Portobelo and San Lorenzo, World Heritage in Danger (SOC by the State party) and Management Plan

Posted on February 16, 2014 by Katti Osorio

Friends and Friends of Heritage Panama:

Thanks to Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC) enabled by the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO, of free access to all around the world, les traigo this update published this month of February 2014. This is a PDF file with the English summary of the report submitted by the State Conservation Panama, Portobelo and San Lorenzo on. It is thanks to the policies of public access to information from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), we can have secondary access to this national information about our world heritage sites.

This report was generated by the Panamanian authorities under their own responsibility and point of view, and is a separate and distinct report to Report Information System State of Conservation of the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS.

Here is the link: Dale click aquí, comes at the end of tabla, next to the boxes marked “2014 / SOC Report by State Party” & click, “Summary of the State of conservation report by the State Party / Summary Report of the State party on the state of conservation (29/01/2014)”. It is a four-page summary, one formato PDF, in English.

Portobelo. Fort Santiago de la Gloria (Photo of the Author)

SUMMARY SUMMARY

In a “abstract” and Salón “Summary Conservation Status Report”, the list as a PDF file in the List of World Heritage, the following fortifications: 1 – The fortifications of San Fernando: Low battery, superior battery, and strong house on the hilltop, 2 – Battery Fuerte San Jerónimo; 3 – Fortifications of Santiago: Castle of Santiago de la Gloria, Casa Fuerte battery and on top of the hill;. 4 – Former Fort Santiago; 5 – Fort Ruins Farnese; 6 – Site of the Trench; 7 – The site of San Cristobal; and finally, Castle of San Lorenzo El Real de Chagre and superior battery as separate structure, ambos a 43 km away from Portobelo, at the mouth of the Chagres River.

The report says the Panamanian authorities as elements that have adversely affected the property (Portobelo and San Lorenzo):

Very bad weather, with a pattern of high temperatures and lots of rain, materials that eroded monuments.

Ground instability in the hillsides around Portobelo; Quote landslides that occurred in the year 2010.

Changes in the slope of the slopes caused by the construction of the access road to Portobelo in the early 1970, and accumulation of water caused by the change thus produced the natural drainage of the hills.

Increased level of sea water due to sedimentation, causing loss of beaches and affecting water coming monuments.

Urban sprawl in Portobelo, including illegal constructions on the ruins and its immediate perimeter.

Panamanian authorities noted that the strongest risks related to climate, suggesting that these factors exacerbate risks caused by man (anthropogenic), as urban sprawl, Water pollution, illegal construction and conservation management incipient.

Titled, “Proposed mitigation measures”, the existence of an Emergency Plan mentioned, based on which an intervention strategy is set, where major mitigation measures are (translate verbatim the points 1 until 11):

1) Strengthen the maintenance work carried out by the Board Portobelo and San Lorenzo, adapting its budget to the scale of the necessary intevenciones.

2) Controlling urban pressure on the strengths of Portobelo, redefining buffer zones and land uses allowed (residential, commercial, parking, etc.) near structures.

3) Solve built environment pollution, as well as water pollution by solid waste, via a drainage system integrated. Required to build public health facilities within existing buildings, the scale of the city, all connected to the sewer.

4) Weed control and extermination and removal of all vegetation roots of invasive.

5) Remove all additions built with concrete, and replace them with traditional materials.

6) Waterproofing work on all ceilings, parapet walls, and any other structural elements to prevent the penetration of rain water and intensification of the deterioration of buildings and ruins.

7) Protection waterproofed surfaces, to allow pedestrian uses.

8) Repair and maintenance of drainage channels of water in and out of the strengths, to allow free flow of rainwater into the sea.

9) Repair rainwater tanks inside the strengths and installation of submersible pumps to discharge water directly into the sea or existing water channels, avoiding unnecessary water pressure on the outside walls and foundations.

10) Complete selective restoration of a limited number of strengths in order to determine actual costs of conservation and establish final standards for finishes and structural treatment to be followed in all future preservation work in Portobelo and San Lorenzo. Cal, wood, stone, brick, etc.. shall be procured locally as much as possible. The extracted material must also be reused when possible.

11) The second phase trabajo conservation will focus on rehabilitation for tourist purposes, Cultural Studies, educational workshops, etc.. in view of sustainable management and maintenance.

Titled, “Monitoring”, Panamanian authorities say the main action carried out during the year 2013 It was a slope stabilization project in the adjacent fortifications of Santiago that were affected by landslides in December hill 2010. This project was monitored by the “Technical Unit of the Office of Casco Antiguo”, in charge of monitoring the Management Plan for World Heritage Sites in Panama. The Management Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 186 DNPH (this means, which is a resolution, the National Institute of Culture through its National Heritage – DNPH), published in the Official Gazette No. 27387 of 3 October 2013. The abstract ends, indicating that the file monitoring presented below (in the full document, that is the internet) is presented in the format established by the Management Plan.

***End Summary Summary ***

ON THE PLAN OF MANAGEMENT OF PANAMA UNESCO SITES

For information on all of you, Resolution No. facilitated them. 186 DNPH de 2013 (Dé click aquí), and inserted in the Official Gazette No. 27387 of 3 October 2013 (Dé click aquí).

Although the title of the Resolution reads, “Whereby the management plan of UNESCO sites approves Panama”, only refers to two (2) of the five (5) Panamanian registry sites on the World Heritage List. The three natural World Heritage sites Panamanians still managed by the National Environmental Authority (The Centre), not by the National Heritage (DNPH) the National Institute of Culture (INAC). Means for, property consists of the Old Town of Panama and the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, and property consists of fortifications in Portobelo and San Lorenzo.

World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

This plan is outlined in a simple resolution, elaborada for the DNPH. It consists of five paragraphs and three resolved, in the first of which consists of a list of 20 plan objectives.

The second pre-determined points to existing authorities to Resolution, somehow that will support compliance objectives listed in the first resolved.

It is very striking that the second does not mention resolved Patronage Portobelo San Lorenzo, nor the Patronato Panama Viejo, currently managing the respective sites present on the board INAC, everyone.

The third resolved signals the start date of the plan. It ends with the legal basis, which are the Constitution of the Republic of Panama (and general), and the basic laws of Panamanian heritage: Law 14 of 1982, Law 91 of 1976 and Executive Order 51 of 2004.

It is interesting that the Manual of Standards and Procedures for Restoration and Rehabilitation of the Old Town of Panama City, is supported by the hierarchy of Decree Law No.. 51 of 2004, by which it approved the Policy and Procedures Manual, containing inserts in articles some institutional resolutions DNPH. Certainly, Historical Monumental Complex of Old Town Panama Panama is the only monument that has its own manual of this type.

Give thanks to UNESCO for, whose transparency policies allow us access to this information publicly available both in Panama and abroad.

Regards,

Katti Osorio Ugarte

o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o
NOTE:
The Report Information System State of Conservation of the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS, likely to be available in July 2014, will be generated jointly by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS international reference material for the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO at its next meeting in mid- 2014. It will incorporate information provided by Panama in its report, reports and information and materials generated specifically for the case of international experts from UNESCO advisory bodies.

These are the latest SOC, generated by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS: State of Conservation (SOC), in English.

341st anniversary of the relocation of Panama City

Posted on January 21, 2014 by Katti Osorio

Dear friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

Today marks 341 years since the relocation of Panama City, from the place we now know as the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, to her current seat on the peninsula occupied by the Historic District of Panama (Casco Antiguo). The 21 th of January, 1673 is a special day, where the geopolitical importance of the strategic position of the port city of Panama in Central America was reaffirmed.

The 21 th of January, 1673 the relocation of Panama City became official 1673 from its original seat in the ruins of Panama Viejo, to another location about eight miles away; a location we know today as Casco Antiguo, within the same city limits assigned to it by the Spanish crown's royal decree of 6 th of September, 1521. These extended from the boundary of the city of Natá, the Chame River to the West; Chepo River to the East; Nombre de Dios to the North, approximately half the distance between the two cities; and the Islands of the Pearls, to the South. Indeed, Panama City was relocated, not refounded, within its original territory, with its Cabildo (seat of municipality), its Royal Court and diocese.

The relocation took place on 21 th of January, 1673, as Don Antonio Fernández de Córdoba executed the royal decree of 31 October 1672, by which the Spanish crown ordered the city relocated to the site called “Lancon” by building in the name of the king the houses for the Royal Court, the Cabildo, and the Cathedral Church; namely, the royal power, the Municipal power and ecclesiastical power for the government of Tierra Firme, retaining the port city on Perico Island, and giving special importance to protect the city by an enclosing wall. In the twentieth century, Panama City Council adopted the Decision No.. 59 of 13 of May 1953 officially declared 15 of August, 1519 date of foundation, considering the 21 January as the date of relocation. On the year 2019, Panama City will be 500 years old.

UNESCO recognized Panama Viejo and Casco Antiguo as the same city, registered in two stages in the World Heritage List, in 1997 and in 2003. Its outstanding universal value is based on the same evaluation criteria for Panama Viejo and for Casco Antiguo, because the relocated city continued its original functions as terminal of maritime and terrestrial routes. Cultural exchange through the centuries, its access to the sea, and the very special setting of the rocky peninsula that protects the historic district gave rise to its urban layout, to the development of its architecture, and to its geopolitical importance, which seduced the mind of Simon Bolivar to celebrate in Panama his Amphictyonic Congress despite the state of ruin in which the city was in 1826, according to maps from the first half of the nineteenth century.

