Minutes of the 23rd Meeting of Yau Tsim Mong District Council (2012-2015)
Date : 25 June 2015 (Thursday) Time : 2:30 p.m. Venue : Yau Tsim Mong District Council Conference Room 4/F., Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street Mong Kok, Kowloon
Present:
Chairman Mr CHUNG Kong-mo, JP
Vice-chairman Ms KO Po-ling, BBS, MH, JP
District Council Members Mr CHAN Siu-tong, MH Ms KWAN Sau-ling Mr CHAN Wai-keung Mr LAM Kin-man Mr CHOI Siu-fung, Benjamin Mr LAU Pak-kei Mr CHONG Wing-charn, Francis The Honourable TO Kun-sun, James Mr CHOW Chun-fai, BBS, JP Mr WONG Chung, John Mr HAU Wing-cheong, BBS, MH Mr WONG Kin-san Mr HUI Tak-leung Mr WONG Man-sing, Barry, MH Mr HUNG Chiu-wah, Derek Ms WONG Shu-ming Mr IP Ngo-tung, Chris Mr YEUNG Tsz-hei, Benny, MH
Representatives of the Government Mrs ARON Laura Liang, JP District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) Home Affairs Department Miss NG Wai-chung, Jocelyn Assistant District Officer Home Affairs Department (Yau Tsim Mong) Mr CHEUNG Kwok-leung, Eric District Environmental Hygiene Food and Environmental Superintendent (Mong Kok) Hygiene Department Mr WONG Kam-wah District Environmental Hygiene Food and Environmental Superintendent (Yau Tsim) Hygiene Department Mr FOSTER Mark District Commander (Mong Kok) Hong Kong Police Force Mr KWOK Pak-chung, Patrick District Commander (Yau Tsim) Hong Kong Police Force Mr CHOY Chik-sang, Mario Chief Transport Officer (Kowloon) Transport Department Mr CHAIONG David, Stanley Chief Leisure Manager Leisure and Cultural (Hong Kong West) Services Department Mr LEUNG Wing-tak, David Senior Engineer/3 (Kowloon) Civil Engineering and Development Department
- 1 -
Mr LEE Chi-yin Senior Housing Manager Housing Department (Kowloon West and Hong Kong 1)
In Attendance:
Ms FUNG Man-ki Engineer/Planning West 2 Transport Department Miss WONG Chin-kiu, Janet Principal Assistant Secretary (Works) Development Bureau Special Duty Mr YIP Hung-ping, Joe Assistant Secretary (Land Supply) 1 Development Bureau Mr WONG Wai-yin, Patrick Senior Town Planner/Strategic Planning Department Planning 1 Mr TAU Chung-lok, Edward Architect 2 (Islands Division) Civil Engineering and Development Department Dr WAT Ming-sun, Nelson Chief Executive, Kwong Wah Hospital Authority Hospital/TWGHs Wong Tai Sin Hospital Dr CHAN Kam-hoi Senior Manager (Redevelopment Hospital Authority Project and Executive Support), Kwong Wah Hospital Mr W T LAU Chief Project Manager Hospital Authority (Capital Planning) Mr Mike KWAN Assistant General Manager, Urban Renewal Authority Planning & Design Mr SO Ngai-long Senior Manager, Community Urban Renewal Authority Development Ms. Agatha Ng Senior Manager, Acquisition & Urban Renewal Authority Clearance Mr YAN Man-kit, Andrew Senior Electrical & Mechanical Electrical & Mechanical Engineer/Consumer Installations Services Department Mr CHAN Sui-hong Divisional Commander Fire Services Department (Kowloon South) Mr NG Shiu-yan Station Commander, Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Services Department Fire Station Mr LUK Kwok-po Chief Estate Officer/Kowloon East Lands Department Mr CHAN Hoi-sing Principal Estate Officer/Kowloon Lands Department West (South) Ms LEE Ka-mei, Patty Senior Executive Officer (District Home Affairs Department Management), Yau Tsim Mong District Office Ms DING Shuk-wah, Alice Assistant District Social Welfare Social Welfare Department Officer (Kowloon City/Yau Tsim Mong) 1 Ms LI Shuk-ming, Selina Senior Executive Officer (Planning) 6 Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mrs CHU LEE Mei-foon, Senior Librarian (Yau Tsim Mong) Leisure and Cultural Services Karen Department Ms SIN Kwai-lan, Sandy Senior Estate Surveyor/Kowloon Lands Department South Mr WEI Chiu-fan, Job Senior Project Manager 325 Architectural Services Department
- 2 - Mr AU Wing-hung Chief Officer (Licensing Authority) Home Affairs Department Mr KO Man-sum Senior Divisional Officer Home Affairs Department (Licensing Authority) Mr CHIANG Wai-leung Senior Structural Engineer/F4 Buildings Department Ms PANG Wai-shan, Catherine Senior Estate Surveyor/Kowloon Lands Department Central Ms YUEN Man-sin, Michelle Senior Town Planner/Yau Tsim Mong Planning Department (Acting)
Secretary Ms CHUNG Siu-lan, Joanne Senior Executive Officer (District Home Affairs Department Council), Yau Tsim Mong District Office
Opening Remarks
The Chairman welcomed representatives from government departments and participants to the meeting. He reported that Mr Ringo MOK, Chief Engineer/Kowloon 5 (Kowloon) of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”) and Mr LUI Kwong-fai, Chief Manager/Management (Kowloon West and Hong Kong) of the Housing Department (“HD”) were absent due to other commitments. Mr LEUNG Wing-tak, David, Senior Engineer/3 (Kowloon) and Mr LEE Chi-yin, Senior Housing Manager (Kowloon West and Hong Kong 1) were attending the meeting in their places respectively. Owing to duty commitments, Mr LEE would leave the meeting at 6:30 p.m.
2. The Chairman said further that the Secretariat received e-mails from Mr Benny YEUNG and Mr Francis CHONG in the afternoon on 24 June 2015 requesting for withdrawal of Yau Tsim Mong District Council (“YTMDC”) Paper No. 66/2015 (To Support the Political Reform Package). However, the document contained a motion. According to the Rule 22 of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council Standing Orders (“Standing Orders”), no motion should be withdrawn except with the unanimous consent of the Councillors present, excluding abstentions.
3. Mr Benny YEUNG indicated that since the Political Reform Package had been rejected by the Legislative Council, further discussion on the matter that day would be meaningless. He therefore requested to withdraw the motion, hoping that all sectors could focus on livelihood of the general public.
4. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they consented to the request to withdraw the motion as raised by Mr Benny YEUNG and Mr Francis CHONG.
5. Mr WONG Kin-san objected to withdraw the motion in the paper. He said that he wished to take this opportunity to reflect the aspiration of the majority of Hong Kong people to attain the aim of universal suffrage in 2017. On behalf of tens of thousands of citizens who were affected by the illegal occupation of Mong Kok the year before, he also wished to take the opportunity to express dissatisfaction that the Political Reform Package was rejected.
- 3 - 6. The Chairman said that since a member raised objection to the withdrawal of YTMDC Paper No. 66/2015, the issue would be discussed under item 22 in accordance with Rule 22 of the Standing Orders.
(Mr CHAN Wai-keung joined the meeting at 2:35 p.m.)
Item 1: Confirmation of Minutes of 22nd YTMDC Meeting
7. The minutes of the last meeting were confirmed without amendments.
Item 2: Matters Arising: — To Further Request Transport Department to Provide Pedestrian Crossing Facilities at Junction of Nathan Road and Shantung Street (YTMDC Paper No. 35/2015)
8. The Chairman welcomed Ms FUNG Man-ki, Engineer/Planning West 2 of the Transport Department (“TD”).
9. Mr CHOW Chun-fai expressed that the item had remained on the YTMDC agenda for over three years. He and the other Councillors who submitted the paper wished to know the TD’s decision on the item.
10. Ms FUNG Man-ki indicated that the department was aware that Councillors had demanded the presence of a more senior officer at the meeting to respond to their enquiries. However, her superior was out of Hong Kong, therefore, she attended the meeting in his place. She further said that the department noted Councillors’ views over the issue. The department showed positive response to the proposals, and was actively studying the feasibility of the provision of additional pedestrian crossing facilities at the junction of Nathan Road and Shantung Street. However, the department needed to strike a balance between the needs of the pedestrians and those of the drivers. Therefore, arrangements had been made for the pedestrian and traffic statistics. Based on the findings, the traffic impact would be assessed. She invited Councillors who submitted the document to conduct a site visit, and to advise on the locations and other details regarding the additional pedestrian crossing facilities.
11. Ms WONG Shu-ming was glad to hear that the TD would consider the needs of both the pedestrians and the drivers. She stressed that the pedestrians, especially the elderly in the district, earnestly hoped that additional pedestrian crossing facilities would be provided at the junction of Nathan Road and Shantung Street. She asked when the TD would conduct the assessment. She also requested the TD to report on the assessment results at the next meeting.
12. Mr HUI Tak-leung asked what criteria the TD would use for the assessment, and when the assessment and the site visit would be conducted. He pointed out that the issue had been discussed at YTMDC meetings for years. He said that Councillors had conducted several site visits and made proposals on the provision of additional pedestrian crossing facilities.
(The Vice-chairman joined the meeting at 2:40 p.m.)
- 4 -
13. Ms FUNG Man-ki responded that it took time to work out the pedestrian and traffic statistics. After collecting the statistics, it would take another two to three months to analyse the data collected before any conclusion could be reached. Since Councillors were deeply concerned about the issue, the department would try to arrange for the statistical survey and assessments as soon as possible. As for the assessment criteria, there were internal guidelines in place on road designs and pedestrian impact. The department would provide complementary information on the assessment results at the meetings. She hoped that a site visit could be arranged for Councillors in July 2015.
14. The Vice-chairman was glad to see the representative of the TD showing positive response at the meeting, and indicating that the TD would consider the interests and safety of both the pedestrians and the drivers while it studied Councillors’ proposals. She hoped that the TD would arrange for the site visit for Councillors as soon as possible.
15. Mr HUI Tak-leung requested the representative of the TD to confirm whether the assessment referred to the study on provision of additional pedestrian crossing facilities at the junction of Nathan Road and Shantung Street. He wished to know which department would be responsible for the assessment. He also requested the TD to liaise closely with the departments concerned.
16. Ms FUNG Man-ki responded that she would invite Councillors to the site visit after the meeting. The TD would first conduct pedestrian and traffic statistics survey, and then the traffic impact assessment. She further indicated that the department kept an open mind towards Councillors’ proposal to provide additional pedestrian crossing facilities at the junction of Nathan Road and Shantung Street. The department would also apply professional knowledge, and conduct the assessment independently.
17. The Chairman asked Councillors whether the item should be further discussed at the next meeting.
18. Mr CHOW Chun-fai wished that the TD would schedule a site visit for Councillors as soon as possible. He also requested to have the item further discussed at the next meeting. There was no objection.
19. The Chairman requested the TD to arrange for a site visit for the Councillors who submitted the document and those who were interested in joining them. He also requested the TD be represented at the next meeting for further discussion of the issue.
