(Translation)

Minutes of the 23rd Meeting of the 4th Wan Chai District Council Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Date: 7 July 2015 (Tuesday) Time: 2:30 p.m. Venue: District Council Conference Room, Wan Chai District Office, 21/F Southorn Centre, 130 Hennessy Road, Wan Chai, H.K.

Present Chairperson Mr SUEN Kai-cheong, SBS, MH, JP

Vice-Chairperson Mr Stephen NG, BBS, MH, JP

Members Ms Pamela PECK Ms Yolanda NG, MH Ms Kenny LEE Ms Peggy LEE Mr Ivan WONG, MH Mr David WONG Mr CHENG Ki-kin Dr Anna TANG, BBS, MH Ms Jacqueline CHUNG Dr Jeffrey PONG

1

23 DCMIN

Representatives of Core Government Departments

Ms Angela LUK, JP District Officer (Wan Chai), Home Affairs Department Ms Renie LAI Assistant District Officer (Wan Chai), Home Affairs Department Ms Daphne CHAN Senior Liaison Officer (Community Affairs), Home Affairs Department Mr CHAN Chung-chi District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Wan Chai), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr Nelson CHENG District Commander (Wan Chai), Hong Kong Police Force Ms Dorothy NIEH Police Community Relation Officer (Wan Chai District), Hong Kong Police Force Mr FUNG Ching-kwong Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Eastern/Wan Chai)1, Social Welfare Department Mr Nelson CHAN Chief Transport Officer/Hong Kong, Transport Department Mr Franklin TSE Senior Engineer 5 (HK Island Div 2), Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr Simon LIU Chief Leisure Manager (Hong Kong East), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms Brenda YEUNG District Leisure Manager (Wan Chai), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr Vincent PANG District Lands Officer (Hong Kong East), Lands Department

Representatives of Other Government Departments and Organisations

Ms Bernadette LINN, JP Director of Lands Mr Jim LAM Senior Estate Surveyor (Technical Information), Lands Department for agenda Mr Alex KWOK Senior Estate Surveyor/Land Control & Lease item 1 Enforcement (District Lands Office/Hong Kong East, West & South), Lands Department

2

23 DCMIN

Mr LAI Man-hin, FSDSM Director of Fire Services Mr TONG Chung-wai Divisional Commander (Hong Kong Central), Fire

Services Department for agenda Mr CHEUNG Tsee-tuck Assistant Chief Ambulance Officer (Hong Kong), item 2 Fire Services Department Mr Eric LO Divisional Officer (Management Group)2, Fire Services Department

Ms April KUN Acting Chief Town Planner (Studies and Research), Planning Department Mr Patrick FUNG Acting Senior Town Planner (Studies and Research 5), Planning Department Dr Eunice MAK Deputy Project Director, AECOM Asia Co. Ltd for agenda Ms Pearl HUI Project Manager, AECOM Asia Co. Ltd item 4 Mr Kenny CHAN Senior Town Planner, AECOM Asia Co. Ltd Ms Joyce CHOW Public Engagement Specialist, Kadoorie Institute Ms Carol LEE Public Engagement Coordinator, Kadoorie Institute

Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chief Engineer (Railway Development 1-2), Railway Development Office, Highways Department Ms Yanny LI Acting Senior Engineer (SCL 6), Railway Development Office, Highways Department Mr Johnny CHAN Senior Engineer (Priority Railway 3), Transport Department for agenda Mr Walter LAM Construction Manager (SCL Civil), MTRCL item 5 Mr T. C. LAM Construction Manager (SCL Civil), MTRCL Mr Kelvin WU Senior Liaison Engineer, MTRCL Ms Sandy WU Projects Communications Manager, MTRCL Dr Victor WONG Arup Hong Kong Ltd Ms Joyce WONG Arup Hong Kong Ltd

3

23 DCMIN

Ms Leonie LEE Assistant Secretary (Heritage Conservation)3, Development Bureau Mr Ryan CHU Engineer (Heritage Conservation)Special Duties, Development Bureau for agenda Mr Tony CHEUNG Senior Engineer (Wan Chai), Transport Department item 6 Mr Thomas Jefferson WU Managing Director, Hopewell Holdings Limited Mr Chris LI General Manager, Hopewell Project Development Limited Mr Philip LIAO Partner, Philip Liao and Partners Ltd Mr Peter MAK Director, WMKY Limited

Absent with Apologies Mr David LAI

Secretary Mr Vincent CHUK Senior Executive Officer (District Council)/Wan Chai, Home Affairs Department

Action Opening Remarks

1. The Chairperson welcomed Ms Bernadette LINN, JP, Director of Lands, Mr Jim LAM, Senior Estate Surveyor (Technical Information), Mr Vincent PANG, District Lands Officer (Hong Kong East) and Mr Alex KWOK, Senior Estate Surveyor/Land Control & Lease Enforcement (District Lands Office/Hong Kong East, West & South) of the Lands Department (LandsD), to the meeting. The Chairperson, on behalf of the Wan Chai District Council (WCDC), extended welcome to Mr Nelson CHENG, District Commander (Wan Chai) of the Hong Kong Police Force, who attended the meeting for the first time; Mr Franklin TSE, Senior Engineer 5 (HK Island Div 2) of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD), who replaced Mr Samson LAM; and

4

23 DCMIN

Action Mr FUNG Ching-kwong, Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Eastern/Wan Chai)1 of the Social Welfare Department (SWD), who replaced Mr NGAN Man-por. The Chairperson congratulated Mr Stephen NG and Mr David WONG for being awarded Bronze Bauhinia Star and Chief Executive’s Commendation for Community Service respectively.

(Mr CHENG Ki-kin joined the meeting at 2:35 p.m.)

2. The Chairperson asked Members to note the papers on the conference table and the suggested discussion time. He reminded them that a maximum of three minutes were allowed for each Member to speak in respect of each agenda item.

Meeting with Head of Department Item 1: Visit by Director of Lands

3. The Chairperson invited Ms Bernadette LINN, JP, Director of Lands, to brief Members on the work of LandsD.

4. Ms Bernadette LINN, JP, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, briefed Members on the work of LandsD. The areas covered were land disposal, including sale of government land, private treaty grant, land lease modification and in-situ land exchange; granting of short term tenancies (STT); estate management, including land control actions and lease enforcement; land acquisition and clearance; and land survey and mapping.

(Dr Jeffrey PONG and Ms Pamela PECK joined the meeting at 2:47 p.m. and 2:55 p.m. respectively.)

5. The Chairperson thanked Ms Bernadette LINN, JP for introducing concisely and clearly the work of LandsD. He then invited Members to express their views.

5

23 DCMIN

Action 6. Ms Peggy LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) The problem of skips had been an issue of concern for local residents. There were cases where LandsD had removed the skips or instituted prosecution, but the construction waste in the skips was then left on the ground, causing environmental hygiene problems. To address these cases, she enquired whether a warning notice could be posted again during an inspection by staff of LandsD to remind the party concerned that enforcement action would be taken if the waste was not cleared. She suggested that communication between departments should be strengthened; otherwise only LandsD would take enforcement action, with no other departments to follow up the problems left after the enforcement action, leaving the problems to remain unresolved.

(ii) Illegal display of banners had been a serious problem in Wan Chai District. Unauthorised banners such as commercial advertising banners, publicity banners from various organisations or political banners were commonly seen on footbridges and streets. She enquired if LandsD could step up enforcement to reduce the nuisance caused by unauthorised banners to local residents. .

7. Mr Stephen NG, BBS, MH, JP raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Various departments seemed to be unable to find a solution to the problem of skips. He enquired whether a registration system could be implemented to require skips owner or manufacturers to be registered, with a view to facilitating any necessary enforcement actions in the future.

6

23 DCMIN

Action (ii) He expressed concern over street sleepers’ occupation of subways, public spaces and government land. Such problem was in particularly rampant in the subway opposite the Hong Kong Racing Museum. He enquired what actions could be taken to address the issue.

(iii) A large number of old buildings in Wan Chai was designated as “One European House” in the land leases. Upon redevelopment, developers had to bring their cases to court before they could redevelop the old buildings into multi-storey buildings. There were currently no clear standards for making applications for redevelopment.

(iv) He opined that “Hong Kong Map Service” was a good idea and suggested that more elements should be added to the website such as outline development plans.

8. Mr David WONG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Owing to the sophisticated division of duties among departments, inter-departmental collaboration was often required in carrying out daily land control work. The Highways Department (HyD), the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) and the police might be involved. It was well known that long-term reliance on inter-departmental collaboration would bring about many limitations. Besides, the existing ordinances were enacted many years ago, which had limited coverage. He suggested that LandsD should amend the relevant ordinances to tackle the difficulties in law enforcement.

(ii) The development of the Caroline Hill Road site, where the former headquarters of the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department was situated, had been under planning

7

23 DCMIN

Action for almost a decade. He enquired if there was a concrete schedule or any preliminary development direction.

9. Ms Jacqueline CHUNG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) As regards the assessment of the Caroline Hill Road site, there were many minibus stations or taxi stands occupying road surface in Wan Chai District, resulting in traffic congestion. She enquired if LandsD could consider setting up a transport interchange on Caroline Hill Road and utilise the area to relieve traffic congestion.

