This essay will focus on three urban waterways and the economic, social and environmental benefits that development and de-culverting creates. First, by discussing the redevelopment of Sullivans Creek in Canberra the urban benefits that result from successful planning and transformation of urban drains to towards their original state will be shown. Second, the major de-culverting of the Cheonggyecheon River in Seoul will illustrate how the day-lighting of urban waterways has huge urban benefits. Finally, the proposed de-culverting of Elizabeth Street in Melbourne will show how it is important to fully understand the consequenses of urban waterway development before projects are undertaken. By focusing on these three modern sustainable development measures, it will be shown that development and de-culvenating of urban waterways has economic, social and environmental benefits for urban systems.
The development
of Sullivan’s creek in Canberra shows how urban waterways provide social,
environmental and economic benefits. Sullivan’s Creek runs through the northern
suburbs of Canberra, entering Lake Burley Griffin at the Australian National
University. Before the settlement of Canberra, Sullivans Creek had a natural
course from Black Mountain to the Molonglo River. With the development of
Canberra, Sullivans Creeks suffered from urban stream syndrome (Walsh et al.
2005). The channel was diverted and concreted. Whilst changing the structure
from a stream to a drain is not the most sustainable decision planning wise, the
planning of the corridor which the creeks runs along is a good example of how
urban water courses should be developed.
The planning of
Canberra’s Northern suburbs includes a green corridor along the length of
Sullivans Creek. This corridor is predominantly ovals and public recreational
space. However, it also serves as an ecosystem service. Firstly, when heavy
rains are present, the large green spaces result in underground water
absorption and movement. Without this green corridor, hard surfaces would result
in higher floodwaters in Sullivans Creek. Secondly, when floodwaters in
Sullivans Creek do occur, the green corridor acts as a flood plain. The values
of this ecosystem service have a huge economic impact as the costs associated
with flooding can be huge. Whilst the green spaces are an economical benefit
they are also a social and environmental benefit. The parks host social interactions
and activities as well as a number of flora and fauna ecosystems. The
successful planning of Canberra around Sullivans Creek shows how urban
waterways can provide huge environmental, social and economic benefits.
More recently,
the ‘drain’ running through Canberra has been re-developed with ‘natural’
wetlands to increase the ecosystems present in this urban waterway. The
redevelopment has some significant social and environmental impacts. Environmentally,
water quality has increased significantly which, in turn, has promoted more
social uses of the Creek including the infamous ANU Sullivans Creek rafters of March
2012 floods (ABC, 2012).
The daylighting of Cheonggyecheon River is a highly successful example of the social, economic and environmental benefits of open, healthy, urban waterways. The removal of the raised highway has left a six-kilometre stretch of the river exposed. This exposure not only is designed to cope with a once every 200-year flood (Hwang, 2004) but also has many significant social, economic and environmental benefits (Douglas, 2013). Socially, there has been a 15% increase in public bus transport usage as well as a 3% increase in subway usage (Kim, Koh & Kwon, 2009). These increases are beneficial as community and neighbourhood is developed through interactions that occur whilst commuting in these methods. The redeveloped river attracts 64,000 visitors daily. Whilst this is a social benefit it also has huge economic benefits too. 1,400 tourists visit daily and contribute $1.9m US to the Seoul economy (Kim, Koh & Kwon. 2009). Other economic benefits include the 50% increase in land price and 3.5% increase in business along the river corridor (Kim, Koh & Kwon. 2009). The most significant benefit however is the environmental benefits. Since the completion of the project, the ecosystems of the river have increased by 639% (Revkin, A. 2009). The urban temperature has started to decrease and small particle pollution has reduced (Kang & Cervero, 2009). The Cheonggyecheon River in Seoul is a great example of how day-lighting rivers can provide huge social, economic and environmental benefits.
Retrieved from: https://kdtokimchi.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/chunggyecheon-5-of-10.jpg
When developing urban watercourses it is essential to fully understand the history of the watercourse otherwise day-lighting may not be successful. Recently, Elizabeth Street in Melbourne has received attention regarding the day-lighting of Williams Creek. This project has been compared to the Cheonggyecheon River project and is expected to achieve similar environmental, social and economic benefits. However, treating every urban watercourse as the same is wrong and will result in undesirable outcomes (Douglas, 2013). Compared to the Cheonggyecheon River, the Williams Creek proposal will be able to cope with a once every 30 year flood rather than Seoul’s 200 year flood. This means that the environmental benefits will be far less as ecosystems will be effected at a more regular basis (Molles et al. 1998). A second factor in the development of Williams’s creek is the social and economic benefits of a flowing stream. The Cheonggyecheon River is a 6km stretch where as Williams Creek is only up to two kilometres long. This significantly smaller catchment area means that Williams Creek is going to have a less consistent flow. The inconsistency of this will affect tourism as well as land and business prices along the corridor. Another factor that may not be considered is the lack of soft surfaces in the catchment area of Williams Creek. Unlike Sullivan Creek in Canberra, the hard surfaces will mean there is a greater direct run-off from roads and thus the water quality of the creek will be significantly less than that of Sullivans Creek (Walker et al. 1999). This will affect the ecosystems that are expected to inhabit the redeveloped creek and thus affect the expected social and economic benefits of the project. By understanding the problems that the Williams Creek projects faces, it is possible to see the importance of urban catchment and waterway history when attempting to daylight urban waterways.
