the flow could have serious consequences further downstream. Such measures might also diminish the ecological value of the river, and would be likely to compound the historic sense of isolation of the river from the city. The same defensive mentality might also influence building design by “sacrificing” basement and ground car parking to the flood waters to protect homes and businesses. This would be a rational response (indeed, it is already happening) but it needs to be balanced against aspirations to promote active streetlevel uses and lively riverside promenades.

strategy adopted in the US; we will return to this later.8 We will certainly need a new mind-set: plans for the future regeneration of the East End have tended to treat the Don in a superficial, cosmetic way; in future they should begin with a strategy for river recovery and flood management. 12.

Water quality If flooding is a persistent problem, the improvement in river water quality has been a notable success story, which is reflected in the achievement of sustainable fish populations throughout the waterways network. Better water quality is the product of:

In our view is vital that aspirations for a lively and attractive urban waterfront – and for raising the environmental quality of the Lower Don Valley – should not be abandoned for the sake of discredited and unsustainable flood prevention measures. Later in the report we discuss the potential of a more innovative and holistic approach to flood prevention which would also yield amenity and environmental benefits, but we recognise that aspirations must be tempered with realism. Measures to “re-naturalise” the rivers or to create washlands to store flood water will require space which is at a premium in urban areas. A pragmatic approach will be required, perhaps the “string of pearls”

 structural economic change: the decline of polluting manufacturing industry  investment in infrastructure: sewage and water treatment facilities, and  regulation: the control of discharges of effluent. Improvements to the sewerage system and the water treatment works at Blackburn Meadows have played an important part. The installation of an effluent treatment plant at Stocksbridge has stopped the discharge into the Little Don of copper, zinc and lead from the steelworks.

Petts, Heathcote & Martin, op cit sheffield - city of rivers | 43

april 2008 | yellow book

The rivers are cleaner than they have been for 200 years, and the benefits are unmistakable. New species – including predators such as kingfishers, otters and herons - have returned to the rivers, but there is still no room for complacency. The Environment Agency’s River Factfile9 records that, in 2004, no part of the Don was classified as having “very good” water quality: 40.6% was “good” and 59.4% “fairly good”. It is worth noting that water quality in the Rother (which marks Sheffield’s eastern boundary in some places) is still very mixed: 43.9% is only “fair”, and 13.2% is “poor” or “bad”. Water pollution events occur from time to time from point sources such as sewage treatment works, sewage overflows and factories and these continue to have localised effects on fish stocks. But pollution is caused by other sources including: surface run-off from roads and pavements; garden fertilisers and pesticides; contaminated groundwater; litter and illegal tipping. 9

Environment Agency, Get to Know Your Rivers: the Don, Rother and Dearne catchment (undated)

13.

Natural heritage and biodiversity “The endurance of rivers, which is part of what makes them such a potent symbol in our culture, is also precisely the reason why they matter so much to ecologists and scientists. In this country there is probably no river or wetland which is ‘natural’ in the sense that it has never been interfered with by man; but river systems have two major characteristics which have enabled their wildlife in all its original complexity to survive interference better than most other systems. First, their continuous, linear nature provides plants and animals with an opportunity to move up and down them…Second, because a river’s nature is one of ceaseless change, forever on the move, the creatures which live in it have evolved strategies for surviving sudden floods and disruptions and alterations of the river’s course. Broken pieces of many water plants have the ability to root again; others have the seeds which float or seeds which resist digestion in the stomachs of birds, and so can be transported upstream. River insects develop wings in the last stage of their life cycle, and dragonflies are known to be able to fly many miles…Fish instinctively fight their way upstream against the current, and many water birds and animals have the ability to travel long distances… “Over the millennia, creatures which live in the

specialised conditions of rivers have evolved by adapting to these conditions. A babbling upland brook is physically very different from a lazy lowland river, and there are subtle gradations all the way between. These differences are further modified by the local geology, which affects the water chemistry, the local climate, and the particular conditions created by the dominant local plants. Thus a river’s wildlife is adapted to, and expresses, its particular local character and that of its different reaches with an almost infinite variety.”.10 Sheffield’s waterways make a vital contribution to the biodiversity of the city. The urban rivers provide valuable refuges for wildlife; they are often associated with woods, parks and open spaces; and they form green corridors that link open spaces throughout the city. Together, the rivers and open spaces in Sheffield form a green and blue network which provides habitats for fish, animals and plants. The network is imperfect and fragmented but it plays a vital role in enabling the movement of species over larger areas and helps to establish sustainable populations. Sheffield’s rivers provide a total of about 150km of running water, which falls into three broad habitat zones:11 10 Jeremy Pursglove, Taming the Flood (Oxford, 1989) 11 This section draws on the Rivers and Running Water Habitat Action Plan produced

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

 the upland area in the north west is characterised by peaty, brown coloured waters of high acidity; peaty pools and fast flowing, stony streams are characteristic of the area, although reservoirs have controlled water flows since the 19th century  the Loxley, Rivelin, Porter and Sheaf cross the lower coal measures which are less acidic and turbulent and have more diverse flora and fauna  the rivers and streams in the north east and south east (the urban Don, the Rother and its tributaries) are often artificially modified, canalised or culverted, with the inevitable consequences for wildlife. This analysis confirms the rich ecology of the Don tributaries in the west as well as the potential for recovery in the less favoured east. We have already noted the dramatic improvement in water quality in the past 20-30 years. In 1992, the Don achieved its River Quality Objective (RQO), by which time “a self sustaining coarse fish population was becoming well established” in the Sheffield area12. Better water quality and growing fish populations have encouraged the return of species such as kingfishers, herons and otters. The Don has become “a popular coarse fishery in its lower and middle reaches… [with] excellent trout and grayling fishing in the upper (as part of the Sheffield Local Biodiversity Action Plan) by the Sheffield Biodiversity Steering Group (report undated). 12 Firth, op cit

reaches”; salmon have returned to the river between Sheffield and Doncaster13. The tributary rivers have been the subject of a number of recent studies. The Environment Agency reports that the river Sheaf “has made a remarkable recovery in recent years, with brown trout, native crayfish and bullhead having re-colonised much of its length”14. A report on the same river by the Sheffield Wildlife Trust and Heeley Development Trust describes “a dynamic and diverse biosystem” with “a surprising wealth” of fish, flora and mammals15. A number of valuable studies have also been published by the Friends of the Porter Valley16. The Friends’ website describes the diversity of wildlife in the valley: “The woodlands of the valley bottom are mainly oak and ash, with alder along the river banks and many fine old beech trees planted over 100 years ago. The wildflowers of the woodland areas are at their best in spring…Lesser celandine and wood anemone carpet the ground in March and April, followed by the white heads of ramsoms (wild garlic) and sheets of bluebells in May… 13 Environment Agency, A River Don Fish Pass Proposal (undated) 14 Environment Agency, River Sheaf Restoration Project (undated) 15 Sheffield Wildlife Trust & Heeley Development Trust, River Sheaf Corridor Study (September 2001) 16 Titles include, Ecological Survey of the Porter Valley (2001), Plants in the Porter Valley and their Ecology (2003) and Butterfly Survey of the Porter Valley (2006) sheffield - city of rivers | 45

april 2008 | yellow book

“Wire Mill Dam is an important breeding site for toads, and frogs spawn in several of the dams. Mammals found in the valley include grey squirrels, foxes, badgers, stoats and voles… On a warm summer evening you should see one or more of 6 species of bat swooping over the water as they feed. “But the most obvious wildlife are the birds. Mallard, coot…and the smaller moorhen are common on the dams. Early or late in the day you will often see a lone heron standing statue-still in a dam or the brook. Something like a blackbird, but with a white chest, flying fast and low along the brook, or seen bobbing underwater to catch insects will be a dipper…if you’re lucky you may catch the turquoise flash of a kingfisher. “In the woodlands, the noisy colonies of rooks are unmistakable and in early spring you’ll hear great spotted woodpeckers….Jays and nuthatches are two other common and colourful residents.” The Environment Agency has noted the conservation value of the Don catchment, highlighting in particular:17     17 46

water vole populations throughout the catchment expanding otter populations on the Don native white-clawed crayfish bats attracted to insect-rich river habitats

Environment Agency, Get to Know your Rivers, op cit

    

great crested newts kingfishers and grey wagtails golden plover breeding in the headwaters brook lamprey are found in the Rivelin the Don is a stronghold for bullhead, an endangered species.

The Sheffield Wildlife Trust reports that more than 140 bird species have been recorded at Blackburn Meadows nature reserve, including migrant visitors such as widgeon, teal, willow warbler and jack snipe. The site is also rich in butterflies, dragonflies and aquatic insects.

Sheffield has seven designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) all of which are by or close to rivers. Most of the sites are designated primarily for their geological interest, but Totley Wood (or Ladies’ Spring Wood), on the north slopes of the Sheaf valley, was cited as: “a fine example of a Pennine birch-oak wood…dominated by sessile oak…with occasional birch and rowan. Small numbers of sycamore, beech, sweet chestnut, larch and scots pine occur…There is a scattered understorey of holly with occasional hazel and rhododendron. The ground Shire Brook Local Nature Reserve

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

flora is typical of acidic woodland with wavy hair-grass and bracken the most abundant plants. Other species commonly found include common cow-wheat…, wood sage…, wood-sorrel…and great wood-rush…, with bilberry also occasionally found. “The birch-oak wood grades into ash-wych on the alluvial soils of the valley bottom. Hawthorn, hazel and elder are frequent in the understorey with creeping soft-grass and bluebell dominating the ground flora. Dog’s mercury, yellow archangel and ramsoms become increasingly abundant towards the stream bank where valley alder woodland has developed.

with extensive wildflower rich meadows, ancient hedgerows, scrub and streams”, which together provide a range of important national and local biodiversity action plan (BAP) habitats.18 The Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy Preferred Options confirms the value of the city’s rivers and valleys as “one of the defining features of the Sheffield landscape”; they form the basis of the green network and provide wildlife habitats. So there is broad recognition of the nature conservation value 18

Source: English Nature Shire Brook Local Nature Reserve

“The well-marked zonations of soil and vegetation allied with the wood’s close proximity to a large urban area make Totley Wood a valuable educational site.” Many of Sheffield’s Local Nature Reserves are on riverside sites including some in the city’s less privileged areas. The Shire Brook Local Nature Reserve (LNR) runs from Gleadless to Beighton and extends to more than 100 hectares. It contains ancient meadows, ponds, marshes and heathland, as well as newly planted trees on reclaimed land. Nearby, in the Gleadless Valley, the housing estates created in the 1950s and 1960s are surrounded by “a rich mosaic of eight ancient woodlands sheffield - city of rivers | 47

april 2008 | yellow book

of Sheffield’s waterways and the recovery of the Don has provided graphic evidence of the rivers’ powers of recovery: in less than a generation the urban rivers have been transformed from “lifeless sewers” to key ecological assets. However, the river system in Sheffield “continues to be impacted by discharges from industry, mining, sewage, water abstraction and impoundment”. The Rivers and Running Water Habitat Action Plan identifies eight key threats to biodiversity:  water pollution from sources including industry, sewage overflow in storm conditions, the atmosphere, agriculture and water from old coal mines  water impoundment and abstraction: reservoirs, weirs, dams, ground and surface water abstraction  physical modification of the river system including channels, culverts, dredging and filling, artificial banks, riverside development  loss of habitats and diversity due to built development and intensive agriculture  conflict between heritage conservation and wildlife  fisheries management can remove native vegetation  invasive plants and animals threaten the integrity of

river habitats and species19  recreational use can cause bank erosion, disturb wildlife and plants.

14.

The river valleys are the prime determinant of what Anne Beer calls Sheffield’s “green structure”21. This is evident in the city’s western suburbs, where the valleys of the Sheaf, Porter, Rivelin and Loxley delineate linear parks, connecting the urban core to the Peak District. The character of these valleys varies considerably: the Porter and (to a lesser degree) the Sheaf are notable for fine formal parks as they approach the city; further upstream, they pass through open countryside and woodland, generally accessible to walkers, cyclists and, in parts, horse riders. The Rivelin and Loxley valleys are less formal – rural rather than suburban – with residential development mostly confined to higher ground rather than the valley sides. The character of the upstream sections of these two rivers is much influenced by reservoirs and associated infrastructure.

This diagnosis highlights some of the potential tensions between policy goals, and the possible unintended consequences of regeneration. For example, river management and flood prevention measures may result in highly artificial waterscapes hostile to wildlife and biodiversity20; similarly, it may be hard to balance the need to extract value from waterfront property development with the need to conserve urban refuges for plants, birds and animals, and to create wildlife corridors. Finding a sustainable balance between biodiversity, economic regeneration and essential river management will be a key goal of the waterways strategy.

19 The banks of the Don and the tributary rivers have been invaded by Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam and giant hogweed, all have which have become dominant in urban areas, driving out native species. 20 As we have seen, these measures may even increase the risks of flash flooding in some conditions.

Lesser streams such as Ewden Beck, Wyming Brook and Limb Brook also contribute to the outstanding rural landscapes close to the city’s western boundary, creating secluded green spaces between the radial routes provided by the four principal tributaries of the Don. The Don enters the city from the north through a dramatic valley, flanked by historic woodlands; this is another 21

Rivers, parks and open space

Anne Beer, op cit

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

defining feature of Sheffield’s green structure and a vital link in walking and cycling networks, including the Trans Pennine Trail. There has been little progress in establishing quality green or open space by the urban rivers, which still reflect the legacy of the industrial era. There is very little good quality space by the Don between Middlewood and Blackburn Meadows. The Five Weirs Walk has opened up the Lower Don for walkers, but most of the open spaces are either “found” spaces resulting from the flight of industry22 or half-hearted – and poorly maintained attempts at landscaping dating from the Development Corporation era23. Sheffield has three substantial local centres by rivers (Heeley, Hillsborough and Attercliffe) but none of them has any meaningful relationship, in the form of parks or public spaces, with their waterways. In characteristic Sheffield fashion, the rivers are generally hidden from view by culverts and deep embankments. This open space deficit is recognised in the various regeneration strategies for the Upper and Low Don Valleys. It is the consequence of the historic tradition

22 These spaces, which may be aesthetically challenging, are often of considerable ecological value 23 The stewardship scheme agreed by Groundwork Sheffield and Sheffield City Council aims to improve the amenity of the Lower Don Valley.

of building factories that backed directly onto the river, which was used for dumping waste and effluent. This built form produced some dramatic and characteristic townscapes, with factories rising sheer from the water, but it severely restricted – indeed, actively discouraged - public access to the riverside. The Don is not a navigable river, and there are no historic quays or riverside promenades; its character is strictly utilitarian. Improving access and creating attractive and comfortable riverside open spaces, without compromising Sheffield’s distinctive built form and urban character, will be an important objective. The open spaces by rivers and streams in the north and east of the city present challenges, but their potential is increasingly recognised and valued. A variety of projects have encouraged local communities to adopt these often forgotten and neglected places, and to rediscover their value for leisure, recreation and learning. Shire Brook – “the forgotten valley” has a visitor centre and the Birley Spa Bath House has been restored as a community centre. The Shire Brook LNR forms a green corridor, 4 kilometres long. As yet it does not match the aesthetic appeal of the western rivers. The landscape still has a raw and provisional character in places, but it is maturing steadily and old and new elements are beginning to integrate. In the north, Hartley Brook Dike, Sheffield Lane Dike and

Tongue Gutter create another valuable green corridor between the area’s large housing estates which forms part of the route of the Sheffield Country Walk. In these less favoured parts of the city – and in the urban Don valley – the value and appeal of the waterways is often undermined by litter, fly-tipping and vandalism. Some sites are associated with drinking, drug abuse and anti-social behaviour. When waterways and their immediate surroundings look dirty and neglected, they are also likely to be perceived as unattractive and unsafe places to be. Sheffield is richly endowed with green space, but the quality of open spaces next to Sheffield’s waterways continues to be very mixed: sites of extraordinarily high quality in the west contrast with neglected and intimidating locations elsewhere. In parallel with this study, work is under way on a green and open space strategy (GOSS) for Sheffield. In Sheffield, open spaces and waterways are inextricably linked, and it will clearly be important to ensure that the outcomes of the two pieces of work are integrated and mutually consistent.

sheffield - city of rivers | 49

april 2008 | yellow book

15.

Sheffield’s waterways have has also shaped the emerging network of footpaths and cycle tracks. For pedestrians, the key building blocks in this network are the 87km Sheffield Country Walk, which circles the city through countryside and urban fringes, and the Trans Pennine Trail, which traverses the city from north-west to southeast. The latter is a route for walkers and cyclists; it has been designated as a section of European Long Distance Footpath No. 8, and is also part of the National Cycle Network. The Sheffield Country Walk traverses most of the city’s river valleys and headwaters, while the Trans Pennine follows watercourses for much of its course across Sheffield, including the Rother, Shire Brook, the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal, the lower Don, Blackburn Brook and Hartley Brook. The Five Weirs Walk is one of the most notable regeneration success stories in Sheffield in the past 20 years. The Five Weirs Walk Trust was formed in 1987, dedicated to opening up access to the Lower Don and contributing to the regeneration of a forgotten river. The walk, which is also a full cycle path, extends 7.5km from Lady’s Bridge to Meadowhall, and links the city centre to the Trans Pennine Trail and Rotherham. The canal towpath provides a return route to Tinsley Locks, Attercliffe and 50

Victoria Quays. The Five Weirs Walk provides almost uninterrupted riverside access, with the exception of a short break at Brightside. The most striking feature of the new works is the Cobweb Bridge (2002) where a walkway is suspended from the 19th century Wicker arches.

Pedestrian and cycling networks

Work is continuing to extend riverside access on a 9km length of the Upper Don between Oughtibridge and Ball Street Bridge. A feasibility study for the Upper Don Walk has been prepared by Arup, which divides the route into 5 project areas: the study sets out guiding principles for the walk24. These include: 24

Arup, Upper Don Riverside Access – Feasibility Study

Five Weirs Walk

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

 creating a walkway on one bank of the river, leaving the opposite bank as an environmental habitat  minimising the use of new structures (bridges and piled walkways) to reduce costs  establishing spurs to connect the Upper Don Walk to surrounding neighbourhoods and parks  a shared route for cyclists and walkers where possible  in areas where land and/or funding are not available, short term alternative routes will be adopted. The upper reaches of the route, between Oughtibridge and Middlewood, are largely in place, but creating the walk further downstream will be a complex task, especially around Hillsborough Stadium and between Hillfoot Bridge and Ball Street Bridge. Major developments, for example, at Clay Wheels Lane will provide opportunities to establish key sections of the walk. The lesser rivers are generally accessible to walkers in rural and suburban areas, with footpaths by – or close to – the rivers in most places. The Porter Brook “parkway” described by Abercrombie continues to be one of Sheffield’s best loved open spaces, and the classic walk from Porter Clough to Endcliffe Park is supplemented by numerous countryside and woodland tracks. The Shire Brook Valley provides a section of the Trans Pennine Trail,

creating an attractive walking and cycling route through previously neglected and contaminated land. Together with the Five Weirs Walk, the Shire Brook route has helped to open up parts of the city which were previously no-go areas for walkers and cyclists, helping to provide more equitable access to open space and recreation in less favoured parts of the city.25

Cycle routes associated with the waterways are more fragmented. The Trans Pennine Trail, the Five Weirs Walk and the canal towpath mean that the east and north of the city, but the west is less well served.

Access to the Don tributaries continues to be problematic as the rivers approach the Don. The lower Loxley runs through still active industrial areas at Owlerton, while the Porter is concealed and partially culverted before it enters the underground section where it meets the Sheaf. There are similar issues on the Sheaf, which has been the subject of a scheme to create the River Sheaf Walk in the transitional area between Norton Hammer (Archer Road) and Granville Square.26 With the exception of the city centre and city centre fringes, pedestrian access to Sheffield’s rivers and waterways is generally very good. Connections with strategic routes and the extensive network of local footpaths mean that the city is richly endowed with walking routes that link the urban core with local parks and open spaces with the surrounding countryside. 25 The “maldistribution” of open space (especially in terms of quality) is described by Anne Beer in “The Green Structure of Sheffield”, op cit 26 River Sheaf Partnership, A Strategy for the Sheaf Valley Walk (undated). shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 51

april 2008 | yellow book

16.