(ii) A large number of street sleepers had been living in the subways in Happy Valley. The District Officer (Wan Chai) (DO) and the District Lands Office concerned had paid great effort to clear the things placed in the subways by treating those things as illegal structures. However, the current situation had been worsening, with accumulation of things not as simple as illegal structures. Street sleepers placed household items such as mattresses and cupboards in the subways, turning the area into a home-like setting, which posed a threat to the safety of pedestrians and environmental hygiene. As government lands were managed by LandsD, she enquired about the laws which LandsD could invoke when working with WCDC to clear the things of street sleepers. Noting that LandsD was able to clear the tents outside the Legislative Council, she opined that it should actively consider how to clear the things of street sleepers, which were also movable items similar to the tents.

(iii) Noting that the Gloucester Road Refuse Collection Point had been operated on a temporary basis for a long time, she enquired if LandsD could consider changing the land use to

8

23 DCMIN

Action flexibly utilise the site, so that the existing substandard temporary refuse collection point could be upgraded to a formal one.

(iv) In the past, the land disposal of Tang Lung Street and Thomson Road sites used to include roads. There were various lots under a sublease. The lots were currently purchased by a consortium and combined into a large lot. Take Tang Lung Street as an example, a traffic lane was fenced by the consortium. If the traffic lane on the other side was also purchased and fenced by any other consortium, the access of public vehicles and fire engines to the area might be affected.

10. Dr Jeffrey PONG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) When dealing with district issues, it was common for Lands Offices to collaborate with the Buildings Department (BD), the FEHD and the Transport Department (TD) to carry out joint frontline work. He enquired how the departments would coordinate the work. Such information would enable Members to know which department they should approach when dealing with district issues.

(ii) The illegal display of banners in crowded places, residential areas and subways was common. While this was unlawful occupation of government land, no improvement had been seen over the years. He enquired about the principles for carrying out an inspection, and asked whether an inspection was conducted after receiving a complaint or conducted regularly to high risk places.

(iii) Sometimes there were recycling vehicles occupying the area around Tai Hang Road and Happy Valley unlawfully. He

9

23 DCMIN

Action enquired if such recycling vehicles were under the purview of LandsD, similar to the illegally parked bicycles occupying government land. He also enquired how LandsD would address such problem.

(iv) The “Hong Kong Map Service” was a great service. He enquired if a reporting mechanism could be established for the public to upload photos of unauthorised structures and illegal banners to the website for action of LandsD.

11. Dr Anna TANG, BBS, MH raised the following comments or enquires:

(i) Occupation of government land could be found in the subway on Wong Nai Chung Road and the side area of the Southorn Playground. Various kinds of stuff were being placed there. Under the Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28), LandsD was required to post a prior notice not less than one day before the clearance of the occupied land or the demolition of illegal structures. She queried why LandsD allowed the occupiers to clear the stuff instead of taking enforcement action directly, given that the occupation was unlawful. She suggested that the Directors of Lands should consider amending the relevant ordinance, taking into account the environment and actual needs of Hong Kong.

(ii) She enquired if LandsD would collaborate with other departments in the land disposal for the construction of a filling station, so as to understand the impacts of the filling station on local residents, traffic as well as the environment.

12. Mr Ivan WONG, MH pointed out the historical problem of private streets could be found in Wan Chai Mid-Levels. The ownership of roads

10

23 DCMIN

Action was granted along with the land sites by the Government at that time, resulting in future problems of maintenance, traffic congestion as well as health and safety. However, the existing ordinances and procedures for the resumption of private streets were very complicated. He enquired how LandsD would learn from mistakes to improve the problems or help the owners troubled by the problem of private streets in the future.

13. Ms Yolanda NG, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) In Wan Chai, there were dozens of complaints about unauthorised structures, skips, banners, floor slabs and bamboo scaffolds every day. She hoped that LandsD would conduct a comprehensive review of the relevant policies, apart from stepping up law enforcement.

(ii) It was a usual practice to submit applications for temporary occupation of a pedestrian area for organising activities to LandsD. However, it was said that LandsD had issued an internal notice stating that the TD would take over the processing of such applications. LandsD did not inform District Councils (DCs) and district offices of such a change. She enquired about the considerations based on which LandsD revised the scope of duties, and asked if it had considered consulting DCs. .

(iii) Regarding the nine government sites open for tender, she agreed that there would be a certain degree of difficulty for non-profit-making organisations to operate the sites. She suggested that LandsD could consider a new practice, taking the initiative to open the sites for use as public spaces. The views she collected when she approached some of the members of the public in the occupation areas during the Occupation Movement reflected that some of them joined the Movement not to express their political

11

23 DCMIN

Action views but to enjoy exchanging views with others in a public space. Therefore, she suggested that LandsD could consider opening some places for the public to gather for discussion.

(iv) Concerning the problem of unlawful occupation of lands, she pointed out that some commercial publicity vehicles and commercial activities on the streets seemed not to be subject to any regulatory control. There were six to seven commercial booths in the pedestrian areas in the district such as the areas around East Point Road and SOGO Department Store every weekend. These activities had been increasingly frequent, thus affecting formal applications by local organisations for venues. She requested LandsD to face up to the problem.

14. Ms Bernadette LINN, JP made the following responses:

(i) With regard to the problem of skips, a joint working group comprising different policy bureaux had been set up to study the way forward for the management of skips. In view of the genuine needs of the industry concerned, the study areas of the working group included how to allow placing of skips in an orderly manner and the possibility of introducing a licensing scheme. The work of the working group was underway and a final decision had yet to be made.

(ii) LandsD had dealt with many cases where the construction materials in the skips were left on footpaths. If such cases caused immediate serious traffic blockage, the police and the HyD would deal with the cases within their ambit. If there was no imminent danger, the case would be handled by LandsD.

12

23 DCMIN

Action (iii) The Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) was not the only tool for managing matters happened on streets and government land. There were other ordinances such as the Summary Offences Ordinance, which could be invoked to address street obstruction cases and institute prosecution. For hawking activities on government land, the FEHD might take enforcement action under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance. The Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) focused mainly on illegal structures on government land.

(iv) As regards the division of work among departments, street management work was coordinated via a platform set up by the Home Affairs Bureau (HAB). Generally, hawking activities on footpaths would be dealt with by the FEHD; cases involving structures would be dealt with by LandsD in accordance with the Lands (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28). In dealing with these cases, departments had a good understanding of each other’s work. However, undoubtedly, there might be grey areas in individual cases, which would require close communication between the District Officer, the District Lands Officer and heads of other departments in the district. If a large scope of work was involved, the case would be dealt with via the platform of the HAB, with heads of departments taking charge of the case. Other individual cases would be handled through collaboration between staff within the district.

(v) The situation of street sleepers was entirely different from that of the occupation of the Tamar area. The Occupation Movement involved a prolonged period of occupation of the areas. Many structures were erected there, which later caused concerns over security and environmental hygiene.

13

23 DCMIN

Action Street sleepers would not stay in a place for a whole day. Each of them had their own story. The issue of street sleepers should be handled in a humane way. Efforts should be made to understand the reasons for them to be left homeless and advice should be given. The problem of street sleepers could not be rooted out by one single clearance action. LandsD would continue to conduct joint operations with the departments concerned, including the SWD. (Ms Jacqueline CHUNG circulated some photos showing the occupation of the subway in Happy Valley by street sleepers to the Director of Lands and her staff. The photos showed that street sleepers had occupied the government land for a prolonged period, with household items such as mattresses and cupboards being placed there all day.)

(vi) With respect to the development of the Caroline Hill Road, no timetable or concrete information could be provided at the moment. In view of the massive traffic flow in the area, various assessments should be conducted first. LandsD would consider Members’ views, including the suggestion of setting up a transport interchange, and would consult WCDC in due course.

(vii) As regards the temporary Gloucester Road Refuse Collection Point, the District Lands Officer and other departments concerned were considering identifying a suitable site for setting up a larger refuse collection point.

(viii) Recycling vehicles did not fall within the purview of LandsD. Cases of recycling vehicles occupying roads, similar to cases of skips, would be dealt with through collaboration between departments. If the recycling vehicle caused serious traffic blockage, the case might be

14

23 DCMIN

Action dealt with by the police. If no serious traffic congestion was caused, LandsD would consider dealing with the case in accordance with the Lands (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28).

(ix) The issue of private streets was indeed a problem left over from history. The Home Affairs Department set up a working group in the 80s, which had compiled a list of streets to be resumed possession by the Government and streets not possible for resumption. Up to now, among the private streets specified in the list, the resumption of about ten-odd streets was yet to be finalised. One of the conditions of the resumption of private streets was that the Government should not incur any compensation liability. As legal issues were involved, the resumption of some private streets could not be achieved.

(x) Members were welcomed to propose any vacant sites suitable for tenancy purpose to LandsD. LandsD would seriously consider the proposed sites.

