Minutes of the 5th Meeting of Culture, Leisure & Social Affairs Committee (2014-15) Central and Western District Council

Date : 13 November 2014 (Thursday) Time : 2:30 pm Venue : Conference Room 14/F, Harbour Building 38 Pier Road, Central, Hong Kong

Present: Chairman Mr CHAN Chit-kwai, BBS, JP*

Vice-chairlady Miss SIU Ka-yi*

Members Mr CHAN Choi-hi, MH* Mr CHAN Hok-fung, MH* Mr CHEUNG Kwok-kwan, JP (2:45 pm - end of the meeting) Mr CHEUNG Yick-hung, Jackie (2:35 pm - end of the meeting) Mr HUI Chi-fung (2:30 pm - 3:35 pm) Mr IP Kwok-him, GBS, JP (3:57 pm - 4:30 pm) Mr KAM Nai-wai, MH (2:30 pm - 4:31 pm) Dr Malcolm LAM (2:48 pm - 4:19 pm) Mr LEE Chi-hang, Sidney (2:30 pm - 4:17 pm) Miss LO Yee-hang* Mr MAN Chi-wah, MH* Mr WONG Kin-shing (2:30 pm - 4:51 pm) Mr YIP Wing-shing, BBS, MH, JP*

Co-opted Members Mr CHAN Hiu-fun* Ms LEUNG Shuk-yi, Emily (2:38 pm - end of the meeting) Mr NG Siu-hong* Ms WONG Mi-hing, Shirley*

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

- 1 - Guests Item 4 Miss AU Wing-yan, Christine Principal Assistant Secretary (Harbour), Development Bureau Mr Vincent NG Chairman, Core Group for Public Engagement, Harbourfront Commission Mr YU Wai-shing, Frederick Assistant Secretary (Harbour) Special Duties, Development Bureau/ Secretary, Core Group for Public Engagement, Harbourfront Commission

Item 5 Mr LO Chi-sing, Jacen Senior Architect/21, Architectural Services Department Mr CHAN Tsin-ching, Jim Architect/207, Architectural Services Department Ms CHOW Pui-shan, Cindy Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Central and Western, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mrs YAU LAU Kwau-yau, Ada Curator (Archaeology), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr MA Man-kwong, Ray Assistant Curator I (Archaeological Preservation)2, Leisure and Cultural Services Department

Item 6 Miss TO Ka-yin, Karen Assistant Secretary (Further Education)2, Education Bureau Ms CHING Yee-ki, Kitty Senior Project Executive (Further Education), Education Bureau Mr TAM Si-wai, Kenneth Chief Heritage Manager (Antiquities & Monuments), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr William LO Senior Heritage Officer 1, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr Gavin TUN Director, Project Management, Capital Project Delivery, Facilities Services, University of Chicago Mr Richard JOHNSON Managing Director of Executive MBA Program Asia, Chicago Booth Mr Francis YAN Managing Director (Architect), Bing Thom Architects (BTA) Mr WAI Hing-wah Authorised Person (Architect), Bing Thom Architects (BTA) Ms Kwan LAM Architect, Bing Thom Architects (BTA) Ms May HO Conservation Architect, Centre for Architectural Heritage Research, CUHK Ms Sarah LEE General Manager & Director of Service, C.K. Lo and S. Lam Limited Ms Sarah HO Account Executive, C.K. Lo and S. Lam Limited Mr Edmund KWOK Associate Director, MVA Hong Kong, MVA Asia Limited

- 2 - Mr Gabriel YAM Associate (Structural Engineer), Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited Ms Cindy TSANG Director (Planning), Townland Consultants Limited Mr Craig DOUBLEDAY Director (Landscape Designer), Urbis Limited Mr NGAI Chak-man Landscape Designer, Urbis Limited

Item 7 Ms CHOW Pui-shan, Cindy Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Central and Western, Leisure and Cultural Services Department

In Attendance: Miss CHOW Ho-kiu, Cheryl, JP District Officer (Central and Western) Mr CHAN Yun-man, Winston Assistant District Officer (Central and Western) Ms CHAN Shing-fung Senior Executive Officer (District Council) (Acting), Central and Western District Office Mr CHU Kam-sing, Daniel Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Central Western, Southern and Islands) 2, Social Welfare Department Ms Doris CHUN Senior Community Relations Officer, Independent Commission Against Corruption Mrs KWOK WONG Mun-yi Senior School Development Officer (Central Western and Southern) 2, Education Bureau Dr Jaime SIN Senior Medical and Health Officer (Community Liaison), Department of Health Mr LAI Fai-keung Neighbourhood Police Co-ordinator, Police Community Relations Office, Central District, Hong Kong Police Force Mr CHEUNG Ka-lok Neighbourhood Police Co-ordinator, Police Community Relations Office, Western District, Hong Kong Police Force Miss WONG Shuk-fan, Elisa Senior Manager (Cultural Services) Hong Kong West, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms LEE Wing-yee, Winnie Manager (Hong Kong West) Marketing, Programme and District Activities, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms CHOW Pui-shan, Cindy Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Central and Western, Leisure and Cultural Services Department

Secretary Miss TAI Lok-tung, Jovy Executive Officer (District Council) 5 Central and Western District Office

Absent with Apologies: Ms CHENG Lai-king Mr CHAN Ho-lim, Joseph Absent due to illness Mr NG Siu-keung, Thomas, MH, JP

- 3 - Ms HUNG Po-wa Mr NG Wing-yan, MH

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed all to the 5th meeting of the Culture, Leisure & Social Affairs Committee (CLSAC) (2014-2015) under the Central and Western District Council (C&WDC). The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received a notification of absence from Mr Joseph CHAN before the meeting. He indicated that he could not attend the meeting due to sickness and a medical certificate had been attached with the notification. The Committee accepted the application of absence from Mr Joseph CHAN.

