Individual heritage sites

The results of the executed monitoring serve as background for the following positive assessment for the individual heritage sites:

Almost all excavated archaeological sites are accessible; most are with preserved authenticity, on some of them is executed conservation and restoration. New sites are also discovered, as the Necropolis of Messambria-Messemvria-Nessebar and single archaeological sites of the peninsula.
There is no irreversible violation in the authenticity and integrity of the medieval churches.
The best examples of vernacular architecture are preserved to a relatively high degree of authenticity and are in a relatively good state.

The following negative processes in the individual heritage sites are observed and determined:

The archaeological sites are threatened by slow physical destruction, caused by natural factors (weathering, erosion), by lack of regular conservation-restoration works or by law-quality interventions. Most often the environment around the sites is ill-kept, inadequately used or disturbed by shopping sites, infrastructure equipments, etc. In most cases the archaeological sites, in spite of their key importance for the outstanding universal value, are an unattractive sight. Underwater archaeology is insufficiently studied.
The valuable Medieval churches in general are in unsatisfactory physical state, as they are lacking both maintenance and conservation-restoration intervention. Their socialisation is ineffective, in a number of cases the architectural frame around the churches is disturbed, thus their contextual and compositional role is underestimated.
A part of the sites of the vernacular architecture, especially these with lower individual value, are lacking conservation intervention and maintenance and are seriously affected by physical damages or inharmonious changes. Inadequate interventions are held, that compromise their look: substitution of original materials and details, new extensions and superstructures, in some cases even entirely substituted heritage.
Modern information system is lacking that should distribute knowledge for the heritage sites to the general public.

: Fig. 106. Preserved integrity of part of the west fortification wall

: Fig. 107. Erosion of stones, bricks and binding substance and opening of voids in the masonry.

: Fig. 108. Physical destruction and lack of presentation of a supporting wall

: Fig. 109. Illegal dining place in the archaeological area around the basilica of Holy Virgin Eleousa

: Fig. 110. Destruction of the original substance – newly found archaeological structures at Krajbrezhna Street

: Fig. 111. Intrusion of the south fortification wall with a dining place

: Fig. 112. Poor physical condition of the church St John Aleitourgitos

: Fig. 113. Poor physical condition of the church St John Aleitourgitos – erosion of the building materials

: Fig. 114. Poor physical condition and vandalism of murals in the interior of the church St John Aleitourgitos

: Fig. 115. Poor physical condition of the church Christ Pantokrator – erosion of the stone facing on the east façade.

: Fig. 116. Church Christ Pantokrator – cement seals in the interior

: Fig. 117. Church St. Paraskeva – loss of ceramic ornamentation on the east façade

: Fig. 118. Church St. Paraskeva – loss of ceramic ornamentation on the east façade

: Fig. 119. Poor physical condition of the conservation sealants of the basilica of Holy Virgin Eleousa

: Fig. 120. Poor physical condition of the conservation sealants of the church St. Archangels Michael and Gabriel

: Fig. 121. Poor physical condition of the roof of the church St. John the Baptist

: Fig. 122. Poor condition of the murals of the church St. Spas (Saviour)

: Fig. 123. Unfinished restoration works of the church St. Archangels Michael and Gabriel

: Fig. 124. Poorly installed new technical installations on the walls of Old Metropolitan church St. Sophia

: Fig. 125. Unathorised intervention on the façade of the Assumption church

: Fig. 126. New murals in the interior of the Assumption church

: Fig. 127. Preserved space around the church Christ Pantokrator

: Fig. 128. Impaired environment around the church St. John the Baptist – illegal constructions

: Fig. 129. Impaired environment around the church St. John Aleitourgitos with over scale building

: Fig. 130. Impaired environment around the church St. Stephen with street trade places

: Fig. 131. Impaired environment around the church St. Stephen with over scale building

: Fig. 132. Impaired environment around the church St. Spas (Saviour)

: Fig. 133. Impaired environment around Old Metropolitan church St. Sophia

: Fig. 134. Impaired environment around Old Metropolitan church St. Sophia

: Fig. 135. Impaired environment around the church St. John Aleitourgitos

: Fig. 136. Impaired environment around the cross-domed church to the north of the Old Metropolitan church St. Sophia

: Fig. 137. House of the heirs of Kosta Nenov. An example of preserved authenticity

: Fig. 138. House of Georgi Shishmanidov. An example of preserved authenticity

: Fig. 139. House of Petar Nikolov Dimitrov. An example of preserved authenticity

: Fig. 140. House of Argir Nakov and Katina Yanulova. An example of preserved authenticity

: Fig. 141. House of Ivan Rusev. Immovable heritage site with major structural problems

: Fig. 142. House of Ivan Rusev. Immovable heritage site with major structural problems

: Fig. 143. House of Ivan Markov Hason. Immovable heritage site with major structural problems

: Fig. 144. House of Ivan Markov Hason. Immovable heritage site with major structural problems

: Fig. 145. House of Hristo Hristodulov – badly repaired façades

: Fig. 146. House of Hristo Stoyanov – badly repaired façades

: Fig. 147. House of Grigor Babaliev – badly repaired roof covering using non traditional materials and colours

: Fig. 148. House of Todora Hristova and house of Yani Pikov and Georgie Parashkevov – badly repaired façades

: Fig. 149. House of Town National Council next to the Old Metropolitan church – badly repaired façades

: Fig. 150. House of Aleksi Pavlov – new non specific elements on the façades

: Fig. 151. House of Atanas Yanulov – façades design of entirely modern materials

: Fig. 152. House of Andiopa Hristova – compromised environment around the site

: Fig. 153. House of Mencho Troev Menchev – built extensions and superstructures violating the site

: Fig. 154, 155. Above: house of Maria Kostova. Archive photo 1991. Below: new residential building erected on the place of the house of Maria Kostova. Photo 2011

: Fig. 156, 157. Above: house of Georgi Damenliev. Arcieve photo. Below: new residential building erected on the place of the house of Georgi Damenliev. Photo 2011

: Fig. 158, 159. Above: house of Galabina Yakimova. Archive photo. Below: new residential building erected on the place of the house of Galabina Yakimova. Photo 2011

: Fig. 160, 161. Above: house of Georgi Kehajov. Archive photo. Below: new residential building with solar panels erected on the place of the house of Georgi Kehajov. Photo 2011

: Fig. 162. New residential building erected on the place of the house of “Zhilfond”

: Fig. 163, 164. Above: house of Nikola Kazakov. Archive photo. Below: new residential building erected on the place of the house of Nikola Kazakov. Photo 2011

: Fig. 165, 166. Above: house of Еlena. Archive photo. Below: new residential building erected on the place of the house of Elena. Photo 2011