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

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x

Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin

Germany
Factors affecting the property in 2004*
  • Ground transport infrastructure
  • Other Threats:

    Fire

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

Fire.

Additional Details:

Infrastructure development pressure

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2004
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2004

By letter of 25 July 2003 the German authorities informed the Centre of the extent of the damages caused by the fire at the "Jagdschloss Glienicke" of March 2003, of the first protection measures and the planned procedure for restoration works. The Centre was furthermore informed that the work has not yet been commenced due to the on-going competition process to appoint an architect and technical conservation companies to be commissioned with the implementation of the restoration.

 

The State Party furthermore reported that the "Havel Waterway Improvement Project " is still suspended.

 

In November 2003 the Centre was also informed about a project to enlarge a road, which crosses the World Heritage property in the Western part of the Park of Sanssouci bordering the ‘Neues Palais’. The enlargement of the road would represent a significant increase in traffic along the Western part of the World Heritage property, likely to affect the stability of the buildings as well as the visual and functional coherence of the site and its immediate surroundings. The road is part of the national road network plan and will also include broadening a bridge over one of the adjacent lakes (Templiner See).

 

Concerning the road project, ICOMOS noted that a plan for a western bypass road was adopted by the city of Potsdam in 2001 including a connection along the existing railway dam across Lake Templin. The traffic in the northern direction would be channelled through the existing streets of Forststraße - Am Neuen Palais - Amundsenstraße. Yet, it cannot be excluded that the Federal Roads Administration upgrades and expands these two-lane-streets at a later stage. ICOMOS would strictly reject such an expansion, because the street Am Neuen Palais, in close proximity of the Neues Palais and the Communs leads through the core zone of the World Heritage property. Even if the city authorities intend to "essentially maintain the actual street formation" the connection of national roads along the railway dam will in any case lead to additional 50% of traffic on these streets, meaning additional emissions and optical impairments.

 

ICOMOS stated that the planned connection of two national roads via the railway dam across Lake Templin is placed outside of the World Heritage property core zone. As the railway dam, dating from 1950, would be considerably broadened by the road connection, ICOMOS considers it a disturbing element in the Potsdam cultural landscape. Therefore a suggestion has been made that in the course of the road connection project the dam should be replaced by a bridge construction. Because of the necessary area planning operation (Raumordnungsplanverfahren), the realization of a B2 and B1 connection along the railway dam will probably take several years.

 

An additional road planning in that area is the construction of a new national road 1, apparently accepted in the Federal Traffic Route Plan, using a route leading through the Wildpark. The deer park (Wildpark) has to be considered as part of the Lenné landscape design west of the Neues Palais; yet, it does not belong to the core zone of the World Heritage property.

 

ICOMOS suggested that any further expansion of the streets Forststraße - Am Neuen Palais - Amundsenstraße must be strictly rejected, as these would endanger the World Heritage property of Potsdam.

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2004
28 COM 15B.89

The World Heritage Committee [40],

1. Thanking the German authorities for the information on the restoration plans for Glienicke Castle,

2. Invites the German authorities to implement the restoration works in due course;

3. Requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed of the restoration work undertaken at the Jagdschloss Glienicke and to provide updated information to the World Heritage Centre;

4. Notes that the “Havel Waterway Improvement Project” is suspended and requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed of any future development of the “Havel Waterway Improvement Project” by providing updated information to the World Heritage Centre as appropriate;

5. Expresses its concern about the plans to expand the roads in and in close proximity to the World Heritage property and further requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an up-date report, by 1 February 2005 on the road project and its potential impacts on the World Heritage property.

[40] Decision adopted without discussion

Draft Decision:  28 COM 15B.89

The World Heritage Committee,

1.  Thanking the German authorities for the information on the restoration plans for Glienicke Castle,

2.  Invites the German authorities to implement the restoration works in due course;

3.  Requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed of the restoration work undertaken at the Jagdschloss Glienicke and to provide up dated information to the Centre;

4.  Notes that the “Havel Waterway Improvement Project” is suspended and requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed of any future development of the “Havel Waterway Improvement Project” by providing up dated information to the Centre as appropriate;

5.  Expresses its concern about the plans to expand the roads in and in close proximity to the World Heritage property and further requests the State Party to provide the Centre with an up-date report on the road project and its potential impacts on the World Heritage property.

Report year: 2004
Germany
Date of Inscription: 1990
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(ii)(iv)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 28COM (2004)
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