2021_ARCH2058_Guidebook_Inclusion_Public Architecture in Central District by ARCH2058

INCLUSION:

Central District

中上環

ARCH2058 Modern Architecture | Fall 2021

ASSIGNMENT 3: GUIDEBOOK

Inclusion: Public Architecture in Central District Wong Lok Yu Angel (3035794375) Joanna Fong Yan Nok (3035793840) Ku Wun Lucinda (3035740506)

1 CITY HALL The Hong Kong City Hall now standing in front of the bustling Central CBD in Edinburgh Place is the first civic service complex in Hong Kong. The complex was built in 1962 as the reconstruction of the Old City Hall of Hong Kong which was a Baroque architecture demolished in 1933. The new City Hall, being a Bauhaus and International Style building, was designed by architects Gordon Brown, Alan Fitch and Ron Philips. Composing of a High Block, Low Block and a Memorial Garden, the architecture was built to incorporate the Queen’s Pier and Edinburgh Place as a group of public infrastructure [1] serving as free public space at the Central waterfront. As par the demolition of Queen’s Pier in 2008 and the land reclamation for the Central Wanchai bypass and Central promenade, the City Hall now stand inland with the Central General Post Office and the Star Ferry Car Park.

Circulation of the City Hall with the surrounding

Right Elevation

Left Elevation

Front Elevation

2 HONG KONG NEWSEXPO (THE BRIDGES STREET MARKET) Standing at what was once a part of the old site of American Congregational Mission Preaching Hall, the Bridges Market was the first permanent, public market of its kind built in the urban area after World War II (WWII). It has marked its significance as it was the place where Dr. Sun Yat-sen lived and received baptism in 1883. In view of the destruction of the old markets during the occupation, the site was evolved into a market, built under the auspices of the then Urban Council, to meet the demand of the post WWII rising population. It was constructed and commenced operation in 1953, housing a total of 59 stalls, especially from Bridges Street and the neighbouring Wing Lee Street. Apart from stalls, the second floor consists of a small penthouse on the roof that provides accommodation for a caretaker and coolies. The market has improvised itself with an entrance added with a link bridge at the east elevation to connect the first floor of the Market to Shing WOng Street. The remaining part of the frist floor is used as an indoor children’s playground which is connected to Wing Lett street by two bridges. Under the Batch III Revitalisation Scheme, the

3 SHEUNG WAN MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING Located at 345 Queen’s Road Central, Sheung Wan Municipal Services Building is a multi-functional building serving the Sheung Wan community. It is Hong Kong’s typical modernist-style municipal services building designed by the government architect. In 1844, it was a T-shaped open-air bazaar run by Chinese merchants[1]. The municipal services building was formerly the two-storey Victorian-style South Block of the original Western Market built in 1858 to cater the rapid population growth due to migration flux. The market was rebuilt into the 13-storey Urban Council Sheung Wan Complex in 1988 which was a modern architecture after the demolition of the South Block in 1983 for the construction of the Mass Transit Railway Island Line. It was renamed as Sheung Wan Municipal Services Building in 2000 after the dismissal of the Urban Council[2].

CITY HALL : THE PIONEER IN MODERNISING PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE

Joanna Yan Nok, Fong

Walking through the history of Hong Kong, the City Hall has captured all of the important milestones since the very beginning of modernity. From the recovery after the war to the golden age of the 80s to the fall of the Queen’s Pier till now. Standing on Edinburgh Plaza, overlooking Victoria Harbour, set as the cornerstone of the modernisation and transformation to what Hong Kong is nowadays. As the first civic complex in Hong Kong, the services and the architectural space of the City Hall showcase modernism in miniature. This essay will highlight how the City Hall ties with modernism in Hong Kong from the eye of inclusion in terms of users, functions and how it is excluded in the present under the public architecture social organisation [1] [2].

