Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City
Factors affecting the property in 2006*
- Commercial development
- Housing
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
a) Urban pressure;
b) New construction in the area surrounding the site.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2006
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2006**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2006
In response to concern about proposals for the construction of a ‘Fourth Grace’ building on the Pier Head waterfront, the World Heritage Committee at its 28th session had recommended that the national authorities pay particular attention to monitoring the processes of change in the World Heritage areas and their surroundings in order not to adversely impact the property, and had requested that the State Party assures proper height for any new constructions, respect the qualities of the historic area, and that they complement the historic buildings.
A significant number of letters have been received at the World Heritage Centre from private citizens and community groups on new developments which were transmitted to the State Party for comments and to ICOMOS for review. At the time of preparation of this report, there has been no response from the State Party.
The concerns expressed included a scheme for a new extension to the Museum in 2005. This is a large, asymmetrical building, sited just to the south of the three Graces and projecting forward from them towards the River Mersey. This proposal was given planning permission in December 2005. The design has attracted some adverse comments locally for its prominent setting and dominant form and for its impact on the Three Graces and the River Mersey waterfront. Two further building projects are now being considered which could also have an adverse impact. The first is a tall tower at Central Station. The second is a group of three large buildings on the waterfront just to the south of the proposed new Museum on Mann Island. There is also a scheme for a new canal along the waterfront.
The thrust of the World Heritage Committee statement for the Pier Head was that any new buildings should not seek to challenge the dominance of the existing Three Graces but rather should complement them and the overall historic quarter. ICOMOS does not consider that the proposed museum building follows this recommendation. Its slanting and sliding monolithic form has been designed to be seen. The massive scale and asymmetry of its components dwarfs the rhythmic architectural detail of the Three Graces, even though the proposed building is much lower.
Liverpool as a port city is a remarkable survival, complete with many docks, waterfront buildings, warehouses, and commercial and cultural centres. It is now thriving as a future European Capital of Culture and there is great enthusiasm for re-development in and around the World Heritage site. A large number of development projects are currently being considered.
When the site was nominated, it was accompanied by a management plan, which set out the framework for future development. That does not seem to have been translated into detailed development plans for discrete areas of the city. Currently there is no master plan for the waterfront, for instance. Nor have any of the proposed buildings now being considered emerged from agreed design briefs. All major development schemes within the World Heritage site should emerge from a structured process that sets out the constraints and context, as well as desired spatial improvements within an agreed brief.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2006
30 COM 7B.93
State of Conservation (Liverpool - Maritime Mercantile City)
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 28 COM 14B.49, adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),
3. Commends the City Council on securing investment to construct a new Museum building;
4. Notes with great concern that the new Museum building next to the Three Graces does not comply with the recommendation of the 28th session as it is designed to be dominant rather than recessive; and also notes that three additional new buildings are being planned on the waterfront, one of which could also be intrusive in architectural terms;
5. Requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS monitoring mission to consider the impact of these proposals on the World Heritage property;
6. Urges the State Party to put in place strategic plans for future development that set out clear strategies for the overall townscape and for the skyline and river front;
7. Further requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an updated report by 1 February 2007 on the progress of strategic plans for future development and on the state of conservation of the property, for examination by the Committee at its 31st session in 2007.
Draft Decision: 30 COM 7B.93
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 28 COM 14B.49, adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),
3. Commends the City Council on securing investment to construct a new Museum building;
4. Notes with great concern that the new Museum building next to the Three Graces does not comply with the recommendation of the 28th session as it is designed to be dominant rather than recessive; and also notes that three additonal new buildings are being planned on the waterfront, one of which could also be intrusive in architectural terms;
5. Requests the State Party to invite a World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS joint monitoring mission to consider the impact of these proposals on the World Heritage property;
6. Urges the State Party to put in place strategic plans for future development that set out clear strategies for the overall townscape and for the skyline and river front;
7. Further requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an updated report by 1 February 2007 on the progress of strategic plans for future development and on the state of conservation of the property, for examination by the Committee at its 31st session in 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.