257
Hongkong, 9th March, 1906.
The Hon. W. CHATHAM,
Sir,
Director of Public Works,
Kowloon Farm Lots Nos. 3 and 4.
We have your letter No. 333 of 6th instant, re the above. Before laying it before our clients we call your attention to what appears to be an inaccuracy in the plan which accompanies it.
You will note that the portion of K. F. L. No. 3 proposed to be resumed is figured as having an area of 0.26 acres (or about 1133 feet super): whereas according to the scale to which the plan is drawn it would appear to contain about 27,000 feet super. Kindly correct us if we are in error, or in the other event have the plan amended and returned to us.
We are,
Yours faithfully,
(Sd.) DENISON RAM & GIBBS.
N°5
No. 361.
Public Works Department,
Hongkong, 12th March, 1906.
Gentlemen,
Kowloon Farm Lots Nos. 3 and 4.
In reply to your letter of 9th instant, the area of Kowloon Farm Lot 3 tinted pink on tracing should have been marked as .795 acre. This has been rectified and I now return the tracing to you.
I have the honour to be,
Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
(Sd.) W. CHATHAM,
Director of Public Works.
Messrs. DENISON RAM & GIBBS.
N° 6
No. 674.
Public Works Department,
Hongkong, 7th May, 1906.
Gentlemen,
K. F. L. 4 and R. P. of K. F. L. 3.
With reference to my letter, No. 333, of the 6th March last, I beg to inform you that, unless I receive a reply by the 15th instant, I will advise the Government to take proceedings under the Crown Lease or under the Crown Lands Resumption Ordinance, as may be considered most expedient,
I have the honour to be,
Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
(Sd.) W. CHATHAM,
Director of Public Works.
Messrs. DENISON RAM & GIBBS.
N° 7
The Hon. W. CHATHAM,
Sir,
Director of Public Works.
Hongkong, 8th May 1906.
Kowloon F. L. No. 3 R. P. and K. F. L. No. 4.
We are in receipt of your letter No. 674 of 7th inst. calling our attention to your previous letter No. 333 of 6th March 1906; which has remained unanswered, and to which we now reply seriatim as follows :-
1. We thank you for the tracing showing the area affected.
2. (a). Our clients understand that the strip of land proposed to be resumed is wanted for the new Kowloon railway, and they think it will not be advisable to convert the adjacent land into building lots. They request therefore that they may be compensated by receiving land in exchange for the land resumed—a course which has been followed, as we believe, in the case of an adjoining owner i.e. the Hongkong Hotel Co.
(b). Our clients state that the house which it is proposed to remove cost $4,000 at least, and they think it reasonable that they should be paid at least $4,000 for its removal.
(c). We understand that over $1,000 has been expended on the fruit trees, and we request therefore that this sum may be refunded in full.
3. Our clients are anxious to meet the wishes of the Government in the matter of surrendering the area required; but request that compensation to them may be made as asked for in para 2 (a) of this letter.
4. Our clients admit having erected buildings on the lot; plans for which have however in most cases been submitted to the Government, and permits been obtained—some of which are now before us. We are informed also that Rates have been levied on these buildings for many years.