Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Factors affecting the property in 2007*
  • Housing
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

a) Urban development pressure;

b) New constructions in the area surrounding the property.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2007
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2007**

World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission 18-20 October 2006

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2007

As requested by Decision 30 COM 7B.93, a World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission took place from 18 to 20 October 2006. It assessed the impact on the World Heritage property of the new Liverpool Museum building, three additional new buildings that are being planned on the waterfront next to the Three Graces, as well as the overall situation of the property of the Maritime Mercantile City with regard to the state of conservation of the site in its widest urban context, its integrity and authenticity.

The mission noted that the city’s potential for development, due to the “urban renaissance” it is experiencing, is being managed through an impressive planning system with formally established Master Plans for each development site (with the exception of Pier Head) and English Heritage as a key partner in the regeneration process. Improvements should include better guidance and involve more partners, in particular local communities.

The World Heritage status should call for the introduction of a stricter regime of planning control based on a thorough analysis and description of townscape characteristics and sense of place. This should be taken as a point of departure to establish consensus upstream over the extent and range of development in and around the World Heritage site, and ways and means to achieve this. Benefits would include more consistency in decision-making and bringing more clarity to the public at large, including developers, local heritage conservation groups and the World Heritage Committee.

The mission concluded that the overall state of conservation of the World Heritage site is good as the docks and port areas, as well as the city’s listed historic buildings are either restored or well-maintained, or part of a programme of rehabilitation, carefully planned, documented and executed with great respect for the authenticity of the design and materialisation. The wider urban context, which includes seriously degraded areas, is part of renovation, rehabilitation and redevelopment initiatives that essentially aim at carefully re-establishing the city’s coherence through the enhancement of its numerous remaining historical features, the infill of vacant lots and the redesign of the public space.

With regard to the Museum of Liverpool Project, as well as the three new buildings of the Mann Island Project, all next to the Three Graces, the mission assessed that:

a) With respect to height, the Museum and Mann Island projects were respectful, as they do not exceed the height of the Three Graces;

b) With respect to these projects being complementary to the Three Graces, the City Council and its partners, including English Heritage, were of the opinion that the projects complement the Three Graces, because of their high-quality architectural design and materialization;

c) With respect to the dominance of the Museum building in particular, the architect and City Council with partners were of the opinion that it was not challenging the “iconic Three Graces” and that the design had taken into account the sensitivity of its location, as set out in the architectural design brief. However, the mission noted that this design brief did not reflect the specific characteristics of the property, such as verticality and rhythm of the Three Graces, which should have served to harmonize the historic environment and contemporary architectural interventions and to minimize controversy.

In response, the City Council has committed itself to rapidly producing a set of Supplementary Planning Documents with the aim of introducing stricter planning control based on a thorough analysis and description of townscape characteristics (including building density, urban pattern, and materials) and sense of place.

In conclusion, the mission considered Paragraphs 178-186 of the Operational Guidelines (the List of World Heritage in Danger) and Paragraphs 192-198 (Procedure for the eventual deletion of properties from the World Heritage List), and in terms of threatening effects of town planning (Paragraph 179 b. iv) established that:

a) Liverpool’s inscription criteria and justification emphasize that the property consists of specific areas that are testimony to the development of modern dock technology, transport systems and port management, with significant individual commercial and public buildings grouped along a limited number of streets that showcase the wealth of the city at the height of its development. As the Liverpool Life Museum and the Mann Island projects are not towering over, nor obscuring principal views to the Three Graces on Pier Head, the site's outstanding universal value is considered not under imminent threat. Overall, the property’s protected areas with related structures and individual buildings were not under threat of significant modification or degradation, nor would any of the development proposals obstruct views to them in any significant way;

b) However, when taking into account building density, urban pattern and historic character of the Pier Head, potential threats exist to the visual integrity of the site. As the World Heritage Committee in its current Operational Guidelines (Chapter II E) has not yet fully developed guidelines for the application of the condition of integrity to cultural properties, impacts on the site remain difficult to assess.