Last year, we celebrated 500 years of the South Sea sighting by Europeans. Both events, the sighting of the South Sea (Pacific Ocean) 1513 and the founding of Panama City in 1519, are inseparable facts. With his sighting, Balboa demonstrated that this land was a new continent to the western world, and also the fact that he had gone across an isthmus. Panama City was born from the order of the Spanish empire to found a port city that would serve as a spearhead for the domain of the new sea and the rest of the continent. From it were established transisthmian routes, Camino Real and Camino de Cruces, and sea routes, linking the port of Panama with other major ports such as Acapulco and El Callao, established after the conquest travels to Mexico and Peru, creating connections that spread to Asia. Its geopolitical significance was worth the cost and effort of reactivating Panama after assault and destruction 1671, transferring it to a nearby site that would allow to quickly reactivate the port in Perico Island, and the Fairs of Portobelo on the Atlantic coast. Panama City and its history can not be interpreted without the sea that surrounds it and that gave it access to the world.

Regards,

Katti Osorio

Approximate boundaries of the city of Panama as royal decree of 6 th of September, 1521.

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

The Historic District of Panama and Criterion (vi) of Outstanding Universal Value

Panamanian tribes

Posted on November 28, 2013 by Katti Osorio

Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panama:

Up to this date, Panama has under inscription on UNESCO's World Heritage List, the property “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama.” Casco Antiguo is another name for the Historic District of Panama City, as it is known in Spanish language. In order to enter the World Heritage List(1), As State Party to the World Heritage Convention, Panama justified to the World Heritage Committee of Unesco, that the property holds outstanding universal value, by means of demonstrating that the property meets the necessary requirements, which include meeting at least one of the ten criteria of outstanding universal value. The property in its two components, Casco Antiguo + Panama Viejo, met criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). The criteria nomenclature is written in lowercase Roman numerals.

Each criterion of outstanding universal value has a theoretical basis, that supports them. I would like to showcase the sixth criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value, justified for the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama. I selected criterion (vi) because today is a special day: It is Panama's Independence from Spain (and affiliation to Colombia) on the 28 of November, 1821. At that date, Simón Bolívar El Libertador wrote a few congratulating lines to General Jose de Fabrega in occasion of the independence of the Isthmus of Panama. These lines were precursory to the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama, which is the basis of the Panamanian justification for criterion (vi) to the World Heritage Committee on the inscription of the Historic District of Panama on the World Heritage List in 1997. Before examining the letter, let us see the criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value for the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama:

Current Version: Decision 37 COM 8E, Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value

Criterion (vi): The ruins of Panama Viejo are closely linked to the European discovery of the Pacific Ocean, the history of Spanish expansion in the Isthmus of Central America and in Andean South America, the African diaspora, the history of piracy and proxy war, the bullion lifeline to Europe, the spread of European culture in the region and the commerce network between the Americas and Europe. The Salón Bolívar is associated with Simón Bolívar's visionary attempt 1826 to establish a multinational congress in the Americas, preceding the Organization of American States and the United Nations. (UNOFFICIAL translation by the author)

In my paper, “The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”, I made an analysis on the justification for the criteria of outstanding universal value presented by Panama that achieved the registration of the property in two stages as previously mentioned, in 1997 and 2003. I referred to each of the three criteria justified by Panama in regards to both components of the property: these are, The Historic District of Panama, and the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, identifying their corresponding attributes, where I pointed out in the case of criterion (vi) for the Historic District of Panama:

Criterion (vi) relates directly to the geopolitical importance of the strategic position of Panama City, from its foundation and relocation to the present day. The criterion is thus justified, based on the Bolivarian idea of making Panama the venue for the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama, considering Panama to be the logical place from the standpoint of strategy and geopolitics, in the vision of a free America, in a position to discuss as equals with European powers and the new nations in the North American continent, to achieve global balance. Even, the idea and the Congress itself, are precursors of international organizations with similar goals (the United Nations, and the Organization of American States, among others). Without the geopolitical importance attributed to Panama City by Simón Bolívar El Libertador, the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama would not have taken place there. Thus, criterion (vi) is more based on the idea of a congress of nations seeking a world balance, than on the ruins of Salón Bolívar itself, which is credited with being the room that hosted the Congress. The ruins are the physical attribute of the space that hosted the idea.

The attributes present in the justification of criterion (vi) are: the Salón Bolívar (at Bolívar Palace, headquarters of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs); and the maritime character of the city of Panama, main part of its geopolitical importance as a strategic point for inter-oceanic communications, and terminal of international trade routes. (Osorio 2012: 14-15)

I would like to draw your attention to the Bolivarian idea of making Panama the venue for the Amphictyonic Congress. In his famous Letter from Jamaica (as translated by Lewis Betrand in, Selected Writings from Bolivar. New York: The Colonial Press, 1951), Bolivar made reference to the Isthmus of Panama three times, first, referring to the Isthmus as possible capital city, after Mexico, of the New World, made into a great republic, and described the Isthmus of Panama as “… Let us assume it were to be the Isthmus of Panama, the most central point for all of this vast continent…” (Bolívar 1967: 38). In his second allusion to the Isthmus of Panama, he points out: “The states of the Isthmus of Panama as far as Guatemala, will perhaps form a confederation. Because of their magnificent position between two mighty oceans, they may in time become the emporium of the world, Their canals will shorten distances throughout the world, strengthen commercial ties between Europe, America and Asia, and bring to that happy area tribute of the four quarters of the globe. There some day, perhaps, the capital of the world may be located - reminiscent of the Emperor Constantine's claim that Byzantium was the capital of the ancient world!” (Bolívar 1967: 42-43). Noting the great difficulties in maintaining peace in the newly founded territories and the impossibility to consolidate them into a single, mighty republic, he makes reference to Panama for the third time, saying: “How beautiful it would be if the Isthmus of Panama could be for us what the Isthmus of Corinth was for the Greeks! Would to God that someday we may have the good fortune to convene there an august assembly of representatives of republics, kingdoms and empires to deliberate upon the high interests of peace and war, with the nations of the other three quarters of the globe.” (Bolívar 1967: 47).

The thoughts on Bolivar's mind concerning the Isthmus of Panama, embodied in his Letter from Jamaica 1815 addressed to an English gentleman in Kingston, Jamaica, was focused on the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Isthmus of Panama. He enthusiastically described the Isthmus of Panama, as a central point for all the Americas; assures that the Isthmus of Panama would become the emporium of the world thanks to its privileged interoceanic communications, including future canals; and that the Isthmus of Panama would strengthen commercial ties between Europe, the Americas and Asia; and he even goes as far as to give it the capital of the globe; Bolívar then reinforces the thought by equating the Isthmus of Panama to the Isthmus of Corinth and saying that Panama would be venue for a future world congress of republics, kingdoms and empires.

Perusing over documents on the internet related to present date November 28th, I found a transcription of the letter El Libertador Simón Bolívar addressed to General José de Fábrega on February 1st 1822, on the occasion of the independence of Panama from Spain. The letter to General Fábrega, back then still a colonel, was written seven years after the Letter of Jamaica; seven years during which the idea of a congress of nations remained brewing on El Libertador's mind..

I took the liberty to transcribe (and translate) the letter, as follows. I used bold letters to enhance some of the text, to highlight those terms that showcase the special interest Bolívar had on the case of Panama.

Headquarters at Popayán, 1February 1st, 1822 - 12º

TO MISTER COLONEL JOSÉ DE FÁBREGA,
GOVERNOR COMMANDER GENERAL
OF THE PROVINCE OF PANAMA.

Mister Colonel:

Yet without having had the satisfaction of receiving the dispatch that. you. have been kind enough to address to me, I hasten to congratulate the distinguished province that. you. have the glory of presiding over. I cannot fully express the feelings of joy and wonder I have experienced upon learning that Panamá, the center of the universe, is regenerated by her own volition, and free by her own virtue. The Act of Independence of Panama, is the most glorious monument that any American province may offer to History. Everything is consulted there, in regards to justice, generosity, politics and general interest.

Do convey on my behalf. you. to those meritorious Colombians, the tribute of my enthusiasm for their pure patriotism and true generosity. Without delay, a part of the army of Colombia, under the command of Colonel Carreño, must have secured already the fate of that precious emporium of commerce and exchange of the world. I have also ordered a second army corps of a 1.000 more men, enter to replace those same troops I now request from their commander to come and join us to cooperate to the freedom of Quito. Thus you. Colonel Fábrega. shall make every effort to ensure that these orders are carried out to their full effect. I trust completely that you. you. shall give all the assistance within your power to ensure that these troops may depart immediately with all the elements necessary for their transport and operations, due to embark for the coast of Esmeraldas and Guayaquil under the command of whomever leader gets appointed to them by Colonel Carreño: and embarking on the transports and warships that may be procured eventfully at the Isthmus ports or on the warships that may be expressly sent for that purpose from Guayaquil. Thus you. Mister, Colonel, are hereby appointed by me as governor commander general of the province of Panama, and Mister Colonel Carreño and should remain in command in that military department, as head, of politics and military, in charge of operations against Veraguas, or any other point occupied by the Spanish armies on the borders of Colombia. Mister Colonel Carreño shall receive from the department of Magdalena and the capital of Bogotá as much support as needed for the defense od the work you have so. you. initiated. I reiterate to you. you. expression of sincere gratitude, with which I accepted on behalf of Colombia the services that you. you. and that generous people have done to thus complete, the scope that Providence and Nature had designed to our mighty republic. May God keep you. you. long and many years.

