Coro and its Port
Factors affecting the property in 2015*
- Flooding
- Management systems/ management plan
- Water (rain/water table)
- Other Threats:
Serious deterioration of materials and structure; Deterioration of the architectural and urban coherence and integrity of the property
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Serious deterioration of materials and structures
- Deterioration of the architectural and urban coherence and integrity of the property
- Lack of adequate management, planning and conservation mechanisms
- Absence of detailed and technical information on the state of conservation of the property since 2007
- Flooding and water damage
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
- Considerable decay of materials and structures resulting from lack of comprehensive conservation and maintenance, and torrential rains in 2004, 2005 and 2010;
- Deterioration of architectural and urban coherence compromising the integrity and authenticity of the property;
- Lack of adequate and efficient management, planning and conservation mechanisms, and institutional arrangements.
Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger
Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5965
Corrective Measures for the property
Adopted, see page https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5965
Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2015
Total amount provided: USD 20,000 (Spanish Funds-in-Trust for World Heritage) for the planning, implementation and subsequent publications of participatory workshops and meetings with artisans and civil society in Coro and La Vela.
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2015
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 2015**
September 2006: World Heritage Centre mission to assessment of the state of conservation; April 2005, May 2008 and February 2011: Joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring missions.
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2015
On 3 February 2015, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/658/documents/, informing of the following actions:
- The cartography regarding the World Heritage area presented in January 2014 is ratified and the boundaries of the buffer zone have been defined. In addition, a Zone of Touristic and Landscaping Interest has been defined for future implementation.
- A plan has been formulated, approved and its execution initiated for the implementation of the corrective measures conservation strategies.
- Broad institutional alliances have been established for the implementation of the corrective measures.
As to management arrangements, the report informs of the broad and participatory approach that is taken in the management and implementation of actions, including the preparation of a Master Plan, under the authority of the Office for Strategic Projects and Design of Heritage Areas of Coro, La Vela and Areas of Protection (OPEDAP). An Ordinance for Zoning, Architecture and Construction was enacted in December 2014 and foresees the creation of a multi-disciplinary Mixed Commission for the approval of the corrective measures, the strategies for the management and master plans, supervision and approval of conservation interventions.
Information is furthermore provided on specific interventions such as the preparation of a drainage master plan for Coro and La Vela, conservation interventions in 2014 (mainly in public buildings) and those planned for 2015 (mainly in privately owned buildings, i.e. 22 in Coro and 40 in La Vela), the closure of streets for traffic, and the incorporation and promotion of traditional know-how, particularly related to mud-brick structures.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2015
The progress made is well noted regarding the implementation of concrete actions that contribute to the achievement of the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR), such as conservation interventions that include the conservation of an important number of public and privately owned buildings, traffic management, transfer of know-how, improvement of drainage systems, progress in inter-institutional coordination, etc. These interventions will contribute to the overall improved state of conservation of the property and it is recommended that the Committee recognize the efforts made by the State Party.
However, there is concern about the lack of detailed and precise information in response to each of the revised corrective measures adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th session, in particular the measures to be completed within one year that focus on planning mechanisms and management and conservation strategies, such as the elaboration of a management plan, conservation strategy and action plan, a strategy to integrate traditional know-how and a strategy to address issues of ownership and abandonment.
The revised cartography submitted by the State Party within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory process requires further clarification to meet the requirements for Minor Boundary Modifications, as set up in the Operational Guidelines.
