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

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x

Palace and Gardens of Schönbrunn

Austria
Factors affecting the property in 2006*
  • Housing
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

Visual impact by high-rise construction project

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2006
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2006**

World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission March 2006

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2006

As requested by the Committee, a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS monitoring mission took place to the site from 15 to 17 March 2006 to review the situation of the project of a proposed high-rise structure in the Meidling area. The mission concluded that the proposed development project at the Kometgründe-Meidling in close proximity to the World Heritage property would have considerable impact on the integrity of the site. The suggested reduction of the high-rise tower from 120m to 90m, proposed by the architects in the first review of the project in February 2006, did not substantially change the situation. The mission suggested the general necessity for the development of the Meidling area to be based on a different architectural concept and integrated in a broader urban planning context. As an outcome of the mission’s discussions with the authorities, the responsible planning authority of the City of Vienna announced on 17 March 2006 to stop the high-rise project of the Kometgründe-Meidling, and to support the development of the area through smaller scale projects.

In terms of the management of the World Heritage property, the mission noted that the competences and formal responsibilities for the World Heritage property are much diversified, and therefore suggested the need to improve dialogue between all stakeholders and to set clear rules in site management to ensure future sustainable use and preservation of the values of the World Heritage property. To this end, the mission underlined the need to elaborate a comprehensive management plan for the property based on the requirements of the Convention. In addition, the mission proposed to improve specific national legislation enabling harmonization of development and preservation of cultural values in their tangible and intangible dimension in order to improve the management of the World Heritage property.

Concerning high-rise development in Vienna in general, the mission further pointed out that the issue of high-rise buildings in the panorama of Vienna is very complex and not limited to this specific case. Although the city authorities have at their disposal planning instruments controlling land use density, height and location of high-rise buildings, the implementation of these tools does not clearly reflect the World Heritage status of the city, and priorities for protection of cultural heritage. It is suggested that the city coordinates closely with the national heritage preservation authorities and related professional bodies for the further development of the vision of Vienna, so as to fine-tune the “High-rise Concept of Vienna” adopted in 2002. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2006
30 COM 7B.81
State of Conservation (Palace and Gardens of Schönbrunn)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.73, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Notes with appreciation the decision by the Vienna authorities to stop the high-rise Kometgründe-Meidling project, as well as the results of the joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission in March 2006;

4. Encourages the authorities to review the buffer-zone of the World Heritage property so as to enlarge the protected area and to prepare a comprehensive management plan for the property that takes into account the broader urban landscape of the property;

5. Recalls the importance of the provisions of the Vienna Memorandum on "World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture, Managing the Historic Urban Landscape" (2005), as well as the fine-tuning of the "High-rise concept of Vienna", adopted by the City of Vienna in 2002 ;

6. Requests the State Party, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, to inform the World Heritage Centre on any major urban development projects that may adversely affect the integrity of the property;

7. Further requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed about any further new development for the Kometgründe-Meidling.

Draft Decision: 30 COM 7B.81

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.73, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),

3. Notes with appreciation the decision by the Vienna authorities to stop the high-rise Kometgründe-Meidling project, as well as the results of the joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission in March 2006;

4. Encourages the authorities to review the buffer-zone of the World Heritage property so as to enlarge the protected area and to prepare a comprehensive management plan for the property that takes into account the broader urban landscape of the property;

5. Recalls the importance of the provisions of the Vienna Memorandum on World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture (May 2005) in safeguarding the historic urban landscape;

6. Requests the State Party, in accordance with paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, to inform the World Heritage Centre on any major urban development projects that may adversely affect the integrity of the property;

7. Further requests the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre informed about any further new development for the Kometgründe-Meidling.

Report year: 2006
Austria
Date of Inscription: 1996
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(iv)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 30COM (2006)
Exports

* : 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