從四個保育案例看香港古蹟制度的敗處🗿 竟然沒有法律保障歷史建築物!? 皇后碼頭/ 皇后碼頭以現代主義建築形式興建而成，原是皇后像廣場的停泊處，只供香港總督及英國主要官員往返香港時使用。後來改建成皇后碼頭，價值不止是其現代主義建築，還有它作為記錄香港人集體回憶的公共空間。政府以發展為由，竟帶頭將這個一級歷史建築清拆。十三年後，至今仍沒有重建計劃。其實香港的「歷史建築」只有參考作用，沒有法律效力；「法定古蹟」才有法律保障。即使近年政府提出，被評為一級歷史建築能被接納為已列入具高度價值的建築，增加成為法定古蹟機會，但很多歷史建築因私人業權問題難以保育，最後也只能落得清拆下場，例如「同德大押」(grade III) 和「何東花園」(grade I)。 「古蹟辦」被笑稱「估即辦」，考察過程草率了事 皇都戲院/ 皇都戲院已經有六十九年歷史，它作為香港昔日娛樂事業風光年代的證據，也盛載我們的集體回憶。國際保育專業組織 Docomomo International在一六年發出「文物危急警示」促請為它評級為一級歷史建築，但古蹟辦被揭發對戲院的內部改動情況不充分掌握就草率提出將戲院列為三級歷史建築的建議。先不論古蹟辦考察過程透明度之低，其中一位負責評審的學者竟說：「假若漢墓值5分，清代（建築）最多4分，咁皇都幾多分？」(bio有「活現香港」皇都戲院評級爭議懶人包的link)，從這話可看出他們的想法已與現今保育方向脫節。幸好最後古諮會評定它為一級，現時被新世界發展商收購，是首個發展商主動提出的活化項目。 Queen's Pier; No legal protection for historical buildings Built in the form of modernist architecture, its value lies in its use as a public space that records the Hong Kong people’s collective memory. The government demolished this first-class historic building for the new development scheme. In fact, Hong Kong’s "historical buildings" are only for reference and have no legal validity; only "declared monuments" have legal protection. Even though the government has proposed in recent years that historic buildings rated as Grade I can be accepted as buildings of high value which increasing the chance of becoming statutory monuments, many historic buildings are difficult to preserve due to private ownership issues, and they can only be demolished in the end. State Theatre; ‘Antiquities and Monuments Office’ teased as ‘Assumption Making Office’ . The inspection process was regarded as hasty It has a history of 69 years. It serves as evidence of Hong Kong's past entertainment industry and also contains our collective memories as a HKer. Docomomo International, an international conservation professional organization, issued the "Cultural Relics Emergency Warning" in 2016, urging it to be graded as a Grade I historical building. However, the AMO was revealed that it did not fully acknowledge the internal changes to the theatre and rashly proposed to list it as a Grade III historical building. It is currently being purchased by the New World Development and is the first conservation project proposed by the developer.

《我港 Kongcept》批鬥大會 2021 【4/8 建築與地方：如何分辨房署和房協的居屋? @kongcept852】 關於 #我港建築 #archi_kongcept 💬// 我港為你介紹一些穿插在這城市並記錄著香港的日常建築和充滿故事性的地方，藉着探索這些空間與我們的關係，尋找建築和地方的存在價值。// 如何分辨房協和房署的居屋？房協居屋具私樓的質素和設計實驗性 相信好多人發現有時經過發現很多特別的房屋設計，既不是私樓又不像倒模般的公屋，這很大機會是房協起的居屋！ 房協被稱為「房屋實驗室」，不是政府組織？/ 雖然大部居屋都是由政府的房屋署所興建，但其實有部份居屋是交由房協（香港房屋協會）去執行和管理。很多人誤以為房協是政府方，但其實他們是獨立的非牟利機構，獲政府以低於市價批出土地，興建過公屋(例如祖堯、乙明邨)和為數不少的居屋。房協一直擔當「房屋實驗室」的角色，發展及研究不同的房屋計劃。例如: 🌿香港首個環保房屋——茵怡花園 👴🏻長者房屋——樂頤居 🏗市區重建房屋——荷李活華庭 設會所、附送的家電和裝修、媲美私樓般——綠悠雅苑 房署居屋/房協居屋/公屋要如何分辨？/ 房署的居屋有與公屋相似的固定建築類型（近年因方便公居屋互換而趨向與公屋設計無異)，而房協的居屋則是千變萬化，既不用像私樓般按當時建築政策去抄盡容積率，或像公屋般為追趕效率而倒模式設計，可算難得地從香港房屋找到創意和人性化的考慮。 公屋以「邨」estate 命名，房署的居屋則根據英國council housing (英國的公共房屋)以「苑」court命名，而苑內的大廈則用「閣」House命名。而房協的居屋並沒有這個限制，過往有出現過「龍濤苑」、「祈德尊新邨」、「駿發花園」、「健康村」、「寶石大廈」、「綠悠雅苑」等等。相信大家要從名分辨房協居屋是有一定的難度😂。 #我港 #kongcept