Item 3: Financial Position of YTMDC as at 15 June 2015 (YTMDC Paper No. 47/2015)
Item 4: Vetting of Funding Applications for Organising Activities with District Characteristics (YTMDC Paper No. 48/2015)
- 5 - Item 5: Funding Application from 2015-2016 Yau Tsim Mong (“YTM”) Organising Committee on Cultural Arts Events for Organisation of Cultural Arts Events (YTMDC Paper No. 49/2015)
Item 6: Funding Application from 2015-2016 YTM District Road Safety Campaign Organising Committee for Production of Road Safety Promotional Items (YTMDC Paper No. 50/2015)
Item 7: Funding Application from YTM District Youth Campaign Programme Committee for Organising Youth Activities in YTM District in 2015-2016 (YTMDC Paper No. 51/2015)
Item 8: Funding Application from Committee on Promotion of Civic Education for Organising Civic Education Activities in YTM District in 2015-2016 (YTMDC Paper No. 52/2015)
Item 9: Funding Application from Festival Celebration Organising Committee, YTMDC for Organising Festival Celebration Activities in YTM District in 2015-2016 (YTMDC Paper No.53/2015)
Item 10: Funding Application from Working Group on Ethnic Affairs, YTMDC for “YTM District Ethnic Minorities Luncheon Symposium” (YTMDC Paper No. 54/2015)
Item 11: Funding Application from Working Group on Women’s Affairs, YTMDC for “YTM District Ethnic Minorities Luncheon Symposium” (YTMDC Paper No. 55/2015)
Item 12: Funding Application from Working Group on Care for the Community, YTMDC for Organising Community Care Activities in 2015-2016 (YTMDC Paper No. 56/2015)
Item 13: Funding Application from Working Group on Promotion of Tourism and Local Community Economy (“WGPTLCE”) for Production of Souvenirs (YTMDC Paper No. 57/2015)
Item 14: Funding Application from Working Group on Promotion and Publicity, YTMDC for Production of Promotional Items and Renewal/Maintenance of YTMDC Web Pages (YTMDC Paper No. 58/2015)
20. The Chairman proposed that the papers in respect of Items 3 to 14 about District Council (“DC”) funding be discussed together and there was no objection. He reminded Councillors to fill in the Declaration of Interests form on the table if necessary.
21. Councillors noted the financial position of the YTMDC funds as at 15 June 2015.
- 6 - 22. The Chairman said that $400,000 was earmarked at the meeting on 23 April 2015 for two organisations in the district for organisation of “an activity with district characteristics” each. However, only one of the organisations had submitted a funding application by the deadline. He invited suggestions from Councillors on the utilisation of the remaining $200,000.
23. Mr WONG Kin-san raised objection to the funding application for item 13. He indicated that he had given reasons for his objection at the meeting of the Working Group on Promotion of Tourism and Local Community Economy. He recalled that it was the second time in a row that only one organisation had submitted an application by the deadline for funding application for activities with district characteristics. In view of the lukewarm response from district organisations, he suggested only $200,000 be earmarked by YTMDC in the future for one activity with district characteristics, and the other $200,000 be allocated to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees.
24. The Chairman said that it should be the discussion and decision of the next DC whether the funding for activities with district characteristics should be retained. As Mr WONG Kin-san suggested that $200,000 of the funding earmarked for activities with district characteristics be allocated to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees, he invited views from Councillors on the proposal.
25. Mr CHAN Siu-tong did not agree to the proposal to allocate the $200,000 to other activities, and he indicated that the surplus could be returned to the Treasury or used to subsidise activities which did not have sufficient YTMDC funds. Moreover, he wished that Ms KWAN Sau-ling, the Chairman of the WGPTLCE, would elaborate on Item 13, as he was not familiar with the details of the funding application.
26. The Chairman asked whether Councillors’ agreed to allocate the remaining $200,000 to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees, as proposed by Mr WONG Kin-san, or refused to allocate the surplus to other activities, as proposed by Mr CHAN Siu-tong.
27. The Vice-chairman wished that the Secretariat would brief Councillors on the current financial position of the YTMDC. She expressed that the Chairmen of a number of working groups and organising committees had indicated that the funds earmarked for them were insufficient this year. It would be unfair for the YMTDC to allocate all the $200,000 to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees.
28. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they agreed to allocate the surplus $200,000 of the funding for activities with district characteristics for this year to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees, or refused to allocate the surplus to other activities.
29. Mr Barry WONG asked the Secretariat whether the surplus $200,000 of the funding for activities with district characteristics for this year could be allocated to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees. He further asked whether the YTMDC could change the purpose of the earmarked funds at this meeting.
- 7 -
30. The Secretary responded that $2,100,000 and $430,000 had been earmarked at the YTMDC Meeting on 27 February 2015 as the funds for non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees respectively for organisation of community engagement activities in the current financial year. The YTMDC funding phases were decided by the Community Building Committee (“CBC”). If the YTMDC agreed that the funding earmarked for non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees should increase by $200,000, the transfer proposal was feasible in principal. As for whether the transferred sum could be fully utilised, it depended on the number of applications received during the funding application period.
31. The Chairman invited Councillors to vote on the handling arrangement regarding the surplus of $200,000 of the funding for activities with district characteristics. The voting results were as follows: Three Councillors were for the proposal to allocate the sum of $200,000 to non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees, namely Mr WONG Kin-san, Mr Barry WONG and Mr HUI Tak-leung. Seven Councillors were against the proposal, namely Mr CHAN Siu-tong, Mr Francis CHONG, Mr Derek HUNG, Mr Chris IP, Ms KWAN Sau-ling, Mr LAU Pak-kei and Ms WONG Shu-ming. It was therefore agreed to that the surplus of $200,000 of the funding for activities with district characteristics would not be transferred to another activity funded by YTMDC. If needs arose, the sum would be used to subsidise activities without sufficient YTMDC funding, or returned to the Treasury.
32. Ms KWAN Sau-ling indicated that the WGPTLCE had endorsed an allocation of $120,000 for the production of ball pens and nylon fans as souvenirs. 15 contractors were invited to submit quotations, and five contractors responded to the invitation. However, only two of them provided a quotation. At the WGPTLCE meeting on 11 May 2015, a member walked out to express his discontent with the way the working group handled the matter, while the other members agreed to the arrangement, and accepted the quotation which met all the requirements. On the same day, staff of the Yau Tsim Mong District Office (“YTMDO”) explained to members the relevant rules under the manual on use of funds, and indicated that the handling method complied with the requirements of the manual.
33. Mr HUI Tak-leung asked whether Mr WONG Kin-san objected to the fund application for Item 15 on the grounds of the tendering procedures, the amount of money involved in the production of souvenirs, or the items to be produced as souvenirs.
34. Mr HAU Wing-cheong said that he was a member of the WGPTLCE. He further stated that the working group invited 15 contractors to submit quotations. However, only five contractors responded to the invitation. Among them, only two provided a quotation. The working group consulted the YTMDO on this. It was replied that the two quotations were valid. The working group had discussed the two quotations and one of the two contractors was subsequently chosen for the production of souvenirs.
35. Mr WONG Kin-san pointed out that under the requirement set out in paragraph 6.7 of the Guidelines on Yau Tsim Mong District Council Funds (“the Guidelines”), for items or services of an estimated value up to $50,000 or above, five written quotations were required. For items or services of an estimated value from $15,000 to $49,999, three written quotations were required. He was of the view that it was against the Guidelines for the WGPTLCE to
- 8 - base its decision on only two written quotations. He also indicated that a number of organisations in the district had received warning letters on breaches of funding terms and conditions for accusation of breaches of the Guidelines over procurement. Therefore, he was of the view that a letter should be issued to all applying organisations to explain the requirements.
(Mr Benjamin CHOI joined the meeting at 3:10 p.m.)
(Mr. John WONG left the meeting at 3:10 p.m.)
36. The Secretary responded that the Guidelines applied to specified organizations, non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees. The WGPTLCE was a working group under the YTMDC, and subject to the control under the Manual on the Use of District Council Funds (“the Manual”) prepared by the Home Affairs Department (“HAD”). She also indicated that as long as the applying organisation observed the estimated value of the item/service, and invited written quotations from the required number of contractors, the requirements of the Guidelines and the Manual would be deemed fulfilled, even if the number of written quotations received fell short of the number set out. If the applying organisation could provide the Secretariat with information to prove that it had complied with the requirement on the number of invitation for written quotation, no warning letter on breaches of funding terms and conditions would be issued.
37. Mr HUI Tak-leung indicated that many government contractors just ignored the invitation without making any reply or quotation. During the last District Council Term, the then District Officer of the Yau Tsim Mong District expressed that she would review the list of government contractors and reflect the problem to the HAD. Where necessary, the YTMDO would suggest streamlining the existing procurement procedures.
38. Mr WONG Kin-san asked, since the Guidelines covered specified organizations, non-specified organisations and mutual aid committees/owners’ corporations/owners’ committees, why the Secretariat expressed that the procurement arrangement set out in paragraph 6.7 of the Guidelines did not apply to the WGPTLCE.
39. The Vice-chairman wished that the YTMDC would first handle the funding applying for Item 13. As for Mr WONG Kin-san’s views regarding the procurement arrangement in the Guidelines, she believed that the matter could be discussed in the annual in house meeting of the next District Council Term.
40. The Chairman called upon the Secretary to respond to the enquiry raised by Mr WONG Kin-san about the scope of application of the Guidelines.
41. Mr Chris IP stated that the Secretary had already clearly explained the scope of application of the Guidelines.
42. The Secretary responded that paragraph 3 of the Guidelines set out the scope of application, as well as delineation of the applying organisations.
43. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they agreed to endorse the funding applications for Items 4 to 14. Apart from Mr WONG Kin-san, who raised objection to the funding application for Item 13, all Councillors agreed to endorse the funding applications for Items 4 to 14.
- 9 -
44. The Chairman announced that the funding applications for Items 4 to 14 (YTMDC Paper Nos. 48/2015 – 58/2015) were approved.
Item 15: Work Plan of Lantau Development (YTMDC Paper No. 59/2015)
45. The Chairman welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Miss Janet WONG, Principal Assistant Secretary (Works) Special Duty and Mr Joe YIP, Assistant Secretary (Land Supply) 1 of the Development Bureau (“DEVB”);
(b) Mr Patrick WONG, Senior Town Planner/Strategic Planning 1 of the Planning Department (“PlanD”); and
(c) Mr Edward TAU, Architect 2 (Islands Division) of the CEDD.
46. Miss Janet WONG briefly introduced the Work Plan of Lantau Development to the YTMDC.
47. Mr Patrick WONG gave a PowerPoint presentation to briefly introduce the paper:
(i) Lantau covered a land area of about 147 square kilometres, of which about 70% was country parks. It had a population of about 110 000, mainly in Tung Chung New Town, Discovery Bay and Mui Wo. At present, Lantau provided about 29 000 jobs, and the Airport Island offered another 65 000. Northern Lantau comprised mainly strategic economic infrastructures and urban developments, eastern Lantau was a tourist hub, while southern and western Lantau mainly consisted of rural townships and rural areas.
(ii) As for the development potential of Lantau, the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (“HKBCF”) Island of the Hong Kong Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (“HZMB”) showed the potential for developing a “bridgehead economy”. Furthermore, with Lantau being closer to the core business district (“CBD”) on Hong Kong Island as compared with other areas in the New Territories, the East Lantau Metropolis had the potential to accommodate a new CBD and become a strategic growth area. Reclamation along the northern Lantau coast would provide development opportunities at Sunny Bay and Siu Ho Wan. Creation of extensive flat land by reclamation within the central waters between Lantau and Hong Kong Island, which were ecologically less sensitive when compared with the northern and western waters of Lantau, would facilitate comprehensive developments. In addition, the development of Lantau would create synergy with the existing tourist and economic facilities. The Government would strive a balance among ecological, cultural and leisure tourism, education, recreation and conservation when developing Lantau.
