Why Dresden Lost Its UNESCO World Heritage Status 

What you fail to mention, though, is the fact, that UNESCO knew about the bridge when they approved the heritage status of the valley.

As a Dresden citizen I can say that the bridge was and is an absolute win for the city and also for tourists. People in the comments say that it destroys the historic old city but actually you can see the bridge only if you look into the opposite direction of the old city. Because of this bridge, a lot of traffic could be redirected to go around the old city while many other bridges have been or are now closed for renovation, because, you guessed it, old bridges tend to wear off the older they get and need a lot of maintainance. Dresden is known in the world already for some reason or the other. May it be the old city and its architectural achievements, sad happenings from '45 or the Elbe river and its surroundings. It does not desperately need the world heritage title like a small village behind and over the hill. With or without the title it is a beautiful city with a lot of places to rest with a beautiful view and lots and lots of green nearly everywhere you look. It is a big city but at the same time not as cold and lifeless as some other city centers around the world. And the Waldschlösschenbrücke contributes to that. (Also it is my way of getting to work at the city border in only 12 Minutes from the center where I live, would have never been possible without it)

I’m surprised Philadelphia, USA hasn’t lost its status yet…developers have been tearing down historic buildings at record paces.

Yeah. But we really needed that bridge. It’s sad that they cut down those old trees but otherwise getting around the city was kinda annoying. There was on bridge, then a really big gap where there was only 1 ferry. And then 5 bridges next to each other. We needed a bridge. Especially for cyclist’s! And just because we don’t have the title doesn’t make our valley ugly. It’s still gorgeous and a great place to see.

I am from another city that also lost its world heritage status, Liverpool. As far as I'm concerned it was well worth it, Liverpool was historically a very poor and neglected city and the construction project that led to the loss of the world heritage status played no small part in the regeneration of the city and transforming it into what it is today. In my opinion these world heritage sites are something of a racket pressuring cities into not improving the lives of it's citizens for some abstract goal of preserving the feel of the place.

As a citizen of Dresden I cannot remember that the city losing World Heritage Status has never made any impact on my life WHATSOEVER, but that bridge I’ve been using more times than I can count, I think it’s the bridge I’ve crossed the most out of all in the city and overall this bridge has made a great improvement to my life in this city, I don’t even think it’s as ugly as many people say, so I congratulate the city on their choice, and UNESCO can go stick some world heritage up their culture hole

I think the city was right to proceed with the bridge and prioritize the quality of life, movement of people and health of their residents over tourists. It's a key connection where people can bike and walk to the other side of the city and provides greater benefits to the city (health, environmental, reducing congestion, economic) than increased tourism. I think the UNESCO stamp helps with tourism but it's not the only reason people choose to travel to culturally significant sites. Given the city worked to receive the stamp I think they could have worked with UNESCO to design a bridge that was more aesthetically in line with the architecture in the valley and in a way that didn't detract from it's 'beauty' as they see it, working with them as stakeholders so they could both build the bridge and keep the title. The video makes it seem like the city just proceeded with the bridge and left the title in the hands of UNESCO. But to me this says more about UNESCO's role as an organization than Dresden's priorities as a city. One of UNESCO's guiding principles is to "transform behaviours and values that reverse and halt the decline of biodiversity... to make peace with nature". Punishing a city by removing a cultural title for building a sustainable transportation bridge that promotes health and environmental leadership, seems to me a misalignment of UNESCO's priorities rather than the city's.

Being born and raised in Dresden, I think that the bridge took nothing from the Elbe valley, except for the UNESCO title. I have always been very excited about the bridge and I am still. For pedestrians it opens new opportunities to explore the area and in general I think the bridge is good to look at. When it was finished, I remember how amazed I was about the bridge fitting so well into the surrounding landscape, especially lining up perfectly with the hills in the background (as seen in your video as well). Looking at the river banks which were, in my understanding, the main point of the world heritage area, the bridge is actually not very invasive given its almost free floating design. Lastly in terms of traffic, even though new roads/bridges don't reduce traffic but rather increase it, I'm sure that the new bridge helped easing traffic in the central area of the city, especially since the very old bridges in the center had to be renewed. So again, I think the bridge didn't take anything from the area. Does it provide something? A little. After all, without the world heritage title there wouldn't have been so much fuzz about the whole thing. But the title also sparked discussion, which made quite a few changes to the design and construction of the bridge. So after all I'm seeing a slight win for the city :) Oh, I frogot to mention one point that's important to me personally. I do see this bridge as a piece of art and certainly as an expression of culture as well. While protecting existing sites of culture is important, we are not done developing, this is not the end. So adding new pieces of culture to the existing ones is something we should persue. There is nothing worse than getting stuck in conservation, especially for the Dresden mentality, which tends to be looking too much back into the past.

