In Brief

Liverpool stripped of Unesco status: could this ‘logical conclusion’ turn out to be a good thing?

Last week, a committee in China voted to strip the city of its World Heritage status, citing ‘irreversible’ damage

For 17 years, the waterfront of my home city of Liverpool has been ranked alongside the likes of the Taj Mahal and the Great Wall of China as a site of “outstanding value to humanity”, said Imogen Cooper in the Daily Mail. “But no more.”

Why? Because at a meeting 4,894 miles away in China last week, a Unesco committee voted to strip it of its status as a World Heritage Site, citing “irreversible” damage caused by new developments.

Never mind that the site includes the Albert Dock, home to more Grade I listed buildings than anywhere else in Britain, and the monumental “Three Graces” – the Royal Liver, the Cunard and the Port of Liverpool Buildings – on the Mersey. And never mind the 54 million tourists who flock here annually for our rich culture and history. Unesco has made up its mind – making Liverpool only the third site ever to be kicked off its list, after Dresden’s Elbe Valley and Oman’s Arabian Oryx Sanctuary.

I’m shocked it took them this long, said Oliver Wainwright in The Guardian. Liverpool council has been trampling on the city’s architectural heritage for years to make way for “atrocious” new developments.

Perhaps the worst are a trio of huge black blocks built in 2013, which ruined the waterfront view of the Three Graces. They joined a Carbuncle Cup-winning ferry terminal; and the “colossal mess” that is the Museum of Liverpool.

But the biggest concerns were over the two planned developments: Liverpool Waters project, a £5bn “60-hectare jamboree of half-baked towers”, which put the city on Unesco’s “danger list” in 2012; and Everton’s new £500m stadium, a “great silver slug” at Bramley-Moore Dock. Now the “unbridled contempt” with which Liverpool’s leaders have treated their city’s architectural heritage has “come to its logical conclusion”.

Actually, Unesco’s decision says more about the “wrong-headed priorities of the cultural cognoscenti” than anything else, said The Times. Sure, not all of Liverpool’s recent developments are beautiful. But it’s hard to disagree with the city’s mayor, Joanne Anderson, who asked whether Unesco would prefer the docks to “remain a derelict wasteland, rather than making a positive contribution to the city’s future”.

Unesco’s designation – of the entire “Maritime Mercantile City” – was always too broad anyway, said Edwin Heathcote in the FT, rendering it difficult to redevelop swathes of empty land. So the Unesco decision, while “a knock to its dignity”, may turn out to be good for Liverpool, if it can focus on architectural quality in future. After all, it is “a terrific city” and “it deserves the best new buildings”.

Recommended

When are the 2022 UK bank holidays?
Deck chairs
In Depth

When are the 2022 UK bank holidays?

Backstage in the White House: what is at stake for Boris Johnson?
Boris Johnson in New York
Behind the scenes

Backstage in the White House: what is at stake for Boris Johnson?

How high could UK inflation rise?
Pound coins and bank note
Today’s big question

How high could UK inflation rise?

Insulate Britain: who are they and what do they want?
Insulate Britain protesters
Profile

Insulate Britain: who are they and what do they want?

Popular articles

Doctor says we should not sleep naked because of flatulent spraying
The feet of a person sleeping in a bed
Tall Tales

Doctor says we should not sleep naked because of flatulent spraying

Abba returns: how the Swedish supergroup and their ‘Abba-tars’ are taking a chance on a reunion
Abba on stage
In Brief

Abba returns: how the Swedish supergroup and their ‘Abba-tars’ are taking a chance on a reunion

The man tasked with putting a price on 9/11’s lost lives
Kenneth Feinberg at a Congressional hearing
Profile

The man tasked with putting a price on 9/11’s lost lives

The Week Footer Banner