Minutes of the 6Th Meeting of North District Council (2016-2019)

Minutes of the 6th Meeting of North District Council (2016-2019)

Date : 13 October 2016 Time : 9:32 a.m. Venue : North District Council Conference Room

Present

Chairman: Mr SO Sai-chi, SBS, MH*

Members: Mr LI Kwok-fung* Dr HO Shu-kwong, Raymond* Mr LEE Koon-hung* Mr LAM Cheuk-ting* Mr HAU Chi-keung (9:36 a.m. – 11:06 a.m.) Mr HAU Fuk-tat, Simon* Mr YIU Ming* Mr CHAN Yuk-ming (9:38 a.m. –11:06 a.m.) Mr CHAN Wai-tat* Mr WONG Wang-to, MH* Mr TSANG King-chung, Kent (9:35 a.m. –11:06 a.m.) Mr PANG Chun-sing, George, MH (9:54 a.m. –11:06 a.m.) Mr TSANG Hing-lung* Mr WAN Wo-tat, Warwick* Mr WAN Wo-fai, MH* Mr LIU Hing-hung* Mr LAU Ki-fung* Mr TANG Kun-nin, Tony, MH* Mr LAU Kwok-fan, MH* Mr LARM Wai-leung*

Secretary: Ms CHU Wai-lin, Francoise Senior Executive Officer (District Council), North District Office

Remarks: * Members who attended the whole meeting ( ) Time of attendance of Members

Action

In Attendance

Ms KWONG Ting-lok, Maggie Acting District Officer (North), Home Affairs Department Ms LAU Fung-ha Acting District Commander (Tai Po), Hong Kong Police Force Mr YAU Siu-kei District Commander (Border), Hong Kong Police Force Mr SOH Chun-kwok District Planning Officer/Sha Tin, Tai Po and North, Planning Department Mr WONG Kin-por Chief Engineer/Boundary Control Point (New Territories East), Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr KWUN Hing-yu, Joseph District Lands Officer/North, Lands Department Mrs CHIU TSE Shuk-yin Senior Housing Manager/Tai Po, North, and Shatin 2, Housing Department Mr YAM Mun-ho District Social Welfare Officer (Tai Po/North), Social Welfare Department Ms YEUNG Min-jing, Anna Chief Transport Officer (New Territories East), Transport Department Mr YIM Ka-yee District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (North), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr WONG Shu-yan, Francis Chief Leisure Manager (New Territories North) , Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr WONG Yiu-wa Senior District Engineer/North East, Highways Department Mr SO Chun-kit, Herman Assistant District Officer (North) 2, Home Affairs Department

Item 2 Dr LAU Chi-pang, JP Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Built Heritage Conservation Mr WONG Chi-pan, Ricky Chief Assistant Secretary (Works) 2, Commissioner for Heritage’s Office, Development Bureau

Action

Mr KWOK Kan-wah, Steven Assistant Project Manager (Heritage Conservation) 21, Commissioner for Heritage’s Office, Development Bureau

Absent

Mr CHAN Shung-fai

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed Members, representatives of government departments and particularly Ms Maggie KWONG, Acting District Officer (North), to the meeting.

Application for Absence

2. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received applications for absence from Mr HAU Chi-keung and Mr CHAN Shung-fai. Mr HAU Chi-keung explained he could not join the meeting as he had to attend a meeting held by Heung Yee Kuk New Territories. Since the reason for absence of Mr HAU Chi-keung was in compliance with the regulations set out in the North District Council (“NDC”) Standing Orders, the meeting approved his application for absence. Nevertheless, as Mr HAU Chi-keung joined the meeting during the discussion on Item 2, he was not absent from the meeting.

3. The Chairman continued that Mr CHAN Shung-fai said he could not join the meeting as he was not in town. As Mr CHAN Shung-fai’s reason for absence was not in compliance with the NDC Standing Orders, the meeting did not approve his application for absence.

Item 1  Confirmation of Minutes of the Last Meeting

4. The meeting confirmed the minutes of the 5th meeting held on 28 July 2016.

Action

Discussion Items

Item 2  Luen Wo Market Revitalisation Project (NDC Paper No. 85/2016)

5. The Chairman welcomed Dr LAU Chi-pang, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Built Heritage Conservation (ACBHC), Mr Ricky WONG, Chief Assistant Secretary (Works) 2, Commissioner for Heritage’s Office, Development Bureau and Mr Steven KWOK, Assistant Project Manager (Heritage Conservation) 21 of the Bureau to the meeting.