Hall was repositioned as a public architecture for all. In the era of fluorishment of post-war Hong Kong, City Hall was the first of many public architecture catering citizens’ growing demand in cultural and leisure activities aside from economic development in building the manufacturing industries and solving the city’s urgent housing problems. As the architect of City Hall Ron Philip once mentioned, “From the very first day the City Hall established itself as a Centre for the community.” [7]. The emarkment of cultural development by rebuilding the City Hall can be considered as part of the embarkment of the governmentled modernity [6] . As the first public architecture focusing on cultural needs in a city-wide scale, a city hall council was formed in 1950, representing voices from 55 local civic organizations. It showed the government’s determination to take the general public’s need into consideration and prioritise. Art exhibition, access to knowledge at the library and music in a concert hallare no longer

exclusive to particular group of people but open to the general public to facilitate people’s awareness in the society regarding to arts and culture. It is also part of the government’s vision to project Hong Kong as a cosmopolitan entrepot and international city[7] to the world by hopping on the modern movement. As the first cultural hub for all in Hong Kong, the City Hall serves as a cornerstone to modernise Hong Kong in diversity. The construction of City Hall aimed to transform arts and culture into something more accessible to the wider public, the architectural element of the building has facilitated such inclusion. The City Hall complex consists of a high black and low block. Back in the very beginning before the existence of the Central Library or other museums, it was composed of the principal library, history and art museum, Memorial Garden and the concert hall, all within the entire complex. With such a multifunctional program, City Hall serves as a landmark public

architecture for future municipal buildings and district town halls that prioritised the inclusion of multifunctional usage within a building or a complex. This strategy not only can gather all related public services for easier management and convenience to the public, but it is also essential to reduce the cost in building public facilities and reserve more resources to the providence of public service. Such emphasis in functionalism also echos with Le Corbusier’s idea of “City within a city” in building projects like the Unite d’Habitation. Prioritising cost efficiency in mass production, avoiding redundancy and optimising the inclusion of various facilities within one building. Such modern strategy has a longlasting influence on the built environment in Hong Kong considering our limited land, buildings are in gigantic height to maximise the full potential of the building, in housing projects or public municipal buildings. Aside from the functionality of the building, the placement of different architectural

elements based on the principle of “form follows function” also facilitates the inclusion of different users. The main entrance of the lower block used to align with the Queen’s Pier in a ceremonial axis [8]and Edinburgh Place Ferry Pier, two of the most used public pier at the time, draw visitors from the area but also those from the Harbour across. The memorial garden is surrounded by the courtyard colonnade promenade and the walkway on top, and the seamless linkage to Edinburgh Plaza also provides a unique public space to the crowded city. Even if citizens do not wish to participate in any cultural activities in the City Hall, they are also able to find their space in the entire complex. Till now, City Hall is still one of the popular sites for white collars to take a short break from the busy side of Central. The guiding principle of “form follows function” also extends to the space allocation within the complex and allow flexibility and rigidity in facility allocation. The high block facing the Harbour is designed with

a free plan, enabling the change in facility allocation easily over the years. For instance, the upper floors of the High Block used to be the exhibition space of the Art and History Museum before turning more floors into a library and study area, as new architecture is built solely for each of these programs. The City Hall as a pioneer in public architecture in hong kong may have served its purpose greatly as one of the best concert halls and a landmark location for all forms of cultural activities and public services over the years. Unfortunately, is the multifunctional architecture still the public architecture our city needs now? Since the reclamation of the new Central waterfront and the demolishment of the City Hall Complex has seemingly become isolated from the main pedestrian bridge from the inner city to the waterfront. The City Hall is no longer a place that is easily accessible to the users, without deliberate intention, it is hardly somewhere citizens will pass by and use its services. Besides, the

important functions of City Hall have been replaced by other public architectures, as dedicated architectures are built to cater for the growing demand in public services in arts and culture, namely the Central Library in Causeway Bay and Hong Kong Cultural Centre across the harbour and the West Kowloon cultural district. The significance of City Hall as a public architecture is devalued and the vast inclusion of functions is no longer attractive to users nowadays. Besides, in view of the promotion of arts and culture, City Hall serves as a venue for more traditional activities like Chinese calligraphy exhibitions and Chinese opera shows by elderly groups. Looking uphil in Central, in comparison to the boom of hipster arts and cultural hubs like Tai Kwan and PMQ nearby, the position of City Hall in the discipline are lost in the radar. In light of the above phenomenon, it raised the question of whether such inclusiveness in terms of functions is still necessary as a public architecture nowadays. With the array

