PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1 DEVELOPMENT IN WORLD HERITAGE SITES ATAA ALSALLOUM

Bath’s new Southgate shopping centre approaching completion in 2009: the style is ‘contextual’, reflecting the surrounding architecture in height, texture and tone, if not in rhythm and detail. The drum, bottom left, is part of the new bus station, and the canopy of the train station can be seen at bottom right. (Photo: Jonathan Taylor)

UILT HERITAGE in use must accommodate Heritage List. A nomination document and the definitions of both cultural and natural change from time to time if it is to remain a management plan should be prepared for heritage. The term ‘cultural landscapes’ is Bin use, and the term conservation has each proposed property to be submitted referred to in Article 1 of the convention. It come to define the process of managing change to the World Heritage Committee, which includes cultural properties and represents sympathetically. Urban areas are no different. manages the process of heritage designation. the ‘combined works of nature and of man’, Successful management of development and The committee is advised by the three although this type of asset will be listed regeneration requires thorough analysis and international bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN and under the cultural heritage category. understanding of the heritage values at stake, ICCROM) which counsel on nominations, The concept of a ‘heritage urban landscape’ particularly in a world heritage site (WHS) the state of conservation of properties and on was introduced by the 2011 UNESCO such as Edinburgh, Bath or Liverpool. Here strategic issues and international assistance Recommendation on the Historic Urban development must be both inclusive and applications. This special procedure, known Landscape, which has been a key guide to the sustainable, so we need to understand the as inscription, includes an evaluation of process of safeguarding world heritage sites area’s ‘outstanding universal value’ for which the potential sites by experts against a along with the 1972 convention and other the WHS was designated. set of established criteria. The criteria are related documents. The document describes included in the Operational Guidelines for the complexity of the urban environment WORLD HERITAGE DESIGNATION the Implementation of the World Heritage as a dynamic system of cultural and natural AND PROTECTION Convention, which is periodically revised to values and aspects. It recognises historic The official international collaboration to reflect the committee’s decisions. cities as multiple active layers of tangible and protect ‘Areas of Outstanding Universal Value A site might be nominated as cultural, intangible heritage ‘deposited over time’ by that belong to all the peoples of the world’ natural or mixed heritage if it meets one their accommodated communities in various began with UNESCO’s 1972 declaration of the or more of the ten criteria of ‘outstanding settings (see Further Information, Bandarin Convention Concerning the Protection of the universal value’ (OUV). Once designated, and van Oers). World Cultural and Natural Heritage. The the state party accepts responsibility for If the state party fails to safeguard the convention came into force in 1976 and it has the effective management of the site and site’s outstanding universal value, it will be now been ratified by almost 200 countries for safeguarding its OUV, along with the delisted, a process which has happened twice. or ‘state parties’. Its purpose is to ‘ensure conditions of integrity and authenticity The first time was in 2007 when the Arabian the identification, protection, conservation, (UNESCO 2016: 26). Articles 1 and 2 of Oryx Sanctuary in Oman, inscribed in 1994, presentation and transmission to future the convention define cultural heritage was deleted from the World Heritage List. generations of cultural and natural heritage of as monuments, group of buildings and/or The decision was a consequence of the Omani outstanding universal value’. sites, while natural features and/or natural government’s reduction of the size of the According to the convention, the state sites are defined as natural heritage. Mixed protected area by 90 per cent, in contravention parties should create a tentative list of cultural and natural heritage sites are of the operational guidelines set out in the properties to be designated on the World properties that satisfy a part or the whole of 1972 convention. The second site was the

