panama 2010 rm mission report1

8/7/2019 Panama 2010 RM Mission Report1

1/53


2/53

World HeritagePatrimoine mondial 35 COMDistribution limited / limite Paris, 26 April / 26 avril 2011

Original: English

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

ORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIESPOUR L'EDUCATION, LA SCIENCE ET LA CULTURE

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLDCULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

CONVENTION CONCERNANT LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINEMONDIAL, CULTUREL ET NATUREL

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE / COMITE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL

Thirty-fifth session / Trente-cinquime session

Paris, France19-29 June 2011 / 19-29 juin 2011

Item 7 of the Provisional Agenda: State of conservation of properties inscribed on


3/53

Report on the Reactive Monitoring Mission to

The Archaeological Site of Panam Viejo and

Historic District of Panam (Panama)

27 31 October 2010

Dr. Nuria Sanz (UNESCO World Heritage Centre)

Dr. Isabel Rigol (ICOMOS)


4/53

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The participants of this Reactive Monitoring Mission wish to thank the Instituto Nacionalde Patrimonio (INAP), the World Heritage Committee, the World Heritage Centre, andICOMOS, for the opportunity to undertake such an interesting and necessaryendeavour.

They would also like to convey their gratitude to the representatives of the State Partyfor the high level of interest displayed in welcoming the Mission, and providing it with all

the means and information needed.

Special thanks to the Office of the President of the Republic of Panama; the Ministries ofForeign Affairs, Tourism and Public Works; the Office for the Historic District, and thePatronato of Panama Viejo.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to theArchaeological Site of Panama Viejo and the Historic District of Panama was undertakenfrom 27 31 October 2010, in response to the request of the World HeritageCommittee at its 34th Session held in Brasilia from 25 July 25 to 3 August 2010(Decision 34 COM 7B.113).

Since the last Monitoring Mission in March 2009, efforts have been made by the National

Institute of Culture (INAC), the Office for the Historic District (OCA) and the Patronatoof Panama Viejo to properly address the various threats facing the property. However

d b h INAC d h OCA i f h i l l l di d


5/53

the waterfront. A third phase, to be started soon (as evidenced by the publicized call fortender), is planned to either surround the peninsula of the Historic District or surpass it

through a tunnel. The first option would aggressively modify the natural seascape of theold town, and the second could result in risks to the physical conditions of the historicbuildings, some of which are in danger of collapse.

In both cases, the values and the integrity for which the District was included in theWorld Heritage List could suffer irreversible losses. Despite several requests andwarnings from the World Heritage Committee, the State Party has not submitted theCinta Costera Project for the review and approval of the World Heritage Centre and the

Advisory Bodies, neither has it presented the requested impact studies.

Panama Viejo presents a starkly different situation. It is efficiently managed by itsPatronato and the archaeological park is duly and systematically preserved. Fund raising,interpretation, promotional and educational actions all form ongoing activities at thesite. There is also a skilled team of professionals who continue to work on the researchand conservation of the site.

A feasible alternative among those proposed by the Patronato for the AvenidaCincuentenario (as the main threat to Panama Viejo) has been recently opened for biddingby the Ministry of Public Works (MOP), with the aim to commence work on thedeviation of the road to eliminate this threat to the property.

According to the declarations of the President of the Republic, who kindly welcomedthe Mission at his office, it is expected that a more comprehensive national policy for

World Heritage will be developed, which would include all Ministries and the variouspublic and private stakeholders.


6/53

-INACs proposal for a National World Heritage Committee should be approved andimplemented as soon as possible;

-The proposal for the Historic District to be established as a special territory with alegal status should be defined and implemented urgently;

-In addition to the recently signed agreement between Panama Viejo and the HistoricDistrict as two components of one World Heritage property, the responsible authorityor entity to unify criteria and coordinate actions must be defined;

-The Emergency Plan submitted in 2009 must be adjusted according to the abovementioned objectives, with a clearer and more practical approach to priorities, dates,financial agreements, etc; as well as endorsed at the highest levels of the State Party;

- A definitive Master Plan for the Historic District must be concluded and implemented;

-The proposal for the Historic Districts buffer zone should be urgently finalized andsubmitted for approval as a legal document;

-A legal and satisfactory solution for those pending cases such as the Hotel Central andthe PH Independencia must be elaborated with the support of the top levels of the StateParty if necessary, in order to avoid the generalized feeling of impunity as it relates tothe historic environment;

-The Cinta Costera Project Phase 3 should be immediately suspended and technical

information on proposed alternatives submitted to the World Heritage Centre forfurther analysis and to start the consultative process. A study of the impacts of allalternatives for the Cinta Costera Project should be urgently carried out. The World


7/53

1. BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION

For 1.1 Inscription history and 1.2 Inscription Criteria and World Heritage values seeAnnex 1. Report of the WHC/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to theArchaeological Site of Panama Viejo and the Historic District of Panama, 11 17 March2009, at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/.