15. The Chairperson made the following comments:

(i) WCDC understood that the issue of street sleepers was a social issue, which should be addressed through inter-departmental collaboration. DO conducted the last inter-departmental operation in collaboration with the SWD, which arranged rehousing for street sleepers as far as possible. Although clearance action could not root out the problem, it could prevent it from worsening. Street sleepers had been occupying government land for a long period of time. Their belongings were not simply a few sheets of cardboard. They placed beds, mattresses, wardrobes and screens in the occupied areas all day. DO was now

15

23 DCMIN

Action planning another inter-departmental action, and would need the assistance of LandsD in law enforcement. The enforcement of ordinances related to government land was within the purview of LandsD. However, in the last inter-departmental operation, DO could not get any assistance from LandsD until having obtained legal advice from the Department of Justice. He hoped that the Director of Lands could pay more attention to the issue to prevent reoccurrence of such situation.

(ii) As regards the issue of private streets around Tang Lung Street, it was more than a common maintenance problem. The area around Times Square had been purchased by a number of private developers. The whole street would be redeveloped. The developers indeed had the right not to allow vehicular access to the area, which might bring traffic around the area to a standstill. WCDC understood that it was no easy task to address the issue of private streets. Although there were no simple solutions to the problem, it was hoped that LandsD could work out some mitigation measures.

Item 2: Visit by Director of Fire Services

16. The Chairperson welcomed Mr LAI Man-hin, FSDSM, Director of Fire Services, Mr TONG Chung-wai, Divisional Commander (Hong Kong Central), Mr CHEUNG Tsee-tuck, Assistant Chief Ambulance Officer (Hong Kong) and Mr Eric LO, Divisional Officer (Management Group)2 of the Fire Services Department (FSD), to the meeting.

17. Mr LAI Man-hin, FSDSM, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, briefed Members on the major functions of the FSD, the performance of various emergency services in 2014, the performance pledge of the FSD, emergency services in Wan Chai District as well as the

16

23 DCMIN

Action work for enhancing service quality and its effectiveness.

18. The Chairperson invited Members to raise follow-up questions.

19. Mr David WONG expressed support for the FSD to require owners of old buildings to modernise their fire service equipment. However, he hoped that the FSD would understand their difficulties. For example, the installation of additional fire service water tanks on the rooftop was required for connecting with hose reels, but sometimes, such installation was infeasible due to structural constraints. After receiving a notice from the FSD, many elderly building owners were worried about the huge maintenance fee to be incurred. Moreover, since the conditions of buildings varied, the owners did not know how to meet the requirements of the FSD. He suggested that the FSD should enhance communication with owners and organise talks in various districts to explain its requirements. He also hoped that staff of the FSD would conduct site visits to different buildings to tell owners what fire safety improvement works were required and alleviate their worries. This would help speed up the completion of the required fire safety improvement works.

20. Ms Yolanda NG, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) She thanked the FSD for its support and assistance for implementing the fire safety enhancement scheme at Jardine’s Bazaar in Causeway Bay. The fire safety standard of the street was enhanced while the disruption to the stall operators and local residents was minimised. She also commended the FSD for its efforts in upgrading fire engines and related equipment in recent years. As a result, the public were offered the highest protection.

(ii) Some old buildings in Wan Chai District did not have an owners’ corporation. Some of the owners were elders or even had moved out. Support was necessary for these

17

23 DCMIN

Action buildings to upgrade the fire safety installations. Despite years of discussion, building owners were unable to implement the directions issued by the FSD. They were worried all day that they would be prosecuted. She asked if the FSD could follow the practice adopted by the BD by taking the initiative to carry out the required works for the buildings and recovering the cost from each household concerned later. This would help owners to comply with the relevant directions more efficiently.

21. Dr Jeffrey PONG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) There were many commercial/residential composite buildings and bars in Wan Chai District where a large number of people gathered. It would have dire consequences should an explosion of flammable substances occurred. He hoped that the FSD would educate the operators of entertainment establishments and bars on the necessary preventive measures.

(ii) He considered the Fire Safety Ambassador Scheme a very meaningful initiative, and suggested that the FSD should devote greater effort to setting up a first aid ambassador club, in particular for old buildings. First aid ambassadors could be trained to handle some simple home accidents such as burns and cuts. This would help reduce the demand for the ambulance service. Besides he also praised fire service personnel for their enthusiasm and dedication shown during a residents’ visit to a fire station conducted earlier.

22. Ms Peggy LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Some old tenement buildings in Wan Chai District had been built for over 40 years, which of course could not fully

18

23 DCMIN

Action comply with the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance (Cap. 572). There was an open area with fences on each floor of these buildings. Under the existing legislation, such construction design was unsafe since smoke and fire would spread to nearby buildings through these openings in case of fire. The FSD therefore required such openings to be enclosed with only a fire resisting window left. Although staff of the FSD had paid visits to the buildings concerned and explained the required works to the owners, they encountered difficulties in carrying out the works as each building had its unique construction design and location. She hoped that the FSD would handle these cases with flexibility, taking into account the individual conditions of the buildings. Support should be provided for owners to help them resolve the difficulties in complying with the relevant directions.

(ii) Even though some owners had tried to carry out the improvement works in order to fully comply with the law, the processing of the building works plan was very slow, which might take two to three years. As a result, there was a delay for these buildings in meeting the statutory requirements. She queried if the FSD should increase manpower for processing building works plans and enquired about the internal operation of the processing work.

23. Ms Jacqueline CHUNG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) The accident occurred at the Formosa Water Park in Taiwan had aroused public concern. Noting that a similar large-scale event would be conducted in Hong Kong in December, she enquired about the fire safety standards or

19

23 DCMIN

Action restrictions imposed on this kind of events and the ways for ensuring the safety of these events.

(ii) Many commercial entertainment establishments in Wan Chai District were situated in enclosed areas. It was common in a birthday party that some participants were blowing candles while some were making pyrotechnic effects with the use of a spray gun. Under such circumstances, those who were blowing candles might be caught in fire. She enquired if there were any regulatory controls imposed on these activities. She suggested that public educational work and publicity should be launched to remind the public that a tragic event might happen under such happy moments. This would help raise public awareness of fire safety and reduce accidents.

(iii) In Wan Chai, there were many large signboards which blocked the windows of buildings. Windows were also means of escape. Although these signboards were erected under the Minor Works Control System, she queried if they would affect fire safety.

(iv) Chapter 572 of the Laws of Hong Kong had a great impact on Wan Chai District. For example, the FSD required owners to provide old buildings with fire-resisting materials under the said ordinance. However, due to the constraints posed by the building design, there was not enough space in the old buildings for carrying out the required works. She hoped that the FSD would provide clear guidelines to advise residents on how to solve the problems, instead of simply issuing summons to building owners.

24. Ms Kenny LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

20

23 DCMIN

Action (i) She thanked the FSD for exercising its discretion to accept residents’ request for the delayed implementation of the fire safety direction. This had enabled residents to have sufficient time to raise money for the necessary fire safety improvement works.

(ii) As regards the ambulance service, there was a case where an elderly was sent to the North District Hospital after an accident happened during an outing in North District sponsored by WCDC. Even though the elderly sustained minor injuries and needed some small-scale examination, the ambulance could not transfer the elderly to the Rutonjee Hospital. Therefore, family members and friends of the elderly had to travel a long distance from Wan Chai to North District to visit the elderly. She hoped that the FSD would consider expanding the ambulance service so that hospital transfer service could be provided.

(iii) Upon receipt of a fire safety direction from the FSD, local residents started raising money for the required fire safety works. The consultant they commissioned would submit the latest works details to the FSD for approval. It was common to involve several rounds of communication, leading to a delay in the completion of the works. She hoped that the FSD would provide clear procedures to facilitate compliance.

(iv) She pointed out that an old lady had occupied the back staircase of a building in her constituency for many years. She not only piled up rubbish in the area but also urinated and defecated there, seriously affecting the hygiene of the area. At present, the FSD instituted prosecution every six months. She considered such action very inadequate. She said that the FSD had a duty to clear articles

21

23 DCMIN

Action accumulated on a back staircase. She would provide the FSD with detailed information about the case later for follow-up action.

25. Mr Ivan WONG, MH said that Wan Chai Mid-Levels was covered with dense forests. Although no hill fires had occurred for years, people should remain vigilant. There was a cemetery in Wan Chai and a new columbarium had been proposed recently. It was expected that there would be a large number of grave sweepers during the Ching Ming and Chung Yeung periods and the chance for them to leave behind kindling would increase. He enquired about the publicity on the prevention of hill fires and the measures for fire prevention for Wan Chai District. He hoped that the FSD would devote more resources to public educational work to educate the public on how to prevent and put out hill fires.

26. Dr Anna TANG, BBS, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Many buildings in Wan Chai were old buildings. The owners were elders and it was common that they did not understand the requirements of the FSD. Moreover, owners had different needs and were in different situations. She suggested that the FSD should follow the practice of the BD by setting up a team of social workers to enable different cases to be followed up by social workers. This would help owners resolve the difficulties in meeting the requirements under Cap. 572, so that the administrative work of owners’ corporations could be smoother.

(ii) There was a case where unauthorised building works were found in the common area of a building. According to the BD’s reply, the relevant plan was approved by the BD. However, the FSD said that the building works contravened the Fire Services Ordinance. At last, the BD replied that

22

23 DCMIN

Action there was a fire services division under the BD which confirmed that the plan had been approved. She was greatly surprised that the BD was empowered to approve fire service plans.

