| Historic Richmond laundry demolished |
|
|
|
| Written by Lucille Davie | |
| Friday, 11 January 2008 | |
|
A dispute has broken out over the demolition of an historic Joburg site one of the citys early steam-driven industries that dated back to 1902. 
Before - a row of buildings with their distinctive red chimneys
WORK crews have been ordered to stop demolition operations at the old Richmond laundry site one of the last examples of the city's earliest steam-driven industries. The demolition was allegedly in defiance of provisional protection given to the Napier Road site by the Provincial Heritage Resources Authority of Gauteng (PHRAG) in September 2006. Grant Botha of the PHRAG yesterday told the demolishers to stop work on the site. He planned to lay a charge with the police on Friday, citing the illegal demolition of a building. He was also going to fax an order to stop demolition through to the landowners, Imperial Properties. The site was originally where Rand Steam Laundries & Cleaning & Dyeing Works began business in 1902. It consisted of a small village with cottages for workers and managers, a blacksmith and farrier for making and maintaining its carts (used for collecting and delivering laundry), and a soap-making section. It nestled on a curve of the Gas Works spruit, from which it drew its water supply. It was one of the last remaining examples of a steam-driven industrial site in the city. 
After - a huge pile of rubble is all that is left of the 106-year-old site
Now all that remains of the four-acre site are several cottages on the corner of Barry Hertzog Avenue although they have been stripped on doors and inner walls. Elsewhere on the site are mangled sheets of corrugated iron, chunks of bricks and odd pipes stretching into the sky. The site has for many years been a ramshackle collection of light-industrial businesses. It was bought by Imperial in March 2006, with a view to building a showroom. According to Dean Merredew, a property consultant with Imperial Properties, a demolition permit was obtained from a building inspector. This was forwarded to the PHRAG in November last year, as notice that the company intended to proceed with the demolition. An engineer's report, stating that the site was a health hazard, was also sent, he added. "We didn't hear from them. Our attorneys tried to contact them," Merredew said. The deputy director of immovable heritage in Johannesburg, Eric Itzkin said the City would investigate the circumstances of the demolition. "My impression is this is not an ordinary demolition. It is done is defiance of the legal status of the site as a provincial heritage site," he said. 
The pile of rubble - all that is left of the charming Richmond laundry site
Itzkin added that the executive director of development planning and urban management, Professor Phil Harrison, had also been informed of the demolition and was outraged.
Provisional protection According to Bird the site was a reminder of the social history of early mining days and of the town's the reliance on the natural streams of the Witwatersrand. Some of the buildings were "architecturally sophisticated", with "longitudinal parallel girder trusses on columns supported smaller transverse roof trusses", having been specially constructed to accommodate large steam machinery, Bird said. She wanted this architecture recognised under "technical innovation", as allowed for in the National Heritage Resources Act of 1999. PHRAG was planning to declare the site a permanent heritage site. According to Merredew the first Imperial heard of this protection was when PHRAG sent a notice to them in October 2007, asking them to comment on extending that provisional protection to permanent protection. 
The remainder of the buildings on the site in the background
"We objected to it," he said, stating that the site was "lying barren". A fire had broken out late last year, and Imperial feared another fire on the site. "What trouble would we have been in then?" Imperial knew of the age of the site when the company bought the property. Merredew confirmed that the former owners had told the company. In October 2006, the MD of Imperial, John Carstens, said the company was in the process of applying for rezoning of the site from residential to a motor dealership site. "We are hoping to redevelop the site to a much better facility," Carstens said at the time, adding that the site was an "eyesore". Merredew confirmed that this application had been submitted. In 2006, Carstens indicated he was not averse to the protection the site had been given. In terms of the protection, Imperial would have to undertake a heritage impact assessment. Merredew couldn't confirm whether this had been done. Bird criticised the haste in which the demolition was carried out, adding that if there was no demolition permit Imperial should be heavily penalised and forced to reinstate the buildings, and the property should be confiscated. "This was deliberate they planned to demolish and pay the fine." Conservation architect Henry Paine concurred, adding that a demolition could not take place without a heritage survey. This would record the social history of the site, the date of construction and the architect, and the history of the buildings. When asked whether the demolition company had complied with City regulations regarding water, electricity, pest control and gas on the site, Merredew said: "I presume the demolition company have done this, that's their problem." Carstens was not available for comment on Friday. In 2006 architect Justus van der Hoven was fined R300 000 for demolishing an Art Deco building, Dudley Court, in Parktown North. He also received a five-year suspended sentence.
Related stories: |