1.3 Examination of the state of conservation by the World Heritage

Committee and its Bureau.

The last examinationof the state of conservation by the World Heritage Committeetook place during its 34th Session held in Brasilia, Brazil, July 2010.

As factors affecting the property identified from the reports of the World HeritageCentre/ ICOMOS reactive monitoring missions undertaken in March 2009 and March2010 respectively, the Committee underlined the following2:

a) Severe deterioration of historic buildings that threaten the Outstanding Universal

Value of the property;b) Conflicting interests of different stakeholders with regards to the use, managementand conservation of the Historic Centre;c) Limited capacity for the rehabilitation and maintenance of historic structures;d) Deficiencies in the implementation of the legislative framework for protection;e) Lack of implementation of clear conservation and management policies for theproperty;

f) Demolition of urban ensembles and buildings;g) Forced displacement of occupants and squatters;h) Urban development projects within the protected area (i.e. Cinta Costera).
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/


8/53

The information received and the technical visit to the property highlighted concernsregarding the Historic District of Panama and how the absence of a clear policy

concerning the preservation and development of the area was significantly affecting thesite. There have been cases of aggressive interventions and alterations resulting inirreversible damage to the sites integrity and authenticity. Neglected buildings are indanger of collapse and funds previously allocated by the Inter American DevelopmentBank (IDB) for social housing have been rerouted to other projects, furthercompounding the poor social conditions that exist at the site.

A. Emergency Plan

ICOMOS conducted an evaluation of the document submitted by the State Party andconsiders that it encompasses a characterization of the property, an assessment ofcurrent conditions by means of SWOT matrixes and conclusions on risks andvulnerabilities, and a list of measures focused on addressing identified risks and threats.

The document reflects the efforts made in comprehensively analyzing the currentsituation from the state of conservation of the property to the assessment of existing

legislative and regulatory frameworks, which confirms concerns pointed out duringprevious reactive monitoring and expert missions, and identified in previous Decisionsof the World Heritage Committee.

Notwithstanding the detailed assessment, the proposals for actions are limited and thereis no indication regarding timelines, sources of funding or how corrective measures andactions will be implemented. Similarly, criteria and methods for interventions at historic

buildings are lacking. The document is more focused on a long-term strategic vision forthe management and conservation of the property, which would still require furtherwork, than on the emergency action plan requested by the World Heritage Committee.


9/53

C. Buffer zone

The document indicates that the buffer zone for the Historic District is currently underevaluation. There is no additional information on the timeframe for legal approval or onthe regulatory measures foreseen.

D. Interventions at historic monuments

Regarding Panama Viejo, the document submitted by the State Party includes theproposal for the intervention at Plaza Mayor. The mission found that the Patronato

continues working with efficiency and commitment. Several interventions to adapt aportion of the monumental space for new functions have been carefully implemented.The project for the new exhibition and interpretation facilities at the site was recentlymodified, moving its location to some distance from the old tower, following therecommendations of the 2009 mission.

With regard to the Historic Centre, information on planned and ongoing projects,including the structural changes at the Hotel Central and the impacts of the PH Plaza

Independencia condominium, was not included.

The mission found that although the Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INAC), the NationalHistoric Heritage Directorate (DNPH) and the Office of the Historic District (Oficina delCasco Antiguo-OCA) are working hard and demonstrate serious regarding the solutionsfor the issues pointed out by the World Heritage Committee, many negative aspectscurrently persist. Various buildings have been rehabilitated and many others are

currently being restored, however there are a significant number of neglected buildingsat risk of collapse. It also noted that real estate speculation and interests continue topervade decision-making processes, leading to detrimental interventions at the property.


10/53

F. Avenida Cincuentenario

This project concerns mainly Panama Viejo, where five alternative routes have beenidentified and submitted to the national authorities, and are currently being evaluated bythe Ministry of Public Works and other involved entities. No evidence of an approvedbudget or implementation project dates has been provided. According to the 2010expert mission, the Patronato supports the alternative proposed by the 2009 ReactiveMonitoring Mission, which would see the project being developed along one edge of thesite, as this option seems to cause the least impact and will help with a better de-limitation of the property.

