News Stories:

Click-on these handy "jump links" to quickly access the news item
you're looking for.

1. Architect scales heights with 1 Peking Road

2. West Kowloon's glass-house effect reflects differing views

3. Check urged on partnership projects

1. Architect scales heights with 1 Peking Road
CHLOE LAI, SCMP 15 March 2004

Renowned architect Rocco Yim Sen-kee's latest masterpiece - 1 Peking Road - yesterday won the top architectural award in Hong Kong.

The Hong Kong Institute of Architects awarded its Medal of the Year to the $750 million project built close to the Tsim Sha Tsui waterfront for its aesthetics and its environmentally friendly design.

"The distinctive profile of One Peking makes it an instantly recognisable landmark, but it is one that maintains dialogues with history, with its neighbours and with the city's natural attributes," said the judges' report.

Mr Yim is a frequent winner of architectural awards. His past credits include the new extension of The Peninsula hotel, the Airport Express station in Central and Citibank Plaza.

"Receiving a prize is always nice. The award proves I am staying abreast of the world," he said.

The building was praised for its aluminium sun-shades that double as light reflectors and its motorised blinds controlled by sensors tracking the position of the sun.

The blinds are powered by energy collected by solar panels.

Its sail-like south facade, while echoing the roof profile of the Cultural Centre across the road, is also functional, allowing for a large floor area for offices in the middle floors and a shallower floor for two restaurants on the top floors.

Even though the top prize went to a private firm, the government won the most awards.The Architectural Services Department won two awards - the Merit Award for the Public Health Laboratory Centre in Shekkipmei and the President's Prize for the improvement works at Sai Kung's waterfront park.

The Housing Department got the urban design special architectural award for the shopping centre in Sau Mau Ping.

A museum in Shanghai to commemorate the achievements of Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa's late father, shipping tycoon C.Y. Tung, won the award of HKIA Members' Work outside Hong Kong.

Architect Nelson Chen transformed a 1909 building in Jiao Tong University into the C.Y. Tung Maritime Museum by restoring the exterior and adding an atrium, gallery spaces, a new internal staircase and new lavatories. He also won another President's Prize for a church in Fairview Park in Yuen Long.

2. West Kowloon's glass-house effect reflects differing views
ANNA HEALY FENTON, SCMP 15 March 2004

The design concept is being compared with the Sydney Opera House - "beautiful, but it took 10 years to work out how to build it", as one structural engineer put it.

British architect Sir Norman Foster's spectacular vision for the West Kowloon Cultural District is an awesome prospect. Like a giant tadpole, the vast glassy canopy hovers more than 55 per cent of the 40-hectare site. According to the government's invitation for proposals (IFP), the sweeping structure should be 120 metres high - as tall as London's St Paul's Cathedral or a 30-storey tower block - at the west end, and slope to 50m on the east side. It will be 1.5km long, with 500m at the 120m height and the remaining 1km at the 50m level.

As a guide, the neighbouring hill on Stonecutter's is about 50m high, but the structure will probably obliterate a lot of the Kowloon skyline from a Central viewpoint and block many harbour views.

The arts district site will have cultural facilities at the west end, and commercial and housing blocks at the eastern end. Construction cost estimates for the canopy, says government project manager Kwan Pak-lam, vary from Sir Norman's "one-point-something billion Hong Kong dollars" to the Architectural Services Department's "up to $3 billion".

Depending on the materials used - whether laminated glass or cheaper Teflon - industry consensus puts the cost nearer $2.5 billion. Doing a rough calculation based on the latter figure - the Government's stated plot ratio of 1.81 and saleable (revenue receivable) gross floor area of 5.29 million square feet - one leading property valuer estimates building the canopy will add $465 per square foot to the construction cost of the commercial and residential portion.

According to the IFP, the saleable area is 67.8 per cent of the site, with core arts and cultural facilities making up 29.4 per cent and utilities 2.8 per cent.

Builders and construction contractors fear Sir Norman's flight of fancy hides another headache - nowhere do the flowing designs show any canopy supports.