Old Park Silver Mill

Industrial heritage A survey of Sheffield’s industrial heritage published by English Heritage and the City Council in 2001 states that the city’s historic industrial buildings and sites are of “national and international significance”.27 Although many important buildings have been lost “there remains an extraordinary variety and spread of sites”. As we have seen the metal industries began in the rural and semi-rural river valleys: “The sheer volume of sites is difficult to imagine nowadays, but the evidence of buildings and water systems, such as leats, dams, weirs, sluices and so on, comprises an intricate network of remains, revealing the importance of the industry in the countryside”. The most famous of these sites of rural industry, the early integrated works at Abbeydale, is still largely intact and is of international importance. There may have been lead smelting here in the 16th century, and there was a cutlery grinding wheel in the 17th century. The present industrial hamlet dates from around 1715: scythes, grass hooks, pear cutters and other agricultural tools were manufactured here until 1933 when Tyzack Sons and Turner moved production to the Little London Works, in the lower Sheaf valley28. When the Little London

27 Wray, Hawkins and Giles, op cit 28 Derek Bayliss (ed), A Guide to the Industrial History of South Yorkshire (Association for Industrial Archaeology, 1995) 52

Works closed in 1988 production of some of these items moved to the La Plata Works by the Loxley at Malin Bridge, which is still in production. Other important surviving sites including the rolling mill at Low Matlock Wheel on the Loxley; Mousehole Forge, “an evocative ruin” on the Rivelin; and Shepherd Wheel and Wilson’s Snuff Mill, both on the Porter. There are only fragmentary remains of the water powered mills on the Don, but much more extensive survivals – usually of the river engineering, sometimes of buildings – in the Sheaf, Porter, Rivelin and Loxley valleys. The great majority of the sites catalogued painstakingly by Crossley had long since fallen into disuse; some surviving buildings have found productive new uses, others (and the associated infrastructure) have fallen victim to neglect and vandalism. The demolition of historic buildings at Wisewood Forge in the lower Loxley valley was a cause celebre and the future of other sites is contested.29 By the 1790s every available water wheel site on Sheffield’s rivers had been developed; as new technologies came on stream in the 19th century, many of these sites – and the weirs, dams and goits that served

29 Sheffield City Council, Loxley Valley Design Statement (October, 2003)

them – were abandoned. The traditional weirs of the early industrial era were progressively replaced by stronger and higher structures of more sophisticated design. Most of these survive to form striking landscape features, especially in the Don, although there is inevitably some tension between the archaeological and aesthetic value of the weirs and their impact on fish movements.

The archaeological record of Sheffield’s remarkable industrial history is hugely significant, but it is also vulnerable. Some valuable excavations have been carried out before the start of new developments; for example, at the Riverside Exchange, next to the Don, excavation of

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Green Lane Works

a wheel pit yielded more than 2,500 artefacts. Numerous riverside sites have remains above ground, but many are overgrown and deteriorating. Sheffield’s waterways have a particularly rich heritage of industrial buildings. The most notable concentration is in and around the Kelham Island conservation area, where the Kelham Island Museum (housed in the former Tramway Generating Station, and seriously damaged by the recent floods) tells the story of Sheffield’s industrial history. Green Lane is the point of entry to “the most coherent stretch of industrial landscape in inner Sheffield”30, where the most important surviving monuments include:  the remarkable arched gatehouse of Hoole’s Green Lane Works (1860)  the handsomely lettered gable wall of the former Brooklyn Works, next to Ball Street Bridge  the outstanding Cornish Works, built in phases between c1820 and c1900, architecturally one of Sheffield’s most distinguished industrial complexes, successfully converted into flats in the 1990s  the atmospheric Cornish Lane, which leads down to the river is still awaiting regeneration; it includes the former Wharncliffe Works of c1861 30 For an excellent description of Kelham Island and Sheffield’s other major industrial buildings, see Harman & Minnis, op cit.

 the 1825 Globe Works has a “remarkably noble” stone façade concealing a typical courtyard surrounded by workshops  next to the Rutland Street Bridge, the 1920 Insignia Works rises sheer from the water  north of the river is a still largely intact pocket of industry, centred on Mowbray Street where there a number of surviving small workshops best viewed from Kelham Island. This is a remarkable urban quarter, although it has been under siege from development pressures. The restoration of the Cornish Works has set the benchmark for creative and sensitive re-use of industrial heritage and some more recent developments have responded to the challenge by respecting the form, scale and character of the conservation area. However, there are worrying signs that the special character of this area is being eroded. Getting it right in Kelham Island is vital because this is the place where the built industrial heritage is most rich and where – despite the recent flooding – there is continuing development pressure. The quality of development in this area needs to set the standard for other locations in the city where market conditions are less favourable. There are other important concentrations of industrial buildings cluster around the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal and sheffield - city of rivers | 53

april 2008 | yellow book

Sheffield and Tinsley Canal basin

in the Lower Don Valley, although the latter is somewhat decayed and fragmented. The canal basin (Victoria Quays) is notable for the two great warehouses and the adjoining coal merchants’ houses; new developments have been added with varying degrees of success. A short distance along the canal are the offices of the former Sheaf Works (1826). The canal is a satisfying piece of industrial landscape, still lined with 19th century factories and warehouses31. The characteristic “canyon” landscape of the Lower Don Valley has changed utterly, although elements of some of the huge 19th century factories survive in Savile Street. The best preserved section is in Brightside Lane, where the huge 28-bay offices of the River Don Works (1906) still loom over the street. Sheffield’s industrial heritage is intrinsically valuable as a record of the city’s unique role as a centre for the metal trades from medieval times through to the 21st century. It is also a defining feature of the Sheffield cityscape which, though eroded and fragmented in places, remains distinctive, memorable and rich in cultural and historic associations. The importance of this legacy is now much more widely recognised, and many of the most important buildings and townscapes are protected by listed building and conservation area status. Making the most of this legacy presents a challenge 31 54

Described in Ogden, The Sheffield and Tinsley Canal, op cit.

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

Globe Works

to conventional UK regeneration practice which is characterised by a desire to tidy up neglected and forgotten places, and to replace rich, layered and unruly landscapes with a glossy, anodyne, placeless product. In Germany’s Emscher Park, the remains of industry are celebrated as key elements of the region’s cultural heritage. This does not mean turning the city into a museum: the aim is (as appropriate) to re-use, animate and conserve the industrial landscape and to integrate it into the life of a prosperous modern city. The European Commission identified the Ruhr region as one of Europe’s leading islands of innovation, notable for a dense concentration of research, development and high-tech industry. In the following pages we will consider the case for a similar approach in Sheffield, treating the Don Valley as a busy, populated and productive landscape park.

sheffield - city of rivers | 55

april 2008 | yellow book

17.

Urban regeneration and development The Don riverside has been the site of significant development and regeneration in the past 25 years. The Lower Don Valley was the focus for the activities of the Sheffield Development Corporation between 1988 and 1997, and the past decade has also seen a number of new-build and refurbishment projects in the Central Riverside area. The Sheffield Development Framework earmarks the Don corridor for another wave of development in the next 10-20 years. A masterplan for the Lower Don Valley was commissioned by the City Council and the British Land Company plc in 2004.32 It sets out a 20-year vision which will see the valley: “…transformed into an attractive, safe and healthy place to live, work and visit. A vibrant and exciting new mix of community, leisure, retail, office and business uses will act as anchors for the area’s new residential communities. In harmony with its residential population, the Lower Don Valley will be a nationally recognised and highly sought-after location for business. Capitalising on its unique and authentic industrial heritage… [it] will be a distinct, yet fully integrated destination within Sheffield…

32 Urban Strategies Inc, Lower Don Valley: Vision & Masterplan Study (November 2004) 56

[and] a model of sustainability in social, economic and environmental terms.” The masterplan describes “five big moves” to regenerate, re-integrate and redevelop the Lower Don Valley:  maximising the area’s natural heritage value by “rediscovering” the river and the canal and using them as structuring components of the plan  new investment in residential communities with a population of up to 13,000  focusing on public transport and reducing reliance on the car  creating a movement network by introducing local roads and pedestrian/ cycle paths  capitalising on existing assets such as the sports and leisure facilities and Meadowhall.

 industrial uses will be concentrated in the Central Zone around Forgemasters, with an attractive riverside environment as a catalyst for investment. Some of these environmental themes are explored in more detail by Groundwork Sheffield in their proposals for the River Don Park: “…well maintained, wildlife rich waterways with high quality, mixed developments on the waterside. The current waterway corridor will be expanded to include natural riverbanks, wetlands, meadows, public space and off-road routes. “New building developments will be landscaped with natural habitats such as wetlands, woodlands, meadows and ponds. Existing businesses will be supported to contribute to and benefit from these new features.

Specific proposals relevant to this study include:  major investment in the public realm to create “a quality environment that is not only beautiful, but functional and thoroughly distinctive”  the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal will be lined with new residential development, restaurants, cafes and community facilities  Attercliffe will be transformed into a “charming” urban village, and Darnall will extend to the canal

“Water will play a key role in the Park. The flood risk will be alleviated by an extended network of wetland habitats whose changing profile will become an intriguing feature of the landscape. “The waterways will be complemented by other ‘greening’ elements to create a complete green infrastructure. Pocket parks, green roofs, street trees and pedestrian/cycle

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

routes will link businesses, people and wildlife to the waterways, facilities and communities.

rediscovered and will be enriched in themselves and add value to development.

“New buildings will be built to the highest sustainable construction principles, reducing life costs for users and establishing Sheffield’s credentials as the UK’s green capital. The industrial role of the valley, both in the past and the future, will be celebrated by the retention and interpretation of iconic industrial structures, public art and the creation of new exciting buildings.”

“Above all the Upper Don Valley will be a more attractive place for people whether they are workers, residents, visitors or investors. It will make the most of its unique features and location to fulfil its potential as one of Sheffield’s most diverse and distinctive regeneration areas.”

The regeneration strategy for the Upper Don Valley, submitted to the City Council in 2006, sets out a 15-20 year vision of:33 “…a place for successful businesses, particularly for materials technologies and advanced manufacturing, which will be an important feature of the local economy. It will also be a place to live, learn, relax and spend leisure time, all of which will take place in a significantly improved environment where the traditional industrial character will be reinforced by high quality development and vibrant new places. “Penistone Road will be a strong corridor, approach and gateway to the city centre. The riversides will be

Strategic objectives relevant to the waterways strategy include:  recognising the value of rivers for regeneration, offering scope to create new and improved places and to realise the value of riverside sites  improving environmental quality by enhancing riversides, public realm and streetscapes, and taking remedial action to create safe, clean and people friendly places  maximising the use of riversides for amenity and recreation, recognising the special character of the Don and Loxley  improving linkages including a continuous riverside walk by the Don  conserve and enhance heritage townscape and landmark buildings.

Specific proposals relating to the rivers include:  extending regeneration north from Kelham to create a new mixed employment area in Neepsend, based on a rejuvenated riverside including a new urban square  enhancing the Loxley riverside around Owlerton Stadium and Hillsborough College  pocket parks at Club Mill Road, Hillsborough Park and Niagara Weir. Kelham and Central Riverside were two of the urban quarters identified in the City Centre Masterplan, and regeneration of these areas is already well advanced, although the quality of development to date has been mixed. Cornish Works and some other industrial buildings have been converted successfully into residential accommodation, but the scale, form and detailing of a number of new-build developments have fallen short of the aspirations of the Urban Design Compendium. The result has already been some dilution of the distinctive character of the urban riverside, although the next wave of investment in this key area promises to set a higher standard. Key developments include new office buildings at Riverside Exchange and 1 North Bank, a 65,000 sq ft development by Priority Sites which makes the important step north of the river into the Wicker area.

33 Taylor Young, Upper Don Valley Physical Regeneration Strategy, October 2006 shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 57

april 2008 | yellow book

Millfands

here centre on accommodating a cluster of advanced manufacturing businesses, and on recovering neglected riverside sites and connecting them to neighbouring communities.

The completion of the Inner Relief Road has created new opportunities for riverside regeneration on Nursery Street. Public consultation is continuing on plans which will create a landscaped riverside strip between Spitalfields and Lady’s Bridge, including a new pocket park. The Don riverside has a crucial role to play in all aspects of Sheffield’s development in the next 25 years:  the Central Riverside is a focal point for office and mixed use development which, in concert with proposals for West Bar and the Markets area, will extend the city centre to the river and act as a catalyst for regeneration, after many years of decline, of key areas north of the river including the Wicker, Nursery Street and Mowbray Street  the Lower Don Valley offers large areas of developable land, suitable for commercial, industrial, retail and leisure uses that cannot be accommodated in the city centre; it also provides an opportunity to repopulate communities that were hollowed out in the latter part of the 20th century  the Upper Don Valley is earmarked for incremental growth and change in the next 15-20 years; plans 58

Sheffield and Tinsley Canal

Strategies developed in the last 5-10 years have helped to define the distinctive roles, character and functions of these three locations. Policies now in place set out complementary visions and also address connections between these zones, including waterfront access. This is encouraging, but the challenge now is to ensure that the quality of development delivered measures up to the city’s aspirations – and to the standards now being set in the city centre. Among other things this will mean:  treating the development of these key locations not as a series of development opportunities, but as an exercise in making civilised, enjoyable and lively places  transforming the Lower Don valley into a high quality parkland setting for business and residential development, based on authentic (not cosmetic) sustainability principles  throughout the river corridor, achieving high quality architecture and urban design, which reflects Sheffield’s unique character and responds imaginatively to the riverside setting

shef f ield’s rivers today | section C

18.

 respecting and where possible re-using the Don Valley’s unique industrial heritage and townscapes. Success will depend crucially on the development and implementation of a robust flood risk management strategy, designed to reduce the incidence of extreme flows and to maximise the capacity of the rivers to contain heavy rainfall.

cyclists and are connected to a wider network of paths and tracks  they provide a variety of important habitats for wildlife, fish and flora, and the rivers act as wildlife corridors  they are associated with the city’s rich industrial history and heritage.

 there is a growing appreciation of the value of Sheffield’s industrial buildings and townscapes.

Overview: conditions and prospects

Over the past 20-30 years there has been a marked improvement in the quality of the waterways and their contribution to the life of the community. In particular:

 the degradation of urban rivers due to culverting, high retaining walls and artificial channels  the variable quality of riverside environments in Sheffield, reflecting the city’s continuing east-west divide  the lack of engagement between the river Don and the city centre: Sheffield does not have a civic waterfront and the suburban “riverside towns” are not well connected to their rivers  the disappointing architectural and design quality of some regeneration schemes and the weak legacy (in terms of the riverside) of the Development Corporation  continuing problems with litter, vandalism and antisocial behaviour  the lack of good quality open space by the urban rivers  gaps in the footpath/cycle track network.

Sheffield’s waterways are places in transition. The rivers and the canal are hugely valuable assets and they have great potential, but there are still some liabilities and significant threats that need to be addressed. The strengths of Sheffield’s rivers and canal can be summarised as follows:  they are integral to the city’s topography and green structure, especially the arcadian western suburbs  they link the city and the countryside  they are places of strong character and distinctive identity  they are a valuable community resource providing access to quality open space and recreation  most are accessible to walkers and, in some cases,

 waterfront regeneration has got under way at the Central Riverside and is spreading into adjoining areas; regeneration strategies have been developed for the Lower and Upper Don Valleys  the pioneering Five Weirs Walk has been completed and a plan to complete the Upper Don Walk has been adopted  the Shire Brook Valley, previously a neglected and highly contaminated site, has been reinvented as a local nature reserve  water quality has improved and fish and mammals have returned to the rivers  a nature reserve has been created at Blackburn Meadows, which is also the site of a new washland scheme

There are, therefore, grounds for optimism, but – before the potential of the waterways can be fully realised – a number of weaknesses still need to be addressed. These include:

sheffield - city of rivers | 59

april 2008 | yellow book

In the following pages we set out a recommended vision and strategy for Sheffield’s waterways designed to build on the progress that has already been made, capitalise on the strengths identified above, and tackle persistent problems and liabilities. In framing that strategy we will be aiming to realise some of the exciting opportunities identified during the course of our research, consultations and analysis. We have been inspired and enthused by the remarkable progress that Sheffield has made in the past 10-15 years, and the success of landmark projects such as the Peace Gardens, the Millennium Galleries, the Wintergarden, and many others. Sheffield has been transformed, and one of the most exciting features of these projects – and the recovery of special places like the Botanical Gardens and Weston Park Museum – has been the way in which they have strengthened Sheffield’s special character and identity, linking the city’s past and future with flair and imagination. In a recent article in Urban Design, the City Council’s Executive Director for Development, Environment & Leisure, John Mothersole, said that, in planning for future development, “I want Sheffield to be like Sheffield”. This is a great message and it should inform the regeneration of Sheffield’s waterways just as it has the rebirth of the city centre. The aim must be to nurture and strengthen Sheffield’s distinctive sense of place and to make the revived 60

waterways network one of the defining features of the “Sheffield signature”. These should be guiding principles of a strategy which will deliver a new wave of economic, community and environmental benefits in the next 10-20 years.

 helping to establish the new Sheffield signature.

Our research and consultations have unearthed many exciting opportunities. Sheffield’s waterways have a vital part to play in addressing the twin themes of the Sheffield Development Framework, transformation and sustainability by:

 the significant and, in all probability, growing risk of flooding of the Don and tributaries may deter investors and discourage people from living near the rivers or running businesses in the area  this may lead to inappropriate and over-engineered flood prevention measures which would dilute the ecological and amenity value of the waterways  the lack of an overarching landscape strategy may result in piecemeal development and lost opportunities  allowing bland and anonymous development to become the norm, thus undermining Sheffield’s distinctive character and culture  the full benefits of capital investment will not be realised unless there is a commitment to the management and stewardship of the rivers and riversides.

 becoming a critical part of a sustainable solution to flood risk management  establishing a network of ecologically rich wildlife corridors and nature reserves  providing the core framework for a city-wide green and open space network  acting as a catalyst for investment, especially in the urban Don Valley, and creating new places to live, work and play  providing the city centre with a lively and stylish urban waterfront  strengthening the identity and appeal of urban quarters and suburban centres  showcasing Sheffield’s rich industrial heritage  creating new sites for culture and creativity

These are big prizes, but success is by no means guaranteed. The waterways strategy will need to overcome significant threats including:

developing the strategy | section D

D developing the strategy: ideas and i n f l u e n c e s city centre place-making improvements

19.

The local and regional policy context The Sheffield Waterways Strategy sits within a wider context of city-wide, environmental, planning, design and economic development policies for the city. We have carried out a review of some of the key policies, focusing on five themes:  the City Strategy, Sheffield’s Future, which sets out a vision of a successful and distinctive city of European significance  environmental strategies, including the Sheffield Environment Strategy  the emerging Sheffield Development Framework, which includes detailed policies for rivers and waterways  the City Council’s Urban Design Compendium which addresses a number of riverside quarters  economic development strategies set out by Creative Sheffield. The results of the review are summarised in Annex 1, and six key messages can be highlighted:  Sheffield is no longer content to be a provincial backwater; it is growing in confidence and is now a city with high aspirations, determined to become a major player on the European stage; to achieve this it needs to capture more private sector investment, and to attract and retain talent. shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 61

april 2008 | yellow book

 environmental excellence is a key goal of the city strategy, and rejuvenating the river corridors is a high priority

a gap between policy aspirations and the reality on the ground. Developers may be reluctant to champion innovative, high quality architecture and urban design, invest in the public realm or contribute to better river management, especially in locations which – in market terms – are unproven or deemed to be high risk. Closing this gap will be a key challenge.

 Sheffield’s waterways figure prominently in the Environment Agency’s regional strategy, and specific targets are contained in the Agency’s State of the Environment report

Nevertheless, policy makers acknowledge that the regeneration of Sheffield’s rivers and canal has the potential to make a major contribution to achieving the strategic goals for the city and the city-region in the next 10-15 years. Sheffield wants to become one of the top innovative producer cities in Europe. That means competing in a sphere where success is a function of innovation, skills and creativity. To thrive in this knowledge economy places must be able to retain and attract talented people, who will by definition have choices about where they live and work. These people will, of course, be drawn by employment opportunities, but they are also attracted to cosmopolitan places which offer rich and diverse lifestyle choices.1 Sheffield now offers a much better urban experience than it did a decade ago, and its proximity to very high quality open space and outdoor activities (climbing, walking, canoeing, cycling, hang-gliding and so on) gives the city a special place among English cities.

 the Sheffield Development Framework is based on the twin pillars of transformation and sustainability: the city’s green spaces and river corridors are highlighted as distinctive and highly valued features, and detailed objectives are set out in the City Policies – Preferred Options document  design guidance for the city centre gives specific direction for the riverside quarters  the economic development agency, Creative Sheffield, recognises the value of distinctiveness – Sheffield’s signature – in promoting place competitiveness, especially in the knowledge economy. Our conclusion is that the policy framework for waterways regeneration is substantially in place. But our consultations show that there is a concern that, especially when it comes to urban design and the environmental agenda, there may continue to be 62

The challenge for Sheffield is to create a distinctive offer that combines the best of urban living with access to a superb 1

Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class – and how it is transforming leisure, community and everyday life (New York, 2002)

outdoor environment, to provide the best quality of life in any UK city. The policy review shows that the city’s waterways have a vital role to play in making this happen: they are the physical links between the city and the countryside; they are the foundation of Sheffield’s outstanding green network; and they will be the catalysts for regeneration in less favoured parts of the city. distinctive new building

developing the strategy | section D

20.