6. Dr LAU Chi-pang said that Luen Wo Market Revitalisation Project was the third historic building revitalisation project in North District. As Luen Wo Market was the landmark of North District, it was believed that the building would attract much attention after revitalisation. He asked Mr Ricky WONG to introduce the paper.

(Mr Kent TSANG and Mr HAU Chi-keung joined the meeting at this juncture.)

7. Mr Ricky WONG said Luen Wo Market was the third historic building revitalisation project in North District, after the Former Fanling Magistracy and Lady Ho Tung Welfare Centre. He presented NDC Paper No. 85/2016 by PowerPoint slides, which were at the Annex.

(Mr CHAN Yuk-ming joined the meeting at this juncture.)

8. Mr TSANG Hing-lung put forward the following views and question:

(a) Luen Wo Market had been regarded as the landmark of North District by the locals, and its development was also of concern to prospective owners of the domestic blocks nearby. Given that Luen Wo Market was located near residential area, he hoped the authority concerned would pay attention to its integration with the community when assessing the revitalisation proposals and have the views of the local residents and organisations incorporated into the project so as to tie in with local development;

(b) To his knowledge, Luen Wo Market was being hired by a non-profit making organisation at nominal rent for carrying out environmental activities. He enquired whether special arrangements would be made for the organisation after an operator was identified for the project.

Action

9. Mr LAU Kwok-fan remarked that Luen Wo Market had local characteristics and a historical background. He hoped the revitalisation project would preserve the historical significance of the building while being in line with the local context and development. Noting that there was already a market and plenty of restaurants in Luen Wo Hui, he opined that the revitalised Luen Wo Market could be used to operate specialty eateries and alfresco tea shops in the hope of sustainable development. He said there were quite a number of successful cases in Hong Kong and overseas countries in which historic buildings were used to operate catering businesses. He also suggested that Luen Wo Market could be used to operate small shops with rural characteristics and introduce the history of the building so that local residents and tourists could know more about its past.

10. Dr Raymond HO said it was understood that the repair and alteration costs of Grade III historic buildings (such as the costs of appointing structural engineers and materials used) were enormous. Moreover, the existing floor layout, ventilation system and fire services facilities of Luen Wo Market limited the feasibility of interior alterations. He estimated that the renovation works would cost at least $15 million, not including the cost of interior fitting-out works. Charities which were interested in the project might find it costly. As there would be restraints on deployment of financial resources for charities, and he was told by some organisations that it would be difficult to carry out repair and maintenance for the Market in future, he asked whether the Government would increase the funding or extend the funding period.

11. Mr LAU Ki-fung raised the following views and questions:

(a) He was in support of the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market, and said that the building was in need of renovation as the site was overgrown with weeds and cracks appeared on some of the walls after piling works had been carried out earlier at a nearby site;

(b) Noting that part of Luen Wo Market was currently used as exhibition venues by some organisations, he asked whether the area would be retained after the Market was revitalised. He also expressed concern about whether the future operator would guarantee the incorporation of historical and cultural elements of Luen Wo Hui into the revitalised Market so that visitors could learn more about the development of Luen Wo Hui;

(c) He expressed reservation on the planning and use of land in respect of the revitalisation project (including setting up shops and conducting service trades). He mentioned that the Southern District Council had

Action

had discussions on whether district facilities should be built for running Chinese restaurants. He found it not a sound practice to use heritage sites for commercial purpose as commercial activities, profit-seeking in nature, might be incompatible with the development of the heritage.

12. Mr WONG Wang-to put forward the following views and questions:

(a) It was known that environmental activities were being carried out by an organisation in Luen Wo Market. The recyclables collected were put outside the Market, making the place look like a refuse collection point and inharmonious with the character of the community and the commercial activities of Luen Wo Hui. Moreover, the stalls in Luen Wo Market were closed most of the time at present, leaving the public unable to use the site;

(b) Noting that the dilapidated Luen Wo Market was a government building, he asked whether renovation and refurbishment works would be carried out by the Government before awarding the revitalisation project, and whether the original appearance of the Market would be preserved and the operator would be required not to alter the original structure and appearance of the Market;

(c) Observing that there were quite a number of Hakka people in Luen Wo Hui and North District, he asked whether the Government could promote their living culture through the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market (e.g. by allowing non-profit making organisations to operate Hakka snack shops inside the Market) so as to make the revitalisation project more connected to people’s daily life and a showcase of the characteristics of the community.

