Opponents of market project miss the point
Oren Tatcher writes in a disparaging manner on the merits of the Central Market building ('You can't turn a concrete block into an urban oasis', April 12).
In his opinion it should be demolished and redeveloped into a couple of grade A office towers. He believes that the public would benefit from the provision of landscaped open spaces, like Three Pacific Place.
Another architect, Tsui Hing-cheong, ('Central Market machinations much ado about not much', April 15), comes to much the same conclusion.
Is there some conspiracy afoot to amend plans for Central Market and perhaps introduce a swap option in view of the strong public objections to the controversial plans to redevelop the west wing of the Central Government Offices? A two for the price of one deal as a panacea to the navel-gazing obsession with grade A office facilities perhaps?
Nobody is touting Central Market as the eighth wonder of the world. Its attraction is that it is a low-lying building amid the curtain-wall canyon effect of the district. Its human scale brings temporary relief to pedestrians overpowered by the oppressive rows of tall office blocks.
As regards architectural merits, what are the architects comparing Central Market to? The overbearing blandness of surrounding office buildings certainly provides no competition. The only iconic buildings in the district, HSBC Building and Bank of China, date back to the mid-1980s.