# HONG KONG | Victoria Harbour Reclamation Development News



## raymond_tung88

hkskyline said:


> The ultimate goal of the Phase 3 reclamation is to finish the job and connect with the Convention Centre. Due to legal challenges, the last part into HKCEC was dropped, and the present project leaves a gap open at that point.


That's kinda stupid... what's the point in leaving open that gap? Why didn't they want to connect it?

hkskyline, you still haven't mentioned about the reclamation phase in Causeway Bay? Is that happening or not?


----------



## vincent

law and regulation is sometimes stupid, you know. Remember the uneducated old women stopped the IPO of the Housing authority fund (whatever it is called). That "gap" is in Wanchai, so the gov can't reclamate it yet. 

The court ruling issued last year about Wanchai reclamation does NOT imply that reclamation cannot be done. The gov just have to go back to the town planning board and start with a new proposal again. (basically the whole planning procedure start over again). So it will take some time.


----------



## Open Road

I saw an amusing article about a year ago with regard to reclamation in the harbor. Some activists came forward and claimed that doing so would destroy the ecosystem in the area. The government brought forward a number of scientists who basically said that there wasn't much of an eco-system to worry about. How much wildlife is there in the harbor area?


----------



## vincent

to the best of my knowledge, there are really not much ecosystem within the Victoria harbour boundary. (but not other part of sea area in hk)


----------



## N/A

nimbies are everywhere.:applause:


----------



## hkskyline

The Causeway Bay reclamation is not going to happen. It was supposed to be part of the HKCEC extension, but that was also attacked by environmentalists and it's off the table. Instead, additional exhibition space will be provided in the new airport facility.

Victoria Harbour has become unusually wavy following the reclamation efforts in the 1990s, affecting navigation and ocean life. This is a major concern for environmentalists arguing that the ecosystem is being affected.


----------



## scorpion

some would argue those waves are almost all due to the irregular patterning of the harbour due to disjointed abutting segments--

ironically, 'smoothing' out the harbour's boundaries with reclamation could remedy this ailment


----------



## hkskyline

Well, as long as the 'smoothening' doesn't result in constructive interference.


----------



## scorpion

maybe NIMBYs could offer their services here!~


----------



## hkskyline

*Public input sought on Wan Chai waterfront *
Chloe Lai 
13 April 2005
South China Morning Post

A series of forums and workshops is being organised to gather public opinion on the future of the Wan Chai waterfront. 

They are part of a plan mapped out yesterday by the subcommittee of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee that is studying the Wan Chai area. 

"Harbour planning is complex, resolving traffic jams is [only] one of the issues we have to study. We can't just think about traffic and forget how to make the harbour accessible," subcommittee chairman Leung Kong-yui said. 

The group is struggling to recover credibility after an embarrassing blunder in January when it issued an information kit listing three options for reclamation on the waterfront and associated roads and development about which members had not been informed. 

Mr Leung was the only non-official member aware of the three options. 

Members' protests and a public outcry forced the advisory body and the government to withdraw the information kit. 

At yesterday's meeting they also decided to publish a new information kit, which will include planning background, constraints and opportunities as well as various old suggestions as references. 

The work plan includes meetings with district councils and the Legco panel on planning, lands and works. 

"It is important that the district councillors and legislators understand our process," said Mr Leung. 

The Wan Chai subcommittee will prepare a questionnaire to draw public input. The public would then be able to voice their opinion on the subcommittee's website. 

The subcommittee met Wan Chai District Council yesterday. 

It will meet the Eastern and Southern district councils later this month. 

A meeting with Central and Western District Council is scheduled for early next month.


----------



## Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm

Hkskyline - Do you have any renderings of what the Causeway Bay reclamation would have looked like? What all reclamations have been proposed for the Harbour?


----------



## hkskyline

More information :

Central Phase 3 Reclamation
http://www.etwb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/boards_and_committees/ace/2003ace/ACE Paper 31-2003.pdf

Central reclamation phase III - engineering works
http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/projects/major/hkihae7343cl.htm


----------



## hkskyline

*Surveyors urge public to say no to bypass plan
Equalising tunnel charges and imposing road tolls will solve problem, they say *
Andy Cheng 
7 March 2005
South China Morning Post

Surveyors have entered the widening argument over the Central-Wan Chai bypass, urging the public to say no to the project when they are consulted next month. 

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) said the government had failed to consider other methods to solve traffic congestion that did not involve reclamation of the harbour. 

The government will publish a new information kit about the bypass next month. The move follows an aborted attempt in late January to kick-start the project by outlining three proposals for reclaiming up to 25 hectares of Wan Chai waterfront. 

The proposals - released in the name of the Harbour Enhancement Committee - were withdrawn shortly afterwards because of a public outcry over the fact that some committee members had not even seen the plans. 

Roger Nissim, chairman of RICS Hong Kong's external affairs and public concerns committee, said equalising tunnel charges and adopting a sophisticated toll system for Central should be done before a bypass was considered. 

"We have got a crazy pricing system for our tunnels. The busiest tunnel is the Cross-Harbour Tunnel, which is the cheapest," said Mr Nissim, who is also a project planning manager for Sun Hung Kai Properties. 

If equalising the tolls failed to solve congestion, Mr Nissim said an electronic road payment system (ERPS) could be introduced in Central. The system would see road users charged more at peak hours and less on weekends. 

Mr Nissim believed an ERPS could solve the congestion problem, contrary to the government's argument that it would not work unless combined with a bypass. 

If it came to the worst and a bypass were considered, Mr Nissim said an underwater tunnel was preferred. The roof of that tunnel should be a cycle track and a footpath "so that you and I can walk on the waterfront and enjoy the view". 

The bypass was the target of a protest yesterday when a fleet of boats carrying activists sailed along Victoria Harbour. 

The Society for the Protection of the Harbour said it would speak directly to the acting chief executive to object to the plans should Tung Chee-hwa resign. The society also called on candidates in the running for Mr Tung's post to promise to protect the harbour. 

"A forward-thinking chief executive must have the determination and moral courage to treasure the Earth and protect natural resources, and not just focus on short-term financial gains," said Christine Loh Kung-wai, chairwoman of the society.


----------



## hkskyline

Why the Fuss about Victoria Harbour? 

1. The case for minimizing reclamation of Victoria Harbour centres on the protection of a unique and special public asset and the natural heritage of Hong Kong.

2. Victoria Harbour is Nature's gift to Hong Kong people. It is set against a stunning landscape of mountains, land and water. There are few harbours in the world that can match its breathtaking beauty. We ruin it at our peril.

3. As natural heritage nothing artificial, however "beneficial", can substitute for it.

4. Heritage connotes continuity capable of transmission from generation to generation. Hence, once any part of the body of water of the harbour is reclaimed, it is lost forever to the people of Hong Kong and can no longer figure in the continuum of inheritance.

5. The original Victoria Harbour was about 7,000 hectares in size. By 1990, over 2,500 hectares had already been reclaimed, but Government still proposed to reclaim a further 1,297 hectares (4½ square miles). Of these, by the time the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance was enacted in 1997, a further 661 hectares had been reclaimed such that nearly half of the original harbour had been made into land. Despite the Ordinance, the Government has been proposing to reclaim the remaining 636 hectares. Thus, Hong Kong is in danger of losing the total of 3,800 hectares (15 square miles), that is, more than half of the harbour.

6. The campaign to protect and preserve Victoria Harbour, which began in 1995 with the founding of the Society for the Protection of the Harbour, aims to ensure that the harbour, which has been designated a special public asset and a natural heritage of Hong Kong people by the Ordinance, cannot be encroached upon unless there is an overwhelming reason, for example, for essential infrastructure. Hong Kong is fighting to protect and preserve what is left of its magnificent harbour.

Victoria Harbour and Hong Kong's Development

1. Up until relatively recently, Hong Kong's economy was dominated by the fact that it was a port and trade was its lifeblood. Victoria Harbour had therefore been the centre of the city's economic life.

2. During the 1950s and 1960s, Hong Kong became a manufacturing centre for light industrial goods made for export. From the 1980s, however, production began to shift to the Mainland with Hong Kong evolving into a centre servicing the growing manufacturing base in South China.

3. Harbour front port activities on Hong Kong Island and Kowloon dropped significantly with the growth of containerized shipment and the construction of the container ports at Kwai Chung from the 1970s.

4. With this major change land along the harbour front became available for development. As Hong Kong began to transform itself into a service centre, more land was needed. It was expedient to reclaim Victoria Harbour rather than to consider developing away from the harbour area since the policy of reclamation appeared to upset nobody. Victoria Harbour had no voice to speak for its own protection.

5. Reclamation also generated substantial revenue for the Government who auctioned off the new land. Developing along the extended harbour front leveraged the existing infrastructure, which turned the northern shore of Hong Kong Island into the focus for transport infrastructure throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s.

6. However, there are limits to how far we can pack further developments onto the harbour frontage. Congestion has become a daily occurrence. The environment has degenerated. The cost of transporting commuters by road and rail to the city centre has risen. Moreover, a beautiful and historic landmark has been decimated by poor planning and zoning.

7. Recent assertions by the Government that reclamation has been a key determinant of Hong Kong's success are inaccurate. Growth was generated by Hong Kong's ability to transform itself into a service economy. The Government simply chose to meet the demand for land by harbour reclamation and not by other means, which could have included developing the New Territories or urban regeneration, because reclamation was expedient and until 1995, there was no advocate speaking for Victoria Harbour.

Impacts of Reclamation

Reclamation affects us all. There are economic, social, political and environmental impacts:

1. Strategic Planning: Harbour reclamation focussed development on the harbour area at the expense of other parts of the city. It contributed to isolating Hong Kong from the Pearl River Delta hinterland even as economic activities began moving across the border from the 1980s onwards.

2. Urban Renewal: The ease with which new land could be created by reclamation resulted in lazy planning, which in turn resulted in a failure on the part of the Government to devise effective urban regeneration policies. Vast tracks of development in the urban areas remain dilapidated and under-utilised today.

3. Land Policy: Reclamation generated land for the Government to sell, the proceeds for which were used to finance roads and other waterfront infrastructure, which in turn fed the government's 'high land price policy' for many years.

4. Amenity Value: Victoria Harbour has substantial amenity value in a world that increasingly places recreational pursuits as key to a high quality of life. That value is overtaking any supposed benefits arising from continuing harbour reclamation.

5. Aesthetic Value: Reclamation, together with the lack of control to protect the skyline and visual integrity of Hong Kong's natural landscape in the harbour area, has diminished the city's overall beauty, which damages tourism opportunities as well as diminishing residents' enjoyment of the city.

6. Harbour Safety: Victoria Harbour has been significantly narrowed, which creates a less safe environment for shipping and other water activities as water currents become much stronger and space to manouever is reduced.

7. Congestion Creation: Each new reclamation project has resulted in additional commercial and residential development, which in turn has generated further traffic demands that require yet more roads and more reclamation for roads.

8. Traffic Management: Coupled with the Government's preference for new road provisions to relieve traffic - rather than using traffic demand-management methods - road systems along the harbour front on Hong Kong Island have taken precedence over aesthetics, pollution control and thereby also public health. Alternatives to the simple addition of more roadways have not been fully explored.

9. Landscape Destruction: Harbour reclamation has resulted in the permanent destruction of Hong Kong's most valuable and irreplaceable natural asset.

10. Air Pollution: Intensive development of the reclaimed areas has substantially and dangerously increased air pollution in the urban area.

11. Contaminated Mud: Soft mud on the bottom of the harbour is heavily contaminated with heavy metals and organic chemicals. Dredging - a necessary part of reclamation - stirs up the mud and releases some of those contaminants into the water.

12. Mud Dumping: The contaminated mud is dumped in an area near Chek Lap Kok airport, which is close to a marine park where pink dolphins swim.

13. Flushing Action: Reclamation narrows the harbour and potentially creates "dead spots" where there is little flushing tidal action, and where litter and sewage could accumulate.

14. Loss of Habitat: The loss of natural coastlines could result in the loss of habitats and shallow feeding areas for many inter-tidal creatures that live in shallow sandy bays or on rocky shorelines.

15. Governance and Good Faith: The rushed award of the works contract for Central Reclamation Phase III raised doubts about whether the hurry was related to the Society for Protection of the Harbour's application for a judicial review on the Town Planning Board's approval of the Wanchai Development Plan Phase II. The award was the subject of an arbitration hearing, where the Review Body ruled that it was made in "undue haste". The effect the Government's "precipitous action" had been "to render nugatory any substantive recommendation that this Panel could make." The Panel noted that the correct procedure would have been for the authorities to give an opportunity to the tenderers to reconsider their tender submissions.

16. Rule of Law: The Society for Protection of the Harbour's successful judicial review against the Town Planning Board's approved plan for Wanchai Development Plan Phase II in effect required the Chief Executive-in-Council to refer the Central Reclamation Phase III back to the Town Planning Board for review. The Government's unwillingness to do so to date raises questions about its commitment to due process and the rule of law.

17. Civic Action: Excessive harbour reclamation has ignited public interest to protect and preserve Victoria Harbour. Where even the law fails to adequately protect the harbour, civic action needs to take over.


----------



## scorpion

HK has selfishly chosen a political battle it knows it can win...

Despite how ironic this particular issue really is--


----------



## spicytimothy

In my humble opinion, any plans will only delay traffic congrestion to occur again... toll road and what not will solve traffic for a MUCH MUCH SHORTER TIME than building new roads... and guess what... toll road means more money outta the public's pockets... and by then people will start complaining again... the buses and others will use it as a reason to raise fares... and the mtr will get even more crowded... 

granted building new roads isn't a permanent fix either but it helps for a longer time... besides it's just a lil more reclamation... wht's the point of keeping the habor the way it is? 

besides, Hong Kong still needs a boardwalk/habor-front walk!


----------



## hkskyline

*How to Lose a Harbor For more than a century, Hong Kong has polluted and misused its greatest asset. 
But a sea change in attitude may be on the way*
Chaim Estulin/Hong Kong
2 May 2005
Time International Asia Ed.

The sun is shining on the balcony of the Quarterdeck Club Seafood Restaurant and Grill, and luncheon diners have a terrific view of Hong Kong's Victoria Harbour, full of wooden sampans and junks, speeding ferries and lavish white yachts. It's the picture-perfect postcard image that Hong Kong promotes to potential visitors from abroad.

Good luck scoring that view if you live in the territory. The Quarterdeck is one of the very few al fresco restaurants open to the public on the harbor, and visiting it on foot involves negotiating an obstacle course over highways and through office buildings. And-- be warned--the view isn't entirely idyllic. As well as those sampans, patrons can also watch half a dozen barges dumping stone and dirt into the water, hence each day robbing Hong Kong of a little more of its most famous feature.

That process has been going on pretty much from the time that Britain took possession of what its Foreign Secretary back in 1841 called a "barren rock." Whatever else they may have been good at, successive generations of Hong Kong people have been terrific at filling in their harbor. The fashionistas' haunts in Causeway Bay, the new 88-story IFC II building (sixth tallest in the world) in Central, Suzie Wong's bars in Wanchai, the world's busiest container port, the runway at the old Kai Tak airport that used to have white- knuckled flyers fingering their rosaries--they were all built on reclaimed land. One hundred and sixty years of hauling landfill from mountainsides and construction dumps and shoveling it into the water has left Hong Kong with a harbor that, between the Central business district and Tsim Sha Tsui on the Kowloon side, is now just about 1 km wide--shorter than the span of New York's George Washington Bridge over the Hudson River. Visitors to Hong Kong who arrive in town expecting an easily accessible, vibrant waterfront like the ones in Sydney or Baltimore are in for a rude surprise: most of Hong Kong's shoreline is hidden behind skyscrapers, parking lots, utilities and highways. "I can't get a beer [on the waterfront]," says Paul Zimmerman, an executive at a local venture-capital firm who in 2002 founded Designing Hong Kong Harbour to encourage new thinking in waterfront planning. "I need to jump over road barriers to get there." And once you've got over those barriers and found the water, here's a tip: stay out of it. Each day, 450,000 cu m of raw semi-filtered sewage--the same volume as 200 Olympic-size full swimming pools--is flushed into the harbor. Pretty much the only things that live there are rabbitfish and ponyfish, acorn barnacles, green-lipped mussels, and bacteria.

But after years of despoiling its very name--Hong Kong means "fragrant harbor" in Chinese--things may finally be about to change. An unlikely coalition of environmental activists, business leaders and (this being Hong Kong) property developers is pushing for a rethink of how to make the harbor something more than an international embarrassment. Last week, about 70 executives from more than 90 of the city's biggest companies and institutions quietly assembled on the 40th floor of the HSBC headquarters--the very heart of the territory's traditional business community--for the first meeting of a new body, the Harbour Business Forum. According to one participant in the gathering, the group will act as a lobby for better use of the harbor and will press for the creation of a single authority to take charge of the harbor's development. "This will give the government a jolt," says Roger Nissim, a project planning manager for Sun Hung Kai Ltd., Hong Kong's largest property developer, and a member of the Forum. "We are not seen as the lunatics, we are not the green groups, we are not radical."

The business leaders' timing could not be better. Two major plans for the harbor are now in limbo, having been subject to a barrage of legal and popular complaints. A planned 26-hectare reclamation in Wanchai--whose principal purpose was for a highway--was halted last year by a court challenge. And proposals for an ambitious arts district on reclaimed land in West Kowloon have been frozen by public protests over the government's intention to hand the $6.8 billion project to a single developer. In this enforced breathing space, Hong Kong has a rare opportunity to figure out, once and for all, what it wants to do with its most valuable resource.

Nobody doubts that without reclamation there wouldn't be a Hong Kong. The narrow band of land squeezed between the water and the hills of Hong Kong island was always too small to nourish the territory's ambitions. But the development of the city's waterfront has been both relentless and uncoordinated. Hong Kong has no central planning for the harbor: its use and misuse are dictated by more than a dozen competing government departments and covered by at least 15 separate zoning plans. Hong Kong's "relationship with the waterfront was always an awkward thing," says Richard Marshall, an urban design director for the planning firm EDAW, who led a Harvard University study of the harbor in 2000. "It's surprising, given the identity the waterfront has with Hong Kong."

Maybe not too surprising. In a city where the word taxes has long had people reaching for the smelling salts, successive British colonial governments learned to use sales of reclaimed land to finance their budgets. In the mid-1990s--the last time a chunk of centrally located landfill came on the market--the administration sold 0.35 hectares to Citic Group for $430 million, while a consortium of developers paid $1.54 billion for the right to develop another site that now includes the IFC II skyscraper. "It was cheap, easy money," says Sun Hung Kai's Nissim, who for 20 years had worked as a senior government surveyor. "But it spun out of control."

While Hong Kong's government was milking the harbor as a tax cow, it missed what was happening elsewhere in the world. As shipping moved from downtown wharves to purpose-built container ports, old cities discovered that their weedy waterfronts could be reworked into the sort of environments that would attract--and retain--both tourist dollars and the creative minds that give a place fizz. From Boston to Bilbao, from Singapore to Sydney--even, for heaven's sake, in Liverpool, the ultimate rusted-up port--city planners have remade harbors into lively, people-friendly places full of restaurants, design studios and cultural attractions. "Waterfronts are now cherished assets," says Marshall. According to a study by the Boston Foundation, the $21 billion, 20-year cleanup of Beantown's once dank harbor has created 47,000 jobs and attracted $8.4 billion in "present or planned" new investment. "We have a renaissance here," says Bruce Berman, spokesman for Boston's Save the Harbor/Save the Bay, the group that spearheaded the waterfront revitalization. "It has transformed the city and put us in a very competitive position." Hong Kong could reap similar rewards. A Designing Hong Kong Harbour study predicts that a vibrant Victoria Harbour with restaurants, cultural venues and marinas would create an estimated 50,000 jobs.

Over the past few years, the realization that Hong Kong, too, can do something with its harbor has begun to sink into the city's consciousness. Winston Chu, 65, remembers taking girlfriends for evening strolls along the harbor in the 1960s. Forty years later, Chu collected tens of thousands of signatures for a law banning most harbor reclamation works. One of his inspirations was his 90-year- old mother, Cissy, who invited him up to her harbor-view penthouse garden in 1995 and, pointing to the shrinking waterway, "gave me a scolding and instructed me to do something about it." In 1997, in the waning days of British rule, the local Legislative Council passed the Harbour Protection Ordinance. The incoming postcolonial administration tried, but failed, to repeal the law, and in 2002 pressed ahead with a plan to build a mostly underground highway from Central to Causeway Bay through reclaimed land. Chu spent nearly $1 million of his own money on a legal challenge to the scheme, and in January 2004, the Court of Final Appeal struck down the government's ambitions. The judges deemed the waterfront "a natural heritage" to be trifled with only when there is "an overriding public need." Part of the land for that project has already been reclaimed, but the government is blocked from reclaiming the other 26 hectares.

Michael Suen, Hong Kong's Secretary of Housing, Planning and Lands, insists that he and his colleagues have got the message. "We know the harbor is our greatest asset," he stresses. But Suen says that somehow or other, a new highway has to be built. "The overriding need is the road," he says, while pledging that most of the land above it will be used for parks and promenades. Activists, however, have heard such claims before. Chu asks, "Who can trust the government?" and notes that the planned West Kowloon cultural district, will, if completed, offer millions of square meters of commercial and residential space--but it was zoned as a park when the land was first reclaimed in 1996.

The key issue now is to find a method and a platform on which the new mood can be turned into real plans. Constant lawsuits--a staple of Hong Kong life as well established as reclamation--won't do the trick. "You can't design a city in a courthouse," says Zimmerman. "We have policy constipation," remarks Sun Hung Kai's Nissim.

In Hong Kong, few policies move without the backing of the business community, which is why the formation of the Harbour Business Forum is important. Business leaders don't want to take over all plans for the harbor. But the Forum has already settled on four broad areas in which it wants the Hong Kong government's performance to improve, and it will release the details next month. The Forum's report will call for a single, omniscient harbor authority, and transparency in the planning of projects. At the same time, the group says there should be a bias toward developing the harbor with public spaces, and that the 2004 court ruling banning nearly all reclamation should be respected. "The strength of feeling about the harbor has become conspicuous," says one of the participants at last week's meeting. "The business community should use its resources, its skills, its position in the community to move things forward. An improved harbor would be good for business."

Make that good, too, for intrepid swimmers, artists, cocktail kings, fishermen--heck, everybody. Who wants lunch? -

WEST KOWLOON: Three plans were shortlisted last year to turn this 40-hectare site into a vast cultural district under a swooping, Norman Foster-designed canopy. Opposition to granting control of the site to a single developer has led even senior officials to admit that it will probably be returned to the drawing board.

WANCHAI RECLAMATION PHASE II: In 2004, a court struck down this 26-hectare project, saying it doesn't comply with a 1997 ordinance requiring that reclamation should occur only when absolutely necessary. The plan is being revamped.

CENTRAL RECLAMATION PHASE III: Almost 20 hectares-- about half of the initial proposal-- will be filled in by 2007 as part of a 30- year plan to unfurl another waterfront highway. The government has recently promised to put the road underground and use the land for low-rise buildings and public spaces.

WATER QUALITY

About a decade ago, the harbor was choking with heavy metals and untreated sewage. The government began a cleanup program, but the water still has insufficient oxygen for most marine life. Only hardy species like the rabbitfish can survive.

More than 160 years of hauling landfill from mountainsides and construction sites and shoveling it into the water has left Hong Kong's harbor about 1 km wide--shorter than the span of the George Washington Bridge over New York's Hudson River


----------



## hkskyline

Thursday June 2, 8:24 PM
*Leading businesses set up coalition to protect Hong Kong's harbor from reclamation*

AP - In a rare display of business concern for the environment, about 100 of Hong Kong's top companies on Thursday formed a coalition to protect the city's famed Victoria Harbor from further reclamation.

"Our harbor is a core part of Hong Kong's heritage, an international symbol of our city and a source of inspiration to those who live and work in Hong Kong," said the coalition's spokesman Vincent Cheng, chairman of The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp., the local unit of HSBC Holdings PLC.

"Reclamation should be avoided as much as possible," he said.

The government welcomed the group's launch in a statement released Thursday.

"It is the common goal and in the interests of the government, the business sector and non-governmental organizations to work hand-in-hand to promote the enhancement and sustainable development of the harbour and harbour-front areas," the statement said.

Concerns about the harbor have been raised since thousands of people protested last year against land reclamation that they say will turn Victoria Harbor into a river. It has already shrunk by almost half, or 3,200 hectares (7,907 acres), after decades of reclamation. 

Last year, anti-reclamation activists won a court battle to stop a planned 26-hectare (74-acre) strip for a road, park and commercial development in Hong Kong's financial district.

Cheng said the business coalition, called the Harbor Business Forum, has set up a committee to study what other cities have done in the transformation of their waterfronts so as to plot a development strategy for Hong Kong's harbor.

The coalition's patrons, which will fund its research projects, include HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd., other conglomerates such as The Swire Group, CITIC Pacific Ltd. and Jardine Matheson Holdings.

It also includes 27 chambers of commerce and business associations.

Cheng said it will try to influence government policy in the harbor's preservation.

He rejected suggestions that the coalition's establishment reflected a sudden change of heart by businesses and property developers, who have been the biggest beneficiaries of development made possible by reclamation.

"We all come together with a very sincere wish, which is to look at the future use of the harbor so that everybody in Hong Kong _ the business, the people, every stakeholder in Hong Kong _ can be proud," Cheng said.

"It's not about property development. It's not just about transport. It's not just about economics. It's the whole value of the harbor for us," he said.


----------



## Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm

^ I read the article above the last one you posted, and I TOTALLY agree with the initiative to "rethink" Victoria Harbour. I first visited Hong Kong last July, and stayed in the Eaton Hotel in Kowloon. I had hoped to at least see a little of the harbour from the rooftop, but all I saw was building after building, and most of them were so tall I couldn't even see anything on Hong Kong Island!

The little pedestrian bridge that goes around the Intercontinental Hotel is a great place to view the harbour from Kowloon, but other than that I had a difficult time seeing it. They need to put some kind of a waterfront park in Kowloon.

I also think the Cultural District would be great for public viewing of the Harbour, but I'm not exactly sure why this is being blocked by environmentalists. Will the project require even more reclaimed land than what's already there from the Western Harbour Crossing road tunnel?


----------



## hkskyline

The cultural district doesn't require any more reclamation. Environmentalists are more concerned with reclamation on the other side - Hong Kong Island.


----------



## hkskyline

*Ex-judge blasts 'lies' on land reclamation *
14 November 2005
South China Morning Post

A former High Court judge yesterday accused the government of lying and only pleasing developers in its reclamation policies. 

He spoke out as 10,000 people took part in two events with the harbour as their theme. 

Simon Li Fook-sean, 83, made a rare public appearance at the closing carnival of Harbour Week in Golden Bauhinia Square, Wan Chai. 

After calling the government's position despicable two years ago, Mr Li was again in a hard-hitting mood. The government "obviously chooses to please property developers", he said, referring to its proposed commercial and office development on the new Central reclamation. 

He said officials disregarded public opinion and nothing would change "unless all Legco members did something drastic like resigning - but then how would that ever happen?" 

Mr Li said: "The government always tells you what they would do to improve the waterfront. But when have they done anything at all? The government is a liar and they have cheated the public." 

The event was organised by the Society for Protection of the Harbour, Action Group on Protection of the Harbour and Friends of the Harbour. They hoped a show of people power would persuade the government to abandon its plan to build a new headquarters at the Tamar site and shopping malls on reclaimed land in Central. 

About 5,000 people turned out for the closing carnival, with a pop concert and a forum to criticise the government's reclamation plans. Also attending were legislators from various political camps, including Audrey Eu Yuet-mee, Lee Wing-tat and Choy So-yuk. 

Former talk-show hosts Wong Yuk-man and Albert Cheng King-hon, now a legislator, held the forum. 

A crowd of 5,000 people showed up earlier in the day to take part in Harbour Day, an event supported by the government. 

It included 180 boats competing in the annual Around the Island Race organised by the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club, followed by helicopter rescue demonstrations by the Government Flying Services, a boat parade and helicopter rides for 43 young cancer patients. 

Society for Protection of the Harbour founder Winston Chu Ka-sun - who had expected 10,000 people to show up for the close of Harbour Week - said he was disappointed at the turnout. 

He revealed the society had held talks with the yacht club - a partner of the Harbour Day's organising committee - in May on the possibility of an activity to promote harbour protection, but he claimed the club said it did not want to damage its relationship with the government.


----------



## hkskyline

*Reclamation projects remain sensitive to public opinion *
13 December 2005
Lloyd's List

MARINE operators such as Van Oord, Jan de Nul and Dredging International are playing a waiting game as Hong Kong mulls the possibility of further reclamation projects to expand its limited land area, writes Keith Wallis 

Gone are the boom days of the 1990s when 75% of the world’s dredging fleet was working in Hong Kong to create about 1,500 ha of land for the new international airport and related projects. 

Instead, public opposition backed up by a harbour protection law against future harbour infill projects imposed a virtual moratorium on dredging and reclamation schemes in Victoria Harbour. 

That ban was only lifted after several court cases clarified the law on harbour reclamation, which is now only allowed “when there is an overriding public need”. 

Yet despite this clarification, public opposition persists. This in turn makes the government very sensitive to future reclamation projects, including those outside the inner harbour area covered by the harbour protection ordinance. 

At present just one reclamation scheme is going ahead, the third phase of a project in the Central business district. Van Oord is part of a consortium that is forming about 18 ha of new land between the Star Ferry piers and the convention and exhibition centre near the Wan Chai district. 

An adjacent project to reclaim land from Wan Chai to Causeway Bay has stalled after a court case that the government lost. As a result, officials are redrawing the reclamation plans. 

Officials are also mulling a smaller reclamation scheme at the former Kai Tak airport, although the plan will be limited to capping an area of contaminated mud close inshore to a heavily industrialised area of the city in the Kowloon district. 

Outside the harbour limits, government officials have proposed reclaiming about 112 ha from the sea at Siu Ho Wan on Lantau Island, about 10 km from the new airport, to create land for a new logistics park. 

Longer term, industry insiders believe there will be a need to reclaim about 400 ha of land to create a third runway at Hong Kong international airport. The Airport Authority has already reserved the required area in the government’s planning blueprint. 

Further reclamation is also expected to be carried out on Lantau Island if plans go ahead for a US$3bn bridge spanning the Peal River estuary between Hong Kong, Macau and Zhuhai. 

While reclamation contractors wait for projects to move in Hong Kong, there are likely to be more opportunities in the former Portuguese colony of Macau after the government announced plans to increase Macau's land area by 13% over the next few years.


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbour panel backs Central bypass *
13 December 2005
South China Morning Post

Harbour advisers have given their blessing for the construction of a waterfront road to ease traffic jams in Central and Wan Chai. 

But they said the government should come up with sustainable transport management measures to resolve traffic problems in the long run, such as adjusting tolls for the cross-harbour tunnels and controlling development along the Eastern Corridor. 

Members of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee's Wan Chai development review subgroup decided the Central-Wan Chai bypass should be built either in the form of a tunnel or a flyover. 

An earlier suggestion to build at ground level was rejected because it would require extensive reclamation and the reclaimed land would largely be used by roads instead of to enhance the waterfront environment. 

Building a tunnel or a flyover would require reclamation off Eastern district. A consultant will now study the extent of reclamation needed for each option, and the public will then be consulted. 

Initial estimates suggest that a flyover would require less reclamation than a tunnel but would have an adverse visual impact at the waterfront. 

The government advisers had earlier refused to endorse plans to build a Central-Wan Chai bypass. But an expert panel reported that a bypass was needed, while pointing out it was not a long-term fix for congestion. It said a bypass alone could not end traffic jams since every road had a finite capacity. 

"The growth of traffic demand over a decade would overrun its capacity," the report said. 

The subgroup ran a public consultation exercise early this year in which it invited people to give their opinions on the future use of the harbour off Causeway Bay. The subgroup is now analysing the views it gathered to prepare for the second stage of consultation. 

Many of the submissions received from companies and groups supported the tunnel suggestion. Among those favouring that option were Swire Properties, the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club and the Business and Professionals Federation. 

Hardy Lok Kung-chin, director of the Society for Protection of the Harbour, stressed that the subgroup must keep open the option of building a flyover. 

Greg Wong Chak-yan, president of the Hong Kong Institute of Engineers, said: "We should always bear in mind the possibility of legal action against reclamation. To avoid this, we should include the flyover suggestion and let the public choose."


----------



## hkskyline

*Stop and rethink Tamar*

A new harbor protection coalition is demanding the government abandon its controversial Tamar redevelopment plans.

Monday, December 19, 2005
Hong Kong Standard

A new harbor protection coalition is demanding the government abandon its controversial Tamar redevelopment plans.

Members of the Stop and Rethink alliance said in a statement Sunday that the government should not rush into "schemes it has plainly not thought through."

Opposition to the government's HK$6 billion, 4.2-hectare site Tamar redevelopment plan has come from politicians, business leaders and conservation groups since the administration resurrected the proposal, which was shelved in November 2003 amid the tough economic climate following the SARS outbreak.

They argued that the government's plan to turn Tamar into its headquarters and house the Legislative Council will be a waste of prime land, which could be auctioned for several billion dollars. Any redevelopment will also ruin the harborfront.

Opponents have said that Kai Tak is better suited for a government headquarters.

The new alliance presented its views before the Legislative Council at a special meeting of the planning, lands and works panel on Saturday.

The panel later passed a non-binding motion urging the government to review its proposals for Tamar and the Central harborfront and to conduct a review with public consultation before taking further steps.

Paul Zimmerman, convenor of Designing Hong Kong Harbour District, told the panel about problems with the current plans.

He also showed photographs of harborfronts in cities in the mainland, Taiwan, Europe, United States and Australia to demonstrate what Hong Kong can achieve with the last available land around Victoria Harbour.

According to Zimmerman, legislators were "quite surprised after we presented maps and photographs."

He added: "I have a feeling this is the first time they have seen a comprehensive overview of the plan.

"This is really the last opportunity left and the government should reconsider the proposal."

Zimmerman said the motion should serve as a warning to the government that it may not be given the go-ahead by Legco to fund the project.

"Obviously, legislators won't approve the financial arrangement of the site if the government can't convince them," Zimmerman said.

He called on the government to recognize that, after decades of reclamation, a new process is required to fix Hong Kong's urban, transport and harbor planning.

Members of the new alliance include the Civic Exchange, Clear The Air, Designing Hong Kong Harbour District, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the Harbour, Save Our Shorelines, Society for Protection of the Harbour, WWF Hong Kong and prominent individuals.

The alliance also voiced concerns over traffic congestion and the negative environmental impact the development will have.

According to a recent report by the Transport Department, the development will add almost 10 million square feet of gross floor area and will attract an additional 7,623 vehicle trips per hour to Central. Even if all the proposed roads are built, in particular the super highway known as P2, traffic will be saturated again by 2016.

"Government lands policy for the area in and near Tamar, which will move tens of thousands more jobs into the Central waterfront area, strains transport to the breaking point, undermines environmental objectives and ignores sound principles of urban planning. Please, let us not be fooled again by government assurances that this fix will finally solve the problem. It will not," said Bill Barron, of the Institute for the Environment of the Hong Kong University of Science & Technology.

The chairman of Save Our Shorelines, John Bowden, added: "The new proposed road capacity is the same as in the metro plan developed in the mid- 1980s. However, occupation and density have been reduced significantly. Then why do we need the same roads? We should question the proposed overcapacity and overprovision of surface roads in the Central area. Stop and think. This is why we need a full review of transport provisions in light of reduced development plans and projections. The government should maximize land-use for public open space and harbor- oriented land uses, not for redundant road capacity."

The alliance also said air pollution in Central will worsen if the new government offices are built at the Tamar site.

Air quality expert Jimmy Fung of Clear the Air said the government's pollution model "pretends Central is a flat surface," and ignores the fact that pollution gets trapped by tall buildings.

In other words, pollution predictions on the Tamar site and the Central Reclamation Phase III were based on 1999 data plugged into a prediction model that assumes Central has no buildings.

This means that official figures seriously underestimate the pollution levels - air pollution could be three times higher than predicted by the Environmental Protection Department's 2001 environmental impact assessment report. "We will not accept anything from the government regarding the Tamar site until the Environmental Impact Assessment ... is updated with recent, actual air pollution data using a newer, proper model," Fung said.

"The time needed to produce such a report would only take about three months and cost HK$300,000. There is no need for the government to rush in proceeding the Tamar development."

Markus Shaw, chairman of WWF, added: "The issue is not a small matter. Since this will be the last reclamation along the Central waterfront, we only have one chance to get it right: we are literally planning a `harborfront for a thousand years."'

Despite opposition, the government maintains Tamar is the most suitable site for its headquarters and the Legislative Council. The project is expected to begin in 2007 and be completed by 2010.


----------



## hkskyline

*Opening move for Tamar contract *
21 December 2005
South China Morning Post

Interested parties have been invited to apply for prequalification for the contract on the planned government headquarters on the Tamar site, despite lawmakers' opposition to the plan. 

A government spokesman said yesterday the main purpose of the prequalification for the $4 billion design-and-build contract was to identify up to five applicants with proven design, managerial, financial and technical capabilities. 

