Case Law - Traffic management

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7B,
2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7B.17, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
3. Notes that the major project for developing Galle Port is currently postponed, and requests the State Party to inform the World Heritage Centre immediately in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, should the project be reactivated, and to provide all the necessary documents requested by the previous decisions of the Committee, for review by the Advisory Bodies;
4. Welcomes the State Party’s ongoing commitment to the management of the property, and also notes the ongoing implementation of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP) and the Sustainable Tourism Management Plan (STMP), an increase in funding for the Galle Heritage Foundation (GHF), and plans to improve its organizational structure and resources;
5. Also requests the State Party, in the light of the importance of the IMP to deal with planning and development controls, and conservation in the property, to provide the following details:
   1. Confirmation of progress with the implementation of the 2016-18 IMP Action Plan,
   2. Confirmation that coordination between GHF and other conservation and development authorities has been strengthened, as recommended by the 2010 Reactive Monitoring mission,
   3. Confirmation of the number and type of applications for developments within the property that were submitted, approved and denied over the last two years, along with the criteria used for these assessments,
   4. Conservation work that undertaken or ongoing,
   5. Progress with the drafting of a Conservation Plan,
   6. Progress with the development of a retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (rSOUV);
6. Further requests the State Party to clarify how the GHF’s resources allow it to implement the IMP and the STMP, and notably to provide details on:
   1. The GHF’s organizational structure and how many posts remain unfilled,
   2. The GHF’s annual budget and how this has increased since 2015 in relation to baselines and taking inflation into account,
   3. The development of a long-term funding strategy, as previously requested;
7. Invites the State Party to consider the development and implementation of capacity-building activities for staff working at the property;
8. Further notes that many of the recommendations of the STMP require additional reports, notably on traffic management, visitor capacity, and the preparation of a masterplan, and requests furthermore the State Party to provide details on:
   1. How much of the STMP has been implemented,
   2. What financial resources are available for its completion,
   3. The appointment of a Tourism Officer at the GHF,
   4. Progress with additional reports (e.g. traffic management, visitor capacity) and the draft master plan, and/or how and when the State Party intends to undertake or commission these tasks, and/or how the State Party intends to take into account the recommendations of the STMP,
   5. Any interim arrangements made to improve the traffic situation in the old town;
9. Requests moreover the State Party to inform the World Heritage Centre, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines of any project that might negatively impact on the property’s OUV before any decision is made than would be difficult to reverse, notably regarding proposals for a new stand at the Cricket Club;
10. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2022, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 46th session.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC/21/44.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 43 COM 7B.45 adopted at its 43rd session (Baku, 2019),
3. Commends the State Party on the progress made in relation to capacity building and compliance with the requirements and processes of the World Heritage Convention and Operational Guidelines, the improved state of conservation of Saqqara including continued archaeological research, excavations and discoveries, which underscore the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, and the comprehensive work undertaken by the Egyptian authorities to open new museums;
4. Notes the findings and recommendations of the 2021 UNESCO Advisory mission and requests the State Party to implement the recommendations of the mission report, including the preparation of a unified and comprehensive Management Plan for the property;
5. Also notes with concern that, works are proceeding on the Ring Road project through the Giza Plateau, and reiterates its request to the State Party to review the reasons and necessity for the project, and to complete necessary studies so that alternatives can be fully considered, and further notes strong concern at the potential impact of any solution outside a tunnel;
6. Notes furthermore the previous Committee Decision that any project should only progress once all requested technical reports and subsequent Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs) have been positively reviewed by the Advisory Bodies and appropriate mitigation measures and procedures for monitoring have been agreed, and reiterates its previous request to the State Party to:
   1. Complete a comprehensive archaeological assessment, incorporating results from remote sensing,
   2. Ensure that, following the review by the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies, the final comprehensive ‘archaeological assessment report’ and the previous technical reports on traffic management and design details, inform the preparation of the engineering designs for the tunnel project,
   3. Finalize the HIA for the project, following the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for Cultural World Heritage Properties;
7. Expresses regret that the Giza Pyramids Plateau Development Project has been completed without referral to the World Heritage Centre in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, and prior to consideration of the potential buffer zone for the Giza component of the property, but acknowledges that the project may improve protection of the property and visitor experiences;
8. Also reiterates its previous request to the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, as soon as possible and in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, a detailed document providing comprehensive information about the proposed Pyramids Security Project;
9. Further reiterates its previous request to the State Party to further strengthen the protection and management of the property, with particular regard to its Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (SOUV), and by reviewing its boundaries, defining a buffer zone and submitting a Minor Boundary Modification request, in line with Paragraphs 163-164 of the Operational Guidelines;
10. Also requests the State Party to consult the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS regarding any proposed modification of boundaries, for both the property and the buffer zone, which should also have regard to the RSOUV, and to submit the above-mentioned Minor Boundary Modification request;
11. Takes note with satisfaction that the State Party would welcome a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to the property as soon as possible to evaluate the property’s state of conservation and to review the ongoing and planned projects, including road projects, and assess how they may affect the property’s OUV, having particular regard to:
    1. The Pyramids Security Project,
    2. The proposed Ring Road project through the Giza Plateau,
    3. The Giza component of the property, and the impact of increasing urban pressure in Cairo,
    4. The appropriate boundary and buffer zone for the Giza component of the property,
       