(Mr George PANG joined the meeting at this juncture.)

13. Mr HAU Chi-keung expressed the following opinions:

(a) He supported the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market, but had concerns about the transportation arrangements for the area as he believed that more people would come to Luen Wo Hui after the Market had been revitalised. He had received complaints from members of the public alleging that they did not know how to go to Luen Wo Hui on foot from Fanling MTR Station due to the lack of directional signages and pedestrian linkage facilities between the two places, and the route they had to take was rather dangerous as quite a few crossings had to be

Action

passed on the way. He hoped the Government would provide the linkage facilities as soon as possible;

(b) He expressed concerns about the Police’s enforcement action against illegal parking in Luen Wo Hui. Every day the Police took enforcement action in the area from around 11 a.m. to 2 p.m., which were exactly the business hours and the lunch hours of site workers in the vicinity. He pointed out that there was only one car park with limited parking spaces in Luen Wo Hui near the office of Fanling District Rural Committee. He understood that illegal parking would cause obstruction and it was a matter of course for the Police to take action to combat such activities. Nevertheless, he considered that justice should be tempered with mercy, and hoped the Police would adopt a lenient approach in law enforcement so as to avoid adverse impact on the business environment. He said similar complaints had been received by Sheung Shui District Rural Committee demanding bringing the matter to the attention of the respective district council and the Police. Therefore, he would like to bring the problem to the attention of the parties concerned.

14. Mr Warwick WAN put forward the following views and suggestions:

(a) Taking the historic buildings in Edinburgh of the United Kingdom as examples, he believed that a balance could be struck between commercialisation and revitalisation/conservation by preserving the appearances of historic buildings while allowing the undertaking of commercial activities after internal fitting-out works had been carried out;

(b) Revitalisation projects should not emphasise solely on market values. Luen Wo Market, once a commodities trading market with a pleasant atmosphere, was worth reminiscing and its social values worth being realised again;

(c) Supporting measures of revitalisation projects were of equal importance. He believed the revitalised Luen Wo Market would attract visitor flow. He said that in the old days, coaches that took local and foreign visitors to Luen Wo Market would stay briefly in the area. With the provision of a footbridge linking Fanling MTR Station and Luen Wo Hui, the pedestrian and vehicular flows would certainly become higher in the area. Without corresponding measures, the sudden increase in pedestrian and vehicular flows would impose burdens on the traffic, shops and residents of the area, creating a situation akin to Tam Shui

Action

Hang Village after its opening up. In this connection, he suggested that traffic planning be done by realigning Luen Wo Road so that vehicles could gain direct access to the ball court adjacent to Luen Wo Market so as to prevent obstruction to the traffic of Luen Wo Hui;

(d) He asked why the piece of land adjacent to Luen Wo Market was not included in the revitalisation project in the beginning so that it could be used for car park development. At present, residential buildings had been built on the land, rendering the site inharmonious with the surroundings and imposing potential burdens to the traffic therein. He hoped the Planning Department, the Transport Department and the Hong Kong Police Force could formulate complementary measures in respect of the revitalisation project.

15. Mr LI Kwok-fung said his grandfather, Mr LI Chung-chong, was the founder of Luen Wo Market. He did not wish to see the ambience of the Market spoiled by the existing recycling activities. He supported the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market and hoped that the renovated market would increase the visitor flow.

16. Mr CHAN Wai-tat had the following views and suggestions:

(a) Given the substantial operating and renovation costs, a Government grant of only $5 million dollars would not be of much use;

(b) Although the appearances of the old buildings in other districts remained unchanged, the buildings could not feature their historic values due to the change of use. Given the lack of similar facilities in North District and Luen Wo Market’s status as an important historical landmark in the District, he suggested an exhibition gallery or a museum be set up in the Market. The exhibition gallery or museum could be managed by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), displaying the historical heritage on loan from the villagers of North District.