商業與公眾利益的取捨 Give and take of commercial and communal interest 以人的角度出發/ 私有的特定公共空間不應只是一個換取更多建造面積的工具，而應以第一身的體驗為出發點。現時發展商提供只限於行人走道這個較低層次的功能，他們認為從商業角度來看公共空間有損鄰近商鋪的價值，所以我們難以找到一個舒適而方便的私有公共空間。但只有從第一身的角度去設計公共空間才可將其空間與商業空間連結，為人們提供一個完整的體驗，更能提升其商場的知名度與價值。一個吸引人來和享受的公共空間反而能夠刺激消費，而不是用方法去阻止人們去使用這空間。青衣城二期便是一個成功將商場與公共空間合作的例子。他們將商場的天台改造成5000平方米多層次的綠化空間，人們能夠經過商場來到怡人的綠化區域，享受著開揚的沿岸河景。 香港，這個世界上數一數二擠迫的城市，對每個室外或室內的空間都爭分寸土，卻不忘尋找一點公共空間讓我們好好享受一個下午。城市當然需要發展，但發展商也有他們的社會責任，不只是為換取建造面積而提供公共空間，而真正讓人享受的空間，這是我們的權利去擁有的。 _______________________________________________________ From the angle of user/ The dedicated POPS should be considered as more than a tool to gain extra areas to build more floors but from the angle of the user's experience. Most of the dedicated POPS provided by developers only reached the first layer objective to provide a space for people passing through. They are examined from the commercial angle that public space will affect the economic value of retail stores nearby. Therefore, it is rare to find a dedicated POPS that is pleasant to stay but also easily accessible. However, only when the public space is designed by the angle of user can bind the commercial and public space together to provide a comprehensive experience for customers. It could be possible to foster the reputation and value of the shopping mall. Rather than setting rules to pushing out people away from the public space, welcoming public space can already fascinate people to stay but also consume in the mall potentially. Maritime Square 2 in Tsing Yi is a delightful example that uses its spacious public park as the magnetism binds with its shopping mall. Located at the terraces, people are engaged to access the 5000 sq m stretching park on different levels through the mall to enjoy the view of the habour. As one of the most dense cities in the world, we are fighting for every inch of space we can have inside and in between buildings, but also a public space that we can pause and relax in the busy afternoon. We do need new development. Developers have their social responsibility not only to provide public spaces for their own interest of extra floors to build, but public spaces that people can really enjoy

尖沙咀鐘樓迎來首鳴一百週紀念，你又知不知為何當初會在這裡興建鐘樓？ 其實這鐘樓原名為九廣鐵路鐘樓，鐘樓隔離本來是建於第一次世界大戰前的尖沙咀火車站(現址香港文化中心)。它其實是為該火車報時用的，除了日佔時段，它一直默默為火車站服務，一直到1950年因馬達零件問題而停止轉動。可惜的是以紅磚和花崗岩建成的火車站因紅磡搬遷計劃而清拆。當時的古蹟學會曾收集15000個簽名向英女王請願要求保留火車站建築，但最後郤是無疾而終。 今天的鐘樓只剩下象徵意義，火車站原有的幾條羅馬柱被移到市政局百週年紀念公園卻無人問津。今晚六點，鐘樓會再次響起，提醒我們，不要再讓自己珍重的事物消失。 The clock tower in Tsim Sha Tsui is celebrating its 100th anniversary. Do you know why the clock tower was built here in the first place? This clock tower was originally called the Kowloon-Canton Railway Clock Tower. The clock tower was originally built for the Tsim Sha Tsui Railway Station, before the First World War. The clock tower was actually used for the train's timekeeping. The service was stopped in 1950 due to a problem with motor parts. It is a pity that the railway station built of red brick and granite was demolished due to the Hung Hom relocation plan. At that time, the Antiquities Society collected 15,000 signatures and petitioned the Queen of England to keep the railway station building, but in the end it was nothing. Today’s clock tower only has symbolic meaning. The original Roman columns of the railway station were moved to the Centennial Park of the Municipal Council but no one cares about it. Tonight, at six o'clock, the clock tower will ring again, reminding us not to let the things we cherish disappear. #我港 #kongcept #香港文化 #hkculture #自己香港自己救 #ฮ่องกง #홍콩 #hongkonger #hkig #insidehongkong #hkculture #hongkongmoment #hkdaily #capturehongkong #尖沙咀鐘樓 #hkclocktower

