Jhb  
 
line decor
  
line decor
 
 
 
 

 
 
Joburg Heritage

 

PROTECTING OUR HERITAGE AND ENVIRONMENT

 

Divider

JOBURG HERITAGE WEBSITE

It is only 80 years since Johannesburg received City status, and the mining town only came into existence in 1886 with declaration of the triangle of Uitvalgrond, Randjieslaagte, was set aside for the community which was developing around the gold mining claims.

This is a good time to be celebrating Jo’burg’s heritage with its old gold mines receiving a second life, mining out what was left behind in the pillars, the Bird and Kimberley reefs.

So it is a mining town at heart, greedy and pretty ruthless, generous when the occasion calls and pretty lawless.

But it certainly has an exciting history of turbulence, exploitation and a strong labour movement, suppression and resistance, apartheid and non-racial developments. The man made scenery changes as the price of gold rises. Buildings topple with the surging economy yet the heritage sites remain, are overgrown or simply fall to pieces with neglect.  

So exploring Johannesburg’s heritage requires some of the pioneering spirit.

Join the tours organised by the Parktown and Westcliff heritage Trust.

Visit the buildings and sites that have been identified with blue and white heritage plaques.

The most important site must be Constitution Hill: The Old Fort, for most of its life a gaol. Stunning views. A history of repression is followed by the hope for all South Africans, the Constitutional Court – accessible and full of artworks. Everyone from Gandhi to Mandela was incarcerated here so follow Struggle history, working class history and gender activism, the Anglo Boer War. Even the crooks and the criminals served time here.  

Click on TOURS for a list of weekly tours.

Click: Customised tours if you want to arrange a private tour touching on your heritage interests.

Click Plaques & Art Deco Plaques, these include the Art Deco buildings in the city centre.

 

Divider

NEWS UPDATE!!

RISSIK STREET POST OFFICE FIRE FINALLY SOME ACTION TAKEN BY THE NEGLIGENT OWNERS

The heritage architect has only been appointed now, almost four months after the fire.

The building is rapidly disintegrating with no roof to stop the  rain water pouring in, and it has been a very wet summer.

No work was undertaken to shore up the structure, or to prop the facades which no longer have their internal walls to brace the structure of the building.

Once the Heritage assessment is finally completed (why it was not carried out immediately after the fire is unimaginable) then the redevelopment of the building will still need to go out to tender.

There are no dates forthcoming from Johannesburg Property Company (JPC) regarding when the restoration work will actually begin?

It really would seem that JPC see no urgency in pushing ahead with the restoration of this building – it seems on track to be left to rot as a sinkhole in the center of the city.

The heritage Architect is Fanuel Motsepe who restored the old Reserve Bank Building. That gives room for hope. Hic client certainly cares nothing about heritage buildings.

 

To get to Parktown and Westcliff the historic suburbs and homes of the elite see: www.parktownheritage.co.za

 

Divider

Johannesburg Heritage Journal

EDITORIAL

 

Welcome to the first edition of the Johannesburg Heritage Journal – the first, we hope, of many editions.

The Journal is intended to provide a forum for the research that undoubtedly is undertaken into many facets of Johannesburg's – and the Witwatersrand's – rich history. It has come about because it was realized that no regular publication on this history and heritage exists. The political powers-that-be are less than enthusiastic in their approach to heritage: one only has to consider the depredation of our heritage fabric that occurs almost daily, with impunity. The Top Star Mine dump, mining head gear, the Rand Steam Laundry buildings, and, of course, one of the oldest buildings in Johannesburg, the Post Office in Rissik Street, are examples which spring all too readily to mind of our heritage being laid to waste . History is no longer considered a subject worthy of teaching in public schools – instead, some watered down version of "social studies" is presented in place of a discipline which has long been central in education at all levels.

Rather than being too negative, though, it was thought that something – albeit small - could be done to counter the gloom – and this journal is the outcome.

We are very proud and privileged to include in our introductory edition an article by Mike Alfred on the life and times of a man who was, almost single-handedly, responsible for the survival of Johannesburg and the Witwatersrand mines as the British closed in on the town in May 1900 … read about the life and times of Dr FET Krause.

Our first edition also includes a report on some of the prominent personalities laid to rest in the Brixton Jewish Cemetery – important, because the now dwindling Jewish community played such a vital role in early Johannesburg and beyond. An article on a little-known builder, Alfred Hoheisen, records some of his early life and work in Braamfontein and Yeoville, and also relates the fascinating tale of how this artisan, albeit indirectly, became the founder of the famous Delheim Estate in the Cape.

