|
Minutes of Meeting
Board Minutes
AAB/5/2005-06
ANTIQUITIES ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION OF THE 122ND MEETING HELD ON
TUESDAY 29 NOVEMBER 2005 AT 4:15 P.M.
IN CONFERENCE ROOM, HERITAGE DISCOVERY CENTRE
KOWLOON PARK, HAIPHONG ROAD, TSIM SHA TSUI, KOWLOON
| Present:
| Mr Edward Ho, SBS, JP (Chairman)
Dr Chan Wai-kwan, JP
Mr Patrick Fung Pak-tung, SC
Mr Daniel Heung Cheuk-kei, SBS, JP
Mr James Hong Shu-kin
Mr Kwong Hoi-ying
Mr Billy Lam Chung-lun, SBS, JP
The Hon Patrick Lau Sau-shing, SBS, JP
Prof Bernard Lim Wan-fung
Mr Ng Yat-cheung, JP
Dr LindaTsui Yee-wan
Ir Dr Greg Wong Chak-yan, JP
Miss Sylvia Yau Siu-fee, JP
Ms Lisa Yip Sau-wah
Ms Heidi Kwok (Secretary)
Senior Executive Officer (Antiquities and Monuments)
Leisure and Cultural Services Department
|
| Absent with Apologies: |
Dr Chan Man-hung, JP
Prof Leslie Chen Hung-chi
Prof Kwok Siu-tong
Prof Peter Lam Yip-keung
Ms Paddy Lui Wai-yu, JP
Mr Almon Poon Chin-hung, JP
Prof Yeung Kin-fong
|
| In Attendance: |
Home Affairs Bureau
Mr Peter Kwok
Principal Assistant Secretary (Culture)2
Ms Elsa Wong
Chief Executive Officer (Heritage)
Miss Susanna Siu
Chief Curator (Heritage)
Leisure and Cultural Services Department
Mr Chung Ling-hoi, JP
Deputy Director (Culture)
Mr Gerard Tsang
Assistant Director (Heritage and Museums)
Dr Louis Ng
Executive Secretary (Antiquities and Monuments)
Mrs Ada Yau
Curator (Education and Publicity)
Ms Cissy Ho
Curator (Historical Buildings)
Mr Kevin Sun
Curator (Archaeology)
Mr Richie Lam
Senior Manager (Antiquities and Monuments)
Mrs June Tong
Principal Marketing Coordinator (Heritage and Museums)
Miss Addy Wong
Senior Marketing Coordinator (Heritage and Museums)
Ms Yvonne Chan
Executive Officer I (Antiquities and Monuments)
Planning Department
Mr Anthony Kwan
Assistant Director/Metro and Urban Renewal
Architectural Services Department
Mr S L Lam
Senior Property Services Manager/Eastern and Antiquities
|
| Opening Remarks | Action |
| The Chairman opened the meeting at 4:15 p.m. |
| Former Police Married Quarters Site at Hollywood Road (former Central School Site)
|
Presentation Session
| 2. |
Before proceeding to the agenda,
the Chairman and Dr Louis Ng took the opportunity to update
Members on the recent media coverage and public concern about the Site and
to clarify some misleading information presented in the press. The
following points were highlighted and additional information on the Site
was tabled at the meeting for Members' reference: |
| (a) |
Dr Sun Yat-sen was educated at the Gough
Street premises of Central School from 1884 to 1886. By the time the
school moved from Gough Street to Hollywood Road, he had already left the
school; |
| (b) |
in light of (a) above, the former school
premises of Central School at Hollywood Road was not directly associated
with Dr Sun. It had little historical significance as far as its
association with Dr Sun was concerned; |
| (c) |
the school building of the former Central
School at Hollywood Road was demolished in 1951. Relics of the School Site
were only confined to the retaining walls surrounding the Site and two
flights of steps along Hollywood Road and Staunton Street. The heritage
value of the relics was not so significant as to warrant preservation
under the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance; |
| (d) |
in response to community concern, the AMO had
proposed to Lands Department (Lands D) to include in the proposed land
sale conditions the preservation of the existing stone wall along Shing
Wong Street and a large portion of the retaining wall along Hollywood Road
together with the trees growing on them in order to preserve the
historical landscape of the Site; |
| (e) |
the authenticity of the retaining walls
fronting Staunton Street and Aberdeen Street had been undermined by
alterations over the years; and |
| (f) |
the Board was informed of the case at its
meeting on 5 July 2005 and was in support of AMO's assessment of the
heritage value of the stone walls as well as the preservation
proposal. |
Discussion Session
| 3. |
Prof Bernard Lim declared
interest as a member of the Metro Planning Committee of Town Planning
Board (TPB), which at its meeting of 25 November 2005 decided not to
approve an application to rezone the Site from 'Residential (Group A)'
(R(A)) to 'Government, Institution or Community' (G/IC) and requested that
a planning brief for the Site be prepared by Plan D to address the
applicants' concern about the needs to preserve the cultural heritage and
historical features of the Site.