BOLÍVAR.

To Bolivar, Panama was the center of the universe; probably, a geopolitical universe built upon vast communication networks. Four years later, he held in Panama City his long-awaited congress…. but, in what conditions was Panama City when it hosted the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama 1826?

A quick look at two cartographic references may show us Panama City at the time of the of Amphictyonic Congress of Panama 1826: Map of Panama in 1814, and the map of Panama in 1850. Both maps show the city in ruins, with more than 30% of its occupation area marked as uncultivated land, in ruins, or covered with bushes 1850, in better off conditions than in 1814.

Figure 1. Plan of the Plaza de Panama, chorographic Map of the New Kingdom of Granada, by Vicente Talledo y Rivera, 1814 (Tejeira 2009: 40)

Figure 2. Map of Panama in 1859, by H. Tiedemann (Spadafora 2001: 37).

Concluding remarks

Panama City was far from being an affluent city in 1826, the city was under a slow economic period and had a less than attractive appearance. Nonetheless, Simón Bolívar El Libertador was convinced about the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Isthmus of Panama, as shown in his Letter from Jamaica 1815, and his letter to General José de Fábrega in 1822. Bolívar summoned kingdoms, republics and empires to the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama in 1826. Regardless of its outcome, the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama in 1826 was a milestone in world history and it is precursor of current leagues of nations such as the United Nations, and the Organization of American States. This would not have come to happen if El Libertador had not been fully convinced of the importance of Panama as a communications hub, with great potential for locating a canal, and to become a commercial emporium accessible throughout the Americas, Europe and Asia. The sea was a vital element for the realization of this dream, and Panama with its important port connections, would fulfill an extraordinary role for the joint progress, “to our mighty republic” (Bolívar 2013). The room where the Amphictyonic Congress presumably took place, identified as the refectory of the convent of San Francisco, was restored in the early 2000. This is the space that housed the idea; the room's existence with all its ideological associations and interpretation of its wider setting give justification to the criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value, in accordance to the integrity of its attributes.

As I noted in a previous work, “To maintain the validity of Criterion (vi) the preservation of the elements that outline the strategic position of Panama City should be taken into account: its marine environment, access and communication with the sea (being a maritime city since 1519 and kept in its second phase from 1673), and its access and communication by land” (Osorio 2012: 22). This is, because of the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Old Town of Panama which cannot be understood without the sea that gives access to its port and environs., surrounding the peninsula where the Historic District was built.

As a final consideration, quote the Article 10 of Law Nº. 16 of 22 of May 2007:

"The institutions of the State shall ensure that the Historic Monuments Groups of Panamá Viejo and Casco Antiguo of the City of Panamá shall maintain their historic relationship, their visual contact and immediate access to the Pacific Ocean, and, accordingly, shall preserve their marine environment, which is part of the integral value of both Groups".

Regards,

Katti Osorio

o——o——o——o
References

Bolívar, Simón (2013) Letter addressed to Mr. Coronel José De Fabrega Gobernardor Commanding General of the Province of Panama, Headquarters at Popayán, 1° of February 1822. University of Los Andes, Venezuela.

Bolívar, Simón (1967) Letter from Jamaica. Publishing House of Culture. Miranda State Government, Venezuela.

Osorio, Katti (2012) The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama. Canto Rodado, 7 (7). pp. 1-27. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]

Tejeira Davis, Eduardo (2009) In Panama 1814: city plans of Vicente Talledo y Rivera. Canto Rodado, 4 (4). pp. 37-74. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]

Spadafora, Vanessa; Tejeira Davis, Eduardo (2001) El Casco Antiguo de Panama. 2 vols. City-City, Bilbao.

Notes:

(1) The property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” was inscribed as such on the World Heritage List in two stages. In 1997, the World Heritage Committee inscribed the equivalent part of the Historic Old Town Set Monumental City Panama delimited by Law No. 91 of 22 December 1976, under the name “Historic District of Panama with the Salon Bolivar” (Casco Antiguo de Panamá con el Salón Bolívar). Later on, without changing the boundaries of the Historic District of Panama, which continued to correspond to those declared by Law 91 of 22 December 1976, the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo was inscribed as an extension of the Historic District, according to their boundary delineated by the same Law, and the name of the property was changed to its current name. Thus was settled the World Heritage property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama.”

State of Conservation Information System Update

Posted on October 15, 2013 by Katti Osorio

Cinta Costera 3 from the promenade General. Esteban Huertas

This Week, the World Heritage Centre has updated once again data regarding the Panamanian property inscribed on the World Heritage List, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”, in order to include under the property's entry all decisions made by the World Heritage Committee about the delicate situation of said property, with emphasis on the Historic District (Casco Antiguo) of Panama City.

They are two Decisions:

1. Decision 37COM 7B.100
Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panama) (C 790bis)

This decision, previously discussed in another article in this blog (click here to read the article), refers primarily to the impact the maritime viaduct Cinta Costera 3 has exerted on the value to the world as cultural heritage of the Historic District of Panama (outstanding universal value). This Decision gives a deadline to Panama until Panamanian post-election year (specifically, until 1 February 2015) for submit to consideration by the World Heritage Committee a significant modification to the boundaries of the property “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” that would allowit to justify a revision of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property; without forgetting that the Cinta Costera 3 modified in an irreversible manner the relationship of the historic center with its wider setting (See points 5 and 6 of Decision 37 COM 7B.100). Although the property includes Panama Viejo and the Historic District (Casco Antiguo), is the latter that receives the emphasis of this Decision.

Link to the updated entry (in English) on the website of the World Heritage Centre, http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5019.

Decision 37 COM 7B.100 is listed in the Information System of State of Conservation (SOC) under the following themes: Credibility of the World Heritage List, inscriptions on the World Heritage List, and Outstanding Universal Value.

The wider setting to which the decision refers includes the sea and the network of relationships between the sea, the port city of Panama, and its terrestrial connections, which are described in the following decision.

2. 37COM 8E

Adoption of Retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value

The Decision 37 COM 8E adopts the Retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value, including on its list the “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”. The text adopted by this Decision is on the website of the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO, under this link, under the title, OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790 /

Allow me to provide you with an unofficial translation, here: Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value to the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (UNOFFICIAL translation). It describes that the city was founded following the discovery of the Southern Sea; that the city was a first class imperial outpost; which was relocated after the fire of 1671, that the city was built on a peninsula; that said peninsula was chosen because it could be fortified in order to prevent enemy access by sea; that the city grew in importance by means of the imperial bullion route; that the city was a strategic location within the geopolitical dynamics in the heyday of Spanish imperial power; including its geopolitical importance recognized by Simon Bolivar, and other revealing aspects of the vital and unavoidable relationship of Panama City with the sea.

The deepwater port of Panama was located at Perico Island (one of the three islands at the entrance of the Panama Canal, where the Americans built a causeway that connects them to the mainland in order to protect the Panama Canal entrance), and its interaction with the port city was via boats and ships smaller in size; the Royal Court and the Royal Houses (they were located where now stands the Presidency of the Republic) were within the walls of Panama.

A revealing preamble to Decision 37 COM 7B.100 may be seen in the State of Conservation report prepared by the World Heritage Centre for consideration by the World Heritage Committee at its Session 37 COM of year 2013 (Click here, for the text in English; Click here, for the text in Spanish) . In the fourth paragraph under “Conclusions”, the report reads as follows:

“The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies underscore the negative visual impacts of the Maritime Viaduct that will adversely impact on and transform the setting of the Historic Centre. They further note that , the Maritime Viaduct is a structure of a very strong shape (.) with a high visual impact which does not integrate harmoniously with the Historic District and establishes an undesirable contrast with regard to its maritime context. They consider that the ability of the property to convey its Outstanding Universal Value, as a fortified settlement in a Peninsula and as a testimony to the nature of the early settlements, with a layout and urban design adapted to a particular context, are being adversely compromised. The urban layout and scale and the relationship between the city and its setting, attributes crucial to the understanding of the evolution of the property, will also be adversely impacted.”

I provide below a picture showing the property before and after the construction of Cinta Costera maritime viaduct 3, featuring Google Earth's satellite photographs.

Cinta Costera Phase 3 Maritime Viaduct

Note:

Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the State of Conservation Information System (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

Panama has five properties of Outstanding Universal Value

Posted on August 1, 2013 by Katti Osorio

World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

The Republic of Panama has to date, five properties considered of outstanding universal value; five assets whose value raised them to appear alongside such well-known world heritage sites such as the Pyramids of Egypt, the Parthenon, the ruins of Machu Pichu, la Muralla China, and many other assets covered by the World Heritage Convention of UNESCO. They belong to all mankind; Panamanians are contributions to the cultural and natural heritage around the world.