The new urban agenda: a good life in a good city

dominated by traditional industries to one defined by modern manufacturing and, increasingly, services.

The Sheffield Waterways Strategy needs to be connected to the wider agenda for change and regeneration in the city. We need to show that long-term investment in Sheffield’s waterways will make a real contribution to achieving the vision of a successful, distinctive city of European significance, and to delivering on the five big ambitions set out in the City Strategy. We believe that the vision set out in the following pages will help to make Sheffield a more attractive, enjoyable, healthy and competitive place. A generation ago, place competitiveness was often reduced to the mantra of “location, location, location”. Successful cities were those that could offer a combination of low labour costs and development sites with easy access to the motorway network. From the 1980s onwards, Urban Development Corporations (UDCs) in a number of industrial cities pursued this formula, providing serviced sites and advance factories, often in out-of-town locations. The UDCs achieved some notable successes, and they played an important part in helping to replace manufacturing jobs in Teesside, Tyne and Wear, Merseyside, South Yorkshire and other regions. Costbased competition was a sensible strategy in an era when attracting large mobile projects – manufacturing, distribution and contact centres - was the key objective. Foreign direct investment played a key role in the transition from an economy

In most UK cities that transition is more or less complete. Mass unemployment has given way to record levels of employment, although not all groups and places have benefited equally. Especially in the English core cities, aspirations are rising and the challenge now is to grow a knowledge intensive economy, based on high-wage, high-skill jobs. That is the goal in Sheffield where the aim is to become one of Europe’s leading innovative producer cities, with an economy based on niche markets and a dynamic enterprise culture. In the knowledge economy, human capital – the skills, creativity and enterprise of people – is the critical success factor2. Cities and regions need to be able to retain talented people, and to attract talent from Britain and the rest of the world. Economic opportunity is the necessary precondition for attracting and retaining talent; in the UK, London is a magnet for talent simply because its huge labour market is an irresistible draw for skilled and ambitious people. Sheffield cannot match the scale of the London labour market, but it is aiming to emulate the most successful medium-sized cities in Europe and the US by nurturing niche strengths in metals, healthcare, creative industries and sports science.

of place competition. Having the right business locations is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success. Now the focus has been shifting from location to place. In his research on the rising “creative class”, the US academic, Richard Florida, argued that the most successful city regions were characterised by concentrations of educated, talented people (the creative class); innovation and high-tech industries; and economic vitality. He went further, arguing that the places he calls creative centres succeed “largely because creative people want to live there. The companies follow the people – or, in many cases, are started by them. Creative centres provide the integrated eco-system or habitat where all forms of creativity – artistic and cultural, technological and economic – can take root and flourish” (our emphasis). Various studies have sought to test the Florida thesis in the UK context. There are important differences – cultural, geographic and economic – and the dominant position of London skews the picture: all other UK regions lag far behind the south east. But the basic proposition appears to be robust. As British society has become more prosperous, the aspirations and expectations of citizens have grown. As a society we are better off and have more life choices than ever before, including choices about where we live and work. As a result, places are competing to attract talent as well as investment and tourism.

The shift to a knowledge-based economy has changed the rules 2

“…the key to regional growth lies not in reducing the costs of doing business, but in endowments of highly educated and productive people” Florida, op cit

None of this is new. The urban renaissance agenda was sheffield - city of rivers | 63

april 2008 | yellow book

conceived as a response to the long-term flight from industrial towns and cities into suburbs and rural areas. But it quickly developed into a more positive agenda in which previously failing cities began to reposition themselves as drivers of growth and hot-spots of the knowledge economy. In the last 5-10 years, talent retention and attraction have become explicit objectives of many city strategies, and in some cases the decline in the population of city centres has been stemmed or even reversed.

it difficult to differentiate between locations purely on the basis of traditional factor conditions, and two-thirds said that it was becoming harder. More than 90% said that intangible factors such as a city’s image and profile were becoming more important, with 60% saying that soft factors such as architecture and culture were exerting more influence on location decisions.3 The WDA report quotes the destination consultants, Locum: “There are over 1,000 locations in Europe alone, all promoting exactly the same thing, looking identical and representing themselves in similar ways – through pictures of people playing golf, people in call centres. These places have become commodities, indistinguishable from one another and offering little or no added value”. Faced with this commodification of place – and the fact that UK and European locations have been levelling out in terms of factor conditions such as labour costs, transport access and communications technology – the indications are that cities need to focus more on intangibles to secure advantage, and to establish an emotional connection with investors.

What do we know about what creative people and knowledgeworkers want from a city? Florida suggests that they are not interested in the familiar components of late 20th century location theory – arenas, stadia, regional shopping and leisure centres, and visitor attractions. For good or ill, such amenities are ubiquitous: everywhere has them, and they are unlikely to confer any decisive advantage. Instead, the US research suggests that knowledge workers are looking for “high quality amenities and experiences, an openness to diversity…, and above all else the opportunity to validate their identities as creative people”. Research evidence from the UK confirms that, even from the perspective of corporate decision makers, place distinctiveness is increasingly important. A report by The Communication Group, commissioned by the Welsh Development Agency, showed that most decision makers find 64

decisions”.4 Mature cities, in particular, will seek to “improve their urban landscapes and their cultural and entertainment offer, recognising that they are key ingredients to retain and attract footloose, well-educated knowledge workers, as well as stimulating tourism”. Instead of competing on the basis of size and wealth, cities will find that “culture, the living environment, city ‘vibe’, branding, environment and social sustainability are becoming more important to achieve success”. The Communication Group conclude that differentiation is the key to successful place marketing. To compete, places must:  create an image that has emotional resonance with investors and influencers  exploit the power of intangible assets as well as financial and economic factors  recognise the growing importance of lifestyle and soft factors in attracting business  tell a unique and compelling story that can be passed on by word of mouth.

A report by the property consultants, Jones Lang LaSalle, reached a similar conclusion. In Rising Urban Stars, JLL predict that “urban sustainability and quality of life will rise up the agenda, and increasingly influence corporate location 3

The Power of Destinations: why it matters to be different, Report by The Communication Group plc sponsored by the Welsh Development Agency, 2006.

Florida’s concludes that it may make more sense “to emphasise policies and programs to attract human capital, 4

Jones Lang LaSalle, Rising Urban Stars – Uncovering Future Winners, 2003

developing the strategy | section D

as opposed to conventional approaches that focus on the attraction of firms and the formation of industrial clusters”. The key message for policy makers is that the needs and expectations of individuals, corporations and investors who are making place decisions are converging, and that the winning places will be those that provide economic opportunity, are technology rich, and offer an outstanding quality of life.

that will distinguish Sheffield from the competition. One key element will be environmental distinctiveness, and the strategy calls for investment in the features that make Sheffield a desirable – and different – place to live and work. A new paradigm of place competitiveness is emerging, based on a more rounded view of what makes a successful city. Cities are not just sets of economic assets: development sites, infrastructure, businesses and amenities. Charles Landry, in his new book The Art of City Making, describes the city as:

This new model of place competitiveness has informed development and regeneration strategies for Sheffield in the post-URC era. The city has always been proud of its remarkable landscape setting, but there was a recognition that for a large city Sheffield lacked urbanity and that the urban environment was undistinguished. Remarkable progress has been made in tackling this quality of life deficit through an ambitious, long-term place-making programme. A number of outstanding public spaces have been created, key streets have been revitalised, standards of architecture and design have been raised, the Botanical Gardens and the Museum have been reborn. Devonshire Green and the CIQ are lively new quarters close to the city centre; the heart of the city is being repopulated; there has been massive investment in higher education and cultural assets. There has also been major investment in the urban environment, by the Don, at Blackburn Meadows and in the Shire Brook Valley. The city’s new development agency, Creative Sheffield, has endorsed this approach, setting out the case for a distinctive signature

“…a multi-faceted entity. It is an economic structure – an economy; it is a community of people – a society; it is a designed environment – an artefact; and it is a natural environment – an ecosystem. And it is all four of these… governed by a set of rules – a polity. Its inner engine or animating force, however, is its culture. Culture…gives the city its distinctiveness – its flavour, tone and patina.”5 Landry aligns himself with the new consensus on economic competitiveness, arguing that the decision makers are becoming more sophisticated: “new ideas are coming into play, such as an innovative business and cultural environment. Is the city a cradle of creativity with high rates of innovation within commerce, science and/or the arts? Does the city have cutting-edge niche specialisms requiring specialised networks 5

of professionals?...is there cultural depth and richness…?” (our emphasis). Far more than a parcel of sites and “opportunities”, the city is “a sensory, emotional, lived experience”, and the art of city making should focus on that “beautifully mundane thing… the ordinary day-to-day lived urban experience…Can I walk from where I live or work to a public space where I can just be rather than have to buy something? Desirable places fulfil the need for just being…to experience the moment, a chance for incidental encounter, a space open for coincidence rather than having to do something specific or continuously having to consider “what next?”. Sheffield knows all about this: for the past 10 years it has been investing in places to be, like the Peace Gardens and the Winter Garden, rediscovering a sense of place and well-being. In Sheffield, more than any other English city, the public realm has been reclaimed. As we have seen, parts of Sheffield’s river system are already desirable places which contribute to the overarching goal of a good life in a good city. At their best, they are an important part of what makes Sheffield Sheffield. However, in other places the urban rivers and canal still reflect the legacy of abuse and neglect in the industrial era. Water quality has improved, wildlife is flourishing, and the community is increasingly alive to the potential of the waterways. The potential is unmistakable: Sheffield’s rivers bear the city’s

Charles Landry, The Art of City Making (Earthscan, London, 2006) sheffield - city of rivers | 65

april 2008 | yellow book

distinctive signature and they are rich in character, history, culture, and ecological value, but too often they are not safe, attractive or desirable places to be. Our vision of Sheffield, the City of Rivers has been shaped by the new paradigm:  we know that cities need to be competitive, not just economically, but socially, environmentally and culturally  cities are competing to attract and retain talented people and to secure mobile investment  cost-based competition has been superseded by a more holistic and sophisticated proposition: investors used to buy a location, now people buy the place  hundreds of places can meet investors’ core requirements, but only a few can offer a truly distinctive place proposition: it pays to be different  the modern place proposition encompasses quality of life and environment – talented people thrive in a rich, diverse, creative and distinctive urban milieu  successful cities generate an emotional connection between citizens and the place: this is an authentic bond which place marketing needs to communicate  the commodification of cities – and the anonymous development that goes with it – has stripped places of their personality and appeal, making it hard to tell them apart 66

 in the next decade, successful cities will compete by celebrating their distinctiveness, welcoming the future while drawing inspiration from their history and culture  in this competitive environment, Sheffield must focus on being Sheffield; the rivers, which are defining features of the city, have a huge part to play in telling the Sheffield story in the next 20 years. Winter Garden

developing the strategy | section D

21.

Landscapes, buildings and memory

resulting strip of apartments, offices and commercial leisure developments is anonymous and generic, and the Clyde’s rich history has been reduced to a handful of interpretation boards.

As well as the new thinking about how places compete in the knowledge age, this strategy has also been influenced by some key trends in landscape design and architecture. For all the undoubted successes of urban regeneration in Britain in the past 20-25 years, there is a concern that many projects have resulted in the unnecessary loss of valuable buildings and townscapes that could and should have been re-used, and that this practice has erased the “memory” of communities. Too often, comprehensive regeneration starts by removing all traces of the previous life, culture and industry of the place. The restoration of important and historic buildings is, of course, standard regeneration practice, even though it may only be a façade that is retained. But architecturally less distinguished buildings and townscapes are likely to be discarded, even though they may have a great deal to say about the history and culture of the place, and form part of the emotional bond between citizens and the city. There is growing recognition that this “scorched earth” school of regeneration diminishes the appeal and authenticity of the new places that are being created. It is impossible to recover the texture, patina and spirit of the places that are swept away, or the layers of memory that they evoke. A recent example is the redevelopment of the Clyde waterfront in Glasgow which has almost totally erased the fabric of the historic river port; the

Of course, preserving historic landscapes in their entirety is neither practicable nor desirable. The demands of a changing economy and society mean that new buildings – and new types of buildings – are essential, and each generation needs to make its own mark on the city and create a new legacy. The new approach is not about the wholesale preservation of tracts of the city, but is predicated on the recognition that places speak to us and should not be silenced. It calls for a more sensitive and respectful relationship with the past, and a greater emphasis on renewing and re-using old buildings and structures rather than removing them. The past should be treated as usable rather than disposable.6 The same sensibility extends to the natural landscape: in Germany’s Emscher Park (see Section 23 below) the woodlands and open spaces that have sprung up spontaneously on abandoned industrial sites have been incorporated into the region’s green space strategy.

above: Spike Island, Bristol (courtesy rbrwr on flickr) below: Red Empty, Zagreb

The creative adaptation and re-use of old buildings has been a defining feature of efforts, in many English cities, to encourage the creative and cultural industries (CCIs). The CCIs are recognised as important economic drivers for urban regeneration. Typically, artists, creative enterprises and 6

David Littlefield and Saskia Lewis, Architectural Voices: Listening to Old Buildings, John Wiley & Sons 2007 shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 67

april 2008 | yellow book

production companies want affordable workspace in the inner city; they are attracted to places of character and tolerant of rough edges. This is what Jane Jacobs meant when she said that “new ideas need old buildings”. Sheffield’s Cultural Industries Quarter emerged in just this type of location on the city centre fringes, and the same process can be observed in areas like Bristol’s Spike Island or Wood Street in Liverpool. This phenomenon predates, but has been incorporated into contemporary regeneration practice. In Sheffield, Manchester and many other cities, local partnerships have tried to cultivate CCIs, sometimes by designating cultural quarters. A new breed of developers, like Urban Splash and Urban Catalyst, has identified the appetite for the rich complexity, authenticity and rough edges of urban life and work, in preference to the bland conventions of mainstream developers.

Northern Quarter, Manchester

Clare Cumberlidge and Lucy Musgrave have highlighted some of the distinguishing features of the new approach:7  a recognition that renewal is a continuous process, with no defined end-point: there must be space for new ideas and adaptation  a commitment to maximise resources – human, financial and material; many projects adapt or reuse existing buildings and social infrastructure  open and effective collaboration between communities, agencies, local authorities, the private sector and professionals; professionals start to operate outside their normal sphere of practice  an awareness of the symbolic value and significance of places  the idea of the unfinished; places evolve over time as a result of the interaction between spaces, uses and residents; new developments need to leave space – physical and social – that can be appropriated by the community.

The new philosophy is comfortable with the contradictions, contingencies and untidiness of urban life. A new school of practice is emerging which treats times and places of change as catalysts for economic, social and ecological renewal. Instead of a single utopian vision, the new approach embraces multiple visions and frameworks where different meanings and cultures can coincide. It is an adaptive approach which uses, reuses and shifts existing infrastructure; participation by local people is integral and non-negotiable; and local distinctiveness and character are respected and celebrated.

These ideas have been at the heart of the regeneration of the Ruhr region, and it is important to note that they have proved to be compatible with – and indeed supportive of – rapid economic transformation, large scale regeneration projects, and high quality modern architecture and design. But, arguably 7

Claire Cumberlidge and Lucy Musgrave, Design and Landscape for People: new approaches to renewal, London 2007

developing the strategy | section D

more than in any English region, the regeneration of the Ruhr also rests on the celebration of the history and culture of a traditional industrial region and on the conservation and reuse of historic monuments and artefacts. It is also transforming a landscape blighted by dereliction and pollution into a network of green spaces and restored rivers. Land which has been off-limits for generations has been reclaimed by communities: forestry, allotments, city farms and community gardens are all contributing to a revival of urban agriculture. This new approach to creating landscapes has a powerful resonance for Sheffield. Local people have played a key role in the regeneration of Sheffield’s waterways through a series of successful community projects, some facilitated by the City Council, some genuine bottom-up initiatives. There has been a strong community input to projects at Blackburn Meadows, Hartley Brook and Shire Brook Valley. Salmon Pastures is a classic example of a derelict site which has become a valued ecological asset. Volunteers have played a vital role in creating the Five Weirs Walk, and other groups have championed the cause of rivers, parks and footpaths, reclaiming places that commercial development perspectives might have disregarded. The city has a large angling community which has brought life and activity to the rivers and canal. We believe that this tradition of volunteering and active citizenship needs to be given even greater encouragement in the next 10-15 years. It should be a guiding principle of the

regeneration of the River Don, helping to make the Don Valley a distinctive and memorable place: a site for new development of all types, but also a place for people, rich in historical and cultural associations, and ecological assets.

22.

The dispersed city The transformation of the Ruhr is relevant for another reason. For the most part, the process has been concerned with the regeneration not of city centres but of dispersed, relatively low density environments. The Ruhrgebeit is characterised by small and medium-sized towns, residential suburbs, large industrial plants, retail and leisure malls and large tracts of derelict land and peri-urban countryside, and this is the territory where most of the region’s high profile projects have been located.

Salmon Pastures

Rafi Segal and Els Verbakel describe how, in the 20th century, “the distinctions between city, suburb, countryside and wilderness have become blurred”. As the process of dispersal has unfolded, traditional urban boundaries have broken down: activities that used to be concentrated in inner cities have migrated to suburban and fringe locations where they have taken new forms. With housing, employment, shopping and entertainment, low density multifunctional environments have emerged, independent of the city. 8 The dispersed city challenges our concept of a good place; the new urban landscapes are characterised by: “ [a] lack of density and centrality, the absence of a coherent urban fabric or distinguishable boundaries, and a ‘damaged’ 8

Rafi Segal and Els Verbakel, Cities of Dispersal, Architectural Design, January/February 2008. sheffield - city of rivers | 69

april 2008 | yellow book

relationship between the pedestrian and urban space…they are seen to lack the conventional forms and uses of urban public spaces…”

Kelham Island

in the Lower Don and elsewhere in the post-industrial era, but there is still a chance to do things differently and better. Sheffield’s city centre is once again a desirable and soughtafter place: can this success be repeated in the Don Valley?

This certainly describes the partially regenerated Lower Don Valley. The area offers an array of valuable economic and community assets, and huge numbers of people are attracted by the shopping, leisure and sports facilities. But, sadly, the new places that have been created are by and large bland and cheerless, and the visual and aural drama (as well as blight) associated with the steel industry has been replaced by something anonymous and colourless. But there is still a great deal to play for. The new uses coexist with large tracts of vacant and derelict whose future remains unresolved and which offer an opportunity to create a memorable and distinctive place of urbanity, vitality, sociability and even delight. The Upper and Lower Don Valleys are key development locations and in future they will accommodate business parks, retail, leisure and residential development. The continuing regeneration of the urban river will have a decisive and pivotal role in the future of the city, and the principles of distinctiveness, design quality, biodiversity and sustainability are as important here as anywhere else. The legacy of the past 20 years suggests that the development imperative has triumphed over every other consideration, but Sheffield needs something better. We cannot wish away what has happened 70

A key determinant of future success and failure will be the treatment of wasteland. Throughout the urban river corridor there are large tracts of derelict land, vacant buildings and abandoned factories, as well as marginal land around roads, railways and waterways. These sites are often unsightly and targets for vandalism and fly-tipping, but that does not mean they are of no value. Michael Southworth notes that “…urban wastelands represent a major resource for future development…[they] are often strategically located with respect to the larger metropolis along established rail or highway transportation corridors and near existing centers of population. Frequently they occupy water edges that potentially have high amenity value for future housing and recreation development. They may occupy wetlands which, when restored, will be of ecological value for the entire region”. 9 Southworth describes the economic, social, aesthetic, cultural and ecological value of wasteland. The presence of a bank of unused land can help a city to adapt to changing conditions and opportunities, although too much vacant land can be a 9

This section draws on Michael Southworth, “Wastelands in the Evolving Metropolis”, University of California Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Working Paper 2001-01.

developing the strategy | section D

blight. Wasteland, as we have seen, if often ecologically rich, and plants and animals can thrive undisturbed in spontaneous habitats. Although they are often associated with criminal or anti-social activity, run down locations are also places of “discovery, experimentation, challenge and retreat”, and they can be attractive (both as sources of inspiration and places to work) to artists. Jonathan Meades has described the influence of these “edgelands where underfed horses freeze between interchanges and reservoirs, sewage outfalls, trails of rusty dereliction” on a school of writers and artists.10 These landscapes have been explored by Iain Sinclair’s extraordinary books on London’s marginal places, Stephen Gill’s photographs of Hackney, the work of the landscape photographer John Davies and many others11. Tim Edensor has celebrated industrial ruins in a recent book and on a remarkable website. 12 13

“pleasure and sensuality”, meaning and value: “Hidden in ruins are forgotten forms of collectivity and solidarity, lost skills, ways of behaving and feeling, traces of arcane language, and neglected…forms of social enterprise”. Edensor argues that the value of ruins and wastelands lies in their “idiosyncrasies and contingencies”, and laments the fact that these qualities are “an affront” to the commodification and homogeneity of contemporary development practice. His conclusion – and ours – is that we need to champion a new urban design that allows “difference, oddness and incongruous juxtapositions”. This does not mean maintaining all derelict land or resisting new development. As Jonathan Meades puts it, “man cannot live by oxidisation alone. It’s not a question of either atmospheric scrappiness or gleaming newbuild. It’s a question of both/and.”

