427
Honourable C. P. CHATER,
DEAR SIR,
( 14 )
Enclosure B.
HONGKONG, 15th September, 1887.
In accordance with the invitation conveyed in your letter of the 3rd instant, we beg to point out that the cutting off of the reclamation, and the termination of the proposed new praya road immediately opposite to Marine Lot No. 188 is calcu- lated, by interrupting the sweep of the tides, to cause a vast increase of the same deposit from the Shektongtsui Nullah at this point.
The owner of Marine Lot No. 188 is precluded from the extension of his area, whilst the owner of Marine Lot No. 183 will have his Lot inextricably encumbered with sand deposit.
This will in a short time become really formidable, spreading westward, and shallowing the water in point of Marine Lots Nos. 183 to 177 and Marine Lot No. 126, which have only just now, at great cost, been reclaimed.
Moreover the new Praya Roadway is made to terminate in a most awkward and unsightly manner, with a godown wall at right angles across its face, a defect which has not failed to attract the attention of every one on examining the plan.
By continuing the reclamation but seventy-five feet further and carrying out the nullah sewer into deep water all these difficulties will be removed. The owner of Marine Lot No. 188 can then share in the extension. Marine Lots Nos. 183 to 126 will be relieved from the danger which threatens their frontages, whilst the new Praya Road will be connected directly in line with a street of equal width, forming, for the meantime, a most appropriate termination of this work to the West.
We are, Dear Sir,
( 15 )
In every new house that may be erected of more than one story in height, the Government requires a back yard of at least 15 feet in width, this appears to us to be a waste of valuable ground entirely uncalled for; without losing sight of the fact that a back yard is absolutely necessary from a sanitary point of view, still a minimum of 15 feet would entail an unnecessary waste of ground and an enormous loss on the land-owner against which we must most forcibly protest.
Paragraph IX in the letter from the Government does not mention the actual breadth of ground required for the new streets, but we are informed that it is the intention to reserve 100 feet for the New Praya and for the purpose of widening the present Praya.
This, we are of opinion is excessive and would suggest that 80 feet-to be apportioned between the two streets as the Government may deem fit-will be amply sufficient.
We must also protest against the proposed new Crown rent of $200 per quarter acre, inasmuch as Crown rents have hitherto always varied according to the position of the plot of ground, and we would suggest that this principle be adhered to and the same rate charged per quarter acre, as is at present charged for the ground immediately in rear of the proposed reclamation, we can only regard any increase in the rate as a premium on the new ground, which the Government pointedly states it does not intend to levy.
We beg to remain,
Sir.
Yours faithfully,
DAVID SASSOON, SONS & Co.
per J. A. Musely.
Yours faithfully,
SHARP & Co., Owners of Marine Lots Nos. 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182.
iny
I consider the foregoing quite correct, and that the value of Marine Lot No. 183 would be very greatly depreciated by the termination of the Praya Road opposite Marine Lot No. 188. The danger of silting up my frontage by sand deposit would be removed were the extension carried only 75 feet further West, so as to admit of the nullah sewer being carried out into deep water, and thereby to reach the sweep of the tides.
(IP CHING CHUNE) ★★ J
Owner of Marine Lot No. 183.
A plan of the proposed alteration is unnexed.
Enclosure C.
To the Honourable C. P. CHATER, M.L.C.,
SIR,
HONGKONG, 3rd September, 1887.
Adverting to your correspondence with the Colonial Government upon the new reclamation scheme and to your request that the marine lot-owners should furnish you with any objections to the scheme or suggestions as to its improvement, we beg to lay before you the following points which to our minds require modi- fication, and which we feel sure will otherwise cause opposition, not only from ourselves, but from many other marine lot-owners to what can otherwise only be regarded as a scelteme tending to the great improvement of this Colony.
Honourable C. P. CHATER,
SIR,
Enclosure D.
HONGKONG, 9th September, 1887.
We are in receipt of your Circular of 3rd instant, with reference to the Recla- mation of the foreshore, accompanied by copy of your letter of 13th July to the Acting Colonial Secretary and copy of his reply of 11th August on the same subject.
We are willing to carry out the conditions of the scheme, but not before knowing how you propose to divide the two pieces of ground in front of marine Lot No. 7, which we have seen in the Plan of 6th August at the City Hall.
As regards the outer one we see no difficulty in dividing it in proportion to the area of the three present sections in the said marine lot No. 7, by running on it lines, from North to South, parallel with those already marked in the Plan to the eastward contiguous to the numbers 34, 34 and 33.
But as regards the inner and triangular portion we shall feel obliged by your opinion on the subject.
We are, Sir,
Your obedient Servants, VIRGINIA A. F. Đ» ROZARIO,
J. M. E. MACHADO, Executors of the Estate of M. C. do Rozario,