With a bang, the highest building by the West Lake in east
China's Zhejiang Province was blown up on January 6.
Its demolition has renewed a heated debate criticizing government
for shortsighted and inefficient city planning.
The demolished 22-story building, towering at 67 meters high and
with a floor area of 21,100 square meters, was the major teaching
building in Zhejiang University. It cost 20 million yuan (US$2.57
million) and was designed to last 100 years, but only served for 13
years before its ignominious and dusty end.
According to its designer, the building load stood at 400 kg per
square meter, far beyond the state standard that governs that a
teaching building should reach 200 kg per square meter.
Local people said they had opposed the construction of the
teaching building 13 years ago, fearing that the block, standing at
500 meters from the West Lake, would affect the scenic environment.
However, they were ignored.
The teaching building is not the only "short-lived" building in
China. On September 16, 2001, a 20-story building in Beijing was
detonated. It was built in 1986 with high earthquake resistance
capability. On August 20, 2005, a 16-story building was torn down
in Yongchuan County, Chongqing Municipality, having only stood
for five years. A day after the demolition of the teaching
building, a 15-year-old landmark building in Shandong Province was also demolished.
According to the Code for Design of Civil Buildings issued by
the Ministry of Construction, tall buildings should be designed to
last 100 years, with others to last for 50 to 100 years. However,
most demolished buildings in China served on average for less than
20 years.
An anonymous source said that the land of the teaching building
had been sold for as much as 2.46 billion yuan (US$315.7 million).
The seller has to deliver the land before the end of this
month.
"Now the building has been blown up after only 13 years'
service. It's a great waste of money," China Youth Daily
quoted a local man as saying. "These 'short-lived' buildings have
caused great financial loss and had a negative impact on the
environment. This kind of blunder should not be repeated in the
future."
(China.org.cn by Wu Nanlan, January 11, 2007)