Queen's Pier

Queen's Pier, named after Queen Victoria, was a public ceremonial pier in front of City Hall in Edinburgh Place, Central, Hong Kong. Its two generations have served as a ceremonial pier as well as a public pier, and have witnessed the official arrival in Hong Kong of all of Hong Kong's governors since 1925; Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II landed there in 1975, Charles and Diana in 1989.

The pier, built along the newly reclaimed waterfront, was designed in a modern utilitarian style, and was opened by Maurine Grantham, wife of Governor Alexander Grantham in June 1954.

On 26 April 2007, the pier was officially closed by the government in order to facilitate land reclamation, soon after the adjacent Star Ferry pier was closed. There was fierce opposition by conservationists, who carried over their campaign to preserve the landmark. Police officers evicted some 30 protesters from the site on 1 August 2007; activists filed for a judicial review, and the High Court hearing began on 7 August. On 10 August, the court dismissed the request.

Finally, the Queen's Pier was completely demolished in February 2008. Its base piles were also removed in March 2008. In 2008, since dismantling, the government attempts to create the appearance of public support for reassembling the pier at the new waterfront has been criticised by conservationists.

History

There was once a wooden pier which bore the name "Queen's Statue Wharf", which was replaced in 1925. It was a ceremonial landing area for the British Royal Family visiting Hong Kong, and for successive governors to assert their authority on arrival. The first governor to land there was Cecil Clementi, in November 1925. The preceding governor, Reginald Stubbs, boarded the "Victoria" from the pier at the end of his term on 31 October 1925.

1925 Pier

The 1925 pier was originally named "Statue Pier", but was officially renamed "Queen's Pier" in honour of Queen Victoria on 31 July 1924 [http://www.amo.gov.hk/form/AAB_Paper129_queen_annexb_e.pdf "A Historical and Architectural Appraisal of Queen’s Pier, Central (Annexe B3)] , Antiquities and Monuments Office, Government of Hong Kong SAR, accessdate=2007-12-15] . It was a sheltered pier made of concrete and steel, with round pillars and arches, built on the waterfront at Pedder Street on the site of the present Mandarin Oriental Hotel [Martin Wong, "Ship has sailed for another landmark", South China Morning Post, 18 December 2006, page 1] at a cost of HKD20,000 ["Final stages of Central reclamation, new Queen's Pier gets a cover", 工商日報，12 February 1954 zh icon] . Intended to open in time for the arrival of Edward Albert of Windsor, the Prince of Wales, construction delays postponed its completion until October 1925. It was demolished in January 1955.

1954 Pier

Due to post war reclamation, work commenced in February 1954 on a new pier on the new waterfront designed in a modern utilitarian style. The structure was described as a U-shaped plan, with an open-sided superstructure. It consisted of tiled reinforced concrete base and pillars, and was modelled after previous piers in the area. Its flat roof was also made of concrete, topped with bitumen waterproofing. Five sets of stairs allowed boat passengers to board and disembark, three located on the north side, one on the east and one on the west.

The pier was considered "an integral part" of ceremonial cluster of the City Hall and Edinburgh Place which was being formed at the time, and the entrance to the City Hall formed an axis with the Pier to lend a sense of occasion to visiting dignatories. The secondary design goal was to maximise public access to the very limited open space in Central in contrast with the city bustleLiz Heron, "Save Queen's Pier, says architect of City Hall complex", South China Morning Post, 13 May 2007, page 4] .

The pier was opened by Maurine Grantham, wife of Governor Alexander Grantham on 28 June 1954 [Sara Z Al-Sudairy, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50379&sid=14752469&con_type=1&d_str=20070802&sear_year=2007 Royal landing site valued by public] , The Standard, 2 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

Function

The pier's primary rôle was ceremonial. It was the traditional landing place of successive Governors, who would arrive at Central on board the official Governor's yacht which would dock at Queen's Pier. From the 1960s, Governors would inspect the Guard of honour at Edinburgh Place, followed by the official swearing-in at the City Hall.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II officially landed there on 4 May 1975 on her first visit, after arriving by plane at Kai Tak Airport [Raymond Yao, [http://sunzi1.lib.hku.hk/newspaper/view/01_08.01/136293.pdf "The Royal seal of stability"] , Far Eastern Economic Review, 16 May 1975, accessdate=2007-08-07] , Charles and Diana, the Prince and Princess of Wales, landed there in November 1989.