27. Ms Pamela PECK pointed out that almost all buildings on Paterson Street were old buildings. A few years ago, each household received frequent prosecution from the FSD. However, with the passage of time, it seemed that no further follow-up action would be taken. She hoped that the FSD could give an explanation with respect to such cases.

28. Mr LAI Man-hin, FSDSM made the following responses:

(i) Regarding enhancing fire safety in old buildings, Cap. 572 aimed to upgrade the fire service equipment of old buildings to a level close to the existing fire safety standards. The FSD acknowledged the fact that old buildings had many constraints in terms of space, equipment, etc. It was not feasible to stringently require old buildings to be installed with modern equipment. Therefore the FSD had adopted a pragmatic approach by allowing the installation of some improvised fire service equipment.

(ii) In view of the fact that many owners of old buildings did not know how to start the fire safety improvement works, the FSD published a pamphlet last year, which set out the ways for upgrading fire service equipment in table form and provided some examples of real cases for reference. The FSD had started distributing copies of the pamphlet to DCs. It was hoped that the pamphlet could enable Members to have a good understanding of improvised installations, so that they could help residents resolve the difficulties in making improvements to their fire service equipment. (Post-meeting note: The FSD had provided WCDC with

23

23 DCMIN

Action copies of the above pamphlet for distribution to Members.)

(iii) The FSD understood that elderly owners in old districts might not have a good understanding of the required fire safety improvement works. Therefore, the FSD had maintained close collaboration with district offices. Staff of district offices would make contact with buildings or residents to assist elderly owners to understand the relevant information. Moreover, in issuing fire safety directions to building owners, the FSD would enclose the information about the Integrated Building Maintenance Assistance Scheme managed by the Urban Renewal Authority. Besides, periodic talks would be organised to explain to residents how to apply for financial assistance. Furthermore, a case manager would be assigned to each building to answer residents’ enquires on fire service installations or help refer their applications for financial assistance to the relevant authorities. District offices would also have the relevant information.

(iv) The FSD, in collaboration with the Water Supplies Department, was implementing a pilot scheme for three-storey old buildings under which these old buildings were allowed not to install fire service water tanks and fire pumps. Instead government water mains would be used to supply water directly to the hose reel tubing through a non-return valve in order to reduce the cost of the entire installation works. The scheme was still being run on a trial basis. Following its successful implementation, it would extend to other old buildings with more storeys. The FSD hoped that by taking advantage of technological advances, residents’ concerns about insufficient space for the installation of water tanks and the high cost involved would be addressed.

24

23 DCMIN

Action

(v) The FSD was in discussion with the Association of Fire Service Installation Contractors to see if it was possible for the association to offer advice on fire safety improvement works to residents on an independent basis, including advice on the approximate installation cost and the required time for residents’ reference.

(vi) The FSD was not in a position to answer the enquiries on the need for the open spaces of old buildings to be enclosed since these enquiries fell within the purview of the BD. It was believed that the major consideration was the spread of fire and smoke through windows or corridors in case of fire.

(vii) On vetting building plans, the FSD had implemented new measures and revised the relevant procedures. Prior authorisation from owners’ corporations should be obtained before submitting a building plan for alteration works to the FSD for approval. This requirement could prevent fire installation contractors from submitting an unauthorised building plan for the FSD’s approval for soliciting business. Moreover, the FSD would issue a follow-up list to building owners which set out all information required to be submitted by their appointed contractors. This arrangement would not only facilitate contractors to provide the required information on the building plan in an accurate and efficient manner, but also reduce the time required for vetting the building plans. Besides, it would help building owners monitor their contractors to see if they had duly discharged their duties. The FSD would continue to monitor the effectiveness of these measures.

(viii) With respect to building improvement works, the BD was empowered by the law to reinstate any unauthorised

25

23 DCMIN

Action alterations to the original state. The works in this respect were not general improvement works. As building structural safety was involved, the BD could directly carry out such works to reinstate the building to its original state and then recovered the cost from the owners concerned. On the other hand, the works provided for under the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance (Cap. 572) were upgrading works. There were a high degree of flexibility and many practical considerations in designing fire service equipment. For example, different options were available in respect of the locations of fire service installations and the mode of the works, taking into account the need for cost-effectiveness. Besides, legal issues such as ownership and the obligation to carry out future maintenance would be involved. Therefore the FSD was not in a position to make a decision on behalf of the building owners. To assist building owners to enhance the efficiency of the fire service equipment in their old buildings, the FSD would adopt new approaches as far as possible which allowed for improvised installations with the same efficiency.

(ix) The improvement works at Jardine’s Crescent were in good progress, with 36 stalls having moved out. The FSD hoped that through practical and flexible ways, stalls were allowed to continue operation while the impact on nearby residents in case of fire would be minimised.

(x) The regulation of large signboards was within the purview of the BD. The BD had been in close collaboration with the FSD. In vetting the erection of a large signboard, the BD would consult the FSD to ensure that the large signboard would not affect the fire escapes for residents and the rescue operation to be carried out by the FSD.

26

23 DCMIN

Action (xi) The BD was responsible for monitoring the structural design and the width of any fire escapes, while the FSD would mainly keep an eye on any obstruction of fire escapes caused by movable items. Consideration would be given to the possible fire hazards in handling the cases. Regarding the individual cases, Members could provide the FSD with the details for joint follow-up action by the FSD and the BD.

(xii) As regards the accident caused by party powder, the powder in question was in fact corn flour for ordinary domestic use. When it was to be used to create special effects during an entertainment event, the FSD would conduct a risk assessment. If it was confirmed that the event would constitute potential hazards, the applicant would be prohibited from the use of such powder. If the applicant was reluctant to follow the FSD’s advice, the FSD would advise the licensing authority to reject the application. The application for holding a party powder event on 25 July was still under processing. The FSD had been liaising with the applicant. The applicant had been urged to provide the application and safety details of the liquid pigments to be used. Since public safety was involved, the FSD had taken samples for a thorough test by the laboratory. The licensing authority, the FSD and the relevant departments would process such applications with utmost caution.

(xiii) The Entertainment Special Effects Licensing Authority was responsible for monitoring the creation of pyrotechnic effects in entertainment establishments. The licensing authority had been working closely with the FSD. The FSD would give advice in respect of the safety guidelines with a view to ensuring that the pyrotechnic effects would be confined to the stage and would not spread to the

27

23 DCMIN

Action auditorium.

(xiv) The FSD would work with the police from time to time to conduct surprise inspections to blackspot bars. This was to ensure that those bars complied with fire safety requirements and did not place any articles in common corridors or stairs. Any incompliance might lead to prosecution.

(xv) Ambulancemen were required by law to send patients or injured persons to the nearest medical facility. Such a statutory requirement was made for patients’ benefit. Although equipped with supplementary medical skills, ambulancemen could not decide if the condition of a patient would have any sudden changes. The safest way was to send them to the nearest hospital under the Hospital Authority for professional medical treatment.

(xvi) On the prevention of hill fires, the FSD had planned to distribute promotional leaflets through District Fire Safety Committees, District Fire Safety Ambassador Honorary Presidents’ Associations and fire safety ambassadors before Chung Yeung Festival, reminding grave sweepers to handle fire with extra care and burn offerings in the designated areas. The FSD was also considering making joint effort with local organisations to distribute containers for burning offerings in the New Territories, with a view to minimising the occurrence of hill fires.

(xvii) Appointing first aid ambassadors was a very good idea. At present, officers of the FSD would visit schools to promote first aid knowledge and advise the public not to abuse ambulance service. The FSD would consider the suggestion and would make every effort to promote the first

28

23 DCMIN

Action aid knowledge.

29. The Chairperson, on behalf of WCDC, thanked the FSD for their dedicated efforts in protecting the lives and properties of the general public. He said that if Members had any views on individual cases, they could contact the Divisional Officer of the Central for follow-up action.

Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting Item 3: Confirmation of Minutes of the 22nd Meeting of the Wan Chai District Council

30. The Chairperson said that the Secretariat received two proposed amendments from Ms Peggy LEE and Mr David LAI respectively before the meeting (at Annex A and B). The Chairperson asked Members if they had any other amendments.

31. Noting that the sentence “Dr Jeffrey PONG and Mr David LAI expressed their disapproval of the proposal” in paragraph 89 was proposed to be amended to “Mr David LAI and Dr Jeffrey PONG expressed their disapproval of the proposal”, Dr Jeffrey PONG enquired about the differences between the two versions and the meaning of such an amendment.

32. The Chairperson said that both versions did not affect the voting result. He suggested that “in alphabetical order” be added to the end of the amended sentence. Since Members did not have objection to another amendment, the minutes of the 22nd meeting of WCDC were confirmed after a motion was moved by Dr Jeffrey PONG and seconded by Ms Jacqueline CHUNG.

Discussion Items Item 4: Urban Design Study for the Wan Chai North and North Point Harbourfront Areas - Stage 1 Public Engagement (WCDC Paper No. 48/2015)

29

23 DCMIN

Action

33. The Chairperson welcomed Ms April KUN, Acting Chief Town Planner (Studies and Research) and Mr Patrick FUNG, Acting Senior Town Planner (Studies and Research 5) of the Planning Department (PlanD); Dr Eunice MAK, Deputy Project Director, Ms Pearl HUI, Project Manager and Mr Kenny CHAN, Senior Town Planner of AECOM Asia Co. Ltd; Ms Joyce CHOW, Public Engagement Specialist and Ms Carol LEE, Public Engagement Coordinator of the Kadoorie Institute, to the meeting.