Panama has many treasures, but these in particular are exceptionally important global:

Reserves of the Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park (enrolled in 1983);
Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection (enrolled in 2005)
Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo (enrolled in 1980)
Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Casco Antiguo; 1997 and 2003)
Darien National Park (1981)

You can see your location according to the numbering of 1 until 5 this list, in the figure that accompanies this note.

Most Panamanian World Heritage properties are natural sites: La Amistad National Park (Costa Rican park counterpart across the border; Reserves property Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park, is a transnational ownership shared with Costa Rica), Coiba National Park (former penal island of Coiba), and Darien National Park (part of the Darien Gap). Panama has two cultural properties on the World Heritage List: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Casco Antiguo); and Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo, currently on the List of World Heritage in Danger because of its state of disrepair and risk for various factors both natural and human action.

Paper about the outstanding universal value of a Panamanian property on the World Heritage List (Now in English and Spanish)

Panamanian tribes

Posted on July 22, 2013 by Katti Osorio

o-o-o-Update Notice, February 2014-o-o-o
Dear friends of Patrimonio Panamá, it is now available in ICOMOS Open Archive the English version my article, “The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (link, here).” Along with the original version in Spanish, it is available for free download, as well as for reading online. Thanks for your interest.

See, Top Ten most downloaded Authors in ICOMOS Open Archive, December 2013 - January 2014
o-o-o-End of Update Notice-o-o-o

I would like to share with you an article of mine titled, “The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama.” It was published in the 7th volume of a Panamanian journal specialized in heritage, “Canto Rodado”; its articles are peer reviewed. The journal Canto Rodado is one of the many achievements of the Patronato Panama Viejo. It is published once a year, to publicize important research related to the archaeological site of Panama Viejo, and historic heritage in general.

This is the abstract of my paper:

“All the properties inscribed on the World Heritage List hold Outstanding Universal Value and are irreplaceable pieces of the cultural and natural legacy of humanity.. The Outstanding Universal Value may be apprehended by means of the justification of the criterion of outstanding universal value assured to be present in a given World Heritage property. These criteria contain the attributes of Outstanding Universal Value, whose definitive loss supposes delisting from the World Heritage List of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, for its acronym in English). Even though the Statement of Outstanding Universal Value only is part of the proposal for inscription forms from 2005, each nomination is based upon the justification of the criteria of outstanding universal value from the beginning. The World Heritage property, Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama was inscribed in 1997 and extended in 2003. This paper analyzes and outlines the attributes of outstanding universal value of the property according to documents concerning the statement, which are available at the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO.”

Presently, Jornal Canto Rodado No.7 will be available on the portal Dialnet at the University of La Rioja (http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/revista?codigo=16122). It is now available at the National Library System of Panama. I have made my paper available in PDF format at the Open Archive of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS Open Archive) on the following link: http://openarchive.icomos.org/1373/

As I mentioned earlier in this blog, during the 37th Session of the World Heritage Committee it was approved by Decision 37 COM 8E, Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value for the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (available in English here, on the pages 2 and 4). The criteria of outstanding universal value in their new syntactic version, retain their meaning and attributes. Here's an UNOFFICIAL translation: http://patrimoniopanama.com/?p=337

In my paper, I analyzed each justification for the criteria of outstanding universal value submitted by Panama to support the property's nomination for inscription on the World Heritage List of UNESCO, for the Historic District of Panama in 1997 (Casco Antiguo), as well as for the Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo in 2003. I considered in my analysis the conceptual basis of the justified criteria, and I identified the attributes of outstanding universal value described in the panamanian justification of the criteria. Through analysis of the criteria, the importance of the relationship of Panama City (in the Historic District and in Panama Viejo) and sea in order to sustain their attributes became apparent.

Without further ado, I invite you to read my paper. The quotation below, contains the direct link to the downloadable PDF file of my article, available in ICOMOS Open Archive:

Osorio, Katti (2012) The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama. Canto Rodado, 7 (7). pp. 1-27. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]

I prepared the following map on a Google Maps image, using only the buffer zone boundaries and property boundaries registered by the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO (National boundaries are wider (than those inscribed) for the Historic District). As you can see, only Panama Viejo has a buffer zone registered in UNESCO's file. I highlighted both components of the single “Property” in color red, so you can clearly see that the limits of both sites together are the boundary of the whole property:

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

Due to the impact of the Coastal 3 (marked yellow), according to Decision 37 COM 7B.100 (see blog post http://patrimoniopanama.com/?p=271) “modified in an irreversible manner the relationship of the historic center with its wider setting”, and “Requests the State Party to submit to the 1 February 2015 a significant change to the limits as to justify a review of the outstanding universal value of the property.” For, limits a major change represents a significant change, that warrants the need to re-justify that the property has outstanding universal value, as if it were a new nomination. Decision Ends, “in the absence of the implementation of the request made in this decision, the property would be deleted from the World Heritage List at its 39th session 2015, in accordance with Chapter IV.C of the Operational Guidelines.”

I recommend reading the Decision 37 COM 7B.100 Full.

____

References (Figure)

Limitations of the Buffer Zone Old Panama Archaeological Site: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/multiple=1&unique_number=934

Note:

Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value to the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (UNOFFICIAL translation)

Posted on July 22, 2013 by Katti Osorio

In order to facilitate understanding of the text Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value approved by the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for the Panamanian property inscribed on the World Heritage List under entry number 790bis, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” (the name Historic District refers to the Casco Antiguo of Panama City), I provide you with an UNOFFICIAL translation.

The original text in English, is of free public access and may be consulted at both the State Information System of the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO (http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4964), and it is also available on the direct link Documento WHC-13/37.COM/8E.ADD (on the pages 2 to 4)

Property / Bien	Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama
State Party / Etat partie	Panamá
Id. N°/ Id. N°	790bis
Date of Inscription / Date d’inscription	1997 – 2003

Brief synthesis

Panama Panamá, on the continuously occupied European settlement in the Pacific Coast of the Americas, was founded in 1519, as a consequence of the discovery by the Spanish of the South Sea in 1513. The archaeological remains of the original settlement (known today as The Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo) are the Pre-Columbian vestiges of the Cuevan aboriginal occupation of the same name, and currently encompass a protected heritage site covering 32 hectares. The settlement was a first rank colonial outpost, and seat of a Royal Court of Justice (Real Audiencia) during the 16th and 17th centuries, when Panamá consolidated its position as an intercontinental hub. Its growth in importance, since it profited from the imperial bullion lifeline, is reflected by the imposing stone architecture of its public and religious buildings.

During its 152 years of existence, the town was affected by slave rebellion, fire and an earthquake, but it was destroyed in the wake of a devastating pirate attack in 1671. Since it was relocated and never rebuilt, Panamá Viejo retained its original layout, a slightly irregular, somewhat rudimentary grid with, blocks of various sizes. There is archaeological evidence of the original street pattern and the location of domestic, religious and civil structures. The site is exceptional testimony of colonial colonial, the ruins of its cathedral, convents and public buildings showcase unique technological and stylistic characteristics of its temporal and cultural context. It also offers invaluable information on a variety of aspects of social life, economy, communications and the vulnerability of a strategic site within the geopolitical dynamics at the height of Spanish imperial Spanish.

In 1673 the city was moved some 7,5 km southeast, to a small peninsula, at the foot of Ancón Hill, closer to the islands that were used as the port and near the mouth of a river that eventually became the entrance of the Panama Canal. The relocated town, known today as Casco Antiguo or the Historic District or Panama, not only had better access to fresh water, but could be fortified. The military engineers, moreover, took advantage of the morphological conditions that complemented the wall surrounding the peninsula, all of which prevented direct naval approaches by an enemy. The area within the walls had an orthogonal layout, with a central plaza and streets of different widths; outside the walls, the suburb of Santa Ana had an irregular layout. There is a centrally- located, main plaza (which was enlarged in the 19th century) and several smaller post-colonial plazas on the fringes. Most of the seaward walls of the colonial fortifications and parts of the landward bastions and moat, survive. Several buildings within the District are identified as important for the country’s 17th-20th century heritage. Most outstanding are the churches, above all the cathedral with its five aisles and timber roof, San Felipe Neri, San José, San Francisco and especially La Merced, with its well-preserved colonial timber roof. The Presidential Palace, originally built in the late 17th century and partially reconstructed in the 18th, and early 20th centuries, is a revealing example of the transformations that characterize the Historic District as a whole. The House of the Municipality, the Canal Museum building (originally the Grand Hotel), The National Theatre, the Ministry of Government and Justice and the Municipal Palace are outstanding buildings of a more recent period. There are several exceptional examples of domestic architecture from the colonial period, above all the mid-18th century Casa Góngora, and also several hundred houses from the mid-19th to the early 20th centuries that illustrate the transformation of living concepts from the colonial period to modern times. These include not only upper-class houses from the entire period, but also 2- to 5-floor apartment houses 2 to 5 and wooden tenement buildings from the early 20th century, erected to satisfy the requirements of a more stratified urban society.

Particularly relevant is Salón Bolivar, originally the Chapter Hall of the convent of San Francisco, which is the only surviving part and Salón 17th-18th century complex. The Salón Bolivar has special historical importance as the site ofthe visionary, but abortive attempt by Simón Bolívar in 1826 to establish what would have been the world’s first multinational and continental the world.