Item 1: Adoption of the Agenda

2. As there were no comments from Members, the agenda was adopted.

Item 2: Confirmation of the Minutes of the 4 th CLSAC Meeting (201 4 -201 5 )

3. As Members had no comments on the minutes of the 4th CLSAC meeting, the minutes were confirmed.

Item 3: Chairman’s Report

4. The Chairman had nothing particular to highlight.

Item 4: Proposed Establishment of a Harbourfront Authority – Phase II Public Engagement Exercise (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 39 /2014) (2:30 pm – 3:20 pm)

5. Miss Christine AU, Principal Assistant Secretary (Harbour) of the Development Bureau (DEVB), thanked the C&WDC for its concern over the harbourfront and the selection of waterfront development as its Signature Project. She said that the Harbourfront Commission (HC) had submitted a report to the Chief Executive in 2012, suggesting the establishment of a dedicated statutory Harbourfront Authority (HFA) to promote harbourfront development. The Proposed Establishment of a HFA – Phase I Public Engagement Exercise (PE) was conducted from October 2013 to January 2014 to consult various sectors. The overall comments were positive, and the majority of the public agreed with the direction of establishing a HFA. However, they raised quite a number of concerns, such as the responsibilities and flexibility of the HFA. In response, the Administration launched the Phase II PE in September 2014 to put forward concrete proposals on the above issues for further discussion with the public and seeking support from

- 4 - various sectors.

6. Mr Frederick YU, Core Group Secretary of the HC, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposals, including the public’s aspirations towards Victoria Harbourfront, definition of Victoria Harbourfront, objectives and functions of the HFA, public accountability measures, land matters, finance matters, way forward, etc.

7. The Chairman invited discussion on the paper. The questions and views of Members were as follows:

(i) Mr HUI Chi-fung enquired about the role of the proposed HFA in the protection and preservation of the harbour, and its response to any future reclamation projects proposed by the Administration. He suggested that no reclamation in Victoria Harbour should be stated clearly as one of the objectives of the HFA. In addition, he enquired of the HFA about the sizes of the sites under its management. He worried that if government departments still wielded influence over these sites, the HFA’s effort in achieving the objective of being “creative in design and operation of the harbourfront” would be undermined. He cited the example of the C&WDC which sought to provide additional cycle tracks in the Central Waterfront Promenade, and said that if the HFA did not have the management rights over the whole promenade, cycle tracks would become fragmented. Lastly, as regards “balancing social objectives and commercial return”, he hoped that the HFA would clarify the definition of commercial return. He was concerned about the HFA’s proposal of seconding civil servants from various government departments to form an executive team in the initial establishment of the HFA. He held the view that this would bring the established culture of non- creativity in the Government to the HFA, and that culture might linger on even after the HFA had its own executive team in the future. He proposed that the HFA should form a new executive team.

(ii) Mr CHAN Choi-hi opined that the structure of the HFA should be as simple as possible to avoid multi-layering. He also enquired whether the HFA would be established by means of legislation. He was of the view that the HFA should form a new executive team so as to bring in new ideas. In contrast, the secondment of civil servants might bring in bureaucracy. As for the provision of additional cycle tracks, he enquired whether the HFA would take the lead in inter-departmental collaboration.

(iii) The Chairman agreed with the vision and objectives of the HFA and hoped that the HFA would forge ahead with its objectives upon its establishment. He agreed that civil servants should be seconded to the HFA during its fledgling stage. He also said that a number of healthcare staff and professionals were seconded from the University of Hong Kong and the Department of Health right after the Hospital Authority (HA) was established and considered that this would reduce the necessary resources for training the staff afresh. Financially, he agreed that funding should be set aside within the Government and allocated to the HFA in phases. He agreed that upon its establishment, the HFA should take over the current advisory role of the HC

- 5 - in relation to the overall development of Victoria Harbourfront so as to avoid multi-layering. He worried that the regulations of different government departments would hinder the work of the HFA. For instance, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) did not allow cycling in parks. In this connection, he asked whether the proposed HFA would have the authority to override the regulations imposed by other departments.

8. Mr Vincent NG, Chairman of the HC’s Core Group for Public Engagement, thanked Members for their views. He said that the C&WDC had worked closely with the HC and the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee (HEC) on harbourfront matters over the years and that they were fully aware of the common vision. He said that members of the public generally agreed to establish the HFA, which would adopt a one-stop approach in the design, construction, operation and management of the harbourfront, and considered that the common vision could only be achieved with this operation model. He said that the vision had been established for over a decade, during which various sectors were actively involved in harbourfront matters. However, there was still a long way to go before the vision could be achieved. He said that the harbourfront was being managed by the LCSD as a park in accordance with the Pleasure Grounds Regulation and this had limited the development of the harbourfront. He opined that at present, no dedicated department was responsible for harbourfront development and the proposed establishment of the HFA was aimed to fill the vacuum. He gave a consolidated response to Members’ enquiries and views as follows:

(i) In response to Mr HUI Chi-fung’s concern over reclamation, he said that the decisions made by government departments or other organisations must comply with the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (PHO). During the initial establishment of the HEC, Harbour Planning Principles were formulated. One of the principles was to preserve the Victoria Harbour as a world-class natural asset. Unless there was an overriding public need, reclamation in Victoria Harbour was not allowed. He said that the restriction had created much difficulty in harbourfront planning, for example, the works to connect harbourfront areas in different districts, such as the construction of a pier at the West Kowloon Waterfront Promenade, and the construction of a bridge connecting Kwun Tong and Kai Tak Cruise Terminal. Under the PHO, every seemingly simple and minor project or alteration that involved reclamation was required to pass the overriding public need test despite its rationality as perceived by the public. He reiterated that as Victoria Harbour was protected by law, members of the public did not have to worry that the HFA’s members would advocate reclamation in the future.

(ii) Regarding Mr HUI Chi-fung’s enquiry about the sizes of sites under the management of the HFA, Mr NG said that the Victoria Harbourfront was 73 km long (i.e. about the length of 73 MTR stations). The vision of the HFA was that members of the public could walk from the harbourfront of Tsuen Wan to that of Lei Yue Mun; and from the harbourfront of Kennedy Town to that of Shau Kei Wan. One of the functions of the HFA was to advocate the overall planning of the 73-km long harbourfront. Even though harbourfront sites were sold to private developers over the past decade, sufficient space had been retained for construction of promenades to connect different areas.

- 6 - In addition, Mr NG undertook that the HFA would seek to meet the aspiration of retaining a cycle track in the entire harbourfront area.