For the Sheffield Development Corporation, it appears, it was axiomatic that regeneration required the removal of almost every trace of the history and memory of the steel city. The implication was that this heritage was of no value and that it should yield to a brave new world of stadia, shopping malls and business pavilions. The assumption that new uses and activities – which were, indeed, essential – could not coexist, in time and space, with the history, culture and continuing traditions of an historic city was typical of its time, but is none the less dispiriting for that. It represents a failure of imagination which is still sadly reflected in the apparently doomed campaign to keep the iconic cooling towers at Tinsley. In the following paragraphs we look at cities and regions that have found a different and better way to tackle this challenge, and which have succeeded in creating places which are modern and competitive but which still engage creatively with the past.

For Meades, the atmospheric appeal of these places, is in contrast to “the place which invites no response, which breeds indifference”. Edensor describes industrial ruins as places of 10 11 12 13

Jonathan Meades, “Space? Place? Life?”, in Brian Evans and Frank McDonald (eds), Learning from Place I, Academy of Urbanism, 2007. See, for example, Iain Sinclair, Lights Out for the Territory (1996) and London Orbital (2002); Stephen Gill, Hackney Wick (2005), Archaeology in Reverse (2007) and Hackney Flowers (2007); John Davies, The British Landscape (2006). Tim Edensor, Industrial Ruins: Space, Aesthetics and Materiality (2005). British Industrial Ruins website: http://www.sci-eng.mmu.ac.uk/british_industrial_ruins/ sheffield - city of rivers | 71

april 2008 | yellow book

23.

Sources of inspiration I: Emscher Landscape Park

Landschaftspark Duisburg at night

 the ecological recovery of the Emscher and its tributaries During the course of this study one regional scale initiative has been cited by many people as a source of inspiration for the Sheffield strategy. The Emscher Landscape Park in Germany’s Ruhr region is arguably the most celebrated example in Europe of the recovery and regeneration of a regional scale postindustrial landscape. A more detailed description is contained in Annex 2. By the early 1980s many of the mines, steelworks and engineering works in the Ruhr had closed or were under threat. The demise of these heavy industries left a legacy of derelict sites and buildings, contaminated land and polluted rivers. The Emscher River, which flows through the Ruhr, had become an open sewer and a symbol of the challenges facing a region searching for new economic roles and needing to create a positive image. In 1989, the state government of North RhineWestphalia launched the 10-year Emscher Park International Building Exhibition (IBA). IBA Emscher Park was focused on an urban corridor, running about 70 km east-west and 10 km north-south, spanning the boundaries of 17 towns and cities.

 preservation and re-use of the industrial legacy  working in the park: ecological upgrading of derelict sites to create a high quality setting for business  living in the park: rehabilitating workers’ housing and extending residential areas  practising an holistic approach to economic, social and cultural transformation. The innovative approach of IBA Emscher Park has been much studied and documented extensively. Its guiding principles – which have had a major influence on this study - included:  making ecology an organising focus for economic, social and environmental regeneration

The key goals of IBA Emscher Park included:

 incorporating the found landscape of derelict industrial land into a regional network of open space and recreational resources

 the creation of green corridors using watercourses and open space to link all the communities in the landscape park

 treating redundant industrial buildings and landscapes as valuable cultural artefacts which should be conserved

developing the strategy | section D

and reused wherever possible

Hansa Coking Plant, Duisburg

ď&#x201A;§ naturalisation projects to restore the water cycle and nurturing spontaneous landscapes. The investment poured into the IBA project during the 1990s had a profound impact on the image of the Ruhrgebeit, and the region earned a reputation as a laboratory for innovation in regeneration. Nevertheless, the sheer scale of the challenges facing the region meant that there was still much to do when IBA Emscher Park came to the end of its life in 1999. The state and local authorities formed a partnership, Project Ruhr, to carry forward the work of IBA. Through Project Ruhr, they developed the Emscher Landscapepark 2010 Masterplan, which was adopted in 2006. The basic principles of the plan are consistent with those adopted by IBA in 1989. Completion of the east-west green corridor remains the goal: the emphasis now is on filling gaps, and on strengthening lateral connections with towns and neighbourhood centres. The themes of living and working in the park remain in place, as does the emphasis on industrial heritage linked to art and culture. The plan also advocates urban agriculture, identifying opportunities for cultivation and forestry. The Ruhrgebeit has been selected as the European Capital of Culture 2010, and the published programme includes an ambitious series of infrastructure projects which will build on sheffield - city of rivers | 73

april 2008 | yellow book

the tradition of IBA by creating “new urban and regional spaces and arenas of excellence from the remnants of the coal and steel era”. Of particular interest here is the Back to the River Centennial Project which will complete the process of returning the Emscher river to a natural meadow landscape. This will be complemented by the creation of a network of new green and open spaces by the region’s rivers and canals, and artbased interventions. The Land for Free project will make plots of vacant land available to settlers from all over Europe who want to contribute to setting up a utopian new city between the Emscher and Rhine-Herne canal. The IBA model – and the Emscher Landscapepark Masterplan – were cited as examples of best practice in the recent National Audit Office (NAO) report, How European Cities Achieve Renaissance, which notes that the particular strengths of the Emscher Park approach include:  a network of partners eager to deliver regeneration  strong central support for partners, and  a clear implementation plan. 14 Between 1991 and 2000, state and EU funding for IBA-backed projects amounted to almost €1.5bn, matched by €1bn private funding. In total, projects in the region are estimated to have attracted €5bn investment in the same period. The 14

National Audit Office, How European cities achieve renaissance, Stationery Office, 2007

Emscher Landscape Park has transformed the quality of life and environment in the Ruhr, played a key role in establishing a positive new image for the region, and acted as a catalyst for economic restructuring. Six defining features of Emscher Landscape Park stand out, and offer vital lessons for the Sheffield Waterways Strategy:  the concept of the landscape park is the big idea, which gives direction and coherence to a wide-ranging programme of projects large and small; every project must play a part in delivering the park; but the masterplan is not a strait-jacket: it establishes guiding principles – spatial and philosophical – but it can also respond to changing conditions  the partners’ approach is genuinely holistic: economic, social, cultural and environmental objectives receive equally priority and are integrated into project design and resource allocation  ecological recovery and the naturalisation of rivers are key themes running through the masterplan, and private sector as well as public sector developments are expected to contribute  the overall quality of architecture and design is exceptionally high: this is true of business space, houses, schools and neighbourhood parks as well as high profile prestige projects

 Emscher Park celebrates the history and culture of an industrial region: the remains of industry are valued and have found new uses as cultural venues, monuments and parks  the regeneration process has been exemplary, with extensive public participation at every stage: by understanding what local communities most value as well as what they want to change the partners have built a broad consensus around the masterplan. Zollverein Tip near Essen

developing the strategy | section D

24.

Sources of inspiration II: Oslo

area, and establish design guidelines for new buildings.

If Emscher Park is the best example of the philosophy in action, key features of the Ruhr model have been replicated elsewhere in Europe. The Aker River runs through the Norwegian capital Oslo before it decants into the fjord. The Aker has been described as the birthplace of the industrial revolution in Norway.15 As in Sheffield it was first important as a source of water power, but in the 1840s large textile factories and sawmills were established by the river, with workers’ housing nearby. As these industries declined or moved to new locations in the 20th century they were replaced by engineering and chemical factories, but industrial production in the area had largely ceased by the 1970s and in 1988 the Aker River Environmental Park was established.

Anne Marit Karlsen’s account of the evolution of the Environmental Park project is candid about the tensions and conflicts that have accompanied this process, but an independent evaluation carried out in 1998-99 found that the Park concept had generated a consensus between the community, the public and private sectors.16 It has also raised awareness of the natural, historical and cultural values of the river basin. More interestingly, the evaluation found that the Park had delivered unexpected benefits beyond its original, mostly green, objectives: 16

“The Akerselva Environmental Park has not only improved the quality of life in the area and the neighbouring urban settlements, it has also successfully tapped into an urban trend by creating a foundation for combining work and play. It stimulated the location factors for new service industries. According to the interactive model of innovation, proximity brings down transaction costs…[and] makes it easier to have face-to-face meetings. This is another requisite for trust building and transfer of tacit knowledge. In a short time, and without any deliberate public planning, the area has developed several industrial clusters. It has turned into an industrial milieu in the classical sense. There now seems to be a critical mass of firms, which generates further growth and attracts other firms.”

The evaluation was carried out by Norwegian Institute of Urban and Regional Research.

Aker River, Oslo

The river was polluted with industrial waste and sewage and many of the great 19th century factories were empty and derelict. The city council proposed to demolish both factories and houses but these plans were hotly contested, in part by the artists and students who had adopted the Grünerløkka area as low-cost alternative to the city centre. As public appreciation of the value of the river and industrial heritage grew, official attitudes changed. The 1988 Park Plan aimed to clean up the river, create a parkland setting, retain and re-use the best of the archaeological heritage, celebrate the history and culture of the 15

Anne Marit Karlsen, “The industrial areas on the River Aker – de-industrialisation and city planning”, paper for the TICCIH Congress 2006.

A recent report by Urhahn Urban Design for the London Development Agency (discussed in more detail below) cites the Aker River as an outstanding example of industry in the city: “The riverside position offers a unique identity to new residents and businesses alike. Today the river functions as a natural attraction, biological refuge and centrepiece of river park. The water is now home to fish again and clean enough for people to swim in”.17 17

Urhahn Urban Design, Industry in the City, report for the London Development Agency and the Greater London Authority, August 2006. sheffield - city of rivers | 75

april 2008 | yellow book

25.

Sources of inspiration III: Helsinki Arabianrata is a former industrial district at the mouth of the River Vantaanjoki in Helsinki, which took its name form the Arabia porcelain factory which was founded there in 1870s. The area was largely derelict when, in 1992, the City of Helsinki designated an 85ha site as an urban development area, with the vision of establishing a “living city” which would be the leading design centre in the Baltic region. The plan aimed to reflect the heritage and diversity of Arabianranta, “linking past and present, the natural environment with the urban fabric and science and technology with arts”, through a combination of business, industry, education, research and new homes.18 The development of the area is well advanced, and by 2010 it will be a community with 10,000 residents, 8,000 jobs and 6,000 students. Implementation of the strategy has been led by a public-private partnership, Art and Design City Helsinki Oy. Guiding principles for the development include a sociallyinclusive mixture of housing types and tenure, including 40% of homes in the social rented sector. All housing units must be connected to a broadband network. The development strategy is based on six key themes:

University of Lisbon Faculty of Architecture, Creative Urban Spaces: ‘Innovation Hub’ as an instrument of urban policy (2007); Mervi Ilmonen and Klaus Kunzmann, “Arbianranta”, Urban Design, 106 (2008)

Arabianranta, Helsinki

developing the strategy | section D

 Connectivity. There is excellent public transport including new subway and bus services, and the road system excludes cars from the waterfront and the immediate surroundings of residential blocks. From the beginning, every home was connected to a broadband network, which led to the development of a pioneering digital community, Helsinki Virtual Village.  Clustering. The University of Art and Design Helsinki had already moved to the area in the 1980s, but a whole new knowledge infrastructure has since been established straddling the boundaries between arts, digital media, science and technology. Two thirds of the companies that have relocated to the area are in the creative industries.  Talent and diversity. Arabianranta is an inclusive community that brings together students, artists, researchers and workers. The housing stock has been designed to encourage diversity with family houses and homes for people with disabilities.  Built environment. The urban grid and design guidelines are designed to reflect the character of the area, which is “a transition zone between the inner city and the suburban-type areas”. Many of the blocks have been developed following architectural competitions. Every developer is required to contribute 1-2% of construction

new building in Arabianranta, Helsinki

costs to public art projects.  Cultural environment. Arabianranta has a long history and an industrial tradition. “The industrial profile of the area, the historic memories of the place, the quality of the natural environment and the art project all reinforce the genius loci, creating a unique identity…[and] a unique and inspiring cultural and living environment.”  Natural environment. The area’s natural environment is central to the project. The ceramics industry has left a legacy of contaminated land, and there has been a longterm cleaning and remediation programme. Everything is connected to green spaces and orientated towards the water. A recent article on Arabianranta was co-authored by Klaus Kunzmann of the University of Dortmund. Kunzmann played a key role in the development of the IBA Emscher Park concept, and he and Mervi Ilmonen argue that the project “combines local assets and spirit with thoughtful urban design, using culture as a catalyst for regenerating a derelict industrial site and creating a future-oriented urban district”. In this respect it is in marked contrast to “grand projects elsewhere in Europe” which are designed “to please tourists and urban consumers” rather than create a living community. Arabianranta is “a pertinent example of how the European city can be modernised sheffield - city of rivers | 77

april 2008 | yellow book

while maintaining its local character. It is possible to for the European city to have a future in a globalised world dominated by mega-cities, if it is envisioned by reading the past and respecting strong local traditions…Arabianranta shows the way forward”.

26.

Sources of inspiration IV: new ideas and approaches In addition to these inspiring built examples designers and academics have been exploring the new urban design. OSA, a research group at the University of Leuven in Belgium, have been developing strategies for bringing coherence to the citta diffusa, where “both centre and periphery [have] vanished and…[been] replaced by an almost omnipresent ‘secondarity’.” OSA do not seek to redefine the dispersed city entirely, but aim instead to “insert…spatial qualities, necessary structures and missing public spaces”. A landscape strategy for the Bossuit-Kortrijk canal works within the infrastructure of canals, roads and railway lines to establish “a network of quays, gardens, fields and forests”. In Kortrijk, the Buda Island project proposes to retrofit a landscape of oversized urban blocks and stand-alone buildings with a network of secret gardens. Also in Belgium, the Urban [IM]plants project aims to enliven the banal urban landscape of Bonheiden by reintroducing elements of the natural landscape back into town.19

Arabianranta, Helsinki (courtesy narnua on flickr)

In the United States, the URBAN VOIDS project has been set up to generate “new thinking about the future of Philadelphia’s vacant lands and to act as a catalyst for implementation.” Philadelphia has 405 hectares of vacant land, as large as the downtown area. Among the entries, Front Studio proposes the 19

Bruno de Meulder, “Old Dispersions and Scenes for the Production of Public Space”, and Els Verbakel and Elie Derman, “Urban [IM}plants: Tactics for Recombining Landscape and Collective Space in Bonheiden, Belgium”, both in Rafi Segal and Els Verbakel, Cities of Dispersal, Architectural Design, January/February 2008.

Buda Island Project, Kortrijk

transformation of the city fringe by converting vacant sites to urban agriculture. Another proposal (Bio-Philadelphia) would support the growth of biotechnology industries by creating “working landscapes that support greenhouses, experimental fields for energy, environment and economy, and dynamic living surfaces”. The regeneration of the urban Don Valley raises important questions about the compatibility of industry with housing and activities. Does the retention of industry in inner urban areas preclude the development of successful and attractive mixed use areas or residential communities? This is a key

developing the strategy | section D

issue in London where the demand for housing land threatens to drive industry out of the city into the Thames Gateway and other fringe locations. The Mayor of London and the Greater London Authority commissioned Urhahn Urban Design to review the issue.20 While acknowledging that some activities need to be segregated on the grounds of noise, nuisance or heavy traffic, the report concludes that the “defensive designation of protected employment areas and separation of activities” are outdated tactics. In an important finding for Sheffield, where industry persists in much of the urban Don Valley, Urhahn warn against “generic planning prescriptions” and call for bespoke solutions which may accommodate light industry, printing, motor trades, wholesale and similar activities in successful and lively urban quarters. Based on an extensive collection of case studies from the UK and Europe, Urhahn have drawn up a set of 17 guiding principles of which the following are of particular relevance to the Don Valley:  define a clear but flexible spatial framework  promote flexible building types that could be adapted for future uses and users  invest in hybrid buildings that can contain a range of functions 20

         

design buildings to minimise environmental disruption create attractive and tranquil private space encourage built parking structures promote design excellence create public space and meeting places define the atmosphere(s) you are seeking to create, and mix scales accordingly make the most of existing assets such as rivers and natural features create critical mass to guarantee vibrancy and safety separate access routes for different uses optimise views from residential units. Industry in the City - Urhahn Urban Design for GLA

27.

Sources of inspiration V: rivers, canals and waterways There is a long tradition of environmental schemes for rivers and waterways in the UK, with the focus on improving amenity and restoring public access. An outstanding success story is the Water of Leith in Edinburgh, an attractive small river that flows through the city’s suburbs before entering the Firth of Forth at Leith. The concept of a footpath by the river was first mooted in the 1940s, and the project was taken up by the then District Council in the 1970s. The whole length of the river within the city boundary now has an attractive, much-loved and well-used walkway. In the post-industrial era, the Water of Leith has become an important trout stream once again, and the walkway now provides a walking route through the city, linked to a city-wide network of paths; it is a recognised wildlife site, and “an outdoor classroom for adults and children”. A visitor centre acts as a base for an extensive programme of school visits. Volunteer effort played a big part, as it has throughout the country, through the work of groups like the Friends of the Porter Valley. Schemes of this type played a key role in raising awareness of the value of urban rivers in the UK. They inspired many others, such as Sheffield’s Five Weirs Walk and the Upper Don Walk. However, a new generation of projects has focused more on the condition of the rivers themselves by promoting ecological recovery and biodiversity. River restoration is one of

Urhahn Urban Design, Industry in the City, op cit sheffield - city of rivers | 79

april 2008 | yellow book

the central themes of the Emscher Landscape Park, but there is also a growing body of successful projects in the UK, with the Environment Agency playing a lead role. A notable early example was Project Kingfisher which restored a 7km stretch of the River Cole in Birmingham. In the late 1990s the River Skerne in Darlington was the subject of a major restoration scheme. During the industrial era the Skerne, like the Don, was canalised and straightened; artificial banks were raised to prevent flooding, and these were overgrown with Himalayan Balsam. Although it was not possible to restore the original course of the river, a meandering channel was created with quiet backwaters for young fish and insects. The banks were re-profiled and the surrounding land lowered to restore the flood plain, making the water safer and more accessible. Sources of pollution was identified and addressed, and outfalls were redesigned so that they discharged under water. The restored river is the centrepiece of an attractive area of parkland and public usage has increased dramatically. In London, river restoration is playing an increasingly prominent role in the regeneration agenda. An Environment Agency publication21 enumerates the benefits:

21 80

Environment Agency, Bringing Your Rivers Back to Life (2006)

Project Kingfisher, River Cole, Birmingham (courtesy sjdean on flickr)

ď&#x201A;§ environmental - improving the river corridor - improving flood storage capacity - addressing water quality ď&#x201A;§ social - attractive, accessible, quality natural places for communities - improving well-being - balancing community access and the needs of wildlife - footpaths and cycleways - opportunities for learning and education ď&#x201A;§ economic - generating sustainable development - attracting businesses A number of successful river restoration projects in urban and suburban locations are presented as case studies, showcasing a range of techniques. The past 20-30 years have also seen numerous riverside and canalside regeneration projects, elements of which have informed the Sheffield strategy. Essentially, the development industry has moved from a position in which urban waterfronts were seen as marginal places or liabilities, to one in which

developing the strategy | section D

a waterfront location is perceived to add value to a site. In looking at best practice exemplars we have focused our attention on cases from industrial cities, or at least sites of industry. Bristol has one of the liveliest and most successful urban waterfronts in the country. The historic river port had reached the end of its commercial life in the 1970s and was threatened with wholesale destruction to make way for massive road schemes. After a long campaign led by community and civic groups, the potential value of an urban waterfront was recognised by the City Council. The regeneration of the docks has been a long and tortuous process, with many setbacks but, paradoxically, the failure to establish and deliver a comprehensive master plan for the whole area seems to have worked in its favour. The process of change has been spasmodic and organic and while the quality of individual developments has been variable, the strong and distinctive sense of place has been preserved, along with a range of activities including surviving pockets of industry. Sheds and warehouses have found new uses as galleries, museums, shops, artistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; studios and workplaces, and the waterfront is the home of a cluster of animation businesses including the Oscar-winning Aardman Studios who are now expanding their premises. The Bristol process has been far from exemplary, but the outcome has been a place with a personality, quirkiness and authenticity that more polished regeneration projects

cannot match. Among the key lessons for Sheffield are the value of allowing new users and uses to occupy old buildings; the fact that old and new uses co-exist comfortably by the waterfront in Bristol; and the benefits of a flexible approach. Another critical factor, especially relevant for the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal is that the waterspace itself is busy all the year round with ferries, cruise boats, sailing dinghies and other watersports. Bristol waterfront

Birmingham was a pioneer of waterways regeneration. The city lies at the heart of the English canal network which was established in the 18th century as the industrial revolution got under way. The cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s extraordinary canal network fell into decline in the 20th century and had become a forgotten secret, known only to waterways enthusiasts. However, led by British Waterways, the canals were rediscovered in the 1970s with the regeneration of Gas Street Basin, a hugely influential scheme Gas Street Basin, Birmingham (courtesy michael.jh on flickr)

sheffield - city of rivers | 81

april 2008 | yellow book

which inspired similar projects in many other towns and cities, not least at Victoria Quays in Sheffield. Birmingham’s central place in the canal network guaranteed high levels of hire boat traffic and encouraged the city to capitalise further on this asset. New developments such as Aston Science Park and the International Convention Centre took up brownfield sites by canals, and in the 1990s work began on the Brindleyplace development, one of the largest mixed use developments ever in the UK, which brought prestige offices, bars and restaurants to a waterfront location close to the city centre. Commercially, Brindleyplace has been a huge success, although both the design and the content (it is very much dominated by national brands) now seem rather bland compared to Bristol’s earthier mix. An interesting and important new project is now being developed a little further from the city centre, around the Icknield Port Loop. A joint venture between Isis, Advantage West Midlands and Birmingham City Council, the proposed urban village promises to be a useful model for Sheffield. A new community is proposed, with offices, houses, shops and leisure; there will be a strong landscape framework and the development will be guided by the principles of biodiversity and sustainability. The recent history of waterways in Manchester is instructive. The regeneration of Salford Quays in the 1980s and 90s was hailed as landmark regeneration project: a new destination in the city, with key attractions including the Imperial War 82

New Islington Millennium Community

Museum North and the Lowry housed in “iconic” buildings. But Salford Quays is a disappointment. Poorly connected to the city centre – the tram route by-passes the waterfront – its architecture is a grim mix of empty gestures and the banal. By contrast, the hugely successful regeneration of the heart of the city has made more imaginative use of the network of canals winding through Manchester, although the “dark” River Irwell (which has much in common with the Don) is still, to quote the Environment Agency, a “forgotten river”. On the east side of the city, in Ancoats, a major new project is nearing completion. The New Islington Millennium Community is based on a masterplan by the architect Will Alsop. A new waterway has been built to re-establish the connection between the Rochdale and Ashton Canals. This will the centrepiece of a new “water park”, Cotton Fields will “promote a diverse wildlife, including a wetlands area, and a range of nesting boxes to attract a wide variety of birds. An eco island where adults and children can learn more about the natural environment and ‘beach’ areas for water play will also form part of the park.

developing the strategy | section D

28.

