BUILDINGS (8)
CONTINUATION.
(b) That all rocklofts used for storing heavy material be also prohibited.
(c) That all buildings or work under the Building Ordinance be carried out under the superintendence of a European architect.
(d) That the provisions of Section 72 of the Building Ordinance which cast upon the Director of Public Works the responsibility and duty of approving only of such alterations and additions to old work or buildings as will render the building, with the said alterations and additions absolutely safe, be carried strictly into effect.
(e) That the provisions of section 75 of the Building Ordinance, which casts upon the Director of Public Works or officers deputed by him, the imperative duty of entering inspecting and surveying every building work during its progress, for securing the due observance of the provisions of this Ordinance, be carried strictly into effect.
(f) That the staff of the Public Works Department at present employed to carry out the provisions of the Building Ordinance is insufficient, and ought to be increased without delay.
Subsequently, the architect who had prepared the plans was fined $105.
In a scathing article on the whole business, published on October 22, 1901, the Hongkong Telegraph had this to say: The second inquiry will stand for all time as disclosing the rottenest state of things imaginable and when every one expected a wholesale charge of manslaughter, all that followed was a whitewashing of the P. W. D. Matters were not allowed to rest here, for a scapegoat had to be found and one was unearthed in the person of a well-known and highly esteemed architect. He was fined $105, for contravention of an Ordinance that had never been put into force, for omitting to do what has not been done for years, and for following the law of custom as it is followed by every architect in town.
At a later date, the owner of Nos 32 and 34 Cochrane Street, and the contractor responsible for the additions were fined $500 and $450 respectively on charges of contravening the Building Ordinance.
Subsequently, thanks to the efforts of that champion of the public interests, the Hon. Mr. T. H. Whitehead, the Building Ordinance was amended and many of the old evils remedied. The wages of P. W. D. inspectors were raised and greater supervision exercised from that time forward.
BUILDINGS ( 8 )
CONTINUATION.
(b) That all rocklofts used for storing heavy material be also prohibited.
(c) That all buildings or work under the Building Ordinance be carried out under the superintendente of a European architect.
(d) That the provisions of Section 72 of the Building Ordinance which cast upon the Director of Public Works the responsibility and duty of approving only of such alterations and additions to old work or buildings as will render the building, with the said alterations and additions absolutely safe, be carried strictly into effect.
(e) That the provisions of section 75 of the Building Ordinance, which casts upon the Director of Public Works or officers deputed by him, the imperative duty of entering inspecting and surveying every building work during its progress, for securing the due observance of the provisions of this Ordinancep be carried strictly ito effect.
(f) That the staff of the Public Works Department a present employed to carry out the provisions of the Juilding Ordinance is insufficient, and ought to be Increased without delay.
Subsequently, the architect who had prepared the plans was fined $105.
In a scathing article on the whole business, pu- blished on October 22, 1901, the Hongkong Telegraph lad this to say : The second inquiry will stand for all time as disclosing the rottenest state things ima- inable and when every one expected a wholesale charge of manslaughter, all that followed was a whitewashing of the P. W. D. Matters were not allowed to rest here, for a scapegoat had to be found and one was unearthed in the person of a well-known and highly esteemed architect. He was fined $105, for contravention of an Ordinance that had never been put into force, for omitting to do what has not been done for years, and for following the law of custom as it is flowed by every architect in town.
At a later date, the owner of Nos 32 and 34 Cochrane Street, and the contractor responsible for the additions were fined £500 and $450 respectively on charges of contravening the Building Ordinance.
Subsequently, thanks to the efforts of that champion of the public interests, the Hon. Mr. T. H. Whitehead, the Building Ordinance was amended and many of the old evils remedied. The wages of P. W. D. inspectors were raised and greater supervision exercised from that time forward.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.