(iii) In response to Mr HUI Chi-fung’s enquiry about commercial return, Mr NG said that he had learnt from the PE carried out in the past year that many people were concerned about the possible over-commercialisation of harbourfront development. As articulated on previous occasions, he did not want to see the harbourfront turning into a tourist spot selling gold ornaments and milk powder only. He considered that the harbourfront should be a place for enjoyment of all people. However, business itself was not evil. Appropriate business activities should be available in an attractive harbourfront, such as outdoor cafes which were affordable by the public regardless of wealth for enjoyment of the harbourfront. He reiterated that a balance should be struck between commerce and leisure. Mr NG said that as the HFA had to meet the recurrent expenses and fees of allocated sites in the future, revenue from appropriate business activities could help the HFA to achieve a fiscal balance in the long run.

(iv) In response to Members’ concerns over the secondment of civil servants, Mr NG said that the committee had discussed and considered the matter for a long time. The general public often believed that civil servants lacked creativity and were bureaucratic. However, through working with civil servants over the past decade, he noticed that civil servants had started to be receptive to public opinions and they had come up with ideas together with the committee to bring vitality to the harbourfront. Activities such as the Wine and Dine Festival and the provision of the Ferris wheel all endeavoured to create a more vibrant harbourfront. Since it was expected that the harbourfront project would require approval from various government departments, achievements could be attained in a shorter period of time with the assistance of civil servants during the initial stage. If a new team was to be formed, it would take more time for the team to coordinate with the Government. He considered that the composition of the HFA team should be able to liaise with government departments and various organisations in achieving greater operational efficiency so as to realise its vision. Mr NG said that he hoped to gauge more opinions in this regard.

9. In response to Mr CHAN Choi-hi’s enquiry, Miss Christine AU, Principal Assistant Secretary (Harbour) of the DEVB, pointed out that powers and functions would be vested in the proposed HFA by legislation. If support of the majority of the public was received during Phase II PE, the DEVB and the HC would map out the way forward, which included how to decide on the establishment of the HFA. The DEVB would also prepare a bill for passage by the LegCo, as well as seek the funding approval of the LegCo. She explained that during Phase I PE, there were opinions that the HFA should set out indicators for public evaluation of the HFA’s performance. In addition, some suggested that the HFA make specific arrangements for each site and consider designating different planned uses and parameters to the five sites allocated to the HFA in Phase I. For example, Sites 1 and 2 at the New Central Harbourfront would involve commercial elements while the remaining sites would mainly be zoned as open space. The HFA could try

- 7 - out different development and operation models in different development phases.

10. The Chairman commenced the second round of discussion. The questions and views of Members were as follows:

(i) Mr HUI Chi-fung further enquired about the arrangements for site management. He said that the HFA would be allocated harbourfront sites which were readily available for development during its initial establishment. He opined that there could be greater flexibility in site allocation. For instance, in addition to just allocating vacant sites to the HFA for development, some harbourfront sites which could be connected together after minimal adjustment could also be allocated with flexibility to the HFA at the same time. Furthermore, the vision of the HFA was to create a sustainable harbourfront. Mr HUI considered that the structure and operation of the HFA would not meet this end and suggested that the HFA should be more innovative and take an extra step.

(ii) Mr MAN Chi-wah agreed to the establishment of the HFA for the overall planning of the harbourfront, but was concerned about its financial viability. In response to the public’s appeal for a non-commercial harbourfront for public enjoyment, Mr MAN opined that the development of the harbourfront would not be successful without commercial elements. The HFA could still be financially viable in its initial establishment as it only managed a few sites. However, with an increasing number of sites to be managed by the HFA in the future, the HFA would not maintain a fiscal balance in the absence of commercial elements in site development. He hoped that the public could accept the commercial uses of harbourfront sites for the development of a vibrant harbourfront.

(iii) Mr YIP Wing-shing agreed to the establishment of the HFA. He shared the view that the development of the harbourfront could be more innovative, but the HFA should keep gauging the views of the C&WDC and the public regarding harbourfront development. He agreed that one of the greatest challenges of the HFA was to connect the harbourfront sites in various districts together.

(iv) The Chairman responded that to maintain a balance between business and open space was the principle of sustainable development from the outset.

11. Mr Vincent NG of the HC thanked Members for their views. He showed his understanding towards the concerns of various sectors and considered that the current task should be to turn the concerns and worries of Members into motivation for problem-solving. He said that a new organisation structure was needed so as to chart a new course after ten years of harbourfront development. Although the 73-km long site might not be connected altogether in the foreseeable future, “a journey of thousand miles always begins with a step” and the community still had to take the first step before knowing how far it could go in future.

- 8 - 12. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to relay the views of Members to the DEVB before the end of the consultation period.

Item 5: Concept Design for Interpretation of the Former Mountain Lodge and Improvement to Its Surrounding Areas (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 40/2014) (3:20 pm - 4:10 pm)

13. The Chairman declared that he was a member of the Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB) and the discussion of this item would be chaired by the Vice- chairlady.

14. Mrs Ada YAU, Curator (Archaeology) of the LCSD, explained that the foundation of the Former Mountain Lodge (FML) site was discovered during the ground investigation for the improvement works for the Victoria Peak Garden. Two archaeological studies had been carried out at the FML site since 2006. Due to the humid environment of the Peak and long-standing disrepair, the FML was dilapidated and finally demolished in 1946. The site was then converted into the familiar pavilion, kiosk and public toilet. The archaeological study conducted at that time discovered the foundation of the then Mountain Lodge as well as the mosaic floor finishing of the porch. After discovering the remnants, the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) commissioned a consultant to carry out an interpretation study on the FML and the Architectural Services Department (ArchSD) materialised the conservation concept in the consultancy study report into actual design thereafter. After consulting the AAB again on the concept design on 4 March this year, the AMO submitted the revised concept design to the CLSAC of the C&WDC to seek its views. Mrs YAU made an amendment to the contents of Paper No. 40/2014 - paragraph 5(c) should be changed to “reminiscent of the layout of verandahs of the FML main building with patterned tiles floor finishes”.

15. Mr Jacen LO, Senior Architect/21 of the ArchSD, gave an account of the progress of interpretation of the FML. He said that no amendment proposal was received when the concept design was submitted to the AAB for discussion this year and the concept design was now submitted to the CLSAC to consult Members. He introduced the existing layout of the Victoria Peak Garden and then explained the design strategies. Strategy 1 “Improvement” included refurbishment and greening of the existing toilets and food kiosk as well as improvement of access to provide convenience to the elderly and children. Strategy 2 “Intervention” was to retain the existing pavilion and make alterations for better interpretation. Strategy 3 “Interpretation” was to restore the foundation of the FML for the viewing of visitors.