Conclusion In Part C we assessed the condition and prospects of Sheffield’s waterways and identified the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that the strategy needs to address. In Part D we have explored the ideas and influences that will shape the strategy:  a supportive regional, sub-regional and city-wide policy context: the waterways strategy can make a major contribution to this policy agenda, especially the vision of “a successful, distinctive city of European significance at the heart of a strong city region”  the emergence of a new paradigm of place competitiveness: cities need to attract and retain knowledge workers and creative talent; to do this they need to move beyond the traditional orthodoxies of location theory, focusing on what makes them distinctive and establishing an emotional bond with citizens and investors  the emergence of new approaches to landscape and architecture that achieve change while celebrating the history and culture of the city, and preserving its memory; this is associated with fresh thinking about the dispersed city and the role of areas, like the Lower Don Valley, that

occupy the dynamic but often disappointing territory between the inner city and the suburbs  the inspirational example of the Emscher Landscape Park, the outstanding example of regional scale regeneration in Europe, which has successfully delivered economic, environmental and community benefits, as well as outstanding design quality

attractive, wildlife-rich environments in the city  a generation of waterfront regeneration has transformed English cities such as Bristol, Birmingham and Manchester, and a new generation of projects aims to create new communities in strong landscape settings.

 the Emscher Park is a project on a regional scale, but similar principles have informed other major regeneration projects in northern Europe, like the Aker River in Oslo and Helsinki’s Arabianranta  the challenge of turning the dispersed landscapes of the post-industrial city into lively, useful and engaging places is high on the agenda of leading-edge thinkers and practitioners in Europe and the US  the Mayor of London has commissioned important research which offers practical guidance on creating lively mixed use areas that retain industry in the city  in the UK there is a growing body of river restoration practice which is re-naturalising urban rivers to create sheffield - city of rivers | 83

april 2008 | yellow book

goals, priorities and vision | section E

E city of rivers: goals, priorities, vision 29.

The strategic framework Our proposals for Sheffield’s waterways are contained within a strategic framework. The framework comprises:   



recommended strategic goals and spatial priorities ….which inform our vision of Sheffield as a city of rivers in order to achieve the vision we recommend a strategy based on three themes: urban waterways, suburban and rural rivers and city-wide initiatives which will be complemented by action with a regional perspectives for each of themes we have proposed a series of priorities for action.

The key elements of the framework are summarised in Figure 29-1, and described in more detail in the following pages. 30.

Strategic goals Based on the analysis in the preceding sections of this report we have identified seven strategic goals for the Sheffield Waterways Strategy:

Figure 29-1: Strategic framework

Goal 1: To make Sheffield well known as a city of rivers, and to establish the rivers an integral part of the Sheffield signature The rivers made Sheffield, but they have been neglected and marginalised. The rivers and canal are places of huge economic, ecological, community and cultural value, and the revival of the waterways will place them at the heart of the life of the community. New riverside neighbourhoods will provide homes, workspace, cultural and educational users and facilities for leisure and recreation, all in memorable and productive landscape setting. The reclaimed rivers will change the way Sheffielders see their city and create a positive new image for prospective residents, visitors and investors. Goal 2: To re-naturalise the rivers and, as far as is practicable, restore the natural water cycle The events of 2007 showed Sheffield’s continuing – and increasing – vulnerability to flash floods and the effects of 250 years of urban development on the natural water cycle. Weirs, culverts, river straightening and canalisation, combined with impermeable surfaces throughout the urban area have created the conditions for extremes of water flow, so that all the urban rivers are at

sheffield - city of rivers | 85

april 2008 | yellow book

high risk of flooding. Wherever possible, rivers should be naturalised and flood plains restored: this will increase their storage capacity, support fish populations, promote biodiversity and create more attractive and accessible watercourses. Goal 3: To make Sheffield’s river valleys a model for sustainable regeneration and the promotion of biodiversity in a post-industrial city Sheffield should emulate the inspirational model of the Emscher Landscape Park by making sustainability and biodiversity fundamental principles of the regeneration process. Proposals for river restoration should be complemented by sustainable urban drainage, green roofs, permeable surfaces and similar features for all new developments. Wildlife corridors and natural habitats should be protected, extended and joined up as part of a concerted greening programme. Goal 4: To secure pedestrian access to all the city’s principal waterways as part of a city-wide network of green and open spaces The regeneration of the urban rivers and waterways provides an opportunity to add to the city’s stock of green and open space. The Don Valley should be a 86

productive landscape with allotments, smallholdings, orchards and woodlands forming an important part of the new riverside. Sheffield’s river corridors provide radial routes (Abercrombie’s parkways) linking the city to the countryside, but there are still gaps to fill especially in the Upper Don Valley and access for cyclists needs to be improved. The goal must be to maximise access to the waterways, strengthen connections to parks and green space and links to round-Sheffield and cross-city routes. But we do not advocate an “access all areas” approach; hidden and private spaces have a purpose and may provide valuable wildlife refuges. Goal 5: To make the restored urban rivers a catalyst for investment and regeneration Riverside regeneration is already well under way in central Sheffield, but other locations in the Don Valley are lagging behind. The quality of development and of the public realm has so far been disappointing and the perception of an increased risk of flooding may also affect market confidence. For these reasons, it is important to address flood risk and establish riverside and canalside sites as desirable, high amenity locations that will attract quality development. But this does not mean that development

by the river should be exclusively commercial or high-end residential; the aim must be to create diverse riverside communities. Goal 6: To deliver high quality buildings, public realm and landscape design The quality of built development in the centre of Sheffield has never been better, and the Gold Route has established a new benchmark for the public realm. With some notable exceptions, the design quality of most riverside regeneration projects has not reached this high standard, and the treatment of riverside areas in the Design Compendium is fairly sketchy. This must change if the potential of the rivers and canal are to be fully realised. In line with the new approaches discussed earlier, design guidelines should focus on themes including adaptability, authenticity and local distinctiveness. We should be creating attractive and rewarding places and challenging the bland conventions of the previous generation. Goal 7: To celebrate Sheffield’s rich history, heritage and culture Sheffield’s rivers have played a pivotal and decisive role in the history and development of the city, and it

goals, priorities and vision | section E

is vitally important that this rich heritage should be recognised and celebrated. Decisions on the retention and re-use of buildings should be informed by their historic and cultural value as well as architectural quality: much of Sheffield’s history was enacted in workaday buildings. There should be a concerted effort to protect and conserve the threatened archaeological record. The strategy should respect and celebrate the past but it must also be forward-looking; the regenerated riverside should include cultural assets and venues. 31.

Spatial priorities We have described Sheffield’s waterways in some detail, identifying an array of character zones and river types, ranging from rural to post-industrial. For the purposes of the strategy and action plan we have distinguished between the urban waterways and the network of rivers in suburban and rural areas. We have defined the urban waterways as follows:  the River Don between Middlewood and Blackburn Meadows  the lower reaches of the Sheaf, Porter, Loxley and Blackburn Brook  the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal.

The rivers in suburban and rural areas are:  the Don from the city’s northern boundary to Middlewood  the upper reaches of the Don tributaries  the Rother and Shire Brook. There are important differences between the two zones which are reflected in our proposals. The Don flows past the heart of the city and connects the key development areas in the Upper Don Valley, Central Riverside and the Lower Don Valley. The transformation of urban Don Valley is one of the biggest challenges facing Sheffield in the next 10-15 years, and it represents a powerful and potentially risky combination of need and opportunity. Much of the Don Valley is underused, under-valued and marginalised. It remains a site for low value activities and bad neighbour industries, and the quality of the riverside environment is generally poor. The whole of this stretch of the Don experienced devastating floods in 2007. Where development has been achieved, the quality has generally been undistinguished and sometimes worse. Despite these difficulties the river corridor is earmarked for massive investment: the pace of development close to the city centre continues to be very rapid, and ambitious new projects are proposed in both the Upper and Lower Don Valleys.

For good or ill, development around the urban waterways will change the face of Sheffield by 2020. At best, this process will shift the city’s centre of gravity, restoring the rivers to a central role in the life of the city and creating a new sequence of special places to live, work, play and relax. But this will require vision and direction: regenerating the Don Valley must be seen as an holistic exercise in place-making, concerned as much with the condition of the rivers, the environment, culture and communities as with property development. The best and most innovative investors and developers will buy into the creation of a new riverside community, but only if the public sector bodies give a clear lead and are prepared to resist the pressures for mundane and one-dimensional commercial schemes. The urban waterways can have a decisive influence on Sheffield’s future competitiveness and quality of life but there is a significant risk based on recent experience in Sheffield and some other post-industrial cities that results on the ground will fall short of their full potential. This would be a lost opportunity of major proportions, and Sheffield would have to live with the consequences for the next 25-30 years. Getting the urban Don Valley right is an absolute imperative and for this reason we recommend that the urban waterways should be treated as the top priority by the SWSG partners. sheffield - city of rivers | 87

april 2008 | yellow book

Fig 31.1 River zones

The small rivers in Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suburban and rural areas present a mixed picture. The rivers in the west and the brooks that feed them are, for the most part, cherished, high amenity places, popular with walkers and cyclists, valuable natural habitats and a key part of Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s green space network. Incremental improvements, voluntary effort, stewardship and maintenance will be order of the day in places that, manifestly, already work and are enjoyed by many. The quality and amenity of the rivers tapers off as they near the Don, and action to tackle these problems will form part of the urban waterways strategy. Action will also be required to enhance small brooks and streams, especially in the north and east of the city, many of which are neglected and overlooked. These are potentially valuable community assets and there will be opportunities to build on existing community initiatives and establish new ones. There will also be a number of city-wide initiatives, in particular the development of a green and open space network, based largely on the rivers, and a linked project to provide pedestrian access to all the principal waterways.

goals, priorities and vision | section E

32.

The vision: City of Rivers In 2020, Sheffield is a City of Rivers, and its watercourses – and the land corridors that surround them – are defining features of a modern, confident, sustainable and competitive city and a key element of the Sheffield signature. The urban Don forms the backbone of an urban landscape park – the Don Valley Park – which extends from Middlewood to Tinsley. The park, which is unique in the UK, incorporates the urban Don, the Sheffield & Tinsley Canal, and the lower reaches of the Sheaf, Porter and Loxley. It builds on the concept of the River Don Park, first advanced by Groundwork Sheffield in 2005, but now extended to provide a framework for development around all the urban waterways. At the heart of the park are the restored and naturalised rivers: wherever possible culverts and artificial channels have been removed, and east of the city the Don now meanders across a reinstated flood plain. Some weirs have been removed: where they remain fish passes have been installed. The restored rivers are attractive places of high ecological value as well as prized community assets. The Don corridor is a designated sustainable drainage zone, and this – combined with the rivers’ increased

storage capacity – has significantly reduced the risk of flooding. The whole of the park is managed as an urban nature reserve. A masterplan guides land use and development in the park. The masterplan provides an organising framework of roads and public transport; footpaths and cycle tracks; open space, green space, woods, wilderness and wildlife corridors, and maps out links to the city centre, neighbourhoods and the wider green and open space network. Within this unique landscape framework, the Don Valley Park is a busy and diverse urban area, with a range of character areas and functions:  Sheffield Waterfront – the riverside between Corporation Street and the Wicker is fully integrated into the city centre, with high quality mixed use development, including hotels and speciality shops, focused on a riverside promenade at Nursery Street; the success of this area has also revived the fortunes of Victoria Quays  Kelham Island, Mowbray Street and Bridgehouses have emerged as urban villages with an edgy bohemian character; niche metal trades, creative industries, bars and restaurants have added economic vitality and a sense of purpose  three local centres – Attercliffe, Hillsborough and

Heeley – have been reinvented as riverside towns, lively centres for shopping, schools and community facilities in the urban park.

The Don Valley Park is:  a place to live – a repopulated urban area, with rejuvenated traditional neighbourhoods and new homes of all types, and a community with shops, parks, schools and healthcare  a place to work –high quality environments for modern workspace and high-tech manufacturing in the Lower and Upper Don Valleys, with specialist manufacturing and creative production in the urban villages  a place for leisure, recreation and relaxation - the canal is popular for boating, cruising and watersports; the rivers have thriving fisheries; the Park is a popular place for walking and cycling; development is set in a productive landscape of gardens, allotments, smallholdings, orchards and woodlands  a place for culture, creativity and learning - valuable townscapes and buildings have been preserved and re-used as performance/events spaces, studios and workshops; the area’s land sheffield - city of rivers | 89

april 2008 | yellow book

art and cultural events are known internationally; and the Don Valley Park is a valuable resource for research, teaching and therapy. The Don Valley Park is at the heart of the Sheffield’s green and open space network. Footpaths and cycle tracks follow the course of all the tributary rivers, linking the Don Valley Park to open countryside, the Trans Pennine Trail and the Sheffield Country Walk.

the tributary rivers and smaller streams is a top priority for the Sheffield’s Green and Open Spaces Investment Programme (GOSIP); a series of small river initiatives provide funding, professional skills and officer support for community and voluntary sector activists.

33.

The strategy The strategy is therefore organised around the three spatial priorities: urban waterways, suburban and rural rivers and city-wide initiatives. These are the key themes of the strategy. Figure 33-1 shows how actions under each of these themes will contribute to achieving the seven strategic goals.

● ●

●

Sustainability/biodiversity Pedestrian access Investment and regeneration

● ● ●

● ●

Design

●

● History, heritage, culture Key: ● high impact ● medium impact

●

City-wide initiatives

Suburban & rural rivers

● ●

Strategic goals City of Rivers River naturalisation/restoration

The stewardship scheme which was first piloted in 2007 has been extended to include all the open spaces in the Don Valley Park, under the management of a community company which is also responsible for the nature reserve, education centre, community woodlands and gardens. Beyond the boundaries of the urban park, the conservation and upgrading of the upper reaches of

Urban waterways

Figure 33-1: Linking the strategic goals and spatial priorities

A non-profit company, Don Valley Limited (DVL), has been set up to plan and implement the park, and to mobilise and coordinate public sector assets and investment. DVL has developed a master plan and design guidance for the park, and is working in partnership with the private sector to deliver commercial developments and public goods throughout the park.

●

goals, priorities and vision | section E

34.

Theme 1: Urban waterways The regeneration of Sheffield’s urban waterways is the top priority. The holistic nature of the vision, as well as the experience of the Ruhr region and other inspirational places described in this report, have persuaded us that a bold, multi-faceted strategic vision is essential. The regeneration of the urban Don cannot be achieved in a piecemeal fashion: a variety of approaches and delivery models will be need but there must be an organising framework – philosophical, strategic and spatial – to direct and coordinate action on the priorities described in the following paragraphs. The Don Valley Park is both the big idea and the vehicle for delivery. Priority 1.1: Don Valley Park The concept of the Don Valley Park is inspired by the model of the Emscher Landscape Park Masterplan, and it builds on the proposals for a River Don Park published by Groundwork Sheffield. Our recommendations are more ambitious in scope and they cover the entire length of the urban Don, from Middlewood to Blackburn Meadows, the canal and the lower reaches of the tributary rivers. Over time there may be opportunities to extend the boundary of the park to include contiguous areas such as Parkwood Springs and Rotherham.

