Preservationists square off with urban planners and
developers over building skyscrapers near heritage sites like the Tower of London
By Martin Bailey. Web only
Published online: 09 January 2013
The British government is facing criticism from Unesco for
allowing the Shard, Renzo Piano’s 95-storey commercial tower, and other
skyscrapers to be built so close to the Tower of London .
A response is being prepared by the UK authorities.
Unesco’s World Heritage Committee last year recommended
that the UK
should “regulate further build-up of the area surrounding the Shard of Glass
building, ensuring that approved heights do not exceed a height whereby they
would become visible above the on-site historic buildings”.
The Shard, which will have a public viewing gallery that is
due to open to visitors in February, now looms over the medieval walls of the Tower of London , when seen from its central
green. The 1,016-foot skyscraper is the tallest building in western Europe.
Although located 700 yards away from the Tower
of London , across the Thames near London Bridge
station, the Shard dominates the nearby skyline and can be seen from miles away
in many parts of the city.
Preserving the views around the Tower of London
has proved highly controversial. Earlier this month, the former heritage
minister John Penrose, who stepped down last September, admitted that the Shard
“nearly didn’t happen” because of its impact on the Tower. He is calling on
English Heritage, with guidance from Unesco, to formulate a policy that would
lead to “selecting the best views of our city and townscapes” to be protected
in a similar way that buildings can be listed for preservation.
The present situation, Penrose says, lacks clarity, which
makes it difficult for developers and offers insufficient protection for the
most important views. Two years ago, English Heritage published a report to
evaluate the significance of historic urban views. Penrose now wants a more
formal solution to the problem.
Urban development versus heritage
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which is
responsible for UK World Heritage Sites, is taking Unesco’s complaint over the
Tower seriously. A spokeswoman told The Art Newspaper that “the
settings of this World Heritage Site should continue to be preserved”. The
department is therefore involved in discussions with English Heritage, the
Greater London Authority and London boroughs (including Southwark, where the
Shard is located) to prepare a report for Unesco, which is due to be submitted
in a year's time.
The Greater London Authority, however, is reluctant to bow
to Unesco pressure. Edward Lister, London ’s
deputy mayor responsible for planning, said that he would “fight” for growth,
which means new buildings. “We understand [Unesco’s] concerns, but have to
balance them with the demands for an expanding city,” he said.
Last July, the World Heritage Committee passed a resolution
on the Tower of London , which was inscribed as an
internationally-recognised site in 1988. Dating from the 11th century and built
by William the Conqueror, it now attracts 2.5 million visitors a year.
Historic Royal Palaces, which manages the Tower of London ,
originally opposed the planning application for the Shard, but permission was
granted ten years ago. As the Unesco mission points out, “the sheer height of
the building will surely attract the gaze—as its design was intended to do—of
many a visitor and away from the main attraction of the World Heritage site”.
The mission’s report then added: “If any tall buildings are
to be planned, these then should not exceed the height by which they would
become visible above the on-site historic buildings that are part of the Tower
complex.”
There have been proposals for other skyscrapers near the
Shard, including Three
Spire Towers ,
a Sellar Property Group project. Planning permission has not yet been given and
a Sellar spokesman said that the project is now “under review”.
Despite the recession, the capital is currently witnessing
a boom in the construction of tall office blocks. If this continues in the
vicinity of the Tower and around the Palace
of Westminster and Westminster Abbey (London ’s other World
Heritage Site) there is a concern that Unesco would consider adding them to the
“Heritage in Danger” list. In 2009, Dresden lost
its status as a World Heritage Site when a new bridge over the Danube was erected at a sensitive spot near the city’s
historic centre.
No comments:
Post a Comment