of public architecture in town, should we consider City Hall as another district-based multifunctional public building serving the population in the CBD or should City Hall reposition to have an exclusive function alike other public architecture in Hong Kong that targets the entire population as target user. Is inclusiveness a principle for a city-scale public architecture to continue align with? What is the significance of the City Hall to citizens now and where do we vision public architecture in the future is the question to be answered from the walking tour. City scale public architecture,like the City Hall served as the landmark project under the social organisation of public architecture. The inclusivity of civic complex in terms of function and user was a successful pioneer in introducing public facilities and the promotion and cultural and leisure activities to the general public. Such large scale complex thus became a great reference for district-scale civic complex and municipal

buildings that scale down the civic complex by adjusting to the target audience and local demand. Fast forward to present, the modernist public architecture may no longer serve as a landmark facility to the public due to the evolution of public architecture and the development in social needs. Therefore, citizens should rethink the position of City Hall and will the change in inclusiveness in function make City Hall revitalise once again by adopting the contemporary way of managing public architecture for the optimal benefits to the citizens.

Notes 1. The Hong Kong Institute of Architects, “ The Hong Kong Institute of Architects Public Statement on the Issue of Queen’s Pier and Edinburgh Place “, (2007) 2.

Edwards, Paul N, “Infrastructure and Modernity : Force , Time , and Social Organization in the History of Sociotechnical Systems.” (2001).

3. Lcsd.Gov.Hk. “Hong Kong City Hall - Introduction” 4. Richard Daniel Klein, ” Law and Racism in an Asian Setting: An Analysis of the British Rule of Hong Kong” (2013) 5.

“PEAK DISTRICT RESERVATION 1904,” Historical Laws of Hong

ORDINANCE, Kong Online

6. Xue, Charlie Qiuli. “Hong Kong Architecture 1945– 2015.” From Colonial to Global, Singapore (2016). 7.

Christopher Dewold, Heritage, Part VI:

“Hong City

Kong’s Hall”,

Antiquities Advisory Board, “A Historical and Architectural Appraisal of Queen’s Pier, Central” ,(2007)

9. Being Hong Kong, “ Rebranding City Hall” 10.

Han,

Man,

“The

Characteristics

Modern (2019)

(2019) Modern

11. 12. 13.

Architecture :

Charlie Q. L. Hong Kong

Hong

Kong,

1930s-1970s”,

(2016)

Xue, Contextualizing modernity architecture 1946-2011, (2014)

HKIA, “ Teaching Architecture in

kit : Central

Introduction “, (2012)

14. HKIA, “ Teaching kit: Visit Central : Architecture forms in different time period”, (2012)

FROM INCLUSIVE TO EXCLUSIVE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMNUITY-BASED ARCHITECTURE Walking from the City Hall, it is hard not to admire diverse architectural beauty along the way. Between the Tanglous, one structure stood out: with plain painted rendered wall featuring two horizontal streamlined bands of windows, this volumetric, undecorated architecture is rather peculiar to the neighbourhood. This is the HKNE. Standing here for more than a century, it has undergone 4 stages of transformation: from a preaching hall in 1883 under British rule, to a market under Japanese occupation in the 1950s to the Chinese handover and finally the present, as a news-expo. The architecture has endured decades and has proved its many significance to the growing community.

Among the many predecessors, this essay will introduce HKNE’s relation with modernism through the idea of inclusion, in particular, how it has become gradually exclusive from its time as the Bridges Street Market to the present in terms of users and function under public architectural social organisation. Built against the chaotic backdrop of the resumption of British sovereignty after the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong, the Market was architecturally positioned as a modern community-scaled market that was designed as a method for top-down social organisation in the post-war period. In the 1950s, the post-war population boom due to the influx of mainland immigrants has made Bridges Street a place for poor settlements of Chaoshan and Hailufeng. Decades of poverty, overcrowding and disease, the major outbreak of bubonic plague further worsened the slum condition. [1] In light of such conditions, considering its geographical location as an uphill, the government decided

modernity and their ambition in creating a more hygienic living and working environment for settlers to rebuild their lives in the post-war era [3]. The Market is designed under Bauhaus’ International Modernism, where the design showed prevailing ideals of utilitarianism buildings in the post-war period. Similar to the Bauhaus design philosophy in the 1920s to 30s, under new social concerns, massive scale production was needed. Hence, modernist emphasis like “form follows function”, minimal ornamentation, the use of economically viable materials like concrete, steel, glass and stonework are also found in this architecture as a way to quickly assemble the architecture to re-organise the community in post-war period. Under such architectural style, the market is then functionally inclusive. The Bridges Street Market follows the idea “form follows function”. It is a 3 storey structure, where it should be noted that the sec-