The pier's secondary rôle was as a public pier, where pleasure craft were allowed to dock. Tour boats offering a view of the Kowloon side of the harbour used the pier for passenger boarding. Up to 1978, it was the winning line for the annual cross-harbour swimming race. As the ceremonies declined, the pier's secondary purpose became the main one: people met and strolled in the area; some fished.

On 26 April 2007, the pier was officially closed in order to facilitate land reclamation in Central [ [http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/26/news/hong.php "In Hong Kong, no looking back at Britain"] , International Herald Tribune, 26 April 2007, accessdate=2007-05-08] .

The Pier's future

From the outset, the fate of the pier has been intimately linked with the central reclamation project which was unveiled in 1989 but not explicitly spelled out as such. However, the scale of reclamations has only been slightly cut back following significant legal battles.

The Government's position

session on 21 March 2007Winnie Chong, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=40705&sid=12771187&con_type=1&d_str=20070322&sear_year=2007 "New spot for pier at old location"] , The Standard, 22 March 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . The Government later unveiled four design options for such relocationDiana Lee, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=43679&sid=13442728&con_type=1&d_str=20070504&sear_year=2007 "Harbor option for Queen's Pier"] , The Standard, 4 May 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . The intended closure of the pier was 26 April 2007.

At the end of January 2007, the government declared it would postpone the demolition of Queen's Pier until a consensus could be reached on the course of action; consultations with the Hong Kong Institute of Architects, the Hong Kong Institute of Engineers, and the Conservancy Association were held. The Institute of Architects, whose members opposed dismantling the pier, originally maintained the pier should remain untouched. However, it was reported that after meeting the government, the Institute and the Conservancy Association were persuaded by the government that the pier could first be dismantled, and then reassembled at another location after completion of the reclamation. This change of heart was heavily criticised by Winston Chu, founder of the Society for Protection of the Harbour. The HKIA clarified that their opposition had not in fact changedPress Statement: [http://www.hkia.net/queenspier_2007.php Approval of Funding for Dismantling and Reassembling Queen's Pier by LegCo Public Works Subcommittee at its Meeting held on 23 May 2007] , Hong Kong Institute of Architects, 7 June 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

Chief Executive Donald Tsang said that being overzealous in saving the past may hurt Hong Kong's competitiveness, and called on activists to take a more balanced view toward economic growth and conservation. Soon after Tsang's re-election of as Chief Executive, on 26 March, the Government pressed ahead with plans to dismantle and move the entire pier, piece by piece, enabling the reclamation to go ahead [ [http://www.news.gov.hk/en/category/infrastructureandlogistics/070326/html/070326en06004.htm Pier preservation plan proposed] , HK Government, 26 March 2007] .

The government stated the in-situ preservation, though apparently viable on paper, would risk irreversible damage to the pier. Furthermore, it argued that important underground facilities such as the Airport Railway Extended Overrun Tunnel would be affected, saying a natural curvature of the track was required. "Setting aside the technical difficulties and the huge risk involved in the works, underpinning for the construction of the extended overrun tunnel would cost about HK$500 million and take more than two years to complete".

Appearing before a public forum at the pier on 29 July, Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor repeated the government's insistence that keeping the pier was not an option. She would not give the people false hopeUna So, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=2&art_id=50121&sid=14706405&con_type=3&d_str=20070730&sear_year=2007 "Death knell on pier"] , The Standard, 30 July 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . Although Lam's performance in public debates was praisedScarlett Chiang & Anson Douglas, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50123&sid=14706306&con_type=1&d_str=20070730&sear_year=2007 "Lam scores well in heated debate"] , The Standard, 30 July 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] , the Secretary for Development's conflict of interest as the head of the Antiquities Authority was criticised. Lam said the AAB did not have governmental authority, and that it had not suggested keeping the pier in its totality.

