I've recently spent the night in Chester (next to wales) where I went out into their town centre for the evening. Walking around the place I was pleasantly surprised, there are so many buildings and shop fronts that were very old and most likely listed because of it.

Now Sheffield is never going to have the kind of history that a place like chester or york has. I couldn't help thinking though, sheffield seems so keen on the 'out with the old, in with the new'. Sometimes I don't think this is a bad thing but sometimes I don't think it's a good thing. I like the idea of a place where you can see and almost feel the history.

So my questions are, does sheffield hate it's old buildings?. Is it in such a rush to be modern that the old has to go at any cost?.

I think thats the kind of thinking that got us the eggbox and park hill.

Chester is very nice, the town centre is very lovely to look at but it's a tourist attration, like the Shambles in York, it wouldn't be able to handle the crowds of a large city like Sheffield.

I think that if Sheffield had not got any bigger in the last 200 years we would still have loads of old buildings like Chester.

Also, how much was Chester bombed in the 2WW ?

Chester is a wonderful place it was a lot luckier than Sheffield as Sheffield had 3 shades of **** bombed out of it during the war.
If Chester had been flattened and Sheffield not then perhaps the comparisons might have been reversed.

However Chester is in the top 50 "crap towns", but Sheffield isn't.

i think that sheffield has plenty of historical areas that are being nicely preserved. Areas that spring to mind are Paradise Square, the east end of Bank Street, and all roads around the cathedral are nice and old. I disagree that the rows of Chester wouldn't cope in a big city, as Chester's shopping catchment area covers a greater population that Sheffield's. at the end of the day, chester is an older city than sheffield, and this accounts for more history. I don't think sheffield does too badly for such a young city, and would safely like to bet that Sheffield has more buildings that are older than it's city status, than buildings built whilst it has been a city, if that makes sense!

I think there is a fair amount of neglect by the council though if the building is not a landmark like the Town Hall or the City Hall.

I don't know if any of you have visited Bishops House lately, that is a realy sad sight.

What's not commonly known is that most of Chesters 'Tudor' buildings that you see are actually much much later buildings with frontages in the style of a Tudor building. Much like the 'Jacobethan' housing estates you see nowadays. It's Victorian stick on architecture.

Some things are old, some are good, but I don;t see the point in preserving something simply because its old. We don't save old shoes or food when they are past their useful life. I'm all for keeping good buildings, and allocating money to upkeep them.

Sheffield does have a few genuinely good old buildings, but stuff like the Yorkshire Grey is not good enough to stand in the way of progress. After all, most of those old buildings are replacements for something much earlier.

I would ask another question instead. Why do we get all sentimental about bricks and mortar?

Originally posted by Tony
I would ask another question instead. Why do we get all sentimental about bricks and mortar?

I think it's more a case of people not getting sentimental about concrete, older buildings just seem to have more appeal, even though I liked the eggbox I wasn't upset to see it go, but I would be upset if the City hall collapsed into a pile of rubble to be replaced by a luxury apartment block.

People get used to buildings, you see the same ones every day on your way to work, or you drink in the same pubs every weekend and it feels weird when one day a building is not there.

I can't believe how different the view from my house is without Claywood flats in the way, it's a much better view, but I still expect to see the tower blocks.

This is really a interesting but funny issue also.

The reason is the HISTORY.

Can you find a elegant historic GOTHIC building in American?

Of-course Not! because the French did not arrive American in 15th century.

Sheffield only has its history from the 17th century, but Chester, Bath and York was the captial of the areas since the Roman period(0-2nd century). Therefore, if you want to look for the environmental character like Chester in Sheffield, it is impossible.

However, Sheffield created it special identity of steel industry heritage. Maybe you can try to enjoy these brick buildings after the start of industrial period in Sheffield.

Originally posted by ted_chen
This is really a interesting but funny issue also.

The reason is the HISTORY.

Can you find a elegant historic GOTHIC building in American?

Of-course Not! because the French did not arrive American in 15th century.

Sheffield only has its history from the 17th century, but Chester, Bath and York was the captial of the areas since the Roman period(0-2nd century). Therefore, if you want to look for the environmental character like Chester in Sheffield, it is impossible.

However, Sheffield created it special identity of steel industry heritage. Maybe you can try to enjoy these brick buildings after the start of industrial period in Sheffield.