Major comments and views expressed
were as follows: |
| (a) |
irrespective of whether the former Central
School site at Hollywood Road was associated with Dr Sun Yat-sen, the
Central School was an important institution in the education history of
Hong Kong. The fact that the retaining walls were the only relics left of
the School site which had survived the course of time and interacted with
community development enhanced their heritage value. The retaining walls
should be preserved unless there were technical difficulties; |
| (b) |
in constructing the Hollywood Road Former
Police Married Quarters in the 1950s, the architect might have seen some
aesthetic merits in and hence preserved the retaining walls on the
boundary of the Site despite making some alterations to them. It was
worthwhile for the AMO to conduct research on the heritage value of the
retaining walls fronting Staunton Street and Aberdeen Street to ascertain
if they should be preserved and restored and to include the relevant terms
in the proposed land sale in response to community call; |
| (c) |
the Board should not advise on whether the
retaining wall at Staunton Street should be preserved or demolished by
simply looking at its present appearance. Expert advice should first be
sought on whether the wall could be reverted to its original state; |
| (d) |
if further research confirmed that the
openings in the retaining wall on Staunton Street had been filled up, it
might not be too difficult to restore the wall to its original state.
However, restoration of the retaining wall would be based on the
conservation principles of authenticity and integrity; |
| (e) |
while noting some aesthetic value of the
retaining walls and the local sentiments attached to them, the Board
should focus on their historical significance in considering their
preservation in order to strike a balance between heritage preservation
and future development of the site and the community; |
| (f) |
while the site had some historical value, it
might not be justified to the extent of giving up redevelopment of the
whole site simply to preserve the retaining walls. As limited work could
be done at Aberdeen Street in view of the narrow passageway and the
secondary entrance, consideration might only be made to restore the
retaining wall fronting Staunton Street, which would however affect the
road widening work; |
| (g) |
preservation of the retaining walls and the
existing trees on Hollywood and Shing Wong Street had already provided a
landmark of the Site. The historical value and feasibility of restoring
the retaining wall on Staunton Street should be carefully assessed prior
to proposing preservation in order not to sacrifice other community needs
such as more greenery and open space, road widening, pedestrian safety,
etc. |
| (h) |
the site served as a good example for
implementing the conservation approach of 'point-line-facet'. As such, the
staircases adjoining the retaining walls on Hollywood Road and Staunton
Street should be retained as well to preserve the integrity of the
retaining walls. By increasing the plot ratio of the site, the architect
could overcome the design constraint posed by the retaining walls;
and |
| (i) |
Members requested for more information on the
original retaining wall fronting Staunton Street and suggested that it be
opened up partly for investigation to further assess its heritage and
architectural values before deciding whether it should be
preserved;
|
| 4. |
The Chairman noted Members'
diverse opinions. In summing up, he concluded that the site had no
historical value as far as its association with Dr Sun Yat-sen was
concerned. Its historical value as the second campus of the Central School
had yet to be ascertained. The retaining walls on Hollywood Road and Shing
Wong Street should be preserved as discussed in an earlier meeting.
However, the historical value and preservation of the boundary walls at
Staunton Street and Aberdeen Street and its impact on redevelopment and
the community had to be carefully assessed. Instead of making a hasty
decision, he suggested calling a special meeting if required for further
consideration of the subject when more information was
available.
|
| 5. |
Dr Louis Ng undertook to
provide more information on the historical significance of Central School;
the feasibility of restoring the original boundary walls fronting Staunton
Street and Aberdeen Street; and the impact of the feasible options on the
community for a thorough discussion at the next meeting. He referred to
the media's recent criticism on AMO and reiterated that the AMO had not
deliberately concealed the relevant information, which had been disclosed
to the AAB in the first instance. The Chairman thanked AMO for
providing the information and assistance in this
subject.
