|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
| Saved from Demolition |
|
Published:
The Star / Focus |
|
Date:
December 24, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
Recent history suggests that Bok House could have been saved. Rashvinjeet
S. Bedi looks at a few past instances where heritage buildings that were
marked for demolition escaped being torn down.
Most tourists to Kuala Lumpur will very likely take a walk from the KL Tower
to KLCC. Interspersed between these two mega structures are old but beautiful
buildings such as the Malaysian Tourist Centre and the Pakistani High Commission.
And, until recently, Bok House.
According to Ahmad Najib Ariffin, a freelance heritage writer, researcher and
tourist guide, old buildings fascinate tourists.
"Whenever we passed by Bok House, people said it looked interesting. Although
it was abandoned, I could stand there regaling them with a story about the
house for 10 minutes. I used to end my story by saying that I hoped it would
be restored one day. Now, I can't say there used to be a house here.
"Tourist brochures always cite our cities as having a mix of the old and new.
It is true to a certain extent but becoming less and less true. I am not
against new building; I am against destroying the old in chasing the new,"
said Ahmad.
Chua Cheng Bok, who co-founded a business in 1899 and built it up into a
successful enterprise that came to be known as Cycle & Carriage, commenced
construction of Bok House in Ampang Road in 1926 and the building was
completed in three years
Seventy-seven years later, Bok House was torn down by KL City Hall on Dec15,
following a study by the Culture, Arts and Heritage Ministry on the safety
of the building which found severe deterioration of its structure.
Precedents have shown that Bok House could still be standing. For instrance,
the neo-classical Loke Hall, which houses the Architects Association of
Malaysia (PAM), was saved from near demolition.
Built by Loke Chow Kit in 1907, Loke Hall was converted to the Peninsular
Hotel before it was taken over by PAM in 1973.
In February 1981, the estate of Alan Loke gave notice to PAM to vacate the
premises as it was sold to Intan Development Sdn Bhd for new development.
According to former PAM president Hajeedar Abdul Rahman, public outcry caught
the Government's attention on the importance of preserving heritage buildings
KL City Hall, then led by Mayor Tan Sri Elyas Omar, acquired the building
from the developers and transferred their development rights to another
side. This transfer of rights was based on the 1984 KL Structure Plan,
which gave importance to the preservation of places and structures that
have historical and architectural significance.
The KL Structure plan also recommended incentives such as a payback scheme
and tax reductions for owners of these buildings.
"We (PAM) were handed responsibility as custodians of the building,' said Hajeedar
Instead of paying rent, PAM was responsible for restoration and upkeep
of the building. And it has not come cheap for PAM whose members had to raise funds.
In 1983, almost RM285,000 was spent to repair the roof that was in danger
of collapsing. In the mid-1990s, the bill to repair a termite-infested
timber floor came up to RM 800,000.
There was also the proposed demotion of the Central Market. Once used as wet
market, it was deemed to no longer serve any purpose because three new markets
were built in the outlying residential suburbs.
In 1983, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) acquired Central Market with
plans to develop the fifth phase of Dayabumi, which would have consisted of
high-rise offices, a hotel and shops. The development was scrapped in 1985
due to a glut office space in the city.
Instead, the developer proposed to transform Central Market into a cultural market.
Under project coordinator Chen Voon Fee, a second level was added to the art
deco-styled Central Market building, which was dubbed "KL's biggest room".
Taking a mere 10 months to restore (it reopened in April 1986), final
construction costs stood at RM8.5mil
"The market was saved and salvaged through the concept of adaptive reuse,"
said Hajeerdar
This concept can be seen at the Asian Heritage Row along Jalan Doraisamy in
Kuala Lumpur. The Asian Heritage Row consists of pre-war shophouses that have
been converted into restaurants and bars. Although purists question the intrinsic
value, William Ng who was behind the Row says that something is better than nothing.
"Internally it may have lost its intrinsic value but has anyone done better?
At least we preserved something. Others have knocked everything down or left
things in derelict condition. We tried to at least keep the façade and the
consistency of its look.
"It is difficult, if not impossible, to find replacements for the original
materials. Also, the buildings did not have the modern amenities and layout
necessary for a different type of business or usage," he said.
Therefore, Ng said there was no choice but to knock down walls and remove
floors. Steel reinforces beams and structure had to be installed to strengthen
the building to accommodate hundreds of customers at one time.
So what was different about Bok House?
While owners had the final say, the ministry study suggested that Bok House
was structurally unsound. Renowned architect Laurence Loh believes it could
have been saved.
"There are no difficulties in preservation or conservation work. You have to
be trained, knowledgeable and well-versed with the methodology," said Loh who
was in charge to restoring the Cheong Fatt Tze Mansion in Penang, winner of
Unesco's Asia-Pacific Heritage 2000 Award for conservation.
"I have worked on the most dilapidated buildings. I have resurrected Suffolk
House in Penang, which was in ruin. I restored the Cheong Fatt Tze Mansion
which had hundreds of structural cracks caused by hammer-driven pilling next
door. Bok House is a relatively younger building erected out of hardier
material," he said.
"The question is, who did the assessment? The situation is like a person
who changes his car because the ashtray is full," he said
PAM president Dr Tan Loke Mun says the Government could give incentives to
corporations to buy these heritage buildings as is done in Australia.
"The corporations would get their name on it and can build up a nice piece
of art. They could use it for advertising and corporate imaging," he said.
|
| |
|