The present-day appearance of the Historic District is marked by a unique blend of 19th- and early 20th century architecture inspired in late colonial, Caribbean, the Coast, French and eclectic (mostly Neo–Renaissance). styles. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, building styles evolved significantly, but spatial principles were fundamentally preserved. The Historic District’s layout, a complex grid with streets and blocks of different widths and sizes and remaining inspired in late Renaissance treatises, is an exceptional and probably unique example colonial colonial town planning in the Americas. These special qualities which differentiate the Property from other colonial cities in Latin America and the Caribbean, resulted from the construction, first of a railroad (1850-1855) and then a canal (1880-1914), that linked the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The construction of the canal, a landmark in the history of the Americas and the world, had a tangible effect on the development and Salón Casco Antiguo and its surrounding area.

Criterion (ii)

Panamá Viejo is an exceptional testimony of town planning of its period and culture. It exhibits an important interchange of of human values, since it bore great influence on subsequent developments in colonial Spanish colonial expansion, even in areas vastly different in climate and setting. The Historic District’s District reflects the persistence and interchange of human values, which have been oriented towards interoceanic and intercontinentalcommunications for several centuries at this strategic site on the Central American Isthmus.

Criterion (iv)

In both Panamá Viejo and the Historic District (Casco Antiguo), the and multiple-family types from the 16th to the 18th centuries, represent a significant stage in the development of Spanish colonial expansion whole. Panamá Viejo is an an exceptional example of the period's building technology and architecture. In the Historic District, the multiple-family houses from the 19th and early 20th (centuries) are original examples of how society reacted to new requirements, technological developments and influences brought about by post-colonial society-and the building of the Panamá.

Criterion (vi)

The ruins of Panamá Viejo are closely linked to on the European discovery of the Pacific Ocean, the history of Spanish expansion in the Isthmus of Central America and in Andean South America, the African diaspora, the history of piracy and proxy war, the bullion lifeline to Europe, the spread of European culture in the region and the commerce network between the Americas and Europe. The Salón Bolivar is associated with Simón Bolívar's visionary attempt in 1826 to establish a multinational congress in the Americas, preceding the Organization of American States and the United Nations.

Statement of Authenticity

The conditions of authenticity of both components of the Property “The Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Casco Antiguo of Panamá”have been maintained. Upon abandonment, the core area of Panamá Viejo was never rebuilt and retained its original street layout. No reconstructions of archaeological remains have been carried out and all conservation and intervention work amongst the ruins has been done in accordance with international standards. Within the boundaries of the protected heritage area there are a few modern structures, but these are clearly identified and differentiated from the archaeological remains.

The urban layout of the Historic District of Panama Panamá can considered to be entirely authentic, preserving its original form largely unchanged. The organically developed stock of buildings from the 18th the 20th century have changed little over time. Most of the fabric buildings and fortifications, as well as the public spaces, is original. There is evidence that dressed stone and other building materials from the ruins of the Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo Viejo were quarried and recycled to help rebuild the relocated settlement, and for the construction of buildings and fortifications and Salón Casco Antiguo, thus providing a measure of material continuity between the two components of the Property. In some well documented cases such, as La Merced, entire church facades were reconstructed on the new site.

The property has maintained the street layout, structural volumetry and the urban scale. Many streets retain the brick paving characteristic of the early years of the 20th century. Although a certain level of gentrification has has taken place, the traditional use has been largely preserved, with a mixture of residential, commercial, institutional and religious activities coexisting with non-traditional touristic and entertainment uses. Since the modern habilitation of interior spaces of buildings can potentially compromise the essence of the site by replacing traditional structural systems with modern structural materials, clear guidelines need to be enforced in the implementation restoration and rehabilitation projects for historic buildings.

Statement of Integrity

Both components of the Property meet the conditions of integrity. As a Pre-Columbian and Historic Archaeological Site with both historic ruins and stratified contexts, Panamá Viejo includes all the elements necessary to convey the Outstanding Universal Value for which this component was included as an extension of the Historic District and Salón Casco Antiguo original Bolívar. The size of protected area is consistent with the distribution of the relevant physical attributes, constituting a coherent and clearly defined whole. In 2012, the Via Cincuentenario was relocated from the core area of the site, generating a new border that will contain growth from the neighbouring communities. With the implementation of zoning regulations (Ministry of Housing Zoning Regulation of 2006) and a National Law (2007), a land and marine buffer zone that regulates the development of the neighboring communities and the waterfront has been established to control erosion of its borders.

The Historic District maintains, within its boundaries and those of the locally-protected adjacent area, sufficient representation of all the attributes that convey Outstanding Universal Value, particularly the urban layout, the dimension and distribution of ground plots, the remaining colonial fortifications and non-residential buildings of monumental value. A great variety of residential building typologies is also present. In almost all cases, the volumetry, rhythm of facade openings and long open, spaces have withstood the substantial number of comprehensive interventions interventions that have taken place since inscription in 1997, most of which have adapted the inner distributions of houses and open spaces within the plots to current requisites of privacy and safety.

Developmentand significant conservation challenges are the most critical aspect threatening the integrity Casco Antiguo. To address threats, the legislative and regulatory framework needs to be enforced and comprehensive interventions implemented, to reverse lack of maintenance of historic buildings.

Requirements for protection and management

The Property has various legislative and regulatory measures to ensure their protection and conservation. The original definition conservation standards areas of protection heritage back to 1976 (Law 91/1976). This law recognizes y define legally culture and heritage Law. It supplemented Law National Heritage of 1982 (Law 14/1982), I think the Directorate National Heritage (District), as part of the Institute National Culture and became entity State responsible for protection and managing Panamá Viejo and the Historic District. A Commission Also Advisory was created by this law. The Heritage Act establishes penalties administrative for destruction of the assets; the fines quintupled through a law 2003 (Law 58/2003). On the other hand, the Code Penal was modified in 2007 to include sanctions imprisonment for destruction criminal of heritage properties (Law 14/2007).

Each component of the property has been provided with a management framework in response to its peculiarities within the geopolitical town city Panamá and realities State administrative centralized. While Panamá Viejo is an an archaeological park of uninhabited public lands, surrounded by settlements unregulated working class, Historic District Live is an urban center with a mixture of functions residential and institutional presented challenges social and of associated conservation to processes of re–occupation and use of private and public property.

The management function Institute National Culture about sites protected historical has been supplemented and enhanced by philanthropy private sector Technical Resources and administrative other state institutions. In the case of Panamá Viejo, on the Patronage Panamá Viejo, nonprofit organization The lucro, public-private mixed with a legal mandate to manage the central government subsidies and lift their own funds, supports site maintenance, preservation architectural and research projects.

In Case historic district of Panama, a law of 1997 (Decree-Law 9/1997) sets specific guidelines for interventions architectural and protection extended an area adjacent. Also, provided a number of incentives fiscal restoration projects and reinforced paper Advisory Commission for the process of project approval property is more efficient and transparent. Regulations were approved Detailed mas (Decree Executive 51/2004), with orientations including zoning and infrastructure aspects, and was provided a manual conservation, with specific recommendations for interventions architectural and new construction. Functions protection and management Institute National Culture is supplemented creating new public body agency: the Office Hull Old (OCA), that developed a Plan the Maestro assumed the role of coordination agency. A land and marine established around peninsula where is Historic District. Building Permits and occupation and the taxation corresponding remain the responsibility municipal authorities elected, however, the approval of plans architectural and documents to projects located in the Historic District remain the responsibility exclusive the Directorate National Heritage. The formulation, application and periodic review of a Plan Heritage Management integral is required to ensure that conservation and managing both components occurs within scheme coordinated.

———End UNOFFICIAL translation———

The following figure, drawn on a map of Google Maps by the author of this blog, property shows “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”, where the Old Town Historic District is. While both components are separated about eight kilometers, constitute a single property.

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

Note:

Decision 37 COM 7B.100, World Heritage Committee of UNESCO Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama, in 2013

Posted on July 11, 2013 by Katti Osorio

The 37th Session of the UNESCO World Heritage (37 COM) ended the day 27 June 2013. Today, World Heritage Centre issued the document WHC-13/37.COM/20 dated 5 July 2013, containing all the decisions adopted by the Committee in Session 37 COM.

The decision concerning the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama is located on page 146 Document WHC-13/37.COM/20, in English. The document is also available in French, and both are original versions.

Then, a translation UNOFFICIAL Text of Decision 37 COM 7B.100:

100. Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panamá) (C 790bis)

Decision: 37 COM 7B.100
The World Heritage Committee,

Having examined Document WHC-37/37.COM/7B.Add,

Recalling Decisions 33 COM 7B.141, 34 COM 7B.113, 35 COM 7B.130, 36 COM 7B.103, adopted at its 33rd (Seville, 2009), 34th (Brasilia, 2010), 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012) sessions, respectively, and its concern that the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) would irreversibly impact on the property,

Also recalling the state of conservation reports and reactive monitoring mission reports of March 2009, March 2010 and October 2010 that underscored the impacts of the Cinta Costera project, in particular the Maritime Viaduct, and the poor state of conservation of the property;

Notes the progress with developing a Management Plan, with quantifying the number of buildings at risk and with work on streetscapes, and undergrounding networks, and reiterates its deep concern about the overall state of conservation of the property, and regrets that no sufficient progress has been made in comprehensively and sustainably addressing issues, or in implementing the emergency Action Plan agreed in 2009;

Also regrets that the State party decided to launch the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) that modifies in an irreversible manner the relation of the historic centre with its wider setting;

Requests the State Party to submit by 1 February 2015 a significant modification to the boundaries to allow it to justify a revision of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

Also requests the State Party to invite as soon as possible a high-level World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission, guided by the World Heritage Centre, to discuss the different possibilities of this modification;

Considers that in the absence of the implementation of the request made in this decision, the property would be deleted from the World Heritage List at its 39th session 2015, in conformity with Chapter IV.C of the Operational Guidelines.