"The prequalified applicants will be invited to submit tenders for the contract but prior to that we will, in the second quarter of 2006, consult the Legislative Council for funding approval," the spokesman said. 

But Democratic party legislator James To Kun-sun said of the move: "It shows that the government does not respect the Legislative Council at all. It is of no use. At the end of the day, the government must come to Legco to ask us for the funding. We might not approve it at the time." 

The contract will cover the government complex, Legco complex and the Civic Place proposed for the Tamar site. 

The spokesman said: "The concept design should illustrate integration of the Tamar development with its surrounding areas,'' adding that Civic Place would comprise about half of the site and would be designed as a public leisure and recreational open space. 

The project is expected to start in 2007 for completion in 2010, the spokesman said. 

"The eligibility criteria are laid out in the prequalification document. Interested parties may apply from now until March 14," he said. 

The document states that the design for the proposed development should take account of the goals and planning principles for the harbour devised by the Town Planning Board and Harbourfront Enhancement Committee.


----------



## hkskyline

*The Tamar site question - can people power prevail?
The future of this contentious piece of prime land rests in the hands of a partisan Town Planning Board *
16 December 2005
South China Morning Post

The government is determined to build new headquarters at the Tamar site, but there are many who want to block the plan. The campaign to stop the development has heated up debate on the future of the former British naval station HMS Tamar, as well as the existing government headquarters on Lower Albert Road. 

Among the opponents, the Society for Protection of the Harbour and the Action Group on Protection of the Harbour are probably the most vocal. 

The Action Group has filed a rezoning request to the Town Planning Board to turn the four-hectare waterfront plot into a park. The application will be heard today. 

The group argues that Tamar is the last piece of prime, undeveloped waterfront land and should be used as a public open space. It questions the government's decision, which it says will eventually turn the promised open space in front of the new headquarters into a piece of uninviting real estate too ugly for public use. 

The group also says building new government headquarters on the site will worsen traffic congestion in Central, after a Transport Department study estimated the development would increase average traffic flow by 800 cars an hour. 

"Even the proposed Central-Wan Chai bypass would not solve the problem of increased traffic flow," said Kwok Ka-ki, a founder of the Action Group and an independent legislator. "The Transport Department says saturation would be reached by 2016. Will the government propose reclamation again to solve the problem?" 

Mr Kwok is pessimistic about the board's decision, saying: "[The board] is chaired by an official; all members are appointed and two-thirds of them are somehow connected to property developers. It is not accountable to the public, but I shall exhaust all possible means to pursue my cause." 

Under the government's plan, Tamar will house the Legislative Council, the Executive Council, the chief executive and his office, as well as all the bureaus. At least four high-rises will be built on the site. According to the statutory plan, at least two hectares of land facing the waterfront will be turned into an open space for the public. 

As the administrative wing is still researching the needs of various bureaus, it cannot provide concrete information, even on the floor space needed. 

Since the government wants to save time, it will award the design and construction contract to one contractor. The design of the new headquarters is another unknown. 

Before Mr Kwok and his group entered the fray, the battle against reclamation and land use in Central was dominated by the Society for Protection of the Harbour and its founder, Winston Chu Ka-sun. 

Five years ago, Mr Chu commissioned Sir Peter Hall, a professor from the Bartlett School of Planning at University College London to compile arguments on reserving Tamar for public space. 

The report, called A New Vision for Tamar, says: "[As] the land at the centrepiece of the planning area, the entire concept of the Central waterfront development depends critically upon it, and without it the entire scheme fails. A decision on the Tamar site cannot and should not be taken in isolation, but in the context of a decision on the wider Central waterfront development scheme." 

It also says: "Hong Kong lacks the classic local urban parks that are characteristic of world cities such as London, Paris and even New York. In Hong Kong, the interests of pedestrians have been consistently ignored in favour of road traffic, despite the obvious potential for creating largely vehicle-free zones in areas such as Central and Tsim Sha Tsui. 

"To escape this, the Hong Kong people have embraced an air-conditioned culture and a series of movement networks above ground level, leaving the ground level disconnected to new users. This is particularly true of the waterfront, which is cut off from the commercial and residential districts behind it by very unfriendly vehicular thoroughfares crossed by bridges." 

The report concludes that proper planning for Tamar provides a golden opportunity to address the problem and give the public access to the waterfront. 

"The site of HMS Tamar has important associations with Hong Kong's colonial past, as does its position on the harbour. This is potentially significant in terms of the need for Hong Kong to rediscover its heritage; and an important source of tourism," it says. 

Mr Chu paid $548,000 for the research. "Nothing has changed over the past five years. The arguments are still valid." 

He said he was optimistic about the harbour's future. "Before July 1, 2003, I was pessimistic about the future of the harbour. After half a million people marched to demonstrate against the subversion law, the government eventually realised it needed to listen to the public. Now I'm optimistic. 

"To save the harbour, the people of Hong Kong must come out and voice their objection." 

While all the attention is focused on the future of Tamar, there are also voices calling on the government to preserve its existing headquarters. 

The Hong Kong Institute of Planners advocates small government headquarters at Tamar, housing only the Legislative Council, the Executive Council, the chief executive and his office. It wants most of the land to be performance venues and parkland for public enjoyment. 

The institute also wants to see the existing headquarters at Lower Albert Road preserved. 

Patrick Hase, a historian, said that the whole hill at Lower Albert Road and Garden Road had been set aside for government use shortly after the British landed in Hong Kong, in 1841. Since then the administration, the army, judiciary and the church were located west of Garden Road. 

Mr Hase said St John's Cathedral was funded by the Hong Kong government, even though the Anglican church had never been the dominant church in the city. Hence land for the cathedral, and for Bishop's House and its attached school, were found on Government Hill. 

Above the Colonial Secretariat, the land was set aside for the Botanical Gardens, another government project dating from early colonial days. Below the secretariat, the old Hilton hotel site, now the Cheung Kong Centre, was originally a gun battery, and the Beaconsfield House site was also used for government purposes. 

Pong Yuen-yee, Institute of Town Planners vice-president, said: "There are many historic buildings on the hill, such as Government House, the Court of Final Appeal, the tram station and the British and US consulates-general. We oppose selling the government headquarters site for commercial or residential development." 

Ms Pong said the hill was dotted with mature trees, and rated high as a must-see destination for tourists. "The trees will surely be gone if the government hands over the land to property developers." 

The institute proposed the area between Robinson Road, the Zoological and Botanical Gardens to Battery Path and Cotton Tree Drive should be turned into a cultural heritage district. 

"Because of development, we have bulldozed countless historic buildings in the past," Ms Pong said. "We shouldn't repeat the same mistakes, sacrificing our history. Money can't buy history."


----------



## hkskyline

The reclamation has begun!


----------



## Duopolis

Nice schots! Kowloon skyline looks great! But Hanoi Road is growing so slow...


----------



## SUNNI

yeah great pics
and another redevelopment to look forward to in 2006


----------



## raymond_tung88

Can someone post a plan of what the shoreline of Hong Kong Island will look like after reclamation? Also, I'd just like to know if there is going to be reclamation in Causeway Bay...


----------



## Duopolis

^^ Me too. Also, I wonder is there any other 200+m projects in Tsim Sha Tsui (core or East) like Hanoi Road.


----------



## Mosaic

Great shot, nice looking. How much is the cost for reclamation land like this in HK.?


----------



## Aboveday




----------



## hkskyline

December 20, 2005
Government Press Release
*Transport experts back bypass option*

There is a compelling transport need to build the Central-Wan Chai Bypass, Transport Advisory Committee Chairperson Teresa Cheng says, adding toll roads can complement, but cannot replace, the link.

The committee discussed today a transport expert panel report on the sustainable transport planning for the northern shore of Hong Kong Island, including the necessity of the bypass. 

Members noted the expert panel's affirmation of the transport need for constructing the bypass and its planned slip roads to improve the reliability of the street network as well as tackling deteriorating traffic conditions in the area.

The bypass is the last, yet to be built, section of a strategic highway running along the northern shore of Hong Kong Island. It will connect the existing flyover near Rumsey Street in Central to the existing Island Eastern Corridor. When the bypass is in place, vehicles commuting between the Eastern District and the western parts of the city, such as Tuen Mun and the airport, can use the strategic highway without having to pass through the busy districts of Causeway Bay, Wan Chai and Central as at present. 

*Road P2 a key interim measure*

Members backed the bypass' slip roads at the Convention & Exhibition Centre area and at Victoria Park Road-Gloucester Road-Hing Fat Street to magnify its benefits.

It recognised the need for Road P2 as an important interim measure to address traffic congestion in the Central area before the bypass comes about, and suggests measures to improve traffic conditions along the east-west corridor on the northern shore of Hong Kong Island.

"On road pricing, we agree with the expert panel's view that without the provision of proper infrastructure, road pricing alone cannot serve as a panacea to the traffic problem. Road pricing can complement, but cannot replace, the Central-Wan Chai Bypass," Ms Cheng said.

On the progress of the measures to enhance road and public light bus safety, Ms Cheng said attitude and behaviour has a great bearing on road safety, adding that education and publicity will instill in drivers a good driving attitude.


----------



## hkskyline

*Opinion : Legco motion calling for Tamar review ignored *
26 December 2005
South China Morning Post

After a year of hard work by more than a dozen groups of environmentalists, in trying to provide the people of Hong Kong with a good living environment and quality of life, a motion - calling for a review of the planning for the Central waterfront, including the Tamar site - was passed unanimously on December 17 by the Legislative Council's panel on planning, lands and works. 

But it came as a bombshell to learn from your article, "Opening move for Tamar contract" (December 21), that the government had simply ignored the motion, and is still proceeding with the Tamar project. 

In doing so, the government is showing blatant disrespect for Legco, the democratic process and the rule of law. 

The motion said, in part, that in view of the government's undertakings to develop Hong Kong into a world-class city, and to provide a vibrant and beautiful Central waterfront for the enjoyment of the community, the panel urged it to comply with the recommendations made by the Town Planning Board on August 5, and an earlier motion by the panel, by reviewing the Tamar development project and the planned land uses for the waterfront. 

The motion asked the government to consult the public before taking forward any further project and planning work, and also to suspend the tender procedure on the development of the Tamar site, pending the review and public consultation. It proposed that a subcommittee be established to review the planning for the Central waterfront, including Tamar. 

In the recent proposal for political reform, the government has been making high-sounding statements about the importance of Legco and the democratic process. Yet in reality, the government only values Legco when it supports its policies. The government's hypocritical attitude is disgraceful and insulting, both to Legco and the public. 

There is therefore a long way to go before Hong Kong can achieve an enlightened government which will truly represent its people. 

WINSTON K. S. CHU, former chairman, Society for Protection of the Harbour


----------



## hkskyline

*An uninterrupted harbour view *
24 December 2005
South China Morning Post

The plan to build a new government headquarters and legislature on the Tamar site is being supported by the chief executive, many politicians, businesspeople and professionals. The administration has also tried to convince the public that the project is vital, creating jobs in the hard-hit construction industry. 

Yet, many others have expressed their concerns on the subject, presented studies that have been ignored, and proposed alternatives. The debate continues, while the government pushes the proposal at full speed. It is difficult for the public to fully understand the issues involved, as the vital information is either missing or difficult to find. 

So we should ask: do we want to preserve the view of our harbour from The Peak for future generations? Do we want a sustainable and responsible approach for the proposed Tamar development? 

Do we want a vibrant, culturally diversified and inclusive public civic space at Tamar, with easy accessibility to the harbourfront? Do we want to bring the people to the harbour and the harbour to the people? 

Further, we need to know: do we want to preserve our historical and cultural heritage buildings and invaluable green space surrounding the existing Central Government Offices? And do we really want sustainable development for Hong Kong for our future generations? The answers should be clear. 

Since 1991, the government has recommended that height controls be introduced to protect the view from The Peak. Yet, little has been done to implement this. 

Similarly, the Urban Design Guidelines say that developments should not reduce the amount of harbour water surface visible from The Peak. In the government's own words: "There is no possibility of compromise. Either height [controls are] adopted, or the laissez-faire approach is maintained and the view to the ridgeline [including the harbour view from The Peak] will become obscured over the next few years." The guidelines also called for a stepped approach to building heights for developments along waterfront areas. 

Unfortunately, the guidelines are not yet law. So, sadly, we have been witnessing the continued obscuring of the views - of the ridge of hills on the Kowloon side, and the harbour - by developers. But how can we blame them, as they are just trying to maximise profits? Not only has the government failed to introduce statutory controls to enforce the guidelines, but it is taking the lead in ignoring them. In November, I asked the government to release to the public the visual impact assessment of the proposed Tamar development, but it has not responded. My own study indicates that the Tamar project would significantly reduce the water surface area visible from The Peak. 

Redeveloping the Central Government Offices will require removing all the trees in and around the compound. The project will remove part of Hong Kong's heritage from our collective memory. To meet its ambitious land-sale target, it will have to build huge commercial blocks that are incompatible with the setting, violating all urban-design guidelines. And the additional traffic could not possibly be absorbed. This, and the traffic generated by the Central reclamations, would accelerate the saturation of the proposed Central-Wan Chai bypass. 

In view of the adverse social, environmental and traffic impacts, is it time to fundamentally review the land use and density of the whole region from a sustainable development point of view?Steve Chan Yiu-fai is an independent member of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee


----------



## hkskyline

The past :









Rendering of Central waterfront :


----------



## SJM

I like that last rendering, fits in very nicely to the surroundings!


----------



## hkskyline

*Ip in Tamar jobs drive for construction woes *

The HK$6 billion Tamar Site project will help alleviate higher-than-average unemployment in the construction sector, Secretary for Economic Development and Labour Stephen Ip said in pushing for legislative approval for the development by 2007.

Michael Ng
Hong Kong Standard
Tuesday, January 03, 2006

The HK$6 billion Tamar Site project will help alleviate higher-than-average unemployment in the construction sector, Secretary for Economic Development and Labour Stephen Ip said in pushing for legislative approval for the development by 2007.

But a unionist in the construction industry said Ip's plan alone would fail to meet the urgent needs of thousands of jobless workers.

Ip said in a radio interview that with more than 30 new hotels completed last year and "a few dozen more" to be built in the next few years, construction unemployment has already fallen from a peak of 20 percent early last year to 11 percent in November.

He hoped the new SAR government headquarters and Legislative Council project at the Tamar site, if endorsed by late 2007, and other public works in the territory will employ some of the 30,000 jobless construction workers.

However, Choi Chun-wa, chairman of the Hong Kong Construction Industry Employees General Union, said that along with those out of work, another third of construction workers are under- employed. Immediate relief measures were more urgent than a long-term plan, he said.

"Secretary Ip needs to be pragmatic. His plan is to be realized in 2007, but how about 2006? What will these unemployed workers do for a living this year? Are you asking them to wait and starve for another 365 days?"

Although the government is willing to lower the height of the new government complex from 180 meters to 130-160 meters to preserve views of the harbor, environmentalists are still worried about potential pollution and visual blight caused by the project.

The government must still lobby for the support of the pro-government Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, which insists the new complex should be built at the site of the former airport at Kai Tak.

At the same time, the Democratic Party is worried about the project's high density and visual impact on the surrounding environment.

Legco's subcommittee to review the planning for the central waterfront will start discussing the development in its first meeting next Friday.

Turning to general employment, Ip said the SAR's jobless rate has fallen from 6.1 percent early last year to 5.3 percent by November and that he is "prudently optimistic" about employment prospects for this year.

But he warned the local economy is still vulnerable to uncertainties such as high crude oil prices and high interest rates.

"We will maintain a sense of crisis and tailor different employment assistance programs according to changes in the employment market."

The DAB is a strong opponent of the Tamar redevelopment plan.

It claims Tamar, which is a prime waterfront site, would generate an estimated income of HK$6.65 billion for the government in an auction of land for commercial use.

The party also says that construction of a new government headquarters at the site of the old airport can be completed by 2012, which is only three years later than that envisaged for the Tamar site.


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbour watchdog closes its office Founder Winston Chu to retire, staffing levels are reduced *
6 January 2006
South China Morning Post

Hong Kong's biggest harbour protection group has closed its office in Central, and founder Winston Chu Ka-sun is planning to retire later this year. 

The Society for Protection of the Harbour, which took the government to court in 2003 over reclamation, has also reduced its staff to just one part-time worker. 

The move has been viewed by other harbour advisers as a scaling back in the society's operations following the government's commitment not to reclaim land from Victoria Harbour after the legal battle. 

The advisers also said the developments could change the landscape of the harbour protection campaign. 

Both Mr Chu and the society's chairwoman, Christine Loh Kung-wai, said the latest moves were just a change in strategy. 

The aim of the society, formed in 1995, is to stop the government from reclaiming the harbour for land sales. It rented an office in Wyndham Street, Central, and hired two full-time staff. 

The office lease did not expire until April but the group has already returned the premises to the landlord. From January 1, its registered address switched to Mr Chu's law firm in Admiralty and it has hired only one part-time staff member, with its campaign manager, Angus Ho Hon-wai, resigning to join the private sector. 

Mr Chu, 65, said he would retire by the end of the year and concentrate on writing a book, Saving Victoria Harbour, detailing his fight against reclamation. He stepped down as chairman in October 2003 after receiving threatening letters. 

"Most of our money is from public donations," Mr Chu said. "We must make good use of the money. As our campaign manager decided to leave, we took the opportunity to restructure the office. We still have many meetings to discuss our way forward but we don't have much administration work to do. 

"In the past, Hong Kong had only one group that cared about the harbour. But after we took the government to court, many people realised they needed to act, and act quickly and decisively, or the harbour would be gone forever. Now we are more a co-ordinator in the anti-reclamation movement." 

Mr Chu said the Harbour Business Forum, a coalition of 106 of the city's largest companies and business groups, including HSBC, Jardine Matheson, Kerry Group, Wharf (Holdings) and the Swire Group, shared much of the society's previous work. 

Ms Loh said: "By saving on rent, staff and other utilities, we will have more resources for campaigning. It is going to be a long and winding road. We will have a forum on the Central waterfront next month - it takes money." 

Greg Wong Chak-yan, who represents the Hong Kong Institute of Engineers on the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, said: "The society did a great job on protecting the harbour. If it had never existed, I'm afraid our harbour [would be] long gone. But it {hellip} cornered the government and forced it to commit to no more reclamation. The society doesn't have much of a job to do now. It is natural for it to scale back the operation." 

He also said the society's uncompromising opposition to reclamation had hampered it from playing a more active role in harbour planning, since there were other new groups that were more prepared to work with the government in efforts to improve the waterfront.


----------



## hkskyline

*Building without brains *
30 March 2006
South China Morning Post

It is frustrating talking to a brick wall. Community groups were branded "anti-development" by Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen when they tried to tell him the government's development plans for Central would lead to worse congestion and air quality, and unattractive aesthetics. 

The reasons are that the planned complex is too dense, the land parcels slated for development are too large, and highways and roads would dominate the waterfront. 

But the government doesn't want to hear this. Officials prefer to hide behind "process": they say the plans have been through the town planning process, and development should proceed quickly. When reminded that the Town Planning Board has raised various concerns, government officials said those issues could be taken care of in the final design. 

The government does not want to review the whole plan, although that is what should happen. Hong Kong needs an approach to planning the Central waterfront that is qualitatively different from what has gone before. To see the results of the old approach, you only have to look at what the entire north shore of Hong Kong Island is like today. The waterfront is ugly and cut off from the city by major highways. 

The government says everything will be much better in the future, without addressing the details. But the problem is that the surface highways are still going to be there. Pedestrians will have to use raised footbridges to cross these major highways. 

In Hong Kong, we all know what walking on raised footbridges is like: they are everywhere. The reason we cannot walk at road level in so many cases is because the space has been given to highways. Is it a pretty sight? No. Is it healthy? No. Are there alternatives? Yes, but we have to adopt a different, lower-density, planning approach. 

This is also how critics see the Tamar development for government offices - Mr Tsang's pet project. The government says it will create "an iconic civic core" at the Tamar site, where half the space will be used for government offices and a new Legislative Council building, and the rest will be "designated as open space {hellip} and be developed into a public, civic space". 

But this icon will be surrounded by multiple layers of roads. The government steadfastly refuses to consider the surrounding environment of this "civic core". 

What critics are trying to tell legislators and Mr Tsang is that the final product cannot be aesthetically pleasing or healthy to visit because of the impact of the entire Central waterfront plan. The government needs to fix the whole plan before it can really consider how best to use and design the Tamar site. 

The government's response is disingenuous. Last week, Susan Mak Lok Suet-ling, the acting director of administration, claimed the Tamar development itself would have no long-term adverse impact on traffic, air quality or the environment of the Central district. 

The point is not just what goes on top of the Tamar site. There are problems with the entire plan, of which Tamar is a part. 

Perhaps government officials and even legislators don't worry about roads, traffic congestion, air quality, noise and aesthetics because they work indoors. But surely, that would be a total failure of their responsibility. To restrict bargaining to essentially the height of the government building is laughable. 

Mrs Mak also repeated the hollow argument that the Tamar project would create about 2,700 jobs. If the government is keen to create even more construction jobs it should proceed with the North Island subway line first. A rail line would benefit more people and reduce the need for waterfront highways. 

Is anyone in the government willing to engage on details, or are we going to be fed more propaganda?

Christine Loh Kung-wai is chief executive of the think-tank Civic Exchange.


----------



## hkth

From news.gov.hk:
Tamar site most suited for Gov't HQ: CE (Chief Executive)


----------



## hkskyline

*It's Tamar - and no argument *
Michael Ng
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, March 31, 2006










Chief Executive Donald Tsang made it crystal clear Thursday that Tamar is the best possible site for the new government headquarters - and that he will not entertain any further arguments against it.

His statement put an end to a determined bid by the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong to get the headquarters relocated to southeast Kowloon.

The HK$5 billion headquarters development was one of the main topics discussed during Tsang's 90-minute question-and-answer session in the Legislative Council Thursday.

DAB legislator Cheung Hok-ming said a study by his party had found that some mainland cities had already moved their government headquarters and political centers to less congested areas.

He said relocating the new government headquarters to the site of the former airport at Kai Tak would also boost redevelopment of southeast Kowloon.

"Has the government taken into account the opinion of the DAB, a party that is close to the public and represents those at the grassroots level?" Cheung asked.

"Has the government considered that relocating a new headquarters to southeast Kowloon would also enhance the claim that the government is getting closer to the public?"

In reply, Tsang said Hong Kong could not be compared with capital cities in other large countries.

"As a financial center, we need to keep the administration, legislature and judiciary close to our financial districts. They are simply inseparable," Tsang said.

"If our headquarters was relocated out of Central, we would have to persuade our legislature and judiciary to also move out and this, I believe, would affect our efficiency.

"That process of moving out would also cause more arguments than the [Tamar site] debate presently going on in the legislature."

Tsang noted that the lengthy time required for replanning would delay the completion of the headquarters and fail to meet urgent demands for the creation of more jobs in the construction industry. Besides, he added, there was already a proposal to build a cruise terminal and a multi-purpose stadium in southeast Kowloon, which should help boost development in the area.

His answer still failed to please another DAB legislator, Choy So-yuk.

He insisted the lack of public facilities in Central would turn it into a dead city during late night hours, like north Wan Chai.

"The chief executive said in his opening speech that the government should have the courage to review and rectify its decisions.

"So will he consider replanning the Tamar site and make it a more lively, energetic and easily accessible area?" Choy asked.

Tsang insisted Tamar will be his only choice. "I hope everybody can stop arguing about this," he said.

"We endorsed the land-use zoning plan of Central in 2000 and the construction of the new government headquarters at Tamar in 2003. These were the result of a public consensus.

"Of course, it is impossible that this decision will satisfy every individual in society."

He said the government was always being criticized for not making prompt decisions, which was why the government decided to act on the Tamar site project.

He insisted people would have sufficient recreation areas at the site as the new headquarters and legislative council building would only occupy about two hectares of land, leaving more than 10 hectares of recreational space.

Tsang also told Democratic Party chairman Lee Wing-tat, in reply to a question, that the government headquarters would not exceed 160 meters in height so as to lessen its impact on the skyline.

After the session, DAB chairman Ma Lik said the party had never opposed the building of the headquarters at Tamar, but merely wanted the government to consider the feasibility of the southeast Kowloon site.

"We hope the government will also consider our proposal and study the pros and cons of both Tamar and Kai Tak," he said.

Ma said that his party caucus would discuss next week whether or not to support the government when it seeks Legco approval of funding for the headquarters project in June.

"If the government could ... at least relocate some of the government offices to the southeast Kowloon area, we would actively consider supporting the government in the voting exercise," Ma said.

Liberal Party chairman James Tien said his party would support the Tamar site.

"In a small city like Hong Kong, we should not have several government buildings.

"I believe most taxpayers would not want to see the government spending public revenue to construct several new headquarters," Tien said.

Democratic Party chairman Lee Wing-tat said that, as Tsang had reacted positively to the party's demand to build a smaller headquarters, they will consider its funding request.


----------



## hkskyline

*The Tamar argument that fails to convince *
31 March 2006
South China Morning Post

A pattern has emerged for Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's question-and-answer sessions in the Legislative Council. His opening statements have been akin to mini-policy addresses, containing initiatives that naturally seize public attention. When he last appeared in January, Mr Tsang's surprise announcement that civil servants would adopt a five-day week dominated the news for weeks. Yesterday, his statements about pressing ahead with plans to build a new government headquarters at Tamar marked the launch of an intensifying campaign to win public opinion over the controversial project. 

By stressing the need for both the government and the Legislative Council to heed public opinion, the chief executive subtly put the blame on legislators for their incessant rows with his administration. His inclusion of specific pledges in his opening remarks not only projected an image of being a strong leader trying to crack difficult issues, but also set the line of questioning by legislators. 

Rather than putting him on the spot, legislators' questions have presented Mr Tsang, the skilful communicator, with opportunities to make his case directly to the public. On issues such as Tamar, central slaughtering of chickens, air pollution, a minimum wage, fair competition and the West Kowloon cultural complex, he eloquently outlined his vision and called for community consensus. 

On Tamar, the chief executive rejected the views of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong that the government headquarters should be sited at the old Kai Tak airport site in southeast Kowloon. He argued that Hong Kong was a small place, and that siting the government headquarters, Legco and Court of Final Appeal within the central business district would be more efficient and conducive to maintaining our status as a financial centre. He even turned the tables on the legislators, noting that it was an old project that they had approved in 2003, and that southeast Kowloon may not be an area they would like to move to. 

But his argument on Tamar is unconvincing. The whole point about relocating the government headquarters out of Central is decentralisation. Central is not the geographical centre of Hong Kong, but its dominance as the central business district has incurred environmental and social costs close to breaking point. 

A few Legco panels might have approved the project three years ago, but the council and the public are entitled to change their minds. After all, the project has not started, and critics have since raised serious concerns about its scale and long-term implications on the look and feel of the area and the waterfront. 

Nor is the project as urgent as Mr Tsang has made it out to be. The argument that work needs to get under way now to help sustain economic recovery is dubious. Creating employment is a valid policy objective, but the rationale for building a project that will become a lasting icon - or eyesore - should not be contingent upon the need to generate several thousand jobs over the next few years. 

The government is said to have secured support for the project from an increasing number of legislators. The community can only hope that both the administration and Legco will really take public opinion into account, as Mr Tsang said they should do, and take time to make sure that we get the development of the harbour right. 

Quality of life, sharing the fruits of success, and economic prosperity - the three themes under which the chief executive packaged his policy highlights yesterday - certainly encapsulated key aspirations of Hong Kong people. But as various legislators rightly pointed out, what the public wants is real and tangible progress. Their expectations might not be entirely fair, as many policy issues do take time to resolve. Unfortunately, Mr Tsang is most likely to be able to deliver on a project that should be handled with the least haste - Tamar.


----------



## hkskyline

*Tsang privately urges tycoons to back Tamar *
1 April 2006
South China Morning Post

Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen has privately lobbied a leading business forum to support building a new government headquarters at the Tamar site, sources familiar with their meeting say. 

The chief executive used the meeting to express his dissatisfaction at the lack of support from patrons of the Harbour Business Forum for the controversial project, they said. 

Among those meeting Mr Tsang two weeks ago were Hongkong and Shanghai Bank chairman Vincent Cheng Hoi-chuen and top managers of Sun Hung Kai Properties, Jardine Matheson and the Swire Group. 

One of the sources, a harbour planner, said: "Mr Tsang told the tycoons that he wasn't happy about the forum's demand for a comprehensive review on the planning of the Central harbourfront. 

"Mr Tsang said the planning of the Central waterfront area was approved by the Executive Council in 2000 and it was unnecessary to conduct another review. 

"He also made clear the government would like to see a cultural hub in West Kowloon and a cruise terminal in Kai Tak." 

The forum had sought the meeting with Mr Tsang two months ago to voice its concerns about development around the harbour. 

"Mr Tsang turned the meeting into his lobbying session on Tamar and other harbour projects," the planner said. "Everybody was very quiet after the meeting." 

The meeting took place in the same week that officials were engaged in heavy lobbying of harbour activists and pro-democracy legislators to support a scaled-down proposal for a government headquarters. 

A government source stressed that the administration was determined to push the project through. "We can negotiate on how the headquarters should be built, but there is no room for discussion on where it should be built. We do not need any further review of planning on the Central waterfront," he said. 

The chief executive strongly defended the Central reclamation and building of a government headquarters at Tamar at Legco on Thursday, expressing hopes that members would support its "early implementation". 

The forum, a coalition of 120 leading companies and business groups, was formed in June. 

The forum has expressed concerns at the huge "ground-scraper" developments planned for the Central reclamation, and voiced fears the headquarters at Tamar would be too large. 

A spokeswoman for the Chief Executive's Office and HSBC spokesman David Hall confirmed the meeting had taken place. 

Mr Hall said: "It was a private meeting and I am unable to tell [you] what was discussed." He said the forum would continue its harbour campaign. 

A harbour walk from Tsim Sha Tsui to Hunghom will be held on April 26.


----------



## hkskyline

*'Secret' report on HQ revamp released *
1 April 2006
South China Morning Post

A "secret study" on the feasibility of redeveloping the Central Government Offices was finally released yesterday after two months of condemnation and accusations from the Legislative Council. 

The study was commissioned through the Government Property Agency in 1990 to examine the options for redeveloping the Central Government Offices West Wing in Ice House Street. 

The existence of such a report was disclosed by the South China Morning Post in February. 

The report estimated the cost of the project, including demolition, at $2.25 billion, yielding 100,000 square metres of gross floor area for government use within three years. 

The 10,500-square-metre West Wing site, it said, was "grossly underdeveloped". 

It said the redevelopment would make "optimum use" of the site to maximise the development potential in a way that was "practicable and desirable". It suggested the government invite developers to take part, opening 57,500 square metres of floor space to private use, thus generating $424 million in rent every year. 

The report will be discussed by the Legislative Council's panel on planning, lands and works on Monday. 

Legislator Kwok Ka-ki said the on-site redevelopment was more viable than the Tamar proposal, which would take $6 billion and five years to finish. 

"Despite repeated requests from legislators, the government has never specified how much office space is needed for expansion," Mr Kwok said. 

"It has never explained how much extra gross floor area can be provided under the Tamar project, either. 

"One hundred thousand square metres of space is vast - it should be enough to accommodate government staff. And it's more cost-effective to redevelop existing buildings. It is obviously a more viable option."


----------



## hkskyline

*Vote reflects frustration over Tamar *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Lawmakers frustrated with the administration's failure to deliver details on the proposed government headquarters at Tamar have passed a confrontational motion in the Legislative Council, but without the support of representatives from two key political parties.

Disappointed with the government's refusal to abide by a previous motion requesting a checklist of all government documents relating to the development of a new headquarters, independent lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki moved a motion recommending members of the Central waterfront review subcommittee hold off on backing the Tamar project until further information can be provided.

"Before the government can clearly state the arrangement and the planning issue of the present central government offices, and carries out a proper environmental impact assessment, and clearly states the urgency and need for building a new government headquarters at Tamar, this committee cannot support the building of the central government offices at Tamar," the motion stated.

The motion was passed by three lawmakers: Kwok, Albert Chan (independent) and Alan Leong (Civic Party). Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Wing- tat and Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong lawmaker Choy So-yuk - both present when copies of the motion were distributed - left the meeting before the vote.

The motion comes amid speculation that Chief Executive Donald Tsang has been intensifying pressure "behind the scenes" on political parties and leading businesses to back the Tamar project, in time for the June 23 vote by the Finance Committee.

At a press conference earlier, Civic Exchange chief executive officer and former lawmaker Christine Loh said her request to meet with Tsang was rejected last week because she did not support the project.

"I met him at a small private luncheon last Friday, and so I took the opportunity to ask him whether it would be possible to meet with him for a private discussion to talk about the Central outline zoning plan and Tamar," Loh said.

"He replied, and I quote: `I would only talk to you if you agree with me."'

Nevertheless, Loh and more than 20 other activists and members of the public marched into the subcommittee meeting to lobby lawmakers to join their cause.

Before her discreet exit from the meeting, Choy told government officials she hoped the administration would listen to the public's cry.

"The government should treat their views as different views, not as opposition," she said.

"These people are working hard to make Hong Kong a better place. They are not trying to overthrow you."

Leong voiced a similar opinion, saying he hoped the administration would "not treat objections as noise, or objectors as enemies."

Leong added the administration should furnish the public with details on the office space breakdown for the proposed headquarters "as soon as possible so that the points brought up today can be addressed and the administration can really convince the public."

But Deputy Director of Administration Susan Mak remained firm and said the subcommittee would be furnished with information regarding space allocation in late April, when the government is due to release its finance proposal for the project. Among the deputations in attendance Monday, only Hong Kong Construction Industry Employees' General Union chairman Choi Chun-wa expressed complete support for the project, saying it would help create badly needed jobs.

"The longer we debate, the longer people are out of jobs. This project will create many jobs for us," he said.

"No more debate, we are desperate and we need jobs."

Other deputations, while expressing sympathy, remained unswayed by the sector's plea. "While we're all sympathetic to the plight of the construction workers, perhaps that's a structural issue and should be addressed separately, not something to drive this project forward," resident Vicki Lukins said.

Meanwhile, in an interview on RTHK Monday Tsang reiterated that the government had "sufficient objective reasons" for the building of the new headquarters, and equated the Tamar project to strong governance.

"This project was approved years ago but was put on hold in 2003 because of cash flow problems. Now we need to make a decision."


----------



## hkskyline

*DAB Tamar U-turn for public good *
Friday, April 07, 2006
Hong Kong Standard

Putting public interest above politics was the reason for the sudden reversal of policy by the main pro-Beijing party to support the new government headquarters proposal at Tamar, a lawmaker insisted.

Lau Kong-wah of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong told the Legislative Council Finance Committee the 10 DAB lawmakers supported the creation of a new post to coordinate the plan.

Lau admitted the U-turn came after Chief Executive Donald Tsang's attendance Tuesday at the party's meeting, where he offered an olive branch in the form of a "core partnership relationship for long-term cooperation on all issues."

Lau said: "The people's interests steered us to support the Tamar plan funding request. Public aspirations had indicated a strong wish for an expeditious completion of the project regardless of the site's location."

Two days after Tsang's visit, the party announced its backing for the new post after receiving a written reply from Director of Administration Elizabeth Tse pledging the government will take into account the DAB proposal to build the headquarters in southeast Kowloon in the final report of all possible sites, to be made public in June.


----------



## khoojyh

[/QUOTE]


Victoria Habour-------------> Victoria River :runaway:


----------



## hkskyline

*Number crunch*
Donald Tsang is determined to push the first phase of the Tamar plan through Legco in a show of strong governance. 
Chris Yeung examines whether he has the votes he needs 
6 April 2006
South China Morning Post

A temporary venue for activities ranging from the 1997 handover ceremony to trade fairs and outdoor film shows in the past nine years, the Tamar site has been condemned as a disreputable landmark of the beleaguered Tung Chee-hwa administration. 

Refraining from revisiting the past official dilly-dallying over the plan to build a new government headquarters at Tamar, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen was full of determination in the past week, hoping to fast-track the plan as a showcase of strong governance. 

"This government," he told the Legislative Council during question time last week, "has often been told we had discussion without making decisions, made decisions without implementation." The message is unambiguous: now is the time for action. 

Mr Tsang insisted Legco gave consent to the project three years ago "but there is still opposition today. I think that has gone overboard." 

Against the backdrop of criticism by former premier Zhu Rongji directed at the indecisiveness of the Tung administration, nine years on, the fate of the Tamar site will be put to a vote tomorrow when the government seeks Legislative Council approval for the creation of a directorate post for co-ordinating the new government headquarters project. 

Although approval won't be sought until June for major funding for the multibillion-dollar plan, tomorrow's vote is seen as an indicator of the stance of major parties. 

Fears of a Legco veto have prompted the director of the Chief Executive's Office, John Tsang Chun-wah, to conduct negotiations with two major parties for a compromise in the past few weeks. 

The Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) has insisted the new headquarters should be seated in southeast Kowloon, referring to the Kai Tak site. The Democratic Party, which previously backed the Tamar plan, warned the party might now oppose the plan if its five-point counterproposal was not heeded. 

