The Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design

Statement on the Central Kowloon Route Project Phase 2 Public Engagement

1.  Principle Issues --

       The Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design (HKIUD) found that the content put forward to the public in the Central Kowloon Route Project Phase 2 Public Engagement (CKR) is greatly deprived of the considerations and feasible solutions on the social, visual, environmental and urban design aspects which are not acceptable to HKIUD and the community as a whole today.

   The following are the principle issues that are of great concern to HKIUD:

   1.1 CKR is not merely an engineering project:

The implementation of a new major highway such as CKR through the dense urban area of central Kowloon is a big challenge. It is not merely an engineering project and will demand great effort to control and mitigate the social, visual, environmental and urban design impacts that such works would bring about.

1.2 CKR should be handled by a project office with multi-professional input.

While the proponent repeatedly assured all the professional institutes and general public that multi-professionals were engaged in the design process, the result put forward in the CKR document fails to respond to the social, heritage conservation, visual, environmental, architectural, urban design and community aspects. The Government shall urgently review and resolve the bottle neck problem in the project organization structure.

1.3 CKR is an Urban Renewal Project

The CKR includes the West Entry (Yau Ma Tei District), the underground tunnel(s) and the East Entry (Ma Tau Kok District and Kai Tak District). Both the West and the East Entries will have tremendous impact on the urban environment, community neighborhoods and the urban spaces of Yau Ma Tei District, Ma Tau Kok District and Kai Tak District. It therefore involves complicated issues far more reaching extent than merely engineering problems. It is an Urban Renewal Project for the three districts.

1.4 Formulation and Implementation of Vision and Objectives of CKR

We are deeply concerned on the process of formulation, design and implementation of the Vision and Objectives of CKR. It should not be a “closed-door” approach lead by the Government Department (actually by a few government officials) with consultants merely hired as the executive arms. All stakeholders should be truly engaged in the process
of formulation, design and implementation of the Vision and Objectives of CKR. Only with this true engagement in the design and implementation process will the Government receive support from the community.

2.    Problems in Scale –



The West Entry of CKR at Yau Ma Tei sharply contradicts in scale and also severs the closely knit urban fabric and neighbourhoods of Yau Ma Tei and Jordan area. They are totally unsympathetic wtih the public spaces and human scale. GIC buildings straddle or encroach upon the entire neighbourhood including the historic building of Yau Ma Tei old police station and the Jade market.

3.    Design for Walkability –

CKR is designed for fast moving vehicles, and is totally in-compatible with the slow pedestrian movements and human scale of streets in the Yau Ma Tei neighbourhood. The walkability, both at the West Entry and the East Entry, is far from satisfactory and to become acceptable requires a complete design review on the this aspect. Particular problems include:

      3.1 The reclamation areas to the north and south of Yan Cheung Road, i.e. Tai Kok Tsui West and Yau Ma Tei West, are already quite segregated and without good pedestrians links. The additional slip roads of this project further segregate these areas from each other as well as from the older neighbourhood. The noise cover in the form of elevated mega decks and fully enclosed structures, are not easily accessible by pedestrians, with limited access points. One of the two Options even suggested that the decks would not be open to public access. We find these designs lack of human touch and would defeat the purpose of providing the green spaces, since even the Option that allows pedestrian access to the deck, would have quite inconvenient access. Moreover, little consideration is seen in provision for pedestrian access to the waterfront.

       3.2 In view of the conflicts between pedestrians, hawker stalls and vehicles in the vicinity of Shanghai Street, Kansu Street and Temple Street, opportunity should be taken to rationalize the land uses of the concerned sites, improve the traffic circulation, reduce the conflicts and enhance the pedestrian environment when designing this project.

       3.3 At the Kai Tak end are the proposed Olympic standard stadium and the Metro park on the ex-runway as well as a system of harbourfront green spaces which could be linked up usefully, however the linkage is cut up by slip roads and flyovers of the CKR. The CKR design should be further studied to improve the pedestrian environment and the linkage between the waterfront and the pedestrian and cycle track system in Kai Tak should be reviewed comprehensively.

