Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Update

The World Heritage Committee at its 31st Session in Christchurch, New Zealand, concluded that the outstanding universal value of Liverpool's Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site is not threatened by the impact of new development but has asked for a further report next year.

In October 2006 UNESCO sent a monitoring mission to Liverpool with the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) to assess the impact of current planning proposals in the vicinity of the World Heritage Site, the state of conservation of the site in its widest urban context and its integrity and authenticity. Since then the Government has worked closely with the World Heritage Centre, English Heritage, Liverpool City Council and other key stakeholders to provide assurances to UNESCO on the maintenance of the outstanding universal value and integrity of the site.

The Committee has welcomed an offer by the UK Government to use Liverpool as a case study for the development of UNESCO's overall approach to urban sites and in support of a subsequent UNESCO recommendation on Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape.

Culture Minister, David Lammy said: "The Government welcomes the World Heritage Committee's affirmation of the outstanding universal value of this unique site at the heart of a vibrant and regenerating city. This is a vote of confidence for all those involved in its conservation and management. We are also delighted that, as case study, Liverpool will be able to make a positive contribution to the World Heritage

Committee's approach to urban landscape world wide.

"Much has been done to ensure that re-development respects Liverpool's magnificent cultural heritage, particularly through planning control based on a keener understanding of townscape characteristics and sense of place and this will continue. We will also be looking at ways to further strengthen protections for our World Heritage Sites and their settings, building on proposals set out earlier this year in 'Heritage Protection for the 21st Century' and will be reporting progress to the World Heritage Committee next year."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,412 Posts
This belongs in the main forum, not here. This topic is directly related to urbanism and planning.

This new structure will only work if people try to make it work.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,506 Posts
Thanks to Adman for this thread.

However, I agree with Poli that this newly structured subforum doesn't seem to work. We still need an Official Liverpool Thread like the other forums do for relevant pieces of news that aren't related to any project in particular, but which are not inconsequential skybar type stuff.

Also, relegating anything that isn't an actual project into the new, Beacon skybar is wrong.

SSC Liverpool is one of the best places on the net for discussing Liverpool's history, culture, governance, economy infrastructure, etc., all things that impact on new buildings in the city. This type of stuff is should not be in the skybar.

I'm sure Bammy means well but this is not what I imagine Martin S was thinking of when he proposed this idea. With this Beacon of his, Bammy has sought to create some kind of Scouse Reservation, where the savage natives can follow their untamed ways without being noticed by his chums in the Manchester forum. It's utterly partronising and terribly ironic given the level of debate often had on this forum and the barely human intellects of the milltowners who do appear on here when anyone dares suggest that every single time the government automatically plants yets more taxpayers money into one city outside of London it just might not be because that city is the most super and amazing place in the world and everywhere is shit.

I, for one, am not going to use this Beacon thing unless I'm (deliberately) speaking shite. If I want to discuss the media in the "North West", regionalism, national and "regional" transport policies, and so on, I'm doing it in the main forum, not in a fucking skybar.

And I'm starting a new Official Liverpool thread right now.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
This belongs in the main forum, not here. This topic is directly related to urbanism and planning.

This new structure will only work if people try to make it work.
Aplogies Liverpolitan and fellow forummers. My mistake.
Bammy, could you please move this thread.
Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,412 Posts
Aplogies Liverpolitan and fellow forummers. My mistake.
Bammy, could you please move this thread.
Thanks
Thank you adman, and no need to apologise to me - re-reading my post it was aggressive in a way I didnt intend, so sorry for that. I'm just keen that the new structure works.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
3,362 Posts
Here we go again!!

The front page of the DP carries a story that UNESCO are to order Liverpool to safeguard the waterfront areas. It seems that North West Development agency and EH are to fund part of the cost of drawing up a new policy.

A couple of quotes from Wayne saying that the damage has already been done blah! blah! blah!

This sounds like a re-vamped tall building policy is in the making with CABE, EH, Government Office North West all involved in a new 'technical officer group' this will be a big threat to Liverpool's re-development.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
3,362 Posts
The full report.