34. Ms April KUN said that the reclamation works and road works in Wan Chai would be completed in the coming few years. Upon the completion of such works, there would be a new harbourfront area in Wan Chai. PlanD commissioned the Urban Design Study for the Wan Chai North and North Point Harbourfront Areas in January 2015 to guide the detailed planning and design for the newly reclaimed land. To ensure timely incorporation of public views, a two-stage Public Engagement (PE) was incorporated in the study process. The Stage 1 PE was now underway. She then invited the consultant to brief Members on the relevant work.

35. Mr Kenny CHAN, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, briefed Members on the following key issues:

(i) The main tasks of the Urban Design Study were to work out an urban design framework for the Wan Chai North and North Point new harbourfront areas, prepare harbourfront enhancement proposals and formulate planning and design briefs.

(ii) The study area mainly comprised newly reclaimed land covering the harbourfront stretching from the area west of the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre eastward to the proposed waterfront open space adjacent to the Island

30

23 DCMIN

Action Eastern Corridor in North Point.

(iii) The study was launched in January this year. The Stage 1 PE was being conducted to gather public views on the overall urban design framework and public aspirations on the new harbourfront.

36. Ms Joyce CHOW briefed Members on the following PE events/activities :

(i) The Stage 1 PE aimed to gather public views on the urban design framework through activities and events including stakeholder interviews and meetings, focus group meetings, on-site public events and resident workshops.

(ii) The Workshop on Shoreline Evolution held on 21 June 2015 showed the changes of the shoreline through a lively puppet show, which drew over 100 participants including local residents, students and people from various sectors.

(iii) The Weekend Project Exhibition held on 27 June 2015 also adopted a lively and new approach. Apart from displaying photos of the old harbourfront, members of the public were given stickers for them to vote for the ideal activities to be held in the harbourfront.

(iv) The Stage 2 PE aimed to seek public views on specific harbourfront enhancement proposals. The events and activities to be held included a design competition, focus group meetings and a public forum.

37. Mr Kenny CHAN, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, provided supplementary information, including the overall development background; considerations, vision, principles, framework and initial

31

23 DCMIN

Action concepts of the urban design; and the next step.

38. Mr Ivan WONG, MH considered that the accessibility and connectivity of the harbourfront areas were very important. He suggested that some spaces in the harbourfront areas should be reserved for the provision of cycling tracks. At present, people living in urban areas had to travel a long distance to the New Territories to cycle on cycling tracks. He pointed out the connectivity of cycling tracks was also important. He acknowledged the fact that the provision of cycling tracks might pose some hazards, but he believed that the possible hazards could be minimised through appropriate design and future regulatory controls.

39. Ms Jacqueline CHUNG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Local residents were highly concerned about the connectivity of pedestrian connections between Wan Chai North and South. People would be very disappointed if the harbourfront area was beautifully constructed but inaccessible. At present, Gloucester Road lied between Wan Chai North and South. Pedestrians had to use a barrier free footbridge for accessing the harbourfront area. She enquired if vehicles would be allowed to access the harbourfront in the future. If yes, the Administration should address the parking problem.

(ii) The harbourfront was a piece of highly valuable land, which should be developed for leisure uses instead of commercial uses only.

(iii) The previous pet garden in Wan Chai had been closed after the site was returned to the authority. She hoped that some areas in the district could be reserved for the reprovisioning of the pet garden. As dogs were not allowed in parks under

32

23 DCMIN

Action the management of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), the pet garden should have separate entrances/exits.

(iv) Noting that the Stage 1 consultation consisted of five PE events/activities, she enquired about the estimated number of participants. A lot of local residents did not know that the Stage 1 PE had commenced because there was a certain degree of difficulty in launching publicity in Wan Chai given its large number of private buildings. She enquired what publicity work would be carried out to establish a real link between the consultation work and the local residents.

40. Ms Kenny LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) She expressed support for the Urban Design Study for the Wan Chai North and North Point Harbourfront Areas. She hoped that the relevant poster would be displayed at Members’ offices as soon as possible to encourage residents to actively participate in the PE events/activities.

(ii) The urban design study framework showed that a spacious area of the harbourfront would be reserved for the Water-related Area and the Typhoon Shelter. Since there were boats in the Typhoon Shelter, the remaining spaces might not be sufficient for doing some water sports. She suggested that separate areas should be provided for fish boats, canoeing and the dragon boat competition.

(iii) She held the views that there should not be any parking spaces as far as possible, so that more spaces could be made available for recreational use. She suggested that members of the public should be encouraged to make use of the existing parking facilities or access the harbourfront by

33

23 DCMIN

Action means of public transport as far as possible.

41. Dr Anna TANG, BBS, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) She enquired what participants were invited to participate in the Stage 1 PE events/activities. She hoped that local residents and organisations should be widely invited to participate in the relevant activities.

(ii) She was of the view that apart from reconnecting people with the water, the themes of the development plan could include enhancing the interaction between humans and pets. There was a pet garden at the Wan Chai Waterfront Promenade for the use by dogs, but no such element was included in the planned framework. She hoped that a pet garden would be built in the development plan.

42. Mr David WONG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) He considered that the PE events/activities already held were for minorities only. Apart from engaging stakeholders in Wan Chai, the PE exercise should inform all people of Hong Kong of the relevant development. The existing PE events/activities were considered inadequate.

(ii) The number of seats provided in a number of existing harbourfront areas was not enough. He suggested that by making reference to overseas practices, seats could be provided in shaded areas to enable visitors to sit down to enjoy the scenery around the harbourfront and feel with their heart the atmosphere in the harbourfront area.

43. Ms Yolanda NG, MH raised the following comments and

34

23 DCMIN

Action enquiries:

(i) One of the focuses of harbourfront planning was to enable the general public to enjoy the harbourfront areas. She considered that there should not be too many commercial elements incorporated into the harbourfront areas since such elements might require visitors to pay for admission.

(ii) On public consultation, WCDC had received an invitation to the workshops but had not been invited to assist in encouraging residents to participate in the diversified events/activities just mentioned. She held the views that the existing consultation mode which contained seminars and discussions seemed to be able to attract people interested in promoting the policy only, but unable to reach out to the community. She suggested that more diversified activities in various forms should be organised to attract the general public, including young people and even primary students.

(iii) During her visit to WCDC in 2008, Ms Carrie LAM said that there would be a pet garden in the harbourfront area. However, no such element could be found in the preliminary planning. It was hoped that such element would be included in future concrete harbourfront planning.

44. Mr Stephen NG, BBS, MH, JP raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Wan Chai harbourfront was an area of scenic beauty. However, with various expressways lying across the area, people had to access the harbourfront via separate footbridges, making it difficult for the public to enjoy the harbourfront scenery. He suggested that an underground

35

23 DCMIN

Action access should be built to connect the old Wan Chai with the new one, so that the public could access the harbourfront area at a leisurely pace without being affected by road traffic.

(ii) Many people hoped that there would be a pet garden and cycling tracks in the harbourfront area and more open spaces would be provided to enable them to enjoy the fantastic scenery of Victoria Harbour in a leisurely manner.

(iii) He considered that it was necessary to provide parking spaces. If the road surface could not provide enough spaces for the provision of parking spaces, consideration should be given to make use of the underground area or the existing parking spaces. This would enable the public to drive to the harbourfront to enjoy its scenery.

45. The Chairperson raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) He shared the same view with the Harbourfront Commission that the ideal Victoria Harbourfront should allow the public to walk from Siu Sai Wan to Kennedy Town. This was a great vision which should be realised step by step.

(ii) A major objective of harbourfront development was to return Victoria Harbour to the public, making Victoria Harbour available for public enjoyment. In this connection, the Administration should carefully consider how to establish pedestrian crossings connecting Wan Chai North and South through which the public could access the harbourfront area in the north from Wan Chai South. The existing pedestrian crossings connecting Wan Chai North and South were definitely not enough. Upon the

36

23 DCMIN

Action commissioning of the railway in Wan Chai North, the bus stop at Great Eagle Centre would be reprovisioned. People going to the harbourfront area by public transport would also need to use the pedestrian crossing connecting Wan Chai North and South.

(iii) The proposed five precincts were acceptable. They should be interconnected with the elements of arts and greening shown in all precincts. The cycling track should also extend to the whole promenade area.

(iv) The aim of harbourfront development was to return Victoria Harbour to the public. Since members of the public were the users, their views were of paramount importance. The elements to be included in the harbourfront areas should not be decided by PlanD or professional organisations alone. WCDC was most willing to join hands with the Administration to organise PE activities or even collaborate with other DCs, with a view to widely consult local residents and all stakeholders on the Urban Design Study for Wan Chai North and North Point Harbourfront Areas.

46. Mr Stephen NG, BBS, MH, JP suggested that on-street consultation should be launched. Through on-street exhibition panels, the public could gain a better understanding of the latest development and express their views. Such PE mode could reach out to the wider community. Since more people were encouraged to participate in the discussion, more creative ideas could be obtained.