       and further requests the State Party to provide the relevant documentation on all planned and ongoing projects, including a detailed HIA for each project, to the World Heritage Centre for review by the Advisory Bodies prior to the mission;
12. Welcomes the intention of the State Party to consider establishing a unit focused on preparing HIAs and encourages the State Party to build upon the 2019 and 2021 HIA workshops in the framework of the capacity building initiatives that the World Heritage Centre is implementing with the support of projects funded by Netherlands Funds in Trust and the Government of France;
13. Requests furthermore the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2022, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 46th session.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Documents WHC/21/44.COM/8B and WHC/21/44.COM/INF.8B2,
2. Taking note of the Note Verbale dated 9 June 2021 issued in Paris by the State Party and the supplemental information in the form of a non-paper dated 15 July 2021 provided by the State Party to all the State members of the World Heritage Committee and the UNESCO Secretariat on the submission made by Japan for inscription on the World Heritage List under the name of property “Amami-Oshima Island, Tokunoshima Island, Northern part of Okinawa Island, and Iriomote Island”;
3. Inscribes Amami-Oshima Island, Tokunoshima Island, Northern part of Okinawa Island, and Iriomote Island, Japan, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (x);
4. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

   Brief synthesis

   Amami-Oshima Island, Tokunoshima Island, the northern part of Okinawa Island, and Iriomote Island is a terrestrial serial property covering 42,698 ha comprised of five component parts on four different islands (with Tokunoshima Island having two component parts). Influenced by the Kuroshio Current and a subtropical high-pressure system, the property has a warm and humid subtropical climate and is covered mainly with evergreen broadleaved subtropical rainforests.

   The formation of the Okinawa Trough in late Miocene resulted in the separation of a chain from the Eurasian Continent, forming an archipelago of small islands. Terrestrial species became isolated on these small islands and evolved to form unique and rich biota. The islands included in the property support many examples of endemic species of terrestrial vertebrate groups and plants that were not able to cross between these islands or adjoining landmasses.

   Thus, the property is of high global value for the protection of many endemic and globally threatened species, and contains the most important and significant remaining natural habitats for in-situ conservation of the unique and rich biodiversity of the central and southern part of the archipelago.

   Criterion (x): The property contains natural habitats of outstanding importance for in-situ conservation of the unique and diverse biodiversity of the central and southern part of the archipelago in which the property is located. The five component parts constituting the property are located in one of the 200 ecoregions considered most crucial to the conservation of global biodiversity. The subtropical rainforests of the property are the largest remaining in the region and harbour a very rich flora and fauna, boasting at least 1,819 vascular plants, 21 terrestrial mammals, 394 birds, 267 inland water fish, 36 terrestrial reptiles and 21 amphibians. These include approximately 57% of the terrestrial vertebrates of the biodiversity hotspot of Japan, including 44% of species endemic to Japan as well as 36% of Japan’s globally threatened vertebrates.