It is really interesting how non Dresdners feel the need to tell us how bad the bridge is while all the Dresdners (me included) see the functionality and neccisity. I also do not think she is ugly. In MY opinion she is very elegant and not as massive as an old style bridge would have looked (which is really not important since it is located far from the old town).

Here in Mexico we have the "Estadio Olimpico Universitario" which one of our top league teams uses every week. Is in a bad condition but because it has the Unesco title, they can't repair it. Sometimes you have to choose between usability or aesthetics. I fully agree on repair it, mostly because its a place they use constantly

Thanks to the bridge, my father got to keep his hand and didn't bleed out since the route for ambulances from the main hospital to the other side of the river was reduced by 10 to 30 minutes (depending on traffic) those 10 to 30 minutes SAFE LIFES on a daily basis! Never forget that! As another plus for many citizens, it reduced my friend's drive to work from 45 minutes to just 20... (For all you eco activists, try thinking of it as tons of CO2 saved long term)

This is super well made! I thought you'd at least have 500k subs with such high quality, consistent content as yours. I truly hope you get the audience you deserve! With high regards, Yours Truly me; with thanks from Sweden!

Tbh no tourist gives a shit about unesco stamps. It’s annoying when a city takes that as an important thing to keep sacrificing well being and a more attractive city. Happened in my county,unesco basically banned public transport in the old town of our second lagerst city

In which way does it affect the City of Dresden to lose that Heritage Site? NONE! I am from Dresden and from what I can say loosing that title did change nothing. First: My mother works as a tourist guide and she constantly asks her tourist groups whether they actually KNOW about that. Most of them don't even know. So who cares? Second: As already stated before, the original application for the Title CONTAINED the bridge, so actually UNESCO granted the title although the Elbe Valley was NOT in the shape it was supposed to be. Third: Corruption... UNESCO grants and removes the titles based on who is paying them most. At first they had no problem with the bridge because, like stated before, the bridge was included in the application form. On the other hand there was another case in another city in Germany where a big part of the historic town was to be granted heritage site title. Then there was the plan to build a modern looking hotel in this area and UNESCO insisted on NOT building it because it would jeopardize the plan to grant the title... However after a certain amount of money was transfered to UNESCO, they "suddenly" changed their minds.... Same goes for Dresden. There have been a lot of people posting concerns about that bridge.. Most of them being not even citizens of Dresden and completely ignoring the advantages of the bridge concerning traffic issues. Those people (mostly prominent people) just used this discussion for self profilation... And I am pretty sure some of them "spend" a little money.... So in the end UNESCO lost a lot of it's creditability and reputation for this. And most people in Dresden are NOT that happy with another application because they feel like UNESCO is interfering with the city's development...

Can you also make a Video on how Liverpool lost its World Heritage Status?

The bridge is absolutely neccesary fot traffic in Dresden and it looks actually pretty good. Dresden lost the World Heritage Status due to a combination of die hard German bridge opponents and Germany bashing of developing contries. In Dresden, no one cares anymore. The Elbe Valley is still extremely beautiful and the tourists are still coming.

I think that the people of Dresden don't want to live in a museum only. A city needs also the possibility to develop itself. And Waldschlößchenbrücke is really not a monstrosity. It fits very well in the surrounding as a discreet arch bridge.

How on earth did you manage to get so many views in that short time with just two videos? This is incredible!

maybe they could have compromised and went with a historic style bridge instead of a modern design. It is obvious the bridge was needed, and if people are so massively in support of it its a good thing it was built, but just building it differently might have been the way to go

People who say they should have built a tunnel instead not only neglect the hlighly increased cost of a tunnel but also the fact that tunnels are very unfriendly to pedastrians and bicycleriders alike which are modes of travel we should encourage, not discourage. You would trade the beautiful view from the bridge and the sunlight for a noisy, dark, liminal space that smells of piss. Also notice how there are stairs going down the arches directly on both sides, better connecting the riverbanks (2:03). I applaud the city of Dresden for building that bridge.

I really don't know if UNESCO really kept its integrity when they are ignoring their own criteria things. The more I learn about it, it really starts looking like UNESCO was simply pissed that people at Dresden cared more of their own lives than what UNESCO had to say

Congrats on the new channel! Love the content-keep it up!!

Nice Video, as a citizen of Dresden i did not knew about all of this

I really love this video and I hope you make more of this kind!

If "preserving the city" goes against the citizens then I'd say it's not worth it. The people at UNESCO should start considering that maybe freezing it in time is not the best way of keeping heritage for the next generations...