16. The Vice-chairlady thanked Mrs YAU and Mr LO for their presentations and invited discussion on the paper. The enquiries and views of Members were as follows:

- 9 - (i) Mr CHAN Choi-hi enquired about the cost of the project. Moreover, he considered the utilisation rate of the kiosk low and suggested demolishing and replacing it with a model of the FML. He also agreed to restore the foundation to commemorate history.

(ii) Mr Sidney LEE enquired about the estimated cost of the project. He considered that it was not worthwhile to spend too much public money on reviving a monument of the colonial age. He said that while some considered this collective memory, some others did not think so. He suggested the department should consult the views of various sectors and members of the public before works commencement to study whether it was worth spending substantial public money, especially when the building had been demolished decades ago.

(iii) Mr Man Chi-wah shared Mr Sidney LEE’s views, saying that the FML had been demolished years before his childhood. His concern was whether the pavilion could be open to visitors as early as possible. He opined that it was time to think about the future development of the site, which was first built with the FML and then replaced by a pavilion. The issue for consideration was whether the pavilion should be retained for preservation of history. Furthermore, he was worried whether the timber proposed to be used could endure the humid environment in the Peak.

(iv) Mr CHEUNG Kwok-kwan asked whether information on the FML would be displayed after the site was redeveloped so that visitors could learn about the original looks of the FML. He considered that it would be difficult for visitors to imagine the grandeur of the FML if they could only see the restored steps and foundation. Even he did not realise the preservation value of the FML until he saw the old photos shown in the PowerPoint.

(v) Mr WONG Kin-shing said that the events in the Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties all happened before our birth, but we should still need to learn them as civilisation and social advancement was propelled by history. He supported the project but considered it wasteful to level the steps of the pavilion with timber decking, especially taking into account the humid weather. He opined that alteration of the four accesses of the pavilion as access ramps could provide convenience to the elderly and children. He agreed to restore the foundation and the steps of the FML. He also remarked that the department could take reference from other countries such as Korea on reconstructing history with the aid of new technologies and advanced materials.

(vi) Ms Shirley WONG expressed her appreciation of Europe’s efforts in preservation of history. She considered that history, embedded with both good and bad events, should be conserved. She agreed that a covered structure for use by visitors under adverse weather should be provided at the site. She had reservation about the use of timber material and quoted an example that the Government could not find the same timber to rebuild the houses in Tai O after a fire broke out more than a year ago. She also said that timber was rather expensive and suggested that the department take into due

- 10 - consideration its durability.

(vii) Mr CHAN Hok-fung proposed that an outdoor cafe should be provided as an improvement measure to replace the outdated food kiosk without hot food, in order to attract more visitors. In addition, he opposed timber decking and opined that the existing stone floor tiles should be retained. He agreed to the idea of restoring the foundation and suggested separating the foundation from visitors with a piece of glass. He shared Mr CHEUNG Kwok-kwan’s view that restoring only the foundation could not reveal the lives of former colonial governors and the interior design of the FML back in those days. Visitors would find it difficult to imagine the grandeur of the FML in the past.

(viii) The Chairman said that the AAB supported the project and suggested that the old photos of the FML be displayed on the architrave of the pavilion. Besides, the AAB considered that the previously added stone parapet should be demolished and the original foundation of the FML be retained, so that the new structure would be separated from the old one to avoid confusion. He agreed to Mr CHAN Choi-hi’s proposal of providing a model of the FML and proposed making use of 3D technology to display the old photos. He considered that the construction had conservation value in view of its history of over a century. Lastly, he reminded that the department should pay attention to whether the driveway required maintenance and provide additional parking meters in light of visitor flow.

(ix) The Vice-chairlady expressed her concerns over the durability of timber in humid environment and opined that timber did not match the original architectural style. She agreed to the proposal put forward by other Members on the provision of the FML model and hoped that the department would display more historical photos of the FML.

17. Mr Jacen LO, Senior Architect/21 of the ArchSD, thanked Members for their questions and views and responded as follows:

(i) In view of Members’ concerns over timber decking, Mr LO explained that timber decking was proposed to emulate the FML’s design as revealed by past records. Moreover, he said that the department had given due consideration and collected information on the use of timber decking in humid environment. References had been made to the timber decking of a number of waterfront promenades and the timber components used at other places in the Peak. It was found that the timber at the said places was in good condition. Timber had eventually been chosen as construction material. He added that the existing stone floor tiles were not the remnants of the FML but were used for repavement after the archaeological study in 2007.

(ii) In response to the suggestion of Mr WONG Kin-shing on constructing ramps at the four corners of the pavilion, Mr LO said that the ArchSD had also considered this option. However, the ramps with suitable gradient would be five to six meters long and there would not be enough space to install them. He supplemented that the main objective of the project was to revive the

- 11 - decking and porch of the FML, these two places were once at-grade where timber was used as construction material. As such, it was suggested that two different combinations of timber be used in the new project to echo with the layout in the past.

(iii) Regarding the project cost, Mr LO explained that as it was merely a preliminary design for consultation, the cost could only be calculated after the completion of the detailed design. He added that as the project was a pragmatic one, it was hoped that the cost could be controlled within the cost range of minor works.

(iv) Mr LO admitted that this design could not display many photos of the FML, but he had contacted the LCSD for more photos showing the daily lives of former Governors of Hong Kong at the FML.

(v) Regarding a Member’s suggestion of removing the kiosk and setting up a 3D model, Mr LO said that he would further study the views of Members. The removal of the kiosk was not included in the project due to cost consideration. In addition, he said that the location for the display of the 3D model could be further discussed, for example, different parts of the model could be placed at different locations.

18. Mrs YAU of the LCSD supplemented that, at a meeting of the AAB, she proposed to display heritage information on the benches of the pavilion and provide a link to the website through a QR code for visitors to see a 3D image of the FML with smart phones. In addition, she said that the LCSD would set up more information panels inside the pavilion and near the FML site to introduce history. Lastly, she supplemented that at present, the pavilion was still open to the public.

19. As regards Members’ suggestions of selling hot food or other food at the kiosk, Mrs YAU said that she would relay the views to the responsible staff of the LCSD.

