No_6_April_1961 — Page 39

WITH MY

TONGUE IN MY CHEEK

By

PROFESSOR :- W.G. GREGORY,

NOO

B. ARCH.. A.R.I.B.A.

00 many buildings in Hong Kong bear the stamp of having been designed literally in accordance with the Buildings Ordinance.

At one time in the United King- dom certain types of buildings were justifiably criticised when referred to as "Bylaw Buildings" and this term could be quite widely applied to-day in Hong Kong.

Too often the minimum require- ment of the building regulations. which are only intended to ensure the safety (in the widest meaning of the word) of the occupants and structure of a building. is taken as a design guide. Thus, for example the minimum permitted widths of treads and heights of risers of staircases, 9 ins, and 7 ins. respec- tively, are taken as gospel, irrespec- tive of the style or function of the staircase.

Steps of these dimensions may be considered as undesirable even for service staircases, giving an uncom. fortable "going." Similarly, the one- tenth of the floor area rule, for lighting rooms, is again minimum and often inadequate for certain types of room and yet often this would appear to be used as the criterion for the fenestration design of a building.

The results of thinking in terms of merely satisfying regulations when designing cannot be termed architec- ture. Architecture cannot be evolved as easily as this. Even if one regards architecture as being nothing more than efficient building, this will not achieved by these means,

and cer- tainly not, if one believes that archi- tecture is also required to be aesthe- tically satisfying as well as efficient.

The squeezing out of every cubic inch of volume, every square inch

THE HONG KONG & FAR EAST BUILDER

"Let's be provoking!" No! it is not a teenger going to a party, who speaks, but one who treads the sidewalks of Hong Kong and seeing the building that is going on around him, asks himself "Whither goest thou and thy fellow architects, can'st thou in fact see the product of the forest as well as the forest from which it comes?"

The purpose of this series of articles, if the Editor permits them to appear, is to be provoking, by voicing comments on the whole field of building personal comments and those comments heard around us, and one voices them with one's tongue in one's cheek, perhaps not always altogether believing them to be true, but perhaps containing the proverbial grain of truth that emphasis or over-emphasis will cause us, it is hoped, to pause and think, and decide whether or not our ideas, views and opinions, are right and valid. Whilst it may appear that the tenor of these remarks is engendered by Hong Kong conditions-"Where the cap fits..

of site coverage and every inch of height from the permissible, apart from not producing architecture. does not produce good functional space, and it is only the current shortage of space generally, that forces tenants to rent space, of which a certain part is unusable, or cannot be efficiently used. Furthermore, it is often evident that an attempt to obtain maximum floor area results in an undue proportion of circula- tion space, the one cancelling the other.

Potential developers and their architect-advisors could well look to the future, when space, particularly office space, will not be at such a high premium, when high rents will only in buildings where the quality can be fully used, and what is more, only in building, where the quality of design will given prestige value.

In the city of New York, the Lever and Seagram buildings have show that the sacrifice of some of the permissible bulk to the good design of the building with space around them, so that they can be seen, has resulted not only in build- ings of high prestige value to the tenants, and therefore much sought after for space, but also buildings very efficient and economic in use and construction.

The contrived rather than logical plans, which working within the maximum envelope evolve, lose much functional quality.

It is a salutary (or not so salutary) excursion, to probe the inmost parts of some so-called modern buildings in Hong Kong. We are used to dirty, dark and decrepit back-stair and lavatory accommodation in the old buildings, but investigation into the same regions of buildings only a matter of two or three years old,

VOLUME 15. NUMBER 6

will often find the same atmosphere

and what an impression it must have on a visitor wishing to do business with a firm tenanted there, if he finds the lift not working or is too busy to wait five minutes and de- cides to try the stairs. After groping in semidarkness, due to dirt encrust- ed minimum building regulation window opening. and falling over dustbins, and piles of rubbish and breathing the fetid air, he arrives at his destination is he in any mood to conduct business?

Whose fault is this? No. not entirely the landlord's. He may not be very much concerned with main- tenance. but unless the architect designs his buildings to overcome such defects, with the best will in the world the landlord cannot efficiently service his building.

There is more to the cake than eating it, and if the cake is made only out of ingredients supplied by the Buildings Ordinance, it will not only be unpalatable but indigestible.

It is not suggested for a moment that the building regulations should not be adhered to, but that they be considered only as one of the many factors which require to be synthesis- ed into the design of the building— in no case should they be regarded as the primary controlling element.

There is a further aspect of bylaw building which challenges comment.

Too many authorised architects become imbued with the Building Ordinance, until they cannot think in other terms, so that in the end they are obsessed by it, and when confronted by a building problem. they direct their efforts to seeking a loophole in the Ordinance through which a solution can be found. rather than tackling the problem

(Continued on page 42)

37