17. Mr LAM Cheuk-ting expressed the following opinions:

(a) With regard to Mr HAU Chi-keung’s suggestion of relaxing enforcement actions against illegal parking, he remarked that the congestion problem of Shek Wu Hui would spread to Sheung Shui town centre which had already suffered from serious traffic congestion if enforcement was relaxed, and the consequences would be unthinkable. Therefore, he hoped the Police would continue to step up the enforcement efforts;

Action

(b) The revitalisation project was worth implementing. The Government should provide different options for the use of the building after listening to all the views and suggestions instead of predetermining the use itself. He agreed with Mr CHAN Wai-tat’s suggestion, remarking that revitalisation projects should preserve the connection between the buildings and their history, rather than being carried out in a piecemeal fashion. He cited the criticisms from the public over the opening of a foreign coffee shop chain outside Tiananmen Square as an example, remarking that chain stores should not be set up inside Luen Wo Market;

(c) Noting that Luen Wo Market was currently used for carrying out recycling activities, he believed better results would be achieved if the building could be used for other purposes after revitalisation;

(d) He hoped the Government would be careful during the decision-making process of the revitalisation project to avoid giving the impression that it had a preference for a particular organisation or private company to run the project. The authority concerned should engage various parties during the decision-making process for the purposes of checks and balances and monitoring as well as avoiding suspicion of making decisions behind closed doors or transfer of benefits. Public engagement could also prevent the project from following the footsteps of some government projects which invited suspicion of granting operating rights to consortia at an exceptionally low price. He did not wish to see the occurrence of such misunderstandings during the decision-making process, which might bring discredit to the project or even North District.

18. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming expressed concerns about the trade mix of Luen Wo Market after revitalisation, worrying that chain stores would be attracted to the historic building in future. Observing that traffic congestion problems already existed in Luen Wo Hui, he worried that more traffic problems would arise if the revitalisation project turned out to be successful and Luen Wo Market was frequented by visitors. He took the view that intensifying enforcement actions against illegal parking was merely a remedial measure. The authority concerned should take pre-emptive measures to relieve traffic flows of the area.

19. Mr Tony TANG recounted the origins of Luen Wo Market, saying that residents of the nearby walled villages had deep feelings towards the old Market. He expressed the following views:

(a) He recognised the efforts of the Development Bureau and the

Action

departments concerned in conserving the old buildings and culture of the New Territories. Taking Ping Shan Heritage Trail and Lung Yeuk Tau Heritage Trail as examples, the Government managed to preserve the cultural delights and distinctive buildings of the heritages. If historic buildings in various districts, properly managed and maintained through legislation and with financial input from the Government and with their historical and cultural values preserved, could be open for public visit, it would help promote the local characteristics and cultures of the districts as well as tourism;

(b) He thanked the Development Bureau and the departments concerned for their work at Lung Yeuk Tau Heritage Trail. He praised the excellent maintenance works of the ancestral hall and Lo Wai which preserved the features of the buildings, attracting flocks of local people and tourists to come to know more about the architectural and heritage features of walled villages. It was hoped that with the display panels on the cultural traditions at Lung Yeuk Tau Heritage Trail, as well as various activities carried out at walled villages throughout the year such as basin meals, communal worship in spring and autumn, lantern-lighting ceremony and Ta Chiu Festival, the culture of walled villages could be conserved;

(c) He supported the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market, but worried that commercial activities and cultural heritage conservation might be at odds. It would be preferable, from his point of view, to use Luen Wo Market as an exhibition venue for showcasing cultural traditions;

(d) Given the poor accessibility of Luen Wo Hui, departments concerned should study the long-term traffic arrangements for the area.

20. Mr George PANG mentioned that Luen Wo Market was built by a group of gentries who bought the land from the Government in 1950s. He put forward the following views and questions:

(a) He opposed the conversion of Luen Wo Market, a Grade III historic building, into food premises, remarking that the idea was at odds with the conservation objective, not to mention the fact that there had already been plenty of restaurants in Luen Wo Hui. He opined that Luen Wo Market was suitable for setting up an exhibition gallery showcasing the rural history of Fanling, Sheung Shui, Sha Tau Kok and Ta Kwu Ling as well as the transformation of Luen Wo Hui;

(b) About four years ago, the NDC endorsed the revitalisation project of the

Action

Former Fanling Magistracy with the Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups as the operator. Although the construction works had commenced, the works progress was slow. He worried the same would happen to Luen Wo Market revitalisation project;

(c) He enquired if there was any non-profit making organisation or district organisation which had showed an interest in taking over Luen Wo Market. If yes, he demanded the background and quality of the organisation as well as the proposed use of Luen Wo Market be examined by the authority concerned.