   Among species listed on IUCN Red List of Threatened Species are the Amami Rabbit, only found on Amami-Oshima and Tokunoshima Islands and the only species in its genus, with no close relatives anywhere in the world, and the flightless Okinawa Rail, endemic to the Northern part of Okinawa Island. Spiny rats form an endemic genus consisting of three species endemic to each of the respective three islands, and the Iriomote Cat, which only inhabits Iriomote Island.

   Speciation and endemism are high for many taxa. For example, 188 species of vascular plants and 1,607 insect species are endemic within the four islands of the property. Rates of endemism among terrestrial mammals (62%), terrestrial reptiles (64%), amphibians (86%), and inland water crabs (100%) are also high. Twenty species are identified as Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) species, including the Okinawa Spiny Rat, Ryukyu Black-Breasted Leaf Turtle, and Kuroiwa’s Ground Gecko.

   Integrity

   The property is the best representation of the archipelago in which it is located and contains the richest biota in Japan, one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots. The boundaries of the five component parts have been carefully selected to ensure that the entire property is strictly protected and that they capture the key values and demonstrate a generally high degree of connectivity, wherever it is possible to achieve this.  It will be crucial to ensure that buffer zones are actively managed to support the attributes of the property’s OUV and that activities such as logging do not create adverse impacts.

   The four islands that host the property consist of mountains and hills with intact and contiguous subtropical rainforests that secure particularly stable habitats for approximately 90% of native species, endemic species and globally threatened species of the central and southern part of the archipelago. There are important naturally functioning freshwater systems, but with some natural values that have been impacted by hard, engineered infrastructure and which could be restored to a more natural function.

   The five component parts of the property have intact subtropical forests and other habitats, including many areas of substantial size. These are selected to include the most important current and potential distributional areas of endemic species and threatened species, and are key attributes expressing the Outstanding Universal Value of this property.

   Protection and management requirements

   The property is under the strictest protection in the Japanese system of nature conservation areas, and its component parts are designated as Special Protection Zones or Class I Special Zones managed by the Ministry of the Environment and/or Preservation Zones of Forest Ecosystem Reserves managed by the Forestry Agency. In addition, the property is designated as a National Wildlife Protection Area and Natural Monument Protection Area. The property thus receives adequate management resources and appropriate long-term protection. Some of the endemic species and/or threatened species of the property, such as the Amami Rabbit, three species of the Spiny Rat, Okinawa Rail and Iriomote Cat, have been designated and legally protected as National Endangered Species and/or National Natural Monuments.

   The four islands of the property are inhabited, with residential areas and industrial activities located close to the habitats for endemic and threatened species. Buffer zones are included adjacent to the property, mainly in the Class II Special Zone of a national park and/or the Conservation and Utilization Zone of a Forest Ecosystem Reserve. In addition, Surrounding Conservation Areas encompassing the property and the buffer zones are designated under the Comprehensive Management Plan.

   Administrations at all levels, i.e. the Ministry of the Environment, the Forestry Agency, the Agency for Cultural Affairs, Kagoshima and Okinawa Prefectures, and 12 municipalities, have established a Regional Liaison Committee to facilitate and coordinate management of multilayered protected areas and the protection of designated species. They manage the property according to a Comprehensive Management Plan, which covers conservation measures not only in the property but also in the buffer zones and surrounding conservation areas.

   Key threats to the property include potential impacts from tourism, posing significant threats to wildlife in some areas, including Iriomote Island. Further threats include impacts from invasive alien species such as the small Indian Mongoose and cats, wildlife roadkill and the illegal collection of wild rare and threatened species. In order to address these threats, the risks to the property are prevented or mitigated by various measures implemented through collaboration among related administrative agencies, private organizations and local communities. In recent years, the tourism industry has increased and sustainable levels of tourism need to be fully assessed and continuously monitored. Invasive alien species and roadkill, especially the potentially critical impact of traffic on endangered species including the Iriomote Cat, need to be kept at an absolute minimum and strictly monitored, and illegal collection of wild rare and threatened species prevented. There is the need to develop a comprehensive river restoration strategy in order to transition wherever possible from hard infrastructure to employ nature-based techniques and rehabilitation approaches.  Activities in the buffer zones, including very limited traditional timber extraction that takes place, also require continued vigilance and to be strictly limited and monitored.