G. Cinta Costera

The Cinta Costera project is a coastal freeway being executed at the seaside area ofTerrapln that is projected to continue along the border of the Historic Centre, withplans for a tunnel beneath the Centres core. At the 33rd session of the World HeritageCommittee, the State Party was requested to, in accordance with Paragraph 172 of theOperational Guidelines, to submit to the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies,

a final report, including the analysis and monitoring of the potential impacts of thisproject. The Mission in 2010 realized that the State Party had commenced the executionof this project. No additional information could be procured regarding the socialimpacts, conservation requirements, impact assessments, etc. of this project. TheMission was therefore left to conclude that these assessments were not undertaken.

H. Other issues

Within the framework of the Periodic Reporting Exercise for the Region, theWorkshop on the Preparation of the Retrospective Inventory, Retrospective statement


11/53

the property or the definition of a clear policy for the preservation and development ofthe historic area.

The World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies consider that factoring theemergency situation as discussed in previous World Heritage Committee sessions thataffect a high proportion of the buildings in the Historic District, and which encompassesa wide range of other threats, and given the very limited response observed by thevarious missions, it is evident that the current situation threatens the attributes of theHistoric District which sustain the Outstanding Universal Value of the property.They consider that the World Heritage Committee may wish to send a reactivemonitoring mission to asses the state of conservation of the property and to evaluate

progress made in addressing the various threats with a view to include the property onthe List of World Heritage in Danger in 2011 if no substantial progress is made.

See Decision: 34 COM 7B.113 on Annex 2.


12/53

PREVIOUS DECISIONS

DECISION 33COM 7B.141

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-09/33.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 32 COM 7B.126, adopted at its 32nd session (Quebec City,

2008),

3. Notes the progress report on the preparation of the Statement of OutstandingUniversal Value of the property and requests the State Party to further develop it inconsultation with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies to integrate allcomponents of the inscribed property and to meet the requirements of the OperationalGuidelines;

4. Also notes the results of the 2009 joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactivemonitoring mission, endorses its recommendations and requests the State Party toimplement them by 30 November 2009 and in particular to:

a) Develop an Emergency Plan for corrective measures that delineates a precise courseof action for the conservation of the historic buildings and the rehabilitation of neglectedbuildings to address social lodging concerns.

b) Prepare the Emergency Plan within the framework of a broad participatory decision-making process and guarantee the commitment of the highest levels of authority to the


13/53

ICOMOS for evaluation and consideration by the World Heritage Committee prior toimplementation:

a) The intervention proposals for historic buildings within the protected area;

b) The proposed boundaries for the buffer zones of Panama Viejo and the HistoricDistrict, including the appropriate cartography and the legal framework for theirregulation and protection;

c) A final report including the analysis and monitoring of the potential impacts derived

from the construction of the Cinta Costera;

7. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1February 2010, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the property and onthe progress made in the implementation of the above recommendations, for theexamination by the World Heritage Committee at its 34th session in 2010.

Decision: 32 COM 7B.126


1. Having examined Document WHC-08/32.COM/7B,

2. Recalling Decision 27 COM 8C.40, adopted at its 27th session (UNESCO, 2003),

3. Requests the State Party, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre andICOMOS, to develop a draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value including theconditions of integrity and authenticity, for examination by the World Heritage


14/53

1.4 Justification of the Mission.This Mission responds to Decision 34 COM 7B.113 of the World HeritageCommittee, where the State Party was requested to invite a joint World HeritageCentre/Advisory Bodies Reactive Monitoring Mission in 2010, to assess the state ofinterventions at the historic monuments, current management arrangements, planneddevelopment projects and the state of conservation of the property (See Annex 2.Terms of Reference, Programme and Composition of Mission Team).

2. NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OFTHE WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTY.

For Protected Area legislation, Institutional Framework and Management structure, seeAnnex 1. Reactive Monitoring Mission to the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo andthe Historic District of Panama 11 17 March 2009.3. IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF ISSUES / THREATS

3.1 Management effectiveness

-The INAC has developed a proposal for the creation of a National World HeritageCommission, which is currently undergoing legal approval with the status of aPresidential Decree. The Committee will be subordinated to the Ministry of ForeignAffairs, and aims to ensure compliance with the compromises of the State Party withregards to Panamanian World Heritage sites and the systematic coordination of all

issues with the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, the World Heritage Centre andthe Advisory Bodies.


15/53

-Several agreements have been achieved between the OCA and other involved entitiesto coordinate actions for the improvement of technical infrastructure, housing

rehabilitation, etc.

-The OCA has undertaken numerous studies regarding housing and other social aspects,hydraulic, sanitary and electrical infrastructure, transportation, cultural industries andothers that would facilitate the formulation of plans and, above all, the updating of aMaster Plan, which would be legislatively supported.

