22-MAY-1992 14:10
HID 40611
BRITISH TRADE COMM
JJun 1992
Mr Smith-Laittan
MANAGEMENT IN CONFIDENCE
P.02
Sue -pl.ce t
(7)
In Neme
Newey
Saraqie
Mr
Wanshow lif
In
DESIGN FOR HONG KONG CONSULATE-GENERAL
1.
In Richelts
+ back to
I attach a short piece by John Partridge and myself summarising our assessment of the six submitted schemes, (having taken into account the wide range of expert and detailed comments from all user Departments and bodies, from OED staff and from Swire). You will see this still has to be subject to a few further checks that we have asked Swires to pursue with the Architect.
2. Mr Partridge and I have had meetings this week with British Council and the Trade Commission, neither of whom, we understand, would dissent from our preference. I know, too, that none of the departments that has been consulted in London (OED, JSD, Security Department, MVD, NTCD and others) are likely to have difficulty with development of the Farrell scheme.
3. The estimated cost of five of the six submitted schemes is a little above the cost target (although all estimated costs should be treated with caution at this early design stage). The Farrell scheme is in the middle of the range. We and Swires will take every step to hold costs down but, given the probable rate of increase in construction costs in Hong Kong over the next few years, QED may need to seek a higher approval from the Treasury in due course.
4. The next step is now for me to report to the AUS' S Steering Committee, which is due to meet early in June, and, once the Committee has reached a recommendation, to submit it formally to Mr Goodlad. If he is content the show will then be well and truly on the road.
5. On the Private Treaty Grant, and as a result of Mr Jarvis' and my meeting with Mr Hughes (BLD) we now await a letter from Mr Hughes that (a) confirms pedestrian accesses (b) waives certain PTG provisions before 1 July 1997 (c) confirms TPB approval (a) concedes our point on 7(a) and (e) modifies 11 (c) (barely to our advantage but I think that we must now accept it). The BC's GFA in Farrell's scheme (as in others) is, on the face of it, in excess of the PTG's 6,500 square metre limit, but there are flexibilities of iterpretation available to us that may have the effect of bringing it within this limit: if not, our best course may be to invite the BC to see if their number of classrooms could be reduced (I have warned Mr Buchanan of this potential problem).
MANAGMENT IN CONFIDENCE
HKD.
nos
2215
14