It became apparent fairly early in its existence that the provision of the intra-campus transport service was a bigger and more expensive operation than had originally been anticipated, inter alia because the steep gradients and overloading resulted in slow operating speeds and frequent mechanical failures and because of the large number of buses which was needed to cope with the high demand during peak periods, and methods of reducing the expenditure on the bus fleet and of replacing or supplementing the system with cheaper means of transporting students around the campus were considered by the University. In November, 1975 it was decided that because there was little need for transport during the vacations, nine of the buses should be sold and replaced for the 160 teaching days in the academic year with eight buses leased from a hiring company, a change which it is expected will effect a saving of between $200,000 and $300,000 per annum. Whilst it cannot be gainsaid that this will be a valuable contribution to the University's economy drive without reducing the scale of the free transport services provided, it must also be noted that one of the University's own committees has remarked that "there is no other example in the world of a university providing door to door bus service on campus.”
71. One transportation scheme previously considered by the University called for the construction of outdoor escalators in various locations, together with a lift tower to connect the middle and upper levels of the campus. When the original proposal was made in 1970 it was estimated that the tower, excluding the lifts, would cost slightly less than $1 million, but by the time the project was approved and tenders were received in September, 1973, the lowest was over $2.3 million. The Secretary, University and Polytechnic Grants Committee considered that this represented an increase on the estimate greatly in excess of the rise in building costs over the period and concluded that despite adequate warnings which he had given against its over-elaboration, there had been undue development of the scale of the project and he suggested that a more modest structure should be designed. One of the changes which had been made which may not have been entirely utilitarian, was to re-site the tower in a position which would allow greater latitude in the design of a more attractive and impressive structure, which it was intended would include glazed panels in order to "afford passengers on the lift an impressive panoramic view of the campus and also create the impression of life and movement for those viewing the tower from the outside." Apart from pointing to several practical difficulties to which the project would give rise, one competent professional authority expressed the view that the design was "too monumental, elaborate and expen- sive and (seemed) more suitable for a viewing tower at a famous scenic spot than for a strictly practical means of transporting bodies from one site level to another" and later that “it would be difficult to see how, within the bounds of credibility, it could be made more elaborate or expensive”. In the event the lift tower has not yet been built and in November, 1975 the Secretary, University and Polytechnic Grants Committee authorized the pay- ment of $138,097 in professional fees for the work on the lift tower project to the time it was shelved.
72. I have suggested to the University that on a cost-benefit basis the lift tower/escalator scheme may not in fact be a satisfactory means of alternative transportation. It is unlikely to be cheaper than a fleet of hired buses, it would cover little of the horizontal distance and only part of the vertical distance, and congestion would almost certainly occur during periods of intensive student movement. Based on the University's own estimates, using six 27-passenger lifts it would take 7 or 8 minutes to clear the congestion at the lift tower during these periods, compared with about 3 minutes to walk to the upper-levels using steps which were constructed recently at a cost of only $60,000.
73. In this connection I have also suggested that even taking into account the nature of the terrain and the adverse weather conditions experienced during the summer months, the disadvantages of perambulating the campus may have been generally exaggerated and the advantages underestimated. The journey on foot between the railway station and the upper level colleges can take as little as 20 minutes and I have ventured the opinion that quite apart from being the cheapest, walking could be the most efficient means of movement for large con- centrations of students over short distances with steep gradients. With the construction of additional footpaths and steps the University would be in a position to withdraw most of its existing free bus services and by so doing, release funds for use in other areas of possibly greater priority whilst still retaining a limited service to carry students between classes held in different Colleges. The University's view is that such a service must be maintained because of the educational need to fulfil a tight intercollegiate time-table and to move students quickly between the Colleges, in order to avoid the curtailment of some desirable courses. When the introduction of a bus fleet was first proposed in 1969 a University report emphasized that in planning the intra-campus transport system "it should be based upon a scale of expenditure which is reasonable and attainable without extravagance." I take leave to doubt whether this objective has yet been achieved.
74. The University Library, one of the four libraries on the campus of the Chinese University forming the University Library System, is primarily a reference and research library and is complemental to the libraries of the three Foundation Colleges. In the initial planning stage of the library, advice on its size and structure was sought from two overseas consultants, whose joint report recommended the creation of a library building with an area of 59,500 square feet designed ultimately to house 400,000 volumes. They envisaged the acquisition of books at an average rate of 30,000 per annum and suggested therefore that the library should be built in two stages of 32,800 square feet and 26,700 square feet respectively, each to house 200,000 volumes. This recom-
15
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.