20. The Vice-chairlady commenced the second round of discussion. The enquiries and views of Members were as follows:

(i) Mr Sidney LEE said that, unlike previous projects in which existing monuments were preserved, this project involved the excavation of structures buried underground. He opined that this type of project would last for an indefinite period and queried whether it was worth the efforts of the Administration to carry out this project. Besides, as regards the use of timber, he considered that the Administration had not listened to Members’ views seriously. Rather, they simply informed Members of their decisions. He also held the view that the Administration should submit an estimated cost ceiling, and explain the reasons for using different materials based on the estimated cost. He said that the Administration’s attitude seemed to suggest that with unlimited resources from the government, there was no need for cost control.

- 12 - (ii) Mr Jackie CHEUNG opined that repaving timber decking could not reflect history as the timber decking was no longer the one in the FML. Furthermore, the existing stone floor tiles were only paved in 2007. As it was unable to retrieve the old decking, he suggested remaining the status quo. He proposed to draw reference from the design of PMQ in which the public could have a close look at the underground stone foundation. He was of the view that the use of brand new materials would fail to show any connection with history and was even a waste of public money.

21. Mr LO of the ArchSD thanked Members for their enquiries and suggestions, and responded as follows:

(i) Regarding the concerns of two Members over cost and public money, Mr LO said that it was a minor works project aiming at pragmatism, and reiterated that the use of public money would be strictly monitored.

(ii) As for Members’ concerns over timber, he undertook to study further with the Administration. He said that he hoped to submit the information and ideas gathered for Members’ consideration. He reiterated that the Administration was willing to further study Members’ views.

22. The Vice-chairlady hoped that the departments would further study the use of timber and public money.

Item 6: The Alteration of the ex-Victoria Road Detention Centre Site in Mount Davis (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 41/2014) (4:10 pm - 5:11 pm)

23. Mr Richard JOHNSON, Managing Director of Executive MBA Program Asia of Chicago Booth, said that the Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA) Programme of Chicago Booth had been offered since 1943 and its Asia campus was set up in Singapore in 2000. With a total of 89 Nobel Laureates among the teaching staff and alumni of the University of Chicago (UoC), including 7 of them from Chicago Booth, the university had been the top performer among its counterparts over the past 125 years. Professors from Chicago Booth, a premier academic and research institution, would teach the EMBA Programme in Hong Kong in person. The programme would be identical to that in Chicago Booth in terms of contents and degree conferment. In 2014, the Asia campus had been moved from Singapore to the temporary campus in Cyberport in Hong Kong. It was believed that the ex-Victoria Road Detention Centre in Mount Davis would be the most suitable permanent campus for nurturing talented executives in Asia. The campus would mainly offer executive programmes and would be used for academic research. The education policy promulgated by the Hong Kong Government aimed to consolidate Hong Kong’s position as a financial centre and a leader in education. He opined that Chicago Booth could help gather executives and future global business leaders to Hong Kong.

- 13 - 24. Mr Gavin TUN, Director of Project Management of the UoC, briefed Members on the advantages that would be brought to the site by the project. Preservation of the existing historic buildings would be taken into careful consideration and the damage to natural landscape would be minimised in campus design. The design of the new building would tie in with the revitalisation of the existing historic buildings. The historic buildings would be revitalised and used as classrooms, space for student activities and other academic and supporting purposes. In addition, the design included exquisite outdoor gardens for public use, such as landscaped decks, trails connecting other trails in Mount Davis and the Heritage Interpretation Centre. The existing trails within the site would be restored and connected to the Battery and other historic relics within the site. Finally, the campus design could reveal the extraordinary landscape of Mount Davis.

25. Mr Francis YAN, Managing Director (Architect) of Bing Thom Architects (BTA), briefed Members on the challenges in campus design. Firstly, the excavation works were rather difficult to manage as the slope was steep and full of rocks. Secondly, extensive vegetation with conservation value at the site should be taken into account in the design. There were also Grade 3 historic buildings at the site.

26. Ms May H O, Conservation Architect of the Centre for Architectural Heritage Research of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), introduced the Grade 3 historic buildings within the site. The buildings and the Jubilee Battery were constructed during the same period in the late 1930s. While one cluster of buildings, including Block A, Block B and Block B Annex, was scattered along Victoria Road, other buildings and the Battery were located farther away at the foot of the hill. The cluster of buildings was then converted into the British Army Royal Engineer’s Mess in the 1950s and later into a detention centre by the Special Branch in the 1960s. Most of the historic buildings would be preserved in accordance with the AMO’s Conservation Guidelines. As these historic buildings had been used for military purpose, they were rather plain and simple in design, with reinforced concrete as their raw material. As the external facade and internal layout of the cluster of buildings had been subsequently altered to fit various purposes, its authenticity and value became low. However, it was still worth conserving because of its integrity. Block B and Block B Annex were of higher historical value than other buildings as they used to be the major activity areas of the detention centre in the 1960s.

27. Mr Francis YAN, Managing Director (Architect) of BTA, continued to explain the difficulties in design, including the registered slopes, the underground military tunnel near the Battery, large mature trees of conservation value and the drainage reserve. The new academic building could only be situated in steep and small areas due to these limitations. As it was necessary to preserve the existing buildings, the new structure would be straddled over Block B and Block B Annex, like a bridge hanging over original buildings. This design could minimise the impact on trees, historic buildings, trails and underground drains at the site as far as possible while maximising natural lighting, natural ventilation and permeability at the same

- 14 - time. He then introduced the latest architectural design: the existing drainage reserve would first be relocated southward and the new architecture could be constructed in the vacated area. Other facilities could be housed in the new ribbon form building. The building was designed to stay clear of large mature trees of conservation value, tunnels, registered slopes and most of the historic buildings. Mr YAN then continued to introduce vehicle access points. There was a separate access for passenger and goods vehicles, and the pick-up/drop-off area would be provided within the campus to reduce the impact on surrounding traffic. The existing entrance of the White House, guard post and entrance courtyard would be retained and revitalised with Block B Annex as a Heritage Interpretation Centre. Other than preserving the specified buildings in accordance with the AMO’s guidelines, the design also adaptively re-used some historic buildings, e.g. Block A, which was originally the British Army Royal Engineer’s Mess, would be adapted as students’ rest rooms and classrooms; the character defining elements such as wooden staircases, wooden windows and fireplaces would also be preserved; the detention rooms and interrogation rooms at Block B and Block B Annex would be converted to classrooms and a Heritage Interpretation Centre. The white wall at the site would be preserved as far as possible and entrances would be provided where necessary such that the public could access and visit the historic buildings and enjoy the sea view previously enclosed by the white wall.