UNESCO got it badly wrong indeed. Dresden was basically destroyed in World War. That so much has been rebuilt according to how it once was is something that should be deeply admired. I remember when the beautiful Frauenkircke was in complete ruins along with the inner city palace and so many other buildings. They have all been beautifully restored. Rather than criticising Dresden, the city authorities should be praised. Shame UNESCO.

Has anyone read "Slaughter House 5" , By Kurt Vonnegut? He was an American POW in Dresden when it was bombed by the USA/british He survived and wrote a book about it. It's a great story about PTSD.

If I were a resident of Dresden, I wouldn't care what UNESCO thinks.

the city will go on with or without the heritage title.

I think there's a good argument for making the old town a heritage site. Idk if they have to be at least x years old or something, but a great city rebuilt from the ashes after being totally destroyed, and as a symbol of reunification, seems like quite a heritage. Maybe in a hundred years it'll be old enough to be acknowledged as such.

As some one who worked in Dresden in the late 90's I must say I never crossed the Elbe - the work then on the Frauenkirche from a pile of rubble was spectacular. The changes made from 89 when I had first visited were huge and I can believe that small items like a much needed bridge would have been of lesser interest -Unesco = Bureaucracy how much should a city invest?

I applaud the sensible decision by Dresden to not burn money on a tunnel, just for the sake of trying to freeze time.

i live 1km away from this bridge, i can tell you this bridge is really necessary otherwise i would have to drive 5km detour

Very interesting my dear!

Totally approve the bridge. Local "World Heritage Status" location is totally neglected because professional restoration is toooooooo expensive, and at the same time residents who live nearby can't do any repairs themselves again because of prices, endless approvals. So as the result - falling pieces from balconies and walls, crappy windows, rusted roofs, ...

1:05 It's Kultusministerkonferenz, not Kulturministerkonferenz. (Kultus is often split into two main branches, Education and Culture/Religion.) 2:55 You left out a major step. In 1910, the bridge was already planned and commissioned. I have an old city map from 1910, where the planned bridge is drawn in. Both ends of the planned bridge were built accordingly in 1910, with recesses for the bridge to fit in. Due to the first World War, the bridge wasn't built. During the whole 20th century, planning the Waldschlösschenbrücke was a popular topic for a master's thesis in Architecture at the Technical University of Dresden (I've seen many of them on public display in the Architecture building in the 1980ies and 1990ies). To use only the Nazi plan as the next historical step is slightly tendentious. 5:05 The tunnel was generally a bad idea. It would only accommodate cars, not bicycles and pedestrians, for whom the detour to a neighboring bridge was especially cumbersome. Additionally, the northern end of the tunnel would have been very long and very steep, as there are hills on the northern side. While the Elbe river has an elevation of 109 m at Waldschlösschenbrücke, the current exit of the Waldschlösschentunnel is at 142 m elevation. If we want a tunnel under the Elbe river, we have to go at least 10 m deep. So we have to overcome 43 m of height difference. With a maximum allowed incline of 5% in road tunnels, the northern end of the Waldschlösschentunnel would have to be at least 2150 m long. Also, connections to Bautzner Landstrasse (B 6) would have been of similar length.

While the bridge is not ideal due its bland modernist design, Dresden has more pressing aesthetic problems: 1) The area of the city center that was reconstructed after the war is minuscule. It is unfortunately surrounded by commie blocks and vast grey streets, which to this day characterize most parts of what used to be the city center (see at 3:15 of this video for example). 2) Even in the tiny area that was reconstructed, modernist architects and city planners willingly destroyed the overall impression by allowing "modern interpretations" and "contrasts", on top of an often sloppy reconstruction that is far from authentic (see at 1:16 of this video for example).

I got so distracted by L'amour est un oiseau rebelle on the background , that I lost trail of what was being said 😅😂

While adding more road to help with traffic is always a questionable decision, I think prohibiting building bridges in general is a bad move. A crossing is needed, and the only reasonable non-bridge solution would be an electric pedestrian and bike ferry + potentially a tunnel for the cars. I think the incentives need to be better, or they need to get off their hardline attitude. Not granting another title because one was lost because of a useful and somewhat needed civil project would not just be petty, but actually be harmful to the conservation effort in general. Because then any city who lost their status once, could just be like "well, we aint going to get the title back anyway, so might as well replace this old [insert building] to build something more functional"

Imagine first losing the World Heritage Status to a bridge and then losing the saxony cultural treasure to the Berlin Mob. The biggest diamonds heist in german history.

