You may have seen your friends’ photos on Facebook of their recent visits to PMQ, formerly known as the Police Married Quarters on Hollywood Road. Also, the opening of the YHA Mei Ho House Youth Hostel a few months ago may have evoked our collective memories. If we ask anyone on the street whether we should conserve our historic buildings, I believe that the answer will be “Yes”.
Like everyone in the community, we want to conserve our historic buildings in whatever way we can. In reality, however, our conservation work has met with considerable practical problems that require deliberation by the whole community in order to make choices.
First, let’s talk about the “point-line-plane” approach in heritage conservation raised in recent years. I believe that most of us welcome the idea of conserving an entire area of significant heritage value, such as the Tai O stilt houses area or old districts with distinctive features. However, given Hong Kong’s scarcity of land relative to its population, we face land constraints for our economic and social development. Although the Government has been endeavouring to conserve our historic buildings amid rapid urban development, and has carried out large-scale conservation work (such as implementing the Conserving Central initiative), if we pursue the “point-line-plane” approach comprehensively in heritage conservation, how can it be done?
Stakeholders may have different views and expectations towards heritage conservation and the concept of “blending the old with the new”. Should we prohibit the demolition and re-development of all buildings in a certain district, or allow some of them to be re-developed? If the design of an individual building is not in harmony with its surroundings, should we force the owner to demolish or re-build it? Who should bear the loss and costs incurred?
Even if we focus on the conservation of individual historic buildings, there are different views here too. Some owners of historic buildings told us that they support heritage conservation. But, as owners and users of the buildings, they have their own experiences and considerations. For example, many of these historic buildings have no escalators and only basic sanitary facilities, a large number of visitors take photos outside these buildings during holidays, historic buildings also have high maintenance costs and a longer maintenance period. These are some of the practical problems the owners and users have to deal with every day.
Some suggest that the Government should buy historic buildings or compensate the owners for their loss arising from conservation as this will give due regard to private property rights while preserving our precious built heritage. But there are more than 1,000 privately-owned monuments and historic buildings in Hong Kong, many of which are of substantial value. Take the case of Ho Tung Gardens as an example. It is estimated that its conservation would cost billions of dollars in compensation. Some people will ask whether such a large amount of public resources should be put into conserving historic buildings or whether it should go towards improving people’s livelihood by helping the poor and the elderly. How much is the community prepared to pay for the conservation of our built heritage? Furthermore, even if the community is willing to pay a sum of money for the purchase of a particular historic building or as compensation for the partial development of the building, supposing the owner does not want to sell the building or refuses to open it to the public after receiving the compensation, what can we do then? Should we compel the owner to sell the building? Should the price be a nominal one? If so, would it contradict the principle of respecting and protecting private property rights that has been upheld in Hong Kong all along?
The conservation of government-owned historic buildings is not without cost either. For example, the conservation of the Central Government Offices Compound, Murray Building and Central Market will reduce the supply of Grade A office/commercial space. How much is the public prepared to share in the cost of conservation?
Needless to say, we should not look at conservation solely from the perspective of cost-effectiveness. We should also treasure our culture, and the legacy of local history and culture. In this regard, achieving a balance between heritage conservation and development and even a beneficial co-existence of the two cannot depend solely on the will of the Government, but also on the approval and support of the public. The Antiquities Advisory Board is now conducting a public consultation on the policy on the conservation of built heritage, with a special focus on the principles and direction of heritage conservation policy going forward. Please let us have your views through the following channels on or before August 4:
Website: www.builtheritagereview.hk
Fax: 2189 7264
E-mail: comment@builtheritagereview.hk
Post: Secretariat, Antiquities Advisory Board, 136 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon
27 July, 2014
Back