-Some educational and cultural programmes have been cancelled.

However in spite of the above-mentioned efforts, the Historic Districts managementstill remains inefficient due to the following reasons:

-INACs National Heritage Directorate and the OCA have insufficient authority toadequately intervene in the various processes taking place in the Historic District.

-The insufficiency, complexity and dualities of the legal instruments persist and do not

allow the proper sanctions or orientation with regards to the negative actions on thepatrimonial areas.

-There is a lack of stimuli for investments in the area, due to a generalized feeling ofinsufficient security, social conflicts, lack of services, etc. The formerly acting Law onIncentives which could greatly help continues without implementation.

-Non-existence of a definitively updated and legally supported Master Plan for theHistoric District, although several proposals have been developed over the years.


16/53

-The Emergency Programme on Social Housing meant to alleviate the alarmingconditions of the popular dwellings in the area, and requested by the World Heritage

Committee, has not yet been duly prioritized in the form of allocated resources orrelated policies.

-The technical regulations comprising the Manual of Standards and Proceedings for therehabilitation of the Historic District of Panama City, approved by Executive Decree 51/2004, are often violated. Examples of this are the cases of the PH Independencia andHotel Central both on the main Plaza, which have not had a satisfactory solution due tothe already mentioned weakness of the current legal instruments and their proper

enforcement.

-The status of government owned properties which could be restored for socialpurposes, is complicated because- in many cases- the soil is a public property but thebuildings are private.

-There is no adequate complex of common services (such as supermarkets, drugstores,parking lots etc) and neither are there plans for developing these amenities for the

benefit of residents and tourists.

-The Tourism authorities maintain that the District cannot yet be considered a tourismdestination because it is unsafe and lacking necessary services.

-While a significant budget has been allocated to the enlargement of the CitysThoroughfare System, funds for the rehabilitation of the Historic District remaininsufficient in relation to current needs.

-The social, cultural and educational projects sponsored by the OCA are insufficient in


17/53

-The buffer zone legally established by Law No.16 from 2007 is adequately working andregulations are being enforced;

- There is increasing fundraising capacity by the Patronato aimed at guaranteeing researchand conservation related activities;

-The conservation laboratory has been completed and fitted with specialized equipmentand staff;

-The consolidation and maintenance of ruins has continued, although signs of humidity

can be observed in some areas. Their urgent treatment and related systematicmonitoring is foreseen;

-The recent restoration of the ruins of the Compaa de Jess for a lecture hall, subtlyinserting some contemporary elements, has been a notable achievement;

-Five alternatives for the deviation of the Cincuentenario Avenue, which currentlytraverses the site, have been carefully studied and proposed by the Patronato; and

according to recent information from the Ministry of Public Works (MOP), thealternative chosen by the Patronato will be adopted. It seems apparent that the MOP hasabandoned the idea posed previously, of having the Avenue deviate through the sitescoastal strip. This was an option firmly rejected by the Patronato as harmful to the Parksintegrity and to its natural maritime border;

-A study by environmental professionals is currently being undertaken in order toidentify a suitable management solution for the increasing mangrove growth on thecoast.


18/53

simple inspection would reveal that a much larger number of persons live underprecarious conditions. At the fore of this alarming situation, is the apparent lack of

priority being given by the Ministry of Housing (MIVI) to the improvement of livingconditions in the Historic District;

-The numerous social challenges such as increasing violence, gangs and others relatedissues that threaten the areas security are mainly due to the precarious livingconditions;

-As a consequence of violating existing technical regulations and the subsequent weak

legal enforcement by the authorities, there are frequent alterations and loss of values ofemblematic landmarks. For example, the Hotel Central is currently undergoingquestionable reconstruction, after a large portion of its original components werearbitrarily destroyed; and at the PH Independencia where new and aggressive volumeswere added to create new high standard apartments4;

-The former Santo Domingo Convent, rehabilitated and adapted to cultural andcommercial functions and opened in early 2010, is now closed without any social use,

consequently the resources used on its restoration have been wasted. The generalneglect of the building also contributes greatly to its deterioration;

-The large (and significant) numbers of vehicles (approximately 400, 000) which circulatethe Historic District on a daily basis contribute significantly to problems of congestion,pollution, and general insecurity;

- In spite of successive warnings by the World Heritage Committee, the Cinta CosteraPhase 2 is currently under accelerated construction at the Historic Districts formerharbour area known as Terrapln, without the necessary social and visual impact studies


19/53

heritage impact studies having been undertaken although repeated requests have beenmade by the World Heritage Committee;

-Based on information received from the MOP, the Cinta Costera Phase 3 will bedeveloped from the Terrapln (Arosemena Street, current Phase 2 to concluded soon) tothe zone ofAmador, as part of an ambitious Thoroughfare Plan for Panama, that, farfrom benefitting the Historic District, intends to use it as a connection and wouldstrongly impact its integrity.6 The MOP has worked out two alternatives:

a) Surrounding the Historic District;

b) Traversing the Historic District with a tunnel.

