Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
State of Conservation Historical Centre of the ... 2014

Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa

Peru
Factors affecting the property in 2014*
  • Deliberate destruction of heritage
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Housing
  • Management systems/ management plan
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Lack of a disaster preparedness Plan;
  • Lack of a Management Plan;
  • Planned and ongoing development projects which impact the Historic Centre, such as the planned construction of the Chilina Bridge;
  • Illegal demolitions involving historic buildings;
  • Urban sprawl.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2014
Requests approved: 1 (from 2001-2001)
Total amount approved : 75,000 USD
2001 Consolidation and restoration of the Cathedral of ... (Approved)   75,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2014**

February 2000: ICOMOS Expert Mission; April-May 2008: World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission.

2014 WHC-ICOMOS Joint Reactive Monitory Mission to “Historic Centre of the City of Arequipa” (Peru) - 25-28 November 2014
2008 Report on the Reactive Monitoring Mission to the Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa, Peru, 28 April - 1 May ...
2001 Expert Mission Report, Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa, August 2001
2001 Expert Mission Report, Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa, July 2001
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2014

On 18 February 2014, the State Party submitted a State of conservation report, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1016/documents and lists the following progress:

  • The Risk Preparedness Plan was completed and will be submitted to the Ministry of Culture for final review; however, no timeframe for this was provided. It identifies potential threats, a risk analysis, different types of interventions and implementation strategies. Five interactive workshops were held in 2013 for approval by different institutions and the general public,
  • Municipal Ordinance 764 of 20 June, defining the proposed new boundaries of the property, was submitted to the Ministry ofCulture. It defines the historical centre(the Historic Centre, the Monument Zone and the newly incorporated areas of San Antonio, Antiquilla and Yanahuara); and the buffer zone(including the newly incorporated areas of IV Centenario, Miraflores and Cayma). Once this Municipal Ordinance is approved, a minor boundary modificationwill be submitted to the World Heritage Centre;
  • Advances in the compilation and completion of the Master Plan for the Historic Centre (MPHC) and its submission for evaluation and approval to institutions and community groups through four interactive workshops. Approval by the Municipal Council is expected by June 2014. No information on the methods of implementation was provided;
  • The drafting of a new Metropolitan Development Plan (PDM) commenced in 2012 to rationalize inconsistencies with the developed MPHC and its social implications. A full review is being undertaken by the Peruvian Association of Architects and an interdisciplinary board. No timeframe to final completion was provided;
  • In April 2013, works were undertaken on the Chilina Bridge, component IV of the Via Troncal Interconectora project.  Media reports indicate that the project has already reached a certain level  and that its completion is expected by November 2014
  • In May 2013, a meeting between the Ministry of Culture and the Regional Government of Arequipa was held to try to achieve a consensus over the Via Troncal Interconectora project. With regard to Chilina Bridge, it was agreed that the Regional Government would adapt the project in light of the Ministry of Culture’s review, and that a Certificate of Non-Existence of Archaeological Remains (CIRA) would be required for the area affected by the bridge. Both institutions agreed not to carry out the other components of project until the CIRA and the Environmental Impact studies were prepared. No information on the effective implementation of those commitments was submitted.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2014

 

It is noted that the State Party has made progress in addressing the final delimitation of boundaries and buffer zone and the completion of the Risk Preparedness Plan and the Master Plan of the Historic Centre of Arequipa. However, it is consider that management and conservation tools for the property have not been sufficiently integrated, which results in inconsistent policies for the property being adopted by different levels of the government. An effective response to the challenges of conservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property requires the urgent development and implementation of integrated policies.

With regard to the Via Troncal Interconectora project, it is regretted that no Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was submitted, as previously requested in 2011 (35 COM 7B.132), 2012 (36 COM 7B.104) and 2013 (37 COM 7B.101), prior to the approval and implementation of the project.  The ongoing construction of component IV, the Chilina Bridge, is of particular concern as is the fact that no information was provided to demonstrate the moratorium on work on the other components of the project while those studies are developed.