5. Commends the State Party for its commitment towards the conservation of this property and for its efforts in revising its original nomination to address questions of integrity;
6. Requests the State Party to take immediate steps to improve the protection and management of the property, including by:
   1. Capping or reducing levels of tourist visitation from current levels, especially on Iriomote Island, until a critical evaluation of tourism carrying capacity and impacts can be conducted and integrated into a revised tourism management plan,
   2. Urgently reviewing the effectiveness and strengthening if necessary, the traffic management measures designed to reduce road fatalities of endangered species (including but not limited to Amami Rabbit, Iriomote Cat, and Okinawa Rail),
   3. Developing a comprehensive river restoration strategy in order to transition wherever possible from hard, engineered infrastructure to employ nature-based techniques and rehabilitation approaches such as replenishment, vegetation, and the formation of different habitat types,
   4. Capping or reducing logging operations in the buffer zones from current levels, both in number and combined size of individual harvesting areas, and ensuring that any logging remains strictly limited to the buffer zones;
7. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2022, a report on the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations for review by IUCN.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Documents WHC/19/43.COM/8B and WHC/19/43.COM/INF.8B1,
2. Inscribes the Churches of the Pskov School of Architecture, Russian Federation, namely 10 of the 18 nominated serial components: 2.2 “Cathedral of Ioann Predtecha (John the Precursor) of the Ivanovsky Monastery”; 2.3 “Ensemble of the Spaso-Mirozhsky Monastery: the Transfiguration Cathedral”; 2.4 “Ensemble of the Snetogorsky Monastery: the Cathedral of the Nativity of the Mother of God”; 2.5 “Church of the Archangel Michael with a bell tower”; 2.6 “Church of Pokrova (Intercession) ot Proloma (at the breach in the wall)”; 2.7 “Church of Koz’ma and Damian s Primostya (near the bridge), remains of the belfry, gate, and fence”; 2.8 “Church of Georgiya so Vzvoza (St. George near the river descent)”; 2.9 “Church of Theophany with a belfry”; 2.11 “Church of Nikoly so Usokhi (St. Nicholas from the dry place)”; and 2.14 “Church of Vasiliya na Gorke (St. Basil the Great on the hill)”, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (ii);
3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:
   
   

   Brief synthesis

   The Churches of the Pskov School of Architecture are located in the historic city of Pskov and along the banks of the Velikaya River in the northwest of Russia. The property includes ten monuments of religious architecture, churches and cathedrals, as well as, in some cases, part of the monastic structures around these, which represent the architectural styles and decorative elements produced by the Pskov School of Architecture between the 12th and the beginning of the 17th century. The Pskov School of Architecture is one of the most influential Russian Schools of architecture, which fostered continuous exchange of ideas and characterized the development of architectural styles in Russia over five centuries, leading to specific architectural and decorative references known as the Pskov School.

   These physical features representing the work of the Pskov School include, among others: architectural elements influenced by Byzantine traditions, transmitted through the earlier Novgorod School; distinctive use of local construction materials; and pragmatist stone buildings with purist and minimalistic approaches to decoration characterized by restraint in form and decoration. The school utilized a limited set of decorative techniques and architectural elements, illustrating a synthesis of vernacular styles brought into urban and monumental contexts, cubic volumes, domes, tholobates, side chapels, porches, narthexes and belfries, as well as other decorative features. The ten selected churches and cathedrals which compose this serial property are recognizable with their historic architectural structures and their immediate property settings in the form of access routes, gardens, surrounding walls and fences, as well as vegetation elements, all contributing to the traditional atmosphere of these spiritual abodes which relates to the endeavours of the School to integrate architectural masterpieces into their natural surroundings.

   Criterion (ii): The Pskov School of Architecture emerged under the influence of the Byzantine and Novgorod traditions and reached its height in the 15th and 16th centuries, when it exerted considerable influence in large areas of the Russian state and its stylistic and decorative characteristics became widely referenced. Whilst Pskov architects worked on monuments throughout Russia, including in Moscow, Kazan and Sviyazhsk, the ten selected churches in Pskov illustrate a local representation of the early development, experimental grounds and masterly references of the Pskov School.

