1997 — Page 249

Page 249 of 654

Page 249 of 654

654

248

HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL

procedures, there may be delays and additional costs. On top of everything, the facilities may take one or two more years before completion. I hope Members will consider this aspect carefully.

Concerning the project at Victoria Park, we in fact invited the Hong Kong Institute of Architects to give opinions. I just want to convey this information for your reference. The Institute advised that in case of an open competition, the winning entry should be accepted entirety and it would not be acceptable to change one part of the design or rule out some parts of the design. Should this Council decide not to accept the design entirety, compensation would have to be paid. In other words, it would amount to admitting the winning design as the best one so that compensation should be paid for not using it.

I have a personal experience of this. From the designer's point of view, the concern is to make a project representative and aesthetically outstanding. Such a design may not be practically functional. Very often, there are problems between practicality and design.

We can look at the design of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST). The first runner-up design was adopted, not the winning entry. We asked the Hong Kong Institute of Architects about this and were told that in light of that incident, they would not in future allow for adoption of the first runner-up design instead of the winning one. They stated that whenever an open competition was decided on, the winning design should be adopted, or else compensation would have to be paid. The sum of compensation would be calculated on a formula. As I understand, the amount involved is big.

I would like to cite another example of the track and field/soccer facilities at HKUST. The soccer pitch is an artificial pitch and it functions quite well However, there is a big problem when the University intends to hold track and field competitions. Field events cannot take place within the campus because the artificial pitch cannot be used for javelin, shot putt and disc events. It is only suitable for track events. For field events, an outside venue has to be located. So, as I said, design may not be able to meet practical and aesthetic needs at the same time. I urge fellow Members to consider this point carefully if you decide to vote for this motion and invite consultancy firms for advice or hold open design competitions.

In conclusion, let me register support on the whole for Mr. CHEUNG'S motion. However, I hope he can contain his proposal and apply it to future projects or those under planning. For those projects already approved by this Council, I think they should be carried out as planned. This will see that we do not pay additional construction fees and that the public get services as promised. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.