Support from one of the two major factions is crucial to securing a majority for its passage in Legco. The DAB has stood firm on its Kai Tak model. Core members hinted they would not necessarily oppose the Tamar plan if the government could come up with concrete plans to rejuvenate Kai Tak. The Democrats have also indicated room for conditional support. Chairman Lee Wing-tat said this week: "We do not oppose for the sake of opposition." 

While the government and the two parties were moving closer to a deal, environmentalists and a business lobby have cautioned against massive development in the area, which they say would aggravate air pollution and cause serious traffic jams. They have called for a thorough review of the development plan for the Central harbourfront area. 

A senior government source said: "Putting the Tamar plan back on the drawing board is a non-starter. We've finished all the planning procedures. The next step is to go to the Finance Committee for funding. 

"It's hard to say whether it will get enough votes in Legco. Things keep changing. Just look at the Legco vote on the constitutional reform blueprint," he said, referring to the embarrassing defeat of the government. 

Defending the Tamar site as the best option, the chief executive has argued that putting the three branches - executive, legislature and judiciary - together would enhance efficiency. It would be fitting to put the new government headquarters near Central, a symbol of the city's financial centre, he said. Importantly, the plan will create more than 2,700 jobs for the construction sector, which has not fully recovered from the 1998 economic downturn. 

But a high-ranking government official was doubtful about the way the decision on the Tamar plan had been made. 

"Yes, the issue has dragged on for many years. But it's not a case where we have ongoing discussion on the merits and demerits of the plan. Have we provided various options and made comparisons? Have we fully assessed its impact on society as a whole? Have we seriously studied the southeast Kowloon model? 

"I wonder why we need to put so many civil servants in Central. Some bureaus and departments should be relocated in other districts to better suit the needs of their work. 

"Few places in the world have their government headquarters in the city centre. Like the West Kowloon cultural district project, the Tamar plan should start afresh," said the official. 

Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, an Executive Council member and a political scientist, said the public did not seem enthusiastic about the debate on where the government headquarters should be seated. 

"People don't seem to have strong views one way or another. Probably the truth is that there is no absolute answer to the question of which is a better location." 

He said the government position on the Tamar plan had been clear and consistent. Its thinking is that extra office space is badly needed. Building a headquarters on the Tamar site could free up the Central Government Offices buildings and the Murray Building for redevelopment. 

"The situation remains as it has been {hellip} Government is adamant it has made its case clear. The DAB has explained its alternative model well. Environmental groups have stated their position," Professor Cheung said. 

"Given one or two more years for debate, the arguments will perhaps remain the same. I can understand why the government wants to take the project forward. There's no massive infrastructure project in the near future. Government needs to keep public works spending going if it wants to create jobs," he said. 

Unless the public agrees to leave the Tamar site as it is, Professor Cheung said it would make more sense for the government to be the developer to ensure concerns such as the protection of harbour views were addressed. 

The Democratic Party's Mr Lee said his members would consider supporting a middle-of-the-road package that includes drastically reducing the scale of the new government headquarters and keeping the Central Government Offices buildings for conservation. 

"The idea of turning the Tamar site into a huge recreation park sounds good. But I don't think the government will agree, even if we vote against the new government headquarters plan. It will lead to nowhere." 

Mr Lee said the Democrats were approached by John Tsang last month for discussion on a compromise. "[The] DAB has stood firm against the plan. There's a genuine possibility the project could be vetoed at Legco. We [the Democrats] are ready to be flexible if they respond positively to our demands." 

The Democratic Party has proposed turning the offices at Lower Albert Road into a museum. "There's a lot of collective memory about the open space outside government headquarters, where tens of thousands of people have staged demonstrations. It should be saved from demolition," he said. 

DAB vice-chairman Lau Kong-wah maintained on Monday its proposal to site the new headquarters in Kai Tak would serve the best interests of society. "The Tamar site can generate huge sums of revenue for the treasury. Officials will of course feel inconvenienced [if they have to move to Kai Tak]. But the overall interest of people is first and foremost in our consideration." 

Tuesday, however, saw signs the DAB might make a U-turn, after the chief executive took the unprecedented step of joining the party's central committee meeting to lobby for support. 

Chairman Ma Lik praised Mr Tsang for his sincerity; the chief executive described the government-DAB relationship as a "core partnership". 

The central committee said its party caucus in Legco could consider voting in favour of the Tamar posting tomorrow, if government responded actively to its southeast Kowloon plan. 

Political scientist Ivan Choy Chi-keung said: "Mr Tsang has already prepared a golden staircase for the DAB to climb down [from its opposition to the Tamar plan]."


----------



## FM 2258

khoojyh said:


> Victoria Habour-------------> Victoria River :runaway:



I think they should fill in those yellow and green areas. Is that what they're going to go ahead and do?


----------



## hkskyline

I doubt they'll do the yellow part. There was a lot of opposition for the Central Phase 3 Reclamation already. Even some of the green on the Kowloon side is contentious.


----------



## hkskyline

*Go-ahead for job brings Tamar HQ that little bit closer *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Saturday, April 08, 2006

After months of intense lobbying by the government, lawmakers have approved funding for an administrative post to oversee the implementation of the Tamar project, bringing one step closer to reality the administration's proposal to build its headquarters at the prime waterfront site.

The Finance Committee Friday engaged in a heated two-hour debate over the HK$115,000 government post, which was earlier approved by a subcommittee in February.

The proposal passed easily 36 to 8, with pro-democracy lawmaker Frederick Fung of the Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood, as the lone abstention.

Among the supporters were 11 lawmakers from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong.

They had changed their stance after Chief Executive Donald Tsang attended the party's meeting Tuesday to push for a "core partnership relationship for long-term cooperation on all issues." Party member Lau Kong-wah told committee members Friday: "Originally, we were against the creation of the post, but recently we had a discussion with the administration on whether the post could consider other options, such as the party's opinion to build at Southeast Kowloon instead.

"Our only criteria is that by June, the government makes public all its findings."

Lau's statement angered more than a few lawmakers, who accused the party of making excuses.

"I don't know what was said to the DAB to change their minds, but the government should tell the public and the DAB clearly whether it has decided to build at Tamar, or whether it is still studying other options," said independent lawmaker Albert Chan.

Committee chairman Emily Lau agreed with Chan, demanding Director of Administration Elizabeth Tse explain why the government had earlier indicated its "mind was set," but was now saying it had an "open mind."

Tse admitted: "I don't think we can say we have an open mind. I don't think there can be any negotiation about building at Southeast Kowloon. We want to persuade parties that Tamar is the right choice."

The responsibility of lobbying the remaining opposition parties, Tse said, would go to the holder of the new post.

She added, however, that the government would still "look at" and "actively analyze" different views put forth by members of the public.

Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Frederick Ma reminded members that the project would create an estimated 2,700 new jobs for the construction sector.

"No project, no jobs," he said. "If you don't give your blessing, then fewer jobs will be created."

But neither Ma nor Tse could guarantee that the project would use local labor and materials - as suggested by labor constituency lawmakers - saying that World Trade Organization agreements prohibited favoring local workers.

Those who opposed the proposal - including five members of the Civic Party and independent lawmakers Kwok Ka-ki, Albert Chan and "Long- hair" Leung Kwok-hung - remained firm despite the fact that they were a minority.

"The government should have understood long ago that its planning mechanism is outdated," Civic Party lawmaker Alan Leong said.

"In the past eight to 10 years, civic society has wanted more participating in planning."

Leung followed by questioning the practicality of approving the post before the project, calling it a "waste of resources on something that may not materialize."

And Chan waxed biblical, equating the chief executive to God.

"For a devout Christian, all honor belongs to God," he said.

"In Hong Kong, a lot of honor, power and privileges rests with the chief executive. Now the last remaining prime site is going to be built into government offices to give greater honor to him."

After the meeting, Kwok said he was "disappointed" but "not surprised" by the results.

"It's political reality. Most of the members who voted are not thinking about planning issues, but their own political agenda," he said.

"They don't have any principles at all."


----------



## hkskyline

*Tamar plan flaws outlined *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Monday, April 10, 2006










Braving fickle skies and droves of Sunday shoppers, a handful of determined lawmakers took to the bustling streets of Mong Kok to enlist the public's support in their quest to halt the Tamar development project.

Braving fickle skies and droves of Sunday shoppers, a handful of determined lawmakers took to the bustling streets of Mong Kok to enlist the public's support in their quest to halt the Tamar development project.

The Democratic Party's Lee Wing- tat, the Civic Party's Alan Leong and independent lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki jointly hosted an open-air forum to outline the main issues of the debate over the government's proposal to build its headquarters at the waterfront site.

The forum took place just two days after the Legislative Council's Finance Committee approved funding for a HK$115,000 administrative post to oversee implementation of the project.

Lee, whose party voted in support of the post, said the government still had to answer a number of issues before it could win the party's approval for the project - including concerns about the density of the buildings, the amount of open space, pedestrian accessibility to the harbor, and preserving the existing headquarters as a historical site.

"We supported the post, but it does not mean we'll support giving the government HK$4 billion to HK$5 billion in June," he said. "We hope by then they will have more detailed answers to the points we have brought up."

He called on the government to initiate an "active dialogue" with the public, saying he felt administrative officials and concern groups had reached an "impasse" in their discussions as "neither side appears to be listening."

Leong said: "People want to know that 30 or 50 years down the road, the next generation will be enjoying open public areas, not walking in a perpetual marketplace."

After explaining the Civic Party opposed the project because the government has failed to answer inquiries concerning its urgency and scale, Leong stood up and fired a barrage of questions at the gathering crowd.

"Does that piece of land belong to us? Don't you want to know who will be moving into it? Do you want to be able to walk to the waterfront? Are you satisfied with the information the government has given us thus far? Have you voiced your opinion yet?" Leong said.

"If you have opinions, express them in the next two months. Make some noise."

Kwok held up a poster illustrating the site, saying the government's plans to construct buildings between 130 meters and 160m tall will "create a wall" between Admiralty and the harbor.

"The government thinks it is compromising because it originally proposed 180m," he said. "But their approach is unclear, they have furnished us with very little information."

Bystanders said they felt the forum was "informative" and "compelling." Manager Yu Yaofeng, 28, said: "I had heard about Tamar before, but I didn't know a great deal about the issues."


----------



## hkskyline




----------



## spicytimothy

It's times like these that I wish the gov't more powerful and the Legco less antagonistic...

build them tall, build them all!


----------



## Marco Polo

All this recent land reclamation is a disgrace to Hong Kong. It simply makes is uglier and less friendly.
Sorry.


----------



## pookgai

When is the new Star Ferry Terminal opening?


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong harbours deep ambitions for wasteland sites 
Plans to transform prime areas will put the chief executive to the test*
By TOM MITCHELL 
12 April 2006
Financial Times

On days when the pollution is less severe, executives with a bird's-eye view of Hong Kong's harbour can discern three great scars on the waterfront. 

To the west, more than 100 acres of land have lain fallow for five years despite being designated as the site of a future "cultural district". To the east, golfers hone their driving range skills on the abandoned runway of Hong Kong's old Kai Tak airport, which closed in 1998. 

And in the heart of the territory's central business and financial district, an empty expanse of Tarmac marks the site of the former shelter - long since filled in - where Royal Navy ships once moored and where the Hong Kong government intends to build its new HKDollars 4.5bn (Dollars 580m) headquarters building. 

The Tamar site, as it is known, too has been abandoned for almost a decade, only sporadically serving as a venue for an outdoor film festival, rock concert or travelling circus. 

Since being selected last July to serve out the final two years of the term abandoned by his predecessor, Tung Chee-hwa, Hong Kong chief executive Donald Tsang has seized on two of these sites as testing grounds for what he has promised will be a new era of "strong government" and "effective execution". 

His administration, however, is already on the back foot. In February it said it would revamp its plans for the West Kowloon Cultural District, which was to host facilities run by some of the world's great museums, after local developers balked at the government's terms. 

Coming two months after the Hong Kong's legislature rejected a limited constitutional reform package, the West Kowloon climbdown marked the second big defeat of Mr Tsang's young administration. 

Now the focus is on the controversial new government headquarters at Tamar. Mr Tsang has pushed the project to the top of his agenda, in spite of concerns from a range of civic and professional groupings about the environmental impact the new headquarters and a neighbouring landfill project will have on Hong Kong's already blighted waterfront. 

A defeat would be the third strike for Mr Tsang, leaving him with precious few accomplishments less than a year before he seeks re-election to a full five-year term and it would also invite unflattering comparisons with his predecessor's ineffectual administration. 

"If Tamar fails, then what did he mean by 'strong governance'?" asks Democratic party chairman Lee Wing-tat, who has provisionally supported the new headquarters project. The chief executive's office counters that the West Kowloon Cultural District will be completed on schedule. 

"We have opted for a new development model and a steering panel was formed last week," a spokesman said. The Tamar project, he added, is merely being revived three years after Hong Kong's Sars outbreak forced its suspension. 

Failure on Tamar would augur badly for a raft of further initiatives that Mr Tsang intends to pursue. Some of these, including the possible introduction of a minimum wage and a new competition policy, are opposed by powerful commercial interests in the territory. 

The December constitutional reform package required two-thirds support from Hong Kong's legislature because it involved changes to the territory's mini-constitution, or Basic Law. 

With 25 seats in the 60-member legislature, the pro-democracy camp found itself in the unusual position of having enough votes to block a government bill, which it deemed too modest. 

For Tamar, Mr Tsang only needs the endorsement of a simple majority of the legislature. But even this target is proving elusive, illustrating the rising power of Hong Kong's political parties. 

The pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), which has traditionally supported the government on policy issues, wants the new headquarters to be built at Kai Tak, the old airport. 

The government hopes to build an ocean liner terminal there instead, and says a preliminary zoning plan for the area will be ready by June. 

The DAB's reticence has forced Mr Tsang to scramble to secure the support of a normally automatic ally and its nine votes in the legislature. While a final funding vote on the headquarters building is not scheduled until June, on Friday the government secured Legco approval to appoint a project director. 

With the DAB's initial opposition to Tamar softening, Mr Tsang will likely get his new headquarters building. But that will still leave hanging the future of two other wastelands on what used to be one of the world's most beautiful harbours.


----------



## _00_deathscar

Marco Polo said:


> All this recent land reclamation is a disgrace to Hong Kong. It simply makes is uglier and less friendly.
> Sorry.


Agreed!

Leave the flipping harbour as it is.

Soon we'll be able to swim across comfortably - and before you know it, Hong Kong's claim to "World's most beautiful harbour" will have disappeared. It's ridiculous.


----------



## FM 2258

Getting a building on reclaimed land must be EXTREMELY expensive.


----------



## hkth

khoojyh said:


>



Victoria Habour-------------> Victoria River :runaway:[/QUOTE]



FM 2258 said:


> I think they should fill in those yellow and green areas. Is that what they're going to go ahead and do?





hkskyline said:


> I doubt they'll do the yellow part. There was a lot of opposition for the Central Phase 3 Reclamation already. Even some of the green on the Kowloon side is contentious.


I agree with most of the hkskyline's points as the Gov't has already dropped the most of the yellow part of the reclamation as it was the plan for assuming huge population growth of HK. But I've no idea if there would be new reclamation plans for the Western part of the HK Island because the Route 4 (HK's highway) is connecting the western and the southwestern part of HK Island. Also, the remaining sections of Route 10, which is connecting between the HK Island, Lantau Island, Siu Lam and Lau Fau Shan would be built on those reclamed land. There're still some unknowns for those. :|

There are some mistakes from the Planning Department's map. The western part of Kowloon Peninsula and the SE part of tht Tsing Yi Island has been reclaimed for the Container Terminial. :|


----------



## hkth

Marco Polo said:


> All this recent land reclamation is a disgrace to Hong Kong. It simply makes is uglier and less friendly.
> Sorry.





_00_deathscar said:


> Agreed!
> 
> Leave the flipping harbour as it is.
> 
> Soon we'll be able to swim across comfortably - and before you know it, Hong Kong's claim to "World's most beautiful harbour" will have disappeared. It's ridiculous.


But do you know most of the HK's skyscrapers were built on the reclamed land? Don't forget HK is a hilly city and HK had to reclam the land in the past for making the population growth and the economy growth! :speech:

Nevertheless, I do agree that the reclamation has to be limited in the future as most people in HK are really concern the environment and the coastal skyline. :|


----------



## myf282828

HK needs Victory Harbour to be looked good. If the harbour getting narrower it won't make HK looked as good as today.


----------



## _00_deathscar

hkth said:


> But do you know most of the HK's skyscrapers were built on the reclamed land? Don't forget HK is a hilly city and HK had to reclam the land in the past for making the population growth and the economy growth! :speech:
> 
> Nevertheless, I do agree that the reclamation has to be limited in the future as most people in HK are really concern the environment and the coastal skyline. :|


Yea I realise that, but isn't the harbour narrow enough as it is?

What exactly are they aiming for here? A harbour narrow enough so that ants can jump across it?


----------



## hkth

_00_deathscar said:


> What exactly are they aiming for here? A harbour narrow enough so that ants can jump across it?


Most properly use those reclaimed land for the properties. :|


----------



## hkskyline

FM 2258 said:


> Getting a building on reclaimed land must be EXTREMELY expensive.


Not really. 2 IFC is built on newly reclaimed land. As long as the bedrock isn't too deep, then construction costs shouldn't be much affected.


----------



## hkth

RTHK news:
*Government again urged to modify plans for new HQ at Tamar** 2006-04-15 HKT 11:12* 

The government has again been urged to modify plans for its proposed new headquarters at Tamar. The call comes from the Chairman of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, Professor Lee Chack-fan, in the RTHK programme: "Hong Kong Letter". He said that while the Tamar site was suitable for the relocation of the government's Central Government Offices, space should be reserved for other purposes. Professor Lee also called on the government to build a harbourfront corridor linking Wanchai and Tamar for public leisure purposes.


----------



## _00_deathscar

WTF!

That's what I'm trying to do....(for my harbour design competition).

By the way, wouldn't the Government site at the waterfront look really nice from a skyline point of view?

Be similar to the Fullerton in Singapore (although differente purposes) - but if they used the same classical sort of design for it and lit it up with a golden hue light.


----------



## hkth

Delete it!!!


----------



## hkskyline

*Central bypass options set out Link to Wan Chai will eat up at least 11.5 hectares *
14 April 2006
South China Morning Post

The proposed Central-Wan Chai bypass will require at least 11.5 hectares of reclamation, a government-commissioned engineering report has found. 

Three types of tunnel construction were studied in the report by Maunsell Consultants Asia released yesterday, with two involving the demolition of the Island East Corridor from Victoria Park Road to City Garden in North Point. 

The three tunnel options will involve construction costs of between $20 billion and $28 billion and annual recurrent costs of $110 million to $125 million. The tunnel would require 15 hectares to 18.5 hectares of reclamation. 

Recreational features including a promenade linking Central and North Point, a green leisure zone, and a waterfront cultural district have been included in all three versions of tunnel option. 

Compared with the three tunnel options, the flyover is cheapest, costing only $11 billon to build and $75 million per year in recurrent costs. It also involves the least amount of land reclamation - 11.5 hectares. 

However, the consultants concluded that the flyover would have the biggest impact, not only visually but also by imposing constraints on potential harbourfront development. No recommendation was made as to which model the government should adopt. 

The report also concluded that the approaches requiring no reclamation were not feasible because of the constraints of existing buildings and infrastructure. A deep tunnel option was also ruled out because it was not technically feasible. 

Legislator Kwok Ka-ki said the government had yet to convince the Legislative Council on any of the proposals. "The government has to provide scientific data to prove that there is no alternative to reclamation," he said. 

The area of reclamation ranged from 10 hectares for the flyover option to 25 hectares for the road option, according to proposed figures released in January last year. The figures have since been trimmed down following opposition from harbour protection groups. 

The report will be discussed by the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, under the Planning Department, next week.


----------



## sharpie20

^^^ that's a lot of land wasted for tunnel development, they better find some alternate solutions or else the reclamation project will be mostly wasted.


----------



## hkskyline

The whole purpose of having more reclamation is to build the underwater bypass and connect the waterfront parklands. Ironically, the plan with the least reclamation will destroy the parkland purpose.


----------



## hkskyline

*Central & Wan Chai Reclamation Plans Map *
Includes Shatin-Central Link Alignment
Click for larger version :


----------



## hkskyline

*Tamar plan scaled down*
Hong Kong Standard
Leslie Kwoh 
Thursday, April 20, 2006

After months of heated debate, the government has unveiled a scaled- down version of its plan for a controversial HK$5 billion headquarters project at the Tamar site, but opponents insist the administration has "missed the point."
A new paper released Wednesday indicates a 10 percent decrease in floor area requirements from a 2003 estimate to 62,340 square meters of net operating floor area - but that is still a 60 percent increase on that available at the existing SAR Government Headquarters.

"In deriving this latest space requirement estimate, we have exercised the most stringent control," the government said in the paper. 

"We have stringently trimmed down bureau requirements, including both staff offices and ancillary facilities."

The scaling back did little to win over the Civic Party, which represents the government's most significant hurdle to securing support for the project after apparent U-turns by both the Democratic Party and the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong.

Civic Party member and lawmaker Alan Leong Kah-kit, who sits on the Legislative Council's planning, lands and works panel, promised "questions would be raised" at next Tuesday's meeting, when the panel is scheduled to discuss the paper.

"I think many issues raised by civic society stakeholders - for example, about traffic, planning, and air quality - are just glossed over," he said.

"So I hope this is just the starting point. In order to engage civic society meaningfully and genuinely, there must be a true dialogue. That is what society deserves." 

Leong added that his party is organizing such a dialogue for next month. 

The paper also fails to answer environmental and traffic queries raised by local concern groups, said fellow Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet- mee, adding that is one major reason the party cannot support the proposal.

"It's not just about raising enough votes in the Legislative Council, but about answering queries backed by scientific data," she said. 

"The government has the duty to sit down and meet these groups." 

According to the paper, the traffic and environmental impact of the project will be "insignificant" as the proposed headquarters would only be "a modest office development."

In light of the lowered building height allowance, from 180 meters to between 130 and 160 meters, the development would attract only about 570 additional vehicles during morning and evening peak hours, or 1 percent of Central's total traffic flow, according to the paper. 

It also dismisses air-quality concerns raised at a Legco meeting earlier this month, saying unease about a "canyon effect" whereby air circulation is hindered by tall buildings is unfounded as the Environmental Protection Department "has advised that there is no existence of such a canyon in the context of Tamar."

At a press briefing, Deputy Director of Administration Susan Mak Lok Suet- ling confirmed the government has received four construction proposals since launching a prequalification exercise in December and that a contract would be awarded early next year. 

When asked whether the public will have a part in the process, however, Mak remained tight-lipped.

"There are many considerations we have to think about, the whole picture, not just the aesthetics," she said.

Civic Party lawmaker Ronny Tong Ka-wah said: "[The new proposal] simply demonstrates convincingly that the government is determined to go it alone without having to be too concerned with how the public thinks about it." 

He said the government has failed to respond to his party's demands for long-term planning for Central, and as a result, "at the moment, we have not been told enough to be convinced."

The government's failure to reveal its space requirements in terms of gross floor area may be a sign that "something strange is going on," said an architect, adding that gross floor area includes the entire building floor area while net operating floor area excludes public utility spaces such as staircases, lobbies, and lifts.


----------



## hkskyline

*縮減一成規模 政黨企硬叫價
添馬艦五障礙未除 *
20/04/2006










為爭取立法會支持添馬艦興建新政府總部計劃，政府不惜縮減總部一成規模，又考慮把大樓不多於兩成的面積建於地底，以進一步限制高度，盡可能滿足政黨的要求，但仍有「五大障礙」未掃清，令反對計劃的政黨繼續企硬「叫價」，或令計劃獲立法會高票通過的願望落空。

政府昨天向立法會規劃地政及工程事務委員會提交文件，提出添馬艦興建政府總部的最新規劃建議，新方案的淨作業樓面面積為六萬二千三百四十平方米，較○三年的估計下降約一成，只有制訂政策的核心辦公室才遷進新大樓，涉及員工約為三千二百七十人。

新政府總部可節省公帑，政府預計約有五千八百二十平方米外置於商業大廈的辦公地方將會騰出，每年可節省約三千一百八十萬元租金支出；亦會令政府物業可騰出約一萬二千七百五十平方米地方，包括修頓中心、稅務大樓、灣仔大樓內的政府物業等，讓其他分散地點辦公的部門遷入，因而有重置及退租機會，估計可節省開支每年達三千六百一十萬元。但律政司繼續留在金鐘辦公。

*大樓高度限160米內*
為確保山脊線下有兩成「無建築物遮擋地帶」，大樓高度限制在一百三十米至一百六十米；更考慮在招標文件註明，大部分停車場、機房，及部分共用設施如碎紙室、樓宇管理辦事處等可建於地底，有關設施建築樓面面積約二萬五千八百三十平方米，即大樓最多不超過兩成面積可建於地底。政府消息人士表示，在第三季完成招標後，設計才考慮諮詢公眾。

雖然順應政黨大多數的要求，但仍存有五大障礙，首先是高度限制。政府消息人士指出，地底興建有限制，如成本是地面興建同樣面積的兩倍，需要提供逃生樓梯和通風系統等，亦需更高能源費用。

針對民建聯要求在東南九龍建政府行政中心，但消息人士重申添馬艦是合適地點建政府總部，政府會把啟德用地發展為經濟蓬勃地方，政府不希望兩個工程都拖延。至於勞工界要求採用本地預製組件，政府仍研究法律問題和世貿規定，待六月向立法會財務委員會申請撥款前有決定。

*民建聯：無投票意向*
儘管政府讓步，但個別政黨仍然「企硬」。民建聯黨團召集人劉江華強調期望政府在東南九龍發展政府行政中心，帶旺當地經濟，在政府公布東南九龍計劃前，現階段沒有投票意向。工聯會立法會議員陳婉嫻原則上支持添馬艦工程，但期望當局交代使用本地預製組件。

民主黨副主席何俊仁直指新方案難以支持，要求最少把總部規模縮減三分之一，並把政府總部原址列為政府博物館。


----------



## hkskyline

*立會新樓容120席 *
20/04/2006









_特首辦搬進新政府總部後，特首不須在禮賓府辦公。 資料圖片 _

[本報訊] 政府為添馬艦工程上馬「搏到盡」，不單止順應外界訴求縮減新政府總部的樓面面積，同時又完全切合立法會行政管理委員會的要求，興建一座總面積達一萬六千零九十平方米的新立法會綜合大樓，預計可容納一百二十個議席。

行政管理委員會成員的李華明認為政府回應了議員的訴求，他說：「長遠計都要咁做，唔通二十年搬一搬咩！」勞工界議員李鳳英則認為政府預計可容納一百二十個議席的空間有「預見性」。

現時的立法會大樓前身是最高法院，八十年代後期轉為立法局使用，大樓的外牆已列為法定古。受制於大樓面積，現時立法會秘書處和議員辦事處的部分辦公室，分散設於附近政府總部西座和商業樓宇。

*面積符行管會要求*
為解決辦公地方不敷應用、議席及人手增加等問題，立法會要求政府在添馬艦興建新立法會綜合大樓，立法會行政管理委員會更認為新大樓應由低座及不少於一座高座辦公大樓組成，提供合共一萬六千零九十平方米的樓面面積。

政府目前拋出的方案，正正切合行管會的要求。在逾萬平方米的面積中，議員辦公室和設施共四千一百九十平方米，另三千六百四十平方米屬職員辦公室。


----------



## hkskyline

*Waterfront committee holds line on bypass *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, April 21, 2006

Members of the government-appointed Harbourfront Enhancement Committee have refused to be swayed by the administration's arguments favoring the construction of the proposed Central-Wan Chai bypass in the form of a tunnel.

"This is the biggest test the committee is ever going to face. We are talking about seven or eight years of construction along the waterfront," committee member and property surveyor Nicholas Brooke said Thursday. "If we don't get it right, we are going to get the blame."

Brooke and other members recommended reinstating the flyover proposal and a "shallow water" trunk road proposal as options for consideration.

A report released by government planning consultants last week indicated a strong bias toward three tunnel options, even though a flyover option would be half as expensive and could be completed one year earlier.

Consultants further narrowed down their preference to one tunnel option which they said would be the least expensive (HK$20 billion), take the shortest time to construct (seven years), and require the least amount of reclamation (15 hectares). Moreover, consultants added, it would create the least impact on the traffic and surrounding environment.

"We hope members carefully consider the options in terms of costs, construction time, and environmental impacts," urged Deputy Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Robin Ip Man-fai at Thursday's meeting.

Phyllis Li Chi-miu of the Planning Department added: "Reclamation is the most important factor from a planning point of view."

But Brooke disagreed, insisting that "sustainability for future generations" was the most important requirement.

"Let's set aside reclamation concerns, let's not try to focus too much on cost," he said, adding that the HK$8 billion cost difference between the government's preferred option and the more expensive options was "not a big consequence" when compared with the "long-term implications."

While all three tunnel options share the same alignment - along the Wan Chai and Causeway Bay shoreline - Brooke said he personally favored the more expensive tunnel option because it will allow for a wider harborfront promenade, and a larger water recreation and entertainment zone.

However, government officials continued to push members to reach a quick consensus, insisting that time for the project is running out.

Members are expected to brief the Town Planning Board on their progress today before presenting their findings to the Legislative Council in late May.


----------



## pookgai

Finally, some good news. I think it's pretty obvious that the most expensive option is the most beneficial to Hong Kong in the long-run. 

Hope this gets done as quickly as possible. It's such a shame that the harbourfront will be "under construction" for the next 7 years or so =(


----------



## hkskyline

*Lawmakers floored as Tamar HQ soars in size *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Lawmakers were shocked Tuesday to discover that figures previously released by the administration concerning the proposed new government headquarters at Tamar were "misleading."

Officials revealed that the gross floor area of the proposed HK$5 billion complex at the prime waterfront site is estimated to be 120,400 square meters - nearly double the area cited by the government last week.

An administrative paper released last Wednesday indicated that the new complex would be scaled back 10 percent from previous estimates to 62,340 square meters of net floor operating area, a term that excludes corridors, restrooms, stairwells and lift areas.

"Gross floor area includes everything - like the car park and electrical plant rooms - so the discrepancy can be very great, but it also depends on the type of buildings involved," explained Director of Architectural Services Yue Chi-hang.

This new figure would reduce the efficiency of the complex to well below- average, according to experts.

A building's efficiency is calculated by dividing the net floor operating area by the gross floor area. The resulting ratio - in this case, nearly 50 percent - determines how well a building's space is used. In Hong Kong, 75 percent is deemed "low efficiency," said one local property surveyor.

Moreover, as government buildings are not subject to the Buildings Ordinance, officials are not obliged to reveal full details of the floor area and may use terms such as "gross floor area" loosely, the surveyor said.

The revelation prompted more than a dozen lawmakers to fire questions at the administration at Tuesday's meeting of the panel on planning, lands and works.

Liberal Party chairman James Tien Pei-chun questioned the project's HK$5 billion pricetag - plus the HK$48.5 million recurrent expenditure - which adds up to more than HK$40,000 per square meter, according to the latest floor area figure. He asked for a detailed breakdown of costs.

"The Liberal Party supports your project, but that does not mean you can have free access to public money," he said. "We don't support the budget."

Project Director of the Architectural Services Department Peter Yuen Ka- tat said construction will cost about HK$13,000 per square meter, and that furniture (HK$500 million) as well as other facilities will add to that cost.

Pressed further, he admitted he could not offer the exact breakdown of the HK$5 billion price and will have to respond later.

Pro-Beijing lawmaker Cheung Hok- ming, from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, demanded to know whether the government had studied the sustainability of the new headquarters to ensure that there will be no need to build another complex later.

Director of Administration Elizabeth Tse Man-yi said: "In terms of sustainable development, we don't have any concrete figures now. But we don't expect to have another new central government complex built 10 years later, so we are talking long-term planning."

She gave a similarly vague response to Democrat Lee Wing-tat, who asked about plans for the existing government headquarters at Lower Albert Road and Murray Building.

"We have to first see whether the new headquarters can be constructed before we do anything about the two sites," Tse said.

Legislators were skeptical about the government's refusal to provide details on space allocation and demanded officials specify which 3,200 civil servants are to be housed in the new headquarters.

"We have to make sure that all persons in the new complex are staff directly related to policy-making," Tse said, adding that only one third of all staff in policy-related bureaus will qualify for the move.

For example, she said, within the Economic Development and Labour Bureau, the port and maritime development office is "directly related to policy-making" and will be stationed in the new headquarters. The travel registration office, on the other hand, will stay behind.

The lawmakers requested an additional meeting before the administration submits its funding proposal to the public works subcommitee May 24.

DAB lawmaker Choy So-yuk and Independent lawmaker Albert Chan Wai-yip, both made it clear that more information is needed.


----------



## Rachmaninov

Huh??? So now it's 120,000 sq. metres instead of 60,000??

Weird...


----------



## hkskyline

*Activist quits `useless' post on harbor committee *
Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, April 28, 2006

Outspoken environmental activist Paul Zimmerman has resigned from the government-appointed Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, saying the administration's refusal to look at the "big picture" in terms of harborfront preservation has rendered his past two years of membership "useless."

"I've spent a lot of time on the committee, and I think it's time wasted," he told members at the committee's quarterly meeting Thursday.

"There are other ways for me to address the issue [of harbor preservation] that would cost me less time and would be more effective than the many hours I've spent here."

Due to a lack of leadership, the two- year-old committee had failed to work as a "proper interface" between the public and the government, he said.

For instance, despite his repeated calls for a review on the Central waterfront area, government members were obstinate about postponing the task until July - after the proposal for a HK$5 billion government headquarters at Tamar is expected to pass through the Legislative Council.

"So I'm not willing to sit here and waste my time if that's the attitude from the other side," he said.

He added that he and other activists would soon be holding several public forums on the planning of the Central harborfront to talk about the "real issues."

Zimmerman's relinquishment of the business representative post on the 29-member committee comes fast on the heels of his resignation in February from the executive committee of the Harbour Business Forum - two events he admits are related.

It also comes at a tense time when politicians and businesses alike are feeling the pressure to back the Tamar proposal, according to sources.

"Now it's up to them to find their own voice, to step up, and to not stand down when the heat gets too hot in the kitchen," Zimmerman said.

He added, in closing: "I look forward to working together with all of you, because I will definitely not shut up outside this committee."

Deputy Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Robin Ip Man-fai responded by gesturing at the handful of officials present at the meeting, insisting the government's support was more than evident.

"The committee has done a great deal in the past few years ... I cannot agree that not enough resources have been put in," he said.

Earlier in the meeting, committee members debated whether legal advice should be sought to ensure reclamation for the proposed Central-Wan Chai bypass corridor would pass the "overriding public need" test, in accordance with a 2004 Court of Final Appeal ruling. Since the ruling, reclamation works in Hong Kong have come to a standstill.

Government officials expressed an eagerness to consult lawyers for clarification on the term "reclamation."

They wondered, for example, whether pilings used to support a flyover or a pier would constitute reclamation as they would technically lie on the seabed.

But property surveyor Nicholas Brooke advised against going into such detail, warning that such an approach would steer the committee off-track.

"I caution against proceeding in too formal a manner and bogging ourselves down in fine print," he said.

"We should focus on the outcomes, and then market these outcomes to groups and persuade them they're in the best interest of Hong Kong. We need to convince them to adopt a pragmatic approach."

Zimmerman agreed, saying the 2004 ruling may not have considered reclamation for public needs, such as piers or other recreational facilities.

"The government is stifled right now. They're so worried about that ruling that they're not coming up with a strategy," he said after the meeting.

"We need to discuss principles during the planning stage - if you build more developments, you'll eventually need more roads, which means more reclamation."

He said that, while the building of the Central-Wan Chai bypass could be excused because it was proposed before the court's ruling, it should not be used as justification to pursue further reclamation in the same manner.


----------



## hkskyline

*Dishonourable politics will not buy Tamar credibility *
28 April 2006
South China Morning Post

It is extremely disturbing that the government has been offering all kinds of favours to political parties to gain their support for building its headquarters at Tamar. While unconscionable governments worldwide do this under the pretext "this is politics", it is dishonourable. 

The more the Hong Kong government proceeds down this road, the more obvious it is to right-thinking people that it has insufficient justification for the project. An honest approach would be for it to win public support on the merits of the plan. 

The government is reminded that power is not a matter of privilege but of responsibility. It owes the public openness and transparency, and it must stop trying to buy its way forward with political favours. 

A. CHUNG, Discovery Bay 

The Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong and the Democratic Party have suggested they will blindly vote in favour of spending $5.13 billion on a building of unknown width, height and depth that will steal the breeze from Admiralty - and the very people who voted for them. By doing so, they have indicated they will not defend our right to clean air. 

Tamar has been presented out of the context of the buildings that, taken together, will create a pollution canyon from IFC Two to Victoria Park. In the business community, this would be called a dereliction of fiduciary responsibility and lack of due diligence. 

Over the past few months, we have been speaking to the Legislative Council to carefully explain the "street canyon" effect. The concept is simple. Take two tallish buildings, put a road between them, and the pollution is trapped. The government's response is that gaps (roads) in the rows of buildings prevent them from forming street canyons. In other words, our chief executive is telling us that these areas are not pollution canyons because there are roads between the buildings. 