I really think you need to read a few books and check out the history of Sheffield. It is a laughable thought that Sheffield only has history dating back to the 17th century.
Just check out the meaning of the name Sheffield for a start which should give you some clue as to the origins of our city. Sheffield was the most important trading settlement between two historic kingdoms.
I don't want to sound pompous but this city's history is really something special and should not be discounted through ignorance.

Originally posted by ted_chen

Sheffield only has its history from the 17th century, but Chester, Bath and York was the captial of the areas since the Roman period(0-2nd century). Therefore, if you want to look for the environmental character like Chester in Sheffield, it is impossible.


It's not all good though! Chester is my home town and yes it has historical buildings and is lucky in that alot of it has been retained over time....the local sport there seems to be tourist bashing (metaphorically I hasten to add!) a bit like the student 'bashing' which sometimes seems a bit rife in Sheff. Yes the city gets stacks of money from tourists but it can be hellish on a weekend when you can't move for USA or Japanese tourists.

I admit to knowing nothing about Sheff history and people I speak to who haven't been here - the best thing they seem to know about this place is the good surrounding countryside...shame we don't promote tourism more here and (some of the good) modern developments we have.

Originally posted by ted_chen
Can you find a elegant historic GOTHIC building in American?

St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York?

I think Gothic is more a style of building than a certain time in history, we could build a gothic style building tomorow if we wanted to.

Originally posted by nick2
I think Gothic is more a style of building than a certain time in history, we could build a gothic style building tomorow if we wanted to.

But we don't because it's far too expensive. Easy to throw up some glass and metal. Times change don't they?

Anyway, sheffield does have some neo-gothic style buildings doesn't it???

Originally posted by Snook
But we don't because it's far too expensive. Easy to throw up some glass and metal. Times change don't they?

Anyway, sheffield does have some neo-gothic style buildings doesn't it???

I guess the cathedral extension is gothic in style.

I too had a shallow view of Sheffield, until I was asked to write an essay on 'Le Corbusier' the architect. He had a utopian idea for high density communities, where every family had it's own private green space, pedestrians were separated from traffic, apartment blocks overlooked large green parks... In researching this topic I realised that Le Corbusier's dream in the 1920's and '30's was the basis for the infrastructure installed in Sheffield in the '60's. Further digging took me to http://www.picturesheffield.com/. Many of Sheffield's landmarks are unappreciated. Park hill flats would be utopian if PEOPLE were civilised (although building to Le Corbusier's principles brought isolation to people who did not ask for 'privacy', the shared yard of the terrace block being replaced by a private balcony). But http://www.picturesheffield.com/ shows what stood before the Polytechnic, the bus station, park hill. The area around the cathedral has been mentioned in this forum. If these are the streets that were allowed to remain, steep and narrow as they are, and characteristically(?) dotted with rickety premises from which motors are rewound or cutlery is polished (yes, these places are still in business), just imagine what was demolished! No, see 'picturesheffield'. Many of the photo's are a study in the post-war 50's showing which areas desperately needed redevelopment. I like Sheffield's Pheonix-like existence, continually reinventing itself, pushing town planning forward, daring to experiment. Most cities don't have this much bottle.

PS. I've lived in Liverpool, Glasgow and Peterborough. And look where I choose to be!

What really bugs me when I read stuff on this forum is how many of you actually are born and bred "Sheffielders", it always seems that the negative comments come from people who have not grown up in this city or know its heritage.
Absolutely nothing constructive in this comment, sorry but a bit peed off , we have a proud industrial history and WW11 did us no favours, stop knocking us and look at the real people and places.

What really bugs me when I read stuff on this forum is how many of you actually are born and bred "Sheffielders", it always seems that the negative comments come from people who have not grown up in this city or know its heritage.

Sometimes it takes an outsider to point out your misgivings,
like when you have a dog you don't notice the smell,
Sheffield council and it's planners have done their best to get rid of most of Sheffields past, as a ex-demolition worker i've seen most of it.

Originally posted by scottcross
What really bugs me when I read stuff on this forum is how many of you actually are born and bred "Sheffielders", it always seems that the negative comments come from people who have not grown up in this city or know its heritage.
Absolutely nothing constructive in this comment, sorry but a bit peed off , we have a proud industrial history and WW11 did us no favours, stop knocking us and look at the real people and places.

Do you mean me? I love this city and it's roots and it's heritage. As an engineer, a resident, a graduate of it's (other) university and a history nut, I feel qualified to comment, thank you. Kindly contribute something positive, if that's how you feel. Which people and places would you like us to look at?