ond floor, the staff quarter, is not visible from the outside, and is significantly smaller in size, with only 90m² in comparison to the 430m² rectangular area in other levels. On the front elevation of the market, the deliberate asymmetry conposition, large public entranceway, the horizontal bands of big grid windows are recessed from the rest of the facade and protected by an overhang. On the right hand end of the facade, projecting concrete fins shaded the windows so that natural lighting would illuminate on the internal staircase. On the northern elevation, two strips of windows are used for domestic purposes, so that the air conditioning unit could rest on the right hand window on the plaster-rendered surface, at the same time providing ventilation to the hidden staff quarters where it helds the administrative office and provide accommodation for caretakers and coolies. Here, we see that the architecture was built not only as a public architecture, but also a habitation for those who work inside.

deeming the market as inclusive to different functions and people. The market stalls inside are built by reinforced concrete, where concrete columns support a flat, white, roof-slab. In specific, the ground floor plan consists of open fronted stalls with white glazed tiled partitions compartmentalised by aisles [4]. Since they are not part of the structure, they are designed flexibly and can be freely added where necessary, facilitating an accessible and organised space for daily business of trading in fresh food. In 1969, the 1/F was partly converted into a covered playground, stalls were then redistributed. The playground is a large, open, free space supported by concrete columns. Within it, there are table tennis tables, seesaws and benches for leisure. In terms of accessibility, this area was accessed via two newly built link bridges from Wing Lee Street, in addition to the old one that connected the Market to Shing Wong Street. As Frampton has noted, ““The free plan was reserved

solely for the horizontal living volume, which modulated… by chromium cruciform columns, opened on its long side to a panorama of the city…”. [5] We can see throughout the years, the Market has developed from a sole functional public architecture to a place of habitation and leisure, where the inclusion of stakeholders evolved from housewives to caretakers, to children and more. Moreover, the extent of inclusivity does not only lie in individuals but also the community as a whole. The construction of linked bridges to surrounding bridges also includes a larger scope of neighbourhood, incorporating into the urban fabric. The idea of social organisation through public architecture was enhanced through the architecture itself, but also of the multi-functionality within. However, turning our eyes to the present, under the change of government’s social organisation, the revitalisation and reconstruction of the Market is an exclusion to its neigh-

especially the central district. In 2011, the Market was included in the Batch II of Revitalisation Scheme by the Development Bureau. Given the central western district was the founding place for Hong Kong’s news media, the Market into a information center and an exhibition and convention facility to demonstrate the history of Hong Kong media, its growing status and to educate the younger generation of the importance of freedom of press. [6] Firstly, the preservation of modernist architecture is not aligned to its function. Unlike the Werkbund Exhibition 1914, where the external architecture of the prismatic dome of the Glass Pavilion that echoes with the modern theatre internally, successfully showcasing “the true index of a nation’s culture as a whole” through their architectonic culture [7]. HKNE has superseded the interior. A new system of exhibition booths and vibrant freestanding backdrops are introduced as partitions to reorganise space and zonings, whereas the old character defining partitions and facilities are all demolished [8].

Secondly, function-wise, the exhibition is also exclusive. As a public architecture, it is mostly open to the public. Yet, certain zones require entrance fees and guided tours are rare, deterring people from visiting. The content of news media interests few people and the lack of preservation of the old market draws little resonance from the Kaifongs, making it even less attractive to visitors hence excluding many. Under the revitalisation of the area, the once crowded Wing Lee street Tanglous has also been leased to tenants as private offices. The Market is no longer a place of cohesion, nor a representation of the social organisation in Hong Kong. Rather, it has excluded many as due to its change in function. The disregard of the neighbourhood and the supplantation of the original architecture raised a few questions: Does solely preserving the form and facade of the building sufficient in preserving the identity of the market? If not, what further function could

parison to its nearby Sheung Wan Municipal Center that thrived, is multi-functioned public architecture more inclusive, and demanded by the people than a single function oriented public architecture? What induced such exclusivity: is it the top-down intervention of brand new function that did not align with the community’s demand? Or is it the architecture itself has been subjected to time and has distanced itself from the community? How do we reach a balance and be inclusive of the old and new architectural elements? These questions have yet to be pondered upon and answered during the walking tour. The Market is undoubtedly a proof of government involvement in local community affairs in achieving top-down social organisation in the post-war period, both architecturally and programmatically. Its community function has helped, sustained and nurtured the community’ identity and relationship, thus facilitating inclusion. But as the city is capable of modernisation, continuous regeneration and

