John Darlington

Why Stonehenge doesn’t have to go the same way as Liverpool

(Photo: iStock)

It has not been a good month for the United Kingdom’s internationally important heritage sites. Stonehenge is teetering on the edge of losing its world heritage site status, with Unesco warning the UK government against a proposed £1.7b, two-mile long road tunnel near to the site.

If so, it could go the same way as Liverpool, which lost its World Heritage Site status last week. In a city that boasts more Georgian buildings than Bath, the arguments have quickly polarised. In one corner, the developers and city authority decry the intransigence of Unesco and maintain that change is necessary to generate jobs and a thriving economy; and in the other, Unesco and various heritage champions, point to poorly conceived developments that undermine Liverpool’s distinctive and special character.

So what has gone wrong?

The recent development of the city’s dockland area to the north of the ‘Three Graces’ has long been contentious, with the Liverpool Water scheme given outline planning permission in 2012.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in