I live near the ruins of Lees Hall, a 16th century Manor House that was occupied and standing up until the late 1950's when the nazis of Sheffield Council evicted the owners ("for their own good") and bulldozed it. Makes me sick.

There must be something radically wrong with me, because Id like nothing better than to demolish everything thats older than a century and rebuild with modern architecture.

There must be something radically wrong with me, because Id like nothing better than to demolish everything thats older than a century and rebuild with modern architecture.

You'd like Rotherham then. ;)

We were going through a few weeks ago and its like being in an anonymous american town. Endless strip development, box like concrete or metal buildings and 'units', alienating underpasses and pedestrian bridges. I know its got the old chapel on the bridge in the town centre, but keeping one or two old buildings doesn't make for much in the way of an attractive town.

I suppose even the old buildings of York or Whitby would have been looked upon as not having much 'merit' years ago, but they escaped being demolished. Give some of our old buildings a few more years and we might learn to appreciate them more.

The streetscapes of Division Street and Fargate are a lot more pleasant to shop in than The Moor or the Market complex, that shows just one example of why the mish-mash of old and new can be much better than just 'new'.

There must be something radically wrong with me, because Id like nothing better than to demolish everything thats older than a century and rebuild with modern architecture.

You're joking! The older, the better, in my opinion.

I just expected better for the 21st century. Most of the new buildings are just plain gruesome while the old stuff looks like something from a Dickensian nightmare.

Here is how some Sheffielders wish the future of our city to look.

http://www.fotogblog.com/uploaded_images/79840003_1-712070.JPG

:hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

the problem with sheffield is that some people just really dont like change. the city would look so dull if it was all victorian buildings in the city centre, and the new developments like the winter garden make the city centre more visually interesting. modern architecture can go very well with older stuff, and modern buildings can be beautiful, just look at the stuff built in birmingham. park hill could be a really interesting focal point, if something nice was done to it, and is iconic, whether it is liked or not. that said, sheffield does have some truly hideous buildings, such as kingdom but at least that'll be demolished soon. saying that sheffield hates old buildings is disproved by the use of existing victorian frontings while the interior is redeveloped such as the new h&m on fargate and the zion(?) building off division street.

Tony is right about Chester. The Tudor buildings the tourists love aren't very old. And I was interested to note nick2's reference to the City Hall as one of our landmark buildings.

What I find most fascinating is that architectural hubris wouldn't allow either development to be built today. Both Chester's mock-Tudor designs and the City Hall's neo-classical design were criticised by the "forward-thinkers" of the time. Fast forward a couple of generations and people don't know about that controversy. All they know is that these are attractive buildings that get Japanese and American tourists excited (well, OK, maybe not the City Hall).

The "forward-thinkers" don't like to acknowledge it but modern designs don't do it for people. People like old buildings because they're not bland. Modern architecture is about what's cheapest, which usually means a box.

Now I'm not putting it forward as a serious proposition for fear of lighting the blue touchpaper, but I reckon if Sheffield's new retail quarter was built in a collonaded neo-classical style and Castlegate was rebuilt as a jumble of mediaeval streets, the Sheffielders of 2100 would find themselves rolling in tourist money.

So concrete it is then.

I don't like this embrace of modern glass buildings, which just looks the same as any other cities. I feel that we can be unique, and we don't have to jump onto the band wagon really.

I once picked up a book to browse in Amsterdam on architecture. It was about how a city can be made to look utopic. Meaning that new buildings can be built to blend in with the existing ones. Looking around the city centre, especially near the Fargate area, it's reaching there.

I am really glad that the building next to the Yorkshire Bank on Fargate is preserving the front facade of the building. Same as the building on Trippet Lane. A building with an oldish looking front is being preserved while the back of the building is being gutted structurally.

I suppose this blending is a nicer way to see the whole city, than to adopt the method used by a lot European cities. i.e. an 'old town', 'new town' area. Then again, I suppose they have a lot to preserve within a certain area.

the problem with sheffield is that some people just really dont like change.
I don't think it is this really. I think it's more a case of, "is what's being knocked down going to be replaced with something more worthy ?"

I too don't like something really old being knocked down. Especially when it has hundreds of years of history to it. If it has to be knocked down, the overall city plan better be worth it !