(iii) When considering the difficulties in developing Lantau, the Government had to take the following factors into account: (1) Lantau was mostly hilly with
- 10 - limited flat land. Most of the country park area comprised slopes of over 20 degrees; (2) Lantau was rich in terrestrial and marine biodiversity. There were rural townships and cultural heritage as well; and (3) The development of the northern coast was subject to the impacts of aircraft noise and air and noise pollution caused by railway and major trunk roads. There were also potentially hazardous installations, such as the Siu Ho Wan Water Treatment Works. Furthermore, the Government should take into account height restrictions related to aviation, the deed of restrictive covenant of the Hong Kong Disneyland Theme Park, port facilities and marine channels, as well as infrastructural and supporting facilities. The Government should also consider providing more infrastructures such as transport, sewage treatment, water supply, drainage and waste treatment facilities to support additional large scale developments.
(iv) There were infrastructural and development projects in progress or planning, including the HZMB and the Hong Kong Link Road under construction, the Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (“TM-CLKL”) under construction as well as a number of proposed development projects such as the Topside Development at the HKBCF Island of the HZMB, the Airport’s Third Runway and North Commercial District, Tung Chung New Town Extension, Sunny Bay Reclamation, Siu Ho Wan Reclamation and Preliminary Concepts of the East Lantau Metropolis and Related Transport Links.
(v) The overall planning vision for Lantau was to promote the strategic growth and sustainable development of Lantau, while striking a balance between the needs for development and conservation. The Government hoped that Lantau could be developed as an international transport, logistics and trade hub in the Greater Pearl River Delta (“PRD”) and a service hub of the Greater PRD and Asia. The Government would conserve the treasure of natural assets of Lantau, while designating a strategic growth area with a new metropolis in the central waters.
(vi) As for planning themes, they included the Northern Lantau Corridor for economic and housing developments; the North-eastern Lantau Node for leisure, entertainment and tourism; the East Lantau Metropolis for strategic growth with a CBD; and the predominant part of Lantau for conservation, leisure, cultural and green tourism.
48. Mr Joe YIP briefly introduced the Lantau Development Advisory Committee (“LanDAC”) as follows:
(i) The Chief Executive in his Policy Address 2014 announced the set-up of the LanDAC to prepare the economic and social development strategy for Lantau. Established in January 2014, the LanDAC was chaired by the Secretary for Development. At present, it consisted of 20 non-official members and nine ex-officio members. The LanDAC was advisory in nature and had no statutory, administrative, executive or resources allocation authority. The non-official members comprised representatives from different sectors including the Legislature, Heung Yee Kuk and District Councillors, representatives of trade associations, professionals and scholars. The ex-officio members included representatives from the DEVB, the Environment
- 11 - Bureau, the Transport and Housing Bureau, the Home Affairs Bureau (“HAB”), the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, the CEDD and the PlanD.
(ii) The LanDAC would advise the Government, through the Secretary for Development, on: (1) the social and economic development opportunities of Lantau to capitalise on its advantages as the confluence of major transport infrastructures linking Hong Kong, Macau and the western PRD, so as to meet the long-term development needs of Hong Kong; and (2) the policies, measures and specific proposals conducive to the sustainable development and conservation of Lantau.
(iii) Since its formation, the LanDAC had held five meetings and arranged site visits for its members and District Councillors of the 18 districts. The Vice-chairman and Mr Derek HUNG joined the site visit to Lantau on 16 June.
(iv) At the third meeting, the LanDAC endorsed the development brief of Lantau, which included the following: north-eastern Lantau for leisure, entertainment and tourism; northern Lantau for economic and housing developments; the East Lantau Metropolis for strategic growth with a CBD; and the predominant part of Lantau for conservation, leisure, cultural and green tourism.
(v) Since its formation, the LanDAC had received over 100 items of views and proposals from its members and the public, which could be grouped into five categories: (1) development planning issues; (2) tourism and recreation; (3) environment and heritage conservation; (4) transport and improvement proposals; and (5) employment, education and social welfare.
(vi) At present, the LanDAC handled the views and proposals received in four ways: (1) Views/proposals falling within the purview of other committees/organisations that relevant government departments were held responsible for or involved in should be dealt with under the existing mechanisms; (2) Views/proposals on developments regarding long-term planning should be included in major studies by the Government for consideration and follow-up; (3) The DEVB would carry out several short-term studies to map out the area, consolidated economic development strategy and market positioning of the commercial land on Lantau, formulate the overall recreational and tourism development strategy for Lantau, and identify specific recreational and tourism uses; and (4) In order to boost the local economy in the short term and enable the people to share the fruits of development as soon as possible, the DEVB would, apart from conducting the above studies and implementing the existing handling mechanisms, continue to carry out improvement works to revitalise Tai O and Mui Wo, construct mountain bike trail networks, conduct improvement works to revitalise Ma Wan Chung Village, and improve sections of a narrow road bend along Keung Shan Road and South Lantau Road. In addition, the TD was studying the arrangements for closed roads and issuance of closed road permits.
- 12 - (vii) Four subcommittees had been set up under the LanDAC, namely the Planning and Conservation Subcommittee, the Economic and Social Development Subcommittee, the Traffic and Transport Subcommittee, and the Public Relation and Engagement Subcommittee, with a view to facilitating the handling of proposals under different categories.
(viii) The Planning and Conservation Subcommittee expected to finish drawing up the spatial development and conservation strategy for Lantau in the first quarter of 2016. The Economic and Social Development Subcommittee also expected to finish drawing up the economic and social development strategy in the first quarter of 2016. The Traffic and Transport Subcommittee would discuss the traffic and transport arrangements and infrastructures that would dovetail with the new development directions and projects proposed by the said two subcommittees. The Public Relation and Engagement Subcommittee would complete the drawing up of the publicity, public relations and consultation strategy and plans in the third quarter of this year.
(Mr LAM Kin-man joined the meeting at 3:30 p.m.)
49. Mr HAU Wing-cheong enquired whether the TM-CLKL was a flyover or a vehicular underpass.
50. Mr Derek HUNG said that the Vice-chairman and he had joined the site visit to Lantau on 16 June 2015. In view of the scarcity of commercial and residential land in the urban area, he agreed that the Government should capitalise on the opportunity to develop Lantau, especially northern Lantau for economic and housing development to solve the pressing housing problem. Furthermore, he learnt that the reclamation for the East Lantau Metropolis covered Kau Yi Chau, Hei Ling Chau and Mui Wo, and would like to know whether the said places would be linked by flyovers or vehicular underpasses. He also considered that the Traffic and Transport Subcommittee under the LanDAC should examine the feasibility of linking these places first.
(The Hon James TO joined the meeting at 3:35 p.m.)
51. Ms KWAN Sau-ling apologised for her absence from the site visit on 16 June. She considered that the Work Plan of Lantau Development was comprehensive and hoped that the supply of residential sites on Lantau would be increased to solve the housing problem in Hong Kong.
52. The Vice-chairman considered that the Work Plan of Lantau Development was huge in scale. Despite the aspirations of the Islands District Council, Rural Committees and residents for a better development of Lantau, the development of southern and western Lantau had lagged behind since the opening of the Chek Lap Kok Airport and the development of Tung Chung New Town. She also considered that the development of Lantau could complement the development trends in Mainland cities like Qianhai, Hengqin and Nansha. Moreover, she supported the Work Plan of Lantau Development as the island could provide more land for development and residential sites. She continued that since the reclamation for the East Lantau Metropolis might affect the marine ecosystem and channels of the surrounding waters, the Government should minimise the impacts of the reclamation works on the waters and enlist the support of green groups and the public for the development plan.
- 13 -
53. Mr Barry WONG pointed out that in Paper No. 59/2015, the DEVB put “welfare” under the fifth category of views received. He would like to know whether the order was arranged according to the order of priority for consideration by the LanDAC. He also said that the development plan for Lantau did not take welfare issues into account and there was no representative from the social welfare sector and the Labour and Welfare Bureau among the members of the LanDAC. He was concerned that the Government did not care for the disadvantaged when developing Lantau.
54. Miss Janet WONG responded as follows:
(i) The TM-CLKL was divided into two sections. The section from Tuen Mun to the HKBCF Island of the HZMB would be linked by a sub-sea tunnel, while the section from the artificial island to the section of the North Lantau Highway in Tai Ho would be linked by an elevated carriageway.
(ii) Kau Yi Chau and Hei Ling Chau were located in the central waters between Hong Kong Island and Lantau. The Government tentatively planned to carry out reclamation works and construct connecting transport facilities in these two places or the surrounding waters, with a view to developing the East Lantau Metropolis. At present, the two places were sparsely populated, thus the number of people affected by the works would be relatively low. Moreover, as the waters were outside the Victoria Harbour, which were not subject to the regulation of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, it would be conceivably favourable to the conduction of works. The Government was planning to carry out a strategic study on the reclamation works in the central waters as early as possible.
(iii) The Government had conducted the stage three consultation on the Tung Chung New Town Extension. It was expected that the reclamation on an appropriate scale would increase land supply for housing development to solve the problem of insufficient land available for a huge population.
(iv) The Islands District Council and Rural Committees were all eager for the development of Lantau, thus the Government had invited the Chairman and Vice-chairman of the Islands District Council as well as members of the Rural Committees to join the LanDAC. The Government expected that it could exchange views with various stakeholders on the development of Lantau, and hoped that local residents would be the first to benefit from the Lantau development plan (such as infrastructures and transportation network, etc.)
(v) Social welfare was the essential core of regional development and an integral part of community development. Hence, it was not necessary to single it out deliberately in the development plan. In addition, the order of the views from the LanDAC members and the public did not represent their importance. In fact, they were roughly listed according to the alphabetical order.
(vi) As it was impossible for members of the LanDAC to cover all sectors, the subcommittees under it would invite representatives from relevant organisations/government departments to participate in meetings and discussions whenever necessary.
- 14 -
55. Mr LAM Kin-man said that quite a number of people criticised that the LanDAC lacked representatives from green groups, and that its meetings were not open enough, thus arousing a suspicion of “black box operation”. There were also views that the Government should conduct a territory-wide consultation on the development of Lantau. He hoped that the representatives of the DEVB would respond to the above criticisms.
56. Mr Derek HUNG said that in view of the huge scale of the Lantau development plan, he anticipated that it would face a considerable amount of resistance. He enquired of the DEVB whether it would set priorities for each development project in order to avoid too many projects being carried out at the same time.
57. Miss Janet WONG gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) At present, the LanDAC had included members with a background in environmental protection, for example, Professor HO Kin-chung of the Open University of Hong Kong, who had a profound understanding of the scope of environmental protection. In the Planning and Conservation Subcommittee under the LanDAC, there was also a nature conservation expert, Professor WONG Fook-yee, who was the former Assistant Director of Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation.
(ii) The DEVB would not only listen to the views and proposals of the LanDAC, it would also conduct comprehensive consultations on particular major projects.
(iii) The representatives of the DEVB attended this meeting with the aim of conducting a preliminary consultation with the YTMDC on each area of the development of Lantau. The DEVB would then consider which projects to be implemented and the priority in implementation according to the land supply situation, relevant legislation, on-going spatial strategic study and positioning results, as well as the views of local residents, etc.
58. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 16: Progress Report on Kwong Wah Hospital (“KWH”) Redevelopment Project (YTMDC Paper No. 60/2015)
59. The Chairman welcomed Dr Nelson WAT, Hospital Chief Executive, KWH and Tung Wah Group of Hospitals (“TWGHs”) Wong Tai Sin Hospital (“WTSH”), Dr CHAN Kam-hoi, Senior Manager (Redevelopment Project and Executive Support), KWH and Mr LAU Wai-tat, Chief Project Manager (Capital Projects) of the Hospital Authority (“HA”) to the meeting.