CATHEDRAL COMMUNCIATIONS CELEBRATING TWENTY FIVE YEARS OF THE BUILDING CONSERVATION DIRECTORY 1993–2018 25 apply for inscription and attempt to obtain the site so the impacts of any change in the international expert assistance to solve the WHS should be based on respecting these problem. Others, however, regard the action as values. In England, the management plans a form of reproach and do their best to avoid it. are usually prepared with a future vision for In addition to these sanctions, each a number of years and they are produced country has its local historic/heritage polices. with respect to the National Planning Policy In the UK each of the home nations has Framework (2012) with the main aim of specific planning policies for the protection achieving sustainable development. of world heritage sites, and buildings and The UNESCO World Heritage Committee structures within a WHS will often be may become involved with individual sites protected as listed buildings and scheduled in various ways. All correspondence with monuments or through conservation area the World Heritage Centre, advisory bodies designation, limiting the alterations that can and the committee is conducted by DCMS. be made without special consents (see page xx). Changes to the definition of outstanding International activity in heritage universal value, the boundaries of the site management has resulted in a continuous or its buffer zone should be reported to the stream of heritage standard-setting committee, which in turn reviews all world documents. These are disseminated by key heritage sites on a cyclical basis. international organisations, namely UNESCO, Furthermore, proposals for major ICOMOS, ICCROM and the Council of restorations, regeneration or interventions The Bling Bling Building (Piers Gough, 2006) on Europe. (The UK, it should be noted, is likely which may affect the outstanding universal Hanover Street, Liverpool in the world heritage site’s to remain a member of the Council of Europe value of a site should be reported to the buffer zone (Photo: Peter de Figueiredo) post Brexit.) The key aim has been to hand on committee in order to advise on appropriate the world’s patrimony ‘in the full richness of resolutions to ensure that its OUV is fully its authenticity’ and to ensure the international preserved. This process often raises problems application of heritage conservation principles. in terms of defining whether developments will have an adverse impact on OUV and to what UK POSITION AND DIRECTION degree. There are also potential conflicts in By signing the convention in 1984, the UK timing since the committee meets only once a government undertook to ‘identify, protect, year while UK planning decisions are normally conserve, present and transmit’ world taken more frequently. heritage sites to future generations. To date, Indeed, ‘large-scale public or private 31 sites in the UK have been designated projects or rapid urban or tourist on the World Heritage List; 26 cultural development projects’ are among the (including one on the List of World Heritage threats identified in Article 11(4) of the 1972 in Danger), four natural and one mixed. convention. The crux of the argument is Also, 11 properties are on the tentative list, how to introduce regeneration projects in with decisions pending. The designated sites harmony with the heritage context in such a in the UK vary in size and type and include way that all heritage values are safeguarded archaeological sites, major country houses and current requirements are met with and their parks, industrial sites (Liverpool) respect to sustainable development standards. and heritage cities (Bath and Edinburgh). The questions that might arise here are: what In the UK, the Department for Culture, benefits does world heritage site designation Green Park House Accommodation, Bath (David Media and Sport (DCMS) is the lead bring and should cities ever consider simply Brain Partnership, 2016), which provides mainly student accommodation for Bath Spa University in government department on world heritage ignoring the designation in the interests of the city centre (Photo: Jonathan Taylor) issues and is responsible for ensuring that promoting economic growth? the UK fulfils its obligations under the Dresden Elbe Valley in Germany, designated 1972 convention. Historic England is CONSERVATION AND URBAN in 2004 and delisted in 2009 in response to the government’s statutory adviser on the REGENERATION the building of a four-lane bridge through historic environment in England, but it also The world heritage movement is based on the the heart of the cultural landscape, which assists the Northern Ireland Environment notion that certain cultural and natural assets was deemed detrimental to its outstanding Agency, the Scottish Government, Historic are the collective property and responsibility universal value. Environment Scotland, Cadw and Overseas of all humanity, despite having vastly Before a site is delisted, the World Heritage Territories’ heritage agencies in advising different historical, cultural, and geographical Committee places it on the List of World DCMS on managing world heritage sites derivations. World heritage site designation Heritage in Danger (LWHD) and seeks to in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and bestows, inter