Q. Which Sheffield buildings are being knocked down that have hundreds of year of history... or even hundreds of years of age? :huh:

A. None.

i think it is the case that the older buildings in sheffield still standing after the war bombings were never the most ornate or eye catching even before the destruction...

however, the Cutlers Hall, City Hall and Town Hall each have an outstanding character and position in the City. I dont think many residents will have a large amount of negative things to say about any of them?

:huh: if im wrong, ill go down to the new arundel gate interchange and ill eat my hat.

Q. Which Sheffield buildings are being knocked down that have hundreds of year of history... or even hundreds of years of age? :huh:

A. None.

Isn't that because the Council have already knocked them down?!

For a current example of old buildings under threat, you might want to look at the Bethel Chapel on Cambridge Street and the building on the corner of Cambridge Street and Pinstone Street. Both are due to be demolished to make way for the boxes that will make up the new retail quarter.

If you're asking about buildings with hundredS (ie. 200 or more) years of history, maybe it's the wrong question for Sheffield.

You're right, it is the wrong question. ;) Sheffield has few genuinely old buildings, but I do feel that it's important to stick to reality as "hundreds of years old" was was the statement I queried and it's very misleading.

I'm not certain that there is much of Bethel Chapel left anyway. The outer skin hasn't got much of note to save from what I remember. The other buildings that you mention are certainly interesting but they have a useless footprint for any modern business which is why they are either empty or have a high occupancy churn of 'low quality' businesses. They are effectively past their sell by date. That doesn't mean to say that I won't be a little sad to see them go as they are quite pretty... but they are of no real use any more and obviously stand in the way of a grander scheme.

If you're asking about buildings with hundredS (ie. 200 or more) years of history, maybe it's the wrong question for Sheffield.

I can think of only one in town, - the 'Queen's Head' in Pond hill. The next oldest is probably the Upper Chapel in Norfolk street, which is supposed to be the first brick building in Sheffield built IIRC in 1700, although the present stone facade was added later.

I'd be interested to learn of any others.

I can think of only one in town, - the 'Queen's Head' in Pond hill. The next oldest is probably the Upper Chapel in Norfolk street, which is supposed to be the first brick building in Sheffield built IIRC in 1700, although the present stone facade was added later.

I'd be interested to learn of any others.


sheffield has its old relics. firstly, there is Gayham.

What's not commonly known is that most of Chesters 'Tudor' buildings that you see are actually much much later buildings with frontages in the style of a Tudor building. Much like the 'Jacobethan' housing estates you see nowadays. It's Victorian stick on architecture.

Some things are old, some are good, but I don;t see the point in preserving something simply because its old. We don't save old shoes or food when they are past their useful life. I'm all for keeping good buildings, and allocating money to upkeep them.

Sheffield does have a few genuinely good old buildings, but stuff like the Yorkshire Grey is not good enough to stand in the way of progress. After all, most of those old buildings are replacements for something much earlier.

I would ask another question instead. Why do we get all sentimental about bricks and mortar?

I think this answers your question very neatly;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5254472.stm


I too like Sheffield's feeling of renewal, and that it is trying to better itself, but maybe it needs to be tied in a little better. The winter gardens are great, so why spoil it, by blocking the view with an exceptionally ugly hotel that does not fit in with the architecture around it. I preferred the eggbox - at least it was more interesting.

I've recently spent the night in Chester (next to wales) where I went out into their town centre for the evening. Walking around the place I was pleasantly surprised, there are so many buildings and shop fronts that were very old and most likely listed because of it.

Now Sheffield is never going to have the kind of history that a place like chester or york has. I couldn't help thinking though, sheffield seems so keen on the 'out with the old, in with the new'. Sometimes I don't think this is a bad thing but sometimes I don't think it's a good thing. I like the idea of a place where you can see and almost feel the history.

So my questions are, does sheffield hate it's old buildings?. Is it in such a rush to be modern that the old has to go at any cost?.

