Kakatiya Rudreshwara (Ramappa) Temple, Telangana

• Management and institutional factors (Lack of effective management and adequate protection – require the finalization of the integrated conservation and management plan and the constitution and functioning of “Palampet Special Area Development Authority”)
• Buildings and Development (Tourism development projects)

N/A

On 1 February 2024, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1570/documents/. Progress in a number of conservation issues addressed by the Committee at its previous sessions is presented in those reports, as follows:

• The comparative analysis of Kakatiya Temples has been completed. An extensive report is provided;
• The Telangana Provincial Committee serves as the management committee for the property at the state level;
• The Palampet Special Area Development Authority (PSDA) has been established to coordinate the overall governance of the property, including commissioning Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs) and regulating development. The roles of other institutions that contribute to the management of the property and its buffer zone have been established;
• Capacity-building programmes aimed at enhancing the skills and awareness of the local community and other stakeholders have been implemented;
• The Tourism Development Master Plan (TDMP), under the Pilgrimage Rejuvenation and Spiritual Heritage Augmentation Drive (PRASHAD) scheme and two components, the 10-acre and 27-acre projects, have been completed and assessed through an HIA. The TDMP includes infrastructure located outside the buffer zone. A summary of the TDMP and the HIA are annexed to the report;
• The documentation project for the reassembling and conservation of Kameswara Temple has been completed and is annexed to the report;
• The Conservation Management Plan (CMP) has been finalised and approved by the Telangana Provincial Committee. Action Plans and Tourism Master Plans are being prepared and will be submitted to the World Heritage Centre. The CMP also covers the smaller temples and the adjoining natural heritage and canals as a cultural landscape;
• A review of the boundaries and buffer zone of the property has been completed and a map submitted as an annex to the state of conservation report. The Directorate of Town & Country Planning Department suggests using the tentative PSDA boundary for the proposed Master Plan and the spatial planning of the area.

The State Party’s state of conservation report is extensive and includes numerous annexes. The State Party made progress in responding to Committee requests, including those made at the time of inscription.

The local, national, and international comparative analysis of Kakatiya Temples submitted by the State Party will be reviewed separately by ICOMOS. The completed Conservation Management Plan for the property was submitted and will also undergo separate review by ICOMOS.

Management controls have been clarified, and an appropriate management system has been established. The capacity building and training reported by the State Party are noted and it is recommended that sustained capacity building is implemented regularly for the local communities and related stakeholders on various aspects of the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) and the attributes that contribute to it as well as the management processes.

The extensive documentation of the Kameswara Temple is exemplary, and it is hoped that the reconstruction will progress according to the works schedule submitted by the State Party in 2022.

The submission of maps for the property is noted. These provide delineations that differ from the map submitted at the time of inscription. It is suggested that the Committee requests again that the State Party continue its efforts to submit a boundary modification request to extend the boundaries in line with the Operational Guidelines, as the Committee’s recommendation to modify the boundaries of the property was related to the integrity of the property, which could not be considered complete without other elements of the wider temple context.

As reported by the State Party in its nomination dossier, the property receives approximately 200,000 visitors per year. The State Party also stated its ambitions to further develop tourism in the region through its PRASHAD Scheme. The completion of the TDMP is noted, but the State Party has provided only a 5-page summary of the TDMP without any maps or other visual materials. The associated HIA conducted on the Detailed Project Proposal of the PRASHAD Scheme Project reviews two components: a 10-acre site and a 27-acre site, but their territorial relationship to the property is not indicated and only site plans and floor plans of the projects are included. The 10-acre site project seems to be located in the buffer zone to the north-west of the property. In its evaluation of the nomination dossier, ICOMOS stated that the shopping arcade to the north of the temple is likewise situated in a sensitive location and “its appropriateness will depend on design, height and volume of the structure”. This project includes upgrading a road that forms the northern boundary of the property complex, which the HIA does not consider.

The HIA requires further development, including taking the property’s OUV as a point of departure to thoroughly investigate the proposed developments and their impact on the OUV and its setting throughout the projects’ life cycles. Resubmission of the further developed HIA and the full TDMP—which can also provide a context for the review of the updated HIA—is recommended, along with material illustrating project proposals, which should show the territorial relationships of the projects to the property and its buffer zone and include section and elevation drawings.