A third article focuses on the life of a middle-class Johannesburg family in the early part of the last century. Margaret Barry, in the preface to her charming album, Magnates & Mansions, writes: "This album is but a small portion of the large mosaic of social life in early Johannesburg … Hopefully, many other vignettes will be written about early residents and their families, with descriptions of their homes and other things important to their way of life." This article represents just such a vignette. So much has been written on the doings of the super-rich Randlords, and since writers such as van Onselen and Callinicos have shed abundant light on the trials and tribulations of the poor in the early years; it is quite refreshing to read of a family who, fresh from England, were able to adapt to life on the Rand without changing too radically their English ways and outlook.

We are also proud to publish an enlightening article on one of the few heritage sites in Sandton – Norscot Manor. This was written by the late Avril Reid, and traces the history of the Eriksen family in greater Johannesburg.

We look forward to the contributions our readers will surely make to the Johannesburg Heritage Journal. Please don't hesitate to submit your story, research or even brief anecdote on the history of Johannesburg and the Witwatersrand.

 

Click on each link to select article:-

Editorial

Alfred Hoheisen

Brixton Jewish Cemetery

Judge FET Krause

PWHT Journal Guidelines for Authors

Story of Norscot

The Atkinsons at Home

JOHANNESBURG HERITAGE JOURNAL VOLUME TWO

Click here to open Journal

 

Divider

 

Heritage report on Rand Steam Laundries prepared March 2006, please click here

 

Divider

 

IMPERIAL DEMOLISHES HERITAGE BUILDINGS

OPEN LETTER TO THE MEDIA - JANUARY 2008

RE: IMPERIAL GROUP (PTY) LTD SMASHES THE RAND STEAM LAUNDRIES HERITAGE BUILDINGS TO SMITHEREENS IN DEFIANCE OF  PROVISIONAL DECLARATION AND CONTINUES IN DEFIANCE OF A STOP ORDER

Imperial Group (Pty) Ltd and/or its agents have violated the National Heritage Resources Act and demolished a large number of protected buildings.  A stop order was issued and they continued to violate the act and ignore the heritage authority, they destroyed the remaining buildings and removed materials from the site.  We are demanding that the authorities show “Zero Tolerance” to these powerful offenders.

In defiance of the declaration by the M.E.C. Barbara Creecy of the Rand Steam laundries as a provisional Provincial Heritage Site, Daniel Coetzee of D.E.M.O.B. Demolishers started stripping the buildings of roof sheeting and other metal. On 9th January 2008 Flo Bird warned Coetzee that this was illegal and he referred her to Dean Merridew of Imperial Group (PTY) Ltd who told her that he had a demolition permit from the City of Johannesburg.  The City of Johannesburg does not out rank the Province and Merridew was informed that he needed a permit from PHRAG – the Provincial Heritage Resources Authority of Gauteng.  Bird asked Merridew to instruct the demolisher to stop the work and he did so while she was on site. 

On Thursday 10th January on the direct instructions of Dean Merridew the same demolisher, Daniel Coetzee, brought in huge mechanical equipment with instructions to destroy the buildings.  The grab pulled over the walls then drove back and forth across the rubble crushing the bricks, splintering the Oregon pine and twisting any metal in its path.  Whatever survived was lifted and dashed down repeatedly until it too was crumpled and useless.

Flo Bird, William Gaul and Henry Paine of Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust witnessed the wilful destruction.  Efforts to halt proceedings by calling Mr Daniel Coetzee and Dean Merridew proved fruitless.  Finally, Grant Botha, an official from PHRAG, arrived to deliver a stop order.  There was no one of sufficient seniority to receive it on site, but Botha spoke to Merridew on the cellphone and notified him that he would fax the order through to him as the representative of Imperial and that a charge would be laid at the Brixton Police station the next day.

At that stage the buildings on the corner of Napier Road and Barry Hertzog Avenue, the filtration tower and part of the one laundry shed were still standing.

Grant Botha of PHRA-G laid the charge against Mr Dean Merridew of Imperial at the Brixton Police station. Case No 220/01/2008 on Friday 11th January and the Stop Order was sent to Merridew by fax. 

In outright and continued defiance of the National Heritage Resources Act and presumably acting under instructions from senior authorities of Imperial Group, Merridew sent the bulldozers and TGB’s back in on Saturday and Sunday morning when the cottages under the oaks were then destroyed.

