Newsletter No. 13

CUHK Newsletter • The Lift Tower : a Vision that Never Became Reality Delving into the Past A t the northern edge of the University Square stands a garden of Roman design named the 'Forum'. Decorated with bougainvillea in different shades of red and purple all year round, the Forum is a scenic comer of the campus and a favourite spot for brides and grooms in gowns and suits to pose for wedding photos. However, can you imagine that had i t not been for circumstantial mismatch and coincidence some two decades ago, this serene location would have taken on an entirely different outlook? Immediately after the site for the University had been chosen, the University started to design ways to link the different levels o f the campus together. A through route was hewn out of the rocks and school buses were used to carry students and staff up and down the hill. However, the University foresaw that the school bus service could not be stretched beyond a certain limit and that additional commuting means for the whole population of the University needed to be explored. Dr. the Honourable Szeto Wai, the University Architect at that time, sketched a lift and observation tower at the norther n edge of the University Square in his campus development blueprint. He planned that the tower would be 160 ft. high and could hold a bank of six lifts. A long bridge would extend from i t to the upper level of the campus where the New Asia and United colleges are located. Pools and gardens would be built around the tower to beautify its appearance. The University submitted plans for the project to the government in 1970 and obtained the UPGC's approval i n principle and an allocation o f $1.65 million for the construction cost. W ithout delay Dr. Szeto Wai proceeded with detailed construction plans and tendering procedures. However, to comply with stipulations of the Buildings Department, revisions in design had to be made, and tendering procedures could only be completed in 1973. Owing to the time lapse, general inflation and additional features resulting from the revision of the construction plans, the tender cost was escalated to over $3 million. As the cost difference was substantial, the UPGC asked the University to further amend the design to scale down the cost. Revised plans were approved by the UPGC in 1975 and tenders were again invited. Unfortunately and to everybody's dismay, the project was trapped in the global economic recession which set i n around the mid-seventies. The government started t o trim down its expenditure and many UPGC-supported building projects had to be shelved. The lift tower was inevitably on the list. In 1978 ， when the economy began to pick up, applications from the University for UPGC funds were reactivated. However, during the three years when the litt project was shelved, the University had already juggled funds from other sources to build shortcuts and flights of steps to link up New Asia and United colleges with the mid-level of the campus. The argument for the lift project was further weakened by government auditors criticism of the University's 'excessive' spendin g on transportatio services for students. The University could find no grounds for re-vitalizing the lift project, which was then aborted. By then Dr. Szeto had already retired but his zeal and concern for the physical development o f the campus persisted. I n 1987 ， he generously donated $1.1 million to the University for landscaping purposes. With the donation, the Forum, which was designed by him and named after him in Chinese, was built. Dr. Szeto further donated a huge bronze sculpture entitled the 'Gate' by a renowned sculptor from Taiwan, which was then erected on the platform in front of the University Library beside the Forum. If you were asked to choose, what would be your choice, the Forum or a lift and observation tower? 9