21. Mr YIU Ming had the following opinions:

(a) In response to Mr LAM Cheuk-ting’s views, he pointed out that NDC Paper No. 85/2016 did not mention that applications would be invited from commercial organisations for Batch V of the Revitalising Historic Buildings Through Partnership Scheme (“Revitalisation Scheme”). It only stated that applications would be invited from non-profit making organisations. He considered that social enterprises should not be regarded as commercial organisations, and believed that the social enterprise which was to operate Luen Wo Market would not want to run a losing business;

(b) What he was concerned about was the meaning of the revitalisation project, not the mode of operation. He would support the project if the land use planning of Luen Wo Market to be done under the Scheme could offer study and work opportunities for ex-offenders, rehabilitated persons and people with disabilities;

(c) In view of the contribution made by the gentries and the rural committees in North District to Luen Wo Market in the past, he considered that the opinions of the four rural committees in North District on the revitalisation project should be respected and the authority concerned should examine the possibility of showcasing the rural culture of Hakka or Tanka people (the boat dwellers) with the future operation mode of Luen Wo Market;

(d) He supported the early implementation of the project to prevent Luen Wo Market from being left idle for a long time;

(e) The revitalised Former Fanling Magistracy would provide guided tours for visitors to know more the use and facilities of the building. Similar arrangements could be made for the future Luen Wo Market so that

Action

visitors could better understand its cultural essence.

22. Mr LAM Cheuk-ting responded to Mr YIU Ming by saying that there was a report in online am730 concerning the provision of a Chinese restaurant at the Fisherman’s Wharf at Aberdeen with an allocation of $100 million from the Government and that the tenancy would be offered at nominal rental of $1. He quoted the report as saying that the Southern District Council had endorsed at a closed meeting the granting of the operating right of the Chinese restaurant to a non-profit making organisation whose director was Mr CHUNG Wai-ping, Chairman of Tao Heung Holdings Limited. It was also reported that some Legislative Councillors as well as members of the catering and tourism industries questioned the decision of granting the operating right of Aberdeen Promenade to a consortium for running a Chinese restaurant made in a neither open nor transparent manner, and considered such practice totally unacceptable.

23. Mr LARM Wai-leung expressed support to the revitalisation of Luen Wo Market, remarking that the NDC had to be consulted on the applications received in future. However, he was of the view that the project came too late. He also enquired under what criteria and circumstances would the Development Bureau put forward a revitalisation plan in respect of district-based historic buildings for the relevant district council (DC)’s consideration. He believed that DC members could convey more forward-looking views if they had a good grasp of the information.

24. Mr YIU Ming added that he would certainly oppose to a profit-oriented mode of operation. But he would not just focus on the operation mode of the revitalisation project. He would accept that Luen Wo Market was used for running a Chinese restaurant as long as the objective was to provide ex-offenders or rehabilitated persons with work opportunities or to serve the disadvantaged in order to facilitate social integration of able-bodied and disabled persons.

25. Mr LAU Kwok-fan added that the project was discussed by Members at open meetings, and he believed that the authority concerned would follow up the views collected and keep Members posted of the progress of the project. Also, Members should be given a chance to know more about the business philosophy of the applicants through certain channels later on.

26. Mr TSANG Hing-lung said that each policy had its own objectives. As the Revitalisation Scheme was aimed at putting derelict historic buildings to good use, one could not rule out the possibility of using such buildings for running restaurants. It was putting the cart before the horse to exclude non-profit making organisations with a commercial background from the

Action project. He said what was important was to have the applications deliberated publicly, and applications that could achieve social objectives should not be rejected merely because the applicants had a commercial background.

27. Mr LAM Cheuk-ting further said that in the report mentioned above, a discussion paper of the closed meeting was quoted as saying that the applicant, Tao Heung, would pay in advance over $10 million for starting the business, and the restaurant would have to repay $10 million to Tao Heung by instalments in five years and appropriate 20% of its earnings for residual payment. What he wanted to point out was that there were many ways for non-profit making organisations to shift their profits to private companies. He did not oppose heritage revitalisation, but objected to the practice of making profit in the name of non-profit making organisations or even with the use of government funding.

28. Mr LIU Hing-hung said that with a subvention of only $5 million from the Government at an initial stage, the non-profit making organisation was expected to be self-sustainable afterwards. In such circumstances, it would be difficult for the organisation to continue its business if a loss had been incurred. In this connection, he asked whether the business would be taken over by the Development Bureau if the organisation chose to quit. He was concerned that the Revitalisation Scheme would be undermined if such occurrences happened frequently.