28. Mr Craig DOUBLEDAY, Director (Landscape Designer) of Urbis Limited, then introduced other landscape designs of the project that were beneficial to the community. The design of the project included several places where the public could enjoy the sea view and the greenery environment, including landscaped decks and public lookouts. Moreover, there was a large green area beneath the building, where trails in the area would be preserved. The public could access the Jubilee Battery via the trails, which would be connected to heritage trails in future. Then he introduced the tree preservation plan in the landscape design. There were 350 trees at the site. A total of 119 trees would be preserved (including the three largest trees at the site in the project), four trees would be transplanted and 227 trees would be felled. Of these felled trees, 75 trees were invasive exotic tree species and were recommended for removal according to the usual practice of the Government, 31 trees were dead trees which must be removed due to safety reasons and the other 121 trees would be felled as they were located in the area of the future new buildings or the works site. All trees to be removed were not rare species or old and valuable trees and their diameters at breast height were less than 0.5 metre. The school would replant 97 new trees to compensate for the loss of trees due to removal or felling. Due to topological constraints, this was the maximum number of trees that the school could plant at present but it did not rule out identifying more sites for tree planting in future. Other than planting trees, the school would also plant ground cover and shrubs and adopt skyrise greenery to harmonise with the surrounding landscape features as far as possible.

29. Mr Edmund KWOK, Associate Director of MVA Hong Kong of MVA Asia Limited, said that the pick-up and drop-off area as well as the loading and unloading area were located within the campus so as to minimise the impact on traffic and pedestrians at Victoria Road. The design ensured that the

- 15 - vehicle access points were wide enough for access of emergency vehicles such as ambulances and fire engines while providing adequate sightline to pedestrians. Limited parking spaces would be provided on campus for staff and VIP guests. The school would proactively encourage students to use public transport as there were a number of bus routes along Victoria Road. Furthermore, with the commissioning of the Kennedy Town Station by the end of 2014, it would only be an about five-minute ride between the school and Kennedy Town Station. Consideration would also be given to the provision of shuttle bus service to connect the school and the town centre. To cater for students walking from the opposite bus stop to the campus, the school proposed providing refuge islands, illuminated bollards and other safety signs.

30. Mr Francis YAN, Managing Director (Architect) of BTA, presented illustrations from bird’s-eye view in the end.

31. Mr Gavin TUN, Director of Project Management of the UoC, said that the project team was working closely with government departments to obtain the necessary approvals. If everything went well and the site was approved for campus construction, the school expected that the construction works would commence in the second quarter of 2016 while the campus would be put into operation in the third quarter of 2018.

32. The Chairman invited discussion on the paper. The questions and views of Members were as follows:

(i) Mr MAN Chi-wah supported the idea and considered that ongoing development and conservation of the site could co-exist. This project had demonstrated how to carry out the next stage of development. He considered that conservation simply for the sake of preserving historic buildings could hardly meet the demand for contemporary use. This project could not only preserve historic buildings, but also optimise their uses. Furthermore, the impact on natural landscape could be minimised owing to the new planning concepts. These should be the directions for revitalising historic buildings.

(ii) Mr CHAN Choi-hi reminded that history in the 1960s was relatively sensitive and should be interpreted carefully and truthfully. In addition, in view of the substantial felling of trees, he hoped that the school would arrange tree planting in more places and give more consideration to vertical greening. As for traffic, he was concerned about high traffic speed and suggested that the school consider installing speed humps in the middle of the road. He also said that part of the Jubilee Battery was located outside the campus, but he hoped that the school could preserve the entire military relic as a whole.

(iii) Mr CHAN Hok-fung supported the entire project of revitalising historic buildings. However, there were several points of concern: first, he hoped that the school could specifically illustrate how the revitalised historic buildings and the Heritage Interpretation Centre would be used by the public, such as opening hours, capacity, etc. In addition, he hoped that the school could

- 16 - provide details on opening hours of the public lookouts. He suggested setting up refreshment kiosks and providing seats there for public enjoyment. He also asked about the height of the new architecture from the ground level and worried that the noise from the air-conditioning engine room would cause nuisance to the neighbourhood. Furthermore, he expressed concern over the reflectivity of glass and worried that birds would hit onto the glass when their sight was deluded by transparent windows. He suggested that more efforts could be put on environmental conservation so that the campus could be integrated with the natural setting. Last but not least, he expressed concern over traffic arrangements and considered that most students of the school were well-off and would have drivers to drive them to and from school. He worried that a large number of private cars parking in the vicinity of the school would affect the traffic nearby and cause obstruction. He was also concerned that the installation of refuge islands would narrow the road, exposing road users to greater danger.

(iv) Mr MAN Chi-wah supplemented that as there were many experts in Hong Kong who could give advice on the Heritage Interpretation Centre, he suggested the school consider approaching them for assistance. Regarding Mr CHAN Hok-fung’s enquiries about the details like the opening hours of the public lookouts and other facilities within the campus, he hoped that the school would commit to this matter and put the commitment on record.

(v) Mr Jackie CHEUNG was astonished to know from the presentation that there were precious historical military relics at this site, and he did not want to see any damage to them. He also opined that a new structure constructed on historic buildings would be out of place like building the Eiffel Tower on the Great Wall. In addition, he held the view that if that site could be zoned for educational use, it would be more appropriate to construct a university to ease the shortage of university places. He also considered that the UoC could provide more common degree programmes.

(vi) Mr CHAN Hok-fung proposed to collaborate with other heritage conservation groups in the district such as Friends of Mount Davis, so that the school could be the meeting and dismissal point for guided tours for promotion of the military relics of Mount Davis.