The park will thus be linear in form, but with spurs reaching out along the minor rivers to Malin Bridge, Hunter’s Bar and Heeley. In much of this river corridor the urban fabric has become fragmented and condition of the rivers themselves is generally poor. The Don Valley Park masterplan will transform these neglected and marginalised places, creating a high quality landscape setting, re-establishing coherence and a sense of place, and restoring connections to the city centre, local centres and neighbourhoods.

above: Piazza Metallica, Duisburg Nord below: steel works, Duisburg Nord

The master plan will establish a landscape framework for the Don Valley Park, starting with the restored rivers and a green, productive framework of open space, parks, gardens and woodlands. This framework will acknowledge the essentially urban character and functions of the park and the historically dense pattern of built development in the Don valley, but it will establish a more sustainable pattern of land use capable of adapting to climate change and reducing flood risk. The green framework will create a high quality setting for development, and the master plan will manage the transition from the late 20th century pattern of single use, mostly industrial zones to mixed use sustainable communities. To support the implementation of the master plan, a policy framework will address key issues such as sheffield - city of rivers | 91

april 2008 | yellow book

sustainability and biodiversity (see below). A detailed urban character appraisal will assess the architecture and townscape of the park, taking account of historical and cultural as well as architectural value. Design guidance should be commissioned with a particular focus on the re-use and adaptation of existing buildings, and the integration of new development into the historic landscape. Priority 1.2: River restoration Following the June 2007 floods, the Environment Agency is reviewing the flood prevention regime in the Don catchment, and is expected to bring forward proposals in 2008. It is not within the scope of this strategy to address the technical challenges or to second-guess the Agency’s expert advice. However, we believe that Sheffield must argue the case for a sustainable solution that will address the fundamental causes of city’s vulnerability to flooding by helping to restore the natural water cycle. This will require a radical approach, tempered by pragmatism. Urban rivers which have been the subject of human interventions for centuries cannot be returned to a “natural” state, and any programme of river restoration will have to work within the constraints imposed by existing development and land use. Nevertheless, vacant 92

and derelict riverside land does present opportunities to introduce measures which will improve the condition of the rivers, reducing the risk of flooding, promoting biodiversity, enabling access to the waterspace and enhancing amenity. A concerted effort is also required to tackle the problem of invasive plant species. Sections of the Upper and, especially, the Lower Don Valley should be restored by, for example, replacing the straightened walled channel with meanders, and reprofiling banks and lowering riverside land to recreate a floodplain. Soft engineering techniques, using timber,

natural materials and geo-textiles, may be used to protect and stabilise river banks. As advocated by Groundwork Sheffield, ponds and wetlands should be a feature of the new Don Valley landscape as they were before the industrial era. Some development land, currently subject to a high risk of flooding, may need to be sacrificed for this strategy, but this will be offset by an improvement in environmental quality and a corresponding uplift in land values. Working within the constraints of an intensively developed urban area it may not be possible to restore long continuous stretches of the channel, so an opportunistic approach may be required to develop a

Los Angeles State Historic Park tackles new scenarios for the Los Angeles River including new channels, eco-type bioswales, storm and gray water processing

goals, priorities and vision | section E

string of (naturalised) pearls along the urban river. Where artificial channels need to be retained, new habitats can be provided by creating mini-meanders, shoals and margins for plants. Pursued consistently over a 10-15 year period, this approach has the potential to transform the image of the urban Don, creating a beautiful green corridor at the heart of the city. Work on the Don should be complemented by action to rediscover the lower reaches of the Loxley, Sheaf and Porter.

to incorporate sustainable drainage measures, and this would be complemented by a 10-year programme to retrofit the whole of the park to the same standard. Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) are a key feature of projects in Emscher Landscape Park, where measures to manage run-off such as open trenches, swales and ponds are treated as attractive design features in gardens, housing schemes and business parks. The regime in the Don Valley SDZ will include a requirement to:

 reduce the volume of surface water run-off at source by introducing permeable pavements, green roofs, infiltration trenches and basins  slow the velocity of run-off by using filter drains and swales  treat surface water using passive treatment systems such as detention basins, retention ponds and wetlands. SUDS at Rieselfeld, Freiburg

Plans to de-culvert Porter Brook between St Mary’s Gate and the Cultural Industries Quarter could deliver some early wins; in the medium term, river restoration will help to reinvent Heeley and Hillsborough as riverside towns (see below). The long term aspiration should be to have the Sheaf flowing through Pond’s Forge again as part of a future redevelopment of that area. Priority 1.3: Sustainable development Proposals for naturalising the urban rivers should be complemented by concerted action to reduce the effects of run-off which is a major contributor to flash floods in the Sheffield area. We propose that the whole of the Don Valley Park should be designated a sustainable drainage zone (SDZ). All new developments in the zone would have sheffield - city of rivers | 93

april 2008 | yellow book

We also propose that all new developments in the park should be required to meet the highest possible standards of energy efficiency. This will require detailed technical appraisal, but the aim should be to work towards energy self-sufficiency in the Don Valley Park. Renewable energy will play a key role together with energy efficient building design. There is already a proposal to use water power to generate energy at a site on Kelham Island, and sponsorship should be sought for a trial to test the technology and examine the potential to extend it to other sites. Priority 1.4: Promoting biodiversity We recommend that the whole of the Don Valley Park should be designated an urban nature reserve. A charitable trust should be set up to manage the reserve; its tasks would be to:  promote biodiversity in the Don Valley Park and the wider green network  raise awareness of the area’s natural heritage  provide education and training for children and adults  facilitate community engagement and participation  ensure the management and stewardship of natural habitats throughout the park. 94

The nature reserve would comprise a number of key nature conservation sites, linked by riverine and other wildlife corridors, extending out into the wider greenspace network. The trust would establish a range of high quality natural habitats, including wilderness areas from which the public should be excluded. As a general rule, public access should be restricted to one bank of the river or canal, leaving the opposite bank as an undisturbed quiet zone for plants and wildlife. A River Life Centre should be created in a high quality eco-building at Blackburn Meadows, providing a focal point for research, education, community activities, bird watchers and visitors.

Priority 1.5: Access and linkages The city-wide green and open space network (currently the subject of a review by Sheffield City Council) will radiate out from the Don Valley Park. Within the park, there will be riverside access for walkers and cyclists, with cantilevered walkways where necessary to protect the character and integrity of the townscape. Completing the Upper Don Valley Walk will be a high priority. The long-term aim will be to release the Sheaf and Porter from tunnels and culverts: until this can be achieved marked trails will trace the course of the underground rivers. biodiversity , access and linkage, Suedgelaende, Berlin

goals, priorities and vision | section E

The landscape park will act as the hub of a city-wide green and open space system (see also Priority 3.1). As part of its role of repairing the damaged urban fabric, the DVP will establish a dense network of local pedestrian and cycle routes connecting the Don Valley to the city centre and neighbouring residential areas, helping to return the rivers to a central place in the life of the city. As well as parks and green spaces, the network will include open spaces with hard landscaping such as squares and pocket parks. Paley Pocket Park, New York

Priority 1.6: Sheffield Waterfront Although the central riverside is nominally part of the city centre, it is in practice a separate and somewhat isolated quarter, lacking in vitality especially outside business hours. A goal of the City of Rivers strategy will be to draw the life of the city to the river, and to create a lively and stylish urban waterfront. A key step – practically and symbolically – will be to establish a foothold on the north side of the river at Nursery Street. Although Nursery Street has been in the doldrums for many years - and invaded by traffic – it is a site of great potential, with a south-facing frontage onto the river and within easy reach of the heart of the city. The quality of recent development on the south bank, at Millsands, has been uninspired, but Nursery

Street – now relieved of through traffic – offers the only chance to create a riverside promenade in the city centre combined with modern development of sympathetic scale and architectural excellence. Already a growing business quarter, the aim must now be to establish a more diverse mix of uses at Sheffield Waterfront, including boutique hotels, arts venues, restaurants, cafes and speciality retail. It should be the new “place to be” for locals and visitors; together with the neighbouring urban villages (see below) it will be an attractive new destination in the city. The creation of a city waterfront will help to establish links with Victoria Quays and provide the impetus for regeneration in the Wicker, Burngreave and Attercliffe. waterfront development, Malmo

sheffield - city of rivers | 95

april 2008 | yellow book

Priority 1.7: Urban villages Sheffield Waterfront should be a smart and stylish city quarter, but the urban villages clustered around it at Kelham, Mowbray Street and Bridgehouses will offer an edgier, bohemian experience. In these places, the intimate urban scale and the long tradition of craft manufacturing should be carefully nurtured. Industrial buildings and streets should be retained – for their historic and townscape value as well as their architectural significance. The re-use of buildings for residential developments should continue, although care should be taken to ensure a mix of housing by tenure and type so that these places become neighbourhoods and not just buy-to-rent ghettoes. As far as is practicable, small metal working and other businesses should be encouraged to stay and to improve their productivity and profitability. These businesses are heirs to a great Sheffield tradition: for the most part, there is no need to disperse them to out of town locations, and much of the special character of the place will be lost if they leave. Jane Jacobs famously wrote that “new ideas need old buildings”. It is valuable for a city to have lowcost business locations: where traditional industries have departed, new enterprises – especially in the creative 96

Priority 1.8: Riverside towns and cultural industries – should be encouraged to take their place. A similar process can be seen at Bristol’s Spike Island, where former factories and warehouses have been colonised by animators and film makers. In the past 10-15 years a new community has grown up along side the old, attracting investment in galleries, cafes and restaurants.

Spike Island, Bristol

The DVP will aim to strengthen and grow existing communities in the Don Valley. A key element of the strategy should be to strengthen the role of traditional centres, and to re-invent them as attractive riverside towns. We have focused on three centres: Hillsborough is still a busy shopping centre, although its relationship to the Loxley river and to the Don is weak. Heeley and Attercliffe are both sadly diminished: local shopping has hollowed out, they are battered by traffic and Attercliffe has become a red-light district. We propose three key approaches:  first, in planning residential development, the three centres should be treated as hubs, with strong pedestrian, cycling and public transport links into new housing areas  second, civic and community facilities, including schools and healthcare facilities, should be clustered in local centres wherever possible, to encourage footfall and improve conditions for traders, and  finally, urban design and public realm strategies should strengthen the relationships between the towns and the rivers; these strategies should

goals, priorities and vision | section E

dovetail with river restoration/naturalisation measures and plans to improve riverside/canalside access. building beside the river - top: Bristol, bottom: Henley

Priority 1.9: Living in the park The repopulation of the Don Valley will be another goal of the DVP masterplan. In principle, the aim should be to extend existing neighbourhoods and communities wherever possible, but – in places where industry has been completely dominant – new residential areas will also be created. The private sector will play the lead role in delivering residential development, but housing associations will also make a major contribution, especially in the revival of Attercliffe. The master plan and design guidance will have a key role to play in setting high design standards, with developments that engage with the restored rivers and reflect the Sheffield signature

on river restoration, SUDS and nature conservation – would be to work with specialist developers and the third sector to provide eco-housing. Together with a strong commitment to design excellence, this would provide reasons for higher income households and knowledge workers to choose the Don Valley as a place to live. Priority 1.10: Working in the park The concept of the Don Valley as an urban landscape park does not in any way preclude economic activity. Greenwich

The creation of new and revived communities should help to promote inclusion and social cohesion by creating neighbourhoods with high quality services and amenities, and an attractive choice of housing by type and tenure. The aim must be to make the Upper and Lower Don Valleys distinctive and desirable places to live, and not allow them to become ghettoes of low-cost and social housing. The aim should be to create strong, sustainable communities, not just housing developments, ensuring that the social and transport infrastructure are in place to support a diverse and aspirational population. One obvious approach – in the light of our recommendations sheffield - city of rivers | 97

april 2008 | yellow book

We recognise the vital role that the river corridor plays in providing sites for industrial and commercial development that cannot be accommodated in the city centre. We have argued that traditional industries should be encouraged to remain in the small factories and workshops close to the city centre, rather than be tidied away to industrial estates. Recent market studies suggest that there will be strong demand for sites and premises in Don Valley in the next 10-15 years. The Lower Don Valley, in particular, has been identified as a key business location by Creative Sheffield.

These aspirations should be encouraged: Sheffield needs modern factories and workspace to achieve its ambition to become one of Europe’s leading innovative producer cities. However, the built legacy of the Sheffield Development Corporation already looks sadly dated, and the cities that Sheffield aspires to match – places like Zurich, Stuttgart and Emscher Park – have all invested in creating high quality environments for knowledgebased businesses, often with a strong emphasis on sustainability and green building technology. industry at the Emscher Park

The DVP master plan will provide a blueprint for reestablishing coherent urban form and identity. The restoration of the Don and its tributaries will help to provide an outstanding landscape setting for modern business space and help to raise land values, while policy guidelines for the park will establish ground rules on sustainable drainage, green roofs and energy efficiency, as well as on building design. Instead of the anonymous prairie landscape of the Upper Don Valley today, the concept of working in the park, which has been so successful in the Ruhr region, will provide Sheffield with an unique selling point in the competition for knowledge economy investment. Priority 1.11: Leisure, recreation and healthy living The Don Valley Park will provide a consistently high quality environment in terms of urban development, green space and open space. By repopulating the river corridor and creating a rich mix of uses it will help to generate renewed vitality and activity in some of the city’s forgotten places. This is critical because places that are in use – by residents, workers and visitors – create a sense of comfort and security. This is the start of a virtuous circle: attractive, busy places are good sites for leisure activities of all kinds

goals, priorities and vision | section E

which, in turn, help to stretch the active hours into evenings and weekends. We have recommended that some sites should be reserved for wildlife and flora, but generally the philosophy of the Don Valley Park should be to maximise access to open space. River restoration will create attractive new green spaces, and improve access to the waterside for anglers; new residential areas will include parks, play areas and sports facilities; and Sheffield Waterfront, the riverside towns and new business locations will provide more formal parks and open spaces. The example of the Ruhr region shows the benefits of creating a productive landscape, reserving sites for allotments, community gardens, city farms, woodlands and other uses. The Sheffield & Tinsley Canal will have a particularly important role to play because it is the city’s only navigable waterway. City centre regeneration will help unlock the potential of Victoria Quays, and new developments in the canal corridor will increase the volume of boat movements and promote rowing, canoeing and other water-based activities. As an inland port, Sheffield has always been at the end of a long cul-desac, but this strategy should help to a make it a popular destination.

key part in realising the Park’s potential as a place for sport, exercise and informal recreation. The DVP must be clean, safe and well cared-for: simply a good place to be. That does not mean that it needs to be a tidy, manicured landscape, though there is a place for that. The park should reflect the character and texture of its industrial past, and celebrate the places – like Salmon Pastures – where natural regeneration has produced something of exceptional value and interest. cycling near the canal, Emscher

Priority 1.12: Culture, creativity and learning One of the most important lessons from the Emscher Landscape Park is that it is possible to create high quality, contemporary places to live, work and play without erasing the structures and landscapes which embody the region’s history and culture. Too often in the UK sites are cleared of any trace of their previous history, which is then cynically “celebrated” in the form of public art works or interpretation boards. In the process, parts of the city’s collective memory are erased and its distinctive identity is inevitably diminished. We strongly recommend that the structures, townscapes and artefacts that embody the social and economic history of the Don Valley should be retained and reused wherever possible. They provide a record of where Sheffield has come from and the kind of place it used to be, and they can and should be inspirational places for creativity and new ventures. A survey of these historic and cultural assets will be an important stage in developing the DVP masterplan. This will, of course, include the best known industrial monuments, but it should also encompass character areas such as Philadelphia, Mowbray Street, Bridgehouses and Sussex Street.

The stewardship measures described below will play a sheffield - city of rivers | 99

april 2008 | yellow book

Some sites and buildings lend themselves readily to conversion into hotels, apartments and studios. New structures can be erected inside the stabilised shells of derelict buildings, and others may be retained simply as monuments. There are great opportunities here to encourage entrepreneurs and community groups to suggest ideas for some of these key sites. These might, for example, include creating atmospheric performance spaces or venues, or a permanent outdoor display of land art. The Westergasfabrieken site in Amsterdam, where industrial monuments are combined with contemporary Desmarest, France

100

landscape design, is an excellent model. Underpinning these proposals is our conviction that the Don Valley Park will be a priceless learning resource for Sheffield and the wider region. The wide range of activities within the park, and the emphasis on sustainability, biodiversity and sustainable communities will create any number of opportunities for schools, people with learning difficulties, communities and interest groups to learn and make a direct, hands-on contribution to the creation of a new urban landscape. Like Emscher Park, the park will be laboratory for Westergasfabrieken, Amsterdam

innovation in urban regeneration. It will draw on European best practice to set a new standard for place making in the UK. The cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s universities should be encouraged to monitor and evaluate the project, and to attract research students from Europe and the rest of the world.

Westergasfabrieken, Amsterdam

goals, priorities and vision | section E

Don Valley Park - strategic directions

shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 101

april 2008 | yellow book

35.

Theme 2: Suburban and rural rivers Sheffield’s western rivers – the Sheaf, Porter, Rivelin and Loxley – are among the city’s most special places. While we have identified the creation of the Don Valley Park as the most pressing priority, it will be important to maintain and enhance the quality of the western rivers and to provide practical support for the voluntary groups who cherish them. At the same time, the success of the Shire Brook LNR shows that even the most neglected and disregarded small rivers and streams can become valuable community assets which improve the quality of life in less favoured parts of the city. We therefore also recommend a programme to encourage community groups to rescue a river. Priority 2.1: Small rivers initiative The small rivers initiative (SRI) will target the principal tributaries of the Don, and recently restored Shire Brook. The western rivers – and the upland streams and becks that feed them – are generally recognised as assets and places of high amenity, while Shire Brook is still a work in progress, but all have issues that need to be addressed. These include: culverted and canalised

102

sections, obstructions including weirs and dams, at-risk archaeological sites and gaps in riverside access, as well as problems with litter and vandalism. A number of active voluntary groups champion the cause of the rivers, including the Friends of Porter Brook and the Rivelin Valley Conservation Group. Several of these organisations are already affiliated to the Sheffield Waterways Strategy Group, and we recommend that they should be invited to prepare 3-5 year river action plans. working within an agreed framework to

identify and prioritise key tasks. SWSG should appoint an independent assessor to review the plans and recommend a priority programme which would be partfunded by the partners, although local groups will still need to raise matched funds or sponsorship from other sources. The lower reaches of the Sheaf, Porter and Loxley will form part of the Don Valley Park where they will be the subject of river restorations schemes and other measures. The SRI actions will therefore need to dovetail with these proposals. river restoration and habitat creation, IGA Park, Rostock

goals, priorities and vision | section E

Priority 2.2: River rescue projects Sheffield has a vast network of streams and becks, most feeding into the Don, but some decanting into the Rother. Many of these minor waterways are little known and not much valued even by neighbouring communities. But the experience in the Shire Brook valley, where the course of a neglected and polluted stream has been transformed into a local nature reserve has highlighted the potential of these forgotten rivers to contribute to the well-being of communities and enhance the quality of life. At Shire Brook and Hartley Brook the recovery of the streams has provided a focus for local residents, school children and others to participate in community projects, promoting neighbourhood pride, active citizenship and healthy lifestyles. We propose that a project should be set up which would start by surveying the streams and assessing their condition. The results of this exercise would be fed back to communities who would be given the opportunity to bid for funding and technical assistance to prepare and deliver a river rescue plan in their area. The aim should be to involve local people in all aspects of the work: school children could take part in nature conservation and tree planting schemes; older residents could contribute to oral history projects; engineering

and construction work could provide training and work experience opportunities for the unemployed or community service for offenders. learning about pond restoration

36.

Theme 3: City-wide initiatives Priority 3.1: Green and open space network Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waterways will have a key role to play in the development of a city-wide network of green and open spaces. A green and open space strategy (GOSS) for the city is currently under development, but it is clear that the waterways and the river valleys will be key determinants of the architecture of the network, providing a number of the key radial routes that link the city to the countryside, including the National Park. Sheffield is richly endowed with high quality open space, but it is not distributed equitably so there is still a deficit in some parts of the city. Throughout the city there is need to ensure that green and open spaces are linked up, creating green corridors that will promote biodiversity and support sustainable wildlife populations. Associated with the green network is the development of an extensive and connected network of footpaths and cycleways. Riverside routes already define large parts of the network. Paths by the Don, the canal and the lesser rivers can be seen as the spokes of a radial network that will be completed by circular routes and cross-city strategic paths. From this perspective, establishing pedestrian access to the Upper Don (Priority 1.5) is shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 103

april 2008 | yellow book

Priority 3.2: City of Rivers Festival The Sheffield Rivers & Canal Festival has become a fixture in the civic calendar. A week-long programme of walks, talks and activities culminates in On the Waterfront, a day of events and entertainment at Victoria Quays. Organised by Groundwork Sheffield the festival is a relatively lowkey affair although, weather permitting, the main event attracts a respectable attendance. We recommend that the festival should continue, but that it should be scaled up as the implementation of the City of Rivers strategy unfolds. The aim should be to establish the festival as one of the highlights of the year in Sheffield, and to attract visitors from the wider region.

especially important because it will close a significant gap in the network, and encourage cross-town walking and cycling trips. There are still some gaps in riverside access by the lesser rivers, especially for cyclists. The Small Rivers Initiative (SRI) action plans will include proposals for filling these gaps so that it is possible to traverse the city on foot â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and to link to strategic routes by following the watercourses.

104

The experience of places such as Cardiff Bay and Duisburg in Germany shows that events and festivals can play an important part in raising awareness of major regeneration schemes, and encouraging people to visit, perhaps for the first time, parts of the city that they have not been to before or which they regarded as dangerous and hostile. A chance to see the river restoration works or the development of new communities will be a draw in its own right, but the partners may be able to reach a wider audience by presenting concerts (urban proms), sitespecific theatrical events or firework spectaculars.

community market garden

goals, priorities and vision | section E

37.

Regional perspectives: The Don catchment

38.

Regional perspectives: The canal network

Securing commitment to the City of Rivers strategy and accessing the resources to make it happen will be major challenges. At least in the short term, the partners should not overreach themselves by trying to extend the strategy to the wider region. However it is important to maintain a regional perspective, and to keep open lines of communication with regional and sub-regional bodies as well as neighbouring local authorities. Flood alleviation and river naturalisation measures can only sensibly be considered in the context of the Don catchment area. We have set out guiding principles for river restoration but the appraisal of specific interventions must take account of their likely consequences in neighbouring areas. All proposals will need to be developed in collaboration with the Environment Agency and other Councils in the catchment area.

The Sheffield & Tinsley Canal is the city’s only navigable waterway, but the terminus at Victoria Quay is at the end of a long cul-de-sac in the canal network. The regeneration of the canal as part of the Don Valley Park will encourage more people to use the waterspace for boat trips, rowing, canoeing and other activities, but the volume of traffic on the canal and onward through the Sheffield & South Yorkshire Navigation is always likely to be modest. Two projects have been mooted which would make Sheffield a more accessible boating destination:

The Don Catchment Rivers Trust provides a forum for networking and collaboration. We believe it is in Sheffield’s interests to play a lead role in shaping and influencing the flood management regime for the Don catchment, and to ensure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

These appear to be attractive projects, but we do not believe that the success of the City of Rivers strategy depends on their implementation. These would be major engineering projects; the cost of restoring the Dearne & Dove and Barnsley Canals alone is estimated to be in excess of £250m and it is not clear that the economic or environmental returns would justify expenditure on

Tinsley: canal and cooling towers

 the first would extend the Chesterfield Canal to join the River Rother, with additional river engineering works to make a navigable Killamarsh to Rotherham  the second would restore the Dearne & Dove Canal from Swinton, creating a connection via the Barnsley Canal to the Aire & Calder Navigation.

shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 105

april 2008 | yellow book

that scale. For these reasons we consider that improving Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s connections to the national waterways network, though desirable in principle, should be treated as a low priority. 39.

