Heritage Citichat 28 March 2008

CITICHAT 12/2008 - 28 March 2008


Heritage Hoops

Over the last few months a number of issues regarding heritage buildings have surfaced so I thought it would be an idea to set out quite simply the requirements of the National Resources Heritage Act and the city’s Policy Framework in this regard. Well, I might have thought ‘quite simply’, but the Act takes some navigating!

Starting with the easier of the two, the City’s Policy Framework, provides an insightful argument as to why Johannesburg in particular needs to be careful in retaining its heritage. It is a young city by historic standards (London was rebuilt after the Great Fire two hundred years before gold was discovered in Joeys!) but our short history has been “full of drama and incident…….different themes, stories and traditions contribute to a diverse store of heritage. A pre-colonial history …the world’s greatest gold rush; diverse architectural forms which took root on the African veld; and historic struggles against apartheid – all of these contribute to Johannesburg’s unique sense of place.” ‘All of these’ also give rise to various forms of remembrance – an architect, Aldo Rossi, considered that “The city itself is the collective memory of its people, and, like memory, it is associated with objects and places.”

The last hundred years, have seen terrible wars and revolutions destroying much of the world’s physical heritage. Apart from two world wars that decimated Europe, the dozens of other wars and revolutions including those in Serbia, Bosnia, China, Tibet and now in the Middle East have all left their physical open scars. Remember the wanton destruction of the two Buddhas of Bamiyan? On the other hand Joburgers have largely destroyed their own heritage through either ignorance or, more often, sheer greed. Robert Bevan in his book “the Destruction of Memory” succinctly comments: “The violent destruction of buildings for other than pragmatic reasons also happens in peacetime, of course, and it is impossible to separate out fully the depredations of ‘progress’ – modernity and industrialization, with all their implicit ideological content – from conflicts between classes and other groups within societies that are all part of the continuous remaking of our environment: as cities evolve and change, so structures become redundant or more valuable uses for a site are found. Benign or culpable neglect is the more common phenomenon. This may include the bastardization or demolition of a building that no longer has a community to serve it or where its builders lack the economic or political power to resist threatening ‘regeneration’ or ‘improvement plans’ (my emphasis added). So the Policy Framework stresses that “the historic environment contributes to an understanding of the impact of the past, and the need to plan critically and creatively for the future and the need to capitalize on the legacy of our history”. I’ll come back to the Framework later.

Looking critically at the National Resources Heritage Act, I can’t pretend that it a perfect piece of legislation but it spells out many good intentions although there appears to be a distinct lack of political will to see that it is adequately enforced to the point where it achieves its stated objectives.

What is the rationale behind the Act? The preamble to the legislation states that it “aims to promote good management of the national estate and to enable and encourage communities to nurture and conserve their legacy so that it may be bequeathed to future generations.” Notice that it places responsibility on ourselves (communities) to a large extent to meet its objectives. So, for those who see heritage organisations as Mother Grundies, it is actually your responsibility as much as theirs to see that the “national estate” is adequately managed and cared for.

But, what is this ‘national estate’? Well, whilst broadly defining the ‘national estate’ as “those heritage resources of South Africa which are of cultural significance or other special value for the present community and for future generations”, the Act provides a long list of what the ‘national estate’ may include ranging from places, buildings structures and equipment, graves, books, records, documents and photographs to places that have cultural significance or other special value because of importance in the community, or the pattern of South Africa’s history or of demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons as also ‘sites of significance relating to the history of slavery in South Africa’.

The first thing to take cognisance of is that the range of the “national estate” is very large – I have just quoted some of the many items that the Act details which is, in itself, not all-embracing. So your great granddad’s metal chocolate box issued by Queen Victoria to the troops of the British Empire that you keep your cuff links in should be cherished and passed on in your family or given to an institution that will cherish and preserve it.

But why does the Act place emphasis on future generations? The preamble goes on to state that “our heritage is unique and precious and it cannot be renewed. It helps us to define our cultural identity and therefore lies at the heart of our spiritual well-being and has the power to build our nation. It has the potential to affirm our diverse cultures and in doing so, shape our national character. Our heritage celebrates our achievements and contributes to redressing past inequities” (my emphasis added). Later, in spelling out the principles of heritage resource management, the Act points out that “Heritage resources have lasting value in their own right and provide evidence of the origins of South African society and as they are valuable, finite, non-renewable and irreplaceable they must be careful managed to ensure their survival.” Only the most philistine amongst us can argue against such sentiments! And why should we worry about all this? Because “every generation has a moral responsibility to act as trustee of the national heritage for succeeding generations and the State has an obligation to manage heritage resources in the interests of all South Africans.”

So, enough about the background, what are the practicalities? Let’s start with the property that you have just bought in the inner city because it is in a prime position for residential so you are just going to demolish it to make way for the new building of your dreams (and the consolidation of your retirement income!)

Firstly, I suggest you check on the age of the building. The Act very clearly states that “no person may ….. demolish any structure or part of a structure which is older than 60 years without a permit issued by the relevant provincial heritage resources authority” So, your building was built in 1960 which means that you are in the clear! Well, what you didn’t know was that your building is one of the city’s best and last remaining examples of the XYZ architectural style or that it was the clandestine meeting place for senior members of Umkhonto we Sizwe or, maybe, that it was the community centre for a particular ethnic or religious group.

