View report page

68
No. 8a, Earl Street Ceilings of stables, and floors of living rooms
(April, 1911) reconstructed and rendered air-tight. The
stable ventilators (passing through rooms)
properly insulated; windows and roofs
repaired; drains and water closet reconstructed.
The premises cleansed and
renovated throughout.
No. 15, Little Church Street Obstructive roof, etc., removed from rear of
(February, 1911) the premises. The w.c., washing copper,
and party wall to staircase reconstructed.
The premises renovated and cleansed
throughout.
Nos. 18 and 20, Huntsworth Mews Premises (in each case) partially reconstructed
at back, so as to provide additional light
and ventilation. Window area to all back
rooms increased. The drains and w.c.'s
reconstructed. Premises cleansed and
renovated throughout.
The number of premises reported to the Public Health Committee for closure as
unfit for human habitation under Section 17 of the Housing, Town Planning, &c.,
Act, 1909, was five.
In five cases closing orders were made. Of these four were second orders, the
first (served in 1910) having been found to be void on account of one or other of
the informalities referred to in the circular letter of the Local Government Board
of 8th September, 1911.
In the case of 22 Burne Street, two closing orders were made during 1911. The
informality, viz., the omission to serve the order on one of the owners, not being
discovered till the making of the demolition order came up for consideration.
In the case of 1, 7 and 8 Cranmore Place, the demolition orders had actually
been served before attention was directed to the fact that the existence of another
owner had been overlooked.
The number of demolition orders served and complied with was two, viz., with
regard to the cottages at the rear of 23 and 24 Burne Street. The improvements
resulting from the demolition of these structures are, as was expected, most striking.
The closing order made on 18th November, 1910, with respect to 12, Mitcham
Street, was withdrawn, after certain alterations and improvements had been made.
In no case was an appeal made against any order of the Local Authority.
The visiting sub-committee of the Public Health Committee visited all premises
reported by the Medical Officer of Health, and their advice and assistance in these
most difficult cases was of the greatest value.
Full particulars with regard to the premises reported and represented are given
in the following table:—