For nearly 140 years, Dhaka Club’s historic Main Lounge has stood as one of the capital’s most recognisable social landmarks, a building tied closely to the city’s institutional, civic and social memory.

But beyond the structure's heritage value, growing safety concerns now raise a difficult question: how long can preservation wait when visible structural distress has already been documented?

A preliminary visual structural condition assessment of the club’s Main Lounge Building and Bar Area has identified corrosion of steel members, cracks in slabs and beams, cracks in load-bearing walls, moisture intrusion, column irregularities and signs of possible past alterations.

The assessment carried out by an expert team appointed by the club describes the building’s overall structural condition as “very vulnerable” and mentioned that because only a few accessible areas were inspected, the actual condition may be more severe than the preliminary findings suggest.

It also states the structure is “very vulnerable during an earthquake” and recommends restricting access to heavily distressed zones while immediately commissioning a full Detailed Engineering Assessment, or DEA, to determine the true extent of the risk.

The building at the centre of the concern is the “Main Lounge”, the historic heart of Dhaka Club.

Tanvir Ahmed, BOD in charge of Sports at Dhaka Club, said the club premises include six buildings: the Main Lounge, Samsung H Building, Royal Bengal Dining, Wellness Building, Guest House and Tennis Lounge shade.

“The main concern is the main lounge rooftop,” he said.

Dhaka Club President Shameem Hossain also identified the Main Lounge as the area requiring urgent attention.

He described it as “the Main Lounge, which has become pretty dilapidated and needs immediate intervention, or a fateful incident may occur.”

He added, “The other buildings are okay structurally, but the lounge building is not. Rain seeping in from many points. Almost 140 years old and has been repaired many times over the years.”

He said the roof was inspected in 1986 by architect and structural engineer Shahidullah, who inspected and proposed immediate work in 1986 and did a minor repair and said it would be good enough for 10 years.

“40 years have since passed yet no action has been taken,” Hossain said.

That timeline now sits at the centre of the debate. If the 1986 intervention was intended as a short-term measure, the structure has outlived that temporary protection by almost four decades. During that time, the building has continued to serve members, staff and visitors.

The preliminary assessment appears to support those concerns.

Its visual findings repeatedly point to corrosion of steel members and slab reinforcement, cracking in slabs and beam joints, cracks near load-bearing walls and moisture-related deterioration.

The report does not call for immediate demolition. Instead, it calls for a deeper engineering investigation.

Its recommendation is clear: distressed areas should be cordoned off to protect occupants, and a full DEA should be commissioned immediately because the preliminary inspection was limited. Only such an assessment can determine the true extent of structural vulnerability and ensure public safety.

According to club officials, the current Executive Committee attempted to take the issue to members at an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM), seeking approval for renovation and restoration while preserving the building’s heritage. But that process has stalled.

Hossain said the committee wanted to “restore the building keeping the heritage intact” but “few (8 members) went to the court to stop the EGM.”

He described the EGM as “the rightful forum to discuss and decide on action.”

He also said, “It is in record that the Attorney General himself stood at the court, which is not a state issue. A very dubious reason.”

No case documents or detailed arguments from the opposing side were available from the materials reviewed for this article.

The legal pause has left the future of the building uncertain at a time when the engineering assessment has already urged immediate further investigation.

Dhaka Club’s Main Lounge is not an abandoned relic. It remains part of an active institution, used by members, guests and employees.

That makes the issue more than a debate over brick, concrete and steel. It is also about the responsibility owed to those who continue to use the space.

The real challenge is not whether heritage should be saved or safety should be prioritised. The question is whether both can be addressed before delay itself becomes the greatest risk.

Preserving the Main Lounge would mean protecting a piece of Dhaka’s institutional history while ensuring that people are not exposed to avoidable danger.

Until a full engineering assessment is carried out and a clear decision is made, the fate of Dhaka Club’s historic Main Lounge remains suspended between memory, law and risk.