TNAG-0774-FCO40-978-Redevelopment-of-the-former-Kowloon-Canton-Railway-Station-1978 — Page 55

2

The effects of these constraints have not been fully recognised and are in some cases ignored in the diagrammatic layout accompanying your petition. For example, the Planetarium (which is already under construction) has been relocated in this layout in an area which includes part of the site for the proposed public transport terminus. The reserves for the underground services have not been taken into account. The cultural complex site proposed in this layout is too cramped to permit the large open spaces required in the planning brief or for the Concert Hall and Museum to be large enough to meet requirements. Nor, as this layout allows for building all along the Salisbury Road frontage from Nathan Road to the former railway station building, are there any breaks to allow views of the harbour.

The proposal to renovate and adapt the former railway station building for cultural uses has been considered. Although the building could be converted, at considerable cost, for limited use, such as lecture rooms and student study rooms, it cannot provide a modern auditorium and other facilities of a high standard.

Contrary to what is suggested in the petition, planning for the cultural complex is at an advanced stage. The present design of the complex on this important site would be totally changed by the retention of the former railway station. It is the view both of the Government and of the Urban Council that a scheme which includes this building would result in a less pleasing and less practical cultural complex. Moreover, it would take one and a half to two years to redesign the complex, a delay which the Government considers cannot be accepted for this much needed facility.

The principal significance for the public of the railway station building is felt to be its familiarity as a landmark. This role will be assumed in due course by the new cultural complex. It is not considered that the former railway station building possesses overriding merits which would justify its declaration as a monument under section 3 of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Chapter 53).

Your criticism of the lack of opportunity for public comment on draft plans produced by the Town Planning Board takes no heed of existing procedures provided for under the Town Planning Ordinance (Chapter 131). In accordance with these procedures, draft plans are exhibited for public comment or objection and are

/publicised