membrance, runs the risk of losing its identity [9]. Without context, “These buildings have no connection with their surroundings; they are crude, primitive boxes that try to turn even humans into machines.”.[10]. But one thing is for sure in terms of the Market’s positioning as a community-scale public architecture, it is that the inherent value of such a modern building is relative, and strongly dependent on the life taking place within and surrounding it.[11]. Therefore, it is for us to rethink whether community-scale public architecture is still required in modern context, whether the Market should be kept as it was, and what modern significance can we endow on it as a response to government social organisation and at the same time, bringing inclusivity to public architecture.

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11.

12.

Unkown. “Memorandum: From Acting Chairman of Urban Council to Hon Director of Public Works.” Public Record Office. 19th May, 1947 Unkown. “Memorandum: Memorandum for Executive Council. Resumption of Land for the Erection of Bridges Street Market.” Public Record Office. 19th May, 1947 Purcell. “Heritage Impact Assessment: revitalisating of bridges Street Market” . August, 2014. “Revitalising Historic Buildings Through Partnership Scheme. Bridges Street Market.”. pp3-4. “Batch III of Revitalisation Scheme: Bridges Street Market - Background” December 23, 2016. https:// w w w. h e r i t a g e . g o v. h k / e n / b s m / b a c k g r o u n d . h t m . Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture. Thames Hudson Ltd, 2020. “Revitilisation Scheme of Bridges Street: heritage Impact Assessment Appendix A” 2013. http:// www.aab.gov.hk/form/168meeting/AAB_40_201314%20(Annex%20A)%20(Chinese).pdf Hermann Muthesius. Aims of the verkbund (exerpt). 1911 必列啫士街街市：化身成香港新聞博覽館.July 7, 2016https://hong-kongheritage.com/bridgesstreetmarket3/ Bauhaus and heritage, Omar Akbar pp.103 Kurt Liebknecht, Fragen der deutschen Architektur, cited in: Andreas Schätzke, Zwischen Bauhaus und Stalinallee, Architekturdiskussion im östlichen Deutschland, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden.1991. pp. 50 Bauhaus and heritage, Omar Akbar pp.105

EVOLUTION OF INCLUSION AND COMPATIBILITY Lok Yu Angel, Wong

The public architecture evolved based on the community’s demand for public services. In light of the need for “market”, the site has witnessed the process of creative destruction[3] through the ages. In Chinese, we call “street market” instead of merely a market as it usually appears and expands along the street first in Hong Kong, in an organic manner according to the needs. The scale and form of the public architecture is associated to different extents of inclusiveness under the system of social organisation[4]. Sheung Wan was one of the earliest developed areas because when Hong Kong Island was ceded to Britain as a colony in 1841, the

British government first developed the areas where they landed, which were the Central Western District. Compared to Central’s economy dominated by the British, Sheung Wan was the earliest settlement of most Chinese people, where the Chinese lived and started their business to make a living[5]. Early in 1844, the government designated a T-shaped open space market which was the site for the “Western Market”, serving the local Chinese neighbourhood of Sheung Wan. It was leased to and run by the Chinese merchants in contrast to the Canton Bazaar serving the foreign neighbourhood in Central controlled by the British[6]. It began with a shabby bazaar for exchange of goods and services which was commonly found in the old Hong Kong. For instance, the aforementioned Canton Bazaar, now Central Market, was established two years earlier in 1842 a few streets next to the western market[7]. At that time, the place was not well-planned and organised. Besides, the market happened to grow organically and naturally to cater the social needs. In an open

area, the space was not particularly divided into smaller ones, so as the programmes were not defined clearly and allocated to specific zoning. Yet, this unordered pace without any regulations gave the chance to be as inclusive as it could to various activities and audiences. The vendors and local residents arranged the market with their desired goods and services and activities. Activities happened horizontally from day to night, from exchange to entertainment like performance. At this point, the market was formed by a bottom-up approach, led by the Sheung Wan community to include different users and functions. The Taiping Rebellion between 1851 and 1864 urged people from the mainland to flee to the South. In view of Hong Kong’s peaceful society, many of them are displaced to Hong Kong and settled down at Sheung Wan. The immigrants brought huge amounts of capitals, which in turn drove Sheung Wan to become a Chinese-dominated commercial area[8]. Thus, the government built the

