LIVERPOOL: The United Nations cultural agency UNESCO on Wednesday voted narrowly to remove Liverpool’s waterfront from its list of World Heritage Sites, citing concerns about overdevelopment, including plans for a new football stadium.
In the committee’s talks, chaired by China, 13 delegates voted in favor of the proposal and five opposed – just one more than the two-thirds majority required to remove a site from the global list.
This means that the site Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City It has been removed from the World Heritage List,” announced Tian Xuejun, Chairman of the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO.
This is only the third such eviction, after previous decisions affecting Oman and Germany, and tensions have emerged after two days of committee discussions on how cities around the world can preserve their pasts going forward.
Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotherham called it a “regressive step” taken by authorities on “the other side of the world”.
“Places like Liverpool should not face a binary choice between maintaining heritage status or revitalizing left-wing communities and the jobs and opportunities that come with it,” he said.
Liverpool City Council cabinet member Harry Doyle told AFP he was “extremely disappointed with the results”, but added that the city’s legacy was “still here to live”.
“We are even more disappointed that UNESCO declined our offer to come to the city and see the work going on for itself,” Doyle said.
“They have made this decision in isolation halfway around the world.”
The UK government also expressed disappointment with the decision, saying that Liverpool “still deserves its World Heritage status”.
But UNESCO representatives heard that redevelopment plans, including tall buildings, would “irreparably damage” the heritage of the port in northwestern England.
The International Council on Monuments and Sites, which advises UNESCO on heritage lists, said there had been “repeated requests” from the UK government to give strong assurances about the city’s future.
The planned new stadium for Everton Football Club was approved by the government without any public scrutiny, and is “the most recent example of a major project that is completely opposite” to UNESCO’s goals, it said.
Several countries had backed the UK, believing it would be a “radical” move amid the coronavirus pandemic, and urged more time for a new city council to be elected in May.
A corruption scandal involving regeneration funding surrounded the leadership of the old city, prompting the national government to step down temporarily ahead of May’s local elections.
Those who argued against delisting Liverpool include Australia, whose own listing for the Great Barrier Reef is threatened at this year’s UNESCO deliberations.
In contrast Norway said that while it was “painfully aware” of the conflicts between development and heritage protection, a “delicate balance” was possible, which Liverpool lacked.
Liverpool’s waterfront and dock were listed by UNESCO in 2004, following an ambitious regeneration following decades of decline in the cradle of Britain’s industrial revolution.
But since 2012 the agency has locked horns with UK officials over the development. It urged the city to limit building heights and reconsider a proposed new stadium for Everton on an abandoned dock site, warning of “significant damage to its authenticity and integrity”.
The waterfront is the site of a statue honoring four members of The Beatles, the most famous cultural export from a city rich in music history.
Alan Ellis, a British tourist who visited the city, rejected the UNESCO decision.
“What is important is the real history of Liverpool,” he told AFP. “People don’t come here because of UNESCO. They come here because the Beatles came from here.”
In the committee’s talks, chaired by China, 13 delegates voted in favor of the proposal and five opposed – just one more than the two-thirds majority required to remove a site from the global list.
This means that the site Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City It has been removed from the World Heritage List,” announced Tian Xuejun, Chairman of the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO.
This is only the third such eviction, after previous decisions affecting Oman and Germany, and tensions have emerged after two days of committee discussions on how cities around the world can preserve their pasts going forward.
Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotherham called it a “regressive step” taken by authorities on “the other side of the world”.
“Places like Liverpool should not face a binary choice between maintaining heritage status or revitalizing left-wing communities and the jobs and opportunities that come with it,” he said.
Liverpool City Council cabinet member Harry Doyle told AFP he was “extremely disappointed with the results”, but added that the city’s legacy was “still here to live”.
“We are even more disappointed that UNESCO declined our offer to come to the city and see the work going on for itself,” Doyle said.
“They have made this decision in isolation halfway around the world.”
The UK government also expressed disappointment with the decision, saying that Liverpool “still deserves its World Heritage status”.
But UNESCO representatives heard that redevelopment plans, including tall buildings, would “irreparably damage” the heritage of the port in northwestern England.
The International Council on Monuments and Sites, which advises UNESCO on heritage lists, said there had been “repeated requests” from the UK government to give strong assurances about the city’s future.
The planned new stadium for Everton Football Club was approved by the government without any public scrutiny, and is “the most recent example of a major project that is completely opposite” to UNESCO’s goals, it said.
Several countries had backed the UK, believing it would be a “radical” move amid the coronavirus pandemic, and urged more time for a new city council to be elected in May.
A corruption scandal involving regeneration funding surrounded the leadership of the old city, prompting the national government to step down temporarily ahead of May’s local elections.
Those who argued against delisting Liverpool include Australia, whose own listing for the Great Barrier Reef is threatened at this year’s UNESCO deliberations.
In contrast Norway said that while it was “painfully aware” of the conflicts between development and heritage protection, a “delicate balance” was possible, which Liverpool lacked.
Liverpool’s waterfront and dock were listed by UNESCO in 2004, following an ambitious regeneration following decades of decline in the cradle of Britain’s industrial revolution.
But since 2012 the agency has locked horns with UK officials over the development. It urged the city to limit building heights and reconsider a proposed new stadium for Everton on an abandoned dock site, warning of “significant damage to its authenticity and integrity”.
The waterfront is the site of a statue honoring four members of The Beatles, the most famous cultural export from a city rich in music history.
Alan Ellis, a British tourist who visited the city, rejected the UNESCO decision.
“What is important is the real history of Liverpool,” he told AFP. “People don’t come here because of UNESCO. They come here because the Beatles came from here.”
.