Meidan Emam, Esfahan
Factors affecting the property in 2015*
- Commercial development
- Housing
- Underground transport infrastructure
Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports
- Uncoordinated urban development - construction of a large scale commercial complex
- Subway route under the historical axis of Esfahan
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds until 2015
Total amount granted:5,710 Euros (France/UNESCO Cooperation Agreement)
International Assistance: requests for the property until 2015
Total amount approved : 13,321 USD
| 2001 |
National seminar for systematic monitoring for enhanced ...
(Approved)
Reapproval: 29 Jun, 2002 (n°1544 - 20,000 USD)
|
6,655 USD |
| 1986 | Purchase of photogrammetric equipment for the Iranian ... (Approved) | 6,666 USD |
Missions to the property until 2015**
July 2002: World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission; October 2002: World Heritage Centre/World Bank mission; June 2004 and May 2005: UNESCO Tehran Office fact-finding missions; May 2006: World Heritage Centre mission; June and December 2006, April 2007, October 2008, and October 2009: UNESCO Tehran Advisory missions; March 2010: joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission; May 2013: joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission.
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2015
On 17 March 2015, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/115/documents/, in response to Decision 37 COM 7B.62 (Phnom Penh, 2013), as follows:
- Metro Line: The Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) of the metro line has been carried out and provided to the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies.
- Jahan Nama building: Demolition works of the last floor on the Jahan Nama building have been completed.
- Boundary of property and modification of the buffer zone: The State Party is in the process of preparing a proposal for the modification of the buffer zone.
- Conservation and Management Plan: A comprehensive conservation and management plan has been prepared. It will form part of the Master Plan of Esfahan, once adopted by the Ministry of Housing and will be provided to the World Heritage Centre after translation.
Analysis and Conclusion by World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in 2015
The efforts made by the State Party to implement the previous Committee decisions are acknowledged, in particular the completed works on the reduction in height of the Jahan-Nama Building
From the information provided, it is not clear however what the actual status of the city metro line is. At the time of the May 2013 joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission, work on Metro Line 2 was not expected to commence before 2016. Planning of the route was to be submitted for review and consideration before commencing construction. The authorities have in the meantime carried out a HIA and provided it to the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS. It recommends detailed mitigation measures, as well as that investigation and monitoring of heritage structures shall be an integral part of the tunnelling activities at all times. While vibrations are expected to be minimal, heritage structures in proximity of Metro Line 2 will be comprehensively studied and monitored before, during and after the works. The placing of rubber pads under the rails may reduce vibrations. Archaeological remains that may be discovered during construction works shall be carefully studied and preserved. The authorities had assured the mission that a floating slab-track system was to be adopted in order to avoid potential vibrations due to Metro operations. It is also noted that a continuous monitoring system for the adjacent monumental buildings will be put in place, in order to ensure that the proposed routing, constructions and underground drillings do not cause any negative impact on the property and its wider setting in Esfahan.
The full Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) will be proposed for adoption at the 39th session of the World Heritage Committee, prior to the official approval of the property boundary and buffer zone.
In addition, the draft Conservation and Management Plan should be submitted to the World Heritage Centre for comments by ICOMOS and should only be finalized, in conjunction with the approval of the property boundary and buffer zone, as well as the Statement of OUV.
The 2013 mission further noted that no assessment study on the vulnerability of the property against disasters such as fire and earthquakes, and no systematic risk-preparedness strategy have been developed. It is therefore recommended that the Committee request the State Party, within the framework of the review process for the Conservation and Management Plan, to carry out an assessment study of the vulnerability of the property against disasters such as earthquake or fire. A systematic strategy on risk preparedness should be developed as a specific section while preparing and finalizing the integrated Conservation and Management Plan.
The UNESCO Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL, 2011) could be a useful tool to address some of the current issues at the property. The HUL approach is being introduced and promoted as a useful tool to help manage the rapid urbanization and development of the property.
Summary of the interventions
Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2015
39 COM 7B.67
Meidan Emam, Esfahan (Iran, Islamic Republic of) (C 115)
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7B,
- Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.62, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),
- Commends the efforts made by the State Party to implement the previous Committee decisions, in particular the completed works on the reduction of the upper floor on the Jahan Nama building;
- Notes the results of the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) on the Metro Line 2 and request the State Party to implement the detailed mitigation measures recommended by the HIA;
- Welcomes the State Party’s commitment to put in place a continuous monitoring system for the adjacent monumental buildings, in order to ensure that the proposed routing of Metro Line 2, constructions and underground drillings do not cause any negative impact on the World Heritage property and its wider setting in Esfahan;
- Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies:
- a proposal for clarifying the boundaries of the property and the buffer zone,
- the draft Conservation and Management Plan;
- Also recommends that the State Party carries out an assessment study of the vulnerability of the property against disasters such as earthquake or fire and develop a systematic strategy for disaster risk reduction and to integrate it into the Conservation and Management Plan;
- Encourages the State Party to apply the UNESCO Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL, 2011) as a useful tool to help manage the rapid urbanization and development of the property;
- Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 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 41st session in 2017.