T-shaped Victorian red-brick architecture at the original site of the Western Market, called the South Block later, in 1858 to meet the growing demand for market facilities of the increasing population in the community. However, the then existing Western Market was insufficient to meet the demand of the rapidly growing Sheung Wan community. The Edwardian period North Block, which was the current Western Market, was built and put in use in 1906 as the extension of the Western Market[9]. In order to improve the poor hygienic conditions of the old Western Market, it was also rebuilt and named the South Block of the Western Market in 1913. The South Block main building had two floors: the lower for fish stalls while the upper for vegetable stalls. There was also a three-storey dormitory building connected to the Market for the workers and managers. The two-storey North Block consisted of meat and poultry stalls, fish stalls, storage rooms, dormitories for security guards or laborers[10]. The site was transformed into a more formulated

market structure with clear division for various types of market goods. The larger scale of the market was able to deal with more people, including a rising population. On the other hand, this more organised strategy somehow undermined the inclusiveness of public architecture as the locations were all designated and were restricted to the specific programmes. Western market turned from a multi-functional space which could accommodate a more diverse programme arrangement to a single-use space only as a market after the institutional intervention. This would reduce the flexibility in organisation and eventually lead to exclusion of other possible programmes which were also necessary to the community. Despite the institutional dominance, some organic social organizations appeared to add on the market’s single function of sale of food to the public. The Market was surrounded by street hawkers and restaurants to extend the functions[11]. The aggregation of food stalls happened naturally in line with the community’s needs. But

most of the street hawkers outside the market were unlicensed, causing hygienic problems to the streets of the neighbourhood. With a continuous population expansion in the Sheung Wan Community alongside the rising hygienic awareness, the existing market facilities became inadequate. Therefore, a larger scale of public architecture was necessary to provide more diverse public utilities to the community. In the early 80s, the municipal services building emerged, replacing the outdated market complex to provide more comprehensive services. The first new-style municipal services building, Aberdeen Municipal Services Building was built in 1983, serving as a prototype of the extensive market building programme of the Urban Council[12]. Meanwhile, the municipal services building was designed to deal with the problem of land shortage. The vertical design of public architecture was meant to maximise the land use. The municipal services building includes public facilities ranging from a cultural centre, a li-

brary, and an indoor sports centre to a market and a cooked food centre. At the same time, the South Block of the original market had to be demolished to cope with the construction of the Sheung Wan Station of Island Line. The government then took the opportunity to reprovision the Western Market and build a new multi-purpose complex on the site of the South Block so as to replace the function of the existing Western Market with a limited variety of goods and services. The construction of Urban Council Sheung Wan Complex was finished in 1988 and the North Block was closed after its opening. The vendors from both Blocks were relocated to the market of the new complex. The complex was renamed as Sheung Wan Municipal Services Building after the handover from Urban Council to the Health and Hygiene Department and Leisure and Cultural Services Department in 2000[13]. It is a 13-storey composite building consisting of a market, cooked food centre, civic centre, sports centre, and office for government departments and non-profit organisations.

Sheung Wan Municipal Services Building is a modern architecture working with functionalism. The building is designed based on the needs, whereas the exterior design reflects the functions in the interior spaces, as well as the interior configuration of different programmes. The circulation space is distributed at the four corners of the building with a seemingly separated exterior from the centre, differentiating the circulation and the still space. With the view of keeping up with the demand for social infrastructure, the construction of municipal services buildings need to be fast and efficient for mass production given that the government is stressing on modernisation of public infrastructure at that period of time[14]. The building adopts the Dom-ino model established by Le Corbusier to eliminate the load-bearing walls and the supporting beams for the ceiling for a freer interior configuration. The freeing of the facade and a low level of ornamentation demonstrate his saying - ‘A house is a ma-