I think thats the kind of thinking that got us the eggbox and park hill.
are you saying we should keep park hill, and we should have kept the egg box

I have only recently moved to Sheffield from Plymouth, another city whose built heritage suffered greatly in the Wars - it used to bring tears to my eyes seeing old photos of the grand parades and impressive sights of Plymouth's town centre that have been replaced by mid-century brutalism which is now being replaced once again by modern shopping centres.
The barbican in Plymouth is a great example of an historic area that is still vibrant and succesfull beyond just the tourism element.
However what you do get with both Plymouth and Sheffield is a sense of a city that is evolving and changing - not always into something we want it to be but it is a living city rather than an architectural showpiece.
I do like all the old brick factories just off the penistone road though - not sure of the actual area but there are some lovely old industrial buildings there...

are you saying we should keep park hill, and we should have kept the egg box

Park Hill, if it were re-clad and refurbished for private occupancy, could still be an asset to the city. As 'social housing' it's doomed to fail because a proportion of the occupants just don't care about their environment, - but to be fair to them they're probably in the wrong environment for their circumstances.

And the 'Egg Box' was an interesting and innovative building for its time. It should have been better clad, but ISTR compromises were made on the grounds of cost(ie council penny-pinching ;)).

Average life of a modern building 25 years, then knock it down and build another.
I always say sheffield council have done more to ruin Sheffields historic buildings than the Luftwaffer did

The average life of a modern building is deliberately little more than 40 years because of the ever changing nature of requirements. It's always been the same, properties have been knocked down to make way for newer more useful more efficient more economical buildings.

It's not a new idea, and people have always moaned, and the people that do it have always just got on with it because they have to!. :)

Average life of a modern building 25 years, then knock it down and build another.
I always say sheffield council have done more to ruin Sheffields historic buildings than the Luftwaffer did

Good examples of council neglect

Kettlebridge School
Hillsborough Hall Coach House

Both listed buildings both neglected for years

I used to live on the Barbican in plymouth and it was a fantastic place to live if not a touch busy in tourist season.

Sheffield has some great buildings and as an engineer I do not just demolish something for the sake of knocking it down. I am also perfectly capable of appreciating good architecture and when a good building is knocked down I am also as dissapointed as the rest of you.

Alot of the buildings in sheffield are demolished as they are no longer commercially viable as a retail / office space. In order to retain a structure it must be able to support itself financially. Yes it is a shame that some come down but occasionally (unfortunately) you get something good in return.

Partly to blame are "modern" companies as they push forward identical buildings glass buildings, at small capital cost for their new jazzy space. Bring back some good stonework facades I say.

Sheffield knocked down a lot of its genuinely historic buildings in the 50s and 60s, philistines that they were (or maybe still are). I've already mentioned Lees Hall...
http://www.nickrobinson.info/peas/leeshall/images.htm

It was the same in most major cities though. The ones laughing now are those like Newcastle, which were too depressed and poor in the 60s to regenerate their city centres, so their old buildings stayed put, and have now been renovated and made beautiful, with a few exceptions.

Leeds (my home town) had some amazing buildings which went in the latter half of the 20th century, and decades of conservatism in the council chambers (thats conservatism with a small 'c') have led to some outstandingly boring architecture going up in their stead. i see signs of my adopted home town of Sheffield going the same way. Great. Come to Sheffield, the new Leeds...

Good examples of council neglect

Kettlebridge School
Hillsborough Hall Coach House

Both listed buildings both neglected for years

There will hopefully be a submission to the Heritage Lottery Fund next year for money to develop the Coach House into an appropriate use for a modern park. Consultants are currently investigating the financial feasibility of various options for the future use of the building. Somewhere to get food and drink is top of most people's wish list.

I think this answers your question very neatly;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5254472.stm


I too like Sheffield's feeling of renewal, and that it is trying to better itself, but maybe it needs to be tied in a little better. The winter gardens are great, so why spoil it, by blocking the view with an exceptionally ugly hotel that does not fit in with the architecture around it. I preferred the eggbox - at least it was more interesting.

I think the hotel is quite a pleasent, and with the waving roofline of that and the winter gardens, it fits in very well indeed.

The problem with the eggbox was it's position. It was an interesting peice of architechture, but not very practical or aesthetically pleasing. In a way, for Sheffield to move forwards at all, it really needed to be demolished. Just imagine if the eggbox was still here. Sheffield would still have it's image of being a grim northern town. Once the St. Pauls place development is complete, I think people will realise how good it is.

Park hill is an amazing building. If you look beneath all the grime and muck, it could again be the great building that it was when it was built.