Alternative A - is unacceptable as it would transform the Districts traditional form andimage on its coastline, an important part of the values which warranted inscription onthe World Heritage List.Alternative B - besides being too expensive could signify risks to the structural stabilityof the old and deteriorated built heritage.7

Neither the OdebrechtCompany (in charge of construction) nor the MOP has developeda third alternative for the Historic District;

-The Districts water supply and sewage infrastructure are also in a severelydeteriorated state;.-Signage on streets and public spaces is also poor.

3.2.2 Panama Viejo:

-The Avenida Cincuentenario remains the most significant threat. As traffic consistently


20/53

-Under a private initiative, several buildings have been successfully rehabilitated for newhostels (for example, Las Clementinas), which has helped to create a necessary and

agreeable accommodation network, resulting in the provision of local jobs.Rehabilitation projects for new private hotels that will increase lodging facilities andenhance the areas where they are located are currently being worked on. For example,Hotels Plaza Herrera, Convento and Unin, as well as others, all comply with statedtechnical regulations;-Over ten very attractive restaurants and cafes were recently installed in the District;-Security has improved due to the permanent patrolling of the District by thePresidential Guard;

-Though only destined for higher income groups and contributing to gentrification, thereis an increasing number of well rehabilitated buildings providing apartments for rent orsale and, in general, rescuing the built heritage;-The ongoing cleaning of Panama Bay will conclude in 2010. With a budget of USD 430million, it will also be of benefit to the Historic District.

As the most negative developments:

-The amount of restoration/rehabilitation works concluded or started by the OCA since2009 to October 2010 is deemed to be small in comparison to the largely deterioratedconditions that still exist regarding the built heritage;- The ideal balance between private and public investments is far from being achieved;- Although the Terrapln traditional waterfront area presented great functional, visual

and sanitation problems, as well as urgently needed rehabilitation, the costly CintaCostera Phase 2 on Arosemena Street and the seaside has radically modernized ormodified the areas traditional form instead of promoting its reorganization/revitalization while profiting from a picturesque harbour;- The Cinta Costera Phase 3, according to the MOPs projections, would shortly either


21/53

Over the last 5 years, Missions and assessments conducted have concluded that theproperty is in danger of losing its Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity and integrity,for the following reasons:

-While the state of conservation of a large number of buildings in the Historic Districtremains precarious, and many remain empty or in danger of collapse, the general amountof restoration works is small;

-Real estate speculation, far from being controlled, is increasing;

-Social conflicts continue to be a serious concern due to the large number of families wholive under crowded and unhealthy conditions, while the State Partys entities (Ministry ofHousing, OCA, etc.) have not prioritized this matter; neither are there allocatedresources for its progressive alleviation and solution;

-The current projects for the Cinta Costera which are aimed at improving the difficulties ofthe Citys Thoroughfare System would strongly affect the integrity and functioning of theHistoric District. Should Phase 3 be built surrounding the Historic District (the apparent

alternative promoted by MOP), the traditional form and image of the maritime border willbe irreversibly transformed;

-Should the State Party not comply in the short term with its compromise to deviate theCincuentenario Avenue, based to the alternative approved by the Patronato and alreadyaccepted by MOP, the heavy traffic (pollution, vibrations, and noise) will continue affectingthe archaeological site;

-Should the coastal alternative for the deviation of the Cincuentenario Avenue be accepted(in the past promoted by the MOP), the sites natural maritime border could be altered


22/53

4. ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF THE PROPERTY

4.1Review whether the values, on the basis of which the property was

inscribed on the World Heritage List, and the conditions of integrity are beingmaintained.

-The Historic District still retains the Outstanding Universal Value for which it wasinscribed on the World Heritage List, however if current threats are not urgently andadequately dealt with, most of these values will be irretrievably lost.;

-Panama Viejo has retained its Outstanding Universal Value, its integrity and authenticity;

however these might become severely threatened if the Cincuentenario Avenue is notproperly deviated.