chine for living’[15]. The building has a few entrances, increasing the accessibility to the building whilst diverting the route to three major sectors of the building which are Sheung Wan Civic Centre, Market and Cooked Food Centre, as well as Sports Centre. The vertical community enables different activities to go on simultaneously, enhancing the inclusiveness towards various programmes and users. Nevertheless, the programmes are segregated into fragments, weakening their linkage. When programmes are placed vertically, their linkage is barely visible. In this case, the circulation flow is vital to connect programmes. As previously mentioned, a market is customary to come along with food hawkers and restaurants. The building strengthens the linkage between the market and cooked food centre which always come together by escalators. The escalators connecting the two programmes are visible from the exterior, like a cross. Users can buy fresh ingredients from the market and bring

to the cooked food centre for a nice meal. At the same time, putting together different programmes creates either mutual-conflicting or complementary reactions. This brings about the question of how to intensify mutual inclusion between programmes. The Civic Centre and Market are two extremely different functions put together. Through isolating their respective circulations, people will be able to distinguish them into separate blocks. This kind of segregation is beneficial to the inclusion of public architecture. Municipal Services Building is a unique community-based public architecture in Hong Kong. It has gone through a series of evolution with different forms and scales, from bazaar to market, and to today’s hybrid building, trying to find the best fit for extending the inclusiveness in terms of functions and users. Yet not only should public architecture be inclusive, but also emphasize on the compatibility among different programmes and target audience.

Notes 1.

Wong, Tai-choi. “Illustrating Hong Kong Historical Buildings 1897-1919.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2011. 2. Chow, Ka-kin. “Wisdom of Architecture : Comment on Hong Kong Historial architecture.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2010. 3. Abramson, Daniel M. “Obsolescence: Notes Towards a History.” Praxis: Journal of Writing + Building, No. 5, Architecture After Capitalism (2003): 106-112 4. Edwards, Paul N, “Infrastructure and Modernity : Force , Time , and Social Organization in the History of Sociotechnical Systems.” (2001). 5. Leung, Bing -wa. “Heritage of the Central and Western District, Hong Kong.” Central and Western District Council, 2011. 6. Wong, Tai-choi. “Illustrating Hong Kong Historical Buildings 1897-1919.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2011. 7. The Hong Kong Institute of Architecture. “Historical and Architectural Research on Central Market.” (July, 2005). 8. Yi Dung, Ho Wing-yi, and Cheung Suk-yan. “Hong Kong Market Tour.” Ming Pao Publication Ltd., 2015. 9. Goods Market. “Old Sheung Wan Market.” (2020). Assessed December 12, 2021. https:// goodsmark.net/spot/hk-western-market/. 10. Chow, Ka-kin. “Wisdom of Architecture : Comment on Hong Kong Historial architecture.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2010. 11. Hong Kong Urban Council. “Urban

Council annual report 1977-1978.” (1978). 12. Hong Kong Urban Council. “Urban Council annual report 1978-1979.” (1979). 13. Yi Dung, Ho Wing-yi, and Cheung Suk-yan. “Hong Kong Market Tour.” Ming Pao Publication Ltd., 2015. 14. Xue, Charlie Qiuli. “Hong Kong Architecture 1945–2015.” From Colonial to Global, Singapore: Springer Singapore Pte. Limited, 2016. 15. Kurt Kohlstedt, “Machines for Living in: Le Corbusier’s Pivotal ‘Five Points of Architecture’.” 99% Invisible, February 19, 2018. https://99percentinvisible.org/article/machinesliving-le-cobusiers-pivotal-five-points-architecture/ 16. .

Bibliography 1.

Abramson, Daniel M. “Obsolescence: Notes Towards a History.” Praxis: Journal of Writing + Building, No. 5, Architecture After Capitalism (2003): 106-112 2. Chow, Ka-kin. “Wisdom of Architecture : Comment on Hong Kong Historial architecture.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2010. 3. Edwards, Paul N, “Infrastructure and Modernity : Force , Time , and Social Organization in the History of Sociotechnical Systems.” (2001). 4. Goods Market. “Old Sheung Wan Market.” (2020). Assessed December 12, 2021. https:// goodsmark.net/spot/hk-western-market/. 5. Hong Kong Urban Council. “Urban Council annual report 1977-1978.” (1978). 6. Hong Kong Urban Council. “Urban Council annual report 1978-1979.” (1979). 7. Kurt Kohlstedt, “Machines for Living in: Le Corbusier’s Pivotal ‘Five Points of Architecture’.” 99% Invisible, February 19, 2018. https://99perc e n t i nv i s i b l e . o r g / a r t i c l e / m a c h i n e s - l i v i n g - l e - c o busiers-pivotal-five-points-architecture/. 8. Leung, Bing -wa. “Heritage of the Central and Western District, Hong Kong.” Central and Western District Council, 2011. 9. The Hong Kong Institute of Architecture. “Historical and Architectural Research on Central Market.” (July, 2005). 10. Wong, Tai-choi. “Illustrating Hong Kong Historical Buildings 1897-1919.” Chunghwa Book Company (Hong Kong) Limited, 2011.