"It's OK for the architects to have these wonderful ideas, but the design has got to be structurally feasible," said Pilkington chairman Sir Nigel Rudd. Pilkington, a glass maker, roofed Chek Lap Kok - another of Sir Norman's visions.

"This is pie-in-the-sky, literally," joked one builder. "Maybe Foster intends the canopy to be supported by the residential blocks."

He may be right. "My thought is, to save money, the developer will use the buildings to hold up the canopy," Mr Kwan said. "If there are too many columns it will not look nice."

His colleague, ASD project director Peter Yuen Ka-tat, agreed.

"It could be suspended by supports on top of buildings. There are examples of this in Europe," Mr Yuen said, adding he was confident the canopy could be built and dismissed issues such as maintenance, air-conditioning and rainwater runoff.

"I am sure the developers will have systems for all of that," Mr Kwan said. Repeated calls to Sir Norman's London office also failed to elicit an explanation of how the canopy is supposed to stay up.

The Government is responding with a "wait-and-see-line" until the bids roll in by the June 19 deadline, and Mr Kwan for one is keeping his options open.

"If the submissions prove the canopy is too expensive or not worth it, then we will not say it should be built," he said, adding it could be slim or made of panels. Their attitude seemed to indicate a hope that the developers will provide all the answers.

Many in the industry are unhappy but not surprised by such woolliness.

"The Government should not just leave it to the developer," said Hong Kong Institute of Engineers president Alex Chan. "They should produce a scheme first to indicate what the final result will look like. This is like trying to build the Sydney Opera House in Hong Kong - totally wrong."

Bernard Lim, representing the Hong Kong Institute of Architects, said his members had doubts about the project too, adding it had not been thought through.

"Property developers only know how to show profits," Mr Chan said. "They have no experience of running museums ... if we're not careful, instead of a cultural centre they will just build a huge clubhouse with wonderful facilities."

Nick Brooke, chairman of Professional Property Services Group and president of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, said: "I've maintained all along the government is on a fishing expedition."

At the heart of the project is a key unanswered question. With government insistence on a single entity to handle the entire project, the only bidders with enough money are probably Sun Hung Kai Properties or Cheung Kong (Holdings), with perhaps a consortium or two in the running.

Smart money is on SHKP and Cheung Kong teaming up. But even together, would any developer be prepared to pay a premium for the land and sign a 30-year build, operate and transfer contract for what amounts to a cultural theme park?

As presented, the government expects the developer to design, build and run theatres, museums, galleries, water features and a people mover. Worldwide, cultural and heritage facilities usually run at a loss and rely on benefactors and government help - not property developers - to survive. What Hong Kong's public ends up getting will hinge not on its need for theatres and museums, but on the best deal the developer can get.

The IFP is strewn with moving goalposts and caveats. There is even a hint that extra land would be provided if required.

It calls for proponents to accommodate Foster's scheme "avoiding any new reclamation unless there is a compelling need for it". However, this has presumably been eclipsed by the Court of Final Appeal's January ruling that further reclamation is permitted only for over-riding public need.

Nevertheless, there are more tempting clues that the developer can come back for another bite of the commercial cherry later. Building layout and design should be flexible enough to "allow scope for future expansion to meet changing needs, in response to market situations", the IFP says enticingly.

The government gives a plot ratio of 1.81, but it is not stated if this discounts public areas or not. It is clearly all to play for, even if only the big two are realistically in the frame. SHKP is understood to be working with Foster already, and industry buzz is that it has spent HK$50 million on the submission. The developer, along with many others close to the project, refuses to discuss it during the bid process.

One valuer suggests that the developer may end up in the driving seat due to the lack of competition.

"If the government demands too many expensive arts facilities, the developer will walk away," he said.

Can the developer make money? A rough valuation summary based on the IFP by one surveyor and valuer made the following assessment. Office and commercial space allocation is 2.69 million sq ft, and the same for residential; and all non-saleable facilities such as museums, theatres and green areas 2.47 million sq ft.