A lot of people havn't realised that there is a great mixture of types of development in Sheffield. There aren't just apartments being built, there's Retail, Leisure facility's, public spaces and of course apartments. If you go to somwhere like Leeds, there isn't so much variation. Its mostly just apartments and office space. There's also a lot of variation in the designs of buildings compared with other city's, such as Manchester, where there's a lot of box like buildings being built. In Sheffield, we're getting daring designs, such as the St. Pauls Car Park, of course the Winter Gardens, the cutting edge sculpture by the station, the Sheffield University buildings and more.

St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York?St. Pat's would certainly qualify as gothic. But , of course, it's not very old. There are plenty of mdern gothic edifices in America, some of them episcopal churches, allied to the Anglicans.There are many elegant wood framed houses in New England, most of them dating from the early 18 th century,with a few going back to the 17 th, but that's all the history we possess.

I actually like the ramshackle old brick workshops that typify the cultural quarter. i loved Butcher Works even before the refurb started, and hope they haven't sanitised it in the rebuild. One of my favourites of the ilk is the one at the bottomm of Matilda St on the left, which had the student occupation and the anti hallam Uni banners until recently. It looks like a higgledy-piggledy sort of semi-organic growth has just added bits onto the building over time, with extra floors and extensions in gritty red brick and white glazed brick, all overhanging the river Sheaf, just over the road from that sadly derelict pub. It'd be a tragedy if they pulled it down, because it epitomises the soul of this part of Sheffield. I've been inside and it's a wonderful building, if impractical as a modern office building. :hihi:

Have to agree with you in a a sense. I think it's a shame that they have totally knocked down several of the old buildings. Having said that , if you look up, literally, you will see that the facades have been preserved, to an extent. Didn't they keep the facade of that amazing building on fargate and knock the rest down?

Didn't they keep the facade of that amazing building on fargate and knock the rest down?

yeah they did. It's better than nowt I suppose, but it's not the building is it?

Here is how some Sheffielders wish the future of our city to look.

http://www.fotogblog.com/uploaded_images/79840003_1-712070.JPG

:hihi: :hihi: :hihi:
Thats far too classy for Sheffield. There's too much affection for the Park Hill Flats.

Have to agree with you in a a sense. I think it's a shame that they have totally knocked down several of the old buildings. Having said that , if you look up, literally, you will see that the facades have been preserved, to an extent. Didn't they keep the facade of that amazing building on fargate and knock the rest down?
And kept up far too many of the buildings that should have been demolished. Oh to demolish everything post WW2 running from Castle Market to the Moorfoot Tavern, plus the Roxy and its ugly sisters.

I can think of only one in town, - the 'Queen's Head' in Pond hill. The next oldest is probably the Upper Chapel in Norfolk street, which is supposed to be the first brick building in Sheffield built IIRC in 1700, although the present stone facade was added later.

I'd be interested to learn of any others.

Oldest buildings in central Sheffield are the Cathedral and the Old Queen's Head, followed by Old Bank House and Upper Chapel. Lady's Bridge is also mediaeval - if you look underneath, you can see the Gothic arches.

Once you get into the eighteenth century, there's a bit more - mostly buildings around the Cathedral, but also odd and mostly neglected ones around the CIQ and West Street.

Further out, you've got the ruins of the Manor Castle, the remains of Beauchief Abbey, Bishops House, Shepherd Wheel, Abbeydale Industrial Hamlet and various other houses.

posters pointing out that buildings should be useful for what is needed now, that commerce is driving the churn of buildings.

but what interests me is that, as a southerner, in a city like london, old esp. industrial building seem to be much more highly valued as residential/office spaces. not just tokenistic city council preservation, but of genuine market value. a drive to restore industrial architecture in london is one that comes from consumers choices. in sheffield an leeds for example, there are acres and acres of buildings that would have developers in london salivating - not to knock them down but to fit villeroy and boch bathrooms and the like, in a restored ( and perhaps souless) re development.

there are very few examples of that in sheffield that i can think of:

butcher works (driven by the fact its listed)
some of shalesmoor/kelham island area (although more is getting knocked down)
victoria quays (but it seems motly empty)

the problem with knocking down stuff and making way for progress is that ypou are left with a city that is always temporary. it has no roots, no solidity, and nothing to identify it. this to me is the very description of leeds - it is a city of nothingness, seemingly no history, no interest in its past, and consequently its known for nothing more that being a good place to go out in and shop.

that to me is not a living, successful city, with character, and i dont want sheffield to become that way.

ok so maybe you dont think i have the right to comment when im not from sheffield but i worry that the people of sheffield are in danger of consigning their city to mediocrity and low ambition!