All of us readily complain about crime, but when we see a big corporate violate the law it brings into question just how serious we are about ridding our country of that scourge.

All we as a small group of heritage enthusiasts asked was that Imperial Group (Pty) Ltd uphold the law of the nation, the National Heritage Resources Act, and follow due process.  This they have failed to do.

Imperial Group (Pty) Ltd has demonstrated its contempt for the law, for the heritage of Johannesburg for due process and for the people of Johannesburg.

We ask the authorities to prosecute the offenders. We require that, rather than imposing a fine, the offenders be instructed to reinstate all the buildings and the site be retained as a heritage site for generations to come.  

Flo Bird Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust
William Martinson Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust
William John Gaul Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust
Fiona Coleman Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust
Henry Paine Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust
Herbert Prins   Egoli Heritage Trust
Geoffrey Klass Parktown Association
Paul Jenkins Westcliff Residents Association
Duncan Gibbon Chairman, Parkview Residents Association
Steve Roulet  
Nathalie Pencrech Architect
Kekeletos Maile  
Sarah Calburn Architect
Jason Frenkel Architect
Clement Leseka  
Lucy Maifala  
Jill Hunter  

 

Divider

 

LINDFIELD HOUSE VICTORIAN MUSEUM

Lindfield House

Click here to view this spectacular house based in Auckland Park and be prepared to be blown away!!


Divider

Follow this link to read up on an article by Neil Fraser - Partner of Neil Fraser & Associates

Laundry Lamentations

 

Divider

RAND STEAM LAUNDRIES, RICHMOND, JOHANNESBURG

Heritage report prepared by the Parktown and Westcliff Heritage Trust. March, 2006.

Stand Numbers: 32, 33,34,35,36, Portion1 and RE of 37, 225, 185,186,187,188,189
Street Address: 27-37 Napier Road
Township: Richmond
District: Johannesburg
Introduction: Running through the west end of Parktown and of Richmond are two streams; the Braamfontein Spruit and the Gas Works Spruit. The existence of a reliable, constant supply of potable and good quality water was very important for a number of industries, particularly laundry. The Zulu washermen, the AmaWasha, worked on the Braamfontein Spruit in a section which is now covered by the German School. Close by, and, much to the chagrin of the township owner of Parktown, the Braamfontein Company was the land owned by Louw Geldenhuys who likewise had a wash site which he leased to the washermen.

Braamfontein Company Minutes of 31st December:
Comments on manager’s report
Kafir Wash: Washing operations were on several occasions stopped by the Pass Office. Officials re-imposed the 5 shilling per month pass. “It is the more aggravating to them seeing that the boys on Mr Geldenhuis’s wash site, which is within 50 yards of the Company’s site are allowed to obtain the usual 2 shilling a month pass.

Up until 1899 the Gezondheitskommittee which administered Johannesburg repeatedly tried to get the AmaWasha closed. The Braamfontein Company opposed this, not out of the kindness of their hearts or concern for the Zulu washermen, but because of the rents received from the washermen and the company’s refusal to recognise the jurisdiction of the municipality over their private land. In 1897 which had been a really bad year because so many of the washermen had returned to Natal due to the political upheavals (Jameson Raid) they had taken 805 Pounds and sixpence.

Presumably Mr Geldenhuys has been doing at least as well from his site in Richmond. It was Lady Dunbar, however, who took over the battle of the washermen, persuading them to accept registration as her employees to avoid the forced removal to Klipspruit. The struggle on the Sans Souci site ended in April 1902 when they were finally evicted by Milner’s Town Council.

Professor van Onselen says the Sans Souci and the Auckland Park wash sites were the oldest of all the wash sites in Johannesburg, and that they had been in use since 1890.

The majority of residents of Johannesburg were working men living in lodging houses or sharing rooms. With no wives to do their washing, little time or space to do their own, they had little choice but to make use of the washermen and subsequently of the steam laundries.

The survival of the laundry buildings in Richmond is a memento of the social history of early mining days and also a reminder of the reliance of mining town on the natural streams of the Witwatersrand.

 

Divider

RAND STEAM LAUNDRIES

The name comes from the amalgamation of two laundries viz. the smaller Palace Steam Laundries (originally the Auckland Park Steam Laundry and re-floated in 1898 as the Palace Steam Laundry) and the Crystal Spring or “American” Laundry. The American Laundry was in financial difficulty and as Nelson who owned the Palace Steam Laundry, was already substantial shareholder, it was proposed that the he take over the bigger operation and that the two be run jointly under the name of the Rand Steam Laundries. This took place in July 1902.

