Heritage Cases

The ground floor additions are formalising of the (as built) Verandah to the Quality Office and the addition of a Quality Control Manager’s office and Store. The ground floor alterations include minor internal changes and a realignment of the plant room and workshop, creating a Pilot Plant room to achieve better workflow. This would achieve greater efficiency in testing the plant on miniature scale in a laboratory setting prior to implementation on the site. The Pilot Plant Room would affect the façade by the additions of a roller shutter door. It must be noted that from a health and safety aspect, we propose installing ground floor windows, aligned to the first floor windows within the plaster bands. The first floor additions include making the existing Laboratory bigger and adding a meeting room and kitchenette. The alterations are the rationalisation of the ablution facility to allow for more space within the Laboratory. The materials utilised for the additions and alterations would be matched to the existing. The materials originally used are still available, while matching the exact colours and textures would be difficult but not impossible. The laboratory building, and the buildings in general that make up the AECI complex at 323 Chamberlain Road are not listed buildings. The proposed additions and alterations are specifically to a building that is 19 years old in its current form . While the interventions proposed could be reversible, the purpose of the building when considered holistically with the purpose of the property would be prone to changing and evolving as technology improves and health and safety regulations become stricter. The aesthetics of the proposed additions and alterations to the building, especially when viewed from the street can be considered as non-significant as the major change would be the building becoming 17% longer and aligned to the existing streetscape which is industrial in nature . The existing building has vertically aligned, large diameter extraction ducts attached to the façade. These mechanical systems are to remain and is the key factor that make the building industrial. If not for these ducts, the building could be mistaken for the office component of the factory. It must be noted that the purpose of the AECI complex is factory to produce speciality chemicals. The Laboratory, while a small percentage of the complex, forms a significant aspect of the factory. The needs of the customers, technology and health and safety considerations are constantly evolving. It is therefore necessary and in fact desirable to revisit the design and function of the building and change these to evolve with the forth industrial revolution. It also must be considered that there would not be any loss to architectural conservation, in terms of the proposed additions and alterations. ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE: The building can be considered of an industrial nature of the modern period constructed from 1976 to 2003 and of an Urban Architectural Style. There is insignificant design quality and technology which is not changing with the proposal. The massing and scale of the proposal can be considered of minimal impact as the length of the building, viewed from the street grows from 23m to 27m. That is a 17% increase. The height of the building remains at two storeys. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE: From our research and knowledge of this building and site, there appears to be no significance associated with any event, person or group. The historical context of the building is post World War 2 and the industrialization of South Africa due to sanctions, bearing in mind that the last significant addition to the building was done in 2003, that is 19 years ago in a democratic South Africa. ENVIRONMENTALSIGNIFICANCE: The building location is in an existing Industrial zone comprising of large industrial buildings with a distinct lack of natural or geographical features for preservation. SOCIAL AND / OR SPRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE: The buildings location has no significance for any religious group. The site and the buildings were never used as social centres or a gathering point since at least 1968. TECHNOLOGICAL OR SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The building cannot be seen as innovative as the design is aligned to the common building practice of the era. There was no use of new materials or construction processes. The material used in the construction are still available. INTANGIBLE SIGNIFICANCE: To our best knowledge there appears to be no cultural, tradition, oral history or ritual that reference the site.