(vii)The Chairman supported the revitalisation of historic buildings to serve the community. He opined that the UoC was globally renowned, the establishment of its Asia main school in Hong Kong could meet the needs for nurturing senior executives. The history of the White House, especially its history as a detention centre in the 1960s, had a close connection with Hong Kong people. In this regard, he hoped that the best conservation work could be done. He expected that the school could carry out the White House revitalisation project with reference to the study report on the military relics in the vicinity of Mount Davis to be published by the AMO early next year, making the whole conservation project more complete. He agreed that historical relics could be better promoted if the campus was used as the meeting and dismissal point of the guided tour. He hoped that the construction of the campus in the future could be in line with the current

- 17 - conversation proposal. He reminded the school to further study the opening hours to allow more members of the public to use the public facilities within the campus. He was of the view that the school should take the initiative to give an account of the demolition of one of the buildings, saying that it was reasonable to demolish one of the defective buildings for construction of a new campus. He hoped that the school would provide comprehensive information and have trust in Members that they would not blindly object to the demolition of buildings.

33. Mr Francis YAN, Managing Director (Architect) of the BTA, responded as follows:

(i) In response to Mr CHAN Hok-fung’s enquiry about the height of the new structure, Mr YAN said that it was three-storey high. People could only see two storeys with an approximate height of 10 metres from Victoria Road.

(ii) In response to Mr CHAN Hok-fung’s concern over the problems of noise nuisance and glass, Mr YAN said that noise barrier would be installed to cover the infrastructure on the roof. Shielding devices would also be installed on outer glass panes to reduce light reflection, as well as preventing birds from hitting onto the glass.

34. In response to the enquiry from Members regarding the opening hours of the facilities to the public, Mr Richard JOHNSON, Managing Director of Executive MBA Program Asia of Chicago Booth, said that the school was studying this matter. It was hoped that different parts of the campus, such as various historic buildings, batteries, trails and the Heritage Interpretation Centre currently not available for public visit, would be open to the public in the future. He also welcomed the collaboration with various local organisations and scholars to promote the history of Hong Kong. At present, the school was discussing with historians on how to attract more visitors. He reassured the Committee that the White House would be open to the public as long as campus operation would not be affected. Furthermore, he said that the Singapore campus of Chicago Booth was also a revitalisation project of a building in the 19th century, which was open to the public after revitalisation.

35. In response to the enquiry regarding the Heritage Interpretation Centre, Ms May HO, Conservation Architect of the Centre for Architectural Heritage Research of CUHK, said that she would make every effort to collect historical information of different times. She would also collaborate with local organisations and professionals to collect views on the unique history of the military relics and the detention centre.

36. The Chairman enquired about the tuition fees.

37. Mr Richard J OHNSON, Managing Director of Executive MBA Program Asia of Chicago Booth, responded that the total tuition fee of the two-year programme amounted to HK$1.2 million. He added that the fee included all teaching and learning materials and the accommodation and other expenses for the class weeks in Chicago and London. He said that there were currently

- 18 - three programmes of the same type in Hong Kong and the tuition fee of the programme offered by Chicago Booth was not the highest among them.

38. The Chairman asked the AMO about what it would like to supplement to the collection of information on the military relics and other historical heritage.

39. Mr Kenneth TAM, Chief Heritage Manager (Antiquities & Monuments) of the LCSD, said that the AMO had commissioned a study on the military structures and relics in Hong Kong from the time it was opened up for trade to the Second World War, with an expected completion date by the middle of next year. The AMO would carry out follow-up actions in light of the study results by then.

40. The Chairman asked about the EDB’s views on this project.

41. In response to Mr Jackie CHEUNG’s concern over the issue of university places, M is s Karen TO, Assistant Secretary (Further Education) 2 of the EDB, said that the bureau had been supporting the complementary development of the publicly-funded sector and self-financing post-secondary education sector. This time, the Administration accepted the recommendation of the independent Vetting Committee in June 2013 and selected Chicago Booth as the prospective operator for the ex-Victoria Road Detention Centre site under the Land Grant Scheme. The EDB supported the recommendation and considered that it could diversify our tertiary education sector and promote the further development of Hong Kong into a regional education hub.

42. Mr Edmund KWOK, Associate Director of MVA Hong Kong, MVA Asia Limited, responded to the enquiries on traffic issues as follows:

(i) In response to Mr CHAN Hok-fung’s concern over parking of private vehicles, he said that the estimated enrolment would be less than 100 and some would be overseas students who would more likely travel by public transport. The school would pay close attention to the ways by which students travel to and fro campus and provide point-to-point shuttle bus service in the light of circumstances.

(ii) In response to Mr CHAN Choi-hi’s concern over traffic speed, he said that a preliminary proposal on safe traffic speed had been mapped out in cooperation with the TD and an evaluation on safe sight distance had been completed to ensure an adequate sight distance between pedestrians and vehicles having regard to the traffic speed on Victoria Road. The school would also provide bollard lights, safety signs, etc. to remind drivers of the location of pedestrian crossings to ensure safety.

43. Mr Richard JOHNSON, Managing Director of Executive MBA Program Asia of Chicago Booth, provided supplementary information on students’ background. He said that Chicago Booth had been offering courses at the temporary campus in Cyberport since September 2014. With reference to past student intake in Singapore and current student intake in Hong Kong,

- 19 - most of them did not receive tuition fee grant from the companies in which they were employed, a majority of these local students held senior positions and travel to and fro the campus by public transport while overseas students stayed at hotels in the vicinity of the campus. As seen from the temporary campus in Cyberport, no student was picked up by chauffeurs at the moment. He said that although no shuttle bus service was provided at the Cyberport campus for the time being, such service might be provided at two to three student gathering points in the future.

44. Mr Jackie CHEUNG expressed regret at the EDB’s decision of selecting Chicago Booth as the prospective operator. He considered that the EDB had taken action before consulting the DC for land grant. He was of the view that designating the site for educational use would deny the public’s right to use the site. Lastly, he asked whether the site was granted at nominal premium.

45. The Chairman reiterated that the land grant was still under consultation and the UoC had not been granted the site so far. The result of land grant would be available in around May 2016.

46. Mr CHAN Choi-hi worried that the school would go back on its words in future. The public space set aside and the conservation proposal put forward at present would not be honoured. He enquired of the EDB whether relevant laws and measures were put in place to protect the rights of the public. Lastly he hoped the EDB could respond to the land premium issue.

