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

Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments

Russian Federation
Factors affecting the property in 2014*
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
  • Quality of new design projects in the inscribed zone;
  • High-rise development ;
  • Confusion over definition and extent of inscribed property and its buffer zones.
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2014

Total amount provided to the property: USD 18,000 from the Netherlands Funds-in-Trust 

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2014
Requests approved: 1 (from 2002-2002)
Total amount approved : 5,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2014**

February 2006: Joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS mission; January/February 2007: International Conference for Eastern and Central Europe Countries on the Application of Scientific and Technological Achievements in the Management and Preservation of Historic Cities inscribed on the World Heritage List, St Petersburg; 2009 and March 2010: joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring missions

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2014

On 31 January 2014, the State Party submitted a detailed state of conservation report that addressed the progress made in the implementation of the World Heritage Committee Decision adopted at its 36th session (Saint-Petersburg, 2012), including the results of an international open-ended group of experts on boundary issue, as well as information regarding development of a legal mechanism for the protection and management of the World Heritage properties in the Russian Federation.

The State Party also submitted, within the framework of the Retrospective Inventory a revised Serial Property Table in order to correct mistakes and inaccuracies concerning the component parts of this serial property as identified in the original submission. The Table is presented in Annex III of Document WHC-14/38.COM/8D and will be reviewed by the Committee under item 8D.

Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2014

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies are of the view that the state of conservation of the property is being adequately addressed by the State Party. The State Party is encouraged to continue with the implementation of all relevant measures and plans, defining appropriate degrees of intervention for each element of the property, in order to prevent any threats to its Outstanding Universal Value.  

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2014
38 COM 7B.98
Omnibus Decisions

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B.Add,
  2. Takes note with satisfaction of the measures taken by the States Parties concerned to address its previous requests to mitigate the threats on the Outstanding Universal Value of the following World Heritage properties:
  • Town of Luang Prabang (Lao People's Democratic Republic),
  • Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments (Russian Federation),
  • Historic Bridgetown and its Garrison (Barbados),
  • Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena (Colombia),
  • Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan (Mexico),
  • Historic Quarter of the City of Colonia del Sacramento (Uruguay),
  • Royal Palaces of Abomey (Benin),
  • Rock-Hewn Churches, Lalibela (Ethiopia),
  • Aapravasi Ghat (Mauritius);
  1. Encourages the States Parties concerned to pursue their efforts to ensure the conservation of World Heritage properties;
  2.  Reminds the States Parties concerned to inform the World Heritage Centre in due course about any major development project that may negatively impact the Outstanding Universal Value of a property, before any irreversible decisions are made, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines.
38 COM 8D
Clarifications of Property Boundaries and Areas by States Parties in response to the Retrospective Inventory

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/8D,
  2. Recalling Decision 37 COM 8D, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),
  3. Acknowledges the excellent work accomplished by States Parties in the clarification of the delimitations of their World Heritage properties and commends them for their efforts to improve the credibility of the World Heritage List;
  4. Recalls that the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies will not be able to examine proposals for minor or significant modifications to boundaries of World Heritage properties whenever the delimitations of such properties as inscribed are unclear;
  5. Takes note of the clarifications of property boundaries and areas provided by the States Parties in response to the Retrospective Inventory, as presented in the annexes of Document WHC-14/38.COM/8D:

ASIA AND THE PACIFIC:

  • China: Mogao Caves; Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor; Lushan National Park; Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area; Jiuzhaigou Valley Scenic and Historic Interest Area;
  • Japan: Historic Monuments of Ancient Kyoto (Kyotot, Uji and Otsu Cities);
  • Thailand: Thungyai-Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuaries;

EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA:

  • Canada: Miguasha National Park; Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks;
  • Canada / United States of America: Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek;
  • France: Prehistoric Sites and Decorated Caves of the Vézère Valley;
  • Germany: Speyer Cathedral; Roman Monuments, Cathedral of St. Peter and Church of Our Lady in Trier; Abbey and Altenmünster of Lorsch;
  • Russian Federation: Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments;
  • Spain: Route of Santiago de Compostela;
  • United States of America: Redwood National and State Parks; Mammoth Cave National Park; Statue of Liberty; Yosemite National Park; Taos Pueblo;

LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARRIBBEAN:

  • Argentina: Iguazu National Park;
  • Argentina / Brazil: Jesuit Missions of the Guarani: San Ignacio Mini, Santa Ana, Nuestra Senora de Loreto, Santa Maria Mayor, Ruins of San Miguel das Missoes;
  • Brazil: Historic Town of Ouro Preto; Serra da Capivara National Park; Historic Centre of the Town of Olinda; Historic Centre of Salvador de Bahia;
  • Colombia: San Augustín Archeological Park; National Archeological Park of Tierradentro; Los Katíos National Park;
  • Costa Rica / Panama : Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park ;
  • Guatemala: Archaeological Park and Ruins of Quirigua;
  • Mexico: Historic Monuments Zone of Querétaro; Earliest 16th-Century Monasteries on the Slopes of Popocatepetl; Hospicio Cabañas, Guadalajara; Historic Centre of Mexico City and Xochimilco;
  • Uruguay: Historic Quarter of the City of Colonia del Sacramento.
6. Requests the States Parties which have not yet answered the questions raised in the framework of the Retrospective Inventory to provide all clarifications and documentation as soon as possible and by 1 December 2014 at the latest.

Draft Decision:  38 COM 7B.98

The World Heritage Committee,

  1.  Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7B.Add,
  2.  Takes note with satisfaction of the measures taken by the States Parties concerned to address its previous requests to mitigate the threats on the Outstanding Universal Value of the following World Heritage properties :
  • Town of Luang Prabang (Lao People's Democratic Republic),
  • Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments (Russian Federation),
  • Historic Bridgetown and its Garrison (Barbados),
  • Port, Fortresses and Group of Monuments, Cartagena (Colombia),
  • Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan (Mexico),
  • Historic Quarter of the City of Colonia del Sacramento (Uruguay),
  • Royal Palaces of Abomey (Benin),
  • Rock-Hewn Churches, Lalibela (Ethiopia),
  • Aapravasi Ghat (Mauritius);

3.          Encourages the States Parties concerned to pursue their efforts to ensure the conservation of World Heritage properties;

4.          Reminds the States Parties concerned to inform the World Heritage Centre in due course about any major development project that may negatively impact the Outstanding Universal Value of a property, before any irreversible decisions are made, in line with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines.

Report year: 2014
Russian Federation
Date of Inscription: 1990
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (i)(ii)(iv)(vi)
Documents examined by the Committee
SOC Report by the State Party
Report (2014) .pdf
arrow_circle_right 38COM (2014)
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