-End UNOFFICIAL translation of Decision 37 COM 7B.100. The underlined and bold text correspond to underlined text and bold text in the original version in English, which is available at, http://whc.unesco.org/document/123631 page 146 and page 147.

The procedure for a “significant modification to the boundaries” is decribed in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention; namely, on the “handbook” of the World Heritage Convention. This procedure involves submitting the proposal (for boundary modification) as if it were a new nomination to get inscribed on the World Heritage List, gathering all the necessary conditions. As shown in the Decision, no deterioration was noted at the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo to warrant its reduction, but (it was noted) in the Historic District (Casco Antiguo).

Let us take into account that the boundaries of the property comprise the boundaries of the Historic District of Panama (delineated by Law 91 of 1976, from the sea to the 12th Street 12 West, mainly) and the boundaries of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo (delineation by Law 16 of 2007). The boundaries of both components, Panama Viejo and Casco Antiguo together, constitute a single property.

To get inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, it is required that the property at risk is already inscribed on the World Heritage List, and that the characteristics which determined its inscription on the World Heritage List have not deteriorated to the extent that they have been lost. (Operational Guidelines, Section IV.C).

The statement in paragraph 5 of Decision 37 COM 7B.100, “Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) that modifies in an irreversible manner the relation of the historic centre with its wider setting” it is of great concern that it contains the word “irreversible”, that highlights the strength of the contents of the Decision, while paragraph 8 underscores that, if the requirements set out in the decision are not fulfilled,, the property shall be deleted from the World Heritage List, without the option of getting inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

For more information, see entries:

____

Note:

Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

The State of Conservation of Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama in 2013 (unofficial translation)

Posted on June 22, 2013 by Katti Osorio

To facilitate understanding of the text of the State of Conservation prepared by the World Heritage Centre the United Nations Organization for Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for the Panamanian property inscribed on the World Heritage List under entry number 790bis, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” (the name Historic District refers to the Casco Antiguo of Panama City), Here I provide an UNOFFICIAL translation.

The original text in English can be consulted both in the Information System of the State of Conservation of the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO (http://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/1975), and also available in, http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/123027 (on the pages 184 to 190)

————–

Unofficial translation.

100. Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panamá)

(C 790bis)

Year of inscription on the List of World Heritage
1997, extension at 2003
Criteria
(ii) (iv) (vi)
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger
N/A
Previous decisions of the Committee
See: http://whc.unesco.org/en/lis/790/documents/Asistencia Internacional
N/A
UNESCO Extra-Budgetary Funds
N/A
Previous missions monitoring

Previous Missions Monitoring

March 2009: Reactive Monitoring Mission joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS

March 2010: Because of the reactive monitoring mission of the joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS to Portobelo and San Lorenzo, conducted a technical visit to the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District, as requested by the authorities of Panama.

October 2010: Joint reactive monitoring mission of the World Heritage Centre with ICOMOS.

Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports

to) The serious deterioration of historic buildings that threatens the Outstanding Universal Value;
b) Conflicts of interests of different stakeholders in relation to the use, management and conservation of the historic center;
c) Limited capacity for rehabilitation and maintenance of historic buildings;
d) The deficiencies in the implementation of the legislative framework for the protection;
and) The lack of clear policy implementation and management of the property conservacióno;
f) Demolition of buildings and urban ensembles;
g) The forced displacement of occupants and squatters;
h) Urban development projects within the protected area (namely, Cinta Costera).
Material ilustrativo
See page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790
y http://whc.unesco.org / and / soc

Current conservation issues

The State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation of the property 31 th of January, 2013, Additional information was submitted on 12 February 2013. More detailed information on the Cinta Costera III project, including information on the impact of the project and in urban transport and mobility strategy for the Historic District of Panama had been submitted by the State party on 21 September and 9 of November, 2012. The 14 March 2013, the State party made a presentation at the World Heritage Centre on the progress in developing the management plan set of two World Heritage properties in Panama: Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama, Portobelo and San Lorenzo, Historic District plus Panama and Old Panama Archaeological Site.

to) Buffer zone and inventory retrospective

A request for minor changes to the boundaries was presented by the State party on 29 th of January, 2013 and additional information regarding the 15 February 2013. On 14 March 2013 was also presented an additional map. However, the proposed minor modifications to the boundaries does not meet the requirements of the Operational Guidelines, therefore requested the State party clarify and complete information presentation.

b) Legislative Framework, policy and management system for the property.

The information presented includes a progress report on the development and implementation of policies and procedures manual for the restoration and rehabilitation of the Old Town Panama City, which was approved in 2004. The manual makes clear the basic requirements for plan approval and the approval of permits for construction and occupancy. There has been no accurate information on the implementation of these tools.

The state party also provided information on the formulation of the "Panama Plan UNESCO Heritage Management" on a presentation made at UNESCO 14 March 2013. The information provided notes to prepare a protocol for the management of the two cultural World Heritage properties in Panama, August 2012; said the protocol signed by all the major players operating plan ensures. A coordinating body is established and also a National Natural and Cultural Heritage will function as a technical advisory body. The Commission integrates various ministries and management entities Portobelo and San Lorenzo, well as Panama Viejo. Presidential Decree to establish a Commission official is under review currently.

The draft Management Plan included in the report presents a list of a number of objectives for both conservation and management of World Heritage cultural properties. The Plan contains background information, an assessment of the current situation and the strategies and actions proposed for the various sectors, structured under the following headings: Knowledge plan, protection and conservation plan, urban planning, plan public space and landscaping, economic development plan, cultural promotion plan and monitoring plan. The document also includes a table of actions to be implemented, cost proposed and identified for the execution times (urgent, medium and long term). While the Management Plan includes a useful systematic evaluation and identifies specific activities, would benefit from the identification of a precise route to address the state of conservation of the built environment, criteria and guidance for interventions, that could be used as a consistent framework to guide decision-making, taking into consideration the conditions of authenticity and integrity of the property. Additional information is required as to whether the proposed management arrangements are in operation and whether it has achieved funding to implement urgent actions identified.

The report submitted by the State party also included the Master Plan for the rehabilitation and restoration of the historic monuments of the Old Town Panama City, dated January 2011. No information was given about the degree of implementation of the Master Plan will be essential and clearly integrated with the Management Plan under development.

c) Condition of the property

Since 2008, World Heritage Committee has expressed concern about the state of conservation of the Historic Center, Particularly with regard to the existence of a significant number of historic buildings mostly dilapidated and neglected.

The State party reports progress with certain steps to begin addressing these problems. For example, actions have been carried out for replacement of sidewalks and painting sidewalks cords, to place pavement, for the installation of storm drains, for the underground electrical and communications, and reconstruction of sewerage infrastructure. It also notes that the historic center visits were carried out to monitor the progress of the actions implemented, including the state of conservation of historic buildings.

More detailed information submitted by the State party considers the magnitude of the problem: of the 845 lots in the historic district, 40,3% is considered to be in good condition, on the 5,8% has unfinished works, 9,8% are vacant lots, 26,4% are inhabited and in poor condition and 17,6% are unoccupied and in poor condition. It is claimed that this analysis will be used for summoning their owners to initiate processes “unlocking value” by National Trust (DNPH) and apply sanctions where appropriate. However, no additional information was provided on whether the Emergency Plan interventions, prepared in 2009, revised in accordance with the provisions provided for in Schedule Management Plan to identify priority actions for implementation and to include a practical plan for implementation, including the resources required and the time schedule for implementation. This review has been requested by the World Heritage Committee since its 35th meeting (UNESCO, 2011).

On the Road Cinquantenaire, State party reports that it has continued to work on his removal from the Old Panama Archaeological Site. In consideration of the new alignment, actions are being implemented as archaeological studies, relocation of utilities, and relocation of affected families. As requested by the Environmental Impact Study (EIA), Archaeological Rescue Plan of Panama Viejo was implemented. However, any Heritage Impact Assessment has been done yet for review.

d) Coastal Belt Project

i. Background

Reactive monitoring mission to the property in 2009 Phase II said Cinta Costera project, located in the seaside area of the Embankment, 'd been built without conducting environmental impact studies or heritage impact studies, without informing the World Heritage Committee. Additionally, The mission noted that the Phase III project planned at that time could have an impact on the property; consequently the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd Session (Seville 2009) requested that the State party betray a final report, including the analysis and monitoring of the impacts of the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase II and the potential impacts on the property for the possible continuation of Phase III.