alia, international prestige, collaborate with the local authorities to take overseas respectively. national identity and civic pride. Designation corrective action. The aim is to restore the At regional level, regional government also confers particular protection and site’s values and enable its swift removal from offices are responsible for safeguarding preservation on the most valued historic sites the LWHD. If remediation fails, the committee world heritage sites through regional spatial while also increasing tourism. It is argued that then revokes the designation. There are strategies and funding. At local level, local the impacts of urban development projects in currently 54 sites on the LWHD. The identified authorities are responsible for spatial planning or adjacent to world heritage sites have been feasible threats according to Article 11(4) of and for the communication, management and growing markedly, delivering regeneration the 1972 convention include large-scale or promotion of the sites. In addition, a range of opportunities but also posing threats to their rapid development, abandonment, conflict and other government organisations and NGOs heritage value. natural disasters. have a particular involvement in world heritage In the UK, conservation became The list is perceived differently by different affairs, such as ICOMOS UK. established as a major objective of planning state parties. According to UNESCO, LWHD In line with the 1972 convention, each local policy in the 1970s and 1980s. Consequently, inscription ‘should not be considered as authority should prepare a management plan heritage regeneration has been one of a sanction, but as a system established to for the world heritage sites on its territories. the cornerstones of economic and social respond to specific conservation needs in an This is based on maintaining the outstanding revival of historic towns and cities in the efficient manner’. Some countries therefore universal value, authenticity and integrity of UK. Conservation is defined by Historic

26 CATHEDRAL COMMUNCIATIONS CELEBRATING TWENTY FIVE YEARS OF THE BUILDING CONSERVATION DIRECTORY 1993–2018 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1

England as ‘the process of managing change Criterion (iv) (significant stage in human the site, and identified the city as a home for to a significant place in its setting in ways history): Bath reflects two great eras in human residents, businesses, education and visitors. that will best sustain its heritage values, history: Roman and Georgian. The current (2016–2022) management plan while recognising opportunities to reveal or of Bath is structured in a way that it recognises reinforce those values for present and future Liverpool’s World Heritage Sites the site with its inclusive tangible and intangible generations’ (see Further Information, Drury). Liverpool was inscribed on the UNESCO elements, past and current, and integrates It is also often agreed that assessing the values World Heritage List in 2004 by the designation well with local policy guidance. The current attributed to heritage is a very important of six areas in the historic centre and management plan explains the attributes of activity in any conservation effort, since values docklands which met three of the criteria: outstanding universal value and links them with strongly shape the decisions that are made Criterion (ii) (interchange of human other natural, intangible and tangible values (see Further Information, Torre). values): Liverpool was a major centre associated with the sites and its communities. A useful definition of heritage-led urban generating innovative technologies and Similarly, a number of heritage-led regeneration is ‘investment in the city’s methods in dock construction and port regeneration projects have been delivered in historic fabric, its buildings and spaces, management in the 18th, 19th and early 20th the Liverpool World Heritage Site. Examples in order to help secure physical, cultural centuries. It thus contributed to the creation of include the restoration of Albert Dock, the and economic regeneration in that city for international mercantile systems throughout Canning Georgian Quarter and Bluecoat the benefit of all those living, working and the British Commonwealth. Chambers, in addition to a number of tall visiting there’ (see Further Information, Criterion (iii) (testimony to cultural buildings in the heritage areas of Liverpool. EAHTR). However, in some cases, the tradition): the city and the port of Liverpool However, more challenges have emerged and regeneration of historic areas has resulted are an exceptional testimony to the were underlined during the World Heritage in standardisation and gentrification when development of maritime mercantile culture Committee’s 30th session in 2006. associated values and cultural contexts were in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries, The