11. Yi Dung, Ho Wing-yi, and Cheung Suk-yan. “Hong Kong Market Tour.” Ming Pao Publication Ltd., 2015. 12. Xue, Charlie Qiuli. “Hong Kong Architecture 1945–2015.” From Colonial to Global, Singapore: Springer Singapore Pte. Limited, 2016. 13. Unkown. “Memorandum: From Acting Chairman of Urban Council to Hon Director of Public Works.” Public Record Office. 19th May, 1947 14. Unkown. “Memorandum: Memorandum for Executive Council. Resumption of Land for the Erection of Bridges Street Market.” Public Record Office. 19th May, 1947 15. Purcell. “Heritage Impact Assessment: revitalisating of bridges Street Market” . August, 2014. 16. “Revitalising Historic Buildings Through Partnership Scheme. Bridges Street Market.”. pp3-4. 17. “Batch III of Revitalisation Scheme: Bridges Street Market - Background” December 23, 2016. https:// w w w. h e r i t a g e . g o v. h k / e n / b s m / b a c k g r o u n d . h t m . 18. Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture. Thames Hudson Ltd, 2020. 19. “Revitilisation Scheme of Bridges Street: heritage Impact Assessment Appendix A” 2013. http:// www.aab.gov.hk/form/168meeting/AAB_40_201314%20(Annex%20A)%20(Chinese).pdf 20. Hermann Muthesius. Aims of the verkbund (exerpt). 1911 21. 必列啫士街街市：化身成香港新聞博覽館.July 7, 2016https://hong-kongheritage.com/bridgesstreetmarket3/ 22. Bauhaus and heritage, Omar Akbar pp.103 23. Kurt Liebknecht, Fragen der deutschen Architektur, cited in: Andreas Schätzke, Zwischen Bauhaus und Stalinallee, Architekturdiskussion im östlichen

1. Deutschland, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden.1991. pp. 50 2. Bauhaus and heritage, Omar Akbar pp.103-105 3. The Hong Kong Institute of Architects, “ The Hong Kong Institute of Architects Public Statement on the Issue of Queen’s Pier and Edinburgh Place “, (2007) 4. Edwards, Paul N, “Infrastructure and Modernity : Force , Time , and Social Organization in the History of Sociotechnical Systems.” (2001). 5. Lcsd.Gov.Hk. “Hong Kong City Hall - Introduction” 6. Richard Daniel Klein, ” Law and Racism in an Asian Setting: An Analysis of the British Rule of Hong Kong” (2013) 7. “PEAK DISTRICT RESERVATION ORDINANCE, 1904,” Historical Laws of Hong Kong Online Dewold, “Hong Kong’s 8. Christopher Modern Heritage, Part VI: City Hall”, (2019) 9. Antiquities Advisory Board, “A Historical and Architectural Appraisal of Queen’s Pier, Central” ,(2007 10. Being Hong Kong, “ Rebranding City Hall” (2019) 11. Han, Man, “The Characteristics of Modern 12. Architecture in Hong Kong, 1930s-1970s”, (2016) 13. HKIA, “ Teaching kit : Introduction to Architecture in Central “, (2012) 14. HKIA, “ Teaching kit: Visit Central : Architecture forms in different time period”, (2012)

The Modern Architecture Guidebook Hong Kong’s built environment represents a unique site of inquiry in the global history of the Modern Movement. The Modern Architecture guidebook series draw from an inter-disciplinary toolkit of knowledge, references, and field studies to understand the processes at work in the built environment. Each walking tour in the series begins with one of the 98 MTR stations in Hong Kong as the meeting point. First opened in 1979, this modernist infrastructure has produced a city rationalized around transportoriented development. Organized around key themes (industrialization, colonization, environment, internationalization, migration, decolonization, counterculture, and globalization), the guidebooks present a critical yet open perspective towards the implications of large-scale modernist schemes on the environment and community.