47. The Chairperson said that Members had fully expressed their views for the reference of the relevant departments and the consultant. If Members had any further views on the issue, they could contact PlanD or the consultant directly.

37

23 DCMIN

Action Item 5: Report on Progress of the Shatin to Central Link (WCDC Paper No. 50/2015)

48. The Chairperson welcomed Mr Jonathan LEUNG, Chief Engineer (Railway Development 1-2), Railway Development Office and Ms Yanny LI, Acting Senior Engineer (SCL 6), Railway Development Office of HyD; Mr Johnny CHAN, Senior Engineer (Priority Railway 3) of the TD; Mr Walter LAM, Construction Manager (SCL Civil), Mr T. C. LAM, Construction Manager (SCL Civil), Mr Kelvin WU, Senior Liaison Engineer and Ms Sandy WU, Projects Communications Manager of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL); and Dr Victor WONG and Ms Joyce WONG of Arup Hong Kong Ltd, to the meeting.

49. Mr Jonathan LEUNG thanked WCDC for giving an opportunity for HyD, in collaboration with the TD and the MTRC, to brief Members on the progress of the Shatin to Central Link (SCL) works in Wan Chai District. He then asked Mr Kelvin WU to report on the progress of the relevant works.

50. Mr Kelvin WU, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, briefed Members on the progress of the SCL works in Wan Chai District, including the major civil engineering works (Construction of Exhibition Station and Construction of Railway Tunnel of the Hong Kong Island Section), temporary night time traffic management arrangements on Wan Shing Street, construction of a temporary footbridge on Convention Avenue and relevant advance works (Reprovisioning of Harbour Road Sports Centre and Wan Chai Swimming Pool as well as Reprovisioning of Postal Facilities at Fleet Arcade), etc.

(Mr David WONG left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.)

51. Mr Kelvin WU supplemented that regarding the reprovisioning of the model car play area, with the assistance of the relevant government departments, the MTRCL had identified a suitable site near Sheung On

38

23 DCMIN

Action Street in Chai Wan for the temporary reprovisioning of the model car play area. However, in view of the concerns and opposition raised by Eastern District Councillors during district consultation, the MTRC had put aside the plan to use the site for temporary reprovisioning purpose. The MTRC had asked for continued assistance from relevant government departments to identify suitable sites in other districts for the temporary reprovisioning of the model car play area.

52. The Chairperson invited Members to express their views on the SCL works progress.

53. Mr CHENG Ki-kin raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) Some residents expressed that they found the way for accessing the ferry pier very inconvenient. After alighting at the temporary bus terminus, they had to take a detour to the ferry pier. He enquired if something could be done to shorten the distance and provide a more direct way to the ferry pier.

(ii) Besides, he enquired why it took such a long time to complete the construction of the temporary footbridge.

(iii) The alighting bus stops of bus route nos. 2 and 2A were far from the ferry pier. He enquired if these bus stops could be moved closer to the ferry pier such as moving them to Convention Avenue or Hung Hing Road.

54. Ms Jacqueline CHUNG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) She thanked the MTRC and the LCSD for their joint efforts to identify a suitable site for the temporary reprovisioning of the model car play area. While she understood that the

39

23 DCMIN

Action MTRC had met with opposition from residents in the process, she urged the MTRC to continue its effort to identify a suitable site on Hong Kong Island for the temporary reprovisioning of the model car play area since the MTRC would not return the site until 2021.

(ii) The relocation of the temporary bus terminus had led to many problems. There was a distance between the ferry disembarkment area and the bus terminus. After disembarking from the ferry, passengers had to take a detour to the bus terminus. Some of them would start jaywalking after reaching Convention Avenue. Caring ambassadors could only be found in the areas outside the ferry pier and near the bus stops. She suggested that passengers should be provided with guidance in the ferry disembarkment area to enable them to know how to walk to the bus terminus after disembarking from the ferry.

(iii) As far as she could recall, the existing pedestrian route was pedestrian route 3 proposed before the relocation of the bus terminus. There should be proposed pedestrian routes 1 and 2 in the site between the ferry pier and the temporary bus terminus. It could be seen that there were only some tools in the site next to the temporary bus terminus and Wan Chai Ferry Pier. No works were being carried out. She asked the relevant government departments when they would hand over the site to the MTRC so that a more direct and safer route could be provided for the public.

(iv) She expressed concern over the further works delay. The completion of the project had previously been delayed from 2020 to 2021. Moreover, a shipwreck had been discovered in the old Wan Chai Ferry Pier within Wan Chai Development Phase II area. However, the relevant

40

23 DCMIN

Action government departments and the MTRC did not report on the details of the incident but only suspended the works there. She queried if the completion of the SCL project would be further delayed to 2023.

55. Ms Peggy LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) The directional signs for the temporary bus stops and the bus terminus on the footbridge were not clear enough. At present, the footpath on eastbound Convention Avenue could not lead to the temporary bus terminus. Members of the public might not realise this until they walked through the footpath. Those who did not want to walk back might resort to jaywalking. She suggested that reference should be made to the footbridge between Hung Hom Station and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University where directional signs were displayed at eye level. Consideration could also be given to erect directional signs to provide the public with advance and clear information about the directions ahead. Since the entire project would not complete until 2021 and the pedestrian arrangements would be in force for a certain period of time, she hoped that the MTRC would make better arrangements.

(ii) She agreed that the route to the ferry pier was very inconvenient as it was much longer than before. She hoped that prompt efforts would be made to provide the public with a safer and more direct route.

56. Ms Yolanda NG, MH said that hoardings erected for fencing off works sites could be used for displaying information or for beautification purposes in addition to providing protection. Some hoardings of similar major works projects or small-scale escalator renovation works inside MTR stations could achieve the above purposes by displaying information

41

23 DCMIN

Action about the entire works and the vision of the projects. Since the public would inevitably have to walk a longer time as result of the works, effort should be made to enable them to have a happy walking experience by providing sufficient information and beautiful environment. This would help allay public discontent arising from road diversions.

57. Ms Kenny LEE said that as far as she knew, the MTRC had discussed with the relevant government departments on the possible ways for dealing with the underground obstructions on Wan Shing Street. Since the removal of the underground obstructions might affect the overall progress of the SCL project, she enquired about the discussion result and the time required for the complete removal of the sheet piles.

58. Mr Kelvin WU made the following responses:

(i) In response to Members’ views on the provision of directional signs around the public transport interchange in Wan Chai North, the MTRC would make a review of all the directional signs concerned with a view to making them clearer and helping passengers find the bus terminus.

(ii) The MTRC started fencing off the works site at the old bus terminus with hoardings on 1 June. The MTRC would discuss with different departments, teams and companies on how to make good use of the hoardings to provide works details where appropriate.

(iii) Regarding the provision of temporary bus stops, the MTRC had received lots of views from passengers after the relocation of the bus terminus. The MTRC would discuss with the bus company on how to make the boarding and alighting arrangements smoother taking into account passengers’ views. With the assistance of the bus company, the MTRC had provided temporary bus stops

42

23 DCMIN

Action near the old bus terminus before the relocation of the bus terminus to make it more convenient for the public to go to Wan Chai Ferry Pier and the nearby commercial buildings. Besides, passengers would be reminded through the next stop announcement system to alight at the temporary bus stops if they wanted to go to Wan Chai Ferry Pier. During the initial period after the bus terminus had been relocated, caring ambassadors were deployed to remind passengers to alight at the appropriate bus stops.

(iv) As regards the removal of the underground obstructions at Wan Shing Street, the contractor was implementing temporary traffic management arrangements during night time. One of the lanes was blocked for carrying out the investigation of the underground obstructions to identify their location and depth. The MTRC had just discovered some sheet piles under Wan Shing Street and the time required for the removal works would be confirmed after finding out the exact length of the sheet piles. Moreover, the MTRC would continue to collaborate with relevant government departments to work out the arrangements for carrying out the obstructions removal works.

(v) With respect to the temporary reprovisioning of the model car play area, the MTRC would continue to discuss with relevant government departments to identify a suitable site for the reprovisioning of the model car play area.

59. Mr Walter LAM responded that it was necessary to maintain the number of lanes on Convention Avenue and ensure the smooth pedestrian flow. Besides, the reclaimed land on Convention Avenue was not available for use yet. Therefore the MTRC could only implement temporary traffic management arrangements on Convention Avenue during non-peak hours to facilitate the transportation of materials to the

43

23 DCMIN

Action works site for the construction of the temporary footbridge. Prior application should be made to the Environmental Protection Department for carrying out works during night time. With limited works site area and other constraints, it was expected that the construction of the temporary footbridge would take longer time, but the progress made so far was better than expected.

60. Mr Kelvin WU supplemented that in regard to the connections between the temporary bus terminus and the ferry pier, the MTRC had implemented some measures during the early period of relocation to remind passengers as early as possible to alight at bus stops near the old bus terminus. The provision of a more direct and safer route involved the works being carried out in the nearby areas. At present, the relevant government departments were carrying out works on the works site between the ferry pier and the temporary bus terminus. The MTRC had been discussing with the relevant departments on the provision of pedestrian connections. Progress details might be provided by the relevant government departments.