So, whether the building is a year old or 100, the first thing you do is apply to the Council for a demolition permit. The application will be sent to the Council’s Department of Arts, Culture and Heritage Services who will assess if the building might have some form of heritage or historic value. If they are in doubt they might ask you to get a report from an architect or other professional. If there is no doubt they will sign the permit and you are on your way. If the building is older than 60 years then your application to demolish is automatically routed to the Provincial Heritage Authority, known as PHRA, who will assess whether the building has some form of significance. If a major development is the intended outcome, additional heritage reports may be required as part of Environmental Impact Assessments that will be required. If not, it will issue you with a demolition permit and once more you are on your way. Incidentally, in terms of the City’s Heritage Policy Framework “demolitions of heritage buildings and structures can only be justified where the loss or damage to cultural property is unavoidable, minor or otherwise acceptable in the light of expected benefits, and only subject to approval by the relevant heritage authority.”

So, once you have the PHRA demolition permit in your hot little hand you can grab the nearest crowbar and start to tear the building down! Not so fast. There may well be members of the public or heritage groupings who believe that the decision of the Provincial or National heritage authorities to allow demolition is wrong. They have the right, in terms of the Act, to appeal against the issue of the permit within 30 days. The Minister, in the case of SAHRA, the National Heritage Authority, or the MEC in the case of PHRA, the Provincial Heritage Authority, then appoints an independent tribunal of three experts on the issue being challenged. If you lose the appeal, or the appellant loses theirs, a further appeal can be referred to the next highest authority.

Bureaucratic? Sure, made more so by the failure of some of the authorities to deal with the matter with the same sense of urgency that you may have but, hey, this is a democracy where everyone has their rights!

Well, I don’t want to really ‘demolish’ the building. I just want to take out that admittedly beautiful sweeping staircase that rises through the podium because it takes up so much otherwise lettable space! Well, legislation requires that you have to submit plans of your intentions to the local authority and that starts the same process as above.

Yes but I know of a number of developers who just do their own thing and seem to get away with it! The Act actually says that “no person may alter or demolish any structure or part of a structure which is older than 60 years without a permit issued by the relevant provincial heritage resources authority”

So those developers who have done their own thing have broken the law and at some stage may well face the penalties that the Act provides which range from fines to imprisonment, to making good whatever they have altered, to being served with a notice prohibiting them from any further development of the site for 10 years, or even to completely re-instate what they have demolished or disturbed. Apart from the Act of course, everyone is required to submit plans to the Council and non-compliance will attract another set of penalties.

So who’s going to rat on me? In terms of the Act any person who believes that there has been an infringement of any provision of the Act may lay a charge and the Act makes clear that every member of SAPS is a de facto heritage inspector so you can’t be fobbed off with suggestions that it is not their responsibility.

OK, that deals with alterations and demolitions, but what about owners who leave their buildings to slowly rot and demolish through neglect? Well, if the building is of heritage value, whether it is over 60 or not, the building can be declared as a protected building.

How and who does this? Firstly ANYBODY can submit a nomination to either the National or Provincial Heritage Resource Agencies for a building to be declared a heritage site on a national basis (if it is of national importance) or on a provincial or local basis dependant on the relevant level of importance of the building concerned. The nomination must include adequate motivation for the declaration. Provided the heritage authority agrees with the motivation, it advises the owner, occupiers, bond holder and all conservation bodies in the geographic area of the site that it has received a nomination. All these bodies, and any other interested parties, are given 60 days in which to object which objections must be considered by the heritage authority and their decision made known to all concerned. However from the date of advice to the owner that the building is under consideration as a heritage site, it is classified as such for six months. If, during this time, the heritage authorities consider that the site has been allowed to fall into disrepair for a variety of purposes - but for the moment let’s concentrate on the fact that it is neglected to such an extent that it will lose its potential for conservation - the owner can be served with an order to repair or maintain the site within a specified time and, if not complied with, can undertake the repairs etc and recover the costs from the owner. Further, no one is permitted to “destroy, damage, deface, excavate, alter, remove from its original position, subdivide or change the planning status of any heritage site” without a permit issues by the relevant heritage authority. A local authority may provisionally protect, for a period of three months, any place it considers worthy of conservation if it considers that it’s conservation-worth is threatened – a provincial or national body for two years (in all cases after advising the owner of their intent). During that time an application can be made to declare the provisional declaration permanent and, if that is agreed to, it then gets registered in the appropriate heritage register. Once that happens, a whole new set of rules apply.

From a practical point of view, it would be great if a register existed of all buildings within the inner city that could be referred to before one buys a building or site so that you are clear, ahead of the purchase, just what obligations you may be letting yourself into. This is being addressed by the City through the compilation of a Johannesburg City Heritage Register. This will identify the city’s most important heritage resources; call attention to properties of architectural and historical merit; form the basis for the city’s own ongoing heritage programme; flag heritage sites on the city’s property information system and inform physical planning and development processes. Eventually, the list will be used as the basis for recommendations for heritage status to the provincial or national authorities. Quite a lot of work has already gone into compiling the register and it will hopefully be completed over the next few years. Incidentally, the work that has already been done includes a record of all transgressions made against local bye-laws or the Act itself and eventually, everyone will be brought to book.

As previously mentioned, the problem in the heritage arena is a lack of political will at some levels, a lack of resources at most levels and a lack of understanding by the general public as to why all this is necessary and the perceived blockage it represents to ‘development’. As my friend Donovan Rypkema concluded in one of his addresses: “For the 21st Century only the foolish city will make the choice between historic preservation and economic development. The wise city will effectively utilize its historic built environment to meet the economic, social and cultural needs of its citizens well into the future.”

Cheers, neil