The two political parties must tell voters why they are not demanding to see an air ventilation assessment for the entire Central Reclamation Phase III and all the roads on the mountain side. They must do this before they vote billions to give the chief executive an edifice to his glory instead of spending it on a thousand other desperately needed projects. 

PHILIP HEUNG, Clear the Air 

The proposal to build the new government headquarters at Tamar has been discussed for years. Now that the government wants to go ahead, the community is divided into two main camps. One suggests the site should be put up for auction; the other that it be made a public park. 

As a resident, I disagree with the idea of auctioning off the site for commercial use, as the density of the development would be high. 

Building a park is a good, but unrealistic, idea. Land in Central is precious and the idea is not in line with the original outline development plan. Also, who would spend some 20 minutes walking from the Wan Chai or Admiralty MTR stations to visit a park when they can go to the easily accessible Chater Garden or Hong Kong Park? 

What can take both idealism and reality into account is building civic and community facilities, including the new government complex. Turning the site into a hub of civic activity would attract large numbers of people to the place, as well as to the waterfront promenade and sitting-out area. This way, the park would not become an isolated island. 

CHAN TAK-CHOR, chairman, Central and Western District Council


----------



## hkskyline

*Yau Tong project may be downsized *
Raymond Wang 
28 April 2006
Hong Kong Standard

A large consortium led by Henderson Land is seeking a breakthrough for its planned mega housing project in Yau Tong Bay, estimated to be worth HK$60 billion, after the Kowloon East project stalled last year because of a land reclamation controversy. 

Proposals for the much-awaited residential project _ which calls for the reclamation of 12.5 hectares of land from the sea and will transform Yau Tong Bay into a 22-hectare residential and commercial center _ will be submitted to the Town Planning Board within a couple of weeks, Henderson Land said. 

If the reclamation is banned, the company said it might just slash the size of the project in order to push ahead with the development of the former shipyard. 

"We will discuss with other owners of the Yau Tong Bay site regarding the proposals before submission," Henderson Land property development department general manager Augustine Wong Ho-ming said, without elaborating. 

As currently planned, the project will provide 10,000 flats in 40 blocks with a total gross floor area of 9.7 million square feet, of which 1.7 million sq ft will be owned by Henderson. 

The project is expected to be one of the biggest in Kowloon, coming in at about two-thirds the size of Tai Koo Shing, the largest development on Hong Kong Island. It will fetch nearly HK$60 billion, based on the almost HK$6,000 per square foot earned by the Canaryside development in Yau Tong. Other consortium members are New World Development, Wharf Holdings and some shipyard and timber mill owners. 

Despite receiving land reclamation approval from the Environmental Protection Department in 2002, the project was delayed when the government began reviewing all reclamation projects after a public outcry against filling in the harbor in 2004. 

In 2003, a court ruling against reclamation off Wan Chai said that any encroachment into the harbor had to be justified by a demonstrative overriding public need. While this does not cover the Yau Tong area, it did cause the government to rethink its approvals. 

But the consortium argued that their reclamation would be positive for Yau Tong Bay, since it would involve cleaning up heavy pollution left over from when the bay was home to a shipyard.


----------



## hkth

RTHK News:
*New proposal for development of harbourfront* 2006-05-03 HKT 18:45 

A group of harbour protection activists has unveiled an alternative proposal to develop the Central harbourfront. It proposes splitting the planned government headquarters at Tamar into several smaller buildings and constructing a waterfront boulevard.


----------



## ENDOPHINS

Central Pier @ 06/05/2006


----------



## hkth

RTHK news:
*Govt defends Tamar construction costs* 2006-05-07 HKT 18:59 

The government has defended construction costs for the Tamar project. It said 4.8 billion dollars was reasonable and similar to those for other grade-A office buildings in the private sector.


----------



## hkth

From news.gov.hk:
Tamar project construction costs reasonable


----------



## Manila-X

FM 2258 said:


> Getting a building on reclaimed land must be EXTREMELY expensive.


It is but that's where the city's current tallest building is at.


----------



## hkskyline

*Review seeks less cluttered waterfront - Means of lowering density of building in Central on agenda *
3 May 2006
South China Morning Post

A review aimed at reducing the density of the Central waterfront development, especially the amount of commercial space, will be launched after the government gets the funding it needs to build its new headquarters at Tamar. 

The Planning Department has confirmed it will in July commission a consultant to study ways to lower the density of buildings in areas in the third phase of a zoning plan for the Central reclamation. 

While Tamar will be excluded from the review, government planners will mainly focus on the four pieces of commercial land that will create millions of square feet of new floor space at the Central waterfront under the plan. 

The Legislative Council's Finance Committee will examine the funding for Tamar next month. The government has already secured enough votes for the plans to go ahead, with the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong and the Liberal Party having declared their support to the project. 

Political analysts believe the review is Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's latest compromise in his attempts to smooth the way for construction of the Tamar headquarters. 

Harbour activists welcomed the review, but said it should have been conducted earlier as damage had already been done. 

Ma Ngok, of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, said: "The chief executive sees Tamar as his major achievement. If major corporations and developers have problems with [too much] commercial space in Central, and if the government can do something to address their concern, he is prepared to compromise." 

The planning of the reclaimed land at Central has been a major concern of many groups such as the Harbour Business Forum, a coalition of 120 leading companies and business groups. The forum met Mr Tsang in March to request he conduct a comprehensive review of the plan. 

Mr Tsang used the meeting to express dissatisfaction at the lack of support from the business community for the Tamar development, and also expressed his unhappiness at the request for a review. 

A Planning Department spokesman said: "We will examine the design criteria, and refine the urban design framework of the waterfront with Central's landscape and public aspirations. I'm sure it will be less dense than before. But we're not prepared to change any land use. Commercial space will still be commercial space." He said the review would include a comprehensive public consultation exercise, and the result would be incorporated into the land leases. 

Paul Zimmerman, convenor of the Designing Hong Kong Harbour District group, said the review should have come two years ago. 

"At last, the government has realised the plan has serious problems {hellip} If they had started the review two years ago, we would not need huge roads along the Central waterfront," he said.


----------



## hkskyline

*Vision to carve up Tamar into five areas presented *
Leslie Kwoh 
4 May 2006
Hong Kong Standard

In a last-ditch effort to influence lawmakers against issuing a "blank check" for the proposed government headquarters at Tamar, a group of activists has hatched an alternative vision for the site and its surrounding areas that involve simple adjustments while conforming with the administration's current plans. 

According to the alternative plans _ unveiled Wednesday by Civic Exchange, Designing Hong Kong Harbour District and World Wildlife Fund _ the 2.2-hectare government complex at Tamar will be broken up into five units, creating more human-scale pedestrian spaces between buildings. 

An area for protesters called "Democracy Square" will be situated at the center of the site. 

The group said these changes will not increase the cost of the HK$5 billion project, and will lend a more "vibrant" feel to the area compared with the administration's current plans, which place the headquarters on one half of the site and a public square on the other. 

The plan retains the controversial dimensions for the headquarters _ a 120,400-square-meter gross floor area and a 20-story building. The Central- Wanchai bypass will also be kept, and no changes will be made to the water- edge of the Central reclamation area. 

The decision to go along with the so- called "government specifications" is not a sign of agreement but rather recognition of "the political reality," Designing Hong Kong Harbour District convenor Paul Zimmerman said. 

In order to win over the two largest political parties _ the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong and the Liberal Party _ Zimmerman said it was necessary to "include whatever the government wants because the parties have made the political decision to support the government." Only after lawmakers back the alternative vision can there be negotiation. 

"We are not selling out, we are just trying to get in the door. And to do that, we have to first make sure to conform with the government," he said. 

A previous alternative plan, called "Central Park," was launched by Civic Exchange in January but failed to win support. 

"A lot of people said it needed more developments," said Civic Exchange chief executive officer Christine Loh Kung-wai. "But we think any of these plans is a better plan than the government's." Zimmerman said he has presented the alternative plan to the DAB, the Liberal Party and the Civic Party, as well as government officials. A meeting with the Democratic Party is in the works. 

"Lawmakers were all very enthusiastic when they saw this. But they're under extreme pressure from the chief executive," he said. 

With regard to the rest of the Central waterfront, the alternative plan recommends the area between the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre and the Central ferry piers be studded with low-density, one- to three-story commercial buildings. 

The proposed "groundscraper" _ the long, two-story pedestrian deck connecting Statue Square and the Star Ferry _ will be cut from the plan after it received widespread criticism from the public, including members of the Harbour Business Forum. 

Instead, a ground-level plaza, complete with greenery and public furniture, will be built in its place. 

In addition, the proposed trunk road along the shoreline will be made into a tree-lined "ocean boulevard" with traffic lights and pedestrian crossings at street level. 

Any traffic congestion issues should be resolved by immediately extending the tram and MTR lines to the northern shoreline, the alternative plan said. 

"This is really a planning issue, but it has become a political issue because the government is rushing to get funding," Loh said. "If it were seen as planning, we think all the political parties would be happy to have the chance to see what the options really are."


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbour activists unveilown plan for Tamar HQ 
Groups call for 20-storey height limit and a zone for protests *
4 May 2006
South China Morning Post

Harbour activists yesterday unveiled a counterproposal to the government's plan for building its headquarters at Tamar. 

They propose that the future government headquarters should be no more than 20 storeys high and call for a "democracy square" in the middle of Tamar where protesters can hold demonstrations. 

This plan, jointly presented by think-tank Civic Exchange and the Designing Hong Kong Harbour District, includes a proposal for breaking up four major pieces of commercial land along the Central waterfront into smaller plots for gardens between shops and offices. 

"If the smaller government headquarters cannot accommodate all the civil servants they want to move to Tamar, the authorities can [accommodate them] at the current offices at Government Hill," said Designing Hong Kong Harbour District organiser Paul Zimmerman. 

The government will conduct a review of development along the Central waterfront in July, but this will be limited to studying ways to reduce building density in commercial zones. 

Civic Exchange chief executive Christine Loh Kung-wai said: "All the buildings are going to be low-rise. By making each plot smaller, there will be multiple ownership of land at the Central waterfront, instead of leaving land in the hands of the biggest developers." 

The activists will present their proposal at a public forum on Sunday at Caritas Community Centre in Caine Road, Mid-Levels. They will incorporate views gathered at the forum and produce a model of the site to visualise the plan. 

They also hope to present their plan to the Legislative Council before the public accounts subcommittee recommends funding approval to the government's Tamar development at the end of this month. 

"This is a planning issue, but the government turns it into a political issue and asserts heavy pressure on the legislators to approve funding in a short period. Whatever happens to Central harbourfront is in the hands of the Legislative Council," said Ms Loh. 

Meanwhile, the Civic Party said it would conduct a survey on Tamar through its newspaper, A45, published today. 

The party said it would include a questionnaire in the newspaper, in which members of the public will be asked for their views on the government's Tamar plan and whether they want a comprehensive review of development of the Central waterfront. 

The public can also express their views on whether Government Hill should be sold for commercial development. 

Also, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong said it would launch its own proposals for the Kai Tak airport site. 

DAB lawmaker Chan Kam-lam said his party still wanted the government to build its Kowloon headquarters at Kai Tak, through reclamation of the Kai Tak nullah.


----------



## raymond_tung88

hkskyline said:


> *Harbour activists unveilown plan for Tamar HQ
> Groups call for 20-storey height limit and a zone for protests *


LOL!!! Only in Hong Kong would they purposely put a "zone for protests". I can't believe Hong Kongers protest so much. They should be lucky as they have some of the world's highest standards of living...


----------



## Monkey

^ I think the right to protest is very important but it's ridiculous to demand a specific zone for it. Why not just protest in Statue Square in Central?


----------



## _00_deathscar

> LOL!!! Only in Hong Kong would they purposely put a "zone for protests". I can't believe Hong Kongers protest so much. They should be lucky as they have some of the world's highest standards of living...


It stops 'city shutdown' to be fair...


----------



## hkskyline

*Statistics for Tamar site challenged 
Development density for new government HQ, and $2b shortfall on the construction cost are contested by lawmakers *
12 May 2006
South China Morning Post

The development density of the Tamar project is higher than the government has revealed, legislators were told yesterday. 

Lawmakers also found a $2 billion shortfall between the construction cost and the money the government is seeking, and demanded a precise breakdown on why $5.1 billion would be needed for the Tamar development. 

Members of the planning, lands and works panel decided to hold another panel meeting unless officials provided satisfactory written answers. If the replies were accepted, the project would be submitted for discussion at the public works subcommittee meeting on May 29. 

The legislature's Finance Committee will vote on the funding on June 23 after the subcommittee endorses the project. The panel's vice-chairman, Patrick Lau Sau-shing, said he had found that Tamar's plot ratio should be 7.3, instead of 5.7 announced by the government. 

The discovery came as the administration released the gross floor area of the proposed government headquarters and the Legco building. 

The government offices will comprise 124,680 square metres and the Legco buildings 36,230 square metres. The Tamar site area will cover 2.2 hectares. Mr Lau said the plot ratio should be 7.3 - calculated by dividing the gross floor area of the government offices and Legco buildings by the site area. He also questioned why there was a $2 billion shortfall, saying the figures did not add up. 

He said with a total area of 201,910 square metres and a cost of $14,500 per square metre, the total cost should be around $3 billion, not $5.1 billion as suggested by the government. 

The administration yesterday failed to explain the difference in the plot ratio and funding shortfall. 

Mr Lau, a retired architecture professor, accused the government of misleading the public and the legislature. 

Meanwhile, independent legislator Kwok Ka-ki continued to question the government on why it had to move 3,200 civil servants to Tamar. Mr Kwok said his research on the number of principal officials concluded there were only 386. 

"Even if all the principal civil servants take their secretaries and clerks with them to the new headquarters, we don't need to move 3,200 people to Tamar," Mr Kwok said. The government said it would only move principal officials involved in policy making to the new headquarters. 

Twenty-one organisations expressed their views on the Tamar project yesterday. The Construction Industry Employees General Union was the only one calling for quick implementation of the project.


----------



## hkskyline

*Will this be the new face of Central? Activists warn of the impact if prime government site is exploited to the full *
20 May 2006
South China Morning Post

Three 70-storey towers providing 5.4 million sq ft of office space could be built on a podium at the site of the Central Government Offices if the land goes into private hands and is developed to its full potential, harbour activists warn. 

John Bowden, chairman of Save Our Shorelines, said the city would either have a three-tower development on Lower Albert Road that would be taller than The Peak, or four 50-storey towers which would create a wall effect, altering air flow and blocking the views of Mid-Levels residents. 

He described the group's estimate as conservative, since developers could easily boost density by increasing the plot ratio. 

"The [Central Government Offices] site is currently covered to less than 10 per cent of its potential," Mr Bowden said, adding that the site had no height restriction, while ridge-line protection was non-binding. Ridge-line protection refers to the recommendation that views to the ridges and peaks be partly building-free. 

Officials have so far refused to discuss the future of the site if the government moves its headquarters to Tamar. However, officials suggested last summer that selling the site would cover Tamar's development cost. 

The harbour group believed a podium would likely be built in any office tower development because it would create retail rental space. 

According to a government-commissioned report on the development potential of the offices' West Wing, released two months ago, there was retail potential if the site was used for commercial purposes. 

The report also said it was possible for developers to increase the site's density and plot ratio. 

"It is traditional for developers to seek to maximise the gross floor area and the plot ratio through the dedication of ground floor areas to public use and as a result, secure an increase in the gross floor area equivalent to five times the amount dedicated," the report said. 

"We would anticipate that much of the podium deck at the Lower Albert Road level will be dedicated to public use, and indeed, on the basis of some very preliminary calculations, it may be possible to achieve an increase in the plot ratio/gross floor area to the maximum permitted, namely 18:1." 

Mr Bowden said that relocating the government headquarters to Tamar "holds the potential for further damage to the environment if the land is sold for commercial redevelopment". 

He also warned of increased traffic congestion and an impact on air quality if the site was built to the maximum potential.


----------



## raymond_tung88

_00_deathscar said:


> It stops 'city shutdown' to be fair...


That's true. Even if they didn't designate a "zone for protests", people would normally just congregate in large, open public areas. Therefore, the new waterfront in Central would be a likely choice. Not to mention that if the government headquarters is built in Tamar, its naturally going to attract large crowds for protests.


----------



## hkskyline

*Construction cost for Tamar development project reasonable*
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Government Press Release

The Government dismisses today (May 24) as erroneous and misleading suggestions that the estimated unit construction cost for the Tamar development project is higher than that for the International Finance Centre (IFC) Two.

The comparison failed to take into account the fact that the development project covers not just construction of the Legislative Council Complex and the Central Government Complex, but also a 2-hectare open space, drainage and related works in the open space and two covered pedestrian footbridges. The latter items should not be counted into the unit construction cost. Besides, it should not be assumed that the contingency provision for the entire project would necessarily be spent or indeed spent on building works.

As explained in the paper for the Public Works Subcommittee, the estimated unit construction cost for the Tamar development project (around $11,600 per m2) is lower than the market comparator for Grade A office buildings (about $13,000 per m2). When quoting the market benchmark, the Government has drawn reference to the regular professional surveying updates published by Levitt & Bailey and Davis Langdon & Seah.

The Government has no basis to verify the figures quoted for the IFC Two development. In any event, given the wrong analysis on the Tamar development project, the Government cannot agree with the conclusions drawn.


----------



## Aboveday

May 28, 2006

Central harbourfront to be vibrant, attractive



The future Central harbourfront will be vibrant, attractive and accessible, Director of Planning Bosco Fung says, adding it will become a world-class waterfront with quality public and private developments in a luxuriant landscape setting.



Speaking at a press briefing today, Mr Fung said the area's land use framework is holistic and balanced, reflecting the community's aspirations for providing extensive public open space along the harbour, while maintaining the competitive edge of the Central Business District.



The illustrative concept for the new Central harbourfront has three design emphases, namely creating vibrancy and diversity; creating enjoyable public spaces; and creating a green edge to the harbour and the district.



Hong Kong icon

"The new harbourfront will be attractive in having a green unifying edge endowed with quality public and private developments in a luxuriant landscape setting. It will be vibrant day and night with a mix of uses and diversity of functions, inviting different activities and residents and tourists alike to the harbourfront," he said.



"There will be good access with the provision of multi-modal transport and comprehensive pedestrian linkages at different levels to bring people to the harbour. The new Central harbourfront will become a symbol of Hong Kong, with a distinctive urban form in harmony with the ridgelines and the harbour setting."



Mr Fung said the 11-hectare waterfront promenade, which is bigger than the eight-hectare Hong Kong Park, will offer residents assorted recreation with open-air facilities such as outdoor forums, amphitheatres, green open space, harbourside walkways and undulating lawns.



Leisure and entertainment activities, outdoor media shows and performances can be organised. Ancillary facilities for resting and alfresco dining will also be available.



3 principal corridors

The urban design framework is structured upon a waterfront promenade across the water edge, intersecting with three principal corridors linking the city with the harbour. All of them will terminate in the new harbourfront with focal points including the new Star Ferry Pier, public piers, plazas, and other activity nodes.



"The nine-storey office-commercial building linking Statue Square to the new Star Ferry pier provides a low-rise garden deck and an at-grade landscape walkway. The development would be a new unique building with cascading design, and extensive setbacks to provide garden decks, terraces and roof gardens," Mr Fung said.



Mr Fung said the land use zonings and other planning parameters including height restrictions laid down in the Outline Zoning Plans have provided a framework for the future developments.



Innovative ideas welcome

"Within the broad development framework, and provided the permitted uses and development intensity as expressed in plot ratio or building height as laid down in the OZPs are not exceeded, we welcome innovative ideas and believe there are no lack of design options which will best realise our planning vision of creating a world-class harbourfront," he said.



A bilingual pamphlet explaining the Government's planning vision has been published and a 3-D model to provide visual images of the new harbourfront area will be displayed at City Hall's Hong Kong Planning & Exhibition Gallery from May 31.


The Planning Department will undertake an urban design study to further refine the existing urban design framework and to prepare planning-design briefs for the key sites on the Central harbourfront to guide future developments. The community will be fully engaged in the study process.


----------



## hkskyline

Mr. Fusion said:


> I see... I don't know, personally I'd be willing to trade a little government "waste" on a developer to see something as spectacular as Foster's canopy and masterplanned structure built, but I guess the public thought differently. The govt. is going to eventually throw away money on something... I'd prefer it to be something globally unique and recognizable that everyone could enjoy. A little public input is great, but it appears they're having a little too much influence, which leads to indecision and mediocrity.
> 
> :grouphug:


Unfortunately the government's flawed development model inadvertently dragged Foster's canopy to the grave. Hong Kongers were excited about the canopy, but when the for-profit model was scrutinized (especially the commercial and residential portions of this 'cultural' district), somehow the economic feasibility of the canopy got dragged into the picture, even though Hong Kongers were well aware it would cost a lot of money to build it. But then, the government is full of money; they could easily have afforded it.

The controversy was never about the canopy, but rather why was the cultural district turning into a residential and commercial development project, and why would those portions subsidize the cultural portion when museums and the district would need a continuous source of funding from the government.


----------



## Mr. Fusion

^^ Yes, I'll never quite understand how the canopy's feasability was dragged into the argument. Very disappointing. 

Back on subject... Would it not make sense to finish smoothing out the Harbour's jagged edges with reclamation and then calling it quits? Not only would it help calm the waters that have gotten a bit choppy in some spots, but it would create a definitive line that says "do not reclaim beyond this point." It sounds like _some_ of the reclamation projects were aimed at accomplishing this. I think the biggest problem is allowing these rectangular plots of land to be reclaimed, sticking out into the harbour. Because it makes it all too tempting to propose "if we just fill in the spots between..." You know what I mean?

:grouphug:


----------



## hkskyline

Mr. Fusion said:


> ^^ Yes, I'll never quite understand how the canopy's feasability was dragged into the argument. Very disappointing.
> 
> Back on subject... Would it not make sense to finish smoothing out the Harbour's jagged edges with reclamation and then calling it quits? Not only would it help calm the waters that have gotten a bit choppy in some spots, but it would create a definitive line that says "do not reclaim beyond this point." It sounds like _some_ of the reclamation projects were aimed at accomplishing this. I think the biggest problem is allowing these rectangular plots of land to be reclaimed, sticking out into the harbour. Because it makes it all too tempting to propose "if we just fill in the spots between..." You know what I mean?
> 
> :grouphug:


The original plan was to reclaim from Central all the way to Causeway Bay and have a continuous waterfront and a highway underneath with entry points in Central and Causeway Bay. The plan called for significant reclamation and that got a lot of negative response. As a result, some legal proceedings were taken to stop certain reclamations and political pressure scaled back others, hence the whole scheme is somewhat fragmented right now.


----------



## hkskyline

*Pressure mounts to move PLA barracks *
12 July 2006
South China Morning Post

The government should enter discussions with the People's Liberation Army in an attempt to move the PLA barracks from the Central waterfront, harbour advisers said yesterday. 

The suggestion was made at a regular meeting of the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee, at which advisers were briefed on two harbour plans, one by the government and the other by four activists, including Society for Protection of the Harbour chairwoman Christine Loh Kung-wai and Paul Zimmerman. 

Adviser Nicholas Brooke, a surveyor in private practice, told the meeting it was time the authorities took up the sensitive issue. 

"I believe it is time we address the issue of the PLA headquarters," he said. "I know there are sensitivities involved in this issue, but the PLA should move out from Central so the land will be freed up when we're sorting out the future of the harbour front." 

He described the location of the PLA barracks in Central as inappropriate, saying: "I hope the government will have some high-level discussions with the PLA on the issue." 

A representative of the Hong Kong Institute of Planners, Chan Kim-on, echoed Mr Brooke's view. 

"The PLA barracks should not be in Central, so the plot should be freed up for us to have integrated planning for the waterfront," he said. 

Officials did not reply to the request for the barracks to be moved. Robin Ip Man-fai, deputy secretary for housing, planning and lands, ruled out major changes at the Central waterfront, stressing the existing zoning plan had undergone the required legal process. 

The Planning Department will conduct a review of the planning of the Central waterfront, but it will only cover designs. 

Central will have an additional 3.3 million sq ft of commercial space under the plan for the reclaimed waterfront. 

It includes a long, low-rise structure dubbed by planners as a "groundscraper" and by activists as the horizontal version of Two IFC. There will be a high-rise office tower north of Two IFC and two high-rise hotel blocks near Central piers number 4, 5 and 6. 

Andrew Thomson of the Business Environment Council said the groundscraper was against the principle of mixed land uses and diversified activities. 

Alvin Kwok Ngai-kuen opposed the hotel plans. He cited an earlier survey the harbour committee had conducted on the development of the Central pier area, in which the public opposed high-rises there.


----------



## hkskyline

*Sydney-inspired bid for harbor loses vote *
Leslie Kwoh and Albert Wong 
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, July 14, 2006

Reminiscences of childhood ferry rides across a wide "fragrant harbor" and the promise of Sydney's commercially successful marriage of waterfront preservation, failed to convince lawmakers of the need for a harbor district authority to oversee the future of Hong Kong's most famous asset.

While all the lawmakers agreed that the harbor must be preserved, the consideration of a specific harbor authority, proposed in a nonbinding motion Thursday, was opposed by mostly functional constituency lawmakers.

The motion, moved by independent lawmaker and Action Group on the Protection of the Harbour convenor Kwok Ka-ki, comes at a time when the government's consecutive unveiling of new waterfront proposals on both sides of the harbor have concerned environmentalists eager to prevent further reclamation.

Retired High Court judge Simon Li Fook-sean warned last month "that in due course, one will be able to walk from Hong Kong Island to Kowloon."

Kwok called on the government Thursday to set up a statutory body that could make legally enforceable decisions on waterfront developments. The authority was planned to comprise a mix of elected and government-appointed members including academics, business leaders and green groups - but would still be subject to government oversight.

Kwok said he was inspired by the body that has been attributed with the success of Sydney's Darling Harbour, as well as the failings of Hong Kong's advisory Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, established two years ago. 

Kwok said a harbor authority would help generate revenue for the government as well as preserve the harbor.

The Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority is responsible for Sydney's most historically and culturally significant waterfront locations. 

It is also one of the biggest landholders in Sydney, owning just over 400 hectares. Its A$1.1 billion (HK$6.45 billion) portfolio of commercial and noncommercial assets, that include the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre and Sydney Entertainment Centre, generated revenue of A$122 million for the year ending June 30, 2004. 

Opposition was led Thursday by Tommy Cheung Yu-yan of the pro- business Liberal Party, who introduced an amendment effectively canceling out Kwok's key proposals. 

Instead of a harbor authority, Cheung submitted there should be "extensive consultation, so that the government can adequately respond to the aspirations of the public when planning developments."

Representing the architectural, surveying and planning sector, lawmaker Patrick Lau Sau-shing said he supported all of Kwok's principles, but believed the government was already adhering to them and respecting the law as laid down by both the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance and the Court of Final Appeal. He voted against the motion.

Cheung Hok-ming of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong said the city's reputation as the "Pearl of the Orient" rested on the harbor, but said his party was unable to support the "controversial" proposal of a harbor authority. 

But two DAB members - Chan Yuen-han and Choy So-yuk, chairwoman of the environmental affairs panel - chose to back Kwok.

Raymond Ho Chung-tai, of The Alliance, said much work still needed to be done to improve the congestion problem in Central. 

"It will not be in the best interests of Hong Kong people to hold up all future developments over the harborfront," he said.

Responding to Kwok's motion, Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen Ming-yeung said in addition to meeting public demands for open space, Hong Kong must also maintain its role as an international finance center by keeping up with demand for commercial development. 

He said a harbor authority "is not applicable everywhere" and that it was more important to complete the various harborfront developments at the moment. 

With about two-thirds of legislators present, the largely pro-democratic geographical constituencies voted 10-2 in favor of Kwok's motion, but the functional constituencies voted it down, 5-13. 

The Liberal Party's amendment was also rejected, but by only a narrow margin. The functional constituencies voted in favor 13-5, but the geographical constituencies voted against 8-9.

Kwok shot back in his closing statement: "I think the happiest party today is the government. You will succeed, but you will have to answer to the public later."

Tommy Cheung earlier said he felt there was no need for a harbor authority as introducing "too many authorities" would only "slow down the process."

Cheung's criticisms angered Kwok, who Tuesday accused the party of giving in to the government's behind-the- scenes lobbying and taking out the two most important parts of the motion.


----------



## _00_deathscar

Turds.

They're going to ruin the harbour I tell thee.


----------



## Rachmaninov

I think they won't be reclaiming any more land in the harbour anyway


----------



## _00_deathscar

Rachmaninov said:


> I think they won't be reclaiming any more land in the harbour anyway


Give it two years when Hong Kong's booming and 'cramped' again...


----------



## sharpie20

Yeah it will be interesting to see how Hong Kong deals with the current and future booms in population and construction


----------



## hkskyline

*PLA unlikely to move out of Tamar site, says analyst *
16 July 2006
South China Morning Post

The PLA is unlikely to leave Tamar because its headquarters is strategically and symbolically important, says a military expert. 

The Admiralty barracks, which includes the former Prince of Wales Building, served as a command centre for British forces before the handover. 

Ma Ding-shing, a People's Liberation Army expert, said it served the same purpose today for the resident PLA troops. It was also an important forward base for the PLA, he said. 

The Phoenix Television commentator said: "The barracks not only has military value but there is a significant political aspect to this as well. 

"Hong Kong is not allowed to interfere with military or foreign relations matters, so it doesn't matter whether it is the government or Legco; they can suggest, but nobody can tell the PLA to leave." 

The comments were made as pressure mounts for the government to start talking to the Hong Kong garrison about a possible move away from Admiralty so the land could be freed up for harbourfront planning. 

Democrat Sin Chung-kai, a vocal proponent of the move, said the base did not appear to be used much. 

"From the outside there are very few activities," he said. "There aren't many people going in or out. There aren't that many places in the world where you can find the headquarters of an army in its central business district. You wouldn't find one near Wall Street in New York." 

Mr Sin said the government could buy the land back from the PLA and build a new barracks in a suburban area. A real estate agency estimated that the former HMS Tamar navy station was worth $22.5 billion. 

Nicholas Brooke, an adviser to the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee, said there was speculation in the property sector that the government had begun talks with the PLA about a possible move out of Tamar. 

"My understanding, and this is purely hearsay, is that the PLA is not particularly fussed about that location and would like in fact to consolidate its presence in Hong Kong," he said. 

"And the Chinese have always said they did not want an indiscrete presence here. They didn't build the building, they inherited it." 

Chan Kim-on, of the Hong Kong Institute of Planners, said the distinctive "gin bottle" shaped building should be preserved. 

A Security Bureau spokeswoman said: "The government currently has no plan to put any military sites to non-military uses." 

Questions submitted to the PLA's Hong Kong garrison were unanswered.


----------



## urban_phx

Kool project I think its great to reclaim land from the ocean since it covers like 75% of the planet


----------



## FM 2258

urban_phx said:


> Kool project I think its great to reclaim land from the ocean since it covers like 75% of the planet



:lol: Good point.


----------



## gakei

Photos taken in exhibition centre at City Hall.

Photos copyright: Hong Kong SAR Government





































The model of the proposed development scheme:


----------



## Rachmaninov

Nice pics!!

But what is that floor with a blowing-wind icon doing???


----------



## Aboveday

Rachmaninov said:


> Nice pics!!
> 
> But what is that floor with a blowing-wind icon doing???


that is a japanese fish ball. yumyum.

nice pic gakei!
I dont like this plan anyway,the color of the ground is weird,too many skybridge...I hope the Architectural Services Department will keep up their good work after the successful of wetland park...


----------



## jose_kwan

its soooooooo green ...
wow


----------



## Manila-X

The idea of this project is really nice and it provides more greenery in HK's waterfront. But I don't like the idea of having a mid-rise building infront of the 2-IFC. 

Watch out though cause that big green waterfront will ended up as "Little Philippines" on a Sunday


----------



## Manila-X

edit


----------



## hktreasure

wow~
the model is so amazing~


----------



## raymond_tung88

They're actually going to build what those rendering pictures show?


----------



## herenthere

*Memories of VH & Anger*

Wow, I cannot believe they will actually tear down the clock tower and pier. I was just there this past summer during the nighttime... 

It was so peaceful, with the pier's lights glowing gently and the harbor's waters lapping gently onto the wall. I remember feeling the night breeze blowing in and bringing a comfortable feeling unlike Hong Kong's daytime humidity. I remember seeing many young and old, locals and visitors, people and birds, strolling. I saw some holding hands, others taking pictures of the harbor and skyline. I recall seeing the Star Ferry traversing old Victoria Harbour, traveling the same path it did when I took my first ride. The memories...are so wonderful.

And now, those memories are being crushed by developers and big business, wanting to fill their pockets with more and more cash. The government and judges are not showing any sympathies towards Hong Kong's life giver and protector, nature's Victoria Harbour. They will not stop until one day there *will* be no need for a Cross-Harbour Tunnel or the MTR or any boats at all. For one day, the people of Hong Kong will literally be "united"; no more conservationists' groups, no more Save the Harbour foundations. Because one day I will be able to walk across from Hong Kong to Kowloon. Then, will everyone have nothing else to argue about-no more protests, no more hatred. 
Only for that one day. Then, we will start regretting and hating and protesting on how we failed Mother Earth by reclaiming all of that land.

Save Hong Kong's Victoria Harbour from demolition. Because you might wake up one day and find it is too late.

~Hopefully this will change the government's hearts, hearing a cry like this from someone who wasn't even born in HK, trying to save it.~


----------



## hkskyline

The local heritage and preservation movements seems to have taken off quite dramatically over the past few years. Sadly, much of the colonial architecture that adorned the waterfront has already disappeared. What remains are the less beautiful buildings such as the old Star Ferry clock tower and Queen's Pier. I believe focus isn't as much on the architectural merit, but rather the collective and historic memory these buildings have on the people. But protest groups seem to lump these two together to generate as much publicity for their cause. 

Keep in mind that the reclamation plans do not allow significant commercial constructions. In fact, the Central-Wanchai reclamation has very minimal developer interest because of the parkland plan (vs. Kai Tak and West Kowloon). On the other hand, the whole project seemed to have materialized because of a traffic need rather than a waterfront beautification objective. The latter was likely added on to appeal to the public interest instead.

Things are not that pessimistic. There are still a lot of Chinese-style villages in the New Territories with over a century of history.


----------



## raymond_tung88

hkskyline said:


> The local heritage and preservation movements seems to have taken off quite dramatically over the past few years. Sadly, much of the colonial architecture that adorned the waterfront has already disappeared. What remains are the less beautiful buildings such as the old Star Ferry clock tower and Queen's Pier. I believe focus isn't as much on the architectural merit, but rather the collective and historic memory these buildings have on the people. But protest groups seem to lump these two together to generate as much publicity for their cause.
> 
> Keep in mind that the reclamation plans do not allow significant commercial constructions. In fact, the Central-Wanchai reclamation has very minimal developer interest because of the parkland plan (vs. Kai Tak and West Kowloon). On the other hand, the whole project seemed to have materialized because of a traffic need rather than a waterfront beautification objective. The latter was likely added on to appeal to the public interest instead.
> 
> Things are not that pessimistic. There are still a lot of Chinese-style villages in the New Territories with over a century of history.


I think the architectural/ heritage preservation movement in Hong Kong doesn't work because the city is based on continuously changing and progressing. Not to mention many of the people in charge are business-minded and do not really express any sentimental feelings. That is the consequence of a financial city and a city that does not have enough land. You can't expect to preserve everything.

On another note, does anyone have any recent pictures of the reclamation efforts under way in Central/ Wan Chai?


----------



## hkskyline

*皇后碼頭拆件保留 日後中環填海區覓地重置 *
01月 23日 星期二 05:05AM

【明報專訊】政府表示，皇后碼頭必須清拆以配合發展，但建議保留碼頭內的鐵器和非結構部分，日後在中環填海區覓地重置。房屋及規劃地政局指出，政府會就天星鐘樓及皇后碼頭的設計意念和選址進行研究，年底有結果後，將申請撥款重建鐘樓及重置皇后碼頭。

立法會規劃地政及工程事務委員會今天將召開會議，討論皇后碼頭及前天星舊址的規劃安排。房屋及規劃地政局向立法會提交的文件強調，了解市民珍惜對舊天星鐘樓和皇后碼頭的回憶，但中環填海計劃已履行所有法律要求和諮詢程序。

*保留鐵器及非結構部分*

政府初步構思是把皇后碼頭內的鐵器和非結構部分，一件一件小心地拆除並妥善保存，包括繫船柱、鐵欄、「皇后碼頭」中英文牌匾、導航燈、登岸階梯的混凝土條等。至於皇后碼頭混凝土上蓋和混凝土柱，局方專業部門會與專業人士研究最好的保存方法。

天星碼頭方面，政府將物色適當地點重新搭建鐘樓，亦會與天星小輪公司商討如何將銅鐘重新裝嵌在新的鐘樓內。

*年底完成研究後申撥款*

重建天星鐘樓和重置皇后碼頭的設計意念和選址，規劃署會在即將展開的「中環填海區城市設計研究」中探討。並委任獨立顧問研究，預計於4月及8月安排公眾活動，包括邀請立法會、專業團體、公眾等提出意見。預計研究於本年底完成後，政府會向立法會財務委員會申請撥款，重建舊天星鐘樓和重置皇后碼頭可保留部分。

政府消息指出，基於皇后碼頭地段的地面、地底將興建隧道、水渠等，又位處P2道路網絡，就算原址保留，皇后碼頭將處於馬路中間，未必有合適功能，因此原址保留並不可行，政府計劃在中環填海區物色地方重置。另外，日後中環新天星碼頭旁的9號碼頭將成為公眾碼頭，功能與現時皇后碼頭一樣，故重置後的皇后碼頭會否維持舊有角色，抑或轉為展覽場地或博物館，政府未有定案。

*學者指未見數據支持拆卸*

捍衛天星、皇后碼頭行動發起人之一朱凱迪認為，皇后碼頭的價值在於其所在位置，她與大會堂、愛丁堡廣場和天星碼頭，形成一個建築群和具有歷史象徵的整體。他重申希望原址保留。

身兼古物諮詢委員會成員的中大建築系教授林雲峰則批評，「我們未見有數據、圖則，在工程技術上支持皇后碼頭拆卸的做法，拆卸是否無可避免？」


----------



## Myster E

Hey dude, in english please!  I can't read any of that!