They could have build a non-modern bridge that integrated in the landscape better. Except, I think they literally can't. We've got structures around that were build by people 2000 years ago, but the only way modern architects/engineers know how to build something that can survive longer than a decade is out of glass and steel.

good content; please drop the distracting music tracts.

If you go back in time the people who built these UNESCO world heritage sites would ask us to build and improve on what they built. I’m 100% with preserving these heritages, but UNESCO must understand there’re people living there that they need to improve their standard of living. Maybe working together to preserve and improve on what’s exciting. Human nature is always to build and rebuild. After all, hundreds of years from now this bridge will be protected as a heritage site.

I lived in Leipzig for 7 years, so visited Dresden around the same amount of times and never saw that bridge except for once, when I crossed it by car. Lmao

While UNESCO in a whole is good, and obviously world heritage sites to have qualifications to have the designation mean anything, it seems wrong for a place to be punished for (at least, what this video shows) a piece of important and needed infrastructure that didn't have any better possible alternatives.

Preservation is all well and good, but unfortunately those pesky living people have needs too. The needs of the living have to come first.

People need to get where they need to be. Other people's feelings don't really matter. If they can't find a way to feel good about their community having happier people, that's too bad.

Imagine if the Rhaetian Railway removed its unesco Spiral viaduct and replaced it with one of those concrete bridges you can see in Zurich or whatever

It was totally bullshit that this bridge "destroyed" the river valley. It's a beautiful bridge, that fits perfectly

I study urban development in Lübeck, another UNESCO site. Except for us its huge parts of the old town island and sights lines onto the church towers.... inside of which you basically cant build anything larger than 4 stories. Essentially the entire city is covered by those sight lines (at least the parts where we could still build more housing), and it makes it nearly impossible to solve our crippling lack of flats. In principle im sympathetic to the Idea od UNESCO. But the execution is really misguided in some places. Yes, we should preserve and do delicate balancing for historic sites. But we cannot freeze cities in time, theyre living organisms that need to adapt to the demands of their inhabitants over time and provide space for the things of tomorrow. While preserving the past. And UNESCO makes that very hard at times.

Dresden:"Bride > Unesco!" ngl I do stand by them, wth you supposed to do not touch anything that becomes a heritage site? what if they turn an old city into one, you would get a lot of complaining if someone needs a new roof (yeah they could get an identical one to before but then you have to hope you can find the materials for it) or wants a balcony cause that is now impossible... they should look if it affects the area in any major way, just let rome make the colloseum pink with red dots, and france turn the eiffeltower into a huge spotlight if they want to, a lot of it's value still stands it just changed slightly.

Dresden is an impressive place to visit. Why did they not exclude the section where the bridge was going to be when sending in the application? It's not as if there is anything of great interest along that stretch?

If any change can remove the UNESCO listing, how come Rome and several other old cities are still on it? They have electricity, a far better sewage and water system, proper paved roads, etc compared to the old ones. Anyway, most of Dresden was destroyed in WW2, so the reconstructed city is not really an old city. All cities are constantly evolving, some buildings stay more or less the same from the outside but very rarely from the inside. Just think, very few buildings had flush toilets in the 19th century, but today you would not be allowed to renovate an old building without electric wiring, flushing toilets, fire alarms, etc. My grandparents lived in a mud-brick house without piped water and electricity, today human rights people would complain if the government would allow people to live like that.

What if Dresden had decided to build a premodernist stone bridge or 19th century iron girder bridge instead?

I'd take the bridge to improve life rather an arbitrary title that didn't really don anything. beautiful bridge btw, really well designed to fit the surrounding.

Was there any of Dresden left after the war to heritage list ?

What's the other site that lost its status?

Maybe Dresden should have waited to apply for World Heritage Listing after the bridge was built, on the single criterion they had remaining after the bridge knocked out the others.

I live i Bruges, Belgium and i really want Bruges to ditch it's UNESCO label. It's makes it nearly impossible to adapt our city to the future. For every cityproject UNESCO needs to give it's approval. Only because we want a certain label. I don't think it even matters for tourists if something is labeled as UNESCO. And even then, it's our city that we need to be able to live in

would the solution have been creating a traditional style bridge?

Another reason for delaying the building of the bridge was some rare bat species they saw there. I think it was a good decision to build it and reduce the traffic jams through the inner city which would have been much more annoying for the historical sights.

they could make a tram tunnel / whatever improvement in transit system which would make the same effect.

Honestly, unless it’s really a tourism spot, hellbend on keeping the heritage title while the life of it’s citizen is badly affected is not a good idea at all.

A city is a living and breathing structure and you can't just take part of it and ban any changes or additions to it because of "historical value". If Dresden needed a bridge, it's good that it got one.

