Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa
Factors affecting the property in 2003*
- Commercial development
- Deliberate destruction of heritage
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Urban Pressure;
- Lack of management mechanism ;
- Lack of institution coordination;
- Earthquake in 2001 (issue resolved)
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2003
Total amount approved : 75,000 USD
|2001||Consolidation and restoration of the Cathedral of ... (Approved)||75,000 USD|
Missions to the property until 2003**
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2003
During the 25th extraordinary session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (7-8 December 2001 Helsinki) it was requested that the State Party submit a report on the state of conservation of the site by 1 February 2003. On 28 February 2003 the State Party submitted the requested report to the World Heritage Centre. The World Heritage Centre also received additional information by letter dated 7 March 2003, concerning the Management Plan of the site. The Plan specifies priorities: urban renovation of the Solar Quarter; rehabilitation of the San Lazaro Quarter; recreation areas around the train station; interventions in the metropolitan park; re-definition of the pedestrian areas; commercial structuring and environmental recovery; traffic redistribution and the re-orientation of urban land uses. The report contains detailed information of the interventions undertaken following the 2001 earthquake.
The State Party has provided a report on the implementation of the Master Plan for this property for the period 1999–2002. This is a comprehensive professional document in three parts (Diagnosis; Proposals; Programmes and Projects) that illustrates the systematic efforts being made by the responsible authorities to rehabilitate the historical centre and improve its state of conservation and social and economic structure. Work began on its implementation in 2000 (the year in which Arequipa was inscribed on the World Heritage List) with detailed analyses and inventories of the multiple components of the urban fabric of the historical centre. The timetable for full implementation identifies three stages: completion of the short-term plan 2006; medium-term plan 2010; and long-term plan 2015. The property was severely affected by an earthquake on 23 June 2001, which damaged a high proportion of the buildings in the historical centre. Structural damage to the cathedral was a source of particular concern, and an emergency assistance grant of US$75,000 was made available from the World Heritage Fund. The State Party has provided a report on the emergency works carried out to ensure the stability of the structure. As part of the Master Plan, a study is being carried out on the damage caused not only by the June 2001 earthquake but also earlier seismic events. ICOMOS congratulates the State Party on the progress being made in the implementation of the Master Plan for the Historical Centre of Arequipa. It recommends the responsible authorities to incorporate a risk-preparedness plan into the Master Plan in view of the frequent seismic activity in this region.
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2003
27 COM 7B.100
Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa (Peru)
The World Heritage Committee ,
1. Shares the ICOMOS recommendations and congratulates the State Party on the progress being made in the implementation of the Master Plan for the Historical Centre of Arequipa;
2. Recommends to the responsible authorities the incorporation of a risk-preparedness plan into the Master Plan in view of the frequent seismic activity in this region.
 Decision adopted without discussion.
Draft Decision: 27 COM 7 (b) 100
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Shares the ICOMOS recommendations and congratulates the State Party on the progress being made in the implementation of the Master Plan for the Historical Centre of Arequipa,
2. Recommends the responsible authorities to incorporate a risk-preparedness plan into the Master Plan in view of the frequent seismic activity in this region.
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”).