Larry Neild, Liverpool Daily Post


A BLUEPRINT to protect Liverpool’s World Heritage Site is to be drawn up on the orders of Unesco, the body responsible for protecting iconic areas.

The blueprint forms part of an action plan aimed at involving the wider public in schemes earmarked for sensitive sites around the historic waterfront.

The North West Development Agency has agreed to pay £100,000 and English Heritage £20,000 towards the cost of drawing up the new policy.

Its aim will be to spell out to developers what is allowed in areas falling within the heritage site as well as the buffer zone around the site.

The city council’s executive board will tomorrow debate the calls for better planning controls for the site that takes in the Pier Head, Castle Street and historic areas of the city.

The council’s world heritage officer, John Hinchliffe, said in a report to the executive board that the World Heritage Committee had picked up on a number of issues raised by Unesco.

Last night, heritage activists welcomed the move, but said the action was two years too late.

Wayne Colquhoun, chairman of Liverpool Preservation Trust said: “The damage has already been done to the critical areas of the WHS around Mann Island. Had the controls already been in place I am sure that the Mann Island schemes would not have won approval.”

Work has already started on the new Museum of Liverpool and site preparation work is about to start for Neptune’s three cheese-wedge shaped granite-faced blocks close to The Strand.

Last October, a mission representing the Paris-based World Heritage Centre arrived in Liverpool to examine concerns raised by conservationists about waterfront developments.

It raised fears that Unesco could place the city’s WHS on an “at risk” register, a pre-cursor to having the inscription removed from the world list.

City councillors breathed a sigh of relief when the Unesco report concluded that schemes, such as the Mann Island developments, were “not an imminent threat” to the outstanding universal value of the World Heritage Site.

But in a caveat to their conclusions the World Heritage Committee warned that potential threats to the visual integrity of the WHS may still exist.

Another worry is that the potential impact of contemporary proposals on historic areas such as the Pier Head remain difficult to assess.

The committee hailed the refurbishment of St George’s Hall as an outstanding example of heritage preserv- ation. But the committee recognised that the process of management could be further improved.

Three key recommendations have been made to the city council as a way forward:

The council should further improve its information, consultation and participation processes. Local communities should be involved, with arguments for and against new schemes aired publicly to ensure more informed decision making;

The council should improve its methods for the management of new developments inside the WHS and the adjoining buffer zone. There has to be particular emphasis on the height of buildings, as well as locations and design;

The city council should rapidly produce a supplementary planning document covering these issues and indicate how the World Heritage Committee will be consulted and enabled to express its views on the issue, says the report.

The council should also raise the population’s awareness of the motives for the World Heritage Site, and in particular ensure property developers and building professionals who intervene in the WHS are made aware of the motives for creating the WHS.

These require the council to provide townscape guidance, including building heights for new development.

Liverpool is to be used by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport as a case study to analyse Unesco’s approach to the way historic urban landscapes are preserved.

The DCMS has been told to file a report by next February to the World Heritage Centre on what action has taken place in Liverpool to enhance protection of the WHS.

Mr Hinchliffe’s report says: “It is essential that work on the production of planning guidance is carried out.”

A technical officer group, made up of the city council, English Heritage, the NWDA, Liverpool Vision, Government Office North West and CABE, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, is to be formed to produce the blueprint. None of the voluntary heritage groups are included in the team.

Last night, city council executive member Cllr Mike Storey said: “Our aim is to introduce the new planning brief in March. We hope to be able to go out to public consultation with a draft form later this year.”

Mr Colquhoun added: “It was organisations such as ours that initially raised concerns about the way our historic waterfront is being ruined. I believe we have a good contribution to make, but once again we are being excluded. I fear it will be a wasted opportunity.”
 

·
Cork 2005
Joined
·
2,223 Posts
i thing this world heritage stuff is a becoming a burden on the city.... WHS need to understand that Liverpool is a living evolving city .... not some pyramids that tourists like to walk about!
 