4.  Problems in adverse Visual Impacts --

       4.1 The landscape decks at both Yau Ma Tei and at Ma Tau Kok are provided to serve as noise covers/barriers. However, they form a further unnecessary significant adverse visual impact (as well as natural ventilation barrier) in themselves. These covers should be redesigned, with other integrated design alternatives, rather than hard concrete edges with difficult pedestrian access. The new design should form places for people to congregate within an integrated structure, include rest areas, shelters, water features, commercial spaces, community and leisure areas etc., thematically and functionally integrated with the street level green spaces rather than becoming stand-alone alien objects.

       4.2 New problems generated by the proposed Noise Barriers –

The proposed noise mitigation measures such as the noise barriers along the reconstructed Gascoigne Road and particularly the large deck with full enclosure over Ferry Street should not be the design solution for noise mitigation. It should form the last design option as it poses significant visual impact and a natural ventilation barrier to the surrounding neighbourhood. It is noted that there are presently two GIC sites without development near the west side of the proposed enclosure. Consideration should be given to reduce the extent and impacts of this enclosure as far as possible.

5.  Need for place-making –

       5.1 A major project like this would have long term and irreversible impacts on the whole community. Its design needs to make reference to the local context. Where there are vibrant local social and economic activities, they should be preserved and enhanced. Where there is a lack of links between some quarters their linkages should be improved. Where it encroaches onto heritage buildings or sites, there should be adequate buffer and the interfaces should be softened. The present design approach essentially just facilitates the transport of people and goods from one district to another by passing through the affected areas of Yau Ma Tei, Ma Tau Kok and Kai Tak, with little consideration for the above concerns. The study team should have made greater effort in taking the changes as opportunities for rather than constraints to introducing better place-making. By just re-provisioning the GIC facilities on the same site valuable opportunities have been missed to rationalize and improve their spatial relationships as well as the pedestrian environment. This is especially so in the Yau Ma Tei area.

       5.2 Take a few examples in the Yau Ma Tei area. Upon re-provisioning the jade market would still be separated in two parts and would not be housed in one entity on a more respectable site. Even if the library has to be re-provisioned on the original site, it is wondered why the reprovisioned building cannot be made taller by suitable integration with the Gascoigne Road flyover structure and adjacent Government land, to free up the ground level space for pedestrian use. If the RCP/bath house block would be included in the re-provisioning then there may perhaps be more design freedom to facilitate a better re-provisioning job. The traffic conditions, including circulation and parking facilities for tourist coaches may also require further improvement.

       5.3 At the Ma Tau Kok waterfront, the landscape deck is not a noise cover for sound generated from the CKR tunnel. It is to cover the re-provisioned Kowloon City Ferry Pier PTI with bus stops, GMB and taxi stands, etc. It would be relevant to first review the context of its need and the justification for all the existing uses and possibilities of gaining back part of the ground level space for pedestrian and recreational uses. Waterfront public spaces are valuable breathing spaces and should be made easily accessible to people in the hinterland. Large structures at the waterfront should be avoided as far as possible. It is worthwhile to consider the feasibility of putting some of these transport facilities at basement level and thus the size of the deck may be reduced. By reducing the need for a large deck as such, the structure might become lighter and there could be greater freedom for the architectural and landscape design. In any case, consideration should be given to providing more convenient access for pedestrians onto the deck if there must be one, as well as provision for a more natural transition from the deck to the public space at the waterfront, to avoid the hard and imposing edges in the design as it is now shown.

6.    Administration buildings and ventilation buildings --

       Administration buildings and ventilation buildings should not be the “icon” of CKR or for the neighbourhood area. There is nothing to celebrate for these building. On the contrary, it shall be made “invisible” and merge into the environment and the urbanscape. The land-take of administration and ventilation buildings should be minimized in order to provide more open spaces for public enjoyment. This is especially so where they are located close to the waterfront.

7.    Other available design alternatives --

The proposed re-provisioning of GIC facilities as well as the design of the mega decks both appear to be too rigid and unimaginative for being conducive to place making. Open design competition should be considered for the design of the ventilation buildings, the Landscape decks and the noise barriers. There are successful past examples of such competitions which HKIUD has organized or supported. HKIUD also considers that an overall review by a dedicated multi-professional team including Planners, Architects, Landscape Architects, conservation specialists, social specialist, environmental expert and urban designers should be warranted on the rationalization of CKR project including the re-provisioning of GIC facilities and enhancement of pedestrian environment in the Yau Ma Tei, Ma Tau Kok and Kai Tak area.

ENDS

Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design

March 2013