Summary The strategy themes and priorities for action are summarised in Figure 39-1. Figure 39-1: City of Rivers â&#x20AC;&#x201C; themes and priorities

Theme 1: Urban Waterways: Don Valley Park Master plan and design guidance River restoration Sustainable development Promoting biodiversity Access and linkages Sheffield Waterfront Urban villages Riverside towns Living in the park Working in the park Leisure, recreation & healthy living Culture, creativity and learning

106

Theme 2: Suburban and rural rivers Small rivers initiative River rescue project Theme 3: City-wide initiatives Green and open space network City of Rivers Festival Regional priorities The Don catchment The canal network

making it happen | section F

F making it happen 40.

Delivering the strategy The City of Rivers strategy is ambitious and challenging. We believe that it is realistic and deliverable, but delivering the strategy will require:  a strong commitment from the SWSG partners to work together and champion the strategy  strong leadership by Sheffield City Council and the executive agencies  an inclusive approach with parity of esteem and status for voluntary and community groups  a dedicated executive team to develop and implement an operating plan  a funding strategy to mobilise resources for major capital projects.  a clear performance and accountability framework  a sustainable management and stewardship regime

Figure 40-1: Design for delivery

Figure 40-1 shows a recommended delivery model, key elements of which are described in more detail in the following sections:  ownership of the strategy rests with the Strategy Group (SWSG): the group should adopt the strategy, collectively and on behalf of the individual partners  to mark the transition from strategy to delivery mode we recommend that the SWSG partners should sign an agreement, committing them to work together to deliver the City of Rivers vision  in the short term, the partners will need to appoint a project manager, probably on secondment from one of the partner bodies, and to secure development funding; the project manager will develop an operating plan, funding strategy and performance framework, and commission further research and/or feasibility studies as required  as the project moves into the implementation phase, the project manager will coordinate the early stages of the work programme and establish reporting arrangements to the partnership  we believe that the scale and complexity of the shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 107

april 2008 | yellow book

Don Valley Park proposals will require a dedicated delivery vehicle, provisionally named Don Valley Ltd; DVL would probably be launched in 2010, its role is discussed in more detail below

Figure 41-1: Indicative action plan

Year 2008-09

ď&#x201A;§ we also recommend that, subject to the experience of the current arrangements, the scale and remit of the River Don Stewardship Companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operations should be extended to cover the whole of the Don Valley Park and the management of the nature reserve.

2009-10

41.

Action Plan 2008-2013 We have drawn up a headline action plan for the period 2008-2013, identifying a number of key milestones. Implementing the strategy described in this report will take at least 10-15 years, but early action is possible on a number of fronts, producing measurable impacts within 2-3 years.

2 3 4 2010-11

2011-12 2012-13

108

Q 1 2 3

1 2 3 4

Tasks/milestones Review draft strategy and consult SWSG adopts City of Rivers strategy City of Rivers Partnership (CRP) agreement signed Project manager appointed Development budget to March 2010 agreed Development of small rivers initiative (SRI) and river rescue project (RRP) Review of current and planned projects in DVP area: testing for fit with the City of Rivers strategy Development plan for City of Rivers festival Work programme and objectives for 09-10 agreed Development of operating plan package (including funding strategy and performance framework) Strategy agreed to influence development proposals in the pre-master plan phase River restoration feasibility study commissioned 3-year operating plan package and budget approved by CRP Study on delivery options commissioned SRI and RRP launched New City of Rivers Festival launched Decision to form DVL and extend remit of RDSC Recruitment process for DVL director commences Consultants appointed to prepare Don Valley Park master plan, including design guide and sustainable development protocols Draft river restoration plan Don Valley Ltd formed and appointment of director First phase SRI and RRP projects announced Draft master plan submitted/period of consultation Master plan + DVL business plan approved by CRP Public launch of DVL and master plan Work starts on first phase of river restoration, landscape and public realm works Ongoing investment in landscape framework Ongoing investment in landscape framework

making it happen | section F

Figure 42-1: Funding the Don Valley Park

42.

Funding strategy Although we are not in a position to cost the proposals at this stage it is clear that the overwhelming majority of expenditure will be directed towards the creation of the Don Valley Park. Essentially, we envisage that the public sector will have to contribute the majority of the resources required to develop the master plan and create the landscape framework, although the private sector will make a substantial contribution to the latter. The private sector will deliver the overwhelming majority of commercial and residential development, including social housing, although public sector support may be needed for some community, recreational and cultural facilities (Figure 42-1):

Developing the funding strategy will be a key task for the project manager in 2008-09. The CRP will have a key role to play in securing financial commitments from the respective partners, as well as in identifying potential sources of financial assistance and preparing funding applications.

Don Valley Park priorities

Anticipated funding

1.1 Master plan

Public sector funded

1.2 River restoration

Public sector funded with developer contributions in some locations

1.3 Sustainable development

Largely private sector funded, working within policy framework. Public sector contributions to major SUDS infrastructure; possible grant assistance with solar energy installations. Seek sponsorship from renewable energy producers for water power pilots.

1.4 Promoting biodiversity

Public sector funding with substantial voluntary sector input. Opportunities for private sector contributions and project sponsorship.

1.5 Access and linkages

Establishing pedestrian/cycling access will be a condition of planning consents for riverside developments. Public sector contributions where more complex solutions are required.

1.6 Sheffield Waterfront

Private sector funded including major contribution to the costs of the promenade and public realm

1.7 Urban villages

Private sector led, but some public sector intervention may be needed to tackle market failure.

1.8 Riverside towns

Mix of private sector development with public sector investment in community facilities and public realm.

1.9 Living in the park

Mostly private sector funded including provision of social housing, but some housing association development.

1.10 Working in the park

Private sector funded

1.11 Leisure, recreation

Public sector funding with substantial voluntary sector input. Opportunities for private sector contributions and project sponsorship.

1.12 Culture, creativityâ&#x20AC;Ś

Public sector funding with substantial voluntary sector input. Opportunities for private sector contributions and project sponsorship.

43.

Performance management The CRP will also need to develop a robust performance management framework for the City of Rivers strategy. SMART targets1 should be agreed relating to each of the strategic goals set out in Section 26. A provisional set of performance measures is shown in Figure 43-1.

SMART targets should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound. shef f ield - cit y of rivers | 109

april 2008 | yellow book

Figure 43-1: Possible performance measures

Strategic goals Image/Sheffield signature

Natural water cycle

Improved water quality Reduction in incidence of extreme water flows Reduction in flooding incidents

Sustainable regeneration

Improvements in energy efficiency Area of sustainable drainage measures

Pedestrian/cycle access

Closing gaps in riverside footpaths and cycle tracks

Investment/regeneration

Value of private sector investment in new developments Jobs created Employment in knowledge-intensive industries

Architecture and design

Developments conforming to the master plan + design guidance Developments influenced by design review Developments winning awards

History, heritage, culture

Reuse of historic buildings Conservation of archaeological sites.

Once this provisional list has been refined and agreed the partners will need to:  establish the baseline position and trend  set challenging but realistic SMART performance targets 110

Essentially, DVL will act as a mini urban regeneration company working within the boundaries of the park. Delivering development will be a vitally important part of the company’s remit, which will in turn generate contributions to environmental, community, educational and cultural projects. But DVL will also have a particular responsibility for creating and delivering the landscape framework, and promoting biodiversity and sustainability.

 establish a monitoring and reporting regime

Performance measures could include… Positive change in external perceptions of the city Positive change residents’ satisfaction

 set a date for an independent evaluation of the strategy. 44.

Don Valley Limited We have argued that the scale and complexity of the Don Valley Park will require a dedicated delivery vehicle. The challenge of transforming the post-industrial landscape, maintaining Sheffield’s distinctive character and achieving sustainable development will demand a holistic approach and a strong commitment to the guiding principles of the strategy. This project will break new ground in UK regeneration practice and it is unrealistic to expect that a piecemeal approach will deliver the goals or fulfil the aspirations of this report. The legal form and status of the delivery vehicle can be determined later, but we have assumed that it will be a private company limited by guarantee, and that the City of Rivers partners will nominate the board members. There should be a strong core executive team with a skilled and experienced director, but the company does not need a large staff. The partners should be expected to provide expertise and contributions in kind.

Careful negotiations will be needed to ensure that DVL can work harmoniously with other public sector agencies including Creative Sheffield. The new company must not be seen as a rival to existing organisations, and it should only intervene to protect the integrity of the master plan and the landscape park concept, and where it can clearly add value. It will be judged by its ability to act as an effective vehicle for transformational change in the Don Valley.

45.

River Don Stewardship Company The SWSG partners have already recognised that Sheffield’s waterways can only fulfil their potential if capital investment – in the rivers, the landscape, commercial development and community infrastructure

making it happen | section F

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is matched by a significant improvement in the management and stewardship of the public realm, especially by the urban rivers. To an extent this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the waterways are integrated back into the life of the city and new residents and businesses move in, the urban waterways and their immediate surroundings will become busier, more attractive and safer. The urban rivers and canal will be livelier and more attractive places because more people will have a stake in them and an interest in their success. But the process takes time; in the Lower Don Valley, the Five Weirs Walk has encouraged walkers and cyclists to return, but the riverside environment is still poor in some places, with derelict land and buildings and endemic problems with litter, graffiti and anti-social behaviour. There are lags in the system and the Walk, though a valuable asset has not yet been the catalyst for more general regeneration.

1-2 years to appraise the performance of the company and its impact on the amenity of the Lower Don Valley, and we recommend that, if it is proving successful (and subject to appropriate tendering arrangements) consideration should be given to extending RDSCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sphere of operations throughout the Don Valley Park. Consideration should also be given to expanding the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s remit to include the management of the nature reserve, allotments, community gardens and the wider public realm.

The River Don Stewardship Company was set up to address these problems and to introduce a visible and proactive management regime in its operating area. While it is too early to judge the success of the present arrangements, and especially the willingness of businesses to share the costs of the scheme, the principle is sound. The partners should use the next shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 111

april 2008 | yellow book

112

conclusion | section G

G conclusion 46.

Challenge and opportunity Sheffield is a city growing in confidence and stature. Its achievements in transforming the heart of the city and reclaiming neglected assets like the Botanical Gardens and Weston Park Museum have earned the city numerous awards and a reputation as place that has had the vision to change, and the skills and durability to deliver change. The regeneration of the urban Don Valley is the city’s next big challenge. If the same ambition and imagination that has been applied to the creation of the Gold Route is brought to bear on the urban riverside the results could be even more dramatic. In this report we have re-imagined the urban Don as huge landscape park providing the framework and context for the development of new communities, new business space, and centres of research, culture and learning. The design of the Don Valley Park will represent a complete break from the drab conventions of most brownfield development in the UK: it will be a distinctive and memorable place with a rich history, a living culture and a vibrant natural environment. In the industrial era, businesses looked to the rivers as a power source and then as a drain; for a few decades the canal was an important transport route but it was

soon superseded by rail. In the post-industrial era, development has for the most part ignored the presence of the rivers or treated it as a threat and a liability. This is disappointing, but not entirely surprising: in contrast to the arcadian landscapes on the west side of the city, the urban rivers have degenerated into dirty and dispiriting places, flowing through artificial channels and below high walls. There are some special places and water quality continues to improve, but the rivers themselves are litter-strewn, forgotten and abused, more likely to create feelings of unease than pleasure. So our proposition is that the regeneration of the urban Don Valley must start with the rivers. We have described some of the dozens of successful river restoration projects carried out by the Environment Agency in the past 20 years. In each case they have taken an unpromising and unloved watercourse and turned into an asset that is appreciated and used by the whole community. And the aesthetic benefits are only the beginning: restored rivers are less prone to flooding, and they contribute to biodiversity and wildlife in the city. Restoring the Don will taken vision and leadership: giving up land to recreate the flood plain or restore meanders may fly in the face of conventional wisdom but, though counter-intuitive, it is essential if the Don is to be converted from a liability to an asset. River restoration is the key to unlocking the full

potential of the Don Valley Park, to making the riverside a popular and sought-after place to live, work, learn and play. This report has looked at projects in Helsinki and Oslo that embody many of the principles on which the Don Valley Park is based. Neither Arabianranta nor the Aker Environmental Park was designed as “destination” for consumers and tourists; both were envisaged as communities with a mix of activities, and both have been shaped by their natural environment, their history and culture. Yet, by making places rather than delivering development, both projects have become successful and sought-after locations for creative and knowledge businesses, and popular places for locals and tourists. The pre-eminent example of this new approach to regeneration is, of course, Germany’s Ruhrgebeit. Here, many of the ideas and approaches recommended in this report have already been applied, and on a regional scale. Since IBA Emscher Park was launched in 1989, this contaminated and degraded industrial area has changed dramatically. The traditional industry base has been modernised, and dozens of innovative projects have regenerated urban waterfronts, created new communities, and turned the Ruhr into a lively cultural centre. Among the principles guiding this process over the past 20 shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 113

april 2008 | yellow book

years, two stand out: the unrelenting focus on ecological recovery and sustainability, and the celebration of the region’s industrial history and culture. It was a measure of the success of the Emscher Park approach that, when IBA came to the end of its fixed (10 year) term, the state and local governments set up a new partnership to take the strategy forward. We make no apologies for focusing so strongly on the urban rivers and the opportunities they present for another phase of transformational change in Sheffield. The Don Valley must be the priority: it is the area of greatest need and of greatest opportunity and, by adopting and implementing the Don Valley Park concept, Sheffield can enhance the quality of life of its citizens, especially people living in deprived communities, and the city’s place competitiveness. The Don Valley Park is the key to making it happen and we urge the partners to adopt it. The small rivers that enter the city from the west before flowing into the Don are among the glories of Sheffield. They were the original sites of industry in the city, but over the past century and more they have been incorporated into the green structure, flowing through fields, woods and parks. They are hugely attractive and popular places but there are still issues that demand 114

attention including the decay of archaeological sites, woodland management, litter and vandalism. In every case, the quality and amenity falls away as the rivers enter the city, which is why we have included the lower reaches of the tributaries in the Don Valley Park. The approach we propose for suburban and rural rivers is straightforward: a fund to support the development and implementation of river action plans, which will be prepared by communities and amenity groups. We also want to see other under-valued small rivers brought back to life, especially in less favoured parts of the city. The recent rediscovery of the polluted Shire Brook is a notable success story and we recommend that a fund should be started to help communities bring forward other river rescue schemes. This study has run in parallel with work on a green and open space strategy for the city. These two pieces of work now need to be reunited: Sheffield’s river and canal define radial and cross-town routes for walkers and cyclists, and they play a defining role in the city’s green structure. One of the objectives of the Don Valley Park is to create an accessible, walkable environment close to the heart of the city, but the benefits will only be fully realised when the Park is accessible on foot or by bike from every part of the city.

47.

From strategy to action Our recommendations centre on a bold and radical step: transforming the Don Valley by creating a great urban landscape park. Delivering the Don Valley Park will be a challenge, but Sheffield should approach it with confidence and optimism. The city is, after all, a leader in regeneration, and its philosophy and approach (summarised in the maxim, Let Sheffield Be Sheffield) is entirely consistent with the proposals in this report. Sheffield can also draw inspiration from other European regions which have shown that, far from being a luxury, putting the environment at the top of the agenda makes good business sense. A strategy, however persuasive, is no guarantee that things are going to happen and good intentions can easily be crowded out by the pressure of events. We have recommended an approach which, although it will still require a great deal of hard work and fortitude, will greatly enhance the prospects of success. The critical first step is for the partners to confirm their commitment by forming themselves into a delivery partnership. Especially in the first few years, the partnership will need to champion the Don Valley Park, and resist pressures to dilute the concept by allowing

conclusion | section G

short-term gain to prevail over long-term vision. Until a delivery vehicle is established, the partners will need to steer the project forward, carrying out detailed planning and research and implementing early action projects. Critically, they will commission the production of the DVP master plan and ensure that it is embedded in the Sheffield Development Framework. Thereafter, the focus will shift to delivery and a dedicated executive team will be required to project manage and procure river restoration and landscape works, and to work with the private sector to deliver high quality development.

shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 115

april 2008 | yellow book

116

annexes | section H

H annexes ANNEX 1: POLICY REVIEW A1.1

in which lifelong learning and skill development are highly valued and properly resourced  every neighbourhood a successful neighbourhood: Sheffield will still be a city of villages, but they must all be strong communities where people want to live  excellence in public transport: to tackle congestion and a decline in bus usage  Sheffield an exciting, magnetic city, known across the world as great place to be, attracting investment and opportunity.

Sheffield’s Future: the City Strategy Sheffield’s City Strategy 2005-20101 sets out a vision of a successful, distinctive city of European significance at the heart of a strong city region. The vision is based on three key principles:  prosperity: making the city competitive, attracting investment and creating an environment for wealth creation  inclusion: promoting access to opportunities and services; and  sustainability: meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. The strategy identifies five big ambitions for the future of Sheffield:  an economy that matches the best cities in Europe: based on innovation, enterprise and private investment; achieving a step-change in wealth creation and inward investment  learning a part of everyone’s way of life: a culture

Sheffield First Partnership, Sheffield’s Future: Be Part of It, 2005

Environmental excellence will be integral to the city’s future success. The strategy cites the results of consultations which showed that Sheffielders “value our greenery and access to parks, woodlands and the Peak District”. The city “is well placed to develop itself as a centre of excellence on environmental sustainability”.

A1.2

Environmental strategies The Environment Agency’s national strategy, Creating a Better Place, sets out nine goals:  a better quality of life for people  an enhanced environment for wildlife  cleaner air for everyone

     

improved and protected inland and coastal waters restored, protected land with healthy soils a greener business world wiser sustainable use of natural resources limiting and adapting to climate change reducing flood risk.

All of these have – in practice or potentially – a bearing on Sheffield’s rivers and waterways, and the Agency’s regional strategy highlights specific contributions to this national agenda, including support for the Sheffield waterways strategy, as well as:  urban regeneration: embedding green infrastructure planning, sustainable construction, resource efficiency and ecological footprinting  improving coarse fisheries habitats on the Don  recovering urban rivers to improve flood risk management and biodiversity, and to realise their social and economic value  green business clubs to help SMEs improve their environmental performance  active promotion of government guidance on flood risk and development  completing a catchment flood management plan for the Don in 2007-08.2 2 Environment Agency, Creating a Better Place, north east local contribution 2006/11: Improving the environment in the north east region shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 117

april 2008 | yellow book

Sheffield First has a vision of a clean, attractive city that places environment at the heart of all its decisions, reduces its dependence on non-renewable resources and enhances its natural and built assets. The City Strategy contains six environmental aims: clean streets, neighbourhoods and open spaces attractive and well-used parks and green spaces reduced dependence on non-renewable resources enhanced natural and built assets, including regenerated water corridors  environment at the heart of decision making  strengthening green businesses.    

The Sheffield Environment Strategy3 is under review. The current strategy sets out a vision of: “…a city whose built and natural environment are distinctive and of high quality, where our environmental assets are recognised for their direct contribution to the city’s economic success and the well-being if its citizens. A city in which citizens enjoy and respect those environments and… [which] contributes positively to the regional, national and global environment”.