Urban Waterways have been around since the urban settlements of Mesopotamia (Douglas, 2013). Since then, they have faced many different social, environmental and economic problems. In more recent history, it is evident that urban waterways can be successfully integrated into urban systems. With such integration, significant social, environmental and economic benefits can be seen. It is however; important to fully understand the context of the waterway otherwise situations similar to the flooding in Mesopotamia will be recreated. The role of urban waterways is a significant one for urban systems and is essential for the sustainable development of an urban environment.
The daylighting of Cheonggyecheon River is a highly successful example of the social, economic and environmental benefits of open, healthy, urban waterways. The removal of the raised highway has left a six-kilometre stretch of the river exposed. This exposure not only is designed to cope with a once every 200-year flood (Hwang, 2004) but also has many significant social, economic and environmental benefits (Douglas, 2013). Socially, there has been a 15% increase in public bus transport usage as well as a 3% increase in subway usage (Kim, Koh & Kwon, 2009). These increases are beneficial as community and neighbourhood is developed through interactions that occur whilst commuting in these methods. The redeveloped river attracts 64,000 visitors daily. Whilst this is a social benefit it also has huge economic benefits too. 1,400 tourists visit daily and contribute $1.9m US to the Seoul economy (Kim, Koh & Kwon. 2009). Other economic benefits include the 50% increase in land price and 3.5% increase in business along the river corridor (Kim, Koh & Kwon. 2009). The most significant benefit however is the environmental benefits. Since the completion of the project, the ecosystems of the river have increased by 639% (Revkin, A. 2009). The urban temperature has started to decrease and small particle pollution has reduced (Kang & Cervero, 2009). The Cheonggyecheon River in Seoul is a great example of how day-lighting rivers can provide huge social, economic and environmental benefits.
When developing urban watercourses it is essential to fully understand the history of the watercourse otherwise day-lighting may not be successful. Recently, Elizabeth Street in Melbourne has received attention regarding the day-lighting of Williams Creek. This project has been compared to the Cheonggyecheon River project and is expected to achieve similar environmental, social and economic benefits. However, treating every urban watercourse as the same is wrong and will result in undesirable outcomes (Douglas, 2013). Compared to the Cheonggyecheon River, the Williams Creek proposal will be able to cope with a once every 30 year flood rather than Seoul’s 200 year flood. This means that the environmental benefits will be far less as ecosystems will be effected at a more regular basis (Molles et al. 1998). A second factor in the development of Williams’s creek is the social and economic benefits of a flowing stream. The Cheonggyecheon River is a 6km stretch where as Williams Creek is only up to two kilometres long. This significantly smaller catchment area means that Williams Creek is going to have a less consistent flow. The inconsistency of this will affect tourism as well as land and business prices along the corridor. Another factor that may not be considered is the lack of soft surfaces in the catchment area of Williams Creek. Unlike Sullivan Creek in Canberra, the hard surfaces will mean there is a greater direct run-off from roads and thus the water quality of the creek will be significantly less than that of Sullivans Creek (Walker et al. 1999). This will affect the ecosystems that are expected to inhabit the redeveloped creek and thus affect the expected social and economic benefits of the project. By understanding the problems that the Williams Creek projects faces, it is possible to see the importance of urban catchment and waterway history when attempting to daylight urban waterways.
Urban Waterways have been around since the urban settlements of Mesopotamia (Douglas, 2013). Since then, they have faced many different social, environmental and economic problems. In more recent history, it is evident that urban waterways can be successfully integrated into urban systems. With such integration, significant social, environmental and economic benefits can be seen. It is however; important to fully understand the context of the waterway otherwise situations similar to the flooding in Mesopotamia will be recreated. The role of urban waterways is a significant one for urban systems and is essential for the sustainable development of an urban environment.
References:
ABC News, (2012) Flood rafting video angers SES, ABC News (March 1 2012) Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-02/rafting-video-angers-ses/3864772
on March 25 2015.
Douglas, I. (2013) Cities: An Environmental History. Environment
History and Global Change Series. London: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd. Pp.233-251.
Hwang,
K.Y. 2004. Restoring Cheonggyecheon stream in the downtown Seoul. Seoul
Development Institute. Seoul, South Korea.
Kang,
Chang Deok and Robert Cervero. 2009. From elevated Freeway to Urban Greenway:
Land value impacts of the CGC project in Seoul, Korea. Urban Studies 46 (13) pgs. 2771-2794.
Kim,
H.S., T.G. Koh, and K.W. Kwon. (2009.) The Cheonggyecheon (Stream) Restoration
Project Effects of the restoration work. Cheonggyecheon Management Team, Seoul
Metropolitan Facilities Management Corporation. Seoul, South Korea.
Molles, M. C., Crawford, C. S., Ellis, L. M.,
Valett, H. M., & Dahm, C. N. (1998). Managed flooding for riparian
ecosystem restoration. BioScience, 749-756.
Revkin,
A. (2009.) Peeling back pavement to expose water havens. New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/world/asia/17daylight.html?_r=1 on March 25
2015.
Walker, W. J., McNutt, R.
P., & Maslanka, C. K. (1999). The potential contribution of urban runoff to
surface sediments of the Passaic River: sources and chemical characteristics. Chemosphere, 38(2),
363-377.
Walsh, C. J., Roy, A. H.,
Feminella, J. W., Cottingham, P. D., Groffman, P. M., & Morgan, R. P.
(2005). The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a
cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society,24 (3),
706-723.