----------



## gladisimo

We're talking about the Central one right? Not the TST one?

Personally, I believe there's gotta be balance between future and past, development and time must move on. I can't say I'm happy if they decide to tear down something like the TST clock tower, but at the same time I understand that as a city evolves, some history must be destroyed. I believe that preservation is good, to a certain level, but if overdone, then a city will not be able to evolve as well as it can. (Take many cities in the States, for example, many redevelopment projects are often hindered by protests, etc. for years, and slow it down).


----------



## gladisimo

Myster E said:


> Hey dude, in english please!  I can't read any of that!


Basically they're going under study to try to save certain artifacts from the old building and non structural parts and move it to the new building.


----------



## Joel que

gladisimo said:


> We're talking about the Central one right? Not the TST one?
> 
> Personally, I believe there's gotta be balance between future and past, development and time must move on. I can't say I'm happy if they decide to tear down something like the TST clock tower, but at the same time I understand that as a city evolves, some history must be destroyed. I believe that preservation is good, to a certain level, but if overdone, then a city will not be able to evolve as well as it can. (Take many cities in the States, for example, many redevelopment projects are often hindered by protests, etc. for years, and slow it down).


I visited HK last January,I notice there's massive "face lift" in central,is the parking lot going to demolish?


----------



## hkth

Gov't Press Release:
Close of tender for Tamar


----------



## hkskyline




----------



## gladisimo

Joel que said:


> I visited HK last January,I notice there's massive "face lift" in central,is the parking lot going to demolish?


No idea, I was there last summer and the Star Ferry was still landing in the old piers, though there was a bunch of construction going on. I know they were going to tear down the old building, but I didn't even know there was a parking lot... 

btw, i still think the new pier is ugly, it looks cheap and plastic, needs a bit of aging, I think


----------



## hkskyline

gladisimo said:


> No idea, I was there last summer and the Star Ferry was still landing in the old piers, though there was a bunch of construction going on. I know they were going to tear down the old building, but I didn't even know there was a parking lot...
> 
> btw, i still think the new pier is ugly, it looks cheap and plastic, needs a bit of aging, I think


There's a parking lot just south of the old ferry pier next to City Hall.










See red circle.


----------



## hkskyline

*專家建議物盡其用
紅磡海濱美化長廊擬通啟德*
05/03/2007
太陽報










【專案組記者潘嘉寶報道】政府有意在紅磡海旁打造長約兩公里的海濱長廊，長廊更會將尖東及啟德連接，但計劃需掃除海旁區阻礙維港景致的高建築物。參與規劃的專家認為需要移走國際郵件中心及九鐵貨運碼頭等建築物，同時應在長廊海旁舉辦各類水上主題活動，加強 「玩樂」功能，否則單線發展海濱長廊只會徒勞無功。

規劃署早前委聘顧問公司展開「紅磡地區研究」，計劃打造長約兩公里的海濱長廊，從西面起即紅磡火車站開始，至東面海逸豪園海旁區域。該署又計劃，當貫通尖東與紅磡海濱後，再與啟德海濱區連接。當局現正就有關研究進行諮詢，其中參與是次規劃的中大建築學系副臈授鄭炳鴻表示，現時紅磡海旁存有一些因素，令興建海濱長廊有一定的局限性。他舉例，位於紅磡香港體育館後、佔地逾十四公頃的國際郵件中心阻礙了海濱景觀：「紅館散場後，皷觀眾都唔知原來有個海景，畀郵件中心遮住畄。」因此，他建議將郵件中心搬走，重現景觀，刺激人流。

*加添水上主題元素*
另外，郵件中心附近亦有一個屬於九鐵的貨運碼頭，與恬靜的海濱格格不入，鄭建議可將部分貨櫃躉船遷至別的地方，亦可美化貨運碼頭內的空置貨櫃，例如改裝成銷售紀念品的小店，供遊人購物。

他續指，以往本港的海濱長廊大多欠缺特色及單調，「尖東海濱淨係得打手印砼特色」。因此，政府可以在紅磡海濱加添水上主題元素，如興建海上餐廳、辦水上活動及邀請團體舉辦文化活動等。現時市民可利用附近的行人天橋往紅磡海旁，但十分迂迴，而途中有不少大型天橋。他指出，政府其實可利用天橋底下的公共空間作為活動場地，讓團體、組織使用，但「政府比較因循，往往不能物盡其用」。

同樣有向規劃署提供意見的九龍城區議員蕭婉嫦表示，知道區內居民就政府興建長廊表示歡迎，她認為長廊一部分可從事商業用途，如經營咖啡店，一部分可作休閒之用。


----------



## hkth

RTHK News:
Plan to build 2 blocks in front of IFC2 comes under fire


----------



## hkskyline

The area in front of 2 IFC is quite empty at the moment. It can use some intensification to add more people flow to the area. It's a fairly good location, with ferry, train, and bus transport exchanges. I wonder how tall those buildings will be? There's a need for more Grade A office space in Central these days.


----------



## hkskyline

Just answered my own question 

*Planned buildings `will block sun, air'*
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, March 09, 2007

A number of legislators have opposed the construction of two tall buildings on Hong Kong Island's north shore facing Tsim Sha Tsui, saying they will have a wall effect and block air flow and sunlight in Central.

They also pointed out plans for these buildings were drawn up more than 10 years ago when the public had a different perception of town planning.

The objections were raised Thursday at a Legislative Council planning, lands and works panel meeting after the Planning Department raised a layout plan for a reclaimed prime site adjoining Central Piers No4 and No6 and the commercial site to the north of Two International Finance Centre. 

One of proposed buildings is an office block 28 stories high, while the other is an 18-story hotel.

Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong legislator Choy So-yuk said the buildings are too high and will create a wall-like effect and prevent the circulation of air while blocking out the sunlight from parts of Central.

"Some 10 years ago, the public was not aware of similar problems, but now it has different views about town planning," Choy said. 

Another DAB legislator, Chan Kam-lam, said the proposed site was intended for low-density development and should be utilized for both commercial and public use.

Independent legislator Kwok Ka-ki, a member of the Action Group on Protection of the Harbour, accused the government of looking at short-term gains instead of long-term benefits.

"I wonder if any international city would build two walls along the waterfront. It will block not only air ventilation but also the views from other buildings," he said.

"If one is looking for quick economic returns, then the best plan is to go 80 stories up. But it is significant the public no longer agrees with such buildings. We can't focus on short-term gains."

Kwok urged the government to reserve an open space for the public and to build commercial blocks in other places.

Planning Department chief town planner Phyllis Li Chi-miu said the proposed layout had been approved 13 years ago and had gone through the Regional Council. 

She also stressed there was a high demand for top-grade commercial buildings in Central.


----------



## hkth

Display for the design of the Tamar Gov't HQ


----------



## Manila-X

hkth said:


> RTHK News:
> Plan to build 2 blocks in front of IFC2 comes under fire


Definitely *not* a good idea!


----------



## hkskyline

WANCH said:


> Definitely *not* a good idea!


There is a great demand for office space in Central, which is pushing up rents and reducing Hong Kong's competitiveness. It's not just from a cost perspective, but with so much expansion in regional operations, some companies that are willing to pay a higher price can't find enough space to house them.

Having bus, ferry, and train connections nearby, that site has prime development potential.


----------



## gladisimo

WANCH said:


> Definitely *not* a good idea!


I don't know, it would reduce the prominence of 2IFC a bit, which, IMO (and only IMO, I totally understand the other POV) juts out a bit too much and is too "in your face" in the HK skyline right now.


----------



## raymond_tung88

Is that piece of reclaimed land next to the convention centre extension going to be reclaimed as well? I remember hearing somewhere that it wasn't...


----------



## hkskyline

raymond_tung88 said:


> Is that piece of reclaimed land next to the convention centre extension going to be reclaimed as well? I remember hearing somewhere that it wasn't...


No. That will stay as sea for now.


----------



## EricIsHim

raymond_tung88 said:


> Is that piece of reclaimed land next to the convention centre extension going to be reclaimed as well? I remember hearing somewhere that it wasn't...


This project, Central Reclamation Phase III, stops just pass the Citic Tower (the tall silver building.) 

But Wan Chai Reclamation Phase II proposes to fill that gap and on the other side of convention towards Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter. This project is under review at this moment.


----------



## herenthere

*Hong Kong party demands UN protection for harbour*

Thu Apr 12, 3:46 AM ET

HONG KONG (AFP) - Hong Kong's main political party called Thursday on the government to seek UN protection for the city's famous harbour, which is under threat from reclamation and development.
Protection of the harbour has become a key concern of conservationists in Hong Kong who view Victoria Harbour not only as a lucrative tourist asset but an essential part of the maritime city's cultural heritage. However, near-continuous reclamation over the past century has reduced the waterway to half its original size.

The Democratic Alliance for the Progress and Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB) urged the Beijing-backed government of the southern Chinese territory to seek World Heritage status.

In a policy paper the pro-government party, which dominates the territory's legislature, called on Hong Kong to follow the lead of neighbouring Macau and seek listing from the United Nations.
More than 20 sites of historical importance -- some dating back to the 16th century -- in the centre of the Macau, also a largely autonomous territory of southern China, were included on the list in 2005.

Listing obliges countries to protect sites from developers and plunderers, and makes them eligible to receive United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) grants.

Widespread public anger greeted the government's most recent reclamation of 23 hectares (57 acres) of land from the shore of the island's Central business and shopping district to build a road bypass to ease congestion. The works were agreed despite the government passing a law a year earlier that was designed to prevent further reclamation.

Until now, conservation activists have been drawn largely from opposition ranks and the save-the-harbour campaign has been labelled anti-government as a result.
"That the DAB has proposed this shows that the harbour's proper management is not anti-government or anti-development," said Paul Zimmerman, who heads Designing Harbour District, a planning group campaigning for better use of the waterway.

The DAB paper said Hong Kong could benefit from China's survey of sites it would consider proposing for listing with UNESCO later in the year.

Zimmerman agreed, saying other key Hong Kong heritage and sites of cultural significance, such as the space-age downtown HSBC building and Cantonese opera and tea houses, could also get a chance of protection.

"The point is, this sort of survey has never been done in Hong Kong," he said.

"The DAB proposal is excellent because it could get everybody -- the community and the government -- focused on what is worth preserving," he added.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070412/sc_afp/hongkongheritagetourismunharbour_070412074610


----------



## roneys_today

interesting stuff there.

going back to the footbridge thing, i fully appreciate how useful footbridges can be in HK, especially in the busier streets in central. they're amazing when you're in a rush and a godsend in a rainstorm. i just thought this one was a little unnecessary and was taking life away from street level for no real reason. i wondered whether it was to keep people away from the building works over the next few years. it would be a shame if this bridge stayed as it is when the waterfront park is finished.


----------



## hkskyline




----------



## EricIsHim

roneys_today said:


> interesting stuff there.
> 
> going back to the footbridge thing, i fully appreciate how useful footbridges can be in HK, especially in the busier streets in central. they're amazing when you're in a rush and a godsend in a rainstorm. i just thought this one was a little unnecessary and was taking life away from street level for no real reason. i wondered whether it was to keep people away from the building works over the next few years. it would be a shame if this bridge stayed as it is when the waterfront park is finished.


That section extends to the ferry is to keep people above ground all the way from the Central core to the ferries without walking up and down.

The footbridge will not be taken down even the waterfront project is finished.
There is no street life there anyways. The park will stop on the east side of that footbridge; and on the west will maintain as a roadway, bus stop and will be a highway interchange. Plus, under the bridge, there is a wide covered sidewalk as well. If someone prefers to walk at ground level, s/he can do it also.


----------



## hkskyline

*Who's guilty on the harbour? *
1 March 2007
South China Morning Post

Hongkongers concerned about heritage and the environment should spare a thought for Ho Loy, who led the protest against the demolition of the Star Ferry clock tower in December. She has been charged with two criminal offences: damaging the canvas covering the scaffolding at the fenced-off pier, and possessing an offensive weapon - a paper cutter - that she used to cut the canvas to gain entry to the clock tower. She pleaded not guilty and her case will be heard in May. 

The facts behind this unfortunate episode shows that the government is by no means blameless. 

The demolition of the Star Ferry and Queen's piers was planned as part of phase three of the Central reclamation. Although the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance was enacted in 1997, the government gazetted a plan in 1998 to reclaim 38 hectares of the harbour at Central. The Legislative Council condemned the plan, 45 votes to zero, which halted it. 

Those 38 hectares formed only a minor part of the 584 hectares of harbour reclamation that the government had gazetted despite the ordinance. 

In 2002, the government reduced the scale of reclamation to 23 hectares and submitted the new phase-three plan for public consultation and for approval by the Town Planning Board. But the government justified the plan with an incorrect interpretation of the harbour ordinance: showing some public benefit, it said, was enough to prove compliance with the law. That misled the board and the public. 

The government's interpretation was successfully challenged in the law courts by the Society for Protection of the Harbour. The court ruled that "public benefit" was not enough, and that an "overriding public need" for the reclamation must be established. 

Knowing only too well about the pending legal challenge, but before the courts could pronounce judgment, the government hastily signed the phase three contract with the current contractor. The government's action was challenged in legal proceedings by another contractor who had also tendered for the contract. 

The government lost, and was criticised by the arbitration panel for having entered into a contract with "undue haste". The government has not published the amount of damages it had to pay, but it must be in the millions. 

In subsequent legal proceedings begun by the Society for Protection of the Harbour, the court was confronted with a fait accompli. 

The government argued successfully that, because the contract had already been awarded, stopping the reclamation would be very costly. So the court refused to order the work halted. 

The conclusion is clear. The third phase of the Central reclamation was never properly considered by the Town Planning Board, nor was the public ever properly consulted. 

The government owes the community an explanation for its culpable and extraordinary behaviour in failing to comply with proper procedure. 

It has led to the loss of a major piece of Hong Kong's historic heritage, the Central harbour, and millions of dollars in damages being paid out of the public purse. 

Had the government followed proper procedure, phase three might never have been approved by the public or the planning board, and 

Ho's protest might not have been necessary. 

It is amazing that the government disregarded a planning board directive that the reclamation plan be reviewed - and a legislators' motion urging the government "to immediately suspend the demolition works of the Star Ferry pier and expeditiously convene an experts' meeting, so as to examine the various preservation options". 

By its high-handed and hasty demolition of the Star Ferry pier, the government again presented the community with a fait accompli. 

The clock tower is gone. And Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen expresses regret - but did not salvage matters when he could have.Christine Loh Kung-wai is chief executive of the think-tank Civic Exchange. [email protected]


----------



## herenthere

Not really sure what to say. I understand the need for more residential and commercial space in HK, but come on, when is the gov't or the ppl going to realize that reclaiming land has go to stop?!?! Nature was there for a reason: so we could conquer it; but there is also a point where we have to respect it or one day it will seek vengeance on our future and our children.


----------



## gladisimo

A balance between destruction and creation has to be observed. Personally, I think its time the government looked inwards and redeveloped land that's been there for 40 years or more. 

I know its probably tougher, more expensive, etc, but... if we keep going, HK wont have islands anymore, it'll all be just one fat piece of land.


----------



## hkskyline

Keep in mind where the reclamation is happening and the extent. Hong Kong has over 200 islands. It's not going to turn into one giant island any time soon. Major reclamation efforts are focussed on Kowloon (Kai Tak & Kwai Chung), Hong Kong Island (north shore projects), and Chek Lap Kok (proposed 3rd runway). These are the more famous ones that will have a significant ecological impact.


----------



## hkskyline

4/19


----------



## EricIsHim

gladisimo said:


> A balance between destruction and creation has to be observed. Personally, I think its time the government looked inwards and redeveloped land that's been there for 40 years or more.
> 
> I know its probably tougher, more expensive, etc, but... if we keep going, HK wont have islands anymore, it'll all be just one fat piece of land.


That point has come. Reclamation on both sides of Victoria Harbour has come to the end; and will not have further reclamation after the Central and Wan Chai reclamation projects are done in the next decade or two. HKers have recongized the problem of over reclamation; but we have to do these last two to three reclamation projects to complete the reclamation project began in th 90s. 

The problems we have now were not recongized back 15-20 years ago. But the overall project master plan has Central Reclamation Phase I, II and III and Wan Chai Reclamation Phase I and II. We are in the middle of the entire reclamation project. The problems we are having today, such as fast moving water and dead water, are supposed to be temproary. If everything just stops and the shoreline is left as what today is, those problems will become permanent. We must go on with the ongoing project to complete the whole project.

On the other hands, we are start doing urban renewal in different parts of the cities. Some of the on bigger going projects include: Tai Yuen St/Lei Tung St, Wan Chai;Kwun Tong Town Centre; Fa Yuen St/Sai Yee St, Mong Kok; and Lower Mid-level, Central/Sheung Wan. Other small projects are also happening in Sham Shui Po, Tai Kok Tsui and western part of HKI.


----------



## hkth

RTHK news:
Activists in 11th hour bid to persuade govt to save Queen's Pier


----------



## gladisimo

hkskyline said:


> Keep in mind where the reclamation is happening and the extent. Hong Kong has over 200 islands. It's not going to turn into one giant island any time soon. Major reclamation efforts are focussed on Kowloon (Kai Tak & Kwai Chung), Hong Kong Island (north shore projects), and Chek Lap Kok (proposed 3rd runway). These are the more famous ones that will have a significant ecological impact.


Yes, I know, but it still amazes me how much land has been filled up over time. The natural shores of the most prominent islands have now been replaced by straight edges. 

I'm not saying tha tI dont like the new land being reclaimed, but looking back, it still strikes me time after time. I was looking at an old (1996) edition of Hong Kong Street (government publication thing my dad got for free) and comparing it to HK in wikimapia, and so much has been filled out, particularly Tsing Yi and Lantau North. 

BTW, are they still going to fill out the harbor between the runway and Kowloon Bay?



EricIsHim said:


> That point has come. Reclamation on both sides of Victoria Harbour has come to the end; and will not have further reclamation after the Central and Wan Chai reclamation projects are done in the next decade or two. HKers have recongized the problem of over reclamation; but we have to do these last two to three reclamation projects to complete the reclamation project began in th 90s.


That's good news, I realized (again) how far the reclamation was. I was looking at an old (1996) edition of HK Street and I saw that the harbour to the west (TKO and Tiu Keng Leng) was nonexistent back in the day, but now they are filled. 

I might post a picture of then and now for some comparison. I dont know if anyone else might, but I found it quite fascinating.


----------



## EricIsHim

gladisimo said:


> BTW, are they still going to fill out the harbor between the runway and Kowloon Bay?


Not sure yet. It depends on the finding form the EIS (environmental impact study.) The problem is that gap between the old runway Kowloon Bay has very limited water flow out to the main harbour trapping dirty water inside causing odor problem in the area.

But on the other side of the runway will not be filled as I know.


----------



## hkskyline

*Demonstrators protest Hong Kong pier closure *
Wed Apr 25, 2:25 PM ET

HONG KONG (AFP) - Protesters gathered on Hong Kong's downtown harbourside Wednesday night to oppose the closure of a historic pier that has become a symbol of a campaign to save the city's architectural heritage. 

Conservationists carrying banners that read "do not move" and "leave alone" called for the preservation of Queen's Pier, which was boarded up at midnight and will be demolished.

Its closure is part of a broader redevelopment plan that will see a huge swathe reclaimed from the famous Victoria Harbour to make way for a congestion-relieving bypass.

The nearby Star Ferry pier was demolished last year, sparking furious protests and scuffles between conservationists and police.

To avoid similar disturbances, the government has said it will consider dismantling Queen's Pier and rebuilding it nearby.

Rows over the demolition sparked renewed concern for the fate of Hong Kong's heritage buildings, which preservationists say are being rapidly destroyed to make way for lucrative real estate projects.


----------



## Aboveday

Central Pier Number 9(New) at night.
by gakei & Guia @ hkitalk.net


----------



## Aboveday




----------



## hkskyline

*Last effort to keep pier close to its current site*
Hong Kong Standard
Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Civic Party legislator Alan Leong Kah- kit is to make a last-ditch effort to keep Queen's Pier close to its present position and in line with other historic waterfront buildings.

Though the pro-government camp defeated an earlier attempt to preserve the pier at its current site next to City Hall, Leong will today propose a nonbinding motion at the Legislative Council calling on the government to adopt the Chinese Cultural Heritage Conservation Benchmark - which not only preserves the building or site, but also ensures it remains within its surrounding environment and settings.

Leong said Tuesday the government's handling of the Queen's Pier issue has been very unreasonable.

"As one of my friends has suggested, the government has already executed the queen but is now dragging her corpse around without saying where it will be buried," Leong said.

The government earlier said the building would be demolished to allow for the construction of a waterfront road, but that it would be reassembled at a suitable site. But it has so far refused to say where this site will be.

"The government says it understands the people's wish in conserving this cultural heritage. But actually, what it is doing shows it is merely following its preset policies. Officials are simply reluctant to change their plans and have no intention of making any adjustment."

Leong agreed his last-ditch attempt may not succeed given that councillors had vetoed a motion last month to preserve the building at its present site.

"Several landmarks in Central - including Queen's Pier, City Hall, Legco, the government headquarters and Government House - are a cluster of structures which were at the center of local political history," Leong said.

"Should the government have a real heart to preserve the place, it should not only preserve the structure of Queen's Pier, but also ensure it remains a waterfront building in line with City Hall and the Legco building."

Legco's public works subcommittee will next week examine the government's funding request for the dismantling of the pier, and the Antiquities and Monuments Office is to discuss next Wednesday whether the pier should be declared a historic monument.

Meanwhile, Leong said he was not angry or surprised at being dropped last week from the board of directors of the Urban Renewal Authority after two years of service.

However, he could not hide his disappointment at the government's mechanism in appointing members to statutory and advisory bodies.

"The government expects those who are appointed to statutory bodies to shut up and not express any opposing view to the public," he said.

"It doesn't really matter that I have not been reappointed to the authority. After all, if I really want to work for the people, then there is no point in staying there."


----------



## EricIsHim

^^^ That's explained why proposed P2 needs to be 100m wide. It is designed for tankers, not regular motor vehicles.


----------



## hkskyline




----------



## hkth

Gov't Press Release:
LCQ8: Wan Chai Development Phase II


----------



## zergcerebrates

Hong Kong is ridiculously slow on this project.


----------



## hkth

zergcerebrates said:


> Hong Kong is ridiculously slow on this project.


Do you think go fast on this project is good?????? Victoria Harbour would really become Victoria River if the original plan was confirmed!!! :bash:


----------



## hkskyline

The reclamation process is well under way. The area in front of Tamar is pretty much filled up and it continues west towards the new Star Ferry pier.


----------



## hkskyline

*Engineers propose $80m solution for Queen's Pier *
Hong Kong Standard
Saturday, May 19, 2007

The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers said Friday the best, cheapest and most pragmatic way to preserve the Queen's Pier would be to divide it into sections that could be dismantled and then reassembled after it was relocated.

"The whole process will cost about HK$50 million, which will include the dismantling of the pier, renovation, storage, reinforcement, foundation and consultant's fee, plus a further HK$30 million as a result of a delay of about four months to the road work, for a total of HK$80 million," said the institution's public relations committee deputy chairman, Yim Kin-ping.

The institution's view is similar to the government's position.

The government is expected to resubmit a request for HK$50 million to the Legislative Council public works subcommittee for the reconstruction of the pier. The request was withdrawn last week following opposition from several political parties.

Yim said the actual cost of the foundation work would depend on where the pier was relocated.

Should it be rebuilt on its current location, this would cost around HK$5 million to HK$10 million.

It would cost more if relocated to a site near Pier 9, one of the areas suggested by the Planning Department.

Another engineer, Wong Chi-ming, said it would be difficult to estimate the total cost of relocating the pier as much would depend on its future location.

Either way, there will be an additional cost of HK$100 million for the building of an MTRC tunnel to be constructed around 2016.

The Institution of Engineers said of the four proposals to preserve the pier, in-situ preservation by shifting the planned infrastructure work is technically not feasible.

Another in-situ preservation method which involves underpinning and tunneling would cost about HK$565 million with a further HK$300 million cost due to work delays and structural risks.

The engineers said in-situ reinstatement by rolling the superstructure away and rolling it back when the work is completed is not practical. The structure is 50-odd years old and the piles are eroding.


----------



## hkskyline

*Group seeks new ruling for Queen's Pier *
Hong Kong Standard
Monday, May 21, 2007

A pro-government Queen's Pier concern group has urged the Antiquities Advisory Board to downgrade the historic structure in a bid seen by observers as more of a move to offset mounting pressure for the pier to be declared a monument.

The Queen's Pier Grading Concern Group Sunday threatened to seek a judicial review of the board's decision to make the pier a Grade 1 historic building. Grade 1 status does not mean the pier's automatic preservation unless it is listed as a statutory monument endorsed by Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen. 

Group convenor Stephen Yam Chi- ming, who is also a member of the pro- government New Forum and represents the accountancy subsector in the Election Committee, is challenging the legality of voting procedures at a May 9 meeting of the Antiquities Advisory Board. Twelve people voted for the pier be declared a Grade 1 historic building, 10 people for Grade 2 and three for Grade 3.

Yam said the majority of the votes should be more than half the total number for the ruling to be convincing. Moreover, citing general meeting regulations and previous court rulings,Yam said the three votes for Grade 3 should be grouped with those for Grade 2, thus Queen's Pier should have been downgraded to a Grade 2 historic building.

Demanding a meeting with board chairman Edward Ho Sing-tin, Yam said his group will not rule out the possibility of seeking a judicial review against the legality of the votes. 

"We think the decision made by the Antiquities Advisory Board is problematic, it's not fair, [it's] illegitimate and unacceptable," Yam said. 

Chinese University political commentator Ma Ngok said the group's opinion suggested that Tsang's job would be made easier.

"The concern group's request to downgrade the pier's historic value is a relief for Tsang and it looks very likely he's not going to grant it monument status," Ma said. 

A date for the government to approach the Legislative Council for HK$50 million funding to relocate Queen's Pier has yet to be determined after the funding plan was withdrawn last week. 

However, the concern group's view is not expected to affect sentiment in Legco as each party's stand is already clear. 

"The government should be able to get enough votes to endorse its proposal in Legco," Ma said.

Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong lawmaker Choy So-yuk said while the party was likely to endorse the government funding request, she had yet to make up her mind. 

Pro-conservation activist Ho Loy described the concern group's decision as "immature" and "lacks respect for the Antiquities Advisory Board." 

"We have examples of Grade 2 or Grade 3 historic buildings being listed as monuments which is bound by law to be preserved and ultimately that's where we're heading," Ho said. 

"They're welcome to raise any kind of opinion because it will deepen public debate over such a controversial conservation issue. The process is raising the Hong Kong people's core values which is making us so unique. Preserving Queen's Pier is an investment to society as a whole, it's priceless." 

Asked whether the board's decision could be changed, Ho said: "I think it's going to be interesting." 

Queen's Pier has become the second battlefield for conservationists and the government over heritage conservation following the Star Ferry saga which saw the iconic landmark demolished amid a public outcry.


----------



## hkskyline

*大狀要求皇后碼頭再評級 *
05月 21日 星期一 03:30AM
星島日報報道

皇后碼頭早前被古物諮詢委員會評定為「一級文物建築」，有關注評級的大律師指當日投票程序不合法，指支持「一級文物建築」評級的委員未過半數，今日將約見古物諮詢委員會主席何承天要求重新評級，並不排除行動會升級，透過司法覆核爭取重新評級。

　　五月九日會議上，古諮會委員就皇后碼頭評級為一級、二級和三級的，分別有十二人、十人和三人。大律師任枝明昨指，按一般會議及常規，應把支持三級的票數，撥入支持二級的評定，「故從票數來說，支持二級的票數應該計算為十三票，而不是十票。」另一辦法是針對一級及二級評定，作第二輪投票。任稱如果委員會主席再次投票，相信結果不會是「一級文物建築」。

　　任枝明表示，當日有部分委員並不滿意投票程序及結果，認為「會議程序的合法性」也極為重要。他今日會約見古物諮詢委員會主席何承天要求重新評級，並且不排除行動會升級，「約見民政事務局 官員及申請司法覆核。


----------



## hkskyline

*New groups are at odds in widening battle over future of Queen's Pier *
22 May 2007
South China Morning Post

The battle over the future of Queen's Pier has widened with the formation of two new groups - one dedicated to the pier's preservation and the other determined to have it stripped of its recently acquired historical status. 

In one corner is the Queen's Pier Grading Concern Group, which has been set up to pressure the Antiquities Advisory Board to downgrade the pier from the Grade I historic status it was awarded two weeks. 

In the other is the Professional Group for Queen's Pier's Conservation, which wants the pier to stay where it is, possibly on the shore of an artificial lake within the reclaimed land that will soon surround the former landing place of royalty and colonial governors. 

Concern group convenor Yam Chi-ming, a barrister and a member of the New Century Forum, described the board's decision as "unfair, illegal and unacceptable" and threatened to take it to court if it did not agree to downgrade the pier. He said if the board had adhered to usual voting procedures, the pier would have been given a Grade II rating. 

Architect Tony Chan Siu-tung, one of about 10 architects and town planners who have formed the other group, said building an artificial lake would solve the problem of the pier becoming landlocked. 

"A big artificial lake can be built, making the existing shoreline the southern edge of the lake," he said, adding that the lake could also collect stormwater and moderate temperatures in the area. 

The group aims to find a feasible solution to preserving the pier. 

The antiquities board awarded the pier Grade I historic status two weeks ago in an unprecedented open meeting. But the government was quick to dismiss the importance of the grading, stressing it did not guarantee preservation. 

It is likely to resubmit its funding proposal for the pier's reconstruction to the Legislative Council's public works subcommittee tomorrow. It withdrew the request hours before the board's decision when it became clear it did not have enough support to pass. 

Leading solicitor and harbour protectionist Winston Chu Ka-sun has already threatened to take the government to court if it tries to pull down the pier.


----------



## Aboveday

Victoria Harbour Reclamation Site @ Google Earth.


----------



## hkth

Gov't Press Release:
LCQ6: Military Dock


----------



## hkskyline

*Last resistance 
A disparate band of conservationists are doing their bit to protect the city's disappearing history*
12 June 2007
South China Morning Post

On November 11 last year, an estimated 150,000 people savoured the mild autumn breeze blowing off Victoria Harbour as they enjoyed the historic last day of operation for the Star Ferry at its former home in Central. Disembarking at the landmark, they were joined by thousands of others flocking to the pedestrian walkway in front of the pier terminal to mark the end of an era as the Star Ferry Pier, Queen's Pier and clock tower were earmarked for demolition. 

As that historic day faded into memory, a small, diverse group of protesters and conservationists returned to the Star Ferry Pier in an attempt to stop the demolition. Despite their efforts, piece by piece the pier was removed. The emblematic clock tower was dismantled on the morning of December 16, and - to remove any thoughts the public might harbour of a possible resurrection - the debris was sent to a landfill inTuen Mun. 

But the protest over the action drew together a small but energised group of heritage protesters, including artists, tertiary students, former journalists and professionals. Their standoff with police in the final days of the pier's demolition drew more people, many of whom were first-time activists. 

Some protesters, such as Lingnan University cultural studies student Chan King-fai, were involved in the fight to protect Wan Chai's Lee Tung Street, also known as Wedding Card Street, from the Urban Renewal Authority bulldozers. Others were first-time protesters who had never considered becoming activists. Retiree Wat Yau-tin, 47, and self-employed Ma Cho-ming, who was born in 1954, the year the Queen's Pier was built, are two cases in point. Mr Ma is the group's cameraman and photographer, capturing each event and every encounter between the activists and officials. 

They were drawn to the movement after watching news bulletins showing heated stand-offs between conservationists and the police after the December demolition work. The like-minded protesters formed a loose alliance, dubbed Local Action, and announced in April that they would camp at Queen's Pier in an attempt to save it from demolition. 

The action group said their movement plans to "Safeguard the Queen, Experience the Queen and Transform the Queen". Their aim was to make the pier their home, and turn it into a makeshift conference venue, exhibition foyer, concert hall and even a football pitch. The idea is that it would have as many functions as possible to draw attention to their cause. 

Their fight is at odds with the harbour reclamation plan, which legislators endorsed in 2002, involving a mega shopping arcade dubbed the horizontal version of Two IFC and a 40-metre road linking the IFC towers with Admiralty. 

From the outset they refused to accept the government's technical explanation of why the pier had to go. Their dedication to the task has seen them transform the site. Walls at the pier are covered with photos, news clippings, poems and essays explaining their aims. And in preparation for an indefinite stay, the protesters have brought in four tents and furniture such as a desk, chairs, a bookshelf, a television and radio, fridge and a gas oven. 

To ensure a round-the-clock presence, group members take turns to keep watch at the pier, greeting visitors and answering press inquiries. Their numbers dwindle to one or two during the day and then rise to about five overnight, when some finish their work or studies. 

Icarus Wong Ho-yin, a second-year sociology and biotechnology student at the University of Hong Kong, is one of those who camps at the pier every night. Like his associates, Mr Wong, 23, had little to do with heritage protests before the demolition of the Star Ferry Pier. 

His participation began with a text a friend forwarded to him, calling for support for those at the pier. Mr Wong became one of 13 protesters the police removed from the terminal by force. He then participated in the 49-hour hunger strike to protest the pier's destruction. 

"The Queen's is more than a public pier," Mr Wong said. "People come here to have lunch, play chess, take a nap, fish. Its future is an issue on how we face and deal with our history, cultural and urban planning. I came to experiment with how to use public space and give new meaning to this place. Participation is crucial when we want to protect public spaces. I also see it as a learning process: learn how to observe, feel and use the space." 

A core member of the group, freelance writer Chu Hoi-dick, 29, said: "We didn't exist during the Star Ferry campaign. Now we have a team. The two campaigns have a totally different ideology." 

Protesters say the campaign last year to save the Star Ferry Pier and the clock tower was based on collective memory, while their latest movement is a crusade to safeguard the principle of public space; to stop the government from privatising common areas that have helped form Hong Kong people's identity. They have also called for city planning to be more democratic. 

Mr Wong disputes the notion of collective memory. "The Star Ferry Pier and the Queen's Pier are not so much about collective memory," he said. "Government uses collective memory because it is abstract, hard to judge, so they will be able to manipulate and achieve what they want to achieve. Our campaign is to break the myth of collective memory. As I've said, the issue is about history, culture and the people's role in urban planning; none of it is abstract." 

In a statement to explain their position, Local Action says the latest strategy is aimed at the future as well as the past. "Conserving this group of constructions and ensuring they and the land around them are maintained for public use would not only help the next generation to gain knowledge of our history, it would also serve to ensure Hong Kong people maintain our right to use the land and the harbour around this area," the group said. 

"Policies affecting space and city planning have a direct impact on the everyday life of people from all walks of life, particularly the working class, the poor and the marginalised. We are fighting for the right of Hong Kong people to take part in making decisions about the development of their city." 

Another regular face is 42-year-old interior designer Julian Fung Ping-tak. He visits the pier three times a day: before work, at lunch time and after work. He helps clean the camp site and often buys groceries.Mr Fung, whose participation was also prompted by a text message to support the Star Ferry Pier activists, spelt out a core principle of the movement. 

"We're not political parties, nor are we pressure groups. We will not become politicians," he said. "We just want our government to do a good job. When we achieve our goal, we'll become ordinary citizens again." 

But the movement appears far from over because Mr Fung says conserving old districts, such as Wan Chai and Sham Shui Po, is the next task. The group bolsters its cause in a variety of ways. They write to media outlets, lobby the government's Antiquities Advisory Board to award the pier Grade I historic status, and have helped persuade political parties to oppose the demolition plan. 

Their efforts have had some success. The Antiquities Advisory Board, though divided, gave the pier Grade I historic building status on May 9. The morning before the vote, objections from pan-democratic legislators and Choy So-yuk of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong forced the government to withdraw a funding application on how to deal with the pier. 

