Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa
Factors affecting the property in 2004*
- Commercial development
- Deliberate destruction of heritage
- Earthquake
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
Urban Pressure; Lack of management mechanism (including legislation); Lack of institution coordination; Earthquake.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2004
Total amount approved : 75,000 USD
| 2001 | Consolidation and restoration of the Cathedral of ... (Approved) | 75,000 USD |
Missions to the property until 2004**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2004
The Secretariat received a progress report from the State Party on 30 January 2004 explaining that an Emergency and Risk Preparedness Plan is being prepared by the Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INC) in co-operation with the Municipality of Arequipa, the Spanish Agency for International Co-operation and the Institute of Civil Defence. The Plan will include a study of the soil, geotechnical studies, plan for seismic zoning,regulations for inter-institutional and multisectoral participation by a Civil Defence System, research on prevention measures, a monitoring system, a large public awareness campaign and post earthquake emergency measures to evaluate damages and to coordinate efforts.
The State Party also informed the Secretariat of the state of implementation of the Revitalization Plan for the Historical Centre of Arequipa during 2003 as a result of a Covenant (2002-2005) signed by the Municipality of Arequipa and the Spanish Agency for International Co-operation (AECI) to implement the Plan by the Technical Office of the Historical Centre (OTCHA). A Unit for coordination and administration of the revitalization plan coordinated the programme for risk-preparedness, while the Unit of Project execution concentrated its work on the restoration of the Cloister and Pinacotecaof the Convent of La Recoleta and the Church of the Franciscan Order, The Church of San Antonio Abad and the Rehabilitation of the Tambo of Matadero, among other interventions.
Furthermore, the UNESCO Office in Lima sent information to the Secretariat on 26 November 2003 concerning the demolition of some protected constructions (405; 405A; 405B; 405D and 405E) to build a market, which was authorized by the Regional Directorate of Arequipa by Resolution 073-2003-INC-DA.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2004
28 COM 15B.121
Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa (Peru)
The World Heritage Committee, 1. Taking note of the progress report submitted by the State Party with information on the implementation of the Master Plan (Decision 27 COM 7B.100), 2. Commending the State Party for the outline programme for Emergencies and Reduction of Disasters, which is under preparation, and thanking the Spanish Agency for International Co-operation for the support provided, 3. Requests information on the demolition of the immovable heritage in the Historical Centre of Arequipa by the Resolution 073-2003-INC-DA, adopted by the Regional Directorate of Arequipa ; 4. Further requests the State Party to submit, by 1 February 2005, a report on the progress achieved in the implementation of the Emergency and Risk Preparedness Plan, for consideration of the Committee at its 29th session in 2005.Draft Decision: 28 COM 15B.121
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Taking note of the progress report submitted by the State Party with information on the implementation of the Master Plan,
2. Commending the State Party for the outline programme for Emergencies and Reduction of Disasters, which is under preparation, and thanking the Spanish Agency for International Co-operation for the support provided,
3. Requests information on the demolition of the immovable heritage in the Historical Centre of Arequipa by the Resolution 073-2003-INC-DA;
4. Further requests the State Party to submit, by 1 February 2005, a report on the progress achieved in the implementation of the Emergency and Risk Preparedness Plan, for consideration of the Committee at its 29th session in 2005.
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.
