Skyscrapers Could Threaten Tower Says UNESCO

Skyscrapers Could Threaten Tower Says UNESCO

There's been a lot of talk in the media lately about UNESCO, the international body that administers the World Heritage Site listing, have attacked the planning authorities throughout London in concern that historical sites could be damaged by development.

The committee noted that "with great concern that proposed new developments around the Tower of London and Westminster Palace, Westminster Abbey and Saint Margaret's Church World Heritage properties, appear not to respect the significance of either World Heritage property, their settings and related vistas".

They paid particular attention to the Tower of London stating "the London Plan policies to protect the World Heritage property and its environment do not seem to be applied effectively, that statutory protection for views to and from the Tower could be diminished, and that the management plan has still not been finalised".

Whilst it's true that the Tower of London unlike St Paul's Cathedral does not have much by the way of protected views throughout London the reasons for this are a bit different.

Firstly the Tower of London is rather short. It is not viewable from most of London, even neighbouring streets in the City itself. It is best viewed from Tower Bridge or Potters Fields on the other side of the Thames where there are no obstructions and does not feature prominently on the skyline. None of the new developments block these key views, indeed it would be difficult to do so thanks to the existence of the river in the way.

It's noteworthy that the committee did not criticise development around the Palace of Westminster in the same way that they singled out the Tower of London, that's because being a prominent building on the skyline the views to it are already protected.

The second thing is that thanks to two major events, the Great Fire of London and the Blitz, there is nothing really around the Tower of London that is of the same era. There are almost no historical buildings in the area save a few churches so having the Tower set in its proper historical context is impossible meaning you can hardly look out on a non existing medieval city from the battlements of the fortress.

The feeling of the committee however is that the current skyscraper proposals in London threaten the setting and views of and from the Tower of London and these developments raise the prospect that the Tower could be placed on the "heritage in danger" list. Then again they might not, or they might see the invisible pink unicorn.

The biggest irony is that the committee feels this only now when arguably the greatest damage to the setting of the Tower of London has already been done with the Thistle Tower Hotel and Tower Bridge blocking views from Rotherhithe whilst current developments will be built behind the tower framing it.

When viewing from Potters Fields as seen in the image to the right, the biggest obstruction to the views is simply trees that have grown in-front of the Tower over the last couple of hundred years - this is easily rectified with a chain-saw or Jeremy Clarkson in a Jeep.

There are already plans to redevelop the Thistle Tower Hotel with the owner having held a competition inviting submissions from top architects. Complicating the design process is the requirement by the owner that the hotel stay open throughout the rebuilding but the plans for this should come out in the end.

Another thing that the committee failed to take into account was that the approved skyscraper that would stand most directly behind the Tower of London when viewed from Potters Fields is the now cancelled Minvera Building. This was the one most criticised by heritage bodies in the U.K too for it's positioning and size.

What the committee's criticism means for London is almost nothing as the UNESCO committee has no teeth. Developers will continue doing what they are doing supported by the planning system and the Tower of London may well end up on the at-risk register.

The Tower of London isn't the first World Heritage Site to be framed by skyscrapers, you can see downtown Cairo from the Pyramids assuming the smog isnt too bad whilst the Statue of Liberty has the whole swathe of New York behind it when viewed from the water and the new World Trade Centre buildings will appear prominently behind it.

Of course, you associate New York with skyscrapers and London with castles and half timbered Tudor buildings that no longer exist. It seems that cliché is everything when defining the views to and from a World Heritage site.

equity release schemes
consumibles xerox