Frank O Nelson, a laundryman from Chicago claimed to have established the first steam laundry on the Rand at the Robinson Mine. He built his home on part of the Rand Steam Laundries site. The building Plans say on stand 32, but the Valuation Roll lists him as an owner on Stands 37 and 38 with a fairly substantial house. The 1916 advertisement shows a twin gabled house facing Park Road on the land he owned. Designed by the architect Bertram Avery, it was a double-storey, attached to a unit containing a shop facing Richmond Road (now Napier Road) with lodging rooms above.

The road or lane which ran from Stanley Avenue to the edge of the property was named Nelson Terrace, presumably in deference to the laundry-master.

The Rand Steam Laundries were the biggest laundry operation in South Africa. The Union Castle line would rail its laundry to the RLS every week and there were depots in a number of centres.

An advertisement in South African Who’s Who in Business 1919 / 1920 has this description.

The Rand Steam Laundries and Cleaning and Dyeing Works is the largest establishment of its kind in the whole sub-continent. Employing about 270 people, including about 100 Whites, it has its own water supply, Cottages for people, Blacksmith and Farrier for making carts, makes its own Soap: and in fact is quite a Village by itself. “

The housing for white workers would have been superior in size and location, probably the picturesque gabled cottages fronting Napier Road with its oak trees. It is possible that the cottages for coloured (originally Malay) workers was the serried row of smaller dwelling units, west of Nelson’s Terrace, but contained within the site with an exit into Park Road.

Both sets of accommodation have survived recognisably as originally residential although altered and very badly maintained. The gabled cottages are used mainly for storage by a metal worker, while serried row are in even worse condition and are used by a furniture maker. The walls between the cottages have all been broken through to create a single extended space, stepping down at each level. Their small gardens are piled high with old timber.

The original accommodation for black workers has not been identified during site visits, but a 1916 sketch in an advertisement shows a “Native Compound.” A remnant of that building might remain. The site needs to be fully investigated.

A large pepper tree is probably indicative of the location of the stables and farrier’s shed as pepper trees were always planted near stables to keep the flies away.

Mr. Amoils Senior acquired the property in 1946 and the laundry was later run by his son until it closed in 1962.

The original laundry buildings – washing and ironing as well as the dyeing and dry-cleaning sections are still standing. Mr Amoils pointed to section where soap was made. The boilers have gone as well as all the laundry equipment

The impressive chimneys on their corrugated iron roofs indicate the use of steam. They are striking buildings both inside and out, underlining the industrial character of the site and also the use of steam which was once the major power source in Johannesburg, operating the mines as well as manufacturing industries.

There is a large round tower where the bore-hole water was filtered to soften and purify it further.

Since 1962 the property has been used by a number of light industrial companies, mainly furniture makers and repairers with the occasional artist. In modern parlance it is a “hive” with tenants of every colour and creed.

 

Rand Steam Laundries Napier Road 1928 with mule carts ready for deliveries
RSL0012

Rand Steam Laundries 2006 viewed from Napier Road

RSL0003

Divider

Demolition In Progress

Pic02Pic01

Torn apart as we watched. 10th Jan - SpacerSpacerUtterly destroyed on Thursday 10th Jan

Pic03 Pic04

Park Road cottages obliterated 10th Jan - SpacerOn Friday 11th these buildings were still standing

Divider

NEWSFLASH!!!

IMPERIAL DEMOLISHES HERITAGE BUILDINGS

CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

 

UPDATE

Letter to those who have supported our petition.