29. Mr TSANG Hing-lung added that he believed no district organisation would want to run a non-viable business. The objectives of social enterprises included making profit, achieving specific social objectives and having its profits reinvested in the business. He would give support to projects which were operated simply in the mode of social enterprise.

30. In response to Members’ views and enquiries, Mr Ricky WONG gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(a) The Revitalisation Scheme had identified four key objectives, including preserving historic buildings and putting them into good and innovative use. So far four exercises were launched, covering a total of 15 projects. Four out of the eight operating projects were UNESCO award winners, including Old Tai O Police Station, Mei Ho House and Old Tai Po Police Station. The operators had renewed their tenancies after expiry of the initial term;

(b) The renovation works of the Former Fanling Magistracy started soon after the funding had been approved by the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council in May this year and it had been more than 3 months

Action

since then. Hopefully the works would be completed by the end of next year;

(c) From the above-mentioned projects one could see that the revitalisation projects not only showcased the unique history and culture of the districts concerned, but could also serve members of the public and promote active public participation in historic conservation projects. With the engagement of non-profit making organisations, the Development Bureau hoped to seek for the best use of the historic buildings by leveraging the wisdom of local communities. The Bureau did not have any preconceptions about the use of the historic buildings;

(d) The amount of funding for the renovation works was not capped at $5 million. In fact, the revitalisation project of the Former Fanling Magistracy had been granted more than $110 million. As long as the ideas of the operators were worth supporting, the Bureau would devote resources to the projects and would not set limitations on the amount of funding;

(e) At present, the Bureau granted the tenancies at a nominal rent of $1 with the aim of helping the operators to become self-sustainable. A maximum funding of $5 million would be granted to the operator if it face a deficit in the first two years of operation;

(f) All of the historic buildings involved were government-owned. The Government Property Agency had told the Bureau clearly that the buildings were of no commercial value and that was why they were handed over to the Bureau for revitalisation. The historic buildings concerned were used by non-profit making organisations, which operated in the form of social enterprises for provision of services, creating more job opportunities for the districts concerned and bringing benefits to the local residents;

(g) As regards Mr LAM Cheuk-ting’s remarks, applicants for Luen Wo Market Revitalisation Project should be non-profit making organisations with charitable status under section 88 of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (Cap 112). Starting from Batch III of the Revitalisation Scheme, the Bureau had established a “firewall” mechanism for upcoming projects, requiring applicants to set up a special purpose company which enjoyed the charitable status mentioned above and keep a separate account for the project concerned. Moreover, any profits made had to be ploughed back into the project and could not be used for purposes other than the project itself;

Action

(h) While using the historic buildings for operating their businesses, the operators were required to allow public access to the buildings and earmark space for displaying history materials on the buildings, just like Mei Ho House, which displayed materials concerning the housing development of Hong Kong after the major fire at Sham Shui Po, and Lui Seng Chun, which displayed materials regarding the development of Chinese medicine in Hong Kong. He understood Members’ concerns and believed that materials relating to the history of Luen Wo Hui and the development of the surrounding areas would be displayed at Luen Wo Market after revitalisation. The operator would also be required to organise open days and guided tours similar to those held at the Former Fanling Magistracy.

(i) After selecting Sik Sik Yuen as the operator of Lady Ho Tung Welfare Centre last year, the ACBHC had attended an NDC meeting together with the organisation. At the meeting, Members suggested the provision of Chinese medicine services under the project so as to restore the former function of Lady Ho Tung Welfare Centre and Sik Sik Yuen showed its willingness to provide such services. There had been good collaboration between the Bureau and the NDC on the Revitalisation Scheme, and the Bureau would continue to take forward the project;

(j) Revitalisation proposals for Luen Wo Market would be invited from non-profit making organisations at the end of this year. The project would be opened for applications for four months. So far no organisations had approached the Bureau to express interest in the project.

31. Dr LAU Chi-pang gave a consolidated reply in response to Members’ views and enquiries as follows:

(a) It had been eight years since he participated in the implementation of Batch I of the Revitalisation Scheme. He was happy to see that Members were concerned about the projects, and the questions and views put forward by Members were exactly what the Bureau was concerned about. The ACBHC had received quite a number of applications, which wanted to give the historic buildings a “facelift”, but all such applications had been rejected in the end. He considered that the most important thing was to give new vigour to the buildings without changing their appearance, just as the old police stations under the Revitalisation Scheme, whose appearances were restored while the interior was altered in accordance with the needs of the operators;

Action

(b) The membership of the ACBHC consisted of historians, architects, representatives of professional bodies, experts on social enterprise as well as accountants and bankers who specialised in managing accounts. When selecting the operator for the project, local organisations would be considered. Applications would be processed in closed meetings by following a number of procedures. The whole screening process would last for six months to one year. The selected applicant would meet with the NDC to see how local views could be incorporated into the project;

(c) He would collate the views raised by Members at this meeting for future consideration by the ACBHC when assessing proposals for the project.

