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

Palace and Park of Versailles

France
Factors affecting the property in 1989*
  • Management systems/ management plan
International Assistance: requests for the property until 1989
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved : 0 USD
Missions to the property until 1989**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 1989

The delegate from Canada informed the Committee of his concern in learning of the tree felling which had taken place last winter in the Park of Versailles, which, together with the Chateau, is inscribed on the World Heritage List.

He drew the Committee's attention to the danger of separating the responsibilities for cultural and natural resource management in the case of a property where a balance between architecture and the surrounding landscapes is essential.

ICOMOS shared these concerns and considered that a tree regeneration plan inappropriate to a protected historical park risked destroying one of the most important features characteristic of Versailles over the last hundred years.

 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 1989
13 COM IX.21
SOC: Palace and Park of Versailles (France)

21. The delegate from Canada informed the Committee of his concern in learning of the tree felling which had taken place last winter in the Park of Versailles, which, together with the Chateau, is inscribed on the World Heritage List. He drew the Committee's attention to the danger of separating the responsibilities for cultural and natural resource management in the case of a property where a balance between architecture and the surrounding landscapes is essential. ICOMOS shared these concerns and considered that a tree regeneration plan inappropriate to a protected historical park risked destroying one of the most important features characteristic of Versailles over the last hundred years.

No draft Decision

Report year: 1989
France
Date of Inscription: 1979
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(ii)(vi)
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 13COM (1989)
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