Losing city's character

Clearly, judging from the local press, a number of individuals and organisations feel that, in the loss of parts of a conservation area, diversity of business, character etc, the price of the New Retail Quarter is far too high.

Nowhere is that price emphasised more clearly than in the Hallamshire Historic Buildings 'Cruck' news letter.

Only a fool or a knave would disagree that there are many recent redevelopments, old and new buildings, that Sheffielders can be proud of.

No-one can deny that parts of the Moor etc are more tired than Rip Van Winkle.

No true Sheffielder knocks his or her city for the sake of knocking.

They care. No doubt the Sheffield proponents of the NRQ do too.

However, consider the contrast between the fate of Park Hill and that of the apparently undervalued cityscape, due to be lost due to the NRQ.

Park Hill remains, as far as public opinion can be judged, singularly unfavoured by an all too apathetic Sheffield public. I've wandered round it, read about it yet, unlike syrup of figs, it moves me not. The only bloke to even half sell it to me was a real character from Sheffield Homes, who acts as a caretaker up there, who told me about community and how well built it was.

Fact is, I suspect that a certain part of the city's political establishment looks back on a golden age when a council could genuinely change the lives of working people for the better. But, is that a reason to hail Park Hill, as being worthy of listing, the same as our Old Queen's Head? I suggest not.

The success, or not, of Park Hill's redevelopment is irrelevant, compared to the damage wrought by the NRQ.

It's being done in your name, Sheffielders, so we can become a regional retail focus. Thought we had that in Sheffield more than ever, a place called Meadowhell, sorry, Hall.

Even BBC Radio Sheffield has followed the party line.

Incidentally, Bethel Sunday School is far from dilapidated and Tricketts Works is a success story. And what is Coun Hesketh blathering about an innocuous fag smokers' awning on the side of the Ship Inn?

Really, John.

Look at it again, please. And those of you out there who write about and love Sheffield's history and character, get emailing t'council. It's our city.

Ron Clayton, Sheffield S6.

I write to you as a concerned resident of Sheffield about the destruction being wrought, presumably in the name of progress, wherein its very character is being ruined, with landmark buildings bulldozed to make way for high rise flats not intended for Sheffield people.

Quite apart from the effect of this ripping apart of the city's infrastructure, its occupancy is simultaneously being changed by the facilitated influx of a seemingly endless flow of foreign newcomers. I am equally opposed to the white East Europeans who are exercising their new rights under the EU rules to enter the country in their thousands.

Clearly, there must come a time when this migrant flood must be curtailed, which brings me to the main point of this letter: that of imminent climactic floods rendered more likely by the facilited population increase.

Quite apart from this dire threat, there are the destructive effects already takling place, since a city is not just its buildings and if its inhabitants are changed on a large enough scale then it can hardly be the same city. Its identity is destroyed.

Should not those in charge of its destiny then consider changing its name, say to 'Mega City'? That is, if the water does not get to it first in which event there will be some accounting and apportioning of blame to be done.

Jack Everett, Castledale Grove, Sheffield S2