60. Dr Nelson WAT and Dr CHAN Kam-hoi gave a PowerPoint presentation to briefly introduce the paper as follows:
(i) After the completion of the KWH Redevelopment Project, an influenza-like illness segregation area and an emergency medicine ward would be introduced in the accident and emergency (“A&E”) department, which would also
- 15 - provide 24-hour computerised tomography scanning services and an enlarged observation ward. As regards outpatient services, the number of specialist outpatient consultation rooms would be increased from 44 to about 100. There would be an integrated ambulatory care centre equipped with advanced facilities, which would provide patient-oriented one-stop ambulatory care services for more convenient treatment and continuity of care. New medical oncology service would be introduced to provide front-line management, consultation services and chemotherapy programmes for patients. The redevelopment would enable KWH to provide better quality medical services.
(ii) Since January 2014, KWH had been carrying out decanting works to relocate the existing clinical services in the South Wing of the Main Hospital Building to the East Wing, North Wing and other locations in the hospital for continuity of services.
(iii) Phase 1 of the main works was scheduled to commence in 2016, which would involve the demolition of the South Wing of the Main Hospital Building, Nurses Quarters, Administration Building and TWGHs KWH - The Chinese University of Hong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Research and Services Centre for the in situ construction of a new complex (Phase 1).
(iv) Upon the completion of Phase 1 of the new complex, relevant clinical services would move in. Phase 2 of the main works would then commence, which would include the demolition of the East and North Wings of the Main Hospital Building, TWGHs Yu Chun Keung Memorial Medical Centre (“YCKMMC”) and Staff Barracks for the construction of Phase 2 of the new complex. Phase 2 of the works was scheduled for completion in 2023.
(v) Tung Wah Museum, which was a declared monument in Hong Kong, and TWGHs Tsui Tsin Tong Outpatient Building, which was built in 1999, would be retained.
(vi) Dr CHAN Kam-hoi explained the preliminary floor layouts of the redeveloped KWH.
61. The Chairman said that after the redevelopment, the medical services offered by KWH would be expanded. He hoped that the healthcare manpower would be increased accordingly. He also hoped that KWH would continue to maintain close liaison with the YTMDC and the community during the redevelopment to reduce the impacts of the works on the community.
62. Mr CHOW Chun-fai declared his membership in the Hospital Governing Committee of KWH. He supported the redevelopment project and indicated that in view of an ageing population and a demand for modern healthcare, there was an urgent need to redevelop KWH to solve the problems of ageing hospital buildings and insufficient space. Funding had been allocated to KWH for in situ redevelopment in phases. In addition, he learnt that 16 trees located within the works area would have to be removed during the redevelopment, and the hospital needed to identify sites in the district for transplantation. He would like to know how the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) would assist the hospital on this matter. He also enquired of the TD whether it was stipulated in the existing legislation that public hospitals must provide visitor car parking spaces.
- 16 -
63. Mr LAM Kin-man, as the Councillor of the King’s Park Constituency, stated his support for the KWH Redevelopment Project. He enquired when the improvement works for the A&E department would be completed and how far the waiting time for A&E services would be shortened upon the completion. He asked whether the redeveloped KWH, which would be 17 storeys in height, would cause a wall effect to nearby buildings. Also, he hoped that the Mass Transit Railway Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) would provide additional accessible facilities in Yau Ma Tei MTR Station for the convenience of patients going to KWH.
64. Mr Benjamin CHOI enquired about the site area of Tung Wah Museum and whether it was located within the area of KWH. He further enquired why the geriatric day hospital at YCKMMC would be relocated to WTSH. Also, he would like to know the details of the existing services offered at the geriatric day hospital.
65. Ms KWAN Sau-ling would like to know the number of storeys of the existing KWH buildings. She suggested relocating Tung Wah Museum to the basement or top floor of the rebuilt hospital building to spare ground level space for the provision of geriatric infirmary service. She also hoped that KWH would pay attention to industrial safety during the implementation of the main works, so as to safeguard the safety of patients, their families and visitors.
66. The Chairman hoped that Tung Wah Museum would be retained in situ as it was a declared monument in Hong Kong. The hospital should carefully conserve the museum during the implementation of the works. Furthermore, the YTMDC had repeatedly requested the MTRCL to provide access linking Yau Ma Tei MTR Station with KWH. He later learnt that although the MTRCL had planned to provide such access, the timing of the provision could not match the completion time of the redevelopment works. He would like to know the progress of such provision.
67. The Vice-chairman said that as far as she knew, the geriatric day hospital at YCKMMC would be relocated to WTSH on a temporary basis during the implementation of the redevelopment works. She asked when the geriatric day hospital would be moved back to the present location. She believed that relocating the geriatric day hospital to another site in the district could reduce the impacts on patients. She also suggested increasing the height of Phase 1 of the new KWH building and decreasing the height of Phase 2, if necessary, as long as the total area remained unchanged, so as to lessen the impacts of the height of the redeveloped KWH on residents in the vicinity.
68. Mr HAU Wing-cheong supported the redevelopment project because there was an actual need to expand KWH as its A&E and outpatient services were close to full capacity. He also said that while the buildings in the vicinity were over 20 storeys in height, the redeveloped KWH would be 17 storeys in height only. He enquired whether the Town Planning Board (“TPB”) had set a height restriction on the hospital. He hoped that the hospital would provide more visitor car parking spaces after the redevelopment and carefully conserve Tung Wah Museum during the implementation of the redevelopment works.
69. Mr CHAN Wai-keung remarked that the focus of the KWH Redevelopment Project was the enhancement of the quality of medical services. However, no emphasis had been given to shortening the waiting time for A&E services and increasing the quotas of outpatient
- 17 - services. He hoped that the redeveloped KWH would take both quality and quantity into consideration.
70. Mr Barry WONG said that at present, the visiting hours of the hospital were from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., plus an additional hour after noon for the intensive care unit, which were indeed not adequate. He proposed that the hospital could consider extending the visiting hours or arranging several visiting sessions.
71. Mr HUI Tak-leung said that as a number of residents living in the vicinity might be affected by the height of the redeveloped KWH, the hospital should enhance communication with them.
72. Mr LAU Wai-tat responded as follows:
(i) Tung Wah Museum was built in 1911. It was originally part of KWH, the first hospital in Kowloon and the New Territories. Having been declared a statutory monument in Hong Kong, the museum was significant for both its location and architecture, and thus should not be relocated. The Antiquities Advisory Board had accepted the heritage impact assessment in respect of Tung Wah Museum at KWH on 4 June 2015.
(ii) The KWH building would be around 98 metres tall upon the redevelopment. The height was restricted by the land lease and the relevant Outline Zoning Plan (“OZP”). Given the technical limitations and the adverse effects on daily hospital operation, coupling with the high construction costs, the hospital would not consider further increasing the depth of the basement. Due to the area constraints, the hospital would accord priority to setting aside areas for medical purposes. The hospital would also conduct an air ventilation impact assessment of the building height later.
(iii) As the 16 existing trees on Waterloo Road would affect the access of vehicles and pedestrians in the future, the hospital had to remove them and identify other public places for transplantation. Although the hospital had discussed with the LCSD on a number of occasions in the past few months, the LCSD had so far only agreed to allow three of the trees to be transplanted on Hong Chong Road. Recently, the hospital was considering transplanting other three to five trees at the junction of Waterloo Road and Dundas Street, but it had yet to discuss with the LCSD. As for the remaining trees, the hospital certainly still had to continue exploring with the LCSD other feasible ways to deal with them.
(iv) The existing legislation did not require public hospitals to provide visitor car parking spaces. In fact, KWH did not provide any car parking spaces to visitors in the past ten years. As the number of car parking spaces was not yet sufficient to meet the own demand of the hospital upon the redevelopment, and drivers might abuse hospital car parking spaces or obstruct the traffic of the hospital because the hourly rate to park at the hospital was far lower as compared with that of other car parks in the district, the hospital hoped that the TD would relax the requirement so that it would not have to provide visitor car parking spaces, thus avoiding affecting its operation.
- 18 -
73. Dr Chan Kam-hoi responded as follows:
(i) The geriatric day hospital mainly provided daytime rehabilitation treatment services (e.g. physiotherapy and occupational therapy) for stroke patients in stable conditions. The area currently used as the geriatric day hospital would be converted into a ward to provide more beds during Phase 1 of the redevelopment. At present, around three-fourths of the patients receiving the treatment services had to rely on non-emergency ambulances for transfer to and from the geriatric day hospital. Upon the relocation of the services to WTSH, the HA would continue to transfer the service users by non-emergency ambulances between WTSH and their homes before and after the treatment. During Phase 1 of the redevelopment, KWH would continue to provide the treatment services on site for the remaining one-fourth of the patients who were not in need of the non-emergency ambulance transfer service.
(ii) The floor area of the redeveloped KWH would be expanded so that more advanced medical equipment could be accommodated for service enhancement. Moreover, the number of beds in KWH could be increased from around 1 100 to around 1 600, while the number of specialist outpatient consultation rooms could be increased from the existing 44 to 100. The A&E department would also have an enlarged observation ward and a new emergency medicine ward.
(iii) In general, there were visiting sessions after noon and in the evening for the wards in KWH. To reduce the risk of cross infections in the midst of the peak season of influenza and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, the HA provisionally decided to limit the visiting hours of acute hospitals to no more than two hours each day. The HA would conduct patient surveys on a regular basis for continuous improvements in hospital services.
(iv) KWH had all along maintained communication with residents, organisations and shops in the vicinity on the redevelopment project. To strengthen the liaison, the hospital had conducted in-depth discussions on the project with the owners’ corporations of Yan On Building, Tsui Yuen Mansion Phases 1 and 2 and other buildings in the vicinity since early 2015. The hospital even conducted a briefing on the project on 15 April, inviting District Councillors and residents nearby to attend to introduce to them the project and answer their enquiries. During the briefing, the hospital promised to maintain communication with residents and consider adopting feasible suggestions they put forward.
74. Dr Nelson WAT thanked the YTMDC again for its support to the KWH Redevelopment Project.
75. Mr CHOW Chun-fai asked the representatives of the LCSD and the TD to respond to the questions put by the representatives of KWH concerning tree planting and car parking spaces.
- 19 - 76. Mr Stanley CHAIONG responded that he had no information on the tree planting issue put forward by the representatives of the HA. He continued that the LCSD was responsible for the maintenance of roadside trees and would advise works promoters on tree transplanting matters involved in their works. If KWH had to remove the cotton trees on Waterloo Road due to the redevelopment works, it should replant the trees in the vicinity as far as possible, so as not to affect the green environment of the area.
77. Mr Mario CHOY responded that the TD had dedicated staff responsible for handling the traffic and transport matters in respect of the KWH Redevelopment Project. They would give a response if necessary.
78. The Vice-chairman pointed out that although the LCSD and the TD had dedicated staff to maintain communication with the representatives of the HA on the redevelopment project, the departments did not actively help the hospital to solve the difficulties in tree transplantation and provision of car parking spaces. She urged the representatives of the LCSD and the TD to reflect to their departments the difficulties encountered by the hospital in order to provide more active assistance.
79. Mr LAU Wai-tat supplemented that KWH had repeatedly attempted to formulate proposals to transplant trees at the locations proposed by the LCSD, yet every time the LCSD responded that the proposals were infeasible. In addition, the Hospital Governing Committee of KWH and the HA had discussed the provision of visitor car parking spaces at KWH. The hospital considered that providing visitor car parking spaces within the hospital area would affect the operation of the hospital and the HA would later give an official reply to the TD. He hoped that the LCSD and the TD would understand the difficulties faced by KWH and actively help to solve them as soon as possible.