·
____________
Joined
·
17,493 Posts
I've had enough of all this interference from UNESCO.

I think that in a democracy the citizens of a city should be free to build what they want – mature adults can make their own decisions.

If UNESCO want to take the World Heritage Site thing back then let them. It’s all becoming a bit tedious.

I for one would rather have a stunning waterfront reality than a World Heritage Site title on a piece of paper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,754 Posts
I've had enough of all this interference from UNESCO.

I think that in a democracy the citizens of a city should be free to build what they want – mature adults can make their own decisions.

If UNESCO want to take the World Heritage Site thing back then let them. It’s all becoming a bit tedious.

I for one would rather have a stunning waterfront reality than a World Heritage Site title on a piece of paper.
I agree wholeheartedly.

This is all we need. Increased influence / interference from Wayne Colquholn:nuts: , EH and the rest and more bureaucracy all round. This will have the result of more watered down schemes and increased delays meaning more expense and developments being shelved. Will the Cesar Pellis and Will Alsops of this world bother in future.:bash:
 

·
Liverpool
Joined
·
927 Posts
I've had enough of all this interference from UNESCO.

I think that in a democracy the citizens of a city should be free to build what they want – mature adults can make their own decisions.

If UNESCO want to take the World Heritage Site thing back then let them. It’s all becoming a bit tedious.

I for one would rather have a stunning waterfront reality than a World Heritage Site title on a piece of paper.
I couldn't agree more, do UNESCO pay towards World Heritage Site or is it just a title that gets in the way of progress:eek:hno: :eek:hno:
 

·
Keltlandia
Joined
·
8,877 Posts
What utter crap, but we all knew this would be coming sooner or later. A three pronged attack from UNESCO, EH and NWDA. £120,000 for a report, jesus. I wonder if the council will hold it's nerve? I think they see how hindering WHS potentially is, but know it'd be terrible publicity even if Liverpool was put on the danger list, let alone be stripped of status altogether. They've called UNESCO's bluff on this in the past, will they continue to do so?

By the way, does anyone think WHS has done anything whatsoever for the city? I mean, most people, even in Liverpool, aren't aware of the designation, let alone the rest of the UK or abroad. You tell people and they say things like "Liverpool? lol. Can't imagine that somehow". Do you reckon we've had a single tourist who's heard of it and has only visited because of it, or that it's influenced the siting of the latest UK call centre? I don't reckon.
 

·
____________
Joined
·
17,493 Posts
What utter crap, but we all knew this would be coming sooner or later. A three pronged attack from UNESCO, EH and NWDA. £120,000 for a report, jesus. I wonder if the council will hold it's nerve? I think they see how hindering WHS potentially is, but know it'd be terrible publicity even if Liverpool was put on the danger list, let alone be stripped of status altogether. They've called UNESCO's bluff on this in the past, will they continue to do so?
By the way, does anyone think WHS has done anything whatsoever for the city? I mean, most people, even in Liverpool, aren't aware of the designation, let alone the rest of the UK or abroad. You tell people and they say things like "Liverpool? lol. Can't imagine that somehow". Do you reckon we've had a single tourist who's heard of it and has only visited because of it, or that it's influenced the siting of the latest UK call centre? I don't reckon.
They shouldn't bother even bluffing - send the title back today.

Show them who's in charge.
 

·
____________
Joined
·
17,493 Posts
And then gets them voted out. No political administration is going to willfully lose credibility for the long term benefit of the city. Politicians just don't do things like that.
That's because they haven't got any balls and they are more interested in feathering their own nest.

The council could make a media statement that they want to do everything in their power to make the city prosperous and welcoming for investors who will create jobs. They could say that they realise that they are taking a political risk, but feel that someone has to take a stand against outside interference from unelected bodies that are holding back the progress of the city.

They could say that they are aware that they could lose votes by doing this, but that they feel that it for the long term interests of the city, and hope that people will support them in this stance.
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Top