Given the circumstances described above, it is imperative that these heritage assessments are undertaken and action plans are developed to mitigate the visual impacts of the overall project, and of the Chilina Bridge in particular, before any further works are undertaken. It is also necessary that clarification be provided to the World Heritage Centre regarding the implementation of the commitments agreed between the Ministry of Culture and the Regional Government

Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2014
38 COM 7B.46
Historic Centre of the City of Arequipa (Peru) (C 1016)

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B,
  2. Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.101, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),
  3. Takes note of the significant progress made by the State Party in addressing the final delimitation of boundaries and buffer zone, and the completion of the Risk preparedness plan and the Master Plan of the Historic Centre of Arequipa;
  4. Urges the State Party to complete the process of final approval and implementation of the new boundaries for the property as well as for its Master Plan and Risk preparedness plan;
  5. Invites the State Party to submit, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines, the final proposal for the buffer zone as a minor boundary modification to enhance the protection of the visually sensitive areas around the property;
  6. Notes with strong concern that work has started on the construction of the Chilina Bridge, one of the components of the project Via Troncal Interconectora, without the completion of a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its last three sessions;
  7. Reiterates its request to the State Party to undertake, an HIA encompassing all the components of the Via Troncal Interconectora project, including the assessment of potential impacts on the landscape areas of Lari Lari, Los Tucos, Cayma and Yanahuara and an action plan to mitigate the visual impacts and requests the State Party to complete and submit these studies to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies, prior to any approval or implementation of the entire project;
  8. Also requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the property to consider the assessments of potential impacts of the Via Local Interconectora project, as well as the development of an action plan to mitigate negative impacts;
  9. Further requests the State Party to complete the review of the Metropolitan Development Plan in order to rationalize inconsistencies with the Master Plan of the property and confirm whether or not this plan is to be regarded as the management plan for the property, requested by the World Heritage Committee to ensure the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;
  10. Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2015, a progress report and, by 1 December 2015, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, both reports including a 1-page executive summary, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016.
Read more
Draft Decision:   38 COM 7B.46

The World Heritage Committee,

1.  Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B,

2.  Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.101, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),

3.  Takes note of the significant progress made by the State Party in addressing the final delimitation of boundaries and buffer zone, and the completion of the Risk preparedness plan and the Master Plan of the Historic Centre of Arequipa;

4.  Urges the State Party to complete the process of final approval and implementation of the new boundaries for the property as well as for its Master Plan and Risk preparedness plan;

5.  Invites the State Party to submit, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines, the final proposal for the buffer zone as a minor boundary modification to enhance the protection of the visually sensitive areas around the property;

6.  Notes with strong concern that work has started on the construction of the Chilina Bridge, one of the components of the project Via Troncal Interconectora, without the completion of a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its last three sessions;

7.  Reiterates its request to the State Party to undertake, an HIA encompassing all the components of the Via Troncal Interconectora project, including the assessment of potential impacts on the landscape areas of Lari Lari, Los Tucos, Cayma and Yanahuara and an action plan to mitigate the visual impacts and requests the State Party to complete and submit these studies to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies, prior to any approval or implementation of the entire project;

8.  Also requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the property to consider the assessments of potential impacts of the Via Local Interconectora project, as well as the development of an action plan to mitigate negative impacts; 

9.  Further requests the State Party to complete the review of the Metropolitan Development Plan in order to rationalize inconsistencies with the Master Plan of the property and confirm whether or not this plan is to be regarded as the management plan for the property, requested by the World Heritage Committee to ensure the protection of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

10.  Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2015, a progress report and, by 1 February 2016, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, both reports including a 1-page executive summary, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016.

Previous 2013 Next 2016
Report year: 2014
Peru
Date of Inscription: 2000
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iv)
Documents examined by the Committee
WHC-14/38.COM/7B
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2014) .pdf
arrow_circle_right 38COM (2014)
Exports
Previous 2013 Next 2016

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top