61. Mr Johnathan LEUNG supplemented that the present available pedestrian route might not be the most ideal one. HyD and the MTRC would continue to discuss with the CEDD on the provision of a more direct pedestrian route. Moreover, after discussing with the bus company by the MTRC, the “Wan Chai Ferry Pier Station” was added to the next stop announcement system to remind passengers going to Wan Chai Ferry Pier to alight at the appropriate bus stop. A bus stop was set up at an area off Wan Chai Ferry Pier for all the buses leaving the bus terminus. Passengers could directly board the buses in the area opposite the footbridge. After the CEDD had handed over the works site to HyD, prompt action would be taken to provide a more direct pedestrian connection between Wan Chai Ferry Pier and the temporary bus terminus.

62. Mr Franklin TSE said that the works site in question was being used for carrying out the tunnel structural works for Wan Chai

44

23 DCMIN

Action Development Phase II and the Central-Wan Chai Bypass. The areas nearby were also required for supporting the tunnel structural works and related works. The CEDD would hand over the site to HyD after the completion of the tunnel structural works for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass. The CEDD would urge the contractor to complete the works as soon as possible.

63. The Chairperson asked Mr Franklin TSE when the works in Wan Chai North for the construction of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass would be completed according to the works schedule.

64. Mr Franklin TSE responded that the works would be completed in early 2017 according to the existing works schedule.

65. The Chairperson asked if the CEDD could hand over the works site in question to HyD after the completion of the works in 2017.

66. Mr Franklin TSE replied that the CEDD would urge the contractor to hand over the works site to HyD after the completion of the works. However, in addition to the tunnel structural works, there would be some reclamation works and related structural works for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass in the nearby areas. The works site in question was also needed to support such construction works.

67. The Chairperson said that the hand-over process of the works site should have been coordinated by the CEDD and HyD. However, both departments had been slow in coordinating the issue. Since the public were being affected, WCDC had to speak up on behalf of them. In fact, what the public needed was only a pedestrian connection of about 3 metres. If the works in that section were basically completed, the CEDD should hand over the works site to HyD to facilitate the setting up of a pedestrian connection. At present, pedestrians had to take a detour to the ferry pier. This would directly affect the public using the ferry pier. The public could not tolerate the inconveniences indefinitely. He urged

45

23 DCMIN

Action the two departments concerned should actively discuss the issue with a view to setting a confirmed date for handing over the works site to HyD.

68. The Chairperson continued that no departments had made a response to the discovery of a shipwreck.

69. Mr Johnathan LEUNG responded that the discovery of a shipwreck would essentially affect the reclamation works being carried out by the CEDD. HyD was discussing with the CEDD on the impacts of the incident and had not yet come up with a definite answer.

70. Noting that the shipwreck was found within the site area of the CEDD, the Chairperson asked if the CEDD would give a response.

71. Mr Franklie TSE said that a large metal object was found in the incident. The CEDD had been making active efforts in handling the incident with a view to resuming the works as soon as possible. The impacts of the incident on Wan Chai Development Phase II, the Central-Wan Chai Bypass and even the SCL project could only be ascertained after detailed assessment was carried out jointly by the CEDD and HyD.

72. The Chairperson made the following comments:

(i) According to the CEDD, the works site in question could not be returned until the first half of 2017 at the earliest. Therefore the directional signs for facilitating public access to the bus terminus were not temporary measures. The MTRC could make reference to the directional signs for buses around Hung Hom Station, and should make the best endeavour to provide relatively permanent and clear directional signs.

(ii) After the relocation of the original bus terminus to the

46

23 DCMIN

Action newly reclaimed area, many people chose to use the temporary bus stops on Convention Avenue due to the inconvenient pedestrian connections. Traffic congestion in that area might be resulted. He asked the TD, the MTRC and HyD to monitor the traffic flow on a long term basis since the traffic flow in Wan Chai North would have significant impact on Wan Chai eastbound and westbound traffic as well as the Cross Harbour Tunnel.

(iii) Since the temporary bus stops had been provided for a short period of time, it was hoped that all the parties concerned would listen to users’ views and liaise with the bus company if any adjustments were needed.

Written Questions Item 6: Conservation of Nam Koo Terrace (WCDC Paper No. 49/2015)

73. The Chairperson welcomed Ms Leonie LEE, Assistant Secretary (Heritage Conservation)3 and Mr Ryan CHU, Engineer (Heritage Conservation) Special Duties of the Development Bureau (DEVB); Mr Tony CHEUNG, Senior Engineer (Wan Chai) of the TD; Mr Thomas Jefferson WU, Managing Director of Hopewell Holdings Limited (HHL); Mr Chris LI, General Manager of Hopewell Project Development Limited; Mr Philip LIAO, Partner of Philip Liao and Partners Ltd; and Mr Peter MAK, Director of WMKY Limited, to the meeting for discussion of the agenda item. .

74. The Chairperson asked Ms Kenny LEE, who raised the written question, if she had anything to add.

75. Since Ms Kenny LEE had nothing to add, the Chairperson invited representatives of the DEVB to give a response to the question.

47

23 DCMIN

Action 76. Ms Leonie LEE invited representatives of HHL to brief Members on the Nam Koo Terrace conservation and comprehensive development project first. The DEVB would give supplementary information afterwards.

77. Mr Thomas Jefferson WU, with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, briefed Members on the Nam Koo Terrace conservation and comprehensive development project, including its background, the sites involved, precedent cases of conservation and development, uses and operation mode of Nam Koo Terrace after revitalisation as well as various design parameters.

78. Mr Philip LIAO, with the aid of a video, briefed Members on the planning considerations and the architectural features of the Nam Koo Terrace conservation and revitalisation project; Mr Peter MAK briefed Members on the development information of Nam Koo Terrace.

79. Ms Leonie LEE provided the following supplementary information:

(i) Nam Koo Terrace was a private residential building. It was declared as a Grade I historic building by the Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB), meaning that it was a building of outstanding merit and every effort should be made to preserve it if possible.

(ii) The owner of Nam Koo Terrace proposed preserving Nam Koo Terrace in-situ and revitalised it into a wedding venue which would be operated on a non-profit-making basis. The building would also be open to the public and guided tours would be provided.

(iii) The DEVB was of the view that the preservation-cum-development proposal was commensurate with the grade status as well as the historical and heritage value of Nam Koo Terrace. From the perspective of

48

23 DCMIN

Action heritage preservation, the DEVB supported the conservation of Nam Koo Terrace and held the view that the preservation proposal was worth in-depth consideration.

80. Ms Peggy LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) As far as she knew, Nam Koo Terrace was once designated as an open space. She was pleased to note that HHL would make every effort to open Nam Koo Terrace for public use. She enquired if the arrangement of opening Nam Koo Terrace to the public would be limited by the existing land use after development.

(ii) The revitalisation of Nam Koo Terrace into a wedding venue as proposed by HHL would lead to additional visitor and vehicular flows. She enquired if any assessment had been conducted to estimate the impact of the conservation proposal on the traffic on Queen’s Road East.

(iii) She said that local residents were also concerned about the accessibility of Nam Koo Terrace. She enquired if the existing public staircase for accessing Nam Koo Terrace would be kept.

(iv) She asked the DEVB that apart from the architectural features, if Nam Koo Terrace had any other historical elements which were worth introducing to the public, such as the people who had lived in Nam Koo Terrace and their contributions to Hong Kong.

81. Mr Stephen NG, BBS, MH, JP said that it was inconvenient for the public to access Nam Koo Terrace via the existing staircase as it was narrow and steep. He enquired if the developer would widen the staircase or make other arrangements to facilitate public access to Nam Koo Terrace, in

49

23 DCMIN

Action addition to the provision of a lift.

82. Ms Kenny LEE raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) She raised the written question on Nam Koo Terrace because the conservation of Nam Koo Terrace had not been mentioned by HHL since it proposed the Hopewell Centre II development project in 2008.

(ii) Nam Koo Terrace was owned by To’s Family in 1918. It was an accommodation for comfort women during the Japanese Occupation. It had been left vacant later, until it was purchased by HHL in 1988.

(iii) In Wan Chai, some buildings were preserved, but there were management problems. For example, some of those buildings were not open to the public or their original state was altered. She hoped that HHL would avoid making the same mistakes and would make every effort to conserve and revitalise Nam Koo Terrace.

(iv) She hoped that the advisory committee to be formed next year would comprise professionals, artists, DC Members, local stakeholders as well as members of the local community, and they would hold in-depth discussions about issues of management, traffic, landscape and noise.

(v) She commended the comprehensive development project as it was very well-thought, with the greening elements in particularly meritorious. She said that on behalf of the local residents, she initially accepted the preservation proposal of Nam Koo Terrace.

83. Dr Anna TANG, BBS, MH raised the following comments and

50

23 DCMIN

Action enquiries:

(i) She was pleased to note that students would be invited to visit Nam Koo Terrace in the future. She enquired how HHL would showcase the history of the old mansion and how the message of conservation would be conveyed to the next generation.

(ii) She hoped that the future management committee would be comprised of members of the local community, government officials and academics.