Although the government managed to have Legco's public works subcommittee approve the HK$50 million funding application two weeks later, the decision to go ahead with the demolition plan damages the credibility of the antiquities board. The Democratic Party and veteran harbour protection campaigner Winston Chu Ka-sun also warned that they might sue the government if it tried to dismantle the pier. 

Chinese University political scientist Ma Ngok sees the tug-of-war between the action group and the government as a battle of ideology. He believes Hong Kong will witness more conflicts between this group and the authorities. 

"There's a huge generation gap between officials and young people. It's not that the people are against construction of buildings in general. They're against development-led ideology. They are unhappy with the decision-making process as there has never been an open forum to adjudicate that development should be allowed to override other values." 

Professor Ma believes the movement will reshape the city's political agenda, forcing political parties to pay more attention to previously off-beat issues such as planning, environment, conservation and gender. He also thinks the government will find them difficult to deal with because they do not have political allegiances. 

"Ideologically, the government is losing this battle. The government can't explain why the road is more important than the pier. Officials weaken their own case as all they do is pay lip service on issues of heritage conservation and public participation," Professor Ma said. 

He said that although their number was small, their intensity and determination made the government unable to ignore them. "Public sentiment is changing. More people are asking why and what is happening at Queen's Pier."


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbor group urges public's voice be heard *
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, June 15, 2007

Reclamation to improve the harborfront should be carried out only if it is in the public interest with people involved at an early stage, according to a revised version of the Harbour Planning Guidelines presented to the outgoing Harbour-front Enhancement Committee Thursday. 

The version was presented during the last meeting of the committee, which had been given a three-year term.

"It's a fairly robust and implementable recommendation," Harbour Planning Guidelines review group convener Andrew Thomson said. 

In February, the draft was issued to 130 relevant organizations and stakeholders. It was also uploaded onto the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee Web site. Since then, 18 written comments have been received. 

Thomson said some suggested the guidelines be mandatory as part of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines of the Planning Department to ensure effective implementation.

Sustainability principles such as preserving the harbor, conserving cultural heritage and enhancing environmental quality have also been included.

Thomson said the revised guidelines should be issued to relevant stakeholders, district councils, developers and academics.

However, when Chan Wai-kwan, convener of the South East Kowloon Development Committee, asked whether there are concrete steps to incorporate the guidelines into the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, Thomson said he could not answer. 

He said the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee is merely an advisory body. "This goes beyond the mandate of [the committee], but we could encourage it."

Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan, permanent secretary for housing, planning and lands, promised the guidelines will be incorporated into the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. The government Web site would also provide hyperlinks to the guidelines posted on the committee's Web site.

Harbour-front Enhancement Committee chairman Lee Chack-fan said the public engagement process has been effective in soliciting opinions on major projects in the past three years, a view shared by government officials.

Ng Fong Siu-mei, of Friends of the Earth, suggested the incoming committee strengthen bonding with universities and create a space for students to offer their opinions.

Committee member Leung Kong- yui said the revised guidelines would be incorporated. 

He wished the proposed environment bureau could see the light of day and realize the chief executive's promise of sustainable development as soon as possible.


----------



## hkskyline

*Queen's Pier may find temporary home at Kai Tak airport site *
Hong Kong Standard
Saturday, June 16, 2007

Tseung Kwan O or the former Kai Tak airport site could be the temporary home for the dismantled Queen's Pier.

However, the final location will only be announced in a few weeks, the Legislative Council's Finance Committee was told Friday before it approved the HK$50 million funding the government has asked for its relocation.

Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet-mee repeatedly pressed Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen Ming-yeung about the storage of the dismantled pier.

She feared various parts could be left out in the open and exposed to the elements as were the statues from the former Tiger Balm Garden. Suen said the government was looking at a few locations for storage, but assured legislators the dismantled pier would not be battered by wind or the rain.

Later he revealed the possible sites at Tseung Kwan O and Kai Tak, but said details will be announced in a few weeks.

The planning chief remained silent when Eu asked for the pier's dismantling date or an assurance that it would not be dismantled until the storage location was revealed.

According to a paper submitted to the public works subcommittee of the Finance Committee, it will cost HK$10 million to preserve the pier's components and another HK$9 million to transport parts of the pier to temporary storage.

Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung and several other lawmakers also bombarded Suen with questions as to whether the government had no respect for the Antiquities Advisory Board, which last month had assessed the pier as a Grade I historical building.

Cheung also asked whether the Antiquities Advisory Board and the Antiquities and Monuments Office used different standards when grading buildings.

Only the latter has the authority to declare heritage monuments.

Permanent Secretary for Home Affairs Carrie Lam Cheung Yuen-ngor said a review of heritage conservation would begin in the next six months but she reminded legislators the board was only an advisory body while there was an internal mechanism when deciding which buildings could be declared as monuments.

She said if a building is deemed to have historical value, the Antiquities Authority - currently the Secretary for Home Affairs Patrick Ho Chi-ping - will declare it a monument without having to consult the board.

She admitted, in reply to a question from legislator Kwok Ka-ki, there were more than 100 Grade I buildings in Hong Kong that have not made the Declared Monuments list.

She would not say how many of these had already been demolished.

Lawmaker Choy So-yuk asked whether Queen's Pier could be kept at its original location like numerous Tin Hau temples in the city that used to be on the seashore but were kept in their original locations when land reclamation look place.

There was no answer.

After three rounds of questions, the HK$50 million request was approved by 28 votes to 18 with one abstention.

Queen's Pier is being taken apart to make way for the Central Reclamation Phase III.

It is to be reassembled in 2011 after the completion of the reclamation and underground work for MTR tunnels and a sewage system.


----------



## mr.x

so when is reclamation going to stop? 300 years from now, you wouldn't even need a ferry ride to get over...just walk over.


----------



## hkskyline

mr.x said:


> so when is reclamation going to stop? 300 years from now, you wouldn't even need a ferry ride to get over...just walk over.


The current reclamation is likely the last in the main harbour area. There are some sporadic plans elsewhere but those are fairly minor and the distance is still large between both coasts.


----------



## hkskyline

*Barracks cut for PLA in campaign to save harbor *
30 May 2007
Hong Kong Standard

Designing Hong Kong, a harbor concern group, Tuesday called for half of the People's Liberation Army barracks at Tamar to be converted into an open space and for a tram track to be laid through the new Central waterfront. 

Presenting 23 proposals to the Town Planning Board, the group also suggested Queen's Pier and the Star Ferry clock tower be rebuilt on original locations. The proposals include reducing a planned six-lane highway, called P2, to the minimum required for a dual two- lane road with a tram track along the middle. 

The chairman of the group's harbour district section, Paul Zimmerman, said the ideas were based on public opinion gathered over the past five years. 

Another board member, Markus Shaw, who is also chairman of World Wide Fund for Nature, said the key would be to reduce the number of cars. 

``P2 should not be the mass transit system. People should move on trams or the MTR,'' Shaw said. 

Shaw said the group had broken up two key sites in their planning _ the low-rise buildings, or groundscrapers, and the festival market _ to give Central a more distinctive look. 

The single huge groundscraper block will be separated into three blocks of buildings while the festival market site will be split into two. 

Civic Exchange chief executive Christine Loh Kung-wai said the group hoped some of the amendments would be included in the Central reclamation urban design study being conducted by the Planning Department. 

The group is also holding an urban planning and design competition to attract more ideas on the design for the Central waterfront. Prizes, including honorariums, amount to HK$1 million and the deadline is August 15. 

Meanwhile, several legislators have also questioned the need for the P2 road, which is a part of the proposed Central- Wan Chai Bypass. 

At a special meeting of the Legislative Council planning, lands and works panel, the Democratic Party's Albert Ho Chun-yan called for more options in the effort to ease traffic congestion in the Central district. 

Deputy Secretary for Environment, Transport and Works Philip Yung Wai- hung said the traffic volume in the district had already exceeded the limit and that a bypass was one way to alleviate the problem. 

Ho said a road-pricing system could help ease traffic congestion. 

He accused the government of pushing ahead with the bypass plan without exploring alternatives in an attempt to secure reclaimed land for business purposes. 

Raymond Ho Chun-tai, who represents the engineering constituency, said the bypass was the only way to solve the existing problem. 

He pointed out the government had looked into the road-pricing system, but concluded the system was too expensive for Hong Kong.


----------



## hkth

Gov't Press Release:
LCQ18: Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront


----------



## hkskyline

*Planners yield ground on views over Central reclamation *
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, June 29, 2007

Transport and Planning Department officials went on the defensive at a special meeting of the Legislative Council's planning, lands and works panel Thursday to discuss the Central reclamation project.

Lawmakers and representatives of harbor concern groups traded barbs with government officials in a heated exchange after activists took on government officials for not addressing public demands over the HK$3.5-billion project. Critics said mutual frustration had arisen from the public's loss of trust in the government's handling of the issue.

Representatives of 13 harbor concern groups grilled officials about the high plot ratio and building heights on reclaimed land in Central.

They voiced concern over the SAR being recently dubbed "the world's worst transportation system on a waterfront" by a leading expert on city space revitalization, and urged the government to consider their suggestions.

On the site close to Two IFC and the lands adjoining piers four to six, there are buildings that rise 12 to 28 stories. Ivan Ho Man-yiu of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects said these block seaviews.

Annelise Connell from Save Our Shorelines said more commercial buildings on reclaimed land would only generate more traffic and defeat the purpose of solving congestion through reclamation. "If you know the Road P2 is going to be full, then stop building more buildings there. This is not a sustainable concept at all," she said.

Paul Zimmerman of concern group Designing Hong Kong Harbour District said public consultation on the project, which began last month, has not included details of traffic arrangements.

In response, Deputy Transport Commissioner Lau Ka-keung said the Road P2 will reach only 70 percent of its capacity by 2016, and should be able to accommodate traffic needs.

Ophelia Wong Yuen-sheung, deputy director of planning, said the first stage of public consultation is under way and the Planning Department will take those views into consideration to try to improve the project gradually.

Lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki said since last year legislators had been urging the Planning Department to lower the plot ratio on future reclaimed lands but nothing has come through yet.

"More than 50,000 square meters of land for commercial use will make Central more congested than before. What have you done to lower the plot ratio with the Town Planning Board? Have you even consulted the people about whether they want to have shopping malls, hotels and offices there?" he asked.

"It's so hard being a civil servant," an agitated Wong replied, arguing that the Central district zoning plan had been approved by the Town Planning Board as well as Legco and the Executive Council years ago. The plan only stated the use of the zones without specific details of planning. She said the phase one public consultation will help understand opinions on the relocation of Queen's Pier and the demolished Star Ferry pier.

"We're planners with a conscience and won't just do whatever bosses say, if not, we will be ashamed to face the people. I cannot accept some people's insults against my colleagues. Planning is for the citizens and our children, there is no turning back after it's built. We have to keep a balance," Wong said.

Legislators also asked whether the winning designs for a Central reclamation planning competition organized by Designing Hong Kong Harbour District will be considered by the department. Wong said the designs will definitely be taken into account.

Bill Barron of Civic Exchange said the frustration felt by both government officials and harbor concern groups is merely due to lack of trust in the government by the people, adding that the project will have to be monitored.


----------



## Rachmaninov

Any building activities will have a potential to block seaviews from adjacent buildings, especially in a dense place like Hong Kong. I don't think lowering plot-ratios is really going to help at all...
And besides, it might be a better idea that part of IFC II is obstructed by some other building (provided that the building is nice of course) anyway...


----------



## hkskyline

*That sinking feeling Can you love a harbour? 
Many people do, and wish town planners did*
1 July 2007
South China Morning Post

Chan Tsu-wing, chief captain on the Star Ferry, hopes the cross-harbour service he has helped provide for 23 years will continue well beyond the next decade: but first it must survive the rapid deterioration of the harbour environment that has gathered pace in the past 10 years. 

Sailing at least six times a day back and forth between Tsim Sha Tsui and Central, the 52-year-old mariner has carried thousands of commuters and sightseers on the city's oldest transport fleet. The ferry service hasn't changed much in decades: it still has the familiar crewmen, the green and white boats, the star logo and the smell of diesel. 

But the ferry operator has been struggling. The changing harbour landscape has meant fewer passengers and forced the service to bid farewell to some core elements - the pier and clock tower in Central, for example. 

The disappearance of these structures - some call them part of the city's "collective memory" - may have been inevitable as the city reshapes and reinvents itself and reclaims its harbour - for better or worse. 

The city has always been thirsty for land, so reclamation became a normal practice and a winning formula for development. 

Captain Chan has seen the harbour's changes first-hand, from the deck of his ferry, and now he believes there is increasingly something wrong with the winning formula. 

"The harbour is getting narrower and the sea becomes so rough sometimes that you can't just sail through the waves," he said. "You have to slow down or the waves will hit the ship and make our passengers wet. 

"We used to tie three ships side by side at the pier, but no longer. The current has become too strong: the ships would smack into each other and get damaged." 

As far back as 13 years ago, the Star Ferry began to worry about the impact of reclamation - the shortened journeys, the removal of piers and the rough seas - which could threaten its continued survival. A senior executive joked that the ferries should take a "Z-shaped" route to give tourists more time for sightseeing. 

Such worries arose from proposed reclamation plans released since the 1980s, when the city was searching for space to cope with urban growth and expansion. 

One planning study proposed reclamation on an unprecedented scale, to produce 1,700 hectares of land. That is more than 40 times the size of the proposed cultural hub in West Kowloon. 

It envisaged shrinking the distance between Tsim Sha Tsui and Central by about a third - to less than 850 metres - while the harbour's twisting shoreline would be straightened into a neat channel. 

That almost happened. But a massive public campaign against reclamation, beginning in the mid-1990s and reaching its peak in early 2000, forced the government to revise and scale down its plans. 

But huge reclamations were rammed through elsewhere: for the new airport, on northern Hong Kong Island and West Kowloon. 

These projects marked the harbour indelibly - a long, fat 340-hectare strip was reclaimed in West Kowloon for the transport route to the new airport, and some of the Central harbour was reclaimed for the airport railway station. 

The impact of reclamation was not felt until a few years later, when the visual and land-use changes became starkly obvious. Rows of high-rise residential buildings were erected in West Kowloon in the post-handover years, while commercial towers were built on both sides of the harbourfront. 

"I get tense when I look at these high-rises surrounding us," Captain Chan said. "They are just too tall and close together. I would prefer shorter buildings, lower density and more green space in the city." 

In a city where land seems the equivalent of oil in the Middle East, it is no surprise that developers maximise the developments on every site. The tall office and residential towers they build have significantly modified the harbour landscape. The 88-storey Two IFC office tower and shopping mall became the city's tallest when it was opened in 2003, overtaking the 78-storey Central Plaza, completed before the handover. On the other side of the harbour, the 118-storey International Commerce Centre is taking shape on reclaimed West Kowloon land: it will be the city's tallest, and the world's third-highest, structure when completed. 

Together with Two IFC, it will form a gate at the western entrance of the harbour. 

But is this the only way to make a truly world-class city? Does it require erecting the world's tallest buildings and stuffing them with luxury offices and shopping malls - especially when the community has awakened to the adverse, "wall" and "canyon" effects of massed high-rises? 

Patsy Cheng Man-wah, a planning critic who was among the first to launch a campaign to save the Star Ferry clock tower, said: "The mainstream value of this society is that it's a waste not to maximise every single piece of land. And we are treating each site in isolation, without seeing the wider picture." Many people were pessimistic about ever achieving sustainable city planning in Hong Kong, she said. 

"It is very likely we'll see more high-rises along the harbourfront, erected bit by bit, including hotels and office towers in Central. It's less likely that we will see parks or other green spaces," Ms Cheng said. 

Despite such pessimism, the decade-long campaign to preserve the harbour has made people more concerned about how the harbour is envisioned, planned for and actually used. 

One person with concerns is Ng Kwok-kuen, 59, a ferry engineer who has worked for Star Ferry for 40 years. He used to swim in the harbour's once-clear waters and caught big fish in it. Now that is impossible because of pollution and reclamation. 

"Victoria Harbour is just like a fish tank," he said. "Its beauty is measured by what kind of fish you put into it." He fears the harbour will lose all its appeal for both local residents and tourists in future. 

Many ideas have been floated since 1997 to make the harbour area more attractive. Some proposals are drastic, such as building a bridge or an undersea pedestrian walkway from shore to shore, and a man-made beach in the inner harbour. 

But such suggestions have never gained public acceptance or even been taken seriously. And even some serious plans for the harbour, like the canopied West Kowloon arts hub project, have fared no better. 

The arts complex had been planned for a 40-hectare site that was the only remaining large piece of reclaimed land in West Kowloon. Planners saw it as a new harbour landmark, the cornerstone of the city's reinvented identity as Asia's cultural capital. But the ambitious plan was shelved after political rows, and the site remains deserted. 

Another prime plot of land is the old Kai Tak airport site. For nearly a decade it has been used as a dump for construction waste, a temporary car park, driving range and recycling centre. 

A final development blueprint for the site has not been decided. The latest proposal, still subject to public scrutiny, would see a cruise-ship terminal in operation by 2012, a sports stadium, office towers and residential blocks built to avoid blocking each other's harbour view. 

"We have already lost some battles for the harbourfront," said lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki, convenor of Action Group on the Protection of the Harbour. 

"Just look at West Kowloon: it's a jungle of concrete skyscrapers. The next battleground will be the remaining sites for reclamation on Hong Kong Island, in Central and Wan Chai, and vacant sites in North Point and Kennedy Town." 

The most complicated harbourfront development is the ongoing Central-Wan Chai reclamation, which faced a legal challenge in 2003. 

The challenge was based on the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, passed by the legislature four days before the handover. The law affirms the harbour as a public asset and natural heritage, and lays down a presumption against reclamation. 

Subsequently, Hong Kong's highest court established the test of an over-riding public need for reclamation in the inner harbour. But these steps have not blocked reclamations completely or put an end to development-related controversies. 

People are still questioning the need for a Central-Wan Chai bypass to relieve traffic, the removal of the Star Ferry and Queen's piers, and the construction of a massive new government headquarters at Tamar, a reclaimed area once used by British naval forces. 

Harbour conservationists continue to challenge the zoning plans and land uses for these sites, and to suggest alternative plans that honour the principle that the harbour is not just for and of the people, but that its future should be decided by the people. 

These activists dislike high-rise commercial developments and a reliance on cars in reclaimed areas. They would prefer to see greener, more open public spaces and emissions-free public transport. 

Such alternative proposals have been put forward to challenge the official plans for the Central and Wan Chai areas. But not even a crystal ball could tell ordinary users of the harbour what it will look like in the future. 

"It's not possible to turn the clock back," Captain Chan said. "But we can always look beyond the present. We might not like what we see now, but perhaps in 10 years, some new structures built on the harbourfront might become our 'collective memory' too." 

Some might argue that the harbour has not changed much over the years or will not change much in the future. But the thinking of the people who own this harbour has certainly changed, and will continue to change. 

And that will be the greatest challenge facing officials - delivering a world-class harbourfront that is vibrant, accessible and symbolic to its people.


----------



## Aboveday

Apr "updates" from the HK Gov.


----------



## Rachmaninov

Nice photos...


----------



## randolphan

wow the pics must be taken from a helicopter or something like that... guess that you are posh then, aboveday.


----------



## _00_deathscar

randolphan said:


> wow the pics must be taken from a helicopter or something like that... guess that you are posh then, aboveday.


They're photos taken by government officials.


----------



## hkskyline

7/14


----------



## hkskyline

*Queen's Pier activists offered talks *
17 July 2007
South China Morning Post

The new development chief has offered an olive branch to activists who have been occupying Queen's Pier for three months, proposing a private meeting with them at City Hall this week. 

But the activists say they are not interested in a private meeting with Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor and want a public one at the pier, which they are battling to save from demolition. 

Some also worry that the pier could be closed for demolition as soon as they leave it. 

Pier activist Chu Hoi-dick said he had received an e-mail from Mrs Lam and telephone calls from officials last week saying the government wanted to open discussions through a private meeting. 

If it goes ahead, Mrs Lam - who took over as secretary for development two weeks ago - would be the first official to meet the protesters since they began their occupation. 

It would also come just days before the government is due to unveil its plan for demolishing the pier. 

Mr Chu, a member of the protest group Local Action, said it would release a statement responding to the invitation soon, adding that there would be conditions. 

"The meeting should be held on the premise that preserving the pier on site is still an option, and it should be held at the pier publicly," he said. 

Mr Chu quoted the officials as saying they did not want the meeting turned into a City Forum where others could jump in and express their views at any time. 

"What's wrong with the City Forum?" he said. "Officials express their views at the forum on Sundays." 

The Legislative Council approved the funding for the demolition of the pier in May, although the Antiquities Advisory Board had listed it as a grade-one historical building. 

Ivan Choy Chi-keung, a political scientist at Chinese University, said Mrs Lam's move was in line with instructions from Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen that officials should get out and about and engage with the public. 

But he warned that negotiations would not be easy. 

"We are talking about social value, not material benefit," he said. "You cannot expect the activists to compromise quickly." 

A spokeswoman for the Development Bureau said the meeting was aimed at gathering views from the action group on ways of preserving the pier, and other conservation projects. She said opening the meeting to the public was negotiable. 

The government had already considered the group's proposal to preserve the pier on site, she said, adding that the reclamation project that required its demolition must go ahead. 

The reclamation is to provide a new Central-Wan Chai bypass.


----------



## hkth

Gov't Press Release:
Construction works for Central-Wan Chai Bypass and Eastern Corridor Link gazetted

Info from the Gazette:
Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance (Chapter 370) (Notice under section 8(2))--PWP Item No. 6579TH--Central--Wan Chai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link

Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance (Chapter 370) (Notice under section 8(2))--PWP Item No. 7677CL--Wan Chai Development Phase II--Proposed Road Works

Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance (Chapter 370) (Notice under section 9)--PWP Item No. 6579TH--Central--Wan Chai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link

Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance (Chapter 370) (Notice under section 9)--PWP Item No. 7677CL--Wan Chai Development Phase II--Proposed Road Works

Town Planning Ordinance (Chapter 131) (Notification under section 6(7))--Proposed Amendments to the Draft Wan Chai North Outline Zoning Plan No. S/H25/1


----------



## hkskyline

*Pier activists launch hunger strike *
Hong Kong Standard
Saturday, July 28, 2007

Three activists began a hunger strike on Friday with no set deadline to protest the demolition of Queen's Pier within the coming days.

Local Action core member Chan King-fai, 25, design artist Karden Chan, 24, and Wong Ho-yin, 23, announced their decision while sitting under the pier's sign.

On the "Protect the Queen" banner strung above their heads they had written "hunger strike" in red paint to show their determination.

Chan King-fai hopes that such peaceful and nonviolent action will draw the attention of the government and the Hong Kong people to the importance of historical preservation.

"The government wasn't chosen by us. All we can do is to use our humble and limited voices," Chan said.

"The pier is important to us and we will do our best to keep it." The trio said the hunger strike will continue until the government promises to keep the pier, adding that even if the pier is boarded up and they are dragged away by the police, the strike will continue.

Karden Chan and her fellow hunger strikers have been camping at the pier since April.

"This is the end of the road. The bulldozers are near," Chan King-fai said.

"If the project continues as planned, it shows the government does not love its people and does not value the city's past."

Pier conservationist and physician Lo Wing-lok voiced concern for the strikers' health given the soaring temperatures.

Lo, who intends to monitor them closely, called the situation "tragic" and hopes the government will heed the message.

Cheung Chor-yung, head of Sociology Studies at the City University of Hong Kong, said hunger strikes had proved effective for Mahatma Gandhi and the jailed members of the Irish Republican Army.

Cheung said the public may eventually feel the government is indifferent to its views, adding it may also reflect the lack of recognition of the authority since the government is unelected.

Patsy Cheng Man-wah of the heritage advocacy group See Network, lauded the protesters for going to great lengths to be heard.

"I respect them for risking their own safety in attempting to awaken the people's awareness.

"They may feel there is no other choice."

The Development Bureau believes communication is more effective. Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor will appear on RTHK's City's Forum and at a public forum on Sunday at Queen's Pier.

"The change has already begun," said Chu Hoi-dick of Local Action, the forum's organizer.

Chu does not expect to be able to convince Lam at the forum but views it as an avenue to argue his case before the public.

Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen Friday said verbal violence, threats or radical measures directed at officials are unacceptable.

Tsang said: "Engaging in logical discussion with civil society is what all principal officials and I believe. Uncivilized behavior will only block dialogue between the government and the public."


----------



## hkskyline

*A harbour concept is the first port of call *
19 July 2007
South China Morning Post

The Planning Department's brochure for the Central harbourfront envisions a "world-class waterfront". What could distinguish a waterfront as "world-class"? Do we want the waterfront restaurants and bars of Lisbon's Docas or the promenade of Shanghai's Bund? An icon like the Sydney Opera House or the shopping centres of Tokyo's Odaiba? What about Seattle's serene Sculpture Park or San Francisco's tourist-packed Pier 39? 

More generally, what do we really want to do at the Central harbourfront? Eat, play, exercise, live or work? And who are "we"? Locals, tourists, families or yuppies? 

When all that has been decided - and only then - can we ask: what facilities will we require? Open-air restaurants, enclosed retail space, low-rise hotels, loft apartments, parks, promenades or museums? 

What do we want? What kind of concept? Typically, this is where a developer would step in - creating a project aimed at specific users. But the fact that the Central harbourfront site is entirely new, very large, highly symbolic and broadly public precludes that option. 

How, then, should our government proceed? The Planning Department is expert at what it does, but it isn't equipped for this unusual task. 

If our harbourfront is to be engaging and vibrant - a commonly cited objective - someone must first develop a clear concept of the uses and users, then brief the designers on the buildings that the concept will require. Form should follow function. 

The right concept can easily endure imperfect design (Lan Kwai Fong), and good design can make a strong concept stronger (Shanghai's Xintiandi), but an extravagant design alone cannot save a problematic concept (the West Kowloon Cultural District). 

How can we find the right concept? The same way developers often innovate - by studying benchmark developments in other cities, selecting commercial and design concepts that fit, reinterpreting them for the market, and weaving them into a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. 

Who, then, can lead the search for our harbourfront concept? 

The Washington-based Urban Land Institute studied the question in 2005. It recommended that the Hong Kong government take its harbour redevelopment work "to the next level" by establishing one of four entities: a development authority, a development agency, a specially appointed "tsar" or a commission. 

If nothing else, wouldn't it make sense for our chief executive to appoint a commission to tackle the question: which concept? After all, Hong Kong has outstanding restaurateurs, creative developers and top hoteliers, for example. Shouldn't people with that sort of experience imagine the uses that can animate the Central harbourfront before the Planning Department's engineers start plotting the site's roads? 

Such a commission could liaise with like entities in other cities, benchmark comparable projects around the world, identify what works and what doesn't, and produce a development solution - a concept - that the chief executive could strongly endorse. 

We read routinely how Hong Kong will need to reinvent itself as China emerges. The harbour that drove our industrial success has tremendous potential to be recast as a symbol of our dynamic, modern and cosmopolitan city. 

It would be a terrible shame if design work on its most important component, the Central harbourfront, proceeded before we first attempted to answer the question: what concept do we want? 

Sitting in the midst of one of the world's most spectacular urban settings, the right waterfront concept, supported by good design, would most certainly rate as world-class. Better yet, it would offer us a great new way to experience and enjoy Hong Kong. 

Dick Groves runs RDC, a consultancy specialising in retail development


----------



## hkskyline

*Piecemeal approach not the way to revamp Central harbourfront *
25 July 2007
South China Morning Post

The Subcommittee to Review the Planning for the Central Waterfront (including the Tamar Site), is a subcommittee of the panel on planning, lands and works, tasked to review the planning for the Central waterfront. 

It has been receiving views from the public and interested parties on the Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront commissioned by the Planning Department in March. There is overwhelming support for the development of a world-class Central harbourfront with heritage buildings preserved. Views have been expressed on a wide spectrum of relevant issues including land use zoning and development parameters, the built form and layout of future buildings and transport infrastructure in the area. 

While we are delighted with the enthusiastic public participation, we have been disappointed that the scope of the study has been confined to refining the existing urban design framework and the preparation of planning/design briefs for specific sites. We have also been advised by the administration that unless there are very strong reasons, the study should not result in any major change to the maximum gross floor areas and building heights specified in the relevant outline zoning plans. The Central harbourfront is a very important part of the city. 

We consider that the vision of creating a world-class waterfront which is vibrant, attractive, accessible and symbolic of Hong Kong, cannot be realised under the current planning approach. 

We think it is necessary to revamp the planning approach for the new Central harbourfront. 

Instead of focusing on refining current planning and making piecemeal design briefs, the government should go for a master design for the entire Central harbourfront area. 

The government should launch an international competition, inviting design proposals and then draw up a master plan based on the winning design. 

There must be public engagement in planning major infrastructure projects. 

Lau Wong-fat, chairman, Subcommittee to Review the Planning for the Central Waterfront (including the Tamar Site)


----------



## herenthere

Maybe HKers should be more like the French. As I saw recently in the Sicko movie, one person said that the government is afraid of its people and that the people are willing to protest for what they want.


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> Maybe HKers should be more like the French. As I saw recently in the Sicko movie, one person said that the government is afraid of its people and that the people are willing to protest for what they want.


If majority thinks alike, and the government is going the other way, HKers do come out together and show the government what we want like the big demonstration in July 1 2003. But many times, the large crowd is not big enough to force the government think that's the "majority" and ignore the truth.


----------



## gladisimo

^^ Have polls been conducted to show what the "truth" of the public's opinion is?

To me, I think the HK government handles development matters quite well, compared to their western (American) counterparts. The bureaucracy here is less bullshit, and more business. People need to understand that it's time to move on. What do the activists want? A useless pier in the middle of the city where land prices are one of the highest in the world?

Somethings are worth saving, and I concede that if the majority of HK do want to save the pier, I suppose it should be saved, but the government is relocating it, making the best compromise they can between progress and history. 

Deal with it, that's life, things change.


----------



## EricIsHim

^^ No polls have been conducted to show the "truth" of the publics opinion; and the government has been saying the project has gone through all the consultation process since the 90s and no one has objected since then til now. If there is such a big controversy now, then I think there was a problem with the consultation process.

In America, development sometimes go very slowly is because people have the voice to say what they want and what they don't want through many many public hearings. A lot of the times, the public hearing actually turned the development down for different reasons. Developers may come back with another option and fit what the public wants; or they may trash their plan and sell the land. In Hong Kong, developments have been going quick and very efficient because there are no public hearing with no public input leads to no strong oppositions. As you said, things change, HKers are now a lot more care about our heritage and history; not just money. We have realized our root and want to save them. We know once the Queen's Pier is torn down, there is no way back. Indeed, existing Queen's Pier is at a prime location and land value; but don't forget the land isn't going for auction after reclamation. It's going to be for public use. The pier location is PROPOSED to be a roadway and some other infrastructure. All these future infrastructure can actually be relocated around and under the existing structure; it's not necessary to take the structure down. Many professionals have said it's possible and can do; but the government refuses to review the original design because of the cost. 

Queen's Pier is more than just a pier, it's a important part of Hong Kong History. It's the place where the Royal Family landed at HK, but also a public place for many HKer. It's part of a building complex with Edinburgh Place and the City Hall. It's a location of history; a location to educate everyone the HK history. It doesn't have to be at the shoreline to show the history; but it has to be at the same location. All Tin Hau Temples in Hong Kong were at the shoreline one point in the history; and they have become inland as more land are reclaimed. 

For a history structure, the history is not just the structure itself, location is also part of the history. Relocating doesn't equal to preservation; it's a wrong concept. It's a different structure, not the same one. Moreover, Queen's Pier is a precast concrete structure, there is no way you can disassemble the structure and put them back together. Relocation is rebuilding another "look alike" structure, not the original one. It's totally a lie the government can reassemble the structure at wherever they want.


----------



## hkskyline

I thought the plan was to cut up the structure, store it somewhere, and reassemble it like Murray House?


----------



## EricIsHim

hkskyline said:


> I thought the plan was to cut up the structure, store it somewhere, and reassemble it like Murray House?


Murray House is a brick structure which can be taken apart piece by piece and put back together like a puzzle. 

On the other hand, Queen's Pier is a single piece of concrete structure with re-bars inside. Once you cut concrete apart and break the re-bars, you can't put them part together at one piece, and basically you need to remove chunk of concrete and rebuild the re-bar inside then pour concrete back in for just one column. It's more like rebuilding rather than what the government has been saying "reassembling."

Think of it as a piece of rock. Once you cut a rock apart, you can't put the parts back together to form the original piece of rock.


----------



## _00_deathscar

EricIsHim said:


> ^^ No polls have been conducted to show the "truth" of the publics opinion; and the government has been saying the project has gone through all the consultation process since the 90s and no one has objected since then til now. If there is such a big controversy now, then I think there was a problem with the consultation process.
> 
> In America, development sometimes go very slowly is because people have the voice to say what they want and what they don't want through many many public hearings. A lot of the times, the public hearing actually turned the development down for different reasons. Developers may come back with another option and fit what the public wants; or they may trash their plan and sell the land. In Hong Kong, developments have been going quick and very efficient because there are no public hearing with no public input leads to no strong oppositions. As you said, things change, HKers are now a lot more care about our heritage and history; not just money. We have realized our root and want to save them. We know once the Queen's Pier is torn down, there is no way back. Indeed, existing Queen's Pier is at a prime location and land value; but don't forget the land isn't going for auction after reclamation. It's going to be for public use. The pier location is PROPOSED to be a roadway and some other infrastructure. All these future infrastructure can actually be relocated around and under the existing structure; it's not necessary to take the structure down. Many professionals have said it's possible and can do; but the government refuses to review the original design because of the cost.
> 
> Queen's Pier is more than just a pier, it's a important part of Hong Kong History. It's the place where the Royal Family landed at HK, but also a public place for many HKer. It's part of a building complex with Edinburgh Place and the City Hall. It's a location of history; a location to educate everyone the HK history. It doesn't have to be at the shoreline to show the history; but it has to be at the same location. All Tin Hau Temples in Hong Kong were at the shoreline one point in the history; and they have become inland as more land are reclaimed.
> 
> For a history structure, the history is not just the structure itself, location is also part of the history. Relocating doesn't equal to preservation; it's a wrong concept. It's a different structure, not the same one. Moreover, Queen's Pier is a precast concrete structure, there is no way you can disassemble the structure and put them back together. Relocation is rebuilding another "look alike" structure, not the original one. It's totally a lie the government can reassemble the structure at wherever they want.


Exactly - can't they kind of build around it?

Or does it come into the structure for the new highway?


----------



## ccsraj

Rachmaninov said:


> Shot today!!



This harbour is almost 150 years old and development and life of hong kong people has been centered around this harbour.Now this place is under threat because already half of its places has been taken by government for building projects.Measures has to been taken to protect this harbour.


----------



## hkskyline

*Temporary reclamation plan defended in court *
6 February 2008
South China Morning Post

Temporary reclamation work for the Central-Wan Chai bypass will be carried out in four phases, with reclaimed land removed as each section of the road's tunnel is completed, a court has heard. 

Details of the government's plans for reclaiming 8.3 hectares of seabed in and around Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter were outlined in the Court of First Instance yesterday. 

The Society for the Protection of the Harbour is seeking a declaration in the judicial-review hearing that the government's temporary reclamation plans fall under the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance. 

The ordinance established a presumption against all future reclamation of the harbour unless there was "an overriding public need" for the work that was supported by "cogent and convincing materials". 

Government counsel Jat Sew-tong said boats moored in each section of the typhoon shelter - with up to 3.9 hectares of moorings affected at any one time - would be moved into a temporary typhoon shelter during the work. 

A 4.2-hectare breakwater almost 500 metres from the shore, as well as two wave walls, would be built to protect the boats, including yachts from the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club, he told the court. 

Mr Jat said the temporary reclamation was not subject to the ordinance because it would be carried out strictly for building the road tunnel and not for forming land - the definition of reclamation in the statute. 

Nevertheless, he said both the temporary reclamation and the bypass plan had been drawn up with the ordinance in mind and the "overriding public need" for the road was not disputed. 

The method for building the tunnel had been chosen because it involved the least permanent reclamation and everyone involved had sought to minimise the extent of reclamation - both temporary and permanent. 

"The tunnel option is clearly the option that would serve best to protect and preserve the harbour," Mr Jat said. He called on Mr Justice Michael Hartmann to make a reference in his ruling to the "strong public interest in progressing with the project". 

The breakwater was part of the work, and evidence from the Marine Department indicated there were no viable alternative moorings at other typhoon shelters within the harbour, he said. 

But Anthony Neoh, SC, counsel for the society, said the project report on the bypass had stated that the "immersed tunnel" method, which did not involve temporary reclamation, could also be used in the typhoon shelter. 

"We have a very incomplete public consultation in relation to the method of construction," he said. "And the society remains unconvinced that the breakwater is the only viable alternative. The yacht club not only has moorings on Middle Island, but also in Sai Kung. 

"The government has not complied with its own procedures, which the public have a legitimate expectation to be followed. What is needed is a survey of all the options." 

Mr Justice Hartmann reserved his decision on the case.


----------



## hkskyline

*Study finds access to harbourfront limited *
21 February 2008
South China Morning Post

The public will find it difficult to reach about 60 per cent of the Victoria Harbour waterfront by foot or by car, a study has found. 

