Topic 4B: Urban watercourses

Topic 4B: Urban watercourses
By Declan Ganz

Introduction
There is an obvious and undeniable relationship between water and the development of cities, both here in Australia and around the world. This connection is evident by the widespread formation and growth of cities on waterways throughout history. Positioning a city in such a way has its benefits, but it also comes with its potential down falls.

Utilisation and Management of Urban Watercourses
The utilisation of urban watercourses is an important part of what makes a city function effectively. As mentioned by Douglas (2013), the very foundations of civilisations are associated with using water for irrigation, with cities often built on rivers for not only water supply and navigation, but also for defence purposes. Such an important resource requires careful and well thought out management to ensure it is not exploited. Ongoing efforts are in place to enhance water supply and consumption efficiency, upgrade drinking water quality and wastewater treatment, and utilise alternate water sources such as rainwater and grey water. This management of urban watercourses creates a more efficient use of resources by providing not only economic benefits but also improved social and environmental outcomes. Urban watercourses aren’t just limited to the rivers or streams that are visible from street level and include the water mains that transport drinking water to homes and businesses, sewers that carry dirty water to sewerage treatment plants, and stormwater drains that carry rainwater running off roads into rivers, creeks and bays. This suggests that an integrated approach to the management of urban watercourses is key to success. Integrated management of watercourses involves ensuring that all water resources are taken into account, water is considered when planning for land use, and that the water use needs of the community, industry and environment are weighed up as a whole. Integration of urban watercourses with other areas of urban planning and development, rather than considering water as a separate entity, facilitates the best possible means of evaluating and assessing issues surrounding water use in the urban environment. It also lends itself to achieving the most desirable outcome for not only the people of city, but also the greater environment.

Flooding & Pollution
Early thoughts on water were that it was unruly or messy, and in the cases of floods, destructive. It was suggested that water had no place in the urban environment other than for water features and other similar uses. This has of course proved to be false, however many events throughout history have demonstrated the destructive power of water. Whether through crippling floods or spreading of disease, the improper use and control of water and watercourses has been shown to lead to devastating effects on urban areas. Pollution of watercourses leads to poor sanitation, which leads to health issues and possible disease epidemics. In the past, Melbourne’s concerns with pollution of watercourses were stimulated by the rapid growth of the cities population and as a result of continual private dumping of waste. The implementation of the Yan Yean scheme helped to provide Melbourne with clean water but at the same time fuelled the requirement for a sewerage disposal system (Barrett, 1979). Whilst urban watercourses are often vital to the life of the city, they can also pose a risk to its very existence due to flooding (Douglas, 2013). The forces of nature are in the most part unpredictable, and even with planning measures and allowances or contingencies in place, considerable damage can occur to cities due to flooding. In saying this however, “flood defences and disaster management have greatly improved” (Douglas, 2013) over the years, with the annual death tally due to floods significantly reduced. Nevertheless, the question remains what more can be done to safeguard cities against the onset of floods? The challenge is to predict the necessary level or amount of flood defences instead of making improvements to flood defences based on a reaction to episodes of flooding, as has been seen in the past.

Moving Forward: Deculverting
Deculverting or ‘daylighting’ involves the full or partial uncovering of a previously buried watercourse (Lancaster, 2015). The restoration of these once hidden watercourses is as much about physically uncovering the watercourse as it is about socially reconnecting the people of the area with it. These formerly underground watercourses are given a new lease on life as they are brought back to the surface and incorporated within the urban neighbourhood. Douglas (2013) states “deculverting schemes can deliver multiple benefits, including positive economic, environmental and social impacts”. Although evidence is hard to come by, proposed benefits of daylighting include improving upon the aesthetics of an area, lessening the risk of flood and providing a place with a feeling of uniqueness. In addition to this, it could be said that daylighting anticipates or attempts to achieve benefits similar to that of urban green space such as softening the urban heat island effect, and promoting “physical activity, psychological well-being, and the general public health of urban residents” as described in Wolch et al. (2014). One example of deculverting that has recently gained attention is Williams creek, which runs under Elizabeth Street in the Melbourne CBD. The digging up, reinstatement and revitalisation of a section of the creek is a proposal that aims to improve a problem area of the CBD that is currently “a pretty tired and uninspiring thoroughfare” (Short, 2015). The street is a place of encounter where people often gather for several reasons, so why not encourage these encounters by making these spaces visually appealing by daylighting watercourses such as Williams Creek? Streets often act as a reflection of the community, and with Melbourne continually striving to maintain its status as the world’s most liveable city; deculverting a section of Elizabeth Street could only strengthen its case. The initiative could even act as the catalyst for further development with Douglas (2013) arguing that such schemes need to be integrated with “other aspects of urban greening and urban regeneration”. All of this said however, due to the nature of every scheme being quite unique, each proposal would need to be meticulously assessed in order to gauge its potential for success.

Conclusion
Water is the lifeblood of cities, but with continual population growth, urbanisation and industrialisation continuing to cause pollution and depletion of water sources, the sustainability of urban watercourses is under threat. Water related challenges aren’t just limited to the developed world though, with 1.2 billion people deprived of adequate access to safe drinking water and 2.4 billion people living without adequate sanitation conditions in developing cities (WHO/UNICEF, 2000). This shows that a concerted effort needs to be made to utilise water in urban areas so that everybody can experience its many benefits.

References
Barrett, B. (1979). 'Sanitation' in The Civic Frontier: The Origin of Local Government in Victoria, Carlton. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, pp.272-277.

Douglas, I. (2013). Cities: An Environmental History. London: IB Tauris, pp.233-251.

Integrated Urban Water Management. (2009).United Nations Environment Programme. Available at: http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/brochures/iuwm.pdf [Accessed 27 Mar. 2015].

Lancaster, M. (2015). Urban Watercourses: A Brief Urban History.  

Short, M 2015, ‘A plan to turn Melbourne’s Elizabeth Street into a rainforest canal’, The Age, 5 March.

Wolch, J.R, Byrne, J & Newell, J.P 2014, ‘Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’’, Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 125, pp. 234-244.

WHO/UNICEF, (2000) Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report, 2000. New York: UNICEF.