4.2 Review any follow-up measures to previous Decisions of the World

Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of the property andmeasures which the State Party plans to take to protect the Outstanding

Universal Value of the property

The current actions taken in response to the requests made by the World HeritageCommittee (Decision 34 COM 7B.113)atits 34th Session held in Brasilia, 2010, are asfollows:

a) Establish the buffer zone for Panama Viejo and the Historic District,including the definition of regulatory measures, and submit the information to

the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies for consideration and

review

The buffer zone for Panama Viejo has been legally established, however the studies for theHistoric Districts buffer zone have not yet been concluded and no official proposals have


23/53

-In spite of the two above-mentioned steps, the coordination of actions between the twocomponents of the property (Panama Viejo and the Historic District) has not yet beenconsolidated.

c) Define policies for the preservation of the historic area, including criteria for

rehabilitation and new developments that could potentially impact theproperty,

Though there is an officialManual with Regulations and Proceedings for the Restoration andRehabilitation of the Historic District, a clear and overall policy as an integral part of an

updated and legally supported Master Plan is currently missing.

d) Secure the required technical and financial resources to implement actions

to address pressing concerns that threaten the Outstanding Universal Value,

authenticity and integrity of the property;The technical and financial resources available for the Historic District are insufficient toadequately deal with the threats to its Outstanding Universal Value, its integrity andauthenticity.

Panama Viejos Patronato continues raising funds which allow proper management andmaintenance of the site. Their technical staff complement has increased and is efficient.Notwithstanding, the deviation of theAvenida Cincuentenario is a costly action that dependson the MOP. The MOP has recently included the relocation of the Cincuentenario Avenuewithin a bidding named Master Plan for the Reorganization of the Thoroughfare System ofPanama City; studies, projects, construction and financing of works for the preservation of the

Citys historic heritage, which comprises other actions such as traditional paving and

underground wiring in the Historic District ;


24/53

-Phase 3, according to the projects presented by the MOP to the monitoring mission,would either surround the Historic District (which seems to be the option currentlychosen) or traverse it by means of a tunnel. No studies on their physical, social orfunctional impacts and risks have been undertaken at the present time.

-In addition, it was requested that the State Party invite a joint WorldHeritage Centre/Advisory Bodies reactive monitoring mission in 2010 to

assess the state of interventions at the historic monuments, currentmanagement arrangements, planned development projects and the state of

conservation of the property;

This last reactive monitoring mission was undertaken 27 - 31 October 2011 with the fullsupport of the State Party.

g) It further requested the State Party to submit to the World HeritageCentre by 1 February 2011, a report on this issue above-mentioned, for

examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011, with a view to considering, in the absence of substantial progress, the

inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

This report was submitted for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 35thSession in 2011.


25/53

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

5.1 Conclusions:

Based on the declarations of the President of the Republic, who kindly welcomed theMission at his office, it is hoped that greater emphasis will be placed by the State Party onthe various Panamanian World Heritage sites.

Nevertheless:-INACs and OCAs advances in terms of technical or legal studies and proposals, inter-institutional agreements, a few educational or cultural programmes, among other positiveactions, do not yet translate to a practical and definitive impact on improvements in the

propertys management or on the physical conservation of its Outstanding UniversalValue, authenticity and integrity;

-In spite of the generalized lack of stimuli for investments in the Historic District, therehas been some private interventions done according to established regulations, onformerly abandoned buildings, adapting them to attractive hotels, restaurants or cafeswhich greatly contribute to the areas animation, provision of jobs and, in general, toprove that it is possible to rehabilitate old constructions for new use; 8

- Regarding two other examples i.e. the Plaza Independencia and the Hotel Central whichhave violated all regulations, the heritage authorities have not been legally able to halt thenegative transformations on the buildings or revert them, turning these cases into symbolsof a lack of enforcement of regulations and the efficacy of authorities;

-Considering real estate needs, particularly those related to the large numbers ofdeteriorated buildings and the acute lack of social housing in the Historic District, only a

limited amount of restoration or rehabilitation works have been either finished orinitiated by the OCA since 2009;


26/53

Committee, and no studies on their physical, social and other impacts have beenundertaken;

Phase 2 has strongly modified the traditional water front of the Terrapln losing theopportunity to rehabilitate the picturesque maritime character of the area;

Phase 3 signifies a very serious threat to the property .The alternative that surrounds theDistrict would definitely modify its coastal border, and the alternative of the tunnel, a partfrom being expensive, could mean physical risks to the old and quite deterioratedstructures;

-Up to October 2010, the steps achieved to positively counter or alleviate the seriousthreats suffered by the property (specifically in the Historic District) have been insufficientor weak and have not produced substantial improvements;

-The various negative factors identified by previous monitoring missions and underlined bythe World Heritage Committees Decisions remain significant threats to the property;(See 1.3)

-For all the reasons posed in this report, the mission considers that the OutstandingUniversal Values, authenticity and integrity of the property are in Danger.