32. The Chairman concluded by saying that the eagerness of Members to express their views reflected that they were very concerned about Luen Wo Market Revitalisation Project and that they looked forward to the early implementation of the project. He witnessed the development and the glorious history of Luen Wo Market, as well as the days when the Market became a sightseeing attraction frequented by foreign tourists. He hoped the authority concerned would consider Members’ views and take them as assessment criteria. The NDC unanimously supported the revitalisation project and hoped that the Bureau would later arrange the selected applicant to visit the NDC to listen further to Members’ views, and that the project could be launched as soon as possible. He thanked Dr LAU Chi-pang, Mr Ricky WONG and Mr Steven KWOK for attending the meeting and listening to Members’ views.

Item 3 Mid-term Review of Allocation of NDC Funds for the Year 2016-17 (NDC Paper No. 86/2016)

33. The Chairman said that the NDC convened the Working Meeting on the Mid-term Review of Allocation of NDC Funds (“the Working Meeting”) on 4 October 2016 to examine the use of the NDC funds for 2016-17. The following proposals were made after discussions:

Provision for District Minor Works (“DMW”) Projects

(a) According to the estimates dated 31 August 2016, the proportions of the estimated expenditures of the two relevant committees, namely the District Facilities Management Committee (“DFMC”) and the District Minor Works and Environmental Improvement Committee (“DMW&EIC”) were 63% and 37% respectively, which approximated to

Action

the original funding split (60% for the DFMC and 40% for the DMW&EIC). Therefore, it was suggested that the amounts of provision for the two committees should remain unchanged;

(b) The Working Meeting also suggested that if, by the end of the financial year, there was any unused DMW provision under the two committees, it would be reallocated between them so as to make the best use of the funding for district minor works in North District;

Provision for Community Involvement (“CI”) Projects

(c) The committees reviewed their situation at the meetings held in September 2016 and confirmed that they had neither excess provision to be returned to the NDC nor any need for additional provision. Therefore, the Working Meeting proposed that the fund allocated for CI projects remained unchanged.

34. The meeting endorsed NDC Paper No. 86/2016.

Item 4  Applications for District Council Funds (NDC Paper No. 87/2016 – Details of Funding Applications) (NDC Paper No. 88/2016 – Past Records of Organisations in Holding Activities)

35. The Chairman said that there were a total of four applications for DC Funds set out in NDC Paper No. 87/2016, including two funding applications for CI projects, one funding application for a DMW project and one application for revising the project estimate of a DMW project. The Secretariat had gathered information on the past record of the applicant department in holding activities and accordingly prepared NDC Paper No. 88/2016 for Members to assess if it had a good record in holding activities for the purpose of vetting individual applications. No Members declared interests.

36. The meeting endorsed the four funding applications mentioned above.

Action

Information Items

Item 5  District Lands Office/North: Returns on Redevelopment of New Territories Exempted House Applications and Small House Applications in North District (NDC Paper No. 89/2016)

37. The meeting noted the contents of NDC Paper No. 89/2016.

Item 6  Report of the 4th Meeting of North District Management Committee in 2016 (NDC Paper No. 90/2016)

38. The meeting noted the contents of NDC Paper No. 90/2016.

Item 7  Reports of Working Groups under NDC

(a) Working Group on Publicity and Festival Activities

39. Mr LARM Wai-leung, Chairman of the Working Group on Publicity and Festival Activities, reported that the 2nd meeting of the Working Group was held on 10 August 2016. The publicity programmes and allocation of funds for 2016-17 was endorsed at the meeting, with the total estimated expenditure amounted to $184,000. The details were as follows:

(i) A provision of $25,000 for participation in Hong Kong Flower Show 2017;

(ii) A provision of $34,000 for production of DC promotional items;

(iii) A provision of $125,000 for DC Chinese New Year publicity materials;

(iv) Production of DC Work Report 2016 with a funding of $30,000 from the dedicated allocation for “NDC Work Report”.