   Integrity

   The churches of the Pskov School of Architecture are largely free of immediate severe threats. All ten elements have kept their initial location in the structure of the town planning. As a group, they demonstrate integrity by including examples of all the historic stages of development of the Pskov School’s output, ranging from the early formative stages in the 12th century, to the apogee of the School in the 15th and 16th centuries. A number of serial components were affected during times of war, in particular during World War II, but are restored to a level which provides a credible reference to the Pskov School’s era of production.

   At times, the setting of these religious monuments has become vulnerable to infrastructural and other developments. Given the strong focus of the Pskov School on the integration of monuments into their natural surroundings, it is essential to preserve these immediate settings, which is achieved by means of the designated buffer zone and should be substantiated by adequate visitor- and traffic-monitoring strategies.

   Authenticity

   The group of churches has preserved an acceptable degree of authenticity in style, decorative features, design, workmanship, atmosphere and, with a single exception, use and function. In material terms the churches have suffered in one way or another damage due to various wars over time, but this group of religious buildings has survived following restorations which remained true to the key architectural and decorative features of the Pskov School of Architecture. The needed repair and conservation works were undertaken using authentic materials, traditional technologies and the explicit aim of preserving the historical and cultural values of the property.

   The traditional use of the churches and cathedrals as places of worship and, for some, as part of monastic structures, explicitly strengthens the authenticity, and the user community should be prominently and closely involved in the management processes in order to ensure the future transmission of authenticity in use and function.

   Management and protection requirements

   The Churches of the Pskov School are protected as architectural monuments of state importance according to the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic of 30.08.1960, no. 1327. The specific boundaries of each component were approved by the State Committee of the Pskov Region between 2010 and 2015 but should be revised where necessary to align with property boundaries or relevant physical boundaries of the churches’ setting. By order of the Government of the Russian Federation of 17.09.2016 No 1975-r, all components of the property were included in the Code of the most valuable cultural heritage properties of the Peoples of the Russian Federation. Traditional protection is provided by the Russian Orthodox communities, who care for the property according to religious requirements of maintenance.

   Management is coordinated by the State Committee of the Pskov Region for the Protection of Cultural Heritage and carried out in strong cooperation with the Pskov Eparchy of the Russian Orthodox Church. A management plan was prepared in parallel with the preparation of the nomination and was formally approved by the Governor of the Region of Pskov and the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation. The management plan provides an integrated action plan for four years (2017 – 2020) and integrates its own quality assessment evaluation scheme which, at the end of the initial period, will commence a review of successes and the reformulation of necessary actions. Future revisions of the management plan will pay closer attention to the aspects of risk management, in particular how this relates to visitor and traffic management, as well as protection of setting and traditional use of the religious structures.