5.2 Recommendations:

-The World Heritage Committee at its 35th Session in 2011 should consider the

inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger in order to finallyachieve the positive reaction expected from the State Party;


27/53

-In addition to the recent agreement signed between Panama Viejo and the HistoricDistrict, as two components of one World Heritage property, the responsible authorityor entity to unify criteria and coordinate actions must be defined;

-The Emergency Plan submitted in 2009 should be updated according to the above statedobjectives, with a clearer and more practical approach to priorities, dates, budgets, etc., aswell as endorsed by the highest levels of the State Party;

- A definitive Master Plan for the Historic District must be concluded and implemented;

-The proposal for the Historic Districts buffer zone must be urgently concluded andsubmitted for approval;

-A legal and satisfactory solution for those negative cases, the Hotel Central and PHIndependencia must be established with the support of the highest levels of the State Partyif necessary, in order to avoid the generalized feeling of impunity they produce and thebad example they represent;

-The Cinta Costera Phase 3 must be immediately halted, and its related projects submittedto the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies for review. A study of the impactsof any alternative to the Cinta Costera must also be urgently conducted. The WorldHeritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies should evaluate the projects and studiestogether with the OdebrechtConstruction Company, the Ministry of Public Works (MOP),INAC and OCA.9 If necessary, the World Heritage Centre should designate a highlyspecialized expert on these matters as a consultant;

-A capacity building and training programme on World Heritage management addressedto all involved sectors should be established and systematically applied.


28/53

6. ANNEXES:

Annex 1. Report of the WHC/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to theArchaeological Site of Panama Viejo and the Historic District of Panama, 11 17 March2009, at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/.

REPORT ON THE WHC/ICOMOS REACTIVE MONITORING MISSION TO THEArchaeological Site of Panama Viejo and the Historic District of Panama

(Panama) 11 17 March 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

1 BACKGROUND TO THE MISSION

Inscription historyCriteria and World Heritage valuesExamination of the State of Conservation by the World Heritage Committee andits BureauJustification of the mission (terms of reference, programme and composition ofmission team provided in Annex)

2 NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE

WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTY
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents/


29/53

Annex 2.

Terms of Reference, Programme and Composition of Mission team

2.1 Terms of Reference

Reactive Monitoring Mission to the Archaeological

Site of Panam Viejo and the Historic District of Panam, Panama.27 - 31 October 2010

In accordance to Decision 34 COM 7B.113 from the World Heritage Committee,the reactive monitoring mission will address the following tasks:

1. Undertake a programme of visits in order to assess the state of interventions at thehistoric monuments, current management arrangements, planned development projectsand the state of conservation of the property and evaluate progress made in addressingthe various threats to the site with particular focus on the assessment of:

a. The establishment of a buffer zone for Panama Viejo and the HistoricDistrict and the definition of regulatory measures;

b. The approval of legislative proposals to enhance the protection of theproperty and its regulatory measures;

c. The establishment of one permanent management authority to ensurethe adequacy and efficiency of the management arrangements;

d. The definition of policies for the preservation of the historic area, and the

established criteria for rehabilitation works as well as guidelines for newdevelopments which could potentially impact the property;


30/53

2. To produce a common mission report (WHC/LAC and ICOMOS). The date forits finalization will be agreed during the mission.

Please refer to the following link for documents relating to the Archaeological Site ofPanam Viejo and the Historic District of Panam:http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents

Archaeological Site of Panam Viejo and Historic District of Panam(Panam) (C 790bis)

Decision: 34 COM 7B.113


1. Having examined Document WHC-10/34.COM/7B.Add,

2. Recalling Decision 33 COM 7B.141, adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2009),

3. Takes note of the Emergency Plan submitted by the State Party and urges it to:

a) Establish the buffer zone for Panama Viejo and the Historic District,including the definition of regulatory measures, and submit the informationto the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies for considerationand review,

b) Approve the legislative proposal to enhance the protection and theregulatory measures of the property and to establish one permanentmanagement authority to ensure the adequacy and efficiency of the
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documentshttp://whc.unesco.org/en/list/790/documents


31/53

the historic monuments, current management arrangements, planned developmentprojects and the state of conservation of the property;

6. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1February 2011, a report on the above-mentioned issue, for examination by theWorld Heritage Committee at its 35th session in 2011, with a view toconsidering, in the absence of substantial progress, the possible

inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

2.2 Mission Programme

Programme for the WHC/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission to Panama

Viejo and the Historic District of Panama, 27 31 October 2010

Wednesday 27 OctoberArrival of the Mission Team to Tucumn Airport.