Many thanks for your support especially those of you sent the letter on to friends and organizations.
I apologise for the delay in getting back to you, but we are not really experts on computers. I have been writing to heritage organizations in South Africa and internationally because this cannot have been the first case of a developer smashing everything down to obtain a greenfields site.  It would be most interesting to know what precedents exist and if there have been other convictions. We do have a precedent in South Africa.
We were horrified to read of the little church demolished in Kwa-Zulu Natal over Christmas.  Recently one of the few surviving homes in Fietas was demolished without a permit.
SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IMPERIAL DOES NOT SET A PRECEDENT FOR DISPOSING OF OUR NATION’S HERITAGE BY IGNORING THE NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT.
We need your help. Please follow up on friends to ensure they have signed the petition. They don’t have to know how to sign, just send a message to RSL@parktown.heritage.co.za saying they support the petition.  Please TALK ABOUT IT. Don’t be scared to bore your friends with repetition.  At least you’ll be talking of a different crime at the dinner table.  
Ask The Star why it is has ignored the subject. At least two reporters have worked on the story yet not a peep out of a Jo’burg daily which used to be so concerned about our heritage. The Citizen, Business Day and Die Beeld have covered it as well as the Mail and Guardian, Sunday Independent and even a tiny contribution from the Sunday Times.  Radio stations have been most supportive and followed up on the story led by Radio 702.  
In case you haven’t got back to our website or the Facebook Page here is an update.
Monday 11 February Meeting with Tak Hiemstra of Imperial:
Flo Bird, Herbert Prins (Egoli Heritage Trust and Johannesburg Heritage Trust) and William Gaul (PWHT) met Mr. Hiemstra at his at his request.
 It was not a happy encounter as he felt the Board members of Imperial were being maligned and we felt the Board members could not escape responsibility for the actions of their employees, Carsten and Merridew.
 Mr. Hiemstra insisted that Mr. Carstens had acted entirely on his own authority and on the instructions of the Johannesburg building inspector. He could not explain why Imperial had not checked immediately with the Heritage Authority when they received the instruction from the building inspector dated 15 November to demolish the buildings. In October Imperial had received a notice from PHRAG of its intention to make the provisional declaration permanent and inviting the owner’s comments. On 8 November Carstens wrote to PHRAG on behalf of Imperial objecting to the declaration. It could hardly have slipped his mind that he had recently received notice of its further protection for 6 months after receipt of the PHRAG letter.  Nor could Mr. Hiemstra explain why Carstens’ respect for authority did not extend to obeying the Stop Orders issued by PHRAG and the City of Johannesburg on Friday 11th January. At that stage there were a number of buildings still standing including the Napier Road cottages.
He insisted that Imperial had obeyed an instruction from the Building Inspector out of concern for public safety.  The demolition cost R1,2 million. Why did not they simply repair the security fence and prevent anyone from entering the site?
 He provided us with a copy of the letter from a professional engineer Mr. BG McLintock of BSM BAKER who said he had undertaken an extensive inspection of the site. It states that “The buildings on the site are generally in a state of disrepair and in our opinion are a structural risk.”

Tuesday 12th February
Mr. Hiemstra wrote to Flo Bird in a more conciliatory tone, proposing an architect be employed to suggest a solution which would give proper recognition to both the historic importance and the current requirements of the site. 
He also asked that we stop our high profile media campaign against Imperial, observing that some of the points made by people at the meeting had been untrue.
Over the next two days we considered our response.
Thursday 14
We replied to Mr. Hiemstra that we would be prepared to negotiate a win-win solution as he had suggested, and that we would halt the adversarial comment temporarily, but that we could not discuss the future of the site while they were trying to sell it.
 Friday 15th February
Mr. Hiemstra replied that they could not stop trying to find a buyer since there was good deal of capital tied up in the site, but they would certainly inform the buyer of the cultural sensitivity of the site.
It is true that at our meeting Mr. Hiemstra said that towards the end of last year they had not obtained approval for the franchise they had planned there and the site was therefore no longer needed which is why they had tried to sell it.
We cannot accept Imperial’s attempt to divest themselves of responsibility by selling the property. Their attitude is incomprehensible.
There has been no further communication with Imperial.
SUPPORTING THE POLICE INVESTIGATION
We are not idle. We are ensuring that the people who witnessed it and had any interaction with the demolishers are submitting sworn affidavits. Those of you who live near to the site and can testify until what hours the demolition work proceeded are asked to get in touch if you are willing and able to submit an affidavit.
We need to compile a list of the tenants who were give notice last year. We would like to know what reasons were given them and the conditions of the buildings they occupied.
 So please send us any information you feel will contribute to the case.
WE WANT A CONVICTION AND WE WANT OUR HERITAGE BUILDINGS REINSTATED.
We ALSO WANT THE DEMOLISHER DEMOB, WHO UNDERTOOK THE WORK KNOWING IMPERIAL HAD NOT OBTAINED A PERMIT FROM PHRAG CHARGED AND PUNISHED AS PROVIDED BY THE ACT.
Please keep a watch on the site and if you see any changes let us know. It is being fenced which was a requirement of the City of Johannesburg.

