DOI:
The Cause and Response of Different Outcomes in Private Historical Building Conservation in Hong Kong: Based on Three Typical Cases

Zhang Jia, Hua Chen, Du Ruijie

Keywords: Private Historical Buildings in Hong Kong; Conservation; Uncertain Outcomes; Quasi-public Goods; Stakeholder; Response

Abstract:

According to “Revitalizing Historic Buildings Through Partnership Scheme”, tripartite collaboration conservation mode as known as “government, non-profit organization, the public” has been gradually set up to protect the government ownership of historical buildings in Hong Kong. But the conservation of private historical buildings is always a problem. Private owners’ uncertain wish and undisturbed final decision often lead to completely different conservation outcomes. The key point is the contradiction between the legal protection of private property right and the quasi-public goods attributes of private historical buildings. King Yin Lei, Ho Tung Gardens and Heritage Hotel in Lugard Road of the Peak Area are chosen as three typical case studies. Some reply strategies have been provided basing on process study, outcome evaluation and stakeholder analysis.


Funds:

Brief Info of Author(s):

References:
  • [1] 张更立. 变革中的香港市区重建政策——新思维、新趋向及新挑战[J].

    城市规划, 2005, 6: 64-68.

    [2] 胡阿祥. 5000 年来香港的人口变迁[J]. 南京史志,1997, 1: 11-13.

    [3] 崔巧敏, 蔡丹薇. 文物保护报告:香港与海外经验[R]. 香港: 长春社,

    2003.

    [4] 郑宏泰, 黄绍伦. 香港华人的身份认同:九七前后的转变[J]. 二十一

    世纪, 2002, 73(10): 71-80.

    [5] 王珺, 周亚崎. 香港“活化历史建筑伙伴计划”及其启示[J]. 规划师,

    2011, 4: 73-76.

    [6] 古物咨询委员会. 古物咨询委员会评级制度的历史发展简介[R]. 香港:

    古物咨询委员会, 2007.

    [7] 古物咨询委员会. List of the 1444 Historic Buildings in Building

    Assessment (as of 24 October 2014)[R]. 香港: 古物咨询委员会, 2014.

    [8] 香港发展局文物保育专员办事处. 活化历史建筑伙伴计划[EB/OL].

    (2012-01-05)[2014-03-08]. http://www.heritage.gov.hk/tc/rhbtp/about.htm.

    [9] 香港发展局文物保育专员办事处. 维修资助计划[EB/OL]. (2013-05-01)

    [2014-07-15]. http://www.heritage.gov.hk/tc/maintenance/about.htm.

    [10] Samuelson. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure[J]. Review of

    Economics and Statistics, 1954, 11: 387-389.

    [11] 发展局文物保育专员办事处. 活化历史建筑伙伴计划(第四期)景贤

    里资料册(2014 年3 月28 日修订版)[R]. 香港: 发展局文物保育专员

    办事处, 2014.

    [12] 长春社. 长春社以600 万投标“景贤里”发起“一人一信”签业主与

    政府寻双赢方案[EB/OL]. (2004-06-06)[2014-07-18]. http://www.cahk.

    org.hk/preleases/20040606.pdf.

    [13] 香港特别行政区政府宪报. 古物及古迹(暂定古迹的宣布)(司徒拔

    道45 号)公告[EB/OL]. (2007-09-15)[2014-07-19]. http://www.gld.gov.

    hk/egazette/pdf/20071138e/cgn2007113845.pdf.

    [14] 太阳报. 终列法定古迹, 业主获地补偿, 景贤里只能修复八成原状[EB/OL].

    (2008-01-26)[2014-07-18]. http://the-sun.on.cc/channels/news/20080126/2008

    0126023652_0000.html.

    [15] 古物咨询委员会讨论文件. 山顶道75 号何东花园的评级及建议引用

    《古物及古迹条例》把何东花园宣布为暂定古迹[Z]. 香港: 古物咨询

    委员会, 2011-01-25.

    [16] 发展局局长谈何东花园[N]. 香港特区政府新闻公报, 2011-10-24.

    [17]“ 业主称何东花园值70 亿元 ’ 不算集体回忆 ’ 反对列古迹”[N]. 香港 :

    星岛日报, 2011-12-19, A04.

    [18] 发展局局长出席前中区政府合署西座及何东花园事宜记者会开场发言[N].

    香港特区政府新闻公报, 2012-12-04.

    [19] Heritage Hong Kong Foundation Limited. A Study of Ho Tung Gardens:

    Past, Present and Future[EB/OL]. (2012-03-05)[2014-07-23]. www.

    hotunggardens2011.hk.

    [20] 城市规划委员会. 关乎申请编号A/H14/75 的拟议用途/ 发展的概括发

    展规范[Z]. 香港:城市规划委员会, 2013-07-12.

    [21] 山顶古典大宅活化酒店有望通过[EB/OL]. 东方日报. (2013-09-06)[2014-

    07-26]. http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/news/20130906/00176_016.html.

    [22] 立法会五题:卢吉道交通[N]. 香港特区政府新闻公报, 2013-10-04.

    [23] 刘淑妍. 公众参与导向的城市治理——利益相关者分析视角[M]. 上

    海: 同济大学出版社, 2010.


TOP 10