ICOMOS Technical Review. Comments on the 2014 State of Conservation report by the State Party of the Czech Republic

Transcription

1 ICOMOS Technical Review Property Historic Centre of Prague State Party Czech Republic Property ID 616bis Date inscription 1992 Criteria (ii)(iv)(vi) Project Comments on the 2014 State of Conservation report by the State Party of the Czech Republic 1. Introduction and summary The State Party report on the state of conservation of the Historic Centre of Prague (SP report) responds to the World Heritage Committee Decision 36 COM 7B.73, which was informed by the report of the reactive monitoring mission in January These comments follow the order of the SP report/decision 36 COM 7B.73, with additional information related to the detailed recommendations of the 2010 Mission included under the appropriate heading. The Architecture Killing Prague report is mostly concerned with sites outside the WH property. The villas on Milady Horáková Street were brought to the attention of the 2010 Mission but are essentially a local matter (Mission Report, p.15, para 3). In general the SP report sets out substantive, positive progress on the issues of concern to the Committee and the 2010 Mission about the historic centre. The new City Plan and WHS Management Plan, expected in draft later this year, should set the framework for resolving ongoing issues, particularly tall buildings in the setting of the historic centre (3), further rehabilitation of the northsouth trunk road (5), limiting parking provision in the historic centre (6), and bringing under-used historic buildings and sites into use while avoiding over-development (9). These two latter issues are the most important ongoing ones, given their potential cumulative impact on the OUV of the historic centre. The only serious issue raised about the second part of the site, Průhonice Park, is future flood risk, following damage in Land use planning and tall buildings Work began in June 2012 on the new Metropolitan Plan for the whole City of Prague. The draft is due to be completed later this year and the World Heritage Centre will be consulted on it. The Plan will be of particular importance in setting the parameters for development in and beyond the buffer zone, and in particular will determine height levels for the entire territory of the city, which continues to be an issue (see Žižkov, 7 below). 3. High rise buildings on the Pankrác Plain Revocation of building permissions for the Epoque Towers has been subject to legal challenge. This has been resolved for the Apartment Building, which will now proceed in accordance with the Committee s recommendations. A final decision on the Hotel building was still awaited at the time the State Party report was written. The principles set out in the State Party state of conservation report, page 7, for completing the development of the central street-block at Pankrác (presumably prior to being incorporated in the new City Plan) are, in ICOMOS s opinion, acceptable although what the appropriate gaps between

2 buildings should be (Principle 3) is essentially subjective. It would be helpful if this were amplified, for example so the gaps between buildings seen from key viewpoints appear at least as wide as the adjacent buildings. 4. WHS Management Plan In parallel with the City Plan, the new Management Plan is due for completion towards the end of Despite the delay, there should be considerable benefit from the City Plan and the Management Plan being finalised in parallel. The revised draft outline seems appropriate, but there are key issues that will need to be addressed at the operational level (see 1 above). The WHC will be consulted on the draft in autumn The North-South Trunk Road The commitment to strict compliance with the monitoring mission s advice (in its Recommendation 3) to transform the north-south trunk road (SP report, p.14) is most welcome. In terms of implementation, the decision not to pursue the idea of a tunnel from the Central Station south to Nusle Bridge is also welcome; the approach of modulation at street level is very much what the Mission had in mind. The proposal to reconnect pedestrian links, and the tram line, from Wenceslas Square, across the Trunk Road, will be a good start. The recognition that reducing vehicular traffic capacity and preliminary measures to give greater priority to pedestrians should be co-ordinated with the opening of the Blanka Tunnel complex later this year so as to ensure that the new ring road does not add to capacity on the road network. More details of the downgrading of the Trunk Road will be set out in the new WHS Management Plan (SP report, p.16). 6. Parking in the historic centre The mission s recommendations on parking in the historic centre are also being pursued, with a proposal to minimise private on-site parking in new developments. (Mission Report, p. 12). This is welcome, although the form of many development projects and proposals continues to be heavily influenced by the provision of underground parking (below, 9, Project 24). The State Party report (p.53) underlines the tensions between the approach by Prague City Hall and the Municipal District of Prague 1 [which] promotes the building of large capacity underground garages below the north-eastern part of the square (Project 24 below). This is a crucial issue that should be addressed in the WHS Management Plan, currently in preparation. 7. Historic Railway Stations Vyšehrad: It seems that problems with the owners neglect of the building have continued and are the subject of administrative proceedings. These problems are no doubt connected with the continuing delay in agreeing acceptable development flanking the station, without which its repair and reuse is unlikely to be viable. The two proposed buildings, reduced from their 2009 form, are now of appropriate scale (one forming a return to the existing street block, the other slightly lower), and are in ICOMOS s opinion acceptable. Planning permission is now in place, although the owners also still seem to be seeking, in parallel, complementation [final approval?] of the 2009 proposals. This is a situation in which objectors seeking an ideal project risk complete loss of the heritage asset. In ICOMOS s view the authorities are therefore to be commended for their persistence in trying to deliver a reasonable scheme. Žižkov: The inscription of this modern movement station as a cultural monument is welcome, No