Flo Bird

Divider

PROTEST ON 7TH FEBRUARY  REPORT BACK

Thank you to all the people who came to hold a banner, sign a petition and greet the passing motorists who hooted their agreement.

Through Councillor Sharon Sabbagh we were told that the demonstration was illegal because we had not completed the right form. Our letter sent with Councillor Sabbagh to the meeting of the JMPD on 29 January had been acceptable at the area meeting, but on the morning of 7th February someone had noticed that we had not completed the correct form in terms of the Gatherings Act.

So when we arrived the site banners furled and only 5 of us inspecting the pavement we were not really surprised to see two vehicles of JMPD waiting around the corner, just beyond the trees Surprisingly they disappeared just a minute before 4 o’clock and we duly sent 15 banner holders out to face the traffic. They never returned and more people arrived, some with placards, all ready to take their place in the line. It was a pleasure to find heritage friends arriving from Parktown, Westcliff, Parkview, Auckland Park and Houghton. The architectural students from Wits provided a lively and much younger component. Richmond residents appeared to support us, several folk from Emmarentia and Melville. Most people had watched the demolition with sorrow and outrage.  Three ward councilors held banners aloft and an ex-councillor wittily protested  “Dirty Work”.    

Thank you everyone and special thanks to the media although they kept me on edge because they were throwing the numbers of our legal demonstration out and I had vowed we would uphold the law.  

Felicity who organised the banners, Millan who painted the lettering and my husband who found the broomsticks gave invaluable support. Geoff Klass agreed to be my deputy and share the responsibility if supporters stepped out of line. Vera organized the petitions.

Divider

UPDATE ON RAND STEAM LAUNDRIES

On Monday 11 February Meeting with Tak Hiemstra of Imperial:
Flo Bird, Herbert Prins (Egoli Heritage Trust) and William Gaul (PWHT)  met Mr. Hiemstra at his at his request.

It was not a happy encounter as he felt the Board members of Imperial were being maligned and we felt the Board members could not escape the responsibility for the actions of their employees.

Mr. Hiemstra insisted that Mr. Carstens had acted entirely on his own authority and on the instructions of the Johannesburg building inspector. He could not explain why Imperial had not checked first with the Heritage Authority when they received the instruction from the building inspector dated 15 November to demolish the buildings. In October Imperial had received a notice from PHRAG of its intention to make the provisional declaration permanent and inviting the owner’s comments. On 8 November Mr. Carstens wrote to PHRAG on behalf of Imperial objecting to the declaration. It could hardly have slipped Mr. Carstens mind that he had recently received notice of its further protection for 6 months after receipt of the PHRAG letter.  Nor could Mr. Hiemstra explain why Mr. Carstens’ respect for authority did not extend to obeying the Stop Orders issued by PHRAG and the City of Johannesburg on Friday 11th January. At that stage there were a number of buildings still standing including the Napier Road cottages.

He insisted that Imperial had obeyed an instruction from the Building Inspector out of concern for public safety.  The demolition cost R1,2 million. Why did not they simply repair the security fence and prevent anyone from entering the site?

He provided us with a copy of the letter from a professional engineer Mr. BG McLintock of BSM BAKER who said he had undertaken an extensive inspection of the site. It states that “The buildings on the site are generally in a state of disrepair and in our opinion are a structural risk.”

Tuesday 12th February

Mr. Hiemstra wrote to Flo Bird in a more conciliatory tone, proposing an architect be employed to suggest a solution which would give proper recognition to both the historic importance and the current requirements of the site. 

He also asked that we stop our high profile media campaign against Imperial, observing that some of the points made by people h\at the meeting had been untrue.

Over the next two days Flo Bird discussed the letter and response with the people involved in the mounting the protest.

Thursday 14

We replied to Mr. Hiemstra that we would be prepared to negotiate a win-win solution as he had suggested, and that we would halt the adversarial comment temporarily, but that we could not discuss the future of the site while they were trying to sell it.

Friday 15th February

Mr. Hiemstra replied that they could not stop trying to find a buyer since there was good deal of capital tied up in the site, but they would certainly inform the buyer of the cultural sensitivity of the site.

It is true that at our meeting Mr. Hiemstra said that towards the end of last year they had not obtained approval for the franchise they had planned there and the site was therefore no longer needed which is why they had tried to sell it.

RSL Demo 01

Divider

 

 

Last Edit : 20/02/2012

 
 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
    Website maintained & hosted by BBIS