4. Recommends that the State Party give consideration to the following:
   1. Redefining more consistently component boundaries in line with title deeds or physical markers,
   2. Extending the existing protection zone for the historic centre of Pskov to include the two view corridors along the banks of the Velikaya River to the north and south of this urban protection zone,
   3. Augmenting the monitoring system through integration of indicators which monitor traffic flows and development pressures,
   4. Studying traffic and visitation volumes and flows and develop a vehicular traffic strategy as well as a visitor management plan for the property;
5. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 December 2019, a map of the inscribed property.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC/19/43.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 42 COM 7B.52, adopted at its 42nd session (Manama, 2018),
3. Commends the State Party for reinforcing the overall co-ordination and management of the property and other World Heritage properties, through the establishment of the Supreme Committee for the Management of World Heritage Sites in Egypt, and through amendments to the law for the protection of antiquities;
4. Welcomes the significant progress made with the Step Pyramid and Southern Tomb Risk Mitigation and Restoration Project at Saqqara, the archaeological discoveries made at the property, and the response regarding the legacy from the abandoned planned Ring Road;
5. While welcoming the advice from the State Party that the necessary studies will be completed before implementation of the Cairo Ring Road tunnel project across the Giza Plateau, reiterates its request to the State Party to:
   1. Complete a comprehensive archaeological assessment, incorporating results from remote sensing,
   2. Ensure that, following the review by the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies, the final comprehensive ‘archaeological assessment report’ and the previous technical reports on traffic management and design details inform the preparation of the engineering designs for the Ring Road tunnel project,
   3. Finalize the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the project, following the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for Cultural World Heritage Properties;
6. Notes the previous Committee Decision that work for the construction of the Cairo Ring Road tunnel should only progress once all requested technical reports and subsequent HIAs have been positively reviewed by the Advisory Bodies and appropriate mitigation measures and procedures for monitoring have been agreed;
7. Expresses concern over the additional information provided by the State Party on the Giza Pyramids Plateau Development Project, and the Pyramids Security Project, and requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, as soon as possible and in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, a detailed document providing comprehensive information about the proposed Pyramids Security Project;
8. Also requests the State Party to further strengthen the protection and management of the property by submitting the Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) for the property to the World Heritage Centre, and by reviewing the property’s boundaries, defining a buffer zone and submitting a Minor Boundary Modification request, in line with Paragraphs 163-164 of the Operational Guidelines;
9. Further requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to the property to evaluate the property’ state of conservation, review the ongoing and planned projects, and assess how they may affect the property’s OUV, having particular regard to:
   1. The Giza Pyramids Plateau Development Project,
   2. The Pyramids Security Project,
   3. The proposed Cairo Ring Road tunnel across the Giza Plateau,
   4. The Giza component of the property, and the impact of increasing urban pressure in Cairo,
   5. The appropriate boundary and buffer zone for the Giza component of the property;
10. Encourages the State Party to finalize the HIA, in coordination with ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre in the framework of the training in the preparation of Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs), following the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for Cultural World Heritage Properties;
11. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2020, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 45th session in 2021.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC/18/42.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 41 COM 7B.78, adopted at its 41st session (Krakow, 2017),
3. Commends the State Party for the significant archaeological discoveries and related research at the Pyramid of Khufu and for the advancement of the Step Pyramid and Southern Tomb Risk Mitigation and Restoration Project at Saqqara, and requests it to submit detailed information thereon to the World Heritage Centre;
4. Welcomes the ongoing engagement of the State Party with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in the development of proposals for a Cairo Ring Road tunnel across the Giza Plateau;
5. Takes note of the submission by the State Party of an initial ‘archaeological assessment’ for the Cairo Ring Road Tunnel project and reiterates its request to the State Party to complete a comprehensive archaeological assessment, in the manner previously requested, incorporating results from remote sensing using ground penetrating radar, magnetic survey and other techniques, and to ensure that, following review by the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies, the final comprehensive ‘archaeological assessment report’ and the previous technical reports on traffic management and design details, inform the preparation of the engineering designs for the Ring Road Tunnel project, which should be subject to a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), following the ICOMOS Guidance on HIAs for Cultural World Heritage properties; and also reiterate its request to the State Party to submit the detailed engineering designs and HIA to World Heritage Centre for review;
6. Also takes note of the previous Committee Decision that work for the construction of the tunnel should only be progressed once all requested technical reports and subsequent HIAs have been positively reviewed by the Advisory Bodies and appropriate mitigation measures and procedures for monitoring have been agreed;
7. Noting that the legacy from the abandoned planned Ring Road of 1995 impacts adversely on the landscape and that the abandoned road has facilitated dumping, waste incineration, and large-scale sand extraction, also requests the State Party to provide additional information about actions being taken to address this impact;
8. Expresses concern over the information provided by the State Party on the Giza Pyramids Plateau Development Project, the Lighting and Security Project of the Giza Pyramids and the Memphis Site and Community Development Project and urges the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, as soon as possible and in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, a detailed document providing comprehensive information about the Giza Pyramids Plateau Development Project;