Construction cost of the office and commercial space would be about $1,500 per square foot net (high quality, comparable to Pacific Place), and residential space $1,500 per square foot (assuming large, quality flats with appliances). Construction cost of cinemas, theatres, arts and culture facilities, and amenities is estimated at $1,200 per square foot, excluding fitting out and equipment. Last is the canopy cost estimate, at $2.5 billion.

The gross development sales value for office and commercial at today's prices would be $5,500 per square foot for office and commercial space. Residential value would be $9,000 per square foot net.

Based on the experiences of other cities, most of the cultural facilities could be expected to operate at a loss or break even at best. The construction period - from contract signing - is five years for the canopy, people mover and residential-commercial section to be ready by 2010-12, along with some arts facilities, in a phased programme. The saleable ratio for the office-commercial space is 70 per cent, and 80 per cent for residential.

That makes profit for the developer of 25 per cent on the office/commercial portion and 20 per cent on residential, assuming a current interest rate of 7 per cent.

"Cost of the canopy comes out at $465 per square foot for the revenue receivable gross floor area," concluded the valuer.

"The development would be profitable at today's interest rates and prices," he added. "But there are several imponderables which could easily change that." Interest rates will probably go up, and the estimate does not include the cost of roads, infrastructure, the people mover and fitting the museums.

"It's prima facie profitable but there are unknown factors especially in the BOT contract [the arts and culture facilities]," the valuer concluded. "Running these for 30 years means a serious risk of making losses. If the Government alters the ratio to give them more saleable area, the plot ratio shoots up and it may cease to be a pleasant recreational space. My assessment of its attraction to a developer as it stands in the IFP is `fairly limited'."

3. Check urged on partnership projects
CHLOE LAI and QUINTON CHAN, SCMP 15 March 2004

A mechanism should be established to monitor how the new public-private partnership model is implemented to protect the public's interest, according to the public works chief.

Secretary for Environment, Transport and Works Sarah Liao Sau-tung said the public and lawmakers should be involved in the selection of projects adopted under the new model, and how they should be carried out.

The minister said that when the government allowed a private business to build and run public services it needed to ensure that the public are not charged unreasonably high fees.

She cited the government's failure to have the Western Harbour Crossing cut its fare as a classic case of a private-sector participated project carried out without a proper regulating mechanism.

Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa vowed in his policy address in January that Hong Kong would make wider use of alternative approaches, such as public-private-partnership, in carrying out large-scale public works projects.

"The government is actively reviewing and exploring possibilities to deliver the public works projects managed by the Works Departments through alternative approaches, such as public-private-partnership, with a view to bringing about more benefits to both government and the public," he said.

Last April, Secretary for Home Affairs Patrick Ho Chi-ping launched two projects with private sector involvement. They include an ice-sports centre in Tseung Kwan O, as well as a leisure and cultural centre in Kwun Tong, with a total value of $2.5 billion.

Financial Secretary Henry Tang Ying-yen said in his budget speech last Wednesday that the government would expand its public-private sector partnership programme, saying a consultancy study had been completed on whether the new model could be adopted in the $6 billion redevelopment of the Sha Tin water treatment plant.

But Dr Liao said a more co-ordinated approach was needed in carrying out such projects.

"Our bureau is now acting like an agent. When other government departments decided that certain projects should adopt the public-private-partnership approach, we will make it happen. I believe we need to work out how it can be monitored. The debate certainly should also involve Legco," the minister said.

Under the public-private-partnership model, which is widely used in Britain, Australia and New Zealand, private firms can be enlisted for the financing, designing, building and managing of public facilities. In return, private business pockets the income generated from the public facilitates.

At present, there is no regulating mechanism on what projects should be allowed with private sector involvement. Since no funding is required from Legco under the new approach, lawmakers' approval is not needed.

Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, a public administration specialist at City University, said it was inevitable Hong Kong adopt this approach as it allowed a government seeking to reduce expenditure to continue providing services to the public.

But he stressed it would be essential for the government to strike a balance between attracting private business and protecting public interest. He also urged the government to inform the Legislative Council on public-private-partnership projects in the pipeline.

He cited the controversial West Kowloon cultural district project, in which the government decided to let a private consortium construct the 40-hectare waterfront site and manage it for 30 years, as a case study of public-private-partnership.