In 2010, the conservation status report considered by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th Session (Brasilia, 2010) noted that was expected at the time that Phase III of the Coastal continue with a tunnel would cross approximately 1 km of the historic center or using surround the Peninsula Historic District. Reactive monitoring mission 2010 verified that the property had continued work on Phase II and it was not possible seek additional information regarding the social, conservation requirements, or project impact assessments. It was also noted that Phase II of the Coastal had resulted in the radical transformation of the coastline and impacted the character of the old port area on the Embankment. The mission noted that the proposal from the Cinta Costera Phase III to encircle the peninsula could have an aggressive impact on targeted views to and from the historic center and could impact on the conditions of authenticity and integrity of the property. He also noted that any alternative to the continuation of the project in Phase III would have been sufficiently explored so far. In Decision 34 COM 7B.113, World Heritage Committee requested the State party to stop the Cinta Costera project and submit the necessary technical studies and impact assessments prior to approval and implementation, and to explore and submit alternative proposals to address the concerns surrounding traffic effectively.

At its 35th Session (UNESCO, 2011) World Heritage Committee noted the commitment made by the State party in the session of the Committee to submit all projects, and studies related to alternative proposals for future works of the Cinta Costera Phase III evaluation, including technical specifications and heritage impact studies. The Committee also requested that the construction of Phase III of the coastal strip was discontinued, because it could potentially have an adverse impact on the outstanding universal value of the property.

The 31 th of January, 2012, the State party submitted, as the only alternative was submitting for consideration and review by the World Heritage Committee, a final proposal to build a viaduct Maritime, Phase III de la Cinta Costera, World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS. In the state of conservation report considered by the World Heritage Centre in its 36th Session (Saint Petersburg, 2012) noted, assessment based on Heritage Impact Study, the project meant a potential threat to the integrity and authenticity of the property as it would transform the traditional form of the Historic District, their appearance in the coastline and irreversibly compromise the relationship between the historic center and the sea and would impact particularly property environment on the peninsula and the uniqueness of the fortified. The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies consider that had not yet been sufficiently explored alternative solutions, nor had they been presented global technical evaluations to rule out other options. The statement for the evaluation of a single proposal also excluded the possibility of talking about other possible solutions. The World Heritage Committee requested, in Decision 36 COM 7B.103, that impact studies on the outstanding universal value of the property were carried out and also requested the State party to implement a series of measures to address comprehensively the precarious state of conservation of the property.

The 21 th of January, 2013, the State party provided a report “Solutions for the future traffic demand Panama City”, prepared by Halcrow Consulting. This report explains the rapid growth of the city of Panama and and provides details of the traffic problem and asserts that the Maritime Viaduct urban freeways have three lanes in each direction, directly connecting Balboa Avenue and the Avenue of the Poets. The report does not provide details of alternative options to cope with increased traffic recognized (vehicular).

ii Current Situation

The 7 th of September, 2012, the State party made a presentation on UNESCO's “Impact of the Cinta Costera III Marine Viaduct to its outstanding universal value under the criteria currently enrolled C790 Property, Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”. In further communication with the World Heritage Centre, during September 2012, the State party indicated that the option presented was revised to address impacts identified through the incorporation of mitigation and compensation measures. He stressed that the island of San Felipe, which had been outside the Presidential Palace, had been removed from the final design.

The 24 December 2012, a letter from civil society was received by the Director General of UNESCO providing notification of maritime viaduct construction. The 17 October 2012 a letter from the Permanent Delegation to UNESCO Panama was received in response to the request for information regarding claims to the start of construction. The State party indicated that the impact study submitted in September 2012 for evaluation was considered as formal compliance with paragraphs 6 and 7 the decision of the World Heritage Committee (36 COM 7B.103) and therefore considered that the construction of the Interconnection on Carretera Maritime Viaduct could begin. The letter also confirmed the State party's willingness to receive suggestions, contributions and input on the technical feasibility necessary to optimize the design and reported that delegations World Heritage Committee had visited the site for this purpose. In January 2013, information available in the public domain indicated that nearly 50% Viaduct was built. For official communication, the State party confirmed the day 25 th of April, 2013 that 55% infrastructure has been completed.

iii. Assessment of impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property

The impact study submitted by the State party noted that the Maritime Viaduct, Phase III of the coastal strip does not affect enrollment criteria of the property. However, The report highlighted the attributes of the property in terms of shape and design that influenced the evolution of military architecture in the Americas. Emphasized its low profile and adaptation of the settlement to the shape of the peninsula, and considered the paramount importance of the location and environment, both critical attributes for authenticity Property. The report indicates “the main reason why the city was moved after the destruction of Panama Viejo was the desire to fortify. As the site of the cove was paid (himself) for the construction of a fortified, was selected despite its narrowness. The peninsula had an additional advantage: on their flanks to the east and south beach has an area of sharp rocks that have significantly hindered any attempt to attack from there. Given these characteristics, this environment was an integral part of the defensive system.”

The study highlighted that the current environment and landscape, understood as being composed of the Historic District, Panama Bay around (Estes) and panoramas, Waterfront (waterfront), the skyline of Panama and Ancon Hill, who had remained unchanged in terms of the location of the Historic Center, the atmosphere of sharp rocks to the east and south of San Felipe, about three rocks that appear in historical cartography as “The Three Sisters”, be altered. The report included a photo, taken from Google Earth, corresponding exactly to an eighteenth century map of the city and it further emphasized that “at a distance, Historical Center landscape seems mostly unchanged from the nineteenth century”. The report also mentions that “clear vision, in their perception of foreground and background, is part of the collective memory of the population of the capital”. Indirect impacts identified are classified to include visual effects, impact noise, tides, metropolitan scene background, functional, and territorial relationship on the site. The report acknowledges the indirect visual impacts on the environment of the coastline of the property and the graduates as large to very large changes (209, 213 – 215). Despite these considerations, The report considered that the visual impact on the environment of the coastline could be mitigated by design changes. No technical detail was provided in terms of mitigation measures envisaged to ensure that the viaduct does not adversely impact the environment of the coastline.

Conclusion

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies wish to attract the attention of the Committee the current condition of the property, where it is reported that the 44% inventoried historic buildings is in extremely poor condition, a problem that has been unattended since 2008. Although the proposed development of the Management Plan can be viewed as a positive step forward, still no indication that the system is fully operational requirements or that adequate resources have been secured.

To date, despite requests made by the World Heritage Committee, unfortunately there is no indication as to whether the Emergency Plan interventions, outlined in 2009, revised in accordance with the provisions made in the guidelines of the Management Plan in order to identify priority actions and to include a practical plan for implementation, schedules including required resources and expected to implement actions. This needs to be implemented urgently to ensure the conservation and protection of the factory built.

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies agree with the need to consider improvements to the road infrastructure to meet growing traffic demands but note that no alternative to the Maritime Viaduct was sufficiently explored and that construction began without giving the World Heritage Committee , and identification of possible recommendations. They take note of the efforts made to conduct impact studies but consider that, despite adverse impacts have been identified with the option selected for the Viaduct Maritime, there was no clear explanation in any of the documents provided on why other alternatives were completely rejected. Also, the report “Solutions for the future traffic demand Panama City” underlines the rapid growth of the City of Panama and the challenges it faces in terms of traffic demand and the urgent need to reorganize the road infrastructure. However, (the report) focuses on justifying why the Maritime Viaduct is the only alternative without considering any alternative or balance their advantages and disadvantages. No justifications supported the viaduct indicating that effectively provide and more importantly, sustainably, long-term solutions to these problems of road traffic.

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies underscore the negative visual impacts of the Maritime Viaduct that will adversely impact on and transform the setting of the Historic Centre. They further note that , the Maritime Viaduct is a structure of a very strong shape (.) with a high visual impact which does not integrate harmoniously with the Historic District and establishes an undesirable contrast with regard to its maritime context. They consider that the ability of the property to convey its Outstanding Universal Value, as a fortified settlement in a Peninsula and as a testimony to the nature of the early settlements, with a layout and urban design adapted to a particular context, are being adversely compromised. The urban layout and scale and the relationship between the city and its setting, attributes crucial to the understanding of the evolution of the property, also be impacted adversely.

The Viaduct Maritime, which, when it is completed within a few months, closely encircle the coastline that has been the edge of the Historic District since its founding in the seventeenth century, produced alter the views to and from the historic center. Also, the work already done in this large-scale infrastructure is significantly and adversely impact the integrity and authenticity of the property, in terms of the way it communicates its historic and defensive strategic position in the Central American Isthmus, crucial attribute of its Outstanding Universal Value.