Dismantling and storing

At the end of July 2007, the Development Bureau issued a paper for the Legislative Council's lands and works panel. Hoardings to be erected by the end of July, and the target for completing "preservation works" by November. It was suggested for the pier's pitched roof to be disassembled into halves and the 34 concrete columns to be cut at roof and deck level. The pieces would be labeled and then lifted by a crane barge and transported to the government's explosives depot in Kau Shat Wan, Lantau Island, where it would be stored under guardDiana Lee & Scarlett Chiang, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=49343&sid=14544237&con_type=3&d_str=20070719&sear_year=2007 Queen's Pier to be cut up and stored at month's end] , The Standard, 19 July 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . The paper suggested that reassembling it in the same location could take as long as December 2012, as re-alignment of the proposed Road P2 would be involved.

District councils

The government polled 16 District Councils, fourteen of which voted in support of relocating the pier to the new water-front. However, in July 2008 activists cried foul when eight councils revealed that the preservation of the pier in its existing location was not put forth as one of the options; the Vice-chairmen of two councils which voted to support also objected that their decision may have not been an informed one as not all possible options were on the table. The Chief town planner said that the omitted proposal "was not an efficient option and would create unnecessary construction waste." ["Councils not told of third option before vote", Pg C3 "South China Morning Post", 15 July 2008]

After it was revealed in August 2008 that the government was behind the 13 concerted District Councils' motions in 2008 supporting the relocation of the pier to the new waterfront, Albert Ho condemned the government of tampering with District Councils in order to "create public opinion." Convenor of the Urban Design Alliance doubted the openness of consultation, saying that "the government had engineered its results". Dr. Li Pang-kwong, of Lingnan University, said that the problematic framework of the councils has led them to work too closely with government. He said the 'copy and paste' Queen's Pier motions passed by 13 councils to support government decisions was a rubber-stamp, and a clear sign that councils lacked independence.cite news|author= Olga Wong & Joyce Ng, |title= 'Rubber stamp' council lashed over pier vote|pages= Pg A3|publisher= "South China Morning Post"|date= 24 June 2008]

Conservationists' position

Ron Phillips, original designer of the pier, backed preservation, saying that any loss of the City Hall and the adjacent open space would be something "future generations will come to regret". The Hong Kong Institute of Architects denounced the government's insistence that dismantling and reassembling of the Pier was the only feasible option, in disregard of the pier's "grade 1" status. The architects concluded that the "technical difficulties were not irresolvable, and the government’s reasons for not revising the current infrastructural design were not at all convincing."

Environmental groups were angred by the Government's technobabble, and for inflating the costs and technical difficulties of keeping the pier at the original siteAudrey Parwani, "Anger over plan to dismantle pier", South China Morning Post, 27 March 2007, page B1] . The proposed 40 metre wide road, planned in the 1980s, was now "obsolete", and would make the waterfront "inaccessible to the publicAudrey Parwani, "Don't kid the public on when the pier will be rebuilt, party says", South China Morning Post, 7 June 2007, page C4] ". Albert Lai, Chairman of the Hong Kong People's Council for Sustainable Development, drew attention to the fact that the budgeted spending for infrastructure over the past three years of HK$90 billion contrasted poorly with HK$90 million spent on acquiring and renovating heritage sites.

The Civic Party accused the Government of misleading the public: the development plans for the North Island Line precluded the restoration the pier before 2016. Christine Loh criticised Donald Tsang for failing to grasp the economical, cultural and social importance of heritageJonathan Cheng, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=2&art_id=37101&sid=11945933&con_type=1&d_str=20070129&sear_year=2007 "Protect heritage and growth, urges Tsang"] , The Standard, 29 January 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

Preservation campaign battlefronts

Public and media

In September 2004, legislator Law Chi-kwong took a swim in Victoria Harbour bearing a plaque saying "Goodbye to the Queen", to protest the Central and Wan Chai Reclamation, particularly the loss of Queen's Pier [ [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=&art_id=9508&sid=&con_type=1&d_str=20040908&sear_year=2004 "Legislator in protest swim"] , Associated Press, 8 September 2004, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