39 COM 8E
Adoption of Retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value
The World Heritage Committee,- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/8E.Rev,
- Congratulates the States Parties for the excellent work accomplished in the elaboration of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties located within their territories;
- Adopts the retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, as presented in the Annex of Document WHC-15/39.COM/8E.Rev, for the following World Heritage properties:
- Mozambique: Island of Mozambique;
- Senegal: Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary;
- United Republic of Tanzania: Stone Town of Zanzibar;
- Oman: Land of Frankincense;
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
- India: Humayun’s Tomb, Delhi; Kaziranga National Park;
- Iran (Islamic Republic of): Bisotun; Meidan Emam, Esfahan; Persepolis; Soltaniyeh; Tchogha Zanbil;
- Belarus: Architectural, Residential and Cultural Complex of the Radziwill Family at Nesvizh;
- Belgium: Flemish Béguinages; Historic Centre of Brugge; The Four Lifts on the Canal du Centre and their Environs, La Louvière and Le Roeulx (Hainault);
- Canada / United States of America: Waterton Glacier International Peace Park;
- Canada: Dinosaur Provincial Park; Gros Morne National Park; Historic District of Old Québec; Miguasha National Park; Old Town Lunenburg; Sgang Gwaay; Wood Buffalo National Park;
- France / Spain : Pyrénées – Mont Perdu ;
- Greece: Acropolis, Athens; Archaeological Site of Olympia; Archaeological Sites of Mycenae and Tiryns; Delos; Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus;
- Italy: 18th-Century Royal Palace at Caserta with the Park, the Aqueduct of Vanvitelli, and the San Leucio Complex; Archaeological Area of Agrigento; Castel del Monte; Church and Dominican Convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie with “The Last Supper” by Leonardo da Vinci; Cilento and Vallo di Diano National Park with the Archeological sites of Paestum and Velia, and the Certosa di Padula; City of Verona; City of Vicenza and the Palladian Villas of the Veneto; Crespi d’Adda; Early Christian Monuments of Ravenna; Genoa: Le Strade Nuove and the system of the Palazzi dei Rolli; Historic Centre of San Gimignano; Historic Centre of Siena; Historic Centre of the City of Pienza; Late Baroque Towns of the Val di Noto (South-Eastern Sicily); Rock Drawings in Valcamonica; Sacri Monti of Piedmont and Lombardy; Syracuse and the Rocky Necropolis of Pantalica; The Sassi and the Park of the Rupestrian Churches of Matera;
- Montenegro: Durmitor National Park;
- Russian Federation: Architectural Ensemble of the Trinity Sergius Lavra in Sergiev Posad; Ensemble of the Ferapontov Monastery; Ensemble of the Novodevichy Convent; Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments; Historic Monuments of Novgorod and Surroundings; Kremlin and Red Square, Moscow;
- Serbia: Stari Ras and Sopoćani; Studenica Monastery;
- Slovakia: Historic Town of Banská Štiavnica and the Technical Monuments in its Vicinity;
- Spain: Aranjuez Cultural Landscape; Archaeological Ensemble of Tárraco; Archaeological site of Atapuerca; Garajonay National Park; Rock Art of the Mediterranean Basin on the Iberian Peninsula;
- Sweden: Engelsberg Ironworks;
- The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Natural and Cultural Heritage of the Ohrid region;
- Ukraine: L’viv – the Ensemble of the Historic Centre;
- United States of America: Pueblo de Taos;
LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN
- Brazil: Atlantic Forest South-East Reserves; Brazilian Atlantic Islands: Fernando de Noronha and Atol das Rocas Reserves; Central Amazon Conservation Complex; Cerrado Protected Areas: Chapada dos Veadeiros and Emas National Parks; Discovery Coast Atlantic Forest Reserves; Pantanal Conservation Area;
- Colombia: Malpelo Fauna and Flora Sanctuary;
- Haiti : National History Park – Citadel, Sans Souci, Ramiers ;
- Honduras: Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve;
- Peru: Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa; Huascarán National Park; Lines and Geoglyphs of Nasca and Pampas de Jumana; Manú National Park; Río Abiseo National Park;
- Saint Kitts and Nevis: Brimstone Hill Fortress National Park;
4. Decides that retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value for World Heritage properties in Danger will be reviewed in priority by the Advisory Bodies;
5. Takes note that the World Heritage Centre, further to Decision 38 COM 8E, continues to harmonize all sub-headings in the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value and updates names and sizes or buffer zones, as appropriate, following relevant Decisions of the Committee concerning changes of names and Minor Boundary Modifications;
6. Requests the States Parties to provide support to the World Heritage Centre for translation of the adopted Statements of Outstanding Universal Value into English or French respectively, and further requests the World Heritage Centre to upload the two language versions on its web site.
Draft Decision: 39 COM 7B.67
The World Heritage Committee,
- Having examined Document WHC-15/39.COM/7B,
- Recalling Decision 37 COM 7B.62, adopted at its 37th session (Phnom Penh, 2013),
- Commends the efforts made by the State Party to implement the previous Committee decisions, in particular the completed works on the reduction of the upper floor on the Jahan Nama building;
- Notes the results of the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) on the Metro Line 2 and request the State Party to implement the detailed mitigation measures recommended by the HIA;
- Welcomes the State Party’s commitment to put in place a continuous monitoring system for the adjacent monumental buildings, in order to ensure that the proposed routing of Metro Line 2, constructions and underground drillings do not cause any negative impact on the World Heritage property and its wider setting in Esfahan;
- Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies:
- a proposal for clarifying the boundaries of the property and the buffer zone,
- the draft Conservation and Management Plan;
- Also recommends that the State Party carries out an assessment study of the vulnerability of the property against disasters such as earthquake or fire and develop a systematic strategy for disaster risk reduction and to integrate it into the Conservation and Management Plan;
- Encourages the State Party to apply the UNESCO Recommendation on Historic Urban Landscape (HUL, 2011) as a useful tool to help manage the rapid urbanization and development of the property;
- Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 December 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 41st session in 2017.
Iran (Islamic 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.