Given the current level and extent of the adverse impact on the outstanding universal value of the property resulting from the construction of the viaduct Maritime and current conservation status of the factory built, on the (Center) World Heritage Advisory Bodies note that the World Heritage Committee may wish to inscribe this property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Draft Decision: 37 COM 7B.100

The World Heritage Committee,

Having examined Document WHC-13 /37.COM/7B.Add,
Recalling Decisions 33 COM 7B.141, 34 COM 7B.113, 35 COM 7B.130, 36 COM 7B.103, adopted at its 33rd (Seville, 2009), 34th (Brasilia, 2010), 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36ta (Saint Petersburg, 2012), respectively, and concern that the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase III (Maritime Viaduct) affect adversely on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property,
Recalling also that the condition reports and reports of reactive monitoring missions March 2009, March 2010 and October 2010 that underscored the impacts of the Cinta Costera project, in particular the Maritime Viaduct, and the poor state of conservation of the property;
Notes progress in the development of a Management Plan, as to quantify the number of buildings at risk and as for work on urban facades (streetscapes), and underground infrastructure, and reiterates its deep concern about the general state of conservation of the property, and regrets that not enough progress has been made globally in addressing critical issues and sustainable, or implementation of the Plan of Action agreed at 2009;
Also regrets the fact that the authorities are not yet sufficiently explored alternatives, traffic management solutions to long-term sustainable and decided, unilaterally, proceed with construction of the Cinta Costera Phase III (Maritime Viaduct) and requests the World Heritage Committee at its 33rd, 34th, 35th, and 36th failed to protect property;
Considers the work already done in building new Maritime Viaduct adversely impacts on property and decide register the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in accordance with paragraphs 177 and 179 of the Operational Guidelines;
Requests the State Party to invite as an urgent issue a joint reactive monitoring World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS to verify the degree of impact that the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase III (Maritime Viaduct) has had on the outstanding universal value of the property and to prepare the Desired State of Conservation, including corrective measures and timetable for implementation;
Also requests World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to deliver a report on the findings of the reactive monitoring mission to review and decision by the World Heritage Committee at its 38th Session in 2014.

———

Note 1:

This draft decision was not approved as it was presented to the World Heritage Committee; was reviewed by a special working group, and approved this – http://patrimoniopanama.com /?p = 271)

Note 2:

Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

The debate on the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama in Session 37 Com of the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO

Posted on June 19, 2013 by Katti Osorio

23 June 2013

The last point on Panama Viejo and Casco Antiguo: in the morning session of the day 23 June 2013, World Heritage Committee approved the Decision 37 COM 8E, based on the Draft Decision 37 COM 8E modified, that included the document WHC-13/37.COM/8E.ADD. Is adopting Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Valuethe, which will be reviewed (modified) Panama has met once Article 6 described under the heading 21 June 2013 of this blog Heritage Panama.

The document is self explanatory:

1) A Statement of Outstanding Universal Value represents a formalization, in an agreed format, of the reasons why a World Heritage property has Outstanding Universal Value. The concept of Statement of Outstanding Universal Value, as a prerequisite for the registration of a property on the World Heritage List, was introduced in the Operational Guidelines on 2005. All registered sites from 2007 present such a statement.
2) In 2007, World Heritage Committee (see Decision 31 WITH 11D.1) requested Statements of Outstanding Universal Value should be drafted and approved retrospectively for all World Heritage properties inscribed between 1978 and 2006, before the launch of the Second Cycle of the Periodic Report in each Region. (UNOFFICIAL translation, and Salón Documento WHC-13/37.COM/8E, page 2)

The Universal Declaration of Exceptional Value (retrospective) approved by the World Heritage Committee for “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” contained in document WHC-13/37.COM/8E.ADD, from the homepage 2 to p 4.

21 June 2013

In the afternoon session of the World Heritage Committee, towards the end of the Session, the working group (Panama drafting group) gave the new decision for Old Panama Archaeological Site and Historic District of Panama, that developed with the consensus of its members. This decision was submitted for adoption without debate by the World Heritage Committee, and indeed was adopted in just five minutes, between the joy of living.

The text of the decision was read aloud, but simply passed on the screen to the World Heritage Committee. Not yet published the official text. I have two images captured on screen (French text):

Image 1: Article 3 Article 5

Image 2: Article 4 Article 6

Called my attention to Articles 5 and 6 (in French in the image):

5. Regrets that the State party has decided to launch the construction of Phase III of the Cinta Costera (viaduc maritime) which irreversibly alters the relationship between the historical center and its wider physical environment;
6. Application to the State Party to submit, d’ici le 1February 2015, a request for a significant boundary modification to enable it to justify a revision of the value…

(In Spanish, 5. Regrets the State party has decided to launch construction Phase III to Tape Coastal (marine viaduct) changing irreversibly relationship between the center historical and physical environment broader;
6. Requests State party submitting, before 1 of February 2015, demand significant change bounds that allow justify a review of buildings of monumental …(incomplete text)

It happens that the relationship between the historic center and the sea is essential for the Historic District of Panama (Casco Antiguo) communicate its outstanding universal value(1), value due to irreversible impairment, Panama must “revise” significantly after changing ownership limits “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” to World Heritage.

Panamá, with great sobriety, stated through his spokesman, Panama's Permanent Ambassador to UNESCO Flavio Mendez, its work and thanked the working group, especially the delegates of Mali and its advice to the delegate of Brazil; said there is a lesson learned, Panama and faithfully discharge the opinion of Decision.

Once the full text of the Decision, know what the ambassador was referring lesson.

Video: Reactions to the final decision

Document: List of Participants. The Delegation of Panama is registered in the page 42 a la 43 Document http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2013/whc13-37com-2inf.pdf

20 June 2013

The afternoon session of the World Heritage Committee was suspended in order to allow time for the different teams that should address various topics of Session 37 COM. Among themselves, the working group to Panama (Panama drafting group) was working in the afternoon today (Cambodian hour). Yet reported their results.

In the working group could participate only representatives 21 Committee countries, This invited. The working group was selected,, organized and led by Cambodian Deputy, Sr. Ros Borat, Deputy Director of Heritage and Sustainable Development Cambodia. The other countries could attend the working group meetings as observers only. Panama is not among the 21 Member countries of the World Heritage Committee in Session 37 COM.

19 June 2013

Today 19 June in the early morning hours in Panama and around the 3:00 Cambodia PM, initiated the Panamanian property debate inscribed as UNESCO World Heritage, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama“, based al repair 2013 and Draft Decision 37 COM 7B.100 (Document WHC-13/37.COM/7B.Add, on the pages 184 to 190). This draft decision (which is also found in the SOC) requesting the inclusion of Panamanian property in the World Heritage List in Danger. He even suggested the removal of the world heritage list, and it was suggested to delay the listing of World Heritage in danger for another year.

For an UNOFFICIAL translation of Status and Draft Decision, click here.

The debate was very intense. Committee members failed to agree, and has established a working group, to achieve consensus in the case of Panama. Tomorrow morning (Cambodian) should begin working on a possible solution. It is a very delicate, by the issue of marine viaduct Cinta Costera III. The debate renudará when the working group to contribute their results.

This is the debate on video in English, divided into six parts 14:30 minutes each:

The team will be led by Cambodian Deputy, Sr. Ros Borat, heritage expert with thirty years of experience and Deputy Director of Heritage and Sustainable Development of Cambodia. He emphasized the importance of the participation of ICOMOS in the working group, although the formation of it was entrusted entirely to Mr. Borat.

Live broadcast: http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/37COM/

Starts at 9:00 pm, When Panama.

————

(1) “The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies underscore the negative visual impacts of the Maritime Viaduct that will adversely impact on and transform the setting of the Historic Centre. They further note that the Maritime Viaduct is a structure of a very strong shape with a high visual impact which does not integrate harmoniously with the Historic District and establishes an undesirable contrast with regard to its maritime context. They consider that the ability of the property to convey its Outstanding Universal Value, as a fortified settlement in a Peninsula and as a testimony to the nature of the early settlements, with a layout and urban design adapted to a particular context, are being adversely compromised. The urban layout and scale and the relationship between the city and its setting, attributes crucial to the understanding of the evolution of the property, will also be adversely impacted.” State of Conservation Report 2013. Available in, http://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/1975 and also available in, http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/123027 (on the pages 188 and 189). The bold were placed by the author of this blog.

Unofficial translation the same text: “The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies underscore the negative visual impacts of the Maritime Viaduct that will adversely impact on and transform the setting of the Historic Centre. They further note that , the Maritime Viaduct is a structure of a very strong shape (.) with a high visual impact which does not integrate harmoniously with the Historic District and establishes an undesirable contrast with regard to its maritime context. They consider that the ability of the property to convey its Outstanding Universal Value, as a fortified settlement in a Peninsula and as a testimony to the nature of the early settlements, with a layout and urban design adapted to a particular context, are being adversely compromised. The urban layout and scale and the relationship between the city and its setting, attributes crucial to the understanding of the evolution of the property, also be impacted adversely.“

Note:

Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

1. Decision 37COM 7B.100 Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panama) (C 790bis)

2. 37COM 8E

Adoption of Retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value

Note:

Note:

Brief synthesis

Criterion (ii)

Criterion (iv)

Criterion (vi)

Statement of Authenticity

Statement of Integrity

Requirements for protection and management

Note:

100. Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panamá) (C 790bis)

Note:

Unofficial translation.

100. Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panamá)

(C 790bis)

Current conservation issues

to) Buffer zone and inventory retrospective

b) Legislative Framework, policy and management system for the property.

c) Condition of the property

d) Coastal Belt Project

i. Background

ii Current Situation

iii. Assessment of impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property

Conclusion

Draft Decision: 37 COM 7B.100

Note 1:

Note 2:

23 June 2013

21 June 2013

20 June 2013

19 June 2013

Note:

1. Decision 37COM 7B.100
Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panama) (C 790bis)