State of Conservation (SOC)
Historic Centre of Puebla (2004)
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
International Assistance granted to the property
Total Amount Ap proved:68,000USD
|1999||Emergency measures to repair and consolidate the Monastery of ...||50,000 USD|
|1994||Expert services to advise on the further development of the ...||18,000 USD|
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Urban pressure; Lack of monitoring system; Earthquake
Current conservation issues
Since 2002 the Secretariat has been receiving information from the civil society of Puebla expressing public concern regarding the construction of underground parking facilities as elaborated by the Mayor of the city over the past one and a half year. Disregarding the ICOMOS recommendations of the May 2002 Reactive Monitoring mission, the Municipality of Puebla had begun the construction of the first parking in September 2003, without having conducted a traffic regulation study or an archaeological survey, and without the authorization of INAH Puebla (Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia). For this reason a second ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission took place from 30 October to 4 November 2003 to verify the state of implementation of construction of the underground parking facilities, which were located in the core and buffer zones of the World Heritage property.
The report of the second ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission established a priority in urgently undertaking a transportation and traffic study, thoroughly adjusted to the current process of urban rehabilitation. Furthermore, the eight recommendations that were formulated by ICOMOS after the first Reactive Monitoring mission (12-14 May 2002) remain valid, as the Municipality of Puebla has unfortunately not addressed them. All the foreseen works were formulated without a careful analysis on how to improve the existing parking facilities in the historic centre and its immediate periphery (since most of them were not used to full capacity).
The Secretariat was informed by letter dated 20 January 2004 through the Permanent Delegation of Mexico to UNESCO on the suspension of construction works: on 9 September 2003 INAH (Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia) had stopped the illegal works and on 23 October it had refused a permit for the project. In this letter the Directorateof World Heritage in Mexico further informed on the elaboration of a special “Declaration” to ensure a better protection and preservation of the Historical Centre of Puebla, which was in the process of finalization. The Secretariat has not received any information on progress in the finalization of the Integral Plan for the Rehabilitation of the Historic Centre of Puebla.
Link to the decision
The World Heritage Committee, 1. Taking note of the information transmitted by the State Party and the ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring report concerning the construction of underground parking facilities in the World Heritage core and buffer zones of Puebla (Decision 27 COM 7B.94), 2. Commending the State Party for having taken the proper measures to stop the construction activities, 3. Requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed on the implementation of the ICOMOS recommendations as well as on the finalization of the Integral Plan for the Rehabilitation of the Historic Centre of Puebla
Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.116
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Taking note of the ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring report and information transmitted by the State Party concerning the construction of underground parking facilities in the World Heritage core and buffer zones of Puebla,
2. Commending the State Party for having taken the proper measures to stop the construction activities,
3. Requests the State Party to keep the Committee informed on the implementation of the ICOMOS recommendations as well as on the finalization of the Integral Plan for the Rehabilitation of the Historic Centre of Puebla.
View inscribed site documents, nomination file, reports, decisions, ...
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”).