Based on the World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission report, the State Party commented on 1 February 2007 on several issues and progress made to ensure the maintenance of the outstanding universal value and integrity of the property:

d) A Heritage Protection White Paper is being published in March. This document will serve to strengthen and clarify measures for protecting World Heritage properties;

e) English Heritage, the Commission for Architecture and Built Environment and historic environment and architecture experts prepared a revised guidance on tall buildings. This document is out for public consultation and will be published;

f) The Regional Spatial Strategy is under review and contains appropriate policies to protect the cultural heritage of the Liverpool’s region;

g) Liverpool City Council has begun work on the Local Development Framework. In addition, a Supplementary Planning Document to set out objectives for the property of Liverpool is being prepared;

h) Liverpool City Council with English Heritage and Liverpool Culture Company have commissioned a World Heritage Education and Interpretation Strategy which will improve the understanding of the values of Liverpool as a World Heritage property;

i) Concerning the implementation of the Vienna Memorandum (2005), they proposed to use Liverpool as a case study for the development of the World Heritage Committee’s overall approach to urban properties and towards the elaboration of a UNESCO Recommendation on the Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2007
31 COM 7B.121
Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (United Kingdom) (C 1150)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 30 COM 7B.93, adopted at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006),

3. Notes the conclusions of the World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission to the property of October 2006 and in particular that the outstanding universal value of the site is not threatened although a number of visual integrity as well as management issues have been raised, including the:
a) Overall management of new developments;
b) Lack of analysis and description of the townscape characteristics relevant to the
Outstanding Universal Value of the property and important views related to the property and its buffer zone;
c) Lack of clearly established maximum heights for new development, for the backdrops of the World Heritage areas as well as along the waterfront;
d) Lack of awareness of developers, building professionals and the wider public about the World Heritage property, its outstanding universal value and requirements under the World Heritage Convention;

4. Also notes the State Party’s report and its reference to the Management Plan of 2004 and specifically requests the State Party to:
a) clearly establish and respect prescribed heights;
b) adhere to the townscape characteristics, wider values (building density, urban patterns and materials) and sense of place;
c) inform the general public about the outstanding universal value of the property and its management;

5. Regrets that the Design Briefs for new development do not take into account the Outstanding Universal Value, integrity and authenticity of the property, and requests the State Party to fully take them into account in future briefs;

6. Further notes that further guidance is required on the definitions of the conditions of integrity for cultural properties as indicated in Chapter II E (Paragraph 89 footnote) of the Operational Guidelines, and requests the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to work together towards the explanatory text for inclusion at the next revision of the Operational Guidelines;

7. Welcomes the offer of the United Kingdom to support the elaboration of the UNESCO Recommendation on the Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape with a case study analysis;

8. Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an update
report by 1 February 2008 on progress made on a stricter planning control, a set of supplementary planning documents and a timetable for the implementation of the
works for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

Draft Decision: 31 COM 7B.121

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 30 COM 7B.93, adopted at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006),

3. Notes the conclusions of the World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission to the property of October 2006 and in particular that the outstanding universal value of the site is not threatened although a number of visual integrity as well as management issues have been raised, including the:

a) Overall management of new developments;

b) Lack of analysis and description of the townscape characteristics;

c) Lack of clearly established maximum heights for new development, for the backdrops of the World Heritage areas as well as along the waterfront;

d) Lack of awareness of developers, building professionals and the wider public about the World Heritage property, its outstanding universal value and requirements under the World Heritage Convention;

4. Also notes the State Party’s report and its reference to the Management Plan of 2004 and specifically requests the State Party to:

a) clearly establish and respect prescribed heights;

b) adhere to the townscape characteristics, wider values (building density, urban patterns and materials) and sense of place;

c) inform the general public about the outstanding universal value of the property and its management;

5. Regrets that the Design Briefs for new development do not take into account the characteristics and qualities of the historic areas and requests the authorities to fully take them into account in future briefs;

6. Further notes that further guidance is required on the definitions of the conditions of integrity for cultural properties as indicated in Chapter II E (Paragraph 89 footnote) of the Operational Guidelines, and requests the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to work together towards the explanatory text for inclusion at the next revision of the Operational Guidelines;

7. Welcomes the offer of the United Kingdom to support the elaboration of the UNESCO Recommendation on the Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape with a case study analysis;

8. Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an update report by 1 February 2008 on progress made on a stricter planning control, a set of supplementary planning documents and a timetable for the implementation of the works for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

 

Report year: 2007
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Date of Inscription: 2004
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (ii)(iii)(iv)
Danger List (dates): 2012-2021
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 31COM (2007)
Exports

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top