dominant scale and intrusive design not properly considered. Moreover, heritage- contributing to the building up of the British of the substitute projects at the Pier Head, the based regeneration projects can falter for a Empire. It was a centre for the slave trade until waterfront Museum of Liverpool and three wide range of reasons, including unexpected its abolition in 1807, and for emigration from buildings on Mann Island raised concerns and costs which undermine viability, difficulties northern Europe to America. the committee urged the UK government to finding a beneficial use for a listed building, or Criterion (iv) (significant stage in set in place clear strategies for design briefs abortive attempts to attract sufficient public human history): Liverpool is an outstanding and for the overall townscape, skyline and interest (see Further Information, EH). example of a world mercantile port city. river front. The first joint UNESCO/ICOMOS Recently, the acceleration of development It represents the early development of Monitoring Mission to Liverpool in October pressures has focussed attention on the global trading and cultural connections 2006 stressed the importance of producing spectrum of major challenges facing the throughout the British Empire. guidance documents for future development. process of safeguarding and protecting world Subsequently, both cities began to Consequently, Liverpool City Council heritage sites. Two sites in the UK, both of attract more visitors and new development issued the Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile which were inscribed on the World Heritage promoting tourism and other economic City World Heritage Site Supplementary List, have highlighted these challenges in benefits. In Bath, the major development Planning Document in 2009 as a key tool different ways. Liverpool Maritime Mercantile projects are the Bath transportation package, for managing the WHS. This document City was listed in 2004 but moved to the List western riverside redevelopment, Southgate identified opportunities for high-rise buildings of World Heritage in Danger in 2012, while project and public realm enhancement. immediately adjacent to the WHS and inside the city of Bath was inscribed on the list in Previous management plans of the Bath the buffer zone, in effect anticipating Liverpool 1987. Although both are facing the challenges World Heritage Site identified a range of Waters. However, during the 35th session of large-scale developments, Bath seems to be socio-economic, physical and structural of the World Heritage Committee in 2011, more successful than Liverpool in safeguarding challenges facing the sustainable future of extreme concern at the proposed development its outstanding universal value along with socio-cultural and economic developments. A brief overview of the world heritage context of both cities and corresponding management plans is presented below to illuminate the different approaches.

Bath’s World Heritage Site Bath became the only complete world heritage city in the UK in 1987. The decision was attributed to three of the ten criteria used to assess outstanding universal value (see http:// bc-url.com/whs for the full list): Criterion (i) (human creative genius): Bath’s neo-classical Palladian crescents, terraces, circus and squares, spreading out over the surrounding hills and down to its riverside centre, demonstrate the integration of architecture, urban design and landscape setting, and the deliberate creation of a beautiful city. Criterion (ii) (interchange of human values): Bath exemplifies the 18th-century move away from the inward-looking uniform street layouts of Renaissance cities and towards the idea of ‘planting’ buildings and cities in the landscape to achieve picturesque views and forms – a style echoed around Europe, Nicholas Grimshaw’s roof-top baths of limestone and glass, slotted neatly into the Georgian townscape of Bath particularly in the 19th century. alongside the conserved and regenerated Cross Bath, top right (Photo: Jonathan Taylor)

CATHEDRAL COMMUNCIATIONS CELEBRATING TWENTY FIVE YEARS OF THE BUILDING CONSERVATION DIRECTORY 1993–2018 27 Regeneration on Liverpool’s waterfront: the long low sweep of 3XN’s Museum of Liverpool to the left, and Broadway Malyan’s glossy black wedge-shaped Latitude Building in the centre: the two towers of the Royal Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building can be seen behind the tall office block at 1 Mann Island to the right (Photo: Peter de Figueiredo) of Liverpool Waters and its potential impact on Attributes for the Heritage Site of Liverpool, away from the original structure, should add the outstanding universal value of the site was established in 2011, were underlined to more value to the city (economic, touristic etc) expressed and a reactive monitoring mission highlight the city’s historic importance as and at the same time respect