Buildings on Liverpool鈥檚 waterfront, including the Liver Building, are pictured across the River Mersey on Oct. 13, 2020. Image: AFP/Paul Ellis
The United Nations (UN) cultural agency UNESCO on Wednesday voted narrowly to remove Liverpool鈥檚 waterfront from its list of world heritage sites, citing concerns about overdevelopment including plans for a new football stadium.
At committee talks chaired by China, 13 delegates voted in favor of the proposal and five against 鈥� just one more than the two-thirds majority required to delete a site from the global list.
鈥淚t means that the site of Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City is deleted from the World Heritage List,鈥� Tian Xuejun, chairman of UNESCO鈥檚 World Heritage Committee, declared.
It is only the third such removal, after previous decisions affecting Oman and Germany, and followed two days of committee discussions that exposed tensions about how cities around the world can preserve their past while also moving forward.
Liverpool City Region Mayor Steve Rotheram called it 鈥渁 retrograde step鈥� taken by officials 鈥渙n the other side of the world.鈥�
鈥淧laces like Liverpool should not be faced with the binary choice between maintaining heritage status or regenerating left-behind communities 鈥� and the wealth of jobs and opportunities that come with it,鈥� he said.
Liverpool City Council cabinet member Harry Doyle told AFP he was 鈥渆xtremely disappointed by the results鈥� but said the city鈥檚 heritage was 鈥渟till here to stay.鈥�
鈥淲e鈥檙e even more disappointed that UNESCO declined our offer to come to the city and see for themselves the work that鈥檚 going on,鈥� Doyle said. 鈥淭hey鈥檝e made this decision in isolation halfway across the world.鈥�
The United Kingdom government also expressed disappointment with the decision, saying Liverpool 鈥渟till deserves its world heritage status.鈥�
But UNESCO delegates heard the redevelopment plans, including high-rise buildings, would 鈥渋rreversibly damage鈥� the heritage of the port in northwest England.
The International Council on Monuments and Sites, which advises UNESCO on the heritage list, said the U.K. government had been 鈥渞epeatedly requested鈥� to come up with stronger assurances about the city鈥檚 future.
The planned new stadium for Everton football club was approved by the government without any public enquiry, and 鈥渋s the most recent example of a major project that is completely contrary鈥� to UNESCO goals, it said.
From shipping to music
Several countries had backed the U.K., agreeing it would be a 鈥渞adical鈥� step in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, and urging more time for a new city council elected in May.
A corruption scandal linked to regeneration funding had engulfed the old city leadership, prompting the national government to step in temporarily before the May local elections.
Those who argued against delisting Liverpool included Australia, whose own listing for the Great Barrier Reef is threatened in this year鈥檚 UNESCO deliberations.
Norway in contrast said that while it was 鈥減ainfully aware鈥� of conflicts between development and heritage conservation, a 鈥渄elicate balance鈥� was possible, which was lacking in Liverpool.
The waterfront and docks of Liverpool were listed by UNESCO in 2004, after an ambitious regeneration following decades of decline in one of the cradles of Britain鈥檚 Industrial Revolution.
But since 2012 the agency has locked horns with U.K. officials over development. It had urged the city to limit building heights and reconsider the proposed new stadium for Everton at a derelict dock site, warning of 鈥渟ignificant loss to its authenticity and integrity.鈥�
The waterfront is the site of a statue honoring the four members of The Beatles, the most famous cultural export from a city rich in musical history.
Allan Ellis, a British tourist visiting the city, dismissed the decision by UNESCO.
鈥淲hat鈥檚 important is the actual history of Liverpool,鈥� he told AFP. 鈥淧eople don鈥檛 come here because it鈥檚 UNESCO. They come here because it鈥檚 where The Beatles came from.鈥澛�IB
RELATED STORIES: