Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman) (N 654)

Decision:    31 COM 7B.11

The World Heritage Committee,

1.    Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,
2.    Recalling Decision 30 COM.7B.10 adopted at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006),
3.    Recalling that, according to Article 6.1 of the Convention, the properties inscribed on the World Heritage List constitute World Heritage, the protection of which is the duty of the international community as a whole and recalling further the duty of the international community to assist and to cooperate with States Parties in their endeavour to conserve such heritage,
4.    Recalling that States Parties have the obligation under the Convention to protect and conserve the World Cultural and Natural Heritage situated on their territory, notably, to ensure that effective and active measures are taken for the protection and conservation of such heritage,
5.    Further recalling the results of the vote by which the Committee decided not to delete the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary from the World Heritage List,
6.    Noting with alarm that despite several years of intensive efforts, the wild population of Arabian Oryx in the property is in serious decline and its future viability is uncertain,
7.    Also noting that most recommendations from the 2000 monitoring mission as well as from previous Committee decisions, in particular Decision 30 COM 7B.10, have not been implemented,
8.    Notes with deep regret that the State Party failed to fulfill its obligations defined in the Convention, in particular the obligation to protect and conserve the World Heritage property of the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary;
9.    Regrets that the State Party has proceeded to significantly reduce the size of the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary, in violation of Paragraph 165 of the Operational Guidelines, thus destroying the property’s Outstanding Universal Value and integrity;
10.    Regrets that the entreaties of the World Heritage Committee, at its 31st session (Christchurch, 2007) failed to protect the property;
11.    Further regrets that the State Party is seeking to pursue hydrocarbon exploration activities within the original boundaries of the property, as recognized by this Committee, thus contributing to the loss of Outstanding Universal Value;
12.    Concludes with regret that, having further consulted IUCN and being convinced that as a result of the reduction of the Sanctuary under Omani Law, the property has deteriorated  to the extent that it has lost its Outstanding Universal Value and integrity;
13.    Decides to delete the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman) from the World Heritage List.

Historic Centre of Prague (Czech Republic) (C 616)

Decision:   31 COM 7B.94

The World Heritage Committee,

1.    Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B.Add,

2.    Expresses its serious concern about the proposed high-rise building projects within the buffer zone which potentially could impact on the visual integrity of the Historic Centre of Prague;

3.    Requests the State Party to reconsider current building projects as to their impacts on the World Heritage property’s Outstanding Universal Value, and also requests that any new construction projects respect the Outstanding Universal Value and important views to and from the property.

4.   Recommends the State Party to conduct comparative studies in terms of sustainable management of historic towns in cooperation with the relevant Scientific Committees of the Advisory Bodies;

5.    Further requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to assess the state of conservation of the property;

6.    Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with a detailed report by 1 February 2008, on the state of conservation of the property, including the visual impact study and describing any steps undertaken in view of high-rise development for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.

Historic Centre of Riga (Latvia) (C 852)

Decision:   31 COM 7B.99

The World Heritage Committee,

1.    Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,

2.    Recalling its Decisions 28 COM 15B.74 and 29 COM 7B.78, adopted at its 28th (Suzhou, 2004) and 29th (Durban, 2005) sessions respectively,

3.   Acknowledges the information provided by the Latvian authorities on the adoption of the Preservation and Development Plan and the Building Regulations for the Historic Centre of Riga and its buffer zone, as well as on progress made in the “Conception Project” for regulating development of the left bank of the river Daugava;

4.    Notes the State Inspection efforts for the on-going visual impact analysis of planned high-rise buildings in the buffer zone and urges the State Party to fully implement its results in order to prevent any negative impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and its buffer zone, as well as on important views to and from the property;

5.    Also urges the State Party to further reinforce the current law on the preservation and protection of the Historic Centre of Riga by limiting the height of new constructions in the World Heritage core and buffer zones, and beyond, if necessary, in order to limit negative visual impacts on the Historic Centre’s landscape;

6.    Further urges the State Party, in close co-operation with the City authorities, to reinforce upstream planning and to carefully review all current and future projects in the core area and its buffer zone, and in particular to halt ongoing high rise projects and further inappropriate planning for the left side of the river Daugava, until a thorough and independent analysis of potential impacts on the values,  authenticity and integrity of the Historic Centre has been undertaken and the “Conception Project” has been thoroughly revised;

7.    Requests the State Party to undertake an overall visual impact study of the property and its setting in order to provide a framework for proposed new developments to ensure that they fully respect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

8.    Also requests the State Party to invite a joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission to assess the state of conservation of the property,including the archaeological values of the site, in particular with regard to the proposed new development projects in the buffer zone on the left bank of the river Daugava;

9.    Further requests the State Party to submit a report to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2008 on progress made with the “Conception Project” for the left side of the river Daugava, and to provide details on any projects which may have an impact on the visual integrity of the property, for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008 in view of the possibility of inclusion of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

102.    Historic Centre of St Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments (Russian Federation) (C 540)

Decision:    31 COM 7B.102

The World Heritage Committee,

1.    Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,

2.    Recalling Decision 30 COM 7B.78, adopted at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006),

3.    Notes the results of the International Conference on the “Application of Scientific and Technological Achievements in Management and Preservation of Historic Cities Inscribed on the World Heritage List”, St Petersburg, 28 January – 3 February 2007;

4.    Regrets that the maps submitted by the State Party dated 18 January 2007 and 5 March 2007, did not comply with the Committee’s request as they did not provide detailed boundaries and buffer zones of all components of the property, including Leningrad Region and urges the State Party to provide these maps by 1 February 2008 at the latest;

5.    Strongly urges the State Party, at the earliest opportunity, to provide a detailed report on the Gazprom tower development project in order for the World Heritage Committee to evaluate the impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;

6.    Requests the State Party to stop any development, including the issuing of building permits, until all relevant materials have been reviewed and its impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property has been fully assessed;

7.    Also requests the State Party to provide a state of conservation report, including details on the Gazprom project, which may have an impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property, to the World Heritage Centre on 1 February 2008 for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008 in view of the possibility of inclusion of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

121.    Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (United Kingdom) (C 1150)

Decision:   31 COM 7B.121

The World Heritage Committee,

1.    Having examined Document WHC-07/31.COM/7B,

2.    Recalling Decision 30 COM 7B.93, adopted at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006),

3.    Notes the conclusions of the World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS mission to the property of October 2006 and in particular that the outstanding universal value of the site is not threatened although a number of visual integrity as well as management issues have been raised, including the:

a)    Overall management of new developments;

b)    Lack of analysis and description of the townscape characteristics relevant to the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and important views related to the property and its buffer zone;

c)    Lack of clearly established maximum heights for new development, for the backdrops of the World Heritage areas as well as along the waterfront;

d)    Lack of awareness of developers, building professionals and the wider public about the World Heritage property, its outstanding universal value and requirements under the World Heritage Convention;

4.    Also notes the State Party’s report and its reference to the Management Plan of 2004 and specifically requests the State Party to:

a)    clearly establish and respect prescribed heights;

b)    adhere to the townscape characteristics, wider values (building density, urban patterns and materials) and sense of place;

c)    inform the general public about the outstanding universal value of the property and its management;

5.    Regrets that the Design Briefs for new development do not take into account the Outstanding Universal Value, integrity and authenticity of the property, and requests the State Party to fully take them into account in future briefs;

6.    Further notes that further guidance is required on the definitions of the conditions of integrity for cultural properties as indicated in Chapter II E (Paragraph 89 footnote) of the Operational Guidelines, and requests the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to work together towards the explanatory text for inclusion at the next revision of the Operational Guidelines;

7.    Welcomes the offer of the United Kingdom to support the elaboration of the UNESCO Recommendation on the Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape with a case study analysis;

8.    Also requests the State Party to provide the World Heritage Centre with an update report by 1 February 2008 on progress made on a stricter planning control, a set of supplementary planning documents and a timetable for the implementation of the works for examination by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008.