The study, by the Harbour Business Forum, found that areas that were most difficult to reach included Yau Tong, Kwun Tong and To Kwa Wan, where pollution was a problem and cargo areas were located. 

The study covered the coastal areas of Victoria Harbour, extending from the Siu Chau Wan point in the west to Chai Wan on the Hong Kong Island side and from Tsuen Wan to Lei Yue Mun on the Kowloon side. 

Only 30 per cent of the 94km of coastline is reachable by the public. Nine per cent is under redevelopment or construction. 

The coastal areas in Tsim Sha Tsui, Hung Hom and the northeastern part of Tsing Yi allowed direct access to inland areas and to the waterfront promenades, the study said. 

About 60 per cent of the harbourfront land was built up, while 21 per cent was used for roads, it said. Vacant land for development takes up 11 per cent and only 6 per cent is allocated for open space. 

Joseph Ma Ching-yuen, director of TMA Planning and Design, which commissioned the study, told a Harbourfront Enhancement Committee yesterday that the report aimed to assess the land use compatibility and accessibility of the Victoria harbourfront. "It is a staggering number that over 60 per cent of the harbourfront area is inaccessible," he said. 

Mr Ma said Yau Tong was an example of poor coastal land use planning. "A lot of nasty industrial activities are found in the Yau Tong coast, with residential blocks behind them," he said. "The cargo working area in Kwun Tong also makes it difficult for the public to get to." 

Mr Ma said development of North Point Estate site would be a good opportunity to connect North Point to Causeway Bay and even to Wan Chai by a promenade. 

The study, "What's on Hong Kong's harbour? Land use study for Hong Kong's harbourfront", is online: www.harbourbusinessforum.com . 

About 20 hectares of open space along the waterfront will be created after the reclamation works in Central, Wan Chai and North Point are completed, the Development Bureau said in a paper submitted to the Legislative Council. 

The figure includes the newly reclaimed areas in Central and Wan Chai, the boardwalk proposed underneath the Island Eastern Corridor, and the public open space designated at the former North Point Estate site and Oil Street site. The areas are expected to be opened to the public after 2010.


----------



## hkskyline

3/9


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> 3/9


Is that Union Square in the bg?


----------



## hkskyline

^ Most definitely.


----------



## EricIsHim

^^ Is that a Guess ad under ICC on the Pier?


----------



## raymond_tung88

EricIsHim said:


> ^^ Is that a Guess ad under ICC on the Pier?


Yes, it is.


----------



## hkth

RTHK News:
Court ruling hits Central-Wanchai by-pass plans


----------



## gladisimo

Interesting. Why are the people against the temporary reclamation, aside from the legal factor?

Are they worried the government will use it as an excuse to make it permanent, or what?


----------



## EricIsHim

gladisimo said:


> Are they worried the government will use it as an excuse to make it permanent, or what?


Yes, and they claimed that the government didn't go through the consultation for the temporary reclamation. I wonder what if the government only reclaim at sea bed below sea level without exposing to everyone eyes visually but enough to lie down the tunnel on it. Do they still claim that as reclamation? All of their concern is basically Victoria Harbour can't be visually become smaller.

IMO, the Society for Protection of the Harbour won in the court again and earned some applause, but everyone else loses to suffer more and more serious congestion problem in the next 10, 15 maybe even 20 years. And by then who is going to complaint the most? Those people that say no to everything today.


----------



## hkth

RTHK News:
Harbour ruling could delay rail project

--MTR Tsuen Wan Line would have to be congested for over 10 years. hno:


----------



## gladisimo

EricIsHim said:


> Yes, and they claimed that the government didn't go through the consultation for the temporary reclamation. I wonder what if the government only reclaim at sea bed below sea level without exposing to everyone eyes visually but enough to lie down the tunnel on it. Do they still claim that as reclamation? All of their concern is basically Victoria Harbour can't be visually become smaller.
> 
> IMO, the Society for Protection of the Harbour won in the court again and earned some applause, but everyone else loses to suffer more and more serious congestion problem in the next 10, 15 maybe even 20 years. And by then who is going to complaint the most? Those people that say no to everything today.


I agree, while I agree that the harbour cannot afford to be any smaller, there are some LOUD nimbys in HK nowadays that are trying to stop everything. I think eventually the public's opinion will win out. Hopefully. This sort of nimbys seriously hinders the development in HK.

There are always compromises that'll have to be made, and I believe the public will be outraged if the government made the reclamation permanent, given the amount of attention paid to it now, and that it will plainly be the government lying should it go through with it. 

The harbour people annoy me less than those that are A) trying to save every tidbit that is being torn down, B) trying to enforce ridiculous height limits as the solution to the wall effect, though.

Some of these nutters are going about the problem from the wrong angle. Compromises must always be made. Otherwise I fear HK will turn into the states, where every highway bypass and new building takes 30 years to build, and 1 out of every 100 proposals ever get through. (Exaggerating of course)

The people of HK will ultimately pay the price, slowing infrastructure extensions will increase congestion and travel times, limiting building heights/redevelopment and/or focusing on developing new places will either 1) further reduce the natural environment in HK, or 2) increase property prices even more, and 3) possibly hinder overall growth


----------



## spicytimothy

gladisimo said:


> I agree, while I agree that the harbour cannot afford to be any smaller, there are some LOUD nimbys in HK nowadays that are trying to stop everything. I think eventually the public's opinion will win out. Hopefully. This sort of nimbys seriously hinders the development in HK.
> 
> There are always compromises that'll have to be made, and I believe the public will be outraged if the government made the reclamation permanent, given the amount of attention paid to it now, and that it will plainly be the government lying should it go through with it.
> 
> The harbour people annoy me less than those that are A) trying to save every tidbit that is being torn down, B) trying to enforce ridiculous height limits as the solution to the wall effect, though.
> 
> Some of these nutters are going about the problem from the wrong angle. Compromises must always be made. Otherwise I fear HK will turn into the states, where every highway bypass and new building takes 30 years to build, and 1 out of every 100 proposals ever get through. (Exaggerating of course)
> 
> The people of HK will ultimately pay the price, slowing infrastructure extensions will increase congestion and travel times, limiting building heights/redevelopment and/or focusing on developing new places will either 1) further reduce the natural environment in HK, or 2) increase property prices even more, and 3) possibly hinder overall growth


I absolutely cannot agree more gladisimo. I take it that you live in the US too where you witnessed firsthand the damage NIMBYism can cause. 

Hong Kong is no doubt turning into that. However I believe firmly that with Hong Kong people's short-term memory and fickle mind this too will eventually pass. There will still be oppositions, but definitely not as vocal.


----------



## Koi

Here in Singapore Nimbyism doesn't seem to exist. In Singapore they are doubling the MRT network (equivalent to HK's MTR) and I have not read or seen anything of the public disapproving the projects.


----------



## Sexas

NIMBY is a good thing, without them we will see Singapore and Hong Kong become Dubai, building tower and road for big people and big company not for everybody.


----------



## herenthere

Koi said:


> Here in Singapore Nimbyism doesn't seem to exist. In Singapore they are doubling the MRT network (equivalent to HK's MTR) and I have not read or seen anything of the public disapproving the projects.


Could that be b/c public dissent is frowned upon? Or it could be b/c of congestion pricing, more people _want_ more mass transit.


----------



## hkskyline

*Linking bypass and fate of road pricing is deceitful, say activists *
31 March 2008
South China Morning Post

Anti-reclamation activists yesterday criticised the government for linking electronic road pricing with the controversial Central to Wan Chai Bypass. 

Activists accused the government of using the road pricing issue to speed up reclamation of Victoria Harbour to build the bypass, a road aimed at easing traffic congestion on Hong Kong Island. 

A Sunday Morning Post report said the second feasibility study on electronic road pricing had determined that if the government introduced the charge tomorrow it would have to sting drivers HK$90 for each trip to Central to achieve its aim of cutting traffic 20 per cent. 

The study found drivers would need to pay only HK$40 to HK$50 if there was a bypass. 

A vocal critic of the government's environmental policy, Albert Lai Kwong-tak, criticised the administration for trying to mislead the public. 

"I cannot see a close relation between road pricing and the construction of the bypass. If our aim of having road pricing is to control pollution and ease traffic congestion, drivers can choose not to take private cars and use public transport if they think the fee is too high," said Mr Lai, a Civic Party member. 

He said the government could still try road pricing without linking it to any "alternative route". 

"For example, we can try it by starting to charge drivers on days with serious pollution or heavy traffic," Mr Lai said. 

Legislator Kwok Ka-ki, convenor of the Action Group on the Protection of the Harbour, said: "The government simply wants to create an excuse to justify its reclamation of the harbour. Overseas experience is that building more roads will only encourage more people to drive and would thus result in road congestion in the end. 

"Then we are locked in the cycle of building more roads and then more congestion, and then reclaiming more of the harbour." 

The Central-Wan Chai Bypass is facing uncertainty and delays after the Court of First Instance blocked 10.7 hectares of temporary reclamation in and around Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter, saying it should be subject to the 1997 Protection of the Harbour Ordinance.


----------



## EricIsHim

hkskyline said:


> A vocal critic of the government's environmental policy, Albert Lai Kwong-tak, criticised the administration for trying to mislead the public.
> 
> "I cannot see a close relation between road pricing and the construction of the bypass. If our aim of having road pricing is to control pollution and ease traffic congestion, drivers can choose not to take private cars and use public transport if they think the fee is too high," said Mr Lai, a Civic Party member.
> 
> He said the government could still try road pricing without linking it to any "alternative route".
> 
> "For example, we can try it by starting to charge drivers on days with serious pollution or heavy traffic," Mr Lai said.


This must be one of the biggest jokes ever said by an expert in the industry misleading the public to against the government as well. hno:

If Lai weren't a civil and urban engineer, this statement is totally understandable, but definitely not from him.


----------



## gladisimo

EricIsHim said:


> This must be one of the biggest jokes ever said by an expert in the industry misleading the public to against the government as well. hno:
> 
> If Lai weren't a civil and urban engineer, this statement is totally understandable, but definitely not from him.


Does he think the people of Hong Kong are retarded?


----------



## Aboveday

delete.


----------



## hkskyline

*Architect takes dim view of groundscraper legacy *
8 July 2008
South China Morning Post

The infamous groundscraper may be gone from the drawing board, but its remnants could still spoil the view of the Central waterfront if one of the latest two concept plans for the area was chosen, a veteran architect warned yesterday.

Lawmakers, conservationists and architects - speaking before consultation ends on Thursday - also criticised the plans for a lack of open space and loss of authenticity in the relocation of Queen's Pier.

Hong Kong Urban Design Alliance convenor Vincent Ng Wing-shun said more attention needed to be paid to the effect of a proposed landscaped deck connecting Connaught Road to the waterfront via a cluster of office and retail blocks about 10 storeys high.

The cluster - once dubbed a groundscraper because it resembled a huge high-rise tower lying on its side - is dissected into four office and retail blocks under the government's new proposals.

The public is given a large deck and a narrow deck with public space at street level to choose from.

Mr Ng said few had noticed the visual corridor from Statue Square to the Star Ferry pier would be blocked by a larger deck.

He said most sites were given two planning designs for the public to choose from except for the arts and cultural precinct located to the north of the Academy for Performing Arts.

He said the planned six-lane P2 road separated the precinct from the narrow open space next to the Convention and Exhibition Centre, and urged the government to reduce the scale of the road and adjust its alignment to allow a more integrated design of open space and arts facilities. "The development density is cut, but the scale of the P2 Road is not," he said.

Mr Ng said the government had named various places without taking appropriate activities there.

"The waterfront is said to have a pier walk, harbour walk, bayside walk, ferry plaza, featured piazza and waterfront-event plaza," he said. "How are they differentiated from each other?"

Lawmaker and member of the Antiquities Advisory Board Patrick Lau Sau-shing said Queen's Pier, recognised as a grade-one historic structure, would not be completely restored if it was relocated to the new waterfront as proposed.

"Instead of extending from the shore, the pier will just stand at the shore and lose two of its landing steps," he said, adding that the existing Pier 9 and Pier 10 would have to give up a berth to make room for it.

Fearing that Queen's Pier would not be the same after relocation, the Conservancy Association is requesting an answer from the Antiquities and Monuments Office.

A spokeswoman for the Planning Department said the consultants would examine and consolidate all public views and suggestions, and prepare design responses where appropriate.

Although the three-month consultation will officially end on Thursday, the department said public views submitted this month would also be considered.


----------



## hkskyline

*Fenwick Pier destined to fall *
28 June 2008
South China Morning Post

Fenwick Pier, historic point of arrival for generations of sailors visiting the city, is to be demolished under the plan for the Central waterfront and be replaced by public landing steps and a park.

But an Antiquities Advisory Board member has questioned whether such a development can adequately take the place of the pier.

Under the plan, the pier and Fleet Arcade will be replaced by a public park after reclamation for the Central-Wan Chai bypass is completed.

But the reclamation is on hold because of a judicial review challenging whether a 10.7-hectare temporary reclamation is necessary to build the bypass, originally scheduled for completion in 2016.

At a board meeting on Thursday, Planning Department director Ava Ng Tse Suk-ying said the pier would be demolished and not rebuilt.

A department source said the pier had no architectural merit and had just a few landing steps.

The source said the area was intended for open-space development, so the Fleet Arcade would need to move to make way for a public park.

A department spokeswoman said public landing steps and waterfront commercial and leisure facilities would be provided along the new harbourfront to serve the public. An amendment to the outline zoning plan had undergone extensive public consultation, she said.

Honorary adviser to the Museum of History Cheng Po-hung said Fenwick Pier had a long history. He said the first Fenwick Pier, located in Johnston Road, was a private pier for a steel factory and a dockyard owned by the Fenwick Company. The pier was moved to Gloucester Road in the 1940s and Lung Wui Road, Admiralty, in the 1960s during reclamation.

Board member Ng Cho-nam said preservation of the pier was omitted from the public consultation.

Karl Milner, of the Quarterdeck Restaurant at Fleet Arcade, said it was not worried as the demolition could take years and the arcade might move to the new waterfront.


----------



## Joel que

Is face lift in central finally over?


----------



## hkskyline

^ Not for a while.

*Architects association floats plan to revive Queen's Pier *
(07-29 16:39)
Hong Kong Standard

The Hong Kong Institute of Architects and Urban Design Association have come up with a proposal to resurrect Queen's Pier, Star Ferry Clock Tower and to relocate the Golden Bauhinia to the proposed central waterfront.

Rejecting the government's design as sterile, Vincent Ng, member of the design council, said the HKIA's proposal mixed open space and water front activities in a way that would create a more exciting and vibrant shore line in Central.

The institute's proposal would also reduce proposed building heights, increase open space by reducing the size of proposed roads, which would be almost entirely at street level instead of the governments multi-level approach. The proposal will also bear a tramline, a marine museum, and space for night markets.


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> *Architects association floats plan to revive Queen's Pier *
> (07-29 16:39)
> Hong Kong Standard
> 
> The Hong Kong Institute of Architects and Urban Design Association have come up with a proposal to resurrect Queen's Pier, Star Ferry Clock Tower and to relocate the Golden Bauhinia to the proposed central waterfront.


I dunno...the Golden Bauhinia in front of the HKCEC is sort of a trademarked sight and representative of the 1997 takeover.


> The institute's proposal would also reduce proposed building heights, increase open space by reducing the size of proposed roads, which would be almost entirely at street level instead of the governments multi-level approach.


Definitely great ideas, especially getting rid of most of the multi-leveled roads. Who would want to see tiers of traffic screaming across a view of the harbour?


----------



## hkskyline

*Architects present design for 'inner harbour' at Queen's Pier *
30 July 2008
South China Morning Post

Queen's Pier would be able to stand at its original site and face the harbour once again if a recreational "inner harbour" was created, a group of architects and planners has suggested. The Urban Design Alliance introduced its Central waterfront proposal yesterday, featuring an inner harbour surrounded by long promenades for al fresco dining and strolling, connected to other spots on the shore by boats and a tram.

The old Queen's Pier would stand on the mini-harbour frontage, re-establishing its historic position. The alignment would form a boulevard from the HSBC Building, through the Star Ferry clock tower - restored at the original site - to Queen's Pier and the new Star Ferry Pier.

Patrick Lau Hing-tat, a member of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee and a landscape architect, welcomed the design. "A shore location for Queen's Pier is the key to respecting heritage, remembering that colonial governors declared rule by the action of 'landing' on the pier," he said.

The envisaged mini-harbour is currently a reclamation site. Alliance chairman Paul Chu Hoi-shan said restoration would not involve technical problems.

"It is only about whether the government wants to do it, though with some costs," he said.

The alliance also doubted that the government's existing plan would be able to launch a "vibrant" harbourfront, as it claimed.

"Its proposed promenade is ill-defined by large empty gardens," alliance member Vincent Ng said. "It cannot attract pedestrians to walk all the way along the harbourfront."

Countering the government proposal, the group suggested deleting the two tall commercial blocks planned in front of Two IFC and spreading the floor areas along the waterfront. A handful of three- or four-storey blocks would dot the shore, while a short hotel cluster would be built near Tamar. An extra storey would be added to existing piers for retail purposes.

"The gross floor area would remain unchanged, but by spreading it evenly the whole area will bring more pedestrians," Mr Ng said.

The scheme also proposed converting the PLA berth into a public swimming pool on the harbour's edge, and bringing in a floating hotel and a maritime museum.

A Planning Department spokeswoman said the government would study the proposal. The public consultation ends this month.


----------



## Aeschylus

What's the proposed completion date?


----------



## hkskyline

*8/1*










http://www.pbase.com/night86mare/image/101189185


----------



## hkskyline

*8/26*


----------



## Sentient Seas

Excellent photos. Looks to be some good progress, a very nice thread you've got going on here, I'll need to look into it a bit deeper. :cheers:


----------



## HSBC

Thanks for your pictures, Hkskyline. Love your update as usual:cheers:


----------



## hkskyline

*Can he stop the sprawl that's eating Hong Kong's harbor? *
4 September 2008
The Christian Science Monitor

From the garden of the Chu family's 30th floor penthouse, Hong Kong's jumble of skyscrapers rising against the harbor look like pixie sticks propped in the ground. To a visitor, the scale amazes, but to fifth-generation Hong Konger Winston Chu, it appalls.

And for one reason: The "fragrant harbor" - which is what Hong Kong means in Cantonese - is literally disappearing under cement.

Hemmed by dramatic mountains, the city has grown seaward, literally over the water's edge through reclamation. Victoria Harbor has shrunk, it's once-scalloped edges have been straightened into the city-street grid.

"The harbor used to be twice as wide as it is now," says Mr. Chu. The government has "been reclaiming [it] bit by bit. There's a Chinese term that translates to a 'silkworm eating a leaf one bite at a time.' But now it's like a tiger. And that tiger is the government."

The view of the harbor from this patio of potted pansies and terra-cotta tiles used to be unobstructed. Fourteen years ago, Chu's five-foot-tall mother, Cissy Fok Wing Yue, then 80, pulled him aside, pointed toward the reclamation across the harbor in western Kowloon, and accused her son of being at least partially responsible for her compromised view.

At the time, Chu, a lawyer, served as a senior member of the powerful Town Planning Board. So Ms. Yue assumed that harbor reclamation - and the destruction of her view - was his and his colleagues' fault. As the mother of 12, she was accustomed to others' claims on her space. But this 1.3-square-mile patch of new earth was too much.

" 'You Town Planning Board people are ruining our harbor!' " Chu recalls her saying. He shakes his finger toward the reclamation like his mother did. "She really gave me a good scolding."

He promised to look into it. After several weeks of research, Chu learned why he'd neither heard about nor participated in the reclamation-approval process: There was no law requiring the board to learn about or participate in it, no system of checks and balances.

And so, 14 years ago, Chu began a campaign to preserve what was left of Victoria Harbor.

* * *

Enticed by the harbor's natural depth and protection, the British dropped anchor off Hong Kong Island during the First Opium War and began setting up permanent shop in 1842, after the Chinese ceded the territory under the Treaty of Nanking. Soon, industrial-sized dreams started to flood the shoreline, and, in 1850, the first reclamation began. Developable land was scarce, after all, and more was needed.

Chu doesn't quibble with the original reclamation. He takes issue with everything reclaimed since 1984, when the Chinese government in Beijing established the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), giving Hong Kong an additional 365 square miles called the New Territories, and increasing Hong Kong's land almost 10-fold. Because of this vast amount of developable land, Chu argues, there's no justification for carrying out the 3,000-plus acres of reclamation that the British proposed or committed to before it handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997.

Chu doesn't exactly fit the profile of a bumper-sticker activist. His own involvement in development investment opens him up to some criticism. He's chauffeured around town in his Mercedes Benz. He was among the powerbrokers responsible for one of Hong Kong's major thoroughfares,and has owned tin mines in Malaysia and Thailand. In his spare time, he reads nuclear physics, plays snooker, and has written a book of poetry in English - a diversion the native- Chinese speaker developed at London's University College, where he's now a visiting professor.

But before Chu came along, there were no activists fighting for the harbor and few activists in Hong Kong. The population had grown accustomed to the dredging in the harbor - and Chinese culture discourages confrontations with power, as did the old colonial regime. Chu points to an old Chinese adage: "A poor person should never oppose a rich man, and the rich will not fight against officials." Apathy, Chu says, is how most people here survive.

It wasn't until the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949 that Hong Kong saw a flood of refugees, bringing many intellectuals who were more inclined to contribute to public dialogue.

"The average person in Hong Kong is rather passive, as under British colonialism there had never been encouragement for such public debates," says former Harvard professor and cultural critic Leo Ou-Fan Lee. "Moreover, the general level of education in Hong Kong is not high - merely high school for the average person, who often feel they lack the intellectual sophistication that should be the expression of any resonance in a cosmopolitan city."However, some locals have "awakened," Mr. Lee adds. "Suddenly they feel that some of the traces of iconic sites are being erased, so they're trying to preserve them. I think one of the reason is wat might be called collective memory."* * * After Chu completed his initial legal research in 1995, he enlisted Christine Loh - who, like him, is Chinese and British-educated. At the time she was serving on Hong Kong's legislative council. Together, Chu and Ms. Loh founded the Society for Harbor Protection, or SPH. Chu went on to draft a law, with the assistance of Loh's legislative office, called the Protection of the Harbor Ordinance. It made the harbor a public asset and natural heritage of the Hong Kong people. Only in cases of "overriding need," the bill read, could the government proceed with reclamation. It was approved 72 hours before the 1997 British handover back to China.

Historically, reclamation has been necessary for development, says Carrie Lam, the secretary of development, but after the current project, reclamation will cease.

Chu claims the government's reclamations since 1984 have been solely for the sake of profits from selling the new land and that its promises "are totally unreliable."

About a quarter of government revenue comes from selling land and other income from land development, according to the government's annual yearbook.

In any case, Chu has staved off the reclamation of more than 1,300 acres. And even Ms. Lam, whom Chu calls the "enemy," commends the SPH for taking the high road.

Asked if Chu's campaign has been a hassle, Lam laughs: "I can't say it's not. We're running around answering questions, getting taken to court, but I accept this is part of public governance."

SPH has won two of the three high court cases it pressed and five lower court decisions.

So far, Chu has sunk more than $500,000 of his own money into the campaign, and, when his mother passed away in 2006, she left him a "meaningful amount" for the fight. All told, their contributions exceed $1.25 million.

Chu isn't just "a meticulous lawyer," says Loh, SPH cofounder, "he's a person of financial means, and he's very dedicated to the issue. In Hong Kong, he's the only person I know who has these characteristics and has gone on to become a campaigner."

Chu has made enough noise in Hong Kong that in October 2003, he, his wife, and his mother fled after he received a letter physically threatening them. The letter contained the make, model, and license numbers of his mother's cars, where she attended the opera, the kind of jewelry she wore, and the name of her hair salon.

Now, back on the terrace, on chairs where Chu and his mother used to nap and where the family celebrated Chinese festivals, Chu lowers his voice. "Look, Hong Kong cannot survive without the harbor - economically, environmentally, in giving people a better quality of life.

"I was raised a Buddhist. My father always told me that if you see a banana peel on the ground, you've got to remove it ... it only takes a minute to do, but the old lady who might step on it could be crippled for life. To practice Buddhism is no more than that. You start with small things, and I suppose you end up with the harbor."


----------



## hkskyline

*Government to provide sustainable living environment for Hong Kong, says official *

HONG KONG, Oct. 18 (Xinhua) -- The Hong Kong SAR government will continue its endeavors to provide a quality and sustainable living environment for the people of Hong Kong, the Secretary for Development of Hong Kong Carrie Lam said Saturday.

Lam was speaking at the plenary session of an international symposium organized by the Skyscraper Museum in New York City, said a press release of the Hong Kong Information Service Department.

She said that Hong Kong's high density development had accommodated the city's population increase at one million per decade in the latter half of the 20th century and propelled its economic growth, while preserving the countryside for public enjoyment.

However, Lam admitted that in recent years, both the civil society and members of the public had voiced concerns about the height and bulk of buildings and their environmental and visual impact, and expressed strong aspirations for preserving heritage buildings, ceasing harbor reclamation, creating quality open space and preserving community networks and local characteristics in urban regeneration.

In response to these aspirations and to pursue a sustainable development in Hong Kong, the Government was committed to finding the right balance between economic benefits and benefits to culture, the society and the environment.

During the speech, Lam outlined in her presentation the various initiatives in reviewing development density, promulgating clear development control parameters in statutory plans, preserving and revitalizing heritage buildings, undertaking area-based revitalization projects, promoting green buildings.

Lam said that to achieve the vision of Hong Kong as Asia's world city, the Government would focus on three broad areas in working out the future blueprint of Hong Kong, namely improving a quality living environment, enhancing economic competitiveness, and strengthening links with the Chinese mainland.

Lam arrived in New York City on October 16 for a 3-day official visit.


----------



## EricIsHim

^^ I went to attend the symposium and was pleased to see that Carrie Lam spoke on behalf of the HKSAR government and brought up all these developing controversies we have been debating (e.g. reclamation, wall effect etc.) in front of a group of international audiences who knew almost nothing about HK. It showed that the government actually recognizes these problems we are having and hopefully, the government is going to find the solutions and build a better HK.


----------



## hkskyline

*Top planner 'too junior' to handle waterfront site *
21 September 2008
South China Morning Post

The city's top planning official was yesterday described as being "too junior" to handle the Central waterfront project.

The blistering attack on Director of Planning Ava Ng Tse Suk-ying came during a forum, attended by business and community leaders, to discuss alternative proposals for the development of the waterfront area in front of Two IFC.

More than 100 people, including veteran harbour activist Winston Chu Ka-sun, Civic Exchange chief Christine Loh Kung-wai, Urban Design Alliance convenor Vincent Ng Wing-shun and former chief secretary Sir David Akers-Jones, took part in the forum.

The government has proposed building medium high-rise and medium-rise commercial buildings on the reclaimed land immediately in front of Two IFC.

Two counter-proposals - one by the Urban Design Alliance and the other by a consultancy firm commissioned by the IFC's management - oppose the construction of tall buildings in front of Two IFC.

Speaking at the forum, Mr Ng told the planning director: "No offence, but you are too junior as director of planning [to handle the Central waterfront development]. There are so many things involved.

"The Transport Department wants to build roads as big as possible {hellip} and [Secretary for Development] Carrie Lam [Cheng Yuet-ngor] will tell you to talk to the chief secretary, financial secretary and [Chief Executive] Donald Tsang [Yam-kuen]."

During a question-and-answer session, Sir David asked Mrs Ng to "go and tell her bosses" that there would be no use putting the scheme to the public as no one would want commercial buildings in front of Two IFC.

Mrs Ng, however, said the government had to take time to "study seriously" the proposals put forward during the public consultation that ended on July 31.

She also said there was a need to pay attention to the constraints and needs concerning waterfront development, including different stakeholders, management and administrative needs, and the existing government planning framework.

But Sir David told her that, after years of experience in administering the city, he was sure there would be ways to get around the otherwise rigid bureaucratic framework.

The problem with the government was that it was too set on making billions of dollars by selling land along the harbourfront, he said.

Mrs Ng said the government would have a dialogue with the public by the end of this year to respond to the proposals.

The alliance, formed by architects and planners, suggested scrapping two tall commercial blocks planned for the front of Two IFC and spreading out the floor area. It also suggested public facilities including an inner harbour and an eco-park.

The IFC consultancy's proposal suggested that the waterfront should comprise extensive shaded green space for the public.

After the forum, Mrs Ng said she got the impression that participants saw the government's view as antagonistic towards the public.

Asked whether she felt she was in a position to oversee and co-ordinate the different layers of issues in urban planning, Mrs Ng said it would be the responsibility of the "government as a whole".


----------



## hkskyline

*施政報告:專責小組探討美化維港海岸*
星島
10月15日 星期三 12:36

行政長官曾蔭權今早在立法會發表新一份的《施政報告》。曾蔭權指出，維多利亞港是香港城市面貌的象徵，具有高度人文歷史價值，是所有香港人共同擁有的寶貴資產。維港備受香港市民熱愛，近年共建維港委員會和不少民間組織亦為進一步優化維港兩岸出謀獻策，他十分欣賞有關工作。他表示，為了有效落實美化和活化維港兩岸的計劃，發展局會統籌各政府部門的工作，並成立專責小組，探討中長期重新規劃的可行性，改善海濱的暢達程度，並與相關的區議會合作，落實海濱長廊的工程。他強調，希望美麗的維港不單繼續成為香港城市的象徵，也可以全民共享。


----------



## hkskyline

10/22


----------



## hkskyline

*政府死撐填海建灣仔繞道 *
23 October 2008
東方日報 

【東方日報專訊】爭議多年的中環灣仔繞道工程有新進展。土木工程拓展署最近完成主幹道興建方式的研究，堅持採用不論永久及臨時填海面積均最大的隧道方案進行工程，捨棄填海面積較小的天橋方案。有立法會議員炮轟政府堅持填海，無回應法庭要求重新修訂計劃，十分離譜，促請政府研究加強鐵路網絡，紓緩交通問題。

拖延近十年的中環灣仔繞道由於涉及填海，引起環保團體不滿，今年初高等法院裁定保護海港會反對中環灣仔繞道臨時填海工程的司法覆核勝訴，當時法官在判詞中明確指出海港是公眾及大自然的資產，即使是臨時填海亦須受《保護海港條例》約束，除非政府有凌駕性的公眾需要才可進行，政府亦須諮詢公眾。而當局年底會完成中環灣仔繞道和東區走廊連接路的諮詢工作。

走線不設「零填海」

不過，政府在重新研究中環灣仔繞道走線後，訂定主幹道應沿灣仔和銅鑼灣海岸走線，並無「零填海」方案，兩個興建主幹線方案均涉及填海，當局更指填海範圍最大的隧道方式最可行。

根據政府提供的資料，隧道方式涉及永久填海面積共達十二點八公頃，涉及範圍包括灣仔會展西面部分、會展中心水道、灣仔沿岸及北角沿岸的土地，並需於填海零點一公頃興建樁帽和防護柱墩，以興建在北角接駁東區走廊的高架主幹路，填海的面積較天橋方案多兩成半。

由於主幹道的隧道將伸延至銅鑼灣避風塘及前公眾貨物裝卸區海床下，兩處亦需於施工階段臨時填海四點九公頃，以隧道方式進行的臨時填海，面積亦較天橋方案多出一點五公頃。

隧道營運費多一截

此外，隧道方案建築費達二百億元也較天橋方案多出八成，每年營運費用總額亦達一億一千萬元，同樣較天橋方案高；隧道方案建造時間長達七年，較天橋方案需時多一年。

雖然隧道方案填海面積多、建築成本又高，但土木署認為天橋會覆蓋及影響水面的面積，海港受影響的面積達六點六公頃，遠較隧道多，而且會佔用海旁用地，影響海濱長廊計劃，而且天橋方案不獲公眾支持，因此認為隧道方案最可取。

一直反對政府填海的立法會議員何秀蘭批評政府並無正視法庭的意見，盡力保護海港，堅持採用填海面積最大的建造方案。她認為隧道方案會影響海床及水流，造成生態影響，而天橋方案亦會影響市民享用海濱長廊，她認為政府應研究其他辦法，如考慮加強鐵路網絡。


----------



## EricIsHim

Blah Blah Blah.... just build that damn underwater bypass and everyone will be happy.


----------



## dajumper

Soon we'll all be able to walk from Kowloon to Central!


----------



## EricIsHim

dajumper said:


> Soon we'll all be able to walk from Kowloon to Central!


You'll never be able to do that. This is the very last piece of reclamation will ever happen inside Victoria Harbour that we absolutely needs to fix the mess created in the past 15 years.


----------



## herenthere

dajumper said:


> Soon we'll all be able to walk from Kowloon to Central!


Like what I said! But it's still pretty far even if they continued reclaiming Victoria Harbour. With the increase of roads though, people might drive even more cars.


----------



## gladisimo

EricIsHim said:


> Blah Blah Blah.... just build that damn underwater bypass and everyone will be happy.


Seriously, all this delay will only increase costs. This is really one of those instances where HK is becoming like the US. We have a tunnel here where various people bitched and complained for *50* years until they finally agreed on something. 

Talk of the project started in 1958, building started in 2005 and to finish in 2010. I really hope this doesn't happen in Hong Kong...hno:


----------



## spicytimothy

Are they SERIOUSLY considering building a BRIDGE? For god's sake isn't the Eastern Corridor enough of a lesson? 

I need to cross the bridge over the freeway everytime I wanna get to the harbor when I lived in Tai Koo Shing! Even on ground level is NOT acceptable!


----------



## hkskyline

*中環灣仔繞道或明年動工 *
01/11/2008









【本報訊】波折重重的中環灣仔繞道可望明年動工，預計二○一五年落成，共建維港委員會多名成員昨贊成中環灣仔繞道以隧道方式興建，並希望這項造價高達二百億元的工程盡快展開，創造就業機會，挽救經濟。

中環填海明年完成
路政署署長韋志成昨在共建維港委員會上稱，年底前會完成中環灣仔繞道設計細節及刊憲等工作，若一切順利，希望明年動工，預計工程需時六年。

土木工程拓展署港島及離島拓展處處長韓志強則稱，中環填海計劃第三期明年底完成，但因中環灣仔繞道多次受到法律挑戰，令工程延誤，未能在填海的同時進行隧道工程，而要在填海區進行保護工程建隔牆預留空間，日後建隧道時不用挖開地面。

共建維港委員會成員吳永順說，中環新海濱設計還未完成，擔心保護工程成為既定事實，變成海濱設計的限制。韓志強回應說，保護工程的臨時頂板離地面三至四點五米，日後隧道則離地面八至九米，不會成為海濱設計的限制。

發展局局長林鄭月娥表示，該局去年工作集中在保育方面，未來幾年則會尠眼於優化海濱，該局會在政府高層統籌下與其他政策局協調工作。在會議開始前，與會者默哀悼念早前不幸中風過身的共建維港委員會前成員陳偉群。


----------



## EricIsHim

^^^ Translation: Central-Wan Chai Bypass (CWB) may begin construction next year, estimating completion by 2015. Members of Harbour Enhancement Committee agreed the CWB to be built as underground tunnel, hoping this HK$20 billions will create more job opportunities and promote the economy.

---------------------------------
But how? Wan Chai Reclamation Phase II is still a no go, and the Wan Chai section alignment east of HKCEE is still in grey. Is the government really going to build the western section first, and hoping/forcing the western section to come.


----------



## hkskyline

EricIsHim said:


> ^^^ Translation: Central-Wan Chai Bypass (CWB) may begin construction next year, estimating completion by 2015. Members of Harbour Enhancement Committee agreed the CWB to be built as underground tunnel, hoping this HK$20 billions will create more job opportunities and promote the economy.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> But how? Wan Chai Reclamation Phase II is still a no go, and the Wan Chai section alignment east of HKCEE is still in grey. Is the government really going to build the western section first, and hoping/forcing the western section to come.


Yes, it is quite odd, when the water is still flowing and no reclamation has started on that outlying piece.

I also notice they started digging down on a part of the already-reclaimed land. A large rectangle hole can be seen from the air.