Soon after the unsuccessful attempt to save the Star Ferry pier in early 2007, a campaign to preserve the pier "in situ" was launched. Ahead of the closure, members of the public, environmentalists, and some lawmakers arrived to tie blue ribbons to indicate their desire to preserve the harbour. On 22 April, about 100 protesters once again rallied at the pier, launching farewell voyages in a last-ditch attempt to urge the Government to reconsiderUna So, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=42807&sid=13259364&con_type=1&d_str=20070423&sear_year=2007 "Groups accused of backtracking on Queen's Pier] , The Standard, 23 April 2007] : a petition of over 400 signatures from the Arts community was collectedJoshua But, "Protest voyagers sail from pier", South China Morning Post, C4, 23 April 2007] .

An occupation of the pier was started by ten activists on the designated closure date. The campaign was boosted by the appearance of Chow Yun-fat early on the morning of 28 April to sign the petition, and to appeal pre-emptively to the police not to hurt protestersChloe Lai, "Chow Yun-fat signs pier petition", South China Morning Post, 29 April 2007, page 3] . Some activists, like Chu Hoi-dick, have been involved in the Star Ferry pier protest, and took turns to maintain a round-the-clock presenceChloe Lai, "Heritage: Last resistance", South China Morning Post, 12 June 2007, page A12] . Leung Chun-yiu, who works a full-time job yet spent 3 nights a week at the site, vowing to block the demolition non-violently, in any way he canSimon Parry, "First Person", South China Morning Post, 7 June 2007, page C2] .

On 27 July, three students, as part of a group called ' "Local Action"' started a hunger strike on the pier"Pier protesters stage hunger strike", South China Morning Post, 28 July 2007, page 1] . Hunger-striker Chan King-fai said: "The government wasn't chosen by us. All we can do is to use our humble and limited voices." The Government countered this with a communications offensive, announcing that Secretary for Development Carrie Lam would appear on RTHK's City's Forum and at a public forum on 29 July at the pier.

On 30 July, the Government ordered an end to the "unlawful occupation" of government land by midnight. Activists vowed to defy the order; a candlelight vigil held at the pier was attended by 200 sympathisers. The Government did not risk a violent confrontation immediately on the expiry of the eviction deadline [Damon Pang, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50293&sid=14736283&con_type=1&d_str=20070801&sear_year=2007 "Protesters spend one last night at Queen's Pier"] , The Standard, 1 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . In an operation which lasted ten hours during daylight hours on 1 August 2007, 300 Police officers cleared away the 30 or so protesters from the site, amid scuffles [Damon Pang, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50378&sid=14757869&con_type=3&d_str=20070802&sear_year=2007 "Violent scuffle mars otherwise tidy operation"] , The Standard, 2 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor complained that its observers were denied access to the area during the eviction [Una So, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50389&sid=14754470&con_type=3&d_str=20070802&sear_year=2007 "Pier vigil comes to dramatic end"] , The Standard, 2 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

In Legco

An application for HK$50 million to fund the dismantling and relocating of the pier was scheduled for debate by the Public Works sub-committee on 9 May 2007, the same day the Antiquities Advisory Board would hold a public hearing to decide on the historical grading of the pier. Government stressed the timing was "a coincidence", and steadfastly refused to defer the vote pending an outcome of the AAB vote.

On 9 May, after an hour-long heated debate, the government was forced to withdraw its motionDamon Pang, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=44107&sid=13530773&con_type=3&d_str=20070510&sear_year=2007 "Antiquities backing to save Queen's Pier"] , The Standard, 10 May 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] due to the lack of support. Choy So-yuk, from the usually pro-Government DAB, called for the vote to be postponed, and the Liberal Party equally did not back the GovernmentAmbrose Leung, "Pier failure shows Tsang team 'like a weak crab'", South China Morning Post, 11 May 2007, page 1] . However, Government ministers declared that it had "no plans to list the pier as a declared monument", and insisted that there was "no direct relationship between the grading and whether we will demolish and relocate the pier". During the debate, the Director of Leisure and Cultural Services also said that even if the site was pronounced a first-class monument, there remained no legally binding prohibition against its demolition. Liberal Party Chairman James Tien said that, in failing to muster support to implement its policies, "the Government is like a crab with weak legs".