|
| Item 1 |
Presentation by Urban Renewal Authority on WAn Chai Master Thinking
(Board Minutes AAB/4/2005-06) |
Presentation Session
| 6. |
Mr Billy Lam declared
interest in the item as Managing Director of the Urban Renewal Authority
(URA). He gave an introduction on the Wan Chai Master Thinking followed by
a presentation by Mr David Au, Senior Manager, Planning and Development,
URA, highlighting the following aspects: |
| (a) |
conservation and revitalization proposals in
Wan Chai to optimize conservation opportunities for suitable adaptive
re-use and proposal to set up heritage trails to connect the heritages;
and |
| (b) |
though the URA redevelopment projects in Wan
Chai were at different development stages, the Wan Chai Master Thinking
was put forward at this point in time with a view to regenerate Wan Chai
through the '4R' strategy for the benefits of local residents and the
general public at large. |
Discussion Session
| 7. |
Major views expressed and questions
raised by Members were as follows: |
| (a) |
the Board placed high hope in the URA for
conservation of historic buildings. URA had done a good job especially in
the preservation and adaptive re-use of historic buildings in private
hands; |
| (b) |
the Wan Chai Master Thinking seemed more like
a redevelopment plan, which did not necessarily preserve all the old parts
of Wan Chai considering URA's redevelopment projects there. The 'facet'
aspect of the 'point-line-facet' approach could not be felt in the Wan
Chai Master Thinking. Whether the area bounded by Chun Yuen Street and Wan
Chai Road would be regenerated to realize the 'facet' approach; and |
| (c) |
would URA incorporate any traffic network
improvement plan and the provision of underground carpark in areas where
URA projects were concentrated to improve the traffic condition between
Queen's Road East and Johnston Road;
|
| 8. |
In response, Mr Billy Lam
made the following points: |
| (a) |
at present, URA's redevelopment projects had
not extended that far to the south of Queen's Road East. They were
confined to the old parts of Wan Chai, i.e. north of Queen's Road East,
south of Johnston Road, west of Ship Street, and north of Tai Yuen Street
However, there is an access road leading from Stone Nullah Lane to Kennedy
Road. Additional access might also be provided in the future Mega Tower
development; |
| (b) |
through redevelopment and rehabilitation, URA
aimed to conserve historic buildings for adaptive re-use; to retain the
distinctive characteristics of and to revitalize Wan Chai. Apart from
Government, URA was the largest agent in heritage preservation. Unlike
overseas countries like Australia, Malaysia, Singapore where preservation
of historic buildings were governed by a separate building code, URA had
encountered practical difficulties in preserving historic buildings, which
had to comply with the building code for new buildings. It was hoped that
the relevant regulations could be relaxed and new building code for
preservation of historic buildings could be drawn up to facilitate and
encourage adaptive re-use of historic buildings; |
| (c) |
apart from the four redevelopment projects at
hand, URA had no other large-scale redevelopment plan in the old parts of
Wan Chai. If the need arises, some minor redevelopment project may be
carried out near the Chun Yuen Street garden to provide a town square to
improve the traffic there. Nevertheless, residents would be encouraged to
rehabilitate their buildings to preserve the look of the old community.
However, private development within the area such as redevelopment of the
Lung Moon Restaurant (龍門酒樓) was something beyond URA's control; |
| (d) |
the proposed pedestrianisation in the Wan Chai
Master Thinking would compound the traffic problem and increase the demand
for parking spaces. Some parking spaces have been planned in the Lee Tung
Street redevelopment project. The proposal of constructing an underground
carpark in Southorn Playground was reactivated at a recent Wan Chai
District Council (WCDC) meeting. URA would discuss with Plan D on the
feasibility of such proposal with a view to improve traffic and transport
arrangement there; |
| (e) |
in the course of consultation, there was a
proposal to establish a heritage trail to connect all the heritages in Wan
Chai. The proposal was being further considered by the WCDC and other
relevant organizations. Local residents had also given their valuable
views and suggestions on how to revitalize the old parts of Wan Chai to
create commercial opportunities for the preserved historic buildings;
and |
| (f) |
the URA thanked the AMO staff for their close
co-operation and exchange of views on heritage preservation, which had
helped URA in implementing its projects.
|
| 9. |
Dr Louis Ng added that there
was close liaison between AMO and the URA while AAB would be consulted on
the preservation of built heritage. The AMO basically supported the
overall concept of the Wan Chai Master Thinking and would closely liaise
with URA and other relevant Government departments on its
implementation.
|
| Item 2 |
Heritage Education and Publicity Plan of
the Antiquities and Monuments Office for 2006
|
Presentation Session
| 10. |
Dr Louis Ng briefly mentioned
the heritage education and publicity plan, which was prepared according to
the guidelines and principles in the strategy statement endorsed by the
AAB. He said that at year-end, a heritage education and publicity plan for
the next year would be prepared for Members' consideration and AMO would
report work done during the year. |
Discussion Session
| 11. |
Member suggested that the AMO report
progress on the heritage education and publicity plan at half-yearly
interval.
|
| Item 3 |
Report on the Antiquities Advisory Board's
Study Tour to Shanxi |
| 12. |
The Chairman remarked that
the Study Tour to Shanxi was fruitful and concluded with success. The
delegation had gained valuable knowledge and experience from the tour. He
commended the report which was prepared as a round-up to the study
tour.
|
| Item 4 |
Any Other Business |
My Heart, My Home - 18 Districts Reach Out
Together for Loveable Sights In Hong Kong
(情繫我家十八區共同尋找全港最愛景點) |
| 13. |
The Chairman appealed to
Members to participate in and to promote the project, which was jointly
organised by HAB, 18 District Councils and the Hong Kong Institute of
Architects. |
| 14. |
There being no other business, the
meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
|
Antiquities and Monuments Office
Leisure and Cultural Services
Department
January 2006
File Ref.: LCSD AM 22/3
|
|
|
|