3 details are provided of the consented development on the Northern Site or of the Revitalisation Project for the station, although the Mission (Recommendation 5) requested that the WHC be kept informed. Buffer Zone Project 1 (SP report, p. 66) is immediately west of Žižkov station in the view directly east from Prague Castle. It includes five 18 story residential towers, approved by Prague City Hall Heritage Department against the advice of the National Heritage Institute, which was concerned about its potential impact on the visual horizons of the city, based on experience of other tall buildings on the opposite side of the street. This suggests a problem of cumulative impacts in this area. ICOMOS cannot offer an opinion however in the absence of accurate visual representations of the proposed development(s). Masaryk: Retaining this as working station with additional platforms is welcomed. 8. Other conservation issues identified by the State Party Organisational changes: The establishment of the World Heritage Site Office should encourage more focused actions to conserve the World Heritage property and their advisory World Heritage Site Council should bring a broad range of perspectives to bear on the task. Urban analysis: This will provide the evidence base for informed conservation of the urban fabric. It is an ambitious project given the scale of the task, and greatly to be welcomed. Potential Threats: The flood defenses, put in place in the City after the 2002 floods, were tested by the flood conditions of June 2013 and proved largely effective. Unfortunately Průhonice Park suffered a devastating flood at the same time. The damage was subsequently repaired, but the SP Report does not address the question of the likelihood of a repetition, and if so, whether improved flood defense measures are practicable. Major rehabilitation projects of public buildings: All are generally welcome, but the use of abrasive cleaning on the National Theatre building (SP report, p. 46), to achieve a uniform visual appearance, may have negative long-term consequences. It raises the question of why this was considered a desirable, objective for this historic stone building. In addition to landscape restoration at Průhonice Park, the proposal to close the road crossing the park to traffic is welcome. 9. Development projects in the historic centre of Prague Overview The largely investor-funded projects reported under IIb and III, illustrate the on-going issues in the historic centre. Particularly in the Old Town, the problem of achieving the reuse of historic burgages without unacceptable levels of alteration and amalgamation remains (eg Project 13). In the New Town, not least around Wenceslas Square, there is strong pressure to redevelop, either completely or behind facades, with the substantial basement car parking (e.g. Projects 18, 19, 24) which tends to drive such drastic approaches. This is inevitable in an area which is the commercial and retail centre of a thriving city, but as the 2010 Mission observed, the lack of a unitary code, with a primary aim of conserving the historic fabric of the city, is a problem and it is not clear from the SP report that this will be addressed under in the City Plan or Management Plan. Several of the sites have protracted planning histories (eg Projects 23-24), which tend to lead to unsatisfactory compromise.

4 There are, however, some clear positive outcomes. Sites which have remained vacant for a long time are being filled in (eg Projects 14, 15, 18), and the former industrial sites north of Masaryk Station (on Na Florenci) are providing a good opportunity to develop modern floor space for commercial uses within the urban framework. The authorities insistence on high quality architecture on infill/redevelopment sites is surely right, even though there are objections ( Architecture Killing Prague ); but new interventions do need to have a dialogue with their context. D ecisions to allow the loss of buildings making a modestly positive contribution to the urban form and specificity of the city (eg Project 23) should not be influenced by the potential contribution of new commercial development or the provision of underground parking. Increasing residential use in the historic centre is desirable, but should not outweigh the insensitive treatment of historic buildings and their settings (eg Project 19). Some project-specific comments Project 13, Sixt s House etc, (SP report, p 54-5): While the rejection of damaging proposals for the conversion to an hotel of this extensive group of houses around the south-east corner of the Old Town Square (all cultural monuments) is welcome, most of the properties remain unused in the long term. Rather than countering damaging development proposals, a more proactive approach to finding sustainable long- term uses for such an important a group of Romanesque and Gothic houses is highly desirable. This was a general issue picked up by the 2010 Mission (Recommendation 10), but not in reference to these particular properties. Project 18: 135 Mikulandská 7: The development of the vacant site is welcome in principle no details are given of the proposed building but again this is seemingly a scheme that maximises underground parking. The degree of intervention in the Baroque palace is unclear, but appears to be substantial. Project 19: Truhlářská 11 etc: The small-scale, two-storey buildings, often with medieval cores and 18th century facades, that survived late 19th and 20th century development of up to seven or eight storeys in this area of the New Town are under particular pressure. The scheme here to partially console (presumably cantilever) a new eight storey residential block over Sukenická 12 (pictured below) is not appropriate in the property, residential use notwithstanding.

5 Prague, Sukenická 12 (Google Streetview) Project 23, Wenceslas Square 1601/47: This project, with a controversial planning history, illustrates well the development pressure in the retail centre of the New Town. The building demolished (Oplatolova 3) and the one still standing are not particularly significant architecturally; but they are characteristic of the architecture of the region. The proposal to replace these two already large but quite separate buildings with a single new does not respect the scale or morphology of the historic urban fabric; and the appliqué metal over glass corner element does little to relieve the basic international commercial design of the replacement. Project 24: Inner block off Wenceslas Square: This highly sensitive site was the subject of comment by the 2010 Reactive Monitoring Mission (3.1.8 with illustrations). The recommendations of the WHS Council regarding this site, reported in the SP report, are sound, but are made in the face of pressure from the international developers concerned (Ballymore) over several years. The potential 450 space car park here has wider ramifications. The decision is in abeyance; the idea should ideally be dropped as part of a wider policy change (see 6 above). Project 26: Růžová Street: The development of this frontage was (from the form of the flanking blocks) envisaged from the 19th century, and seems reasonable in principle subject to prior archaeological excavations. ICOMOS Paris September 2014