Terraces in Hong Kong | Gwulo: Old Hong Kong

Terraces in Hong Kong

Primary tabs

Submitted by johnwong on Wed, 2017-05-24 09:58

I noticed that there are so many places are named as "Terrace" in Hong Kong, many of them were residential areas since they exist, anybody know why the old generation liked constructing terraces, like a coupla storeys up the ground, as their living places?

In today's viewpoint, when a flat is purchased, renovation is to be done and furniture is to be ordered, the transportation charge (include coolie charges) is a lot if you bought a place that the only way to get access to is staircases.  Anyone has similar experience?

Forum: 
General
Tags: 
Terrace
  • Log in or register to post comments

Submitted by johnwong on Wed, 2017-05-24 17:59.

Fung Fai Terrace in 1952

https://s17.postimg.org/48he3u9xr/scan0001.jpg

downloaded from the below blog:
http://walterchanboston.blogspot.hk/2009/08/blog-post.html

Submitted by philk on Wed, 2017-05-24 19:09.

surely most of the terraces are a product of the natural environment and the need to create flat space for construction on what was largely sloped land? Or am i misunderstanding your question?

Submitted by johnwong on Thu, 2017-05-25 10:12.

Thanks for your reply.

I was wondering why the government/developer did not level the relatively small slopes before erecting buildings on them.  I believe there were sufficient ability to do so even back in some 100 years ago.  Nothing serious but just curious actually.

Submitted by tngan on Thu, 2017-05-25 13:50.

Hi There,

Early colonial government tend to put up land sales (crown lease) for an extended period of time and those sold plots were then developed by the private sector.  It was probably why the Government has very little to do with the terraces you mentioned.

Thanks & Best Regards,

T

Submitted by breskvar on Thu, 2017-05-25 16:24.

Not at all sure about what I am saying here, but I am of the view that construction methods and technologies at the time probably limited the ways in which buildings on these sloped lots can be built.  Maybe it was just cheaper not to completely level the land (and surroundings), so nice, flat approaches between floors could not be accomodated.
 

breskvar

Submitted by David on Sun, 2017-05-28 11:28.

Hi John,

So if we take Fung Fai Terrace as an example, are you asking why didn't they cut away the site down to the level of Village Road, so there would be easy, flat access from the road?

Here's an early view of the site:

Fung Fai Terrace
Fung Fai Terrace, by Admin

I can guess at a couple of possible reasons. First though it was technically possible to dig away the volume of earth and rock in the two tiers shown above, it would have been an expensive operation. Not just the excavation of the rock, but what do you do with it afterwards? Reclamation could use it, but it was an expensive operation to move it - at Morrison Hill they had to build a railway to move the earth & rock from the hill out to the reclamation area.

The other is that I think the terraces were a more attractive place to live. If the full area above was excavated, both sections of Fung Fai Terrace and the buildings on the opposite side of Village Road would be at the same level. But with the terraces the front section is above Village Road, and the rear section is above the buildings on the front terrace. That way both the upper and lower sections of Fung Fai terrace get more light and breeze.

Regards, David