Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa
Factors affecting the property in 2006*
- Deliberate destruction of heritage
- Earthquake
- Flooding
- Major linear utilities
- Management activities
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
a) Frequent seismic activity in the region and flooding during the rainy season;
b) Demolition of certain houses in the historical centre and the restoration of San Agustin Church.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2006
Total amount approved : 75,000 USD
| 2001 | Consolidation and restoration of the Cathedral of ... (Approved) | 75,000 USD |
Missions to the property until 2006**
Monitoring Mission in 1999; ICOMOS Expert Mission 2000
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2006
The World Heritage Centre received a State of Conservation Report by the State Party in January 2006. The report described the works carried out by the regional, local, foreign and private institutions concerned with the conservation of the site. The works included the restoration of a number of public spaces and historical buildings in collaboration with the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation (AECI), as established in the work calendar presented last year. Other projects mentioned in the report included the restoration of facades, underground cabling for the public lighting of the historical centre, the inventory of the historical centre and the inauguration of a restoration school. According to the report, some of these projects are still in the conception stage, while others are being implemented and due to be completed in the following months.
Concerning the demolition of historic houses in the historical centre of Arequipa, the report explained that these houses were not listed as Historic Monuments and did not form part of any monumental urban context. Nevertheless, the National Cultural Institute (INC) of Lima is dealing with the question and sanctions will be imposed on the owners for having demolished the houses without the required authorization.
Regarding the Committee’s request for information on the tower of the San Agustin Church, the State Party has reported that this has now been restored, by the Regional Government, according to its original style and the church has today resumed its normal activities.
The Committee had also encouraged the State Party to implement the Disaster Preparedness Plan at the soonest. This Plan, however, is still being finalized and, according to the report, will be submitted to the World Heritage Centre in the coming months. No specific timeframe was provided.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2006
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2006
30 COM 7B.98
State of Conservation (Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa)
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7B.97 adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),
3. Urges the State Party to finalise and implement the Disaster Preparedness Plan as soon as possible;
4. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2007, a report on the progress made in the implementation of the Disaster Preparedness Plan for examination by the Committee at its 31st session in 2007.
Projet de décision : 30 COM 7B.98
Le Comité du patrimoine mondial,
1. Ayant examiné le document WHC-06/30.COM/7B,
2. Rappelant la décision 29 COM 7B.97 adoptée à sa 29e session (Durban, 2005),
3. Engage vivement l’État partie à finaliser et à mettre en œuvre dès que possible le plan de prévention des catastrophes ;
4. Demande à l’État partie de soumettre au Centre du patrimoine mondial, d'ici le 1er février 2007, un rapport d'avancement sur les progrès réalisés dans la mise en oeuvre du plan de prévention des catastrophes pour examen par le Comité à sa 31e session en 2007.
Peru
* :
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.