Support

Even the humblest, most crappy bridge is a marvel of human development. How jaded are these people that they think it subtracts from anything? Especially this one, it looks clean and it isn't some kind of eyesore.

Showing the building at 3:18 as an example for bad aesthetic really hurts me being one of my favorite buildings close to the Pirnaischer Platz in Dresden. (They finally started renovating it a few months ago so it will become more "clean" soon)

A lot of Structures in Europe doesn’t deserve UNESCO World Heritage designation because it’s not culturally or historically significant. Just pretty old buildings.

We should remember that throughout our human history there were no UNESCO type meddling organizations. Progress was lauded and it's obvious from the comments that this great city needed the progress. The loss is the UN's, not Dresden's.

You know, it is possible to build a bridge that looks old but is modern. These Germans did a mistake and built a new bridge that looks new.

Been drunk below that bridge so often, never knew about the UNESCO Part, lol

Had they built the bridge in 1909 nobody would have cared.

Next time you make a video, TURN THE DAMN MUZAK DOWN so we can hear the commentary without straining!

Interesting.

Do you guys still know wayne?

But the rebuilt Old Town of Warsaw is on the Unesco Heritage list, so how come Dresden is not?

You misuse the phrase "begs the question". It doesn't mean "invites the question", it's a concept in logic and it means to assume the thing you are trying to prove.

3:18 That graffity is still there, but alas, they closed the Lidl :(

Now it's the *Former* UNESCO World Heritage Status, come for the controversy, stay for the lovely pubs and affordable schnitzel.

As a citizen of Dresden, That bridge cured my aids, brought my wife back and paid for my kids tuition. 10/10.

This seems so pointlessly reactionary from UNESCO - the Bridge doesn't damage or obscure the urban development or intellectual heritage cited in the first two met criteria; surely their desire to 'preserve' needs to be specific. What is to be preserved, and what would violate that? Otherwise they can deem any change of any sort sufficient for stripping the title, no matter how unrelated to the heritage claim. You could remove the world heritage status of a Cathedral's stained glass because an underground metro line passes underneath it, or because they reconfigured the pedestrian crossing outside.

I don't see anything wrong with either side's choice. City population wanted a bridge, so they got a bridge. UNESCO wanted to preserve the whole point of conservation of these sites, so they pulled the status to ensure that standard was kept. UNESCO's World Heritage status wouldn't mean much if they didn't do that. It wasn't a hostile act, it was just both parties doing what was best for both themselves.

Its not an unattractive bridge, in fact it is somewhat elegant. You could say its a suitable modern addition to ongoing story of the valley.

Dresden is such an important city that this one needs not the UNESCO World Heritage Status.

I mean regardless of the UNESCO status, they could've and should've made a better looking bridge

Eh, it's a nice bridge. The issue is the original designation being too broad. A whole valley or city (Liverpool) shouldn't be designated in the first place.

The person is trying to prove that UNESCO title is more important than comfort of the city residents....

I just realized It is still a heritage site even if Unesco doesn’t agree.

Dresden should be incentivised to painstakingly rebuild itself from its ruins. It may be a bit of a con, but who can deny the tragedy of this devastatingly beautiful city? UNESCO should know better!

Good to see germans didnt lose theire attitude after World Wars...

I genuinely surprised that the East Germans didn't destroy all the old buildings.

Great video but why have music and speech at the same time. Very annoying, not even German music.

3:20 What's so horrible about this building? It looks okay, has lots of apartments--all of which get a balcony and many a good view--and was probably quite cheap to build? Houses are for their inhabitants, not for being tourist attractions. In fact, tourists tend to fuck those beautiful cities full of ornamented buildings quite badly and make them uninhabitable for actual residents (e.g. Prague, Venice, etc.).

Huh. Didn't know UNESCO could revoke that status

Dresden doesn't need UNESCO world Heritage status. UNESCO world Heritage status needs it.

I have been to Dresden and I have to say that the bridge doesn't really fit into the historic aesthetic of the old town. A tunnel would have really fit in better, even though I think that we should be looking at ways to decrease the number of cars instead of increasing them. Maybe the traffic could have been decreased by prioritizing public transport or banning cars in the old town.

Oh well it's not like Germany is lacking in UNESCO sites. When you have so many the status loses its value.

I think they should have just built a nicer bridge in a historical style. The bridge looks soulless and quite meh from my point of view.

Kind of funny to think about the fact that Dresden somehow got removed from the list for building a tiny bridge while the list continues to include Essen Zollverein, which is literally nothing more than industrial wasteland and one of the ugliest places you can possibly imagine. :D

Because their slogan was if you are naked Dresden