Sat, Mar 24, 2001 page2

• Taipei City's decision on village confuses activists

  HERITAGE DEBATE The city has designated the Four Four South Village as `historic architecture,' which some fear will not protect the old military compound

  • By Ko Shu-ling / STAFF REPORTER
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Conservationists and officials are bewildered after Taipei City's Bureau of Cultural Affairs (文化局) decided to designate the Four Four South Village -- Taiwan's first military residential compound -- as "historic architecture" instead of as a "historic relic" as originally requested by conservationists.

  A researcher at the cultural affairs bureau, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the designation did little to protect the village.

  "It's like giving candy to a crying baby, because it doesn't have any substantial meaning," he said. "If the designation has any power at all, it's that the Bureau of Civil Affairs (民政局) must obtain approval from us before it carries out demolition or reconstruction work."

  Yang Chang-chen (楊長鎮), a member of the Alliance to Preserve Four Four South Village as a National Relic (四四南村國家古蹟促進聯盟), said that the bureau's decision sounded like a political compromise.

  "I think that they're just so sick and tired of our protests that they've come to this compromise," he said. "We feel sorry about the decision, and we will proceed by seeking help from the Cabinet's Council for Cultural Affairs (文建會)."

  Curtis Smith, a Canadian living in the vicinity of the village and an avid supporter of the conservation idea, said that he was completely confused by the differences between a historic relic and historic architecture.

  "I'm trying to find out what protection historic architecture has. That's the key. The other question which I don't understand yet is whether the designation will make for a raise in the 15 percent building restriction," he said.

  Urban planning regulations stipulate that the maximum area of any building or facility erected within a park should not exceed 15 percent of the park's total area.

  The city has planned to make the village into a community park, leaving only four buildings to be used as a community center, a museum and an education center. Over half of the village has been reduced to rubble and only about 70 buildings remain.

  In January this year, conservationists filed a petition with the city's cultural affairs bureau requesting that it designate the village a historic relic, in a bid to stop the demolition.

  "It would be a disaster for the village if the description of historic architecture still means what it meant two years ago," Smith added.

  "It would just give the owner [the city government] total freedom to do what it wants. They might end up with some token buildings and put up a sign or something like that," he said

  The legislature passed an amendment to the Cultural Heritage Preservation Law (文化資產保存法) last year to protect historic architecture. No specific procedures or criteria, however, are stipulated in the measure for local governments to follow.

  Lu Chun-che (呂俊哲), a division chief of the cultural affairs bureau, explained the major difference between a historic relic and historic architecture.

  "In short, no one can touch any part of a historic relic, while it is permissible to alter historic architecture," he said.

  Yeh Nai-chi (葉乃齊), an urban planning professor at National Taiwan University (台灣大學), said that although he approves of the bureau's decision, it is important that the bureau ensures the best possible development of the village.

  "The city would be breaking the law and discriminating against working class culture if it allowed any development project sabotaging the essence of the village to take place," he said.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Airlines prohibit earbuds, chargers

  • 2

    Coast guard launches two patrol vessels

  • 3

    Foreigners on a layover to get NT$600 vouchers

  • 4

    China ignores new airport safety concerns, CAA says

  • 5

    China will not attack Taiwan: Trump