Ancient City of Nessebar

• Lack of a Management Plan 
• Urban development pressure 
• Lack of an urban master plan and of a conservation master plan of monuments and archaeological sites 
• Illegal constructions 
• Housing
• Impacts of tourism/visitor/recreation
• Management Systems/Management plan
• Marine transport infrastructure

On 26 February 2021, the State Party submitted a report on the state of conservation, which is accessible at https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/217/documents/ and reports on the implementation of Decision 43 COM 7B.81 (Baku, 2019) and other activities in 2019 and 2020, as follows:

• A revised project for the Severna Buna Fishing port was transmitted: a floating pontoon and piers anchored to the sea-bottom have been chosen to augment the mooring capacity of the port;
• Monitoring of the urban environment of the property was implemented in 2020: issues, priorities and remedial measures have been identified;
• Steps to remove illegal constructions and installations continue;
• The Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the school and sports centre in the area of the Ancient Necropolis of Messembria is being prepared;
• An Integrated Development Plan for Nessebar Municipality (2021–2027) is being developed to harness EU funds from its regional development and cohesion policy. It was submitted to public consultation and will then be adopted by the Municipal Council;
• A 5-year General Plan for the Organisation of the Traffic (GPOT) in the Ancient City of Nessebar has been prepared and awaits adoption by the municipality in spring 2021;
• Geodetic and photogrammetric survey of the churches and streets has been completed;
• The conservation projects for two windmills have been prepared with financial resources from the municipal fund “Culture”;
• The repaving of several streets of Ancient Nessebar is ongoing;
• Funds for restoring cultural properties and creating a “bazaar and park space” to improve the urban environment of the buffer zone are being sought;
• Underwater archaeological investigations and documentation of the medieval and post-medieval graffiti continues. Reports on the results of the research campaigns and programmes for future research have been transmitted;
• Educational and awareness raising initiatives and events have been conceived but only partially carried out, due to the Covid-19 pandemic;
• Scientific research conducted by the Centre for Underwater Archaeology between 2017 and 2020, aims at gathering scientific data to justify a potential boundary modification of the property.

On some priority actions, the State Party reports the following:

• An analysis of the draft Conservation Management Plan (CMP) for the property has been carried out and recommendations issued;
• The draft General Development Master Plan (GDMP) was sent for an Environmental Assessment by a licensed company in January 2021;
• The preparation of the Detailed Development Plan, based on the adopted Conservation Regimes for the Ancient City of Nessebar (2015), will begin after the adoption of the GDMP.

Other measures discussed in the State Party report were already reported on in 2018 and acknowledged by the World Heritage Committee in 2019.

Some progress has occurred in implementing the Committee’s decisions, but key steps remain to be addressed, namely the finalization and approval of the updated CMP, that incorporates an updated Sustainable Tourism Management Plan that addresses the pandemic and post- pandemic scenarios, the Detailed Development Plan for the property and its buffer zone and the GDMP, including guidelines for urban design, and the creation of an inter-ministerial committee, supported by a working group, to ensure clear governance and effective management of the property based on its Outstanding Universal Value (OUV).

The analysis of the draft CMP is a useful step but its finalization, approval and entry into force, for which no timeframe has been set out, needs to be achieved urgently as the GDMP is under revision and should incorporate the OUV-based vision for the property on which the CMP should be based.

The State Party has submitted one map of the GDMP. However, a report on the overall principles, strategy and main axes for the future territorial development of the city of Nessebar also needs to be presented, along with the outcomes of the Strategic Impact Assessment, in relation to potential impacts on the OUV of the World Heritage property. No timeframe for the approval and enforcement of the GDMP has been indicated by the State Party.

Following amendments to the Regional Development Act, an Integrated Development Plan for Nessebar has been drafted; however, only a list of projects has been transmitted. No long-term shared vision for the property seems to inform these projects - a vision which is much needed and should be urgently elaborated. For some of the listed projects – the North Coast aestheticization, construction of the Natural History Centre, and completion of the church building in the Black Sea r.a. (see Annex 4. Measure 4.3)– further information and documentation need to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre, according to Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines, for review by the Advisory Bodies.

It is reported that a Specialized Expert Council on the Conservation of Immovable Cultural Properties operates at the Ministry of Culture; nevertheless, this is an advisory body rather than the interinstitutional decision-making body which is needed to ensure a coherent governance of the property. The reported increased dialogue and cooperation between the Ministry of Culture and other relevant ministries, state agencies and Nessebar municipality should facilitate setting up such a committee. The World Heritage Committee may wish to reiterate its recommendation to the State Party to establish promptly an inter-ministerial steering committee for the property involving all relevant actors, supported by a working group, including the staff of relevant institutions.

The 5-year GPOT envisages measures for regulating access of residents and merchandises to the ancient city and identifies parking spaces outside the old fabric, in areas by the sea. These measures seem appropriate, but their effectiveness is to be assessed over time on the basis of careful monitoring.

Research on underwater archaeology has yielded important findings on submerged ancient defense and port infrastructures. The commitment of the State Party to document and increase the knowledge about the property’s ancient history and its vestiges is to be recognized and the completion of the research encouraged, so that the necessary Minor Boundary Modification can be promptly submitted.

The State Party seeks to secure financial resources for the conservation, enhancement and better presentation of the property, and has deployed human resources to implement monitoring and documentation. These efforts need to be continued to ensure effective management over time.

The State Party proposes to transform the ICOMOS Advisory mission, which had previously been recommended in 2017, into a series of online workshops to held in 2021. The World Heritage Committee may wish to recommend the State Party to implement this proposal.

The progress made by the State Party is acknowledged, but efforts need to increase in order for the threats to the integrity, authenticity and OUV of the property, confirmed by the findings of the 2018 joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission, to be addressed effectively and systemically. The implementation of much-awaited key actions has commenced but they are yet to be accomplished, while others are expected to enter into force soon. It would be important for a Reactive Monitoring mission to visit the property in 2022 to ascertain the condition of the property and to assess the progress made in implementing the measures requested by the Committee and the recommendations of the various missions to remove the identified threats to the property.

Some progress in implementing the last decisions of the Committee by the State Party has been observed but urgent matters still need to be addressed. Therefore, a consideration of the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger is not warrant at this point. However, if the absence of substantial progress in addressing Committee’s decisions and all missions recommendations will persist, this might be warranted.