80. Mr Derek HUNG opined that when considering the provision of visitor car parking spaces by KWH, the TD should take into account the actual operation of the hospital first.
81. Mr HAU Wing-cheong remarked that drivers might park their vehicles at KWH just because the hourly rate of the hospital car park was far cheaper than that of nearby car parks, which would affect the operation of the hospital. He hoped that the TD would give due consideration to the circumstances of the hospital.
82. Mr CHAN Wai-keung said that the visitor flow to Tung Wah Museum was not high. The HA should step up publicity, especially in the vicinity of Mong Kok Pedestrian Precinct, to attract people there to visit the museum.
83. Mr HUI Tak-leung enquired of the representative of the LCSD whether it was stipulated in current policies that removed trees should be transplanted in the original district. He suggested that the YTMDC write to the TD to request relaxation of the requirement for KWH to provide visitor car parking spaces within the hospital area upon the redevelopment. He also expressed dissatisfaction with the representatives of the LCSD and the TD who said that they did not have the relevant information on this item.
84. Mr CHOW Chun-fai enquired of the representatives of the HA whether it was necessary for the YTMDC to write to the LCSD and the TD to convey the requests of the HA in respect of tree transplantation and provision of visitor car parking spaces. He further enquired how the HA would deal with the 13 trees to be transplanted if it failed to identify suitable locations for transplantation in the district.
- 20 -
85. Mr LAU Wai-tat responded that the HA would readily transplant the trees in other districts if it failed to identify suitable locations in the district for transplantation. Nevertheless, approval was required from the LCSD for all proposals.
86. The Chairman said that the representatives of the HA had sought help on tree transplantation from him before the meeting. He urged the LCSD to be responsive to the HA. If the HA failed to identify suitable locations in the district, the LCSD should consider exercising its discretion to allow the HA to transplant the trees in other districts. He further stated that insufficiency of car parking spaces had been a long-standing problem in YTM District. The problem would be even worse after Yau Ma Tei Car Park Building was demolished due to the works of the Central Kowloon Route. Therefore, he urged the TD to review the situation in the district and strive to identify sites for the provision of car parking spaces. The YTMDC would write to the LCSD and the TD separately on the above matters.
87. Mr Mario CHOY responded that he would relay Councillors’ opinions put forward at the meeting to the dedicated staff of the TD.
88. Mr LAU Wai-tat responded that upon the redevelopment of KWH, the public would have more chances to appreciate the Tung Wah Museum building as they could once again see its facade from Waterloo Road.
89. The Chairman concluded that the YTMDC gave its full support to the KWH Redevelopment Project in principle. He then thanked the representatives of the HA for joining the discussion on this item.
(Post-meeting note: The Chairman wrote to the LCSD and the TD in the name of the ----- YTMDC (Annexes 1 and 2) to relay Councillors’ requests on 16 July 2015.)
Item 17: Urban Renewal Authority (“URA”) Ash Street “Demand-Led” Redevelopment Project (DL-11:YTM) (YTMDC Paper No. 61/2015)
90. The Chairman welcomed Mr Mike KWAN, Assistant General Manager, Planning and Design, Mr SO Ngai-long, Senior Manager, Community Development and Ms Agatha NG, Senior Manager, Acquisition and Clearance of the URA to the meeting.
91. Mr Mike KWAN gave a PowerPoint presentation to briefly introduce the paper:
(i) The Ash Street Development Project (DL-11:YTM) was the last project under the third round of the “demand-led” pilot scheme commenced by the URA after screening. The URA published a notice in the Gazette on 29 May 2015 to announce the commencement of the project and conducted a freezing survey in the project area on the same date, officially commencing the planning procedures for the project. According to Section 26 of the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance, the URA implemented the project by way of a “development project”.
- 21 - (ii) The Ash Street Development Project, which involved a building located at Nos. 5-13 (odd numbers only) Ash Street, Tai Kok Tsui, Kowloon, covered an area of 474 square metres, with 418 square metres available for development.
(iii) Under the “demand-led” redevelopment model, the project was subject to the fulfillment of the following conditions precedent: (1) When a joint application was submitted to the URA, the application must be submitted by owners of not less than 67% of undivided shares of the respective lots. In addition, there must be owners of not less than 80% of undivided shares of each lot in the redevelopment site accepting the URA’s “conditional acquisition offers” and signing the relevant sale and purchase agreements within 75 days of the issue of the offers; and (2) The Secretary for Development authorised the URA to implement the project according to section 24 of the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance and no appeal was filed within the appeal period after the authorisation or any appeal filed was dismissed within one year of the issue of the “conditional acquisition offers” by the URA. If any of the two conditions above were not met within the prescribed time, the project would not be implemented further and would be ceased automatically. If the Secretary for Development approved the project, the URA would proceed with it using public money and powers.
(iv) On the day of project commencement, the URA conducted a freezing survey and a social impact assessment within the project area to identify and assess the possible impacts of the project on residents. The URA also held briefing sessions for persons affected on 4 June 2015 to answer questions from owners, tenants and business operators. At present, the public could view the social impact assessment report of the project at the YTMDO, the headquarters of the URA and the Urban Renewal Resource Centre. The URA would release the Stage 2 of social impact assessment report on 10 July for public inspection.
(v) The public could inspect the information and the social impact assessment reports of the project and lodge objections on or before 29 July 2015. The URA would submit the project information and objections collected to the Secretary for Development for consideration within three months after the expiration of the publication period. The Secretary for Development would make a decision whether to approve, amend or disapprove the project.
(vi) The URA planned to issue “conditional acquisition offers” to owners in the project in August or September 2015.
(vii) Within the project area, there was a nine-storey building which was built in 1965. The building was primarily for residential purpose and included a number of ground floor shops. The condition of the building was unsatisfactory and was identified as “varied”. The most obvious problem was that exposed bar tendons were found in some of the common areas of the building (such as stairway and rooftop). Furthermore, suspected unauthorised structures were found on the rooftop of the building. At present, there were 79 property interests with about 128 households and 6 business operators.
- 22 - (viii) The project would have a floor area of 3 527 square metres and a residential floor area of 3 135 square metres after development. About 69 to 70 flats with an average size of 40 square metres would be built. The commercial floor area would be 392 square metres. The whole project was expected to be completed in 2021 to 2022.
(ix) In general, if there was no objection to the project, the relevant statutory procedures would be completed in about five to six months. If there was any objection from the public to the project, the relevant statutory procedures would take about 12 months to complete. In the case of an appeal against the project, more than 12 months would be needed to complete the relevant statutory procedures.
92. The Chairman said that as the URA aimed at introducing the Ash Street “demand-led” redevelopment project to Councillors at the meeting, the YTMDC was not required to express its stance on the project at this stage.
93. Mr LAU Pak-kei recalled that in the past the URA had never consulted the YTMDC on specific “demand-led” redevelopment projects. He enquired of the URA why it specially consulted the YTMDC on the Ash Street “demand-led” redevelopment project, and whether it would take the initiative to consult the YTMDC on similar projects in the future. He continued that the public could lodge objections to the project from 29 May to 29 July 2015. However, the public consultation was still on-going on the day of the meeting. In other words, the URA had not grasped the public’s views on the project at the moment, so it could not provide the relevant information to the YTMDC, which made it difficult for Councillors to offer their views to the URA. Besides, he enquired about the number of owners/occupiers participating in the briefing sessions held by the URA on 4 June for persons affected by the project and the questions they raised during the briefings. He opined that the URA should provide the above information to Councillors before consulting the YTMDC on the project.
94. Mr Benjamin CHOI said that the URA only introduced the redevelopment project to Councillors without providing information about the acquisition offers for the project. As a result, the YTMDC could not give more detailed views on the project.
95. Mr SO Ngai-long responded as follows:
(i) The URA would generally consult the relevant District Council (“DC”) during the two-month publication period of a “demand-led” redevelopment project. If the publication period of a particular redevelopment project could not tie in with the respective DC meeting schedule, the URA might provide information papers on the project to Councillors for perusal by circulation within the publication period.
(ii) The two-month publication period was a statutory consultative process in which all members of the public were able to express their views on the redevelopment project.
(iii) The URA held two briefing sessions on the redevelopment project on 4 June 2015, which aimed to explain to the affected owners/occupiers the procedures and schedule of the project and the relevant policies. A total of 200
- 23 - owners/occupiers attended the two briefing sessions. Owners were more concerned about the acquisition arrangement for the project and the URA’s criteria for calculating the compensation. On the other hand, tenants were more concerned about the policies and arrangements for compensation and relocation.
96. The Vice-chairman considered that the “demand-led” redevelopment project could really improve the living environment in the old area and welcomed its implementation by the URA. She also said that as the consultation period for the project had just started, the URA could not provide the YTMDC with the public’s views on the project. Therefore, the YTMDC could only note the progress of the project but was unable to advise the URA. However, she considered that it was necessary for the URA to introduce the project to the YTMDC so that Councillors could take note of the project.
97. The Chairman said that as the consultation period for the redevelopment project was not over yet and the URA was still collecting the public’s views, the YTMDC could only take note of the project at the meeting. It had not indicated whether it supported the project.
98. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the URA for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 18: Demand for Law Amendments to Combat On-street Mobile Promotional and Advertising Items (YTMDC Paper No. 62/2015)
99. The Chairman said that the written responses of the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (“EMSD”), the Lands Department (“LandsD”) and the Fire Services ----- Department (“FSD”) (Annexes 3 to 5) had been distributed to Councillors for perusal before the meeting. He then welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Mr Eric CHEUNG, District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Mong Kok) of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“FEHD”);
(b) Mr Andrew YAN, Senior Electrical and Mechanical Engineer/Consumer Installations of the EMSD;
(c) Mr CHAN Sui-hong, Divisional Commander (Kowloon South) and Mr NG Shiu-yan, Station Commander Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station of the FSD;
(d) Mr LUK Kwok-po, Chief Estate Officer/Kowloon East and Mr CHAN Hoi-sing, Principal Estate Officer/Kowloon West (South) of the LandsD; and
(e) Ms Patty LEE, Senior Executive Officer (District Management) of the YTMDO.
100. Mr HUI Tak-leung briefly introduced the paper. He said that on-street publicity materials had caused serious obstructions in the district. To avoid committing the offence of occupying government land, quite a number of people put posters on easy-mount frames or wheels on advertising light boxes. He hoped that the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) would
- 24 - amend the legislation as soon as possible to plug the loophole. He further said that the FSD and the EMSD should conduct proactive inspections to see if the on-street advertising light boxes in the district were in breach of the Fire Services Ordinance and the Electricity Ordinance.
101. Mr Andrew YAN responded that the EMSD had all along been inspecting the condition of communal fixed electrical installations in buildings. However, no proactive inspections had been conducted specifically for a certain type of electrical installations, such as on-street mobile advertising light boxes. The EMSD had also taken follow-up actions on reports of suspected electrical safety problems with advertising light boxes. Over the past two years, no advertising light boxes were found to have immediate electrical safety problems. He said that although mobile advertising light boxes might occupy street spaces and their electrical wires might be placed improperly, they were unlikely to cause electrical safety problems and fire risks.
102. The Chairman said that it was common to find on-street mobile publicity materials in the district. However, due to the grey areas in the existing legislation, there was little that the relevant departments could do. He said that placing easy-mount frames on streets would obstruct the vision of pedestrians or motorists and cause tripping hazards to pedestrians. Furthermore, conflicts over placing of easy-mount frames often arose among on-street promoters. He urged the relevant departments, particularly the LandsD and the FEHD, to co-ordinate efforts to combat the problem.