84. Mr CHENG Ki-kin said that Nam Koo Terrace was said to look like a haunted house and there were media reports that it was inhabited by spirits of the deceased. He suggested that HHL could make use of these legends of hauntings and develop Nam Koo Terrace into a haunted house for people seeking excitement.

85. Dr Jeffrey PONG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) He was worried that if Nam Koo Terrace was to be developed into a wedding venue, people would dare not visit it because of its legends of ghosts and hauntings.

(ii) He suggested that vintage elements should be added to the podium garden and special lighting should be provided for the staircase nearby, so as to highlight the features of the historical building which was built in 1918.

(iii) The staircase leading to Kennedy Road was quite winding. Therefore, apart from beautification works, he hoped that the staircase could be revitalised for easier access by students from the neighbouring secondary schools.

51

23 DCMIN

Action (iv) He suggested that part of Nam Koo Terrace should be reserved for establishing a memorial hall or a history exhibition hall to introduce the rich history of Nam Koo Terrace as well as the historical and cultural elements of the vicinity.

86. Ms Jacqueline CHUNG raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) As far as she knew, a section of the site involved was a public open space. She enquired about the opening hours and the rules for the use of the open space. She hoped that the open space would be unlike the one in Times Square, which was subject to too many restrictions, making it difficult for the public to use it.

(ii) She enquired if the covered spaces and the path next to the building were included in the area of the garden of 2 000 square metres.

(iii) The development project would include the construction of a 17-storey building, which would lead to an increase in visitor flow. She enquired if HHL had assessed the impact of the relevant building on the traffic on Queen’s Road East.

(iv) Noting that an open space and a residential development would be included in Nam Koo Terrace and the surrounding four sites, she enquired if land premium or land exchange would be involved.

(v) Miu Kang Terrace was currently situated at a lower level. She enquired, upon the completion of land filling works, if the middle storeys would be used for the provision of a lift only or other purposes.

52

23 DCMIN

Action

87. Ms Yolanda NG, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) The inclusion of an open space in the comprehensive development project inevitably gave an impression that a public space was to be used for a private development. Since Nam Koo Terrace would be developed into a wedding venue, it was likely to associate Nam Koo Terrace with high-spending items. She enquired about the area to be designated for public use and if HHL would take the initiative to provide spaces for the public to organise various activities.

(ii) Nam Koo Terrace and the four surrounding sites had rich historical backgrounds. She hoped that HHL could invite more experienced people who were familiar with Hong Kong history to join its team. She also suggested that HHL should make reference to the conservation zones in other countries, such as the cultural and creative parks in Taiwan, with a view to preserving and displaying the historical backgrounds of Nam Koo Terrace as much as possible. It was hoped that the public would be immersed in the old stories once they entered the comprehensive development area.

88. Ms Pamela PECK said that Nam Koo Terrace was a private place and its owner would have his own ideal design. The comments raised by Members might affect such private development.

89. Mr Ivan WONG, MH raised the following comments and enquiries:

(i) The marriage rate of Hong Kong had been declining and many people tended to keep their weddings as simple as possible. Since HHL was planning to revitalise Nam Koo

53

23 DCMIN

Action Terrace into a wedding venue, he enquired whether it had considered alternative uses of Nam Koo Terrace after a certain period if the usage was low.

(ii) He suggested that by making reference to the case of King Yin Lei, a special commemorative book should be published after the completion of the restoration works, which should contain the architectural and historical materials obtained in the whole process of restoration.

90. The Chairperson made the following comments:

(i) Nam Koo Terrace and the playground on Ship Street should be developed on an integrated basis. The staircase of the playground on Ship Street would also serve as a main public access in the future. He hoped that in carrying out the preservation work of Nam Koo Terrace including its management and opening hours, the arrangements in the playground on Ship Street would also be taken into account.

(ii) As proposed by HHL, Nam Koo Terrace would be revitalised into a wedding venue, which would be operated on a non-profit-making basis and would not be used for holding wedding banquets. It was believed that, upon the completion of the Nam Koo Terrace conservation project and the beautification works of the playground on Ship Street, the area would be an ideal place for taking wedding shots.

91. Mr Thomas Jefferson WU made the following responses:

(i) Built almost 100 years ago, Nam Koo Terrace had a rich historical background. In recent years, HHL had invited various organisations to assist in the historical research of Nam Koo Terrace. Tremendous efforts had been made in

54

23 DCMIN

Action collecting historical evidence, which would be made for public display in various forms in the future.

(ii) Nam Koo Terrace was located on private land. The preservation proposal was made with reference to two preservation-cum-development precedent cases, namely the projects of CLP Clock Tower and No. 179 Prince Edward Road West. Both development-cum-preservation projects were carried out on private land, which could provide useful information for reference. Besides, clear guidelines on public space and management responsibility would be provided when the Government processed HHL’s application for development. It was expected that HHL would report to WCDC again on the detailed progress of the project in the second half of 2016.

(iii) As regards the visitor flow and traffic, HHL would follow all planning standards and carry out a traffic impact assessment. It would also decide the opening hours of the garden in accordance with the Public Open Space in Private Developments Design and Management Guidelines.

(iv) HHL planned to set up a conservation team in early 2016. DC Members were welcomed to join the discussions. The conservation team would be comprised of experts in architecture and conservation, similarly to the Committee on Garden Greening established before, which had collected many valuable suggestions. The appearance of Nam Koo Terrace would be retained.

(v) With regard to the arrangement of opening Nam Koo Terrace for public visit, it was believed that the Government would specify such arrangement clearly in the conditions for development in processing HHL’s application for

55

23 DCMIN

Action development.

(vi) As many to-be-weds wished to try different places for marriage registration, HHL believed that there would be certain demand for new wedding venues. Most importantly, building conservation should be done in harmony with the surrounding environment. Since Nam Koo Terrace was near Lee Tung Street, turning it into a wedding venue complemented the surrounding environment.

92. Mr Peter MAK made the following responses:

(i) The open space with an area of 2 000 square metres did not include the covered area. The area of the covered area was about 500 square metres, therefore the whole open space was quite spacious.

(ii) The existing staircase did not comply with the Buildings Ordinance. The staircase would be widened to 4.5 metres and suitable lighting would be installed as part of the relevant construction works.

93. Ms Leonie LEE supplemented the following:

(i) Nam Koo Terrace was declared as a Grade I historic building by the AAB in 2009. Such a grading was given based on criteria including historical value, architectural features and social value. The DEVB and the Antiquities and Monuments Office were willing to exchange views on the interpretation of the historical and the heritage value of Nam Koo Terrace such as establishing an exhibition hall or providing guided tours.

(ii) The CLP Clock Tower just mentioned was also a private

56

23 DCMIN

Action historic building. The owner should pay due regard for conservation elements in developing the building. The Government had specified in the land lease the requirement for CLP to operate a privately owned museum and other details such as opening hours. The Government would consider specifying similar requirements in the land lease of the Nam Koo Terrace conservation project.

94. The Chairperson believed that the DEVB and HHL would give due consideration to Members’ views during the subsequent process, and hoped that HHL would report to WCDC on any further development of the project.

Information Items Item 7: Report of Wan Chai District Fight Crime Committee (February to March 2015) (WCDC Paper No. 51/2015)

95. Since Mr Nelson CHENG had nothing to add and Members did not have any questions either, the Chairperson asked Members to note the report.

th Item 8: Progress Report of the 200 Meeting of Wan Chai District Management Committee (WCDC Paper No. 52/2015)

96. The Chairperson asked Members to note the relevant document.

Information Papers Item 9: Progress Reports of Promotion Committees/Working Groups/Organising Committees Directly under WCDC (WCDC Paper No. 53/2015)

97. The Chairperson asked Members to note the progress reports.

57

23 DCMIN

Action Item 10: Progress Reports of Committees of WCDC (a) Community Building Committee (WCDC Paper No. 54/2015) (b) Cultural and Leisure Services Committee (WCDC Paper No. 55/2015) (c) District Works and Facilities Management Committee (WCDC Paper No. 56/2015) (d) Development, Planning and Transport Committee (WCDC Paper No. 57/2015) (e) Food and Environmental Hygiene Committee (WCDC Paper No. 58/2015) (f) Funding and Finance Committee (WCDC Paper No. 59/2015)

98. The Chairperson asked Members to note the six progress reports.

Item 11: Financial Statement of WCDC Funds for 2015/16 (WCDC Paper No. 60/2015)

99. The Chairperson asked Members to note the financial statement.

Item 12: Summary of Meetings of Area Committees (WCDC Paper No. 61/2015)

100. The Chairperson asked Member to note the paper.

Item 13: Any Other Business (i) Application for Adding the Hyperlink of “Wan Chai a la Carte 2015-2016”

101. The Chairperson informed the meeting that the Trade Development Council wrote to WCDC applying for adding the hyperlink of “Wan Chai a la Carte 2015-2016” to WCDC’s website for easy browsing of the relevant information by the public. Since Members did not raise any

58

23 DCMIN

Action objection, the Chairperson declared that the application was approved.

Date of Next Meeting

102. The next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 15 September 2015 (Tuesday).

Adjournment of Meeting

103. There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.

Wan Chai District Council Secretariat August 2015

These minutes of meeting were confirmed on 15 September 2015.

59

23 DCMIN