The Environment Strategy also identifies a series of crosscutting themes which have informed our approach to the waterways study:

 involving the community, and  integrating action on the environment with other socio-economic priorities.

 raising the profile of Sheffield’s environmental assets  improving knowledge, attitudes and behaviour  highlighting environmental inequalities

The partners’ strategic plan for 2003-06 highlighted four “critical initiatives” – underpinned by targets/ milestones and measures of success - for enhancing and

Figure 1: Sheffield First for Environment: Strategic Plan – critical initiatives

Critical initiatives

Headline indicators

Measures of success

Coordinated regeneration of water corridors

A water corridor study for the canal, Lower Don and Sheaf Valleys

British Waterways or Tourist Board award River stretches meeting river quality initiatives

Improve combined sewer overflows Continued regeneration of parks and woodlands

Strengthen links with area panels and involve local conservation groups in funding applications

Successful bids Proportion of green space/trees being managed

Implementation of management plans for key sites/woodlands

safeguarding Sheffield’s environmental assets:

Implementing the biodiversity action plan

Improve linkages between green corridors and emphasise importance of wildlife habitats Link with local people, groups, businesses and area panels to produce and implement management plans

Recognising and valuing Sheffield’s distinctive built and natural heritage

Priority species and habitat indicators Costed management plans agreed and implemented

Coordinate green space information

GIS-based resource and awards scheme

Raise profile of Sheffield’s distinctiveness via SFfE awards

Number of awards

Develop sustainability appraisal toolkit

Use of sustainability appraisal in development decisions

Environmental assets audit and feasibility study Study commissioned Sheffield Green Business Park initiative 3 118

Sheffield First for Environment, Sheffield Environment Strategy 2003-2006

Completion of Darnall site

annexes | section H

The strategic plan places a strong emphasis on process rather than outputs. The plan does not connect convincingly with the overarching vision and goals of Sheffield First, or show how a better environment will help to make Sheffield a successful, distinctive European city. The Environment Agency’s Local Authority State of the Environment (SOE) report for Sheffield identifies five key goals for the city:  realising the environmental value of the city’s rivers to support economic growth  identifying and prioritising strategic flood defence work  promoting the agency’s flood warning service  supporting air quality improvements  improving resource use by tackling illegal waste dumping and reducing waste production. The Environment Agency priorities and targets for Sheffield are summarised in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Environment Agency: priorities and targets for Sheffield

Priorities Reduce flood risk

Improve and protect waters

Increase biodiversity

Protect land and soils

Cleaner air

Greener business world

Targets Enable new development without putting properties at greater risk of flooding Create new and improve existing defences Give better and earlier warnings especially to the vulnerable Achieve 91% compliance with River Quality Objectives by 2011 Ensure Yorkshire Water achieves £3.4 bn investment in infrastructure by 2010 Conserve and increase numbers of water voles and otters Protect native crayfish from extinction Increase coarse fish stocks to sustainable levels Shift regulatory effort to illegal waste disposal sites Reduce illegal waste dumping incidents Reduce hazardous waste from Agency controlled processes by 15% Ensure that industries controlled by the Agency do not contribute significantly to loss of air quality Encourage more businesses to take responsibility for their environmental performance Ensure that businesses controlled by the Agency do not have a significant adverse effect on the health of the people of Sheffield

A1.3

Sheffield Development Framework The Sheffield Development Framework (SDF) is currently being developed. A consultation paper, Preferred Options for the Core Strategy was published in February 2006. The SDF is based on a vision of transformation and sustainability through which Sheffield will become a city that:  is economically prosperous and attractive to business  has sustainable neighbourhoods that are good places to live  prizes, conserves and enhances its distinctive heritage and natural environment…and promotes sustainable, high quality buildings and spaces  enables people and goods to move about the city  enriches the city region of which it forms the core. The SDF states that “Sheffield is increasingly renowned for its green environment”; the city “enjoys an unparalleled location next to the Peak Park with topography that sets it apart from any other city in the country”. Protecting and enhancing this natural environment is thus a key objective. The river corridors are identified as some of Sheffield’s “most distinctive and valued features”. The paper shef f ield - cit y of r i ver s | 119

april 2008 | yellow book

proposes a strategic green network “of areas and routes for wildlife, movement and recreation penetrating the built up area and linking with the countryside”. The network will be based on the principal rivers and waterways: the Upper Don, the Loxley, the Rivelin, Porter Brook, the Sheaf, the Rother, the Lower Don and the canal. These will be complemented by other “strategic links” associated with smaller streams in the city including Shire Brook, Shirtcliffe Brook, Ochre Dike and Blackburn Brook.

urban environment and if rivers are incorporated into new development this will make new and existing buildings more appealing to residents, workers and visitors. This all helps to achieve a vibrant and attractive City Centre…” The rivers form an important part of the preferred options for other specific locations, notably the Lower and Upper Don Valley areas. In the Lower Don Valley the draft core strategy endorses the principles of the masterplan produced by Urban Strategies for the City Council and British Land4. The lower Don will continue to be a key gateway location for industry and logistics; key elements of the masterplan include:

The green network “will serve a range of purposes including movement of wildlife in the city, leisure and recreation and walking and cycling. Woodland areas will be safeguarded and new trees will be planted. Diversity of wildlife will be encouraged across the city and areas of special ecological or geological value will be protected.”

120

Other riverside locations highlighted in the core strategy include the Lower Porter Valley, which will continue to be promoted as an office location, complemented by housing; the Sheaf Valley (between Lowfield and Archer Road) is under pressure for housing development, but its “unique value” is as a location for enterprises serving the south west of the city; the Blackburn Valley should be promoted as a site for economic regeneration, subject to roads capacity. Other environmental objectives of the SDF include:

 capitalising on the river and the canal to provide a green setting for the whole area  looking to the area around Attercliffe and the canal as sites for new residential communities.

The spatial vision addresses the opportunities presented by rivers and riversides in the city centre: the Don, Sheaf and Porter. Preferred option PCC10 states that: “Improvements will be made to the environment and accessibility of all rivers and riversides [in the city centre], opening up culverted rivers and providing walkways where appropriate. “…accessible waterways form an attractive part of the

(one of Sheffield’s riverside towns) as an important district centre will be consolidated.

The Upper Don Valley has been in physical and economic decline over many years, but the vision for the future set out in the core strategy “is of a place for successful businesses including high technology companies and advanced manufacturing”, though there will also be new housing, and an extension of the leisure/education cluster around Livesey Street. The role of Hillsborough 4

Urban Strategies Inc, Lower Don Valley: Vision and Masterplan Study (submitted to Sheffield City Council and the British Land Company plc, November 2004)

 safeguarding and enhancing natural and landscape features  enhancing and protecting biodiversity and wildlife habitats  conserving features of ecological or scientific value  encouraging walking and cycling  a variety of renewable energy schemes  reducing flood risk by appropriate drainage, flood prevention measures and avoiding building in areas where risks are unacceptable.

annexes | section H

Other relevant planning objectives in the draft core strategy include:  creating the conditions for a balanced, diverse and sustainable high-growth economy  creating environments to attract high-technology manufacturing and knowledge-based services  a major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture in the city centre, complemented by the Upper and Lower Don Valley  high quality design of buildings and spaces  culture, leisure and tourism  improving the quality of life in neighbourhoods with poor environments  encouraging healthy lifestyles for all  enhanced character and distinctiveness of neighbourhoods  improving the environment of areas seeking to attract business investment  protecting and enhancing the landscape and character of villages, countryside and the urban fringe.

Figure 3: Watercourses

Figure 4: Sheffield and Tinsley Canal

All watercourses will be protected and enhanced for the benefit of

The canal will continue to be improved as a focus for regeneration,

wildlife and, where appropriate, for public access and recreation.

as part of the green network and as a resource for recreation and

Development beside a watercourse will be required to:

tourism. New development by the canal should contribute to its recreational, tourism and environmental value by:

re-open culverted watercourses where opportunities arise

design alterations to the channels of watercourses in a way

retaining or improving access to the towpath

that will:

linking development visually with the canal

 increase their value for wildlife and conserve

promoting recreational use of the canal

protecting and enhancing its heritage value.

archaeological features  contribute to sustainable drainage, and  not increase flood risk c.

where appropriate, provide fish passes and remove redundant weirs unless they are of scenic, historic or

A1.4

Design Guidance

ecological value d.

An Urban Design Compendium commissioned by the City Council provides guidance on design principles for eleven defined city centre quarters.5 The compendium contains detailed guidance on riverside development at Kelham Island, noting that, despite the area’s strong historic links to the river, “there is little connection between the existing built form and the watercourse. Although many buildings are flush with the water’s edge they are not orientated to engage with the riverside environment”.

set back new development to an appropriate distance from the banks of rivers to create green links and allow for maintenance

create continuous footpaths along the main rivers except where this would conflict with conservation or safety.

Where watercourses have been artificially channelled, developers

Another document in the SDF family, City Policies: Preferred Options, sets out policies for the green environment, including watercourses (PGE 8) and the Sheffield and Tinsley Canal (PGE9).

must provide environmental and ecological improvements, including flood water storage. In the city centre a more formal design approach may be appropriate. 5

Gillespies, Sheffield City Centre Urban Design Compendium (2004) sheffield - city of rivers | 121

april 2008 | yellow book

The compendium sets out a vision of Kelham as “a vibrant, mixed use neighbourhood which represents and celebrates its riverside location and the industrial heritage”. The river will be “the heart of the Kelham Island community, providing leisure, employment and educational facilities.” Regeneration will require the imaginative re-use of historic buildings as well as high quality new developments, with “active ground floor uses… [to] generate street life and reinforce a feeling of community”. The guidance also recommends the development of parks and walkways to create a more permeable urban form, improve access to the river and strengthen links to neighbouring quarters. A new Kelham Island Park will be the hub of this pedestrian network. Similar principles underpin guidance for the Riverside quarter, although the compendium acknowledges that the quality of this area is more variable, and the townscape fragmented. The vision is of new developments opening up onto the river: “shops, cafes or bars…will add vibrancy to the riverside”; the completion of the Inner Relief Road will take traffic out of Nursery Street and could enable it to “become the focus of an urban village”. At present this are feels “remote”, but the new road will reduce the severance caused by heavy traffic and strengthen links with Victoria Quays. 122

The treatment of waterfront issues in the guidance for Castlegate is more broad-brush, but the document notes that this area has lost “any sense of connection with the River Don…, and inhibited key linkages to…Victoria Quays and the Riverside Quarters”. It also suggests that deculverting the Sheaf should be a long-term aspiration. A1.5

 economic success: creating sustainable, high quality jobs  environmental distinctiveness: cultivating features that make Sheffield a desirable place to live and visit

Creative Sheffield

 easy access and internal mobility.

One of the most important – and potentially exciting – developments in Sheffield in recent years has been the formation of a new development agency, Creative Sheffield, which will have a strong focus on Sheffield’s role as the core city in the South Yorkshire region. CS has subsumed Sheffield First for Investment, Sheffield One and other bodies.

A number of the key themes being pursued by Creative Sheffield in its first year of operations are of particular relevance to the waterways study:7  strategic marketing, to achieve “a decisive and sustainable shift in the city’s image, reputation and external perception” and to tackle challenges revealed by market research – negative perceptions of the city, which lag behind the improved reality; and a sense that Sheffield is stuck in the past

In its prospectus the new body states that Sheffield is known as an innovative producer city, “designing and making products at the leading edge of specialised markets”.6 The document draws on lessons from other successful innovative producer cities – Stuttgart, Pittsburgh and Tampere – to argue that Sheffield needs to create a distinctive signature that will distinguish it from the competition. The city’s reputation will be based on three key criteria: 6

Creative Sheffield, Prospectus for a Distinctive European City in a Prosperous Region (2007)

 developing the knowledge economy in Sheffield, especially in niches such as advanced manufacturing and metals, biomedical and healthcare, creative industries and digital media, and sports science and technology: the city needs to retain and attract talented and skilled people 7

Creative Sheffield, Business Plan 2006-07: the start-up and transition phase (November 2005)

annexes | section H

Environment Agency’s regional strategy, and specific targets are set in the State of the Environment report.

 developing the physical infrastructure through transformational projects. iv. A1.6

Conclusion This review of the policy context for this study is by no means comprehensive, but these key documents confirm the importance of the Sheffield’s waterways, both for their intrinsic landscape and ecological value and their potential contribution to the competitiveness and attractiveness of the city.

The Sheffield Development Framework is based on the twin pillars of transformation and sustainability: the city’s green spaces and river corridors are highlighted as distinctive and highly valued features, and detailed objectives are set out in the City Policies – Preferred Options document. Design guidance for the city centre gives specific direction for Kelham Island and other riverside quarters.

Six key messages should be highlighted: vi. i.

ii.

iii.

Sheffield is no longer content to be a provincial backwater; it is growing in confidence and is now a city with high aspirations, determined to become a major player on the European stage; to achieve this it needs to capture more private sector investment, and to attract and retain talent. Environmental excellence is a key goal of the city strategy, and rejuvenating the river corridors is a high priority. Sheffield’s waterways figure prominently in the

A new agency, Creative Sheffield, recognises the value of distinctiveness – Sheffield’s signature – in promoting place competitiveness, especially in the knowledge economy.

Our conclusion is that the policy framework (which also embraces relevant issues not covered by this review) is substantially in place. But our consultations show that there is a concern that, especially when it comes to urban design and the environmental agenda, there may continue to be a gap between policy aspirations and the reality on the ground. Developers may be reluctant to champion innovative, high quality architecture and urban design,

invest in the public realm or contribute to better river management, especially in locations which – in market terms – are unproven or deemed to be high risk. Closing this gap will be a key challenge which we address later in this report. Nevertheless, it is clear that the regeneration of Sheffield’s rivers and canal has the potential to make a major contribution to achieving challenging strategic goals for the city and the city-region in the next 10-15 years. In the 21st century the rules of place competition have changed fundamentally: over the past 25 years many post-industrial cities have developed a formula for success based on attracting low wage/low skill industries, incentivised by government grants and European funding. That formula – which underpinned the regeneration of the Lower Don Valley in the 1980s – helped Sheffield and other cities to work their way through a difficult transitional period, but it is no longer a sustainable approach. Sheffield now wants to become one of the top innovative producer cities in Europe. That means competing in even more challenging territory, where success is a function of innovation, skills and creativity. To thrive in this knowledge economy places must be able to retain and attract talented people, who will by definition have choices about where they live and work. These people will, of sheffield - city of rivers | 123

april 2008 | yellow book

course, be drawn by employment opportunities, but they are also attracted to tolerant, cosmopolitan places which offer rich and diverse lifestyle choices.8 Sheffield now offers a much better urban experience than it did a decade ago, and its proximity to very high quality open space and outdoor activities (climbing, walking, canoeing, cycling, hang-gliding and so on) gives the city a special place among English cities. The challenge for Sheffield is to create a distinctive offer that combines the best of urban living with access to a superb outdoor environment, to provide the best quality of life in any UK city. The policy review shows that the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waterways have a vital role to play in making this happen: they are the physical links between the city and the countryside; they are the foundation of Sheffieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s outstanding green network; and they will be the catalysts for regeneration in less favoured parts of the city. .

124

Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and how it is transforming leisure, community and everyday life (New York, 2002)

annexes | section H

Annex 2: Emscher Landscape Park

A2.1

Introduction There are valuable lessons to draw from these exemplars, but the truly inspirational model for the regeneration of waterways in a post-industrial landscape is the Emscher Landscape Park in Germany.9 The genesis of the landscape park dates back to the early 1980s, when many of the mines, steelworks and engineering firms that were the lifeblood of the Ruhr region were threatened with closure. The demise of heavy industries left a daunting legacy of derelict sites and buildings, contaminated land and polluted rivers. The condition of the Emscher river, which flows through the heart of this industrial zone, appeared to symbolise the scale of the challenges facing a region searching for new economic roles and needing to create a positive image. The river had become an open sewer carrying human and industrial waste. In 1989, after an extended period of debate and planning, the state government of North Rhine-Westphalia launched the Emscher Park International Building and

For history and descriptions of Emscher Landscape Park, see: Gudrun Lethmate and Harald Spiering, “Emscher Landscape Park – new regional park in the Ruhr area”, conference paper 2003; Judith M LaBelle, “Emscher Park, Germany – expanding the definition of a ‘park’”, from Crossing Boundaries in Park Management: Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Research and Resource Management in Parks and on Public Lands, George Wright Society, 2001; www.elp2010.de; www.eaue.de; and various reports and publications by IBA Emscher Park.

Construction Exhibition (IBA). The creation of a regional scale landscape park provided the organising spatial framework for the IBA development strategy. IBA Emscher Park was focused on a narrow, highly urbanised corridor, running about 70 km east-west and 5-10 km northsouth. This area spans the boundaries of 17 towns and cities, from Bergkamen in the east to Duisburg in the west. The landscape park was intended to establish a green corridor, connecting all 17 cities, using existing watercourses and green spaces.

A2.2

IBA goals and achievements Other key goals of IBA Emscher Park included:  the ecological recovery of the Emscher and its tributaries  preservation and re-use of the industrial legacy  working in the park: ecological upgrading of derelict sites to create a high quality setting for business  living in the park: rehabilitating workers’ housing and extending residential areas  practising an holistic approach to economic, social and cultural transformation. The innovative approach of IBA Emscher Park has been

much studied and documented extensively. A number of features have influenced our approach to the Sheffield Waterways Strategy, notably:  ecology as an organising focus for economic, social and environmental regeneration  incorporating the found landscape of derelict industrial land into a regional network of open space and recreational resources  treating redundant industrial buildings and landscapes as valuable cultural artefacts which should be conserved and reused wherever possible  implementing the largest naturalisation project in Europe, restoring the water cycle and nurturing spontaneous landscapes. The IBA project had a 10-year life. Between 1990 and 1999 about 120 projects of all kinds were implemented. The first phase of a programme to restore the Emscher and its tributaries was implemented, with the renaturalisation of the 9.5 km long Deininghauser Bach stream. Throughout the area, housing and industrial/ commercial developments were designed to restore the natural cycle by retaining water in the area: the green technology park at Holland Colliery and the residential development at Welheim Garden City introduced sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). sheffield - city of rivers | 125

april 2008 | yellow book

Perhaps the most celebrated IBA project was the creation of the 200 ha Duisburg-Nord Country Park on the site of a former Thyssen steelworks. The three huge blast furnaces were preserved, and industrial structures now contain gardens, climbing walls and sites for adventurous play. Elsewhere, the Bauhaus-inspired pithead buildings at the Zollverein Colliery in Essen have been adapted to house an industrial museum, a school of architecture and a design centre. The vast gasometer at Oberhausen has become an exhibition and performance space. The investment poured into the IBA project during the 1990s had a profound impact on the image of the Ruhrgebeit, and the region has earned a reputation as a laboratory for innovation in regeneration. Nevertheless, the sheer scale of the challenges facing the region meant that there was still much to do when IBA Emscher Park was wound up in 1999. In particular, the process of ecological recovery and the creation of an integrated landscape park were still very much works in progress.

A2.3

126

The IBA model – and the Emscher Landscapepark Masterplan – were cited as examples of best practice in the recent National Audit Office (NAO) report, How European cities achieve renaissance.10 The report notes that the particular strengths of the Emscher Park approach include:

Project Ruhr However, the local partners always understood that these were long-term goals that might take 30 years to realise. They therefore developed a succession plan, which led

 strong central support for partners, and  a clear implementation plan.

to the creation of a new planning and delivery vehicle, Project Ruhr, to carry forward the work of IBA Emscher Park. The focus of Project Ruhr, which is a partnership representing 23 local authorities, has been on agreeing the Emscher Landscapepark 2010 Masterplan, which was adopted in 2006. The territory covered by the landscape park has grown – to 457 sq km – but the basic principles are consistent with those adopted by IBA Emscher Park in 1989. Completion of the east-west green corridor remains the goal: the emphasis now is on filling gaps, and on strengthening lateral connections with towns and neighbourhood centres. The themes of living and working in the park remain in place, as does the emphasis on industrial heritage linked to art and culture. The plan also advocates urban agriculture, identifying opportunities for cultivation and forestry.

 a network of partners eager to deliver regeneration 10

National Audit Office, How European cities achieve renaissance, Stationery Office, 2007

Between 1991 and 2000, state and EU funding for IBAbacked projects amounted to almost €1.5bn, matched by €1bn private funding. In total, projects in the region are estimated to have attracted €5bn investment in the same period. A great deal has been achieved, but there have also been disappointments and frustrations. Reaching agreement among the numerous local authorities on planning, resources and ongoing care and maintenance has not been easy, and progress on some of the big structural initiatives has been slower than anticipated. Despite this, the Emscher Landscape Park has transformed the quality of life and environment in the Ruhr, and has played a key role in establishing a positive new image for the region. It has been a catalyst for economic transformation and it should therefore be a source of inspiration and encouragement for Sheffield. A2.4

Lessons for Sheffield Six defining features of Emscher Landscape Park stand out, and offer vital lessons for the Sheffield Waterways Strategy:

annexes | section H

 first, the concept of the landscape park is the big idea, which gives direction and coherence to a wideranging programme of projects large and small; every project must play a part in delivering the park; but the masterplan is not a strait-jacket: it establishes guiding principles – spatial and philosophical – but it can also respond to changing conditions

 sixth, the regeneration process has been exemplary, with extensive public participation at every stage: by understanding what local communities most value as well as what they want to change the partners have built a broad consensus around the masterplan.

 second, the partners’ approach is genuinely holistic: economic, social, cultural and environmental objectives receive equally priority and are integrated into project design and resource allocation  third, ecological recovery and the naturalisation of rivers are key themes running through the masterplan, and private sector as well as public sector developments are expected to contribute  fourth, the overall quality of architecture and design has been exceptionally high: this is true of business space, houses, schools and neighbourhood parks as well as high profile prestige projects  fifth, Emscher Park celebrates the history and culture of an industrial region: the remains of industry are valued and have found new uses as cultural venues, monuments and parks sheffield - city of rivers | 127

yellow book WMUD

sheffield waterways strategy group

yellow book 3 hill street, edinburgh, eh2 3jp t: +44 (0)131 225 5757 f: +44 (0)131 225 5750 www.yellowbookltd.com