Moreover, the Working Group endorsed the production of DC Work Report 2016, Chinese New Year publicity materials (including red packet envelopes, hanging calendars and spring scrolls) and DC promotional items (including cloth shopping bags and ring holders for mobile phones), and gave opinions on production issues. The relevant funding applications were endorsed by the

Action

NDC by circulation on 19 August and 5 October this year.

(b) Working Group on Parallel Trade Issues

40. Mr WONG Wang-to, Chairman of the Working Group on Parallel Trade Issues, reported that the 4th meeting of the Working Group was held on 22 August 2016. The North District Office, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“FEHD”) and Hong Kong Police Force introduced at the meeting the fixed penalty system for shop front extensions implemented on 24 September 2016. Members hoped that the departments concerned could clarify the enforcement standards and step up raids against shop front extensions. They also hoped that more manpower resources could be allocated for tackling the problems caused by shopfront extension and parallel trade activities. In addition, the departments concerned reported to the Working Group on the enforcement actions taken to cope with the issues arising from parallel trade activities in the district during the period from 17 June to 8 August 2016 as continuing efforts in combating such activities. Members remarked that the enforcement efforts had started to pay off and asked the departments to continue their efforts in law enforcement. As regards the suggestion made by Members for the Mass Transit Railway Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) to provide additional exits at Sheung Shui Station, the Working Group wanted a substantive reply from the MTRCL. The departments concerned responded that they would keep an eye on the parallel trade activities in the district and take enforcement actions as appropriate.

41. Mr YIU Ming asked whether the legislation related to the fixed penalty system for shop front extensions was applicable to the obstruction problems caused by excessive stall size of licensed itinerant hawkers.

42. Mr YIM Ka-yee replied that the legislation related to the fixed penalty system for shop front extensions mainly applied to the obstruction of public places caused by shops. There was other legislation pertaining to the tackling of the problems of obstruction or trading outside the approved area by licensed or unlicensed hawkers. The FEHD noted the obstruction problems caused by hawking activities at the two MTR stations in North District, and had closely monitored the situation and instituted prosecutions as appropriate.

43. Mr TSANG Hing-lung pointed out that some shop operators placed wooden handcarts on carriageways or put foam boxes and cardboards at the railings and planters erected between carriageways and pavements. He asked whether the legislation related to the fixed penalty system for shop front extensions was applicable to such obstruction problems, or if enforcement actions should be taken by the Police in accordance with other ordinances.

Action

44. Mr YIM Ka-yee replied that if the shop front extension area covered carriageways, planters or railings, joint enforcement actions would be taken by the FEHD, the Police, the Lands Department or the LCSD.

45. The Chairman said that Members could raise street obstruction issues at the meetings of the Working Group on Parallel Trade Issues. Those who were not members of the Working Group could have their questions asked by the members on their behalf. He believed that it could achieve better results if such issues were discussed at the meetings of the Working Group.

46. The meeting noted the reports of the above working groups.

Item 8  Any Other Business

Invitation to Enrolment for the “Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon 2017 – ‘District Councils Challenge Cup’ ” (NDC Paper No. 91/2016)

47. The Chairman said that the NDC had received invitation from the Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon 2017 Organising Committee to participate in the “Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon 2017 – ‘District Councils Challenge Cup’ ” to promote the idea of exercising for good health, the unity of local community and friendships among different districts. The Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon 2017 would be held on 12 February 2017 (Sunday). The NDC was invited to take part in the 10km race vying for the District Councils Cup. Each of the districts might be represented by a team of 10 members with at least one member to be an incumbent DC member of the district concerned. The race would start at 5:45 a.m. and the enrolment fee for per team was $2,500. The race would be cancelled if less than six DCs enrolled. The invitation letter and the details of the event were set out at NDC Paper No. 91/2016.

48. Mr YIU Ming and Mr TSANG Hing-lung responded that they were interested in forming a team to compete in the race. The Chairman designated Mr YIU Ming to form a team for the NDC to compete in the race, saying that he would pay the enrolment fee while the participants had to arrange their own insurance. The Secretariat would contact Mr YIU Ming for enrolment matters later on.

Action

Item 9  Date of Next Meeting

49. The Chairman announced that the next meeting would be held at 9:30 a.m. on 8 December 2016 (Thursday) in the North District Council Conference Room.

50. The meeting ended at 11:06 a.m.

North District Council Secretariat November 2016