the existing social, was requested. a port and cultural exchange city. Despite cultural and environmental context. Therefore Thus, in November 2011, a second acknowledging the key achievements and a strategy to find a good balance between UNESCO-ICOMOS mission to the Liverpool future plans in the world heritage site and heritage conservation, economic growth and World Heritage Site was invited. It concluded buffer zone, the management plan fails to social inclusion should be developed. that ‘if the proposed Liverpool Waters scheme introduce contemporary socio-cultural values Designation based on UNESCO’s as outlined during the mission would be within its heritage-led regeneration process. outstanding universal values is significant, but implemented, the world heritage property Despite its clear objectives, designation alone cannot ensure the socio- would be irreversibly damaged, due to a serious implementation strategies and a cultural cultural sustainability of a city. deterioration of its architectural and town- framework, the Liverpool management planning coherence, a serious loss of historical plan focusses on rebranding the city as a Further Information authenticity, and an important loss of cultural centre of investment and presenting it as a EAHTR, Investing in Heritage: A Guide to significance’. It recommended that the tourist centre. It proposes involvement of Successful Urban Regeneration, Norwich, 2007 principal stakeholders (Liverpool City Council, the community as a key stakeholder, but English Heritage, The Use of Historic Buildings in Peel Holdings and EH) work out an adjusted fails to address the question of how the Regeneration: A Toolkit of Good Practice, 2013 scheme including the mission’s observations. community values the site, for example F Bandarin and R van Oers, The Historic Urban But, in March 2012 Liverpool City Council as the home of the Beatles, Liverpool Landscape: Managing Heritage in an Urban granted outline planning consent to Liverpool Football Club, multi-cultural festivals Century, Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, 2012 Waters. Consequently, during its 36th session and other local intangible characteristics P Drury and A McPherson, Conservation in June of the same year, the World Heritage of the city which are a source of identity Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Committee placed the WHS of Liverpool values and civic pride. References to the Sustainable Management of the Historic on the UNESCO List of World Heritage in specifics of the UK’s planning and heritage Environment, English Heritage, London, 2008 Danger, a position that has been restated at management policy are also overlooked. M De La Torre, Assessing the Values of Cultural subsequent sessions. The last was the 41st Liverpool was also branded as the Heritage: Values and Economics of Cultural session in July 2017, when the committee asked European Capital of Culture in 2008, but Heritage, Getty Conservation Institute, Los the state party (the DCMS) to resubmit, by 1 this should be integrated with its current Angeles, 2002 February 2018, an updated report on the state and inclusive socio-cultural values in order UNESCO, Convention Concerning the of conservation of the property in line with to achieve heritage-led sustainable urban Protection of the World Cultural and Natural previous recommendations, particularly the development. Since 2004, Liverpool has used Heritage, 1972 (http://whc.unesco.org/en/ UNESCO Recommendation on the Historic heritage as a catalyst to attract investment. conventiontext) Urban Landscape (2011), and with a view to However, this investment has threatened the considering the deletion of Liverpool WHS outstanding universal value of this site. ATAA ALSALLOUM PhD is a lecturer at the from the World Heritage List at its 24th session Indeed, the Liverpool World Heritage University of Liverpool’s School of Architecture. if the ongoing large-scale projects continue. Site should be perceived as a dynamic system Her doctorate at Liverpool focussed on The Liverpool Maritime Mercantile of both built and intangible heritage (social, developing an assessment model for world City World Heritage Site Management Plan cultural and traditional practice and knowledge) heritage cities. Her master’s thesis at the 2017–2024 explains the geographic locations in order to sustain its inclusive values for University of Damascus examined the design and outstanding universal value criteria of current and future generations. Moreover, of new neighbourhoods adjacent to historic the WHS and its buffer zone. Moreover, the investment in the city and the introduction of cities. Her teaching and research interests are five key themes comprising the Statement of new innovative projects, rather than taking focussed on cultural heritage studies.

28 CATHEDRAL COMMUNCIATIONS CELEBRATING TWENTY FIVE YEARS OF THE BUILDING CONSERVATION DIRECTORY 1993–2018