8.00 PM. Dinner/ Meeting with Mrs. Maruja Herrera, Director General of INAC andstaff to coordinate and adjust the working plan - Hotel Bristol

Thursday 28 October 289:00 AM. Visit to Panama Viejo10.30 AM -12M. Meeting with:- Ms. Mara Eugenia Herrera, Director General INAC- Mr. Federico Surez, Minister of Public Works (MOP)

- Mr. Salomon Shaman, Minister of Tourism- Ms. Lucy Molina, Minister of Education


32/53

Friday 29 October9.00 AM -11.00 AM - Tour by helicopter to Portobelo- San Lorenzo World HeritageSite and the Bay of Panama. Ms. Nuria Sanz, Ms. Isabel Rigol, Ms. Maria Eugenia Herrera

and Mr. Ral Castro12.00 M-2.00 PM - Lunch at Miraflores Restaurant, Panama Canal.Ms. Nuria Sanz, Ms. Isabel Rigol, Ms. Maria Eugenia Herrera and Mr. Ral Castro andICOMOS National Committee.2.00 PM 5.00PM. - Reports on the current situation of Panama Viejo/Historic DistrictSites and Portobelo /San Lorenzo Sites.Mr. Ernesto Boyd, Ms. Julieta Arango, Ms. Judith Jan, Mr. Daro Cadavid,Mrs. Sandra

Cerrud, Mrs. Almyr Alba, Mrs. Isabel Rigol , Mr. Raul Castro, Mr. Jaime Zarate.Meeting Room.National Heritage Directorate. Reina Torres de Arauz Museum .Llanosde Curund8.00 PM. Dinner - Manolo Caracol Restaurant

Saturday 30 October

10.30 AM - Final Working meeting at INAC for conclusions12.30 PM- 2.00 PM Lunch

2.00 PM-3. 00 PM - Visit to the Cathedral.3.00 PM- 4.00 PM. Meeting with OdebrechtCompany, OdebrechtHeadquarters4:00 PM - 6:00 PM - Tour of the Historic District6.00 PM-7.00 PM - Meeting with Mr. Jaime Ford, Vice Minister of Housing (MIVI)8:00 PM - Dinner.

Sunday 31 OctoberDeparture


33/53

MarioLewis FundacinRilemo Director

3222311

66760455 [email protected]

FernandodeLen

Autoridadde

TurismoPanama

(ATP) Viceministro

5267000


MaraE.Herrera INAC DirectoraGeneral

5014929

66153435

[email protected]

m

ErnestoA.Boyd

PatronatoPanam

Viejo Presidente

2696267


NuriaSanz UNESCO/WHC DirectoraLAC/WHC

(0033)620.80.17.


IsabelRigol ICOMOS Consultora 5372032960 [email protected]

SiteManagersMeeting DNPH/INAC 29October2010

Name Intitution Post Phone Email

RicardoEspno

OficinadelCasco

Antiguo(OCA) [email protected]

JuanMadridOficinadelCasco


MariaCristina

Otero

OficinadelCasco


JulietadeArango

PatronatoPanam

Viejo DirectoraEjecutiva 2261526 [email protected]

DarioM.Cadavid

R.

OficinadelCasco

Antiguo(OCA)

[email protected]

a

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


34/53

MaraE.Herrera INAC DirectoraGeneral

5014929

66153435

[email protected]

m

NuriaSanz UNESCO/WHC DirectoraLAC/WHC(0033)620.80.17.40 [email protected]

Others

Name Intitution Post Phone Email

MitsilaEspino MOP 66718771 [email protected]

SaloShamah ATP 66167670 [email protected]

FedericoSuarez MOP 5079400 [email protected]

CsarA.Tribaldos

InmobiliariaSan

Felipe 60705761 [email protected]

AdolfoLinares

InmobiliariaSan

Felipe [email protected]

InmobiliariaSan

Felipe

JaimeJ.Zanate [email protected]

IvnMcbowln [email protected]

CarlosA.MockD.InmobiliariaSan

Felipe [email protected]

RamiroSalceda STC [email protected]

JoelJelderks

Salzburg

Development

[email protected]

m

K.CHardin [email protected]

EldaSanson 21377777 [email protected]

Raul

Castro

INAC

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


35/53


36/53


37/53


38/53


39/53


40/53


41/53


42/53


43/53


44/53


45/53


46/53


47/53


48/53


49/53


50/53


51/53


52/53


53/53

panama 2010 rm mission report1

Documents