103. Mr HUI Tak-leung pointed out that there were already six to seven easy-mount frames on Shanghai Street. He urged the HAD to co-ordinate joint operations with other departments.
104. Mr Derek HUNG asked the representatives of the LandsD whether the four wheels installed on advertising light boxes would be regarded as “occupying government land”.
105. Mr CHAN Siu-tong was disappointed at the EMSD’s response. He added that the EMSD should take actions to plug the grey areas in the existing legislation. He also pointed out that the obstruction problem caused by easy-mount frames was exceptionally serious at Ferry Point.
106. Mr LUK Kwok-po responded on the issue of roadside publicity materials that some officers in the LandsD were authorised by the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene to give permission for the display of roadside non-commercial publicity materials (“NCPMs”). If NCPMs were found to be unauthorised or non-compliant with the Implementation Guidelines of the Management Scheme for the Display of Roadside NCPMs, they would be removed by the joint operations of the LandsD and the FEHD. As for commercial publicity materials, they would be handled by the FEHD in accordance with the law. As such, commercial publicity materials on pavements (such as mobile publicity materials like easy-mount frames) were not under the purview of the LandsD. The LandsD usually dealt with prolonged occupation of government land by large objects or structures under the Lands (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance which was, however, not applicable to handling the occupation by mobile miscellaneous articles on roadsides. If mobile business activities on pavements involved the occupation of government land by fixed structures, the LandsD would conduct joint operations with other departments.
- 25 - 107. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant government departments for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 19: Is the Government Performing So Poorly in Handling “Occupation of Public Places”? (YTMDC Paper No. 63/2015)
108. The Chairman said that the written responses of the Social Welfare Department ----- (“SWD”), the FEHD, the LandsD and the Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) (Annexes 6 to 9) had been distributed to Councillors for perusal before the meeting. He then welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Ms Alice DING, Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Kowloon City/Yau Tsim Mong) 1 of the SWD; (b) Mr WONG Kam-wah, District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Yau Tsim) of the FEHD; (c) Mr LUK Kwok-po, Chief Estate Officer/Kowloon East and Mr CHAN Hoi-sing, Principal Estate Officer/Kowloon West (South) of the LandsD; (d) Mr KWOK Pak-chung, District Commander (Yau Tsim) of the HKPF; and (e) Ms Patty LEE, Senior Executive Officer (District Management) of the YTMDO.
109. Mr Derek HUNG briefly introduced the paper. He said that one to two persons were found sleeping rough and placing miscellaneous items in the vicinity of the To Wah Road Roundabout and underneath the Nga Cheung Road Flyover in Tsim Sha Tsui West around six months ago. The relevant departments had taken actions after noting the above but the situation showed no improvement. The number of street sleepers there had increased to eight recently. As the area was adjacent to a works site and very close to the carriageway, street sleepers might pose danger to themselves and motorists in placing a lot of miscellaneous items and erecting structures there. He opined that the Government seemed to be out of wits in handling the occupation of public spaces by street sleepers and wondered how the relevant departments would handle and follow up on the occupation of the above area by street sleepers.
110. Ms Alice DING responded that the mobility of street sleepers at the To Wah Road Roundabout and underneath the Nga Cheung Road Flyover was relatively high and new street sleepers joined from time to time. The SWD and the Salvation Army, having all along been very concerned about the street sleeper problem there, conducted an outreach visit with Mr Derek HUNG on 12 June 2015. Eight street sleepers were identified but most of them were unmotivated to accept services. On the other hand, the relevant departments carried out a joint operation on 16 June and four of the street sleepers left on their own. Upon active persuasion and counselling by social workers, the remaining four street sleepers preliminarily indicated that they would consider accepting services. As the four street sleepers were ethnic minorities (“EM”), the Salvation Army was discussing the provision of rental accommodation with them through EM organisations with the assistance of Mr HUNG, so that they could quit street sleeping as soon as possible.
- 26 - 111. Mr LUK Kwok-po responded that the LandsD had all along been concerned about the street sleeper problem in the district, especially cases involving erection of temporary structures. Under the co-ordination of the YTMDO, the LandsD took part in the inter-departmental joint operation on 16 June 2015 to provide assistance in handling the environmental hygiene problem caused by street sleepers underneath the flyover near Sorrento at Nga Cheung Road. The LandsD and the relevant departments had immediately dealt with larger items (e.g. wooden hoardings) on that day.
112. Mr KWOK Pak-chung responded that the Police was very concerned about the public safety and law and order problems posed by street sleepers. During police inspections in the vicinity of the To Wah Road Roundabout and underneath the Nga Cheung Road Flyover, it was found that some South Asian street sleepers were given “bail sheets” and there were street sleepers relocating there from other places. The Police assessed that the public safety and law and order situations there were acceptable at present. He said that the Police would conduct patrols and take enforcement actions on a regular basis, and would actively take part in joint operations arranged by other departments as well as the planning and preparation before those operations.
113. Mr Derek HUNG considered the response of the representative of the SWD passive. He doubted whether the manpower resources provided by the SWD to the Salvation Army were adequate and whether the monitoring of the SWD was effective. Although several street sleepers had left Nga Cheung Road after the joint operation, but he found two new street sleepers at the motorcycle parking spaces at To Wah Road. They erected tents, placed beddings and put cooking utensils there. He was not sure whether they came from Nga Cheung Road. He requested to continue the discussion on this item at the next meeting and said that if EM street sleepers were identified, he was willing to make referrals and arrange EM leaders to conduct outreach visits.
114. The Vice-chairman considered that the number of street sleepers in the vicinity of the To Wah Road Roundabout and underneath the Nga Cheung Road Flyover was on the increase and the problem was worsening. If the relevant departments did not address the problem in the area early, it would become more complicated. She agreed to continue the discussion on this item at the next meeting.
115. The Chairman asked whether Councillors agreed to continue the discussion on this item at the next meeting. There was no objection.
Item 20: Follow-up Action and Enquiry on “Strongly Demand Inclusion of a Swimming Pool, a Library, a Multifunctional Activity Room and a Community Hall in the Indoor Recreation Centre to be Constructed at Hoi Ting Road”. To Fight for Making Use of the Work Site for the Purpose of Temporary Car Park (for Private Cars) before Commencement of the Construction Work” (YTMDC Paper No. 64/2015)
116. The Chairman said that the consolidated written response of the HAB and the LCSD ----- (Annex 10) had been distributed to Councillors for perusal before the meeting. The Chairman said that the HAB had entrusted the representatives of the LCSD to answer Councillors’ questions. He then welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
- 27 -
(a) Mr Stanley CHAIONG, Chief Leisure Manager (Hong Kong West), Ms Selina LI, Senior Executive Officer (Planning) 6 and Mrs Karen CHU, Senior Librarian (Yau Tsim Mong) of the LCSD; (b) Ms Patty LEE, Senior Executive Officer (District Management) of the YTMDO; (c) Ms Sandy SIN, Senior Estate Surveyor/Kowloon South of the LandsD; and (d) Ms FUNG Man-ki, Engineer/Planning 2 of the TD.
117. Mr CHAN Wai-keung briefly introduced the paper. He said that the Chairman and he had aspired for the construction of an indoor recreation centre at Hoi Ting Road for years. He had also reflected residents’ aspiration for an indoor recreation centre at the site to Mr TSANG Tak-sing, the Secretary for Home Affairs, eight years ago. The site was currently a works area for the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (“XRL”) Project which had been delayed repeatedly. He would like to know the progress of the inclusion of facilities including a swimming pool, a library, a multifunctional activity room and a community hall in the indoor recreation centre to be constructed at Hoi Ting Road (“Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre”). In view of the repeated delays in the XRL Project, he enquired when the site would be returned to the LCSD for development.
(Mr LAM Kin-man left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.)
118. The Chairman said that Mr CHAN Wai-keung and he had proposed the inclusion of facilities including a swimming pool, a library, a multifunctional activity room and a community hall in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre at the YTMDC meeting on 20 June 2013. At the subsequent joint meeting with a number of departments in October 2014, government representatives supported the proposal in principle, yet the departments concerned needed to seek the support of their policy bureaux and the LegCo. He wondered if the proposal had gained the support of the relevant policy bureaux. He continued that the site was currently a works area for the XRL Project. The YTMDO had consulted him on developing the site into the West Kowloon Government Offices and he had voiced his objection. He further proposed that the Government could consider making use of the site or the works area opposite Yaumati Catholic Primary School (Hoi Wang Road) for the purpose of a temporary private car park to alleviate the problem of insufficient car parking spaces in Tai Kok Tsui before constructing such recreational facilities in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre.
119. Ms Selina LI responded that the HAB and the LCSD were considering the proposal by, apart from referring to the guidelines set out in the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (“HKPSG”), taking into account various factors such as the policy objectives for sports development, public preferences for different types of sports as indicated by studies and surveys, utilisation rates of existing facilities, the development of infrastructural and community facilities of the district, the advice of the YTMDC, resources available and the cost-effectiveness of the services. The LCSD would consult the CBC under the YTMDC after gaining the support of the HAB.
120. Ms Patty LEE responded that the YTMDO was studying the proposed inclusion of a community hall in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre. Matters taken into account included the guidelines set out in the HKPSG, the population of the district, district
- 28 - characteristics, utilisation rates of community facilities and the availability of similar community facilities in the vicinity. The YTMDO would seek the support of the HAB and consult the YTMDC once the study was completed.
121. The Chairman would like to know whether the YTMDO responded positively to the inclusion of a community hall in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre.
122. Ms Patty LEE replied that the YTMDO’s response to the proposal was positive.
123. Ms Sandy SIN responded that the LandsD had contacted the Highways Department and learnt that the site of the proposed indoor recreation centre was still a works area for the XRL Project. However, half of the site opposite Yaumati Catholic Primary School (Hoi Wang Road), which was also a works area for the XRL Project, could be used as a temporary car park. The LandsD had requested the YTMDO to conduct a district consultation to gauge local views on turning the site into a temporary car park.
124. The Chairman enquired about the effective date of the short-term tenancy for the proposed temporary car park and the number of private cars the car park could accommodate.
125. Ms Sandy SIN responded that the LandsD believed that the YTMDO would conduct a district consultation as soon as possible. If local residents and stakeholders gave their support, it was expected that the department could advertise in November 2015 and let out the site to the operator at the end of this year or in around January 2016. In case objections were received during the consultation period, the department needed to handle the objections first and the time required for turning the site into a temporary car park would hence be prolonged.
126. Ms FUNG Man-ki responded that the number of car parking spaces to be provided at the site would not be stipulated in the tenancy terms. She added that given that the site occupied an area of 1 600 square metres, the department estimated that about 50 car parking spaces could be provided.
127. The Chairman hoped that more car parking spaces could be provided at the site. In addition, he was pleased that the relevant departments responded positively to the proposed inclusion of recreational facilities including a swimming pool, a library, a multifunctional activity room and a community hall in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre, and that the LandsD and the TD also considered the proposal to make use of the site opposite Yaumati Catholic Primary School (Hoi Wang Road) for the purpose of a temporary private car park feasible and might invite tenders within the year.
128. The Hon James TO opined that the Government should consider requesting the operator of the temporary car park to provide a specified number of car parking spaces at the site to accommodate the needs of local residents. He welcomed the proposed inclusion of recreational facilities in Hoi Ting Road Indoor Recreation Centre and the proposal to make use of the site opposite Yaumati Catholic Primary School (Hoi Wang Road) for the purpose of a temporary private car park.