The government claimed that its handling of the issue had been "in line with pledges made by Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen during his recent re-election campaign" to regain the moral high ground regarding heritage preservation, following the mistakes of the Star Ferry saga [Carrie Chan, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=44119&sid=13534026&con_type=1&d_str=20070510&sear_year=2007 "New policy aims will lead heritage debate"] , The Standard, 10 May 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . Civic Party legislative councillor Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung said that there was "no sincerity [from the government] to preserve historic venues".

The public works subcommittee approved the Government's re-submitted request for funds to dismantle and relocate Queen's Pier on 23 May in a 10-7 voteDiana Lee, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=45173&sid=13752998&con_type=1&d_str=20070524&sear_year=2007 "Pier demolition cash bid gets nod"] , 24 May 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . Choy So-yuk, who voted against the appropriation on 9 May, abstained. She revealed that she had been lobbied by Michael Suen and Donald Tsang; party whips did not allow her to cast an opposing vote. The Hong Kong Institute of Architects said it "regretted the funding approval".

Antiquities Advisory Board grading vote

The Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB) held a public hearing 9 May, and Board members voted a 'Grade 1' listing for the pier by a majority. Twelve members voted for Grade 1 listing, and ten voted for Grade 2 listing. However, the status is not-binding on the Government"Historic status for pier, but future still in doubt", Chloe Lai, South China Morning Post, 10 May 2007, page 1] .

After the hearing, an activist from 'Local Action' declared the AAB's decision a victory for the people, and warned the government "not to treat the voice of the people lightly".

Legal challenge

As Lands Department officials arrived on 30 July to put up notices ordering an end to the "unlawful occupation" of government land, the activists filed for a judicial review [Damon Pang, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50212&sid=14718283&con_type=3&d_str=20070731&sear_year=2007 "Court challenge as tussle looms on pier"] , The Standard, 31 July 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] , claiming that Secretary for Home Affairs' decision not to declare the structure a monument was unreasonable and illegal [http://www.straitstimes.com/Asia/China/Story/STIStory_144415.html "Hong Kong court delays demolition of historic Queen's Pier"] , The Straits Times, 1 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . The High Court set the date for the case to be heard on 7 August [Una So, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=50292&sid=14734247&con_type=1&d_str=20070801&sear_year=2007 Pier drama extended as court bid offers delay] , The Standard, 1 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] . Judge Johnson Lam said that the case about the future of Queen's Pier should be heard as there is great public interest in the outcome and thus a one-week respite for the site.

On 10 August, Hong Kong's high court dismissed the request for judicial review, thus giving the go-ahead for the government to demolish it. The judge ruled that the applicants had failed to establish that the government had acted perversely [Una So, [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=51043&sid=14893111&con_type=1&d_str=20070811&sear_year=2007 "Court ruling clears way for Queen's Pier dismantling"] , The Standard, 11 August 2007, accessdate=2007-08-07] .

Institute of Planners controversy

The Hong Kong Institute of Planners, the majority of whose members work in government departments, had backed the "in-situ" preservation of the pier. There was uproar in May 2008 when it made an apparent U-turn in a position paper submitted to the government backing the relocation to a waterfront location, based on a sparsely attended meeting. It then submitted a revised paper presenting that a majority of its members supported such a move as a conclusion prior to the completion of a survey. A former vice-president of the institute questioned how the institute had become allies of the government. ["Planners cry foul over Queen's Pier survey", Pg A1 "South China Morning Post", 2 July 2008]

Popular culture

The pier is featured in following:
* "My Date with a Vampire" (ATV)
* "Life Made Simple" (TVB)
* "Glittering Days" (TVB)
* Sam Hui's song "Goodbye Bell" Music Video

ee also

* Central Police Station
* Central Market
* Yau Ma Tei Police Station
* Lee Tung Street

References