Ambrose, i completely agree with you. A city should build on (no pun intended) its architectural heritage. If that heritage, as it exists, consists of industrial buildings, then at the very least, those amongst them which are of architectural merit, or are visually interesting, or which represent the history of the city in an important way, should be preserved and made use of.
To me, a building is far more than a facade. What has been done in Fargate is the destruction of what was probably a fine building - the facade is mere icing on the cake, and meaningless without the main structure behind it. The whole thing has been reduced to a decoration, and the design and form of the original building has been lost, to be replaced by concrete block walls and stud partitions.
I work adjacent to Butcher Works and it, together with many of the other buildings in the so-called 'cultural quarter', is an example of a structure which is historically important, representing the small cutler's and metalworker's workshops which helped make the city famous. It is also, though far from conventionally beautiful, possessed of a functional grandeur and charm, and is (was?), in my opinion, a very attractive building, reeking with character and life. I can only hope the developers have retained that, and not done another 'facade job' on it.
Another fine example is the building on Matilda Street, opposite the boarded up pub, next to the River Sheaf. This is the building, now owned by Hallam University, which was occupied by protesters against that very ownership for a while. It is a place which has grown and been extended, in a highly organic fashion, over the decades of the 19th and early 20th century, and all that can be said about Butcher Works applies here also, though perhaps not "grandeur". It is a charming higgledy-piggledy building, the antithesis of the logical space-planning driving modern developments, with changes in level, odd angles and bizarre internal thoroughfare routes. It is precious; a remnant of a style and type of building that is becoming rare. I have no idea what preservation order, if any, lies on it, but to lose it, or for it to be reduced to a shell or facade and rebuilt, would be tragic.
When Forgemasters goes broke, will the great black sheds be torn down? I hope not. I think they're beautiful in their own way, and they define our city, surely, more than any other structure one could name.
Constant architectural regeneration destroys cities. Leeds has lost the majority of its finest buildings, mostly during the 20th century. I'd hate to see Sheffield go the same way.

if you think sheffield has lost a lot of its older buildings then check out barnsley. during the 70's the labour gov. has the idea of out with the old and in with the new, hence in barnsley there are only a few building of any quality, the rest like the libary for example are aweful! - check out the new bus shelter in barnsley, so new and bright orange, are we actually in yorkshire.?! in my opion i love traditional stone buildings. however many of these were bombed in shef during the war.

There will hopefully be a submission to the Heritage Lottery Fund next year for money to develop the Coach House into an appropriate use for a modern park. Consultants are currently investigating the financial feasibility of various options for the future use of the building. Somewhere to get food and drink is top of most people's wish list.

I seem to remember some such scheme almost 5 years ago. Why wasn't the momentum maintained and a submission made then? Yet another missed opportunity due to a stifling Mickey Mouse council.

In my opinion the aesthetics of buildings are always going be be a subject of debate. What I've said before on other threads on here is that if quality materials are used and top professionals employed, the old can sit very comfortably with the modern. You only have to visit, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Manchester et al to see that. The Urbis in Manchester, The new Assembly building in Edinburgh, The glass arts centre (name escapes me) in Newcastle, love them or hate them they are bold statements by forward thinking councils and compliment constantly evolving cities.

Sorry to Butt in but I was not born in this city. I lived in Chester for 10 years and originaly from London I obtained the lease on a building of national significance over 4 years a go it had been derilict for 8 years before I got there, we have recieved no help from the local council only red-tape and objections to its use. I even named my daughter who was born in Sheffield after the building. I employed 2 local builders to carry out extentensive refurbishment works. Both of these builders were paid in full now I am having to strip all of thier work and pay another builder to rectify thier works up to building reg standards The first two builders cost me over £30,000 each and the building was one of many bombed by the germans in the war. From what I can see most people in Sheff do not give a toss do not take pride in thier historic buildings and when they do they get stuffed by red tape freaks in the council

if you want to see any quality buildings of real significance that have recently been built that will be here for much longer than you are I have a visit out to Pot House Hamlet which is of solid stone construction and just won a RICS Pro Yorkshire award for 2008. Also le corum in barnsley is a conversion of an old building that looks amazing and unlike a lot of this moden rubbish will be here to stay

There's a chance coming up in a couple of years to redress some of the balance. When the Castle Markets are demolished there's an opportunity to unearth the remains of the castle and preserve what's left for posterity.