129. Mr HAU Wing-cheong said that Yau Ma Tei Car Park and Middle Road Multi-storey Car Park would be demolished. The departments concerned should strive for the provision of more permanent and temporary car parking spaces in the district to meet local needs.
- 29 - 130. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 21: To Follow up on the Progress of the Planning of the Open Space next to the Hoi Fan Road School Area (YTMDC Paper No. 65/2015)
----- 131. The Chairman said that the written response of the LCSD (Annex 11) had been distributed to Councillors for perusal before the meeting. He then welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Mr Stanley CHAIONG, Chief Leisure Manager (Hong Kong West), Ms Selina LI, Senior Executive Officer (Planning) 6 and Mrs Karen CHU, Senior Librarian (Yau Tsim Mong) of the LCSD; and (b) Mr Job WEI, Senior Project Manager 325 of the Architectural Services Department (“ArchSD”).
132. The Hon James TO briefly introduced the paper. He said that he had asked at the LegCo meeting on 2 July 2014 about the planning of the open space at Hoi Fan Road. He would like to know the current progress and hoped that the relevant departments would expedite the planning and development of the open space.
133. Ms Selina LI responded that the LCSD was deliberating with the ArchSD and hoped to commence the design of the project as soon as possible. Upon completion of the preliminary design, the LCSD would consult the YTMDC on the design.
134. Mr Job WEI said that the ArchSD would continue to consider public works projects at both district and territory-wide levels with the LCSD so as to deliberate over the finalised timetable for the design as soon as possible.
135. The Vice-chairman said that for years, residents in the vicinity of the Hoi Fan Road school area had been asking the Government for the provision of an open space. However, no progress had been made in the planning and development of the area. She asked whether the project was waiting for the funding approval from the LegCo Finance Committee (“FC”), or the relevant departments had yet to seek funding from the FC for the project.
136. The Hon James TO asked when the LCSD would consult the YTMDC on the planning and design of the open space. He also hoped that the relevant departments would complete the preliminary work on the project as soon as possible.
137. Ms Selina LI responded that as the project, which involved over $30 million, was a government public works project, its implementation should follow the established procedures for public works. The LCSD had finalised the project definition statement, while the ArchSD had completed the technical feasibility study and established the project as a public works project. Tenders would be invited if the ArchSD appointed a consultant for the design. Upon completion of the preliminary project design, the LCSD would consult the YTMDC. She added that the project design was expected to take two to three years from
- 30 - start to finish. Funding approval would then be sought from the LegCo FC in accordance with the established procedures for government public works.
138. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item.
139. Mr Chris IP requested a recess of five minutes.
140. The Chairman announced a recess of five minutes.
Item 22: To Support the Political Reform Package (YTMDC Paper No. 66/2015)
141. Mr Francis CHONG supplemented the contents of the paper. He said that he and Mr Benny YEUNG submitted this item on 10 June 2015, hoping that the Consultation Document on the Method for Selecting the Chief Executive (“CE”) by Universal Suffrage (“political reform package”) could be passed. However, the political reform package was negatived by the LegCo on 18 June. As such, even if the motion was passed by the YTMDC, it would be useless. He added that the advantage of the political reform package was that the power to elect the CE would no longer be vested only in an election committee of 1 200 members but the several million eligible voters in Hong Kong. In this connection, the CE-elect would be more responsive to public aspirations in formulating policies.
142. Mr Benny YEUNG said that as the political reform package had been negatived by the LegCo, he and Mr Francis CHONG requested to withdraw the motion at the beginning of the meeting. However, under the Standing Orders, no motion should be withdrawn except with the unanimous consent of the Councillors present (excluding abstentions). As a Councillor objected to withdrawing the motion, the YTMDC should continue to discuss this item. He added that he and many other Councillors deeply regretted the veto of the political reform package. He hoped that all sectors of the community would focus on improving the people’s livelihood again.
143. The Chairman said that according to the Standing Orders, no motion should be withdrawn except with the unanimous consent of the Councillors present (excluding abstentions). As Mr Benny YEUNG and Mr Francis CHONG proposed withdrawing the motion, he asked whether Councillors agreed with the proposal.
144. Mr WONG Kin-san objected to withdrawing the motion.
145. The Chairman said that as Mr WONG Kin-san objected to withdrawing the motion, the YTMDC should, according to the Standing Orders, continue to discuss the motion.
146. The Chairman said that the original motion in YTMDC Paper No. 66/2015 was proposed by Mr Benny YEUNG and Mr Francis CHONG and seconded by Mr WONG Kin-san. The original motion was as follows:
“The YTMDC supports the Consultation Report and Proposals on the Method for Selecting the CE by Universal Suffrage put forth by the Government of the Hong
- 31 - Kong Special Administrative Region in accordance with the Basic Law and the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to enable all eligible voters in Hong Kong to select the CE by universal suffrage through ‘one-person, one-vote’.”
147. The Chairman pointed out that Mr LAM Kin-man had authorised the Hon James TO in writing to vote on this item on his behalf.
----- 148. The Chairman added that Mr Chris IP proposed an amended motion (Annex 12) which was seconded by Mr CHAN Siu-tong. The amended motion was as follows:
“The YTMDC supports the Consultation Report and Proposals on the Method for Selecting the CE by Universal Suffrage put forth by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in accordance with the Basic Law and the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to enable all eligible voters in Hong Kong to select the CE by universal suffrage through ‘one-person, one-vote’. The YTMDC deeply regrets the veto of the Proposals by the LegCo on 18 June this year.”
149. The Hon James TO said that although government officials had ruled out the request to restart the political reform process, he was not discouraged and would continue to promote democracy. He had clearly expressed his stance and did not intend to move an amendment to the original motion. He and Mr LAM Kin-man objected to both the original and the amended motions.
150. The Chairman asked Councillors to vote on the amended motion according to the Standing Orders.
151. Voting result: 17 Councillors voted for the amended motion, they were the Chairman, the Vice-chairman, Mr CHAN Siu-tong, Mr CHAN Wai-keung, Mr Benjamin CHOI, Mr Francis CHONG, Mr CHOW Chun-fai, Mr HAU Wing-cheong, Mr HUI Tak-leung, Mr Derek HUNG, Mr Chris IP, Ms KWAN Sau-ling, Mr LAU Pak-kei, Mr WONG Kin-san, Mr Barry WONG, Ms WONG Shu-ming and Mr Benny YEUNG. Two Councillors voted against the motion, they were the Hon James TO and Mr LAM Kin-man (The Hon James TO voted on his behalf). No Councillor abstained from voting.
152. The Chairman announced that the amended motion was passed.
153. The Chairman announced a recess of 10 minutes.
(The meeting was adjourned for 10 minutes.)
(Mr WONG Kin-san and Mr Benny YEUNG left the meeting at 6:23 p.m.)
(The Vice-chairman and Mr Barry WONG left the meeting at 6:30 p.m.)
(The Hon James TO left the meeting at 6:35 p.m.)
- 32 - Item 23: Urging Law Amendments to Facilitate Collection of Evidence against Unlicensed Guesthouses (YTMDC Paper No. 67/2015)
154. The Chairman said that the written responses of the Buildings Department (“BD”), the FSD and the Office of the Licensing Authority (“OLA”) under the HAD (Annexes 13 to ----- 15) had been distributed to Councillors for perusal before the meeting. He then welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Mr AU Wing-hung, Chief Officer (Licensing Authority) and Mr KO Man-sum, Senior Divisional Officer (Licensing Authority) of the OLA under the HAD;
(b) Mr CHAN Sui-hong, Divisional Commander (Kowloon South) and Mr NG Shiu-yan, Station Commander of Tsim Sha Tsui Fire Station of the FSD ; and
(c) Mr CHIANG Wai-leung, Senior Structural Engineer/F4 of the BD.
155. Mr AU Wing-hung responded that the HAD had earlier conducted a comprehensive review on the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Ordinance (“the Ordinance”), with a view to improving the licensing regime, reducing the nuisance caused by licensed guesthouses to residents, and facilitating enforcement actions against unlicensed guesthouses. The HAD had also conducted a public consultation on the proposed amendments to the Ordinance and submitted the outcome of the public consultation and the proposed way forward to the LegCo Panel on Home Affairs. The HAD was drafting the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation (Amendment) Bill and would introduce it to the LegCo for scrutiny as soon as possible upon completion.
156. Ms WONG Shu-ming said that a fire broke out in a building at Mong Kok Road between late May and early June. She noted that residents of the building had repeatedly lodged complaints to the HAD that a flat in the building was suspected to be used for the operation of an unlicensed guesthouse. However, the HAD only replied briefly on the telephone instead of informing the complainants one by one in writing of the investigation results. In addition, the residents had repeatedly relayed to the BD that electrical appliances such as washing machines and refrigerators were placed at the yard of the building, which worried them that the building would be overloaded. Nevertheless, the BD had failed to follow up on the case proactively. She was deeply dissatisfied with how the above departments dealt with the complaints against the unlicensed guesthouse. She also enquired about the timetable of the Government for amending the Ordinance.
157. Mr HUI Tak-leung criticised the HAD for its failure to effectively handle the problem of unlicensed guesthouses. He pointed out that he had made a number of telephone calls to the HAD reporting suspected unlicensed guesthouse operations in Kwong Wing Building at 18 Shantung Street, Far East Mansion at 5-6 Middle Road and Great Eastern Mansion at Reclamation Street. However, the HAD had never replied.
(Post-meeting note: The OLA had contacted Mr HUI Tak-leung after the meeting for further details of his reports. According to the records, the OLA had replied to Mr HUI in a timely manner.)
- 33 - 158. Mr Francis CHONG said that according to his understanding, the Director of Buildings was empowered to issue a certificate certifying whether a premises was used for residential or non-residential purpose. The certificate could even be used as evidence in court. He opined that this could serve as a reference for the Government in tackling the problem of unlicensed guesthouses. For instance, the Director of Buildings or the Director of Home Affairs could be empowered to determine whether a premises was used for guesthouse operation. If so, the relevant departments could refer to the licence record to verify whether the premises was a licensed or unlicensed guesthouse, and to institute prosecution if it was the latter case. He also pointed out that quite a number of unlicensed guesthouses were subsidiary to licensed guesthouses, the Government should revoke the licences of such licensed guesthouses.
159. Mr CHAN Siu-tong said that he had repeatedly reported the unlicensed guesthouses or shadow guesthouses in Man Wah Sun Chuen, but the HAD responded in a perfunctory manner without following up proactively. He held the view that in order to effectively combat unlicensed guesthouses or shadow guesthouses in the district, the Government had to amend the legislation, gather evidence proactively, and increase the number of “snaking” operations.
160. Mr AU Wing-hung responded that the HAD was deliberating with the Department of Justice on the amendments to the Ordinance. It was hoped that the amendment bill would be introduced to the LegCo for scrutiny as early as possible. He added that “snaking” operations could effectively combat unlicensed guesthouses, but some unlicensed guesthouse operators were familiar with the mode of “snaking” operations by the HAD. Consequently, the HAD did encounter difficulties in carrying out “snaking” operations. To crack down unlicensed guesthouses, the Government suggested raising the penalty. At present, if a guesthouse licence holder was convicted of unlicensed guesthouse operation, the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Authority would consider revoking or suspending all the guesthouse licences being held by the licensee or refusing to renew the licences pursuant to the Ordinance. He added that Councillors could provide information about unlicensed guesthouses to him after the meeting to facilitate follow-up actions.