It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to urgently prepare a strategy, work plan and timetable to respond to the revised corrective measures and timeframe for implementation, as adopted by the Committee at its 38th session, and to submit these documents no later than 1 December 2015, for review by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, for immediate response to the State Party.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2015
39 COM 7A.48
Coro and its Port (Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of) (C 658)
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7A,
- Recalling Decision 38 COM 7A.23, adopted at its 38th session (Doha, 2014),
- Takes note of the submission of the clarification of boundaries for the property and the proposal of extension of the buffer zone and requests the State Party to submit a minor boundary modification, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines;
- Appreciates the progress in the implementation of concrete actions that contribute to the achievement of the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR), such as an important number of conservation interventions in public and privately owned buildings, traffic management, transfer of know-how, improvement of drainage systems and progress in inter-institutional coordination through strategic alliances and the establishment of a Mixed Commission;
- Recalling, however, that the timely implementation of the revised corrective measures defined in Decision 38 COM 7A.23 is an essential requirement for achieving the DSOCR, regrets that on the basis of the report of the State Party, it is not possible to assess the real and concrete progress in the implementation of the revised corrective measures and make additional recommendations as could be required;
- Also requests the State Party to urgently draw up a strategy, detailed work plans, timeframes and budgets for the full implementation of the corrective measures within a two year period and to take all the necessary legal, managerial and budgetary provisions for their implementation, and to submit these documents as soon as possible, and no later than 1 December 2015, for review by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;
- Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2016, an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016;
- Decides to retain Coro and its Port (Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
39 COM 8C.2
Update of the List of the World Heritage in Danger
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-15/39.COM/7A and WHC-15/39.COM/7A.Add),
- Decides to retain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
- Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 39 COM 7A.38)
- Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Decision 39 COM 7A.39)
- Belize, Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System (Decision 39 COM 7A.18)
- Bolivia (Plurinational State of), City of Potosi (Decision 39 COM 7A.44)
- Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.1)
- Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 39 COM 7A.45)
- Côte d'Ivoire, Comoé National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.2)
- Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 39 COM 7A.3)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virunga National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.4)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.5)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Garamba National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.6)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Salonga National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.7)
- Democratic Republic of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 39 COM 7A.8)
- Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 39 COM 7A.24)
- Ethiopia, Simien National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.10)
- Georgia, Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery (Decision 39 COM 7A.40)
- Georgia, Historical Monuments of Mtskheta (Decision 39 COM 7A.41)
- Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 39 COM 7A.20)
- Indonesia, Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra (Decision 39 COM 7A.15)
- Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 39 COM 7A.25)
- Iraq, Samarra Archaeological City (Decision 39 COM 7A.26)
- Jerusalem, Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (site proposed by Jordan) (Decision 39 COM 7A.27)
- Madagascar, Rainforests of the Atsinanana (Decision 39 COM 7A.11)
- Mali, Timbuktu (Decision 39 COM 7A.21)
- Mali, Tomb of Askia (Decision 39 COM 7A.22)
- Niger, Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 39 COM 7A.12)
- Palestine, Birthplace of Jesus: Church of the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Route, Bethlehem (Decision 39 COM 7A.28)
- Palestine, Palestine: Land of Olives and Vines – Cultural Landscape of Southern Jerusalem, Battir (Decision 39 COM 7A.29)
- Panama, Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Decision 39 COM 7A.46)
- Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 39 COM 7A.47)
- Senegal, Niokolo-Koba National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.13)
- Serbia, Medieval Monuments in Kosovo (Decision 39 COM 7A.42)
- Solomon Islands, East Rennell (Decision 39 COM 7A.16)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Damascus (Decision 39 COM 7A.30)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Bosra (Decision 39 COM 7A.31)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Site of Palmyra (Decision 39 COM 7A.32)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient City of Aleppo (Decision 39 COM 7A.33)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din (Decision 39 COM 7A.34)
- Syrian Arab Republic, Ancient Villages of Northern Syria (Decision 39 COM 7A.35)
- Uganda, Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi (Decision 39 COM 7A.23)
- United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (Decision 39 COM 7A.43)
- United Republic of Tanzania, Selous Game Reserve (Decision 39 COM 7A.14)
- United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 39 COM 7A.17)
- Venezuela, Coro and its Port (Decision 39 COM 7A.48)
- Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 39 COM 7A.37)
Draft Decision: 39 COM 7A.48
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7A,
- Recalling Decision 38 COM 7A.23, adopted at its 38th session (Doha, 2014),
- Takes note of the submission of the clarification of boundaries for the property and the proposal of extension of the buffer zone and requests the State Party to submit a minor boundary modification, according to paragraphs 163-165 of the Operational Guidelines;
- Appreciates the progress in the implementation of concrete actions that contribute to the achievement of the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR), such as an important number of conservation interventions in public and privately owned buildings, traffic management, transfer of know-how, improvement of drainage systems and progress in inter-institutional coordination through strategic alliances and the establishment of a Mixed Commission;
- Recalling, however, that the timely implementation of the revised corrective measures defined in Decision 38 COM 7A.23 is an essential requirement for achieving the DSOCR, regrets that on the basis of the report of the State Party, it is not possible to assess the real and concrete progress in the implementation of the revised corrective measures and make additional recommendations as could be required;
- Also requests the State Party to urgently draw up a strategy, detailed work plans, timeframes and budgets for the full implementation of the corrective measures within a two year period and to take all the necessary legal, managerial and budgetary provisions for their implementation, and to submit these documents as soon as possible, and no later than 1 December 2015, for review by the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies;
- Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2016, an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 40th session in 2016;
- Decides to retain Coro and its Port (Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
Documents examined by the Committee
39COM (2015)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.