其實香港古蹟制度是如何運行?🗿‍香港古物與古蹟架構/「古物及古蹟條例」於一九七六年實施，以確保香港最具價值的文物古蹟得到適當保護。古物諮詢委員會及古物古蹟辦事處於同年相繼成立。［圖3］古物古蹟辦事處的文物保育組由五個小組組成，分別負責考古、 歷史建築、教育及宣傳和技術及顧問，以及策劃及管理方面的工作職能，他們先為古物古蹟作考察研究，［圖4］再將其建議交給由二十一人組成的古物諮詢委員會作討論和決定「歷史建築」和「法定古蹟」，全員由特首委任，來自超過十個界別。決定「法定古蹟」後會提交給古物事務監督(發展局局長)，最後經特首同意藉憲報公告宣布法定古蹟，由古物古蹟辦事處執行其行政工作。‍The Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance was enforced in 1976 to ensure that the best examples of Hong Kong's monuments are under appropriate protection. In the same year, the Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB) and the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) were established. [Pic3]In AMO, there is a Heritage Conservation Unit with five sections: archaeology, historical buildings, education and publicity, technical and advisory, planning and management. They first conduct research on antiquities and historic sites, and then submit their recommendations to the AAB, [Pic4]which is composed of 21 people for discussion and decision on "historical buildings" and "declared monuments”. All 21 members are all appointed by the chief executive and come from more than 10 industries and professions. After the decision is made, it will be submitted to the Antiquities Authority (Secretary for Development), and the Chief Executive will announce the official monuments through a gazette announcement, which will be implemented by the AMO.

僅存的戰前唐樓其實一直扎根於香港的市區裡，給自己一天的時間去好好探訪這些唐樓! 我們或許不能拯救他們，但請用你的眼晴去記錄轉角唐樓的歷史吧。 1. 汝州街269及271號, 深水埗, 1920s, grade III 2. 雷生春, 荔枝角道及塘尾道交界, 太子, 1931, grade I 3. 青山道301及303號, 深水埗, 1933, non-graded 4. 北河街58號, 深水埗, 1920, grade II 5. 皇后大道西1號, 上環, 1920s, grade III 6. 史釗域道6號, 灣仔, 1920s, grade III 7. 德輔道西207號, 西營盤, 1921, grade II 8. 彌敦道190號, 尖沙咀, 1937, grade III 9. 廣東道578號, 佐敦, 1945, non-graded The only remaining pre-war corner Tong Lau are actually rooted at Hong Kong city centre. Give yourself a day to visit these them! We may not be able to preserve them all, but please use your eyes to record the history of those corner Tong Lau. 1. 269 and 271 Yu Chau Street, Sham Shui Po, 1920s, grade III 2. Lui Seng Chun, junction of Lai Chi Kok Road and Tong Mei Road, Prince Edward, 1931, grade I 3. 301 and 303 Castle Peak Road, Sham Shui Po, 1933, non-graded 4. 58 Pei Ho Street, Sham Shui Po, 1920, grade II 5. 1 Queen's Road West, Sheung Wan, 1920s, grade III 6. 6 Steward Road, Wan Chai, 1920s, grade III 7. 207 Des Voeux Road West, Sai Ying Pun, 1921, grade II 8. 190 Nathan Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, 1937, grade III 9. 578 Canton Road, Jordan, 1945, non-graded #我港 #kongcept #archi_kongcept #tonglau #hkconservation #我港建築