9. Further requests the State Party to continue its efforts to strengthen the protection and management of the property by:
   1. Reinforcing the overall co-ordination and management of the World Heritage property, and reinforcing the conservation of the property by the Ministry of Antiquities,
   2. Investigating national legislation specific to World Heritage properties,
   3. Defining a buffer zone and submitting a Minor Boundary Modification request;
10. Requests furthermore the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission to the property to evaluate the property’s state of conservation, the ongoing and planned projects and how they may affect the property’s Outstanding Universal Value;
11. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2019, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session in 2019.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC/17/41.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 39 COM 7B.68 adopted at its 39th session (Bonn, 2015),
3. Welcomes the progress made by the State Party, especially with the development and adoption of a road network and management scheme, the Monument Zoning Plan together with construction and zoning regulations, and the completion of the Champasak Cultural Landscape Master Plan;
4. Regrets that the State Party has not finalized the Management Plan and requests the State Party to finalize it, as a matter of priority, and to provide a final draft to the World Heritage Centre, along with the new Monument Zone Plan resulting from the recent landscape study, for review by the Advisory Bodies;
5. Acknowledges the adoption of the Champasak Cultural Landscape Master Plan, which addresses recommendations made by the 2015 Reactive Monitoring mission and by the Committee, and also requests the State Party to:
   1. Monitor and report on progress made with the implementation of the road network and traffic management scheme,
   2. Ensure that the revised building and other regulations are enforced effectively to prevent new construction along the section of Route 14A from km29 to km34,
   3. Monitor and report on the effectiveness of inter-agency coordination and cooperation;
6. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 2018, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session in 2019.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7A,
2. Recalling Decision 38 COM 7A.23, adopted at its 38th session (Doha, 2014),
3. 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;
4. 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;
5. 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;
6. 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;
7. 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;
8. Decides to retain Coro and its Port (Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B.Add,
2. Recalling Decision 36 COM 7B.78 adopted at its 36th session (Saint-Petersburg, 2012),
3. Welcomes the continuing collaboration between the two national parks and the commitment to produce a transnational Management Plan for the property, as well as the recently strengthened regulations within the Russian National Park that should support sustainable development within the property;
4. Also welcomes the significant progress made within Lithuania to contain and reverse illegal development;
5. Expresses its concern however that work on the liquefied gas terminal outside Klaipėda has been approved and commenced although no impact assessments were provided, despite its earlier requests and reiterates its request to the State Party of Lithuania to undertake full impact assessments (Strategic Environmental and Heritage Impact Assessments) in order to consider the potential impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property; these assessments should be provided to the World Heritage Centre, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines ;
6. Expresses its strong concern that approval in principle has apparently been given for the construction of a large suspension bridge from Klaipėda across the lagoon to the Spit, as this structure could have severe adverse visual impacts and affect traffic management along the Spit;
7. Understands that the bridge could be part of a larger project to develop a deep sea port at Klaipėda, which could have an impact on the stability of the dunes, and notes with regret that no details of either project have been submitted to the World Heritage Centre, as required by Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines ;
8. Requests the State Party of Lithuania to halt further development of both projects until full details have been provided, including detailed impact assessments (Strategic Environmental and Heritage Impact Assessments), in order to allow an evaluation of potential impact on the property;
9. Also requests the State Party of Lithuania to invite an ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to the property in 2014 to consider the proposed bridge and port projects as well as the liquefied gas terminal project;
10. Further requests the States Parties to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2015, a progress report on the implementation of the above and, by 1 December 2015, an updated report 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, both reports including a 1-page executive summary.

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-11/35.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decisions 31 COM 7B.80 adopted at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007) and 34 COM 7B.68, adopted at its 34th session (Brasilia, 2010),

3. Urges the State Party to continue progress in the development of an Integrated Management Plan for the Taj Mahal, and Agra Fort properties, and requests it to submit the plan when completed to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies;

4. Encourages the State Party to continue progress in the development of a separate management plan for Fatehpur Sikri, and also requests it to submit the plan when completed to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies;

5. Further requests the State Party to reconsider the inappropriate design and installation of the Door Frame Metal Detectors and barricaded queue arrangements at the Eastern and Western gates of the Taj Mahal;

6. Regrets that the State Party did not provide any details of the new bridge over the Yamuna river, nor a heritage impact assessment, as requested by the Committee, before any commitment was made in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;

7. Expresses its concern at the apparent impact on visitor numbers that the new bridge could have and considers that an overall visitor management strategy which considers traffic management in the hinterland of the property needs to be developed urgently as part of the management plan for the property and Agra Fort;

8. Requests furthermore the State Party, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, to ensure that impact assessment studies are undertaken for any other development proposal that could affect the properties, including the current visitors traffic access, and museum development proposals at Fatehpur Sikri, before any operational work commitment is entered into;

9. Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and on the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013.