161. Mr CHIANG Wai-leung responded that the BD would deploy staff to conduct site inspections upon receipt of reports on unauthorised building works (“UBWs”) inside buildings. The BD would take corresponding actions in accordance with existing enforcement policies against UBWs. For example, the BD would accord priority to handling UBWs that affected the structural safety of buildings. Moreover, the BD would refer reported cases of unlicensed guesthouse operations to the OLA under the HAD for follow-up.
162. Mr CHAN Sui-hong responded that the operational firemen of the FSD would refer cases of suspected unlicensed guesthouse operation identified during routine inspections to the OLA under the HAD for follow-up. The FSD would take enforcement and follow-up actions as appropriate according to the Fire Services Ordinance if the operations or the activities concerned led to obstructions of any means of escape, exits or fire service installations and equipment. Moreover, the FSD would conduct fire safety assessments or provide advice on fire safety issues for the HAD’s reference in approving hotel and guesthouse licenses.
163. Mr Francis CHONG opined that the Government was out of wits in handling unlicensed guesthouses, just as how it handled UBWs. He also opined that potential fire
- 34 - hazards existed in unlicensed guesthouses and thus the Government should raise the penalty for unlicensed guesthouse operations. The seriousness of the offence could only be reflected if unlicensed guesthouse operators would be jailed upon conviction. He also said that Hong Kong’s tourism industry would suffer a huge setback if fires broke out in unlicensed guesthouses which led to casualties.
164. Ms WONG Shu-ming doubted that the HAD did not conduct any “snaking” operation for the case mentioned in the discussion paper. Moreover, she was discontented that the HAD did not reply to the complainants in the case. She urged the Government to submit the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation (Amendment) Bill to the LegCo for scrutiny as soon as possible.
165. The Chairman considered the progress of prosecutions against unlicensed guesthouses slow and casted doubt on the effectiveness of the “snaking” operations arranged by the HAD. He believed that the powers of the HAD and relevant departments would be increased and the penalty for unlicensed guesthouse operations would be raised significantly after the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation (Amendment) Bill came into effect. This would combat unlicensed guesthouse operations effectively. Moreover, he hoped that the HAD could step up publicity on the channels to report unlicensed guesthouses, arrange timely inspections for reported cases and respond promptly to complainants.
166. Mr AU Wing-hung responded that it was inappropriate for him to discuss the enforcement progress of an individual case at an open meeting since a criminal investigation was involved. However, he welcomed Councillors to provide information to him after the meeting for cases of concern to them and he would take follow-up actions.
167. Mr HUI Tak-leung stressed that Councillors speaking on this item opined that the ways in which the HAD collected evidence failed to combat unlicensed guesthouse operations effectively. The focus was not on the enforcement against flats reported by them.
168. Ms WONG Shu-ming was discontented that the representatives of the HAD refused to respond at the meeting on whether they had conducted any “snaking” operation for the case mentioned in the discussion paper. She requested the HAD to respond to her questions in writing.
169. Mr AU Wing-hung clarified that discussing the enforcement for an individual case at an open meeting would affect the future criminal prosecution for the case and thus it was inappropriate for him to give Councillors an account of the status of the case at the meeting.
170. The Chairman said that as Councillors had reported to the HAD and wanted to know the investigation progress and status of the case concerned, he asked the HAD to provide the relevant information to Councillors after the meeting.
171. Ms WONG Shu-ming reiterated her request for a written reply from the HAD on the case she reported.
(Post-meeting note: The OLA had provided a written response on the investigation of the case concerned to Ms WONG Shu-ming after the meeting. The OLA had also responded timely to Ms WONG on other cases she reported.)
- 35 - 172. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 24: The Government is Performing Poorly as it Fails to Make Use of Available Lands. Urging the Authority to Use Effectively the Site of Soy Street Temporary Cooked Food Market, 322-324 Reclamation Street and 445-447 Shanghai Street (the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street Sites) (YTMDC Paper No. 68/2015)
173. The Chairman welcomed the following representatives to the meeting:
(a) Ms Catherine PANG, Senior Estate Surveyor/Kowloon Central of the LandsD; (b) Ms Michelle YUEN, Acting Senior Town Planner/Yau Tsim Mong of the PlanD; and (c) Ms Patty LEE, Senior Executive Officer (District Management) of the YTMDO.
174. Mr HUI Tak-leung briefly introduced the paper. He said that the PlanD had indicated in 2013 the inclusion of the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the site between 322-324 Reclamation Street and 445-447 Shanghai Street (the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site) in the land sale programme. However, the sites were not on the land sale list for the time being and he wanted to know how the Government would develop the sites. As the Government had been slow to develop the sites, he had proposed setting aside the sites for use as bicycle parking spaces. However, the LandsD considered the proposal infeasible. He suggested rezoning the sites as open spaces to avoid wasting land resources.
175. Ms Michelle YUEN responded as follows:
(i) In terms of long-term planning, the Government had rezoned the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site from “Government, Institution or Community” to “Residential (Group A)”. The Soy Street Cooked Food Market site, in addition to being rezoned as “Residential (Group A) 4”, would be required to provide community hall facilities. However, since an organisation applied for judicial review of the Mong Kok OZP during the rezoning process, the OZP had not yet been submitted to the Chief Executive in Council for approval. As the judicial review was still in progress, the department could not provide the schedule for rezoning the sites for the time being.
(ii) The planning of the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site was on hold due to the judicial review. In view of this, the PlanD would not object to putting the sites to temporary use as proposed by any department, provided that there was no objection from other departments and the proposal was supported by the relevant policy bureaux.
- 36 - 176. Ms Catherine PANG said that the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site was used as a temporary car park at present and the LandsD had not received any application to use the site from other departments or organisations to date. As for the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site, since it had been included in the land sale programme, no government departments or other organisations intended to apply for temporary use of the site. She continued that according to established procedures, the LandsD would from time to time provide vacant government sites for short-term leasing to interested persons or organisations for community uses such as government/institution/community facilities and greening. The LandsD would also update the list of potential sites for community uses quarterly and notify the YTMDC Secretariat accordingly. The LandsD would later update the list which would include the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site. Interested persons or organisations could apply for short-term leasing of the sites on the list through established procedures. The LandsD would consider individual applications without affecting government land sale.
177. Mr HUI Tak-leung said that as in the case of the ex-Mong Kok Market site, the planning of the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site had been suspended due to judicial review. To avoid wasting land resources, he urged the PlanD to promptly rezone the sites as open spaces and asked whether the proposal was feasible.
178. The Chairman would like to know whether the PlanD could rezone the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site as open spaces. He also enquired about the rezoning procedures and schedule.
179. Ms Michelle YUEN responded as follows:
(i) According to the OZP, the relevant departments could rezone the sites as open spaces without submitting planning applications as long as they secured the necessary funding.
(ii) The sites had been rezoned from “Government, Institution or Community” to “Residential (Group A)” for constructing residential buildings. Provision of recreational facilities was a use always permitted within such sites.
(iii) The procedures and time required for rezoning the sites from “Residential (Group A)” to open spaces would be no different from those for rezoning the sites from “Government, Institution or Community” to “Residential (Group A)”. Nevertheless, the department would not rule out the possibility that the public might apply for judicial review of the rezoning.
180. Mr Francis CHONG enquired whether the applicant in the judicial review case of the Soy Street Temporary Cooked Food Market objected to rezoning the site to residential use and what the grounds were.
181. Ms WONG Shu-ming was discontented with the response of the representative of the PlanD and said that the situation with this item was exactly the same as that with the ex-Mong Kok Market site. The Government should reconsider the development of the sites mentioned in the paper as the judicial review of the OZP had ended already. She enquired whether the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site could be excluded from the OZP. She would also like to know why government
- 37 - departments or other organisations were not interested in the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site, and enquired whether the Government would consider turning the site into a temporary multifunctional venue for public use.
182. Ms Michelle YUEN responded as follows:
(i) The judicial review was against the new building height restrictions stipulated in the amended OZP. Building height restrictions also apply to the sites mentioned above (80 metres above Principal Datum).
(ii) The Court of First Instance of the High Court had overruled the TPB’s decisions on the representations regarding the OZP. The TPB had applied for an appeal against the High Court’s judgment and was waiting for a hearing to be scheduled.
(iii) In the long run, the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site had been zoned as “Residential (Group A)”. Although the planned development of the sites was on hold for the time being due to the judicial review, the sites could be utilised for temporary use for a term not exceeding five years if all government departments had no objection and the relevant policy bureaux supported the proposed temporary use.
(iv) In general, applications for temporary use of sites covered by the OZP for a term not exceeding five years would be approved. However, since the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site and the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site had been included in the Government’s land sale programme and planned for development into residential use eventually, such applications might still be disapproved by the relevant departments and policy bureaux even though they were allowed under the OZP.
(Mr Francis CHONG left the meeting at 7:13 p.m.)
(Mr CHOW Chun-fai left the meeting at 7:14 p.m.)
183. Ms Catherine PANG supplemented that while the Soy Street Cooked Food Market site was being used as a temporary car park, the Reclamation Street/Shanghai Street site was still vacant. The LandsD welcomed interested departments or organisations to apply for temporary use of the site. The LandsD would consider individual applications as long as government land sale would not be affected and the proposed temporary use met the requirements of the OZP. The LandsD would further consult the relevant policy bureaux on the duration of the term for the temporary use.
184. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item.
Item 25: Progress Reports
(1) District Management Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 69/2015)
- 38 - (2) Community Building Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 70/2015) (3) District Facilities Management Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 71/2015) (4) Food and Environmental Hygiene Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 72/2015) (5) Housing and Building Management Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 73/2015) (6) Traffic and Transport Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 74/2015) (7) Working Group on Ethnic Affairs (YTMDC Paper No. 75/2015) (8) Working Group on Promotion of Tourism and Local Community Economy (YTMDC Paper No. 76/2015) (9) Working Group on Care for the Community (YTMDC Paper No. 77/2015) (10) Working Group on Women’s Affairs (YTMDC Paper No. 78/2015) (11) Working Group on Concern for Yau Ma Tei Fruit Market (YTMDC Paper No. 79/2015) (12) Working Group on Publicity and Promotion (YTMDC Paper No. 80/2015) (13) Area Committees (YTMDC Paper No. 81/2015)
185. Councillors noted the contents of the progress reports.
Item 26: Any Other Business
The 5th Hong Kong Games (“HKG”)
186. Mr Derek HUNG reported that the 5th HKG had officially closed on 31 May 2015. As the Head of the YTM District Delegation in the HKG, he extended his heartfelt gratitude to the YTMDC, the YTM District Organising Committee for the HKG, all the sponsors, the LCSD and the YTMDO staff for their enormous support. The YTM District Delegation did brilliantly in the HKG, winning five gold, four silver and four bronze medals and ranking eighth in Hong Kong, which was one place higher than it did last time. In addition, the YTM Cheering Team was named the second runner-up in the Best Performance Award and the Best Local Characteristics Award.
187. The Chairman said that athletes joining the HKG could only represent the districts in which they lived. Although the resident population of YTM District ranked second or third last in the territory, the district ranked eighth in the overall ranking in the HKG. He congratulated the athletes on their success. He also especially thanked Mr Derek HUNG for being the Head of the YTM District Delegation.
- 39 - 188. Ms WONG Shu-ming said that, to her knowledge, Mr Derek HUNG often attended the event to support the athletes of YTM District during the HKG. She thanked Mr HUNG for this.
189. There being no other business, the Chairman closed the meeting at 7:16 p.m. The next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 10 September 2015 (Thursday).
Yau Tsim Mong District Council Secretariat July 2015
- 40 -