47. Miss Karen TO of the EDB said that even if there was only one application for the sites or vacant government premises under the Land Grant Scheme, the application might not necessarily be accepted. She said that the Administration could only consult the DC formally after selecting the prospective operator of the site and the institution concerned had submitted the detailed site development proposal. As the prospective operator of the site, Chicago Booth would submit the proposal concerned to the Town Planning Board (TPB) for approval and further consult the views of the public. Moreover, as for the concern of Mr CHAN Choi-hi on the right of public use, Miss TO said the site development proposal to be submitted by the school to the TPB for approval suggested that facilities such as the Interpretation Centre and the lookouts be opened for public use. Guided tours would be organised too. The EDB would also continue to follow up in future to ensure the school would honour its promise.

48. The Chairman responded to the question of Mr Jackie CHEUNG. He reiterated that the site had yet to be granted for the time being and suggested Mr CHEUNG submit his views to the EDB.

49. Mr Jackie CHEUNG criticised that the EDB was playing with words in its response. He said that only one institution had submitted an application under the Land Grant Scheme so far. The EDB had theoretically granted the site to the UoC and the approval of the TPB was only a formality.

- 20 - 50. The Chairman reiterated that the TPB had the power to reject applications of institutions. He said that the project was at the consultation stage and therefore he had just enquired about the inclination of the EDB. He cited the example in which the Jockey Club had considered withdrawing its application for use of the Central Police Station site and opined that Members should state their requests frankly. It might not be the best outcome for the education sector or the revitalisation of historic buildings if an application had to be withdrawn due to its failure to meet the requests of Members.

51. Lastly, Miss Karen TO of the EDB supplemented that the Government granted the site at a nominal premium of $1,000.

52. The Chairman said that most Members supported the project but reminded the school to pay more attention to conservation.

Item 7: West Island Line Recreational Facilities Arrangement (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 43 /2014) (5:11 pm – 5:25 pm)

53. The Chairman supplemented that the aim of submitting this paper was to follow up the arrangement proposed by the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) to hand over the recreational facilities in the vicinity of MTR stations to the LCSD upon the commissioning of the West Island Line (WIL) as well as learning about the final decision concerning the changes in the provision of some recreational facilities with a hope to propose other changes before re-opening the facilities. The Chairman said that the MTRCL could not send representatives to attend the meeting due to official commitment as indicated in its written response on 7 November but the LCSD could relay the views concerned.

54. The Chairman invited discussion on the paper. The enquiries and views of Members were as follows:

(i) Mr CHAN Choi-hi said that the number of facilities reprovisioned was reduced by one and hoped the number of facilities could be increased upon reprovisioning. He appreciated the new elderly facilities provided and hoped the LCSD could further discuss with the MTRCL on the number of facilities. Moreover, he also hoped the MTRCL could enhance vertical greening, e.g. to plant some representative trees to replace the breadfruit which had been removed due to access construction at Hill Road.

(ii) Mr CHAN Hiu-fun suggested the Administration increase the type of facilities provided, e.g. seesaws which were less common nowadays. Moreover, he also enquired about the change in the area of open space and hoped the Administration could seek to increase the area.

(iii) In response to Mr CHAN Hiu-fun’s enquiry, the Chairman said that the C&WDC had deliberated on the matter and noted that the area for most of

- 21 - the recreational facilities had remained the same. Only the Forbes Street Temporary Playground was smaller than its original size, but the reduction in area was compensated by the provision of additional open space at the former Kennedy Town Swimming Pool opposite to the playground. The Chairman was pleased with the provision of new recreational facilities for the elderly in King George V Memorial Park, Hong Kong (the Park) and suggested that reference could be made to the facilities at the former Kennedy Town Swimming Pool so as to enhance the variety of elderly facilities in the Park, such as upper and lower limbs stretching facilities and pebble walking trails. As the Park would not be re-opened in the near future, there should be sufficient time to further enhance the facilities therein.

55. Ms Cindy CHOW, Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Central and Western of the LCSD, thanked Members for their questions and views and responded as follows:

(i) Regarding Mr CHAN Choi-hi’s and Mr CHAN Hiu-fun’s concerns over the number and area for provision of facilities, she said that as the swimming pool had been moved to a new location, a portion of the former Kennedy Town Swimming Pool would be designated as open space (i.e. Smithfield Sitting-out Area). Furthermore, she said that the reduction in area for Forbes Street Temporary Playground had been compensated by the provision of additional open space at Smithfield Sitting-out Area. She said that the number of most facilities had remained the same. As mentioned in the paper, in case there were several facilities of the same type, reduction would be required for installation of other types of facilities. As in the case of King George V Memorial Park, a new set of elderly fitness equipment was provided. One set of spring rider and one set of chess table were reduced in Hill Road Rest Garden for installation of a set of elderly fitness equipment. In addition, three pieces of elderly fitness equipment were provided at the Smithfield Sitting-out Area. The greening project at the entrance/exit of Hill Road was pending the follow-up and reply of the MTRCL.

56. The Chairman added that the Administration had undertaken to study the feasibility of providing more seats in the football pitch at Sai Woo Lane Playground. He hoped that the Administration could actively conduct studies and report the findings.

57. Ms Cindy CHOW of the LCSD responded that she would convey the relevant views to the MTRCL.

58. The Chairman suggested that the LCSD could continue to consult the C&WDC on the number and type of facilities. As the population began to age, he hoped that more recreational facilities could be provided for the elderly.

- 22 - Item 8: Arts and Cultural Activities Organised by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department in the Central and Western District in 2014/2015 (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 42/2014) (5:25 pm)

59. Members noted the paper and had no other comments.

Item 9: Action Checklist on Matters Arising from the 4th CLSAC Meeting (2014/2015) (C&W CLSAC Paper No. 44/2014) (5:25 pm)

60. Members noted the paper and had no other comments.

Item 10: Reports of Working Groups (5:25 pm)

61. Members noted the reports of working groups and had no other comments.

Item 11: Any Other Business (5:25 pm)

62. No other business was raised by Members.

Item 12: Date of the Next Meeting (5: 25 pm – 5:26 pm)

63. The Chairman announced that the 6th CLSAC meeting (2014-2015) would be held on 5 February 2015. The paper submission deadline for government departments would be 15 January, while the deadline for Members would be 21 January.

64. The meeting was adjourned at 5:26 pm.

The minutes were confirmed on 5 February 2015 Chairman: Mr CHAN Chit-kwai, BBS, JP Secretary: Miss Jovy TAI

- 23 - Central and Western District Council Secretariat January 2015

- 24 -