----------



## hkskyline

*發展局增3職 統籌維港規劃*
10月23日 星期四 05:05

【明報專訊】為加快維港兩岸的規劃，發展局長林鄭月娥 昨日表示，發展局將開設3個新職位，包括一名首席助理秘書長，以成立專責小組去統籌維港規劃的工作。對於被質疑海濱長廊進展緩慢，她歸咎於沿海私人發展及政府公用設施對優化兩岸造成掣肘。

林鄭月娥昨於立法會 發展事務委員會會議上表示，參考去年成立文物專員辦事處的經驗，認為由專責小組針對美化維港兩岸的工作，能提高規劃沿海地區的效率，「由專責小組統籌涉及海岸規劃的各個政府部門，以及與共建維港委員會和區議會 溝通，會更有效」。

發展局將向立法會人事編制小組及財務委員會申請開設3個職位，專責維港兩岸的規劃。林鄭月娥解釋，過往維港一直擔當「工作港」（working harbour）的角色，她希望專責小組能開放更多空置的沿岸政府土地，以便發展連貫的海濱長廊，並會探討中長期重新規劃的可行性。


----------



## hkskyline

*政府叫停清拆港內碼頭*
(星島)10月26日 星期日 05:30

《施政報告》提出美化維港兩岸，發展局局長林鄭月娥 表示，碼頭對海濱的暢達程度十分重要，加上受《保護海港條例》影響，新建碼頭十分困難，政府內部決定，維港兩岸的公眾碼頭不可隨便清拆，並已叫停西區副食品批發市場空置碼頭清拆計畫。

林鄭月娥昨日出席電台節目時表示，近日先後到澳洲 、倫敦 考察，認為碼頭對保持海濱暢達非常重要，加上香港有保護海港條例，碼頭清拆後若要再興建，十分困難，部門內已決定，維港兩岸的公眾碼頭不能隨便清拆。

重申不賤賣土地

對於空置的碼頭，當局會加以鞏固美化及找尋新用途，包括曾被審計署 指出須尋找活化用途的西區副食品批發市場四個空置碼頭。漁護署 雖考慮拆卸碼頭，但林鄭月娥表示，已經叫停該清拆計畫，並已要求各工務部門，研究遷置海濱現有貨物起卸區、垃圾轉運站、泵水站等功能設施，以便騰出土地發展為海濱長廊。共建維港委員會轄下小組已展開研究，就維港兩岸土地管理成立管理局的可行性。

樓市步入寒冬，政府本年度至今的土地收益一百億元，僅及預算案預計收入的四分之一。林鄭月娥表示，土地供應由市場主導，會繼續維持勾地表制度，絕不會賤賣土地，「就好似放到滿枱佳餚，但來的客人不想食，便不應該逼他們食」。她又強調，土地是社會的寶貴資源，應以市場價格拍賣，不會降底勾地門檻。

對於公共工程開支問題，林鄭月娥預計，本立法年度會有一百項工程需呈交立法會 審批，期望隨着有關大型工程陸續上馬，可創造更多就業機會，紓緩建築業的就業問題。造價不超過二千一百萬元的小型工程，今年的總開支接近六十八億元，若市場有能力承接更多小型工程，她不排除增加有關撥款，令各區也可進行多些小型工程。 本報記者


----------



## hkskyline

*繞道工程不建防波堤 逾百避風塘遊艇施工期搬遷*
(明報)10月24日 星期五 05:05

【明報專訊】為讓中環灣仔繞道上馬，政府經3個月公眾諮詢後初步決定，取消備受爭議的臨時防波堤，以縮減約2.4公頃的臨時填海範圍，但停泊於「私人繫泊區」的逾百艘遊艇，卻要於施工期間遷往香港仔南或其他避風塘；有共建維港委員會委員認為，有關建議已平衡工程對海港及艇戶的影響。

高等法院以「臨時填海也屬填海」為由，裁定政府須為中環灣仔繞道工程的臨時防波堤作諮詢才可動工；不過，根據路政署的資料文件，路政署建議取消興建防波堤及相關的臨時填海工程，以符合《保護海港條例》的要求。

不過，興建繞道的隧道期間，將佔用部分銅鑼灣 避風塘的水域，約有100艘碇泊船隻及180艘繫泊船隻將受工程影響。路政署發言人說，經詳細考慮及歸納公眾意見，當局擬「把私人繫泊區的船隻遷往香港仔南避風塘及其他避風塘」，將使用者的影響減至最低。現時，佔地4.4公頃的私人繫泊區有152艘船停泊。

遊艇會船不遷移 免影響比賽

至於香港遊艇會繫泊區及碇泊區的船將不會遷移；路政署解釋，搬遷遊艇會會影響該會定期在維港舉辦的帆船比賽，亦會令船與奇力島的會所分開。而遷移碇泊區的船則會滋擾碇泊處的商業活動，影響使用者的生計。部分碇泊處的使用者亦擔心他們的船日久失修，搬遷將影響船的結構。

共建維港委員會海港計劃檢討小組委員會主席吳永順認為，建議可平衡工程對海港及艇戶的影響，屬最合理的方案，「這證明政府無法證明臨時填海讓艇戶停泊具凌駕性公眾需要，若強行興建防波堤，可能會被人控告，只好犧性部分艇戶的需要」。

議員：艇戶停業兩年失客源

但東區區議員周潔冰說，私人繫泊區內亦有「搵食船」，「整個工程約需6年，分階段遷移船隻的話，即有關艇戶至少有兩年要離開銅鑼灣，失去客源，而香港仔南避風塘亦未必歡迎他們」，路政署將於本周六舉辦論壇，進一步諮詢公眾及艇戶意見，希望於今年底完成諮詢。


----------



## hkskyline

*鯉魚門擬建觀景台地標 *
02/11/2008


















【本報訊】由旅遊事務署負責的油塘鯉魚門海旁改善計劃，經過長達三年的諮詢，已進入詳細設計階段，稍後將會刊憲，並向立法會申請撥款。按計劃鯉魚門海旁將興建一個鯉魚形狀的觀景台作為地標，建造海濱長廊及興建全新的泊岸設施，並考慮應地區人士要求將觀景台延長至覆蓋毗鄰的蠔灘。旅遊發展局曾估計，重新打造後的鯉魚門每月可吸引約一萬一千人次旅客乘船前往用膳。

鯉魚門以海鮮美食聞名，為發揮其優勢及提升吸引力，旅遊事務署計劃在鯉魚門海濱闢設五個以海洋為主題的觀景點，接連海濱長廊，讓旅客可漫步沿岸欣賞鯉魚門海峽的美景。

2012年分階段完成
另外，由於不少旅客是乘船前往鯉魚門，現時的泊岸設施過於簡陋，當局已選定在鯉魚門燈塔以東興建一個全新的公眾泊岸設施及防波堤，方便遊船停泊。據悉，擬建的泊岸設施須可容納三十米長的船隻停泊。

早前曾有漁民團體擔心興建泊岸設施及防波堤會影響鯉魚門航道，經旅遊事務署解釋新設施不會令該區航道收窄，亦不會改變水流速度，而且有關部門會為擬建泊岸設施制訂一套管理方案後，終釋漁民團體的憂慮，消除了反對聲音。改善工程最快於二○一○年底動工，並於二○一二年開始分階段完成。

當局在進行有關規劃設計時，亦會一併加入考慮鯉魚門地區人士及觀塘區議員最新提出的建議，包括將觀景台延長至覆蓋毗鄰的蠔灘，並會連接擬建的泊岸設施，將海濱長廊延長；提供公眾通道以接連鯉魚門海濱休憩處和伸延後的觀景台及海濱長廊，並且美化海旁公廁旁另一面的兩幅空地，改善環境。

觀塘區議員呂東孩對計劃終於落實表示歡迎，他指改善計劃討論近三年，連居民也等得心急了，他希望工程能加快上馬，區議會亦配合自行撥款在區內進行小型改善工程。


----------



## hkskyline

*High hopes. Protesters release balloons after a march in support of the preservation of Victoria Harbour *
3 November 2008
South China Morning Post

High hopes. Protesters release balloons after a march in support of the preservation of Victoria Harbour yesterday. Waving banners, about 300 protesters marched about 2km from the Star Ferry in Central to Golden Bauhinia Square in Wan Chai. The "Walk for the Harbour" was jointly organised by a number of concern groups.


----------



## hkskyline

11/2


----------



## hkskyline

*LCQ19: Projects to improve pedestrian environment and beautify the harbourfront *
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Government Press Release

Following is a question by the Hon James To Kun-sun and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, in the Legislative Council today (November 5):

Question:

In his policy address delivered last month, the Chief Executive stated that the Government would study a number of district projects, including "extending the footbridge system in Mong Kok to cover central Mong Kok and the Tai Kok Tsui area", and "study the feasibility of conducting medium and long-term re-planning of the harbour, improve the accessibility of the harbourfront and, …… proceed with the construction of waterfront promenades". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) given that in reply to my question in May last year, the Government indicated that the extension works of the pedestrian footbridge at Mong Kok Road were expected to be completed by the end of 2009, but it has recently been reported that the Transport Department advised that there was quicksand underneath the proposed location for the bridge columns and the works were thus suspended, whether the Government has assessed if the works will be completed on schedule;

(b) of the details of the above study on the extension of the footbridge system in Mong Kok to cover Tai Kok Tsui area, including the scope of the study and its completion date;

(c) given that in commissioning the consultancy study on Area Improvement Plan for the Shopping Areas for Mong Kok earlier, the Planning Department ("PD") also explored the proposal to construct a footbridge along Argyle Street, but the proposal was subsequently rejected on grounds that the footbridge foundations would decrease vehicular capacity, whether the Government will reexamine the proposal; if it will, of the details; 

(d) given that it was proposed in the Report of the Hung Hom District Study commissioned by PD that a waterfront promenade should be developed in Hung Hom, whether the Government will draw up a timetable for implementing the proposal; and

(e) whether the Government will study the reprovisioning of a number of the existing public facilities along the West Kowloon waterfront, such as the Yau Ma Tei Cargo Handling Area, so as to avoid impeding PD from implementing the proposals to develop the land along the waterfront, which were put forth in the Report of the Planning Study on the Harbour and its Waterfront Areas published in 2003?

Reply:

President,

My reply to the five-part question is as follows:

(a) The western extension of the Mong Kok Road footbridge system across Nathan Road will be constructed by a private developer. The associated preliminary investigation works were completed last year with the assistance of Government departments such as the Transport Department (TD) and the Police. As there are legal procedures remain to be completed, including the consideration of whether the extension should be regazetted, and part of the works arrangements of the project such as underground ducts diversion have not been finalized, the construction works for the footbridge were unable to commence at the end of last year as scheduled. We will continue to liaise with the developer for the early commencement of the works. TD and the Highways Department have not received any report from the developer on the discovery of special geological conditions that would hinder the works progress. 

(b) The Policy Address proposes to improve the pedestrian environment. One of the proposals to be studied is to extend the footbridge system in Mong Kok to cover central Mong Kok and Tai Kok Tsui area. TD is making preparations for the concerned study. Various factors such as transport needs, geographical conditions, technical feasibility will be considered in arriving at a suitable proposal. The study is expected to be completed in early 2010. Upon completion of the footbridge system extension scheme, together with the existing and planned footbridges and public corridors, the footbridge system in Mong Kok and Tai Kok Tsui will be enhanced. It will facilitate pedestrians to commute to and from the busy locations in the districts. 

(c) The Study on Area Improvement Plan for the Shopping Areas for Mong Kok commissioned by the Planning Department (PlanD) did not put forward any specific and substantive recommendations to extend the footbridge system in Mong Kok to cover the central Mong Kok area. When PlanD conducted public consultation on the study in mid-2007, some members of the public requested to extend the existing footbridge system at Mong Kok Road along Sai Yee Street to cover the Argyle Street area. From the traffic point of view, if a new footbridge is built over the section of Sai Yee Street and Argyle Street, the footbridge foundations will occupy part of the roads, thus decreasing vehicular capacity and affecting the traffic. As such, the above proposal was considered undesirable by the consultant.

By redeveloping the depots of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department and the Water Supplies Department at Sai Yee Street in Mong Kok, TD's proposed extension of the footbridge system to cover the central area serves to connect the public corridors inside such depots to the footbridge at Mong Kok Road. There is also a branch footbridge over Argyle Street to improve the footbridge network of the area. Compared with the previous proposal of constructing a footbridge along Sai Yee Street, it is a more desirable option with much less impact on traffic during and after construction. TD will continue to examine this proposal.

(d) To beautify and revitalise the waterfront of Victoria Harbour for use by the public, the Development Bureau (DEVB) will co-ordinate with various government departments in carrying out the waterfront promenade projects in different districts. Given the existing restrictions over the use of waterfront sites, the work will be planned for implementation on short-term, medium-term and long-term basis. To take Hung Hom as an example, the Hung Hom District Study recommends that a continuous waterfront promenade should be built from Tsim Sha Tsui East to Laguna Verde. As the MTRC Freight Yard and International Mail Centre (IMC) are located on the Hung Hom waterfront, the continuous waterfront promenade proposal cannot be implemented until the MTRC Freight Yard and the IMC are relocated in the long-term. No specific timetable for its implementation has been drawn up yet. Nevertheless, beautification of the wall of Tai Wan Shan Swimming Pool will soon be carried out for better integration with the public realm. The works will commence in early 2009. In the medium-term, we will explore the feasibility of public private partnership to develop the waterfront promenade adjoining the Comprehensive Development Area near the Hung Hom Pier. 

(e) At present, the site along the West Kolwoon waterfront is mainly used as a public cargo working area. Other uses include an abandoned vehicle surrender centre, the Yau Ma Tei Marine Office and some undeveloped sites for temporary uses. The main purpose of the Planning Study on the Harbour and its Waterfront Areas, which was completed in 2003, was to formulate a Harbour and Waterfront Plan to guide the use of waterfront areas and recommend major tourism development components and opportunities for the Study Area. The Study recommended that additional tourist attractions and facilities should be provided outside the Inner Harbour, such as the Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area/ Typhoon Shelter. This recommendation was a conceptual idea and aimed to explore feasible ways to enhance the environment of the coastal area of the district. However, the cargo industry strongly objected to the idea. Hence, the Yau Ma Tei Public Cargo Working Area cannot be relocated within a short time. The Planning Study therefore did not include this conceptual proposal in the Action Area Plans. The Public Cargo Working Area is still in operation and no definite plan has been drawn up for its relocation. 

The waterfront promenade of the West Kowloon Cultural District has been opened for public use since September 2005. DEVB will continue to explore long-term and short-term initiatives to enhance the accessibility to and beautify the West Kowloon waterfront, including opening up some undeveloped sites for use by the public.


----------



## hkskyline

11/10


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> 11/10


Wow, looking at this pic reminded me of when I went there a few yrs ago: they had barely started and I remember wondering looking out from the IFC2 mall why they built a pedway from the land to the piers right next to boarded up walls...

...something like this:


----------



## Skybean

*Nov 4, 2008*









source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thevlad/3004069162/in/set-72157608657753699/


----------



## hkth

RTHK News:
Causeway Bay reclamation to go ahead

Central reclamation cost rises 60%


----------



## hkskyline

herenthere said:


> Wow, looking at this pic reminded me of when I went there a few yrs ago: they had barely started and I remember wondering looking out from the IFC2 mall why they built a pedway from the land to the piers right next to boarded up walls...


Yes, I believe they only filled in that section last year!


----------



## spicytimothy

Bye bye harbor, helllllo park!


----------



## hkskyline

*Planners want to drive over court ruling on bypass *
19 November 2008
Hong Kong Standard

The administration is set to press ahead with the controversial Central-Wan Chai bypass despite a court ruling that a temporary reclamation required for the job would break harbor protection laws.

In a government document to be discussed in the Legislative Council next Tuesday, the Development Bureau will seek to increase the funding for the Central Reclamation Phase III project by 60 percent to HK$5.7 billion from an original HK$3.5 billion.

The extra funding is mainly for work in Central, including protective walls and slabbing so that work on the bypass can continue after being disrupted by the court ruling in March.

A government official said work could begin next year and would advance the reclamation from 2013 to 2011.

The extra funding would also include consultancy fees and adjustments to building costs.

The government estimates the protection work will create about 1,390 jobs.

In March, High Court Judge Michael Hartmann granted an application by the Society for the Protection of the Harbour for a declaration that 10.7 hectares of temporary reclamation in and around Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter is subject to a 1997 ordinance, including a strong presumption against reclamation.

But in its latest document, the Development Bureau concludes that ``without temporary reclamation, the Trunk Road Tunnel cannot be safely and practically constructed. There is an overriding public need for the temporary reclamation in the construction.''

A government official explained: ``We have sought legal advice and we are confident that there is sufficient justification to carry out the reclamation.'' Planners want a tunnel rather than a flyover for the construction even though that will require permanent reclamation of 12.7 hectares against 9.8 hectares.

A tunnel is also HK$9 billion more expensive at HK$20 billion, though either of the choices would take about seven years to complete.

A government official said a tunnel would allow an open view of Victoria Harbour. ``Going simply on the size of the reclamation, the flyover seems a better choice,'' the official said. ``However, the eyesore it will create will be permanent. So we prepared a tunnel option.''

Government planners also propose moving yachts from Causeway Bay to Aberdeen typhoon shelter to make way for fishing boats and other vessels.

Legco's development panel will discuss all the proposals next week.

Conservancy Association chairwoman Betty Ho Siu-fong warned that the plans could draw more legal challenges from harbor-protection activists. And a bypass alone could not end traffic congestion, she said, so road pricing was needed.


----------



## hkskyline

*HK$172.6m to give harbourfront access *
19 November 2008
South China Morning Post

The government has proposed spending an extra HK$172.6 million to ensure the public has access to part of the new Central harbourfront despite a delay in building a road tunnel.

Construction of the 950-metre tunnel, which is a section of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass and involves reclamation, has not started because of judicial challenges. The strip of land involved on the harbourfront now lies idle while public consultations continue.

A government spokesman said yesterday that protection works for the tunnel would be done so that the whole piece of newly reclaimed land in Central - including the tunnel site - could be freed up as soon as possible for other harbourfront developments.

Without the works, the new Central harbourfront would not be open for public use until 2013 after the tunnel is completed. With the works, the harbourfront is expected to be available to the public in 2011.

The protection works will comprise building diaphragm with a top slab along the future tunnel alignment, ensuring the tunnel box can be safely built underground in future without opening up the land.

This will save the trouble of digging up the land to make way for tunnel works. The proposed works project will create 1,390 jobs, including 1,130 labourers and 260 professional and technical posts.

Meanwhile, a High Court judge ruled yesterday that the government should not be liable to pay for three lawyers who represented a group that won the bid to stop temporary land reclamation for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass.

Mr Justice Michael Hartmann praised the Society for the Protection of the Harbour and its "entirely altruistic" efforts, but questioned the need to hire a trio of lawyers to fight its case.

Two lawyers, not three, would have been reasonable, the judge wrote in his ruling.

But the society "acted again in protection of the public interest to protect a public asset - our harbour - which is central to our identity and heritage", he said in the judgment.

Mr Justice Hartmann awarded the society its legal costs in March after the group won a battle that forced the government to prove further reclamation served an overriding public need. But the two sides could not agree on how much the government should pay. The legal fight concerned a plan to temporarily reclaim 10.7 hectares in and around the Causeway Bay typhoon shelter during construction of the bypass.


----------



## hkskyline

*國金旁地盤掘出 屬英軍遺物
中環又引爆戰時炸彈 *
22/11/2008










【本報訊】中環添馬艦新政府總部地盤，周一發現戰時日軍遺下的炮彈後，毗鄰的舊天星碼頭填海地盤，工人昨又掘出一枚疑戰時英軍「回禮」還擊遺下的炮彈，殺傷力達方圓一百公尺，拆彈專家奉召到場引爆，但為免附近大廈玻璃幕牆被震碎，先將炮彈搬至海邊，炮彈經兩次才完成引爆，爆炸威力強大，壓住炮彈的沙包飛彈十多公尺墮地，一百名地盤工人需要疏散。

威力可及方圓百公尺
昨午二時許，工人在中環填海地盤郵政總局對開一百五十公尺位置，掘出一枚直徑十五公分，五十公分長的炮彈，即通知上司報警。

警方拆彈專家到場，證實炮彈仍有爆炸威力，由於位置接近國際金融中心，恐引爆震碎大廈的玻璃幕牆，拆彈專家先將炮彈運到遠離大廈的海邊才進行引爆，警方為安全計，疏散了地盤內一百名建築工人，及封閉從郵政總局通往新天星碼頭的行人天橋及附近街道。

警方爆炸品處理課高級炸彈處理主任布立頓表示，該炮彈重四十公斤，屬於二次大戰時英軍使用的炮彈，相信是一九四一年十二月日軍攻佔中環後，英軍用作還擊日軍之用，其威力可及方圓一百公尺，第一次引爆主要是炸毀炮彈外殼，第二次才正式摧毀炮彈。


----------



## hkskyline

*Second shell in a week blown up*
22 November 2008
South China Morning Post

A wartime artillery shell was unearthed at the site of the former Star Ferry pier yesterday, the second time in a week that an explosive has been found by construction workers in the area.

At about 2.30pm, workers discovered a 40kg, 50cm-long, 15cm-wide shell on the site, 100 metres away from a flyover leading to the new Star Ferry pier and Two IFC tower.

Police believe the shell was a British one fired in a battle with Japanese forces who were shelling the city from Kowloon side.

"The one that we found on Monday [at the Tamar site] was shot by the Japanese military from Kowloon side," waterfront divisional commander Johnny Chan Man-yin said. "When the Japanese occupied Hong Kong Island, British forces in the city tried to fight back. We believe [the shell found yesterday] was fired by them at that time."

Although it was less powerful than the one found on Monday, officers estimated it could still have affected an area up to 100 metres away if it exploded.

Fearing the detonation could damage nearby buildings, including Jardine House and the Central Post Office, bomb disposal officers moved the shell to the waterfront for the controlled explosion.

The 100 workers on the site were evacuated and nearby Man Yiu Street was closed temporarily.

As on Monday, two explosions - one at 5.12pm, another at 5.36pm - were needed to destroy the shell after the first only damaged the casing.

The shell was found during work on a hotly contested reclamation project that led to demolition of the former pier in December 2006 amid marathon protests.

Activists claimed the building, although having little architectural merit, was part of the history and culture of the city.

But the government was determined to push ahead with the reclamation, insisting it had conducted sufficient consultations in the five years leading up to the demolition.

The reclamation project, which includes a highway linking north Central and Wan Chai, is regarded by the government as the solution to traffic congestion. It is scheduled to be finished by the end of next year.

Work at the site resumed immediately after the detonation and the Development Bureau said the discovery of the shell would not affect the progress of the work.



hkskyline said:


> *國金旁地盤掘出 屬英軍遺物
> 中環又引爆戰時炸彈 *
> 22/11/2008
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 【本報訊】中環添馬艦新政府總部地盤，周一發現戰時日軍遺下的炮彈後，毗鄰的舊天星碼頭填海地盤，工人昨又掘出一枚疑戰時英軍「回禮」還擊遺下的炮彈，殺傷力達方圓一百公尺，拆彈專家奉召到場引爆，但為免附近大廈玻璃幕牆被震碎，先將炮彈搬至海邊，炮彈經兩次才完成引爆，爆炸威力強大，壓住炮彈的沙包飛彈十多公尺墮地，一百名地盤工人需要疏散。
> 
> 威力可及方圓百公尺
> 昨午二時許，工人在中環填海地盤郵政總局對開一百五十公尺位置，掘出一枚直徑十五公分，五十公分長的炮彈，即通知上司報警。
> 
> 警方拆彈專家到場，證實炮彈仍有爆炸威力，由於位置接近國際金融中心，恐引爆震碎大廈的玻璃幕牆，拆彈專家先將炮彈運到遠離大廈的海邊才進行引爆，警方為安全計，疏散了地盤內一百名建築工人，及封閉從郵政總局通往新天星碼頭的行人天橋及附近街道。
> 
> 警方爆炸品處理課高級炸彈處理主任布立頓表示，該炮彈重四十公斤，屬於二次大戰時英軍使用的炮彈，相信是一九四一年十二月日軍攻佔中環後，英軍用作還擊日軍之用，其威力可及方圓一百公尺，第一次引爆主要是炸毀炮彈外殼，第二次才正式摧毀炮彈。


----------



## hkskyline

12/1


----------



## hkskyline

Source : http://www.flickr.com/photos/smilevv/sets/72157608680642949/


----------



## hkskyline

*Pier plan's popularity disputed *
10 December 2008
South China Morning Post

Most Hong Kong people want the historic Queen's Pier rebuilt at a new harbourfront site rather than restored at its previous location, the government has concluded.

It said this has emerged from public views submitted to the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee on design of the new Central waterfront.

The findings were released by the Planning Department yesterday.

The department said a majority of responses from the public favoured placing the historic pier beside Victoria Harbour, instead of re-erecting it at its original site, which will be landlocked by the Central reclamation. It said 16 of 18 district councils supported reassembling the pier on the harbourfront for public use.

But it was favoured by only 49 per cent and 27 per cent of respondents to comment cards and in phone interviews respectively.

Civic Party vice-chairman Albert Lai Kwong-tak questioned the validity of what he said were the "manipulated" views of district councils.

Meeting records show most of the motions backing the relocation were initiated by appointed councillors and members of the government-friendly camp, and 13 out of 18 had similar wording.

"Some councils in remote districts say they don't really care where the pier is put," he said, adding that Hong Kong should adopt international best practice - and site the pier at its original location to avoid irreversible damage to heritage - if opinions were divided.

Engineers and surveyors support the waterfront option but architects and planners say the pier - demolished this year amid strident protests - should stay at its original position because of its historic relationship with City Hall and Edinburgh Place.

Meanwhile, the department said there was no consensus on the siting of the old Star Ferry clock tower, also demolished amid protests, but people in face-to-face interviews, telephone polls and focus group workshops preferred putting it close to its original location.

On future development, most respondents preferred building a hotel and one office tower in front of Two IFC rather than a hotel and two towers. But half of focus group workshop participants disliked both concepts, saying the density was too high for a site close to the waterfront.


----------



## hkskyline

*Courts not the place to cure ills of society says HK's top judge *
11 December 2008
Hong Kong Standard

Hong Kong's top judge says the city's social, political and economic problems should be resolved through the political process rather than the courts.

Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang made the comments while addressing the issue of a growing number of judicial review cases here and overseas.

He made no direct mention of the most recent controversial case that saw a judge rule this week that prisoners have the right to vote. The ruling came at the end of a judicial review launched by two inmates at Stanley Prison - one of them a convicted robber - and a lawmaker.

But, in an opening address to a conference on ``Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance Today,'' jointly organized by Chinese University and Britain's Cambridge University, Li said: ``It is only through the give and take of the political process after consultation and dialogue that viable solutions may be found.''

Li added that the legislative and executive procedures are better suited to reconciling society's various interests.

``It is to the political process that the citizen must look for an appropriate resolution to these problems,'' he said.

``The judicial review is a cornerstone of good governance,'' said Li, but he added that the public should understand that the decisions of the courts in such cases are concerned with ``what is legally valid and what is not.''

Li said courts dealing with judicial reviews were ``not decision-makers'' and warned that the courts of law were not the solution to political, economic or social ills.

Serial judicial review-seeker and League of Social Democrats lawmaker ``Long Hair'' Leung Kwok agreed.

``He's right, but the problem is the SAR government failed to make amendments or strike down ordinance and laws which have violated human rights for decades,'' he added.

Leung, the third man in the case seeking the vote for inmates, said the government also failed to ensure Hong Kong residents could enjoy rights guaranteed under Article 39 of the Basic Law.

``That's why there are so many judicial review cases in court. We aren't going to court to get decisions on policy and political reform but to seek justice,'' Leung said.

Danny Lam Wai-fung, who heads Hong Kong University's department of politics and public administration, said the focus of a judicial review should be ``solely on whether government agencies have exercised the powers given to them in an appropriate way.''

He added that sometimes court rulings can impose unnecessary constraints on policy deliberations.

Lam added that judicial reviews do provide a suitable channel for conservationists and environmental protection groups to fight the government's monopoly of power over reclamation policy.

``In a political system where the venues for policy debates are limited and monopolized by the executive branch, the court is a venue in which interest groups can at least have a chance to win,'' he said.

Li said the sharp increase in judicial reviews in Hong Kong was also largely due to a more educated public with higher expectations of those who govern.

He said reconciling the Basic Law and Bill of Rights with executive and legislative acts along with attempts to navigate the middle ground between individual rights and the public interests have also led to more challenges.


----------



## M.Schwerdtner

pictures from 27. december ... view from central plaza sky lobby


----------



## hkskyline

*Project makes a nonsense of rules on reclamation *
28 December 2008
South China Morning Post

The cavalier attitude many government officials take towards reclamation never ceases to amaze. After the furore over damage to the harbour stemming from the Central-Wan Chai bypass project, it should have been clear to officials that any reclamation needs to be carried out with full transparency and public support. Yet the Drainage Services Department appears to have completed a substantial reclamation off Cyberport, Pok Fu Lam, without proper permission. It claims the authority to do so because the work is not "technically" reclamation.

The site is part of a HK$3.8 billion storm-water management project to relieve flooding at times of heavy rain. No one disputes the need for such work in many parts of Hong Kong Island, especially in Sheung Wan, an area which has been plagued by chronic flooding for years. The department announced last year that it would build a small, temporary pier for the project off Pok Fu Lam and obtained permits for it. It gazetted a map showing a narrow, finger-like pier jutting out into the middle of the proposed works area. But contractors for the department have instead reclaimed an area of sea to build a giant platform several times larger than the proposed pier and nearly equal in size to the entire works area.

The department has admitted the original plan for the site was revised after its initial approvals. With no sense of irony, it has insisted the platform is the pier and that it falls entirely within the approved works boundary. If so, it must be one of the strangest- looking piers in the world. Drainage officials said the Environmental Protection Department had not objected to the revised plan, and the main contractor said the site was not technically reclamation because it was only temporary. These are excuses that fly in the face of common sense and legal precedent. The platform fits any reasonable person's definition of reclamation. Under the Foreshore and Sea-Bed (Reclamations) Ordinance, all plans for reclamation - and all subsequent changes to those plans - need to be approved by the director of lands and gazetted. The drainage department has not complied with the law.

As for the distinction between temporary and permanent reclamation, the High Court has already ruled that there is no difference and that both must pass the same stringent test of overriding public interest. Granted, that ruling in March was an interpretation of harbour protection laws; the Pok Fu Lam site falls outside the harbour. But officials should not assume they can carry out any reclamation project outside the harbour by claiming it is only temporary.

It may well be that construction of the platform is necessary to complete the anti-flooding project in the area. If so, drainage officials should now make an effort to explain the new development to nearby residents and the public at large. If the works platform is intended to be temporary, they should explain how long it will be there and whether surrounding marine conditions may be restored when it is dismantled. Moreover, those officials in charge of approving reclamation must now look into the project to make sure it has the necessary permits and that it does not cause any further damage to the marine environment. Government departments are required to gazette public works so that people will know exactly what is being done. Drainage officials have made changes that appear not to be in the gazetted plan. They must now rectify the situation and convince people they are not being misled.


----------



## hkskyline

*Opening up harbourfront to take 10 years *
9 January 2009
South China Morning Post

About 70 per cent of harbourfront land would become accessible open space for public enjoyment, but the whole plan would probably take at least 10 years to achieve, the government said yesterday.

The plan would take time because a lot of harbourfront sites were privately owned, Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor told a Legislative Council subcommittee on harbourfront planning.

The government's ultimate objective was to construct continuous promenades around most parts of Victoria Harbour, she said.

At present, about 30 per cent of the harbourfront comprises promenades or parks, and 27 per cent is devoted to cargo. Another 40 per cent, or 180 hectares, will be turned into green, accessible open space.

The minister said the number of years the process would take was uncertain, but "it is probably not a single digit".

Her bureau would study the feasibility of public-private partnership to develop waterfront promenades in private sites, and would start with Hung Hom Pier, which adjoins a private residential area.

While district-level planning could be accomplished in new areas such as West Kowloon and Kai Tak, she said other districts such as Kwun Tong, Sheung Wan and Wan Chai, where waterfronts were already occupied, would need the co-operation of various government bureaus and engagement with private stakeholders and district councils.

The government was also looking for consultants to study the possibility of introducing water taxis, as there were a lot of disused piers around the harbour that could be used, she said.

Mrs Lam said she was also considering the possibility of removing cargo areas from harbour sites in the long run, as Sydney was doing, because some argued the government should preserve the historic function of the harbour.


----------



## hkskyline

By *memphis * from a Hong Kong photography forum :


----------



## spicytimothy

O my, we seem to be missing a building somewhere! :-D


----------



## hkskyline

*Now create a harbour we can take pride in *
14 January 2009
South China Morning Post

After years of making and revising plans, the government has finally unveiled a development blueprint for the former Kai Tak airport site that looks set to go ahead. At long last, officials have come up with a viable plan that seems to have bypassed the sort of pitfalls and minefields that held up development of Tamar, the Central-Wan Chai bypass and the West Kowloon arts hub. Moreover, the economic climate has worsened, changing public sentiment. It is easier, now, for the government to push ahead with major infrastructure and development projects, given the need to provide work and stimulate the economy.

Along with West Kowloon, the 320-hectare Kai Tak site is the most valuable piece of vacant urban land we have, and one that does not have roads blocking access to our beautiful waterfront. We must make sure it stays that way. The site's development is important to the whole city, not only to those who will move to live there. One major concern is the relative geographic isolation of the site. Planners must ensure easy access for future residents, visitors and tourists. Its success will very much depend on accessibility.

There are two reasons why the latest blueprint will be acceptable to the public. First, the government will pay most of the bill, which will amount to more than HK$100 billion over 12 years. This will help the administration avoid any allegations of collusion with big business interests. Suspicions of this kind contributed to problems for the original plan for West Kowloon to be built by a single developer. The government was forced to backtrack and parcel out the site as individual projects for different bidders. The proposed cruise terminal, a major component of the Kai Tak site's development, was originally to be built and run by a single private operator. But several private bids failed to meet minimum government requirements. Now, the government will be the main builder.

Second, the government recognises the Kai Tak site amounts to a sub-district, so it has something for everyone: schools, public housing flats, private residential development, government offices, parks, a cleaned-up nullah to be turned into a river, a major stadium, tourist attractions and shopping malls. An MTR station connecting Sha Tin and Central will be built, and possibly a monorail. There is also the possibility of a bridge linking the tip of the runway to Kwun Tong. Questions have been raised about whether building this will contravene harbour protection laws against reclamation and block the flow of vessels. It must be carefully thought through.

With the latest blueprint, the government has made an attempt to avoid flaws in the way it had conducted previous public consultations. Since 2004, it has made extensive use of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee to gauge opinions across different sectors regarding the Kai Tak development. In the past, critics have accused officials of failing to highlight the salient points and hiding the real agenda behind major public projects. In turn, officials have become upset that attempts at transparency have opened them up to attacks and criticism. So even now, Kai Tak's planners should listen to legitimate concerns about their project and, where possible, adopt changes that can bring improvement.

With the Kai Tak blueprint, all the major development plans are now in place. The future landscape of our city is taking shape. Our children will have to live with this for a long time. Let's now create a new harbourside of which Hong Kong can be proud.


----------



## SilentStrike

hkskyline said:


> *Project makes a nonsense of rules on reclamation *
> 28 December 2008
> South China Morning Post
> 
> The cavalier attitude many government officials take towards reclamation never ceases to amaze. After the furore over damage to the harbour stemming from the Central-Wan Chai bypass project, it should have been clear to officials that any reclamation needs to be carried out with full transparency and public support. Yet the Drainage Services Department appears to have completed a substantial reclamation off Cyberport, Pok Fu Lam, without proper permission. It claims the authority to do so because the work is not "technically" reclamation.
> 
> The site is part of a HK$3.8 billion storm-water management project to relieve flooding at times of heavy rain. No one disputes the need for such work in many parts of Hong Kong Island, especially in Sheung Wan, an area which has been plagued by chronic flooding for years. The department announced last year that it would build a small, temporary pier for the project off Pok Fu Lam and obtained permits for it. It gazetted a map showing a narrow, finger-like pier jutting out into the middle of the proposed works area. But contractors for the department have instead reclaimed an area of sea to build a giant platform several times larger than the proposed pier and nearly equal in size to the entire works area.
> 
> The department has admitted the original plan for the site was revised after its initial approvals. With no sense of irony, it has insisted the platform is the pier and that it falls entirely within the approved works boundary. If so, it must be one of the strangest- looking piers in the world. Drainage officials said the Environmental Protection Department had not objected to the revised plan, and the main contractor said the site was not technically reclamation because it was only temporary. These are excuses that fly in the face of common sense and legal precedent. The platform fits any reasonable person's definition of reclamation. Under the Foreshore and Sea-Bed (Reclamations) Ordinance, all plans for reclamation - and all subsequent changes to those plans - need to be approved by the director of lands and gazetted. The drainage department has not complied with the law.
> 
> As for the distinction between temporary and permanent reclamation, the High Court has already ruled that there is no difference and that both must pass the same stringent test of overriding public interest. Granted, that ruling in March was an interpretation of harbour protection laws; the Pok Fu Lam site falls outside the harbour. But officials should not assume they can carry out any reclamation project outside the harbour by claiming it is only temporary.
> 
> It may well be that construction of the platform is necessary to complete the anti-flooding project in the area. If so, drainage officials should now make an effort to explain the new development to nearby residents and the public at large. If the works platform is intended to be temporary, they should explain how long it will be there and whether surrounding marine conditions may be restored when it is dismantled. Moreover, those officials in charge of approving reclamation must now look into the project to make sure it has the necessary permits and that it does not cause any further damage to the marine environment. Government departments are required to gazette public works so that people will know exactly what is being done. Drainage officials have made changes that appear not to be in the gazetted plan. They must now rectify the situation and convince people they are not being misled.


exactly, why reclaim for such an ugly building?? if they chose the other design then ok... but this??


----------



## hkskyline

*為中環新海濱建立共識 *
10 January 2009
星島日報 

《中環新海濱城市設計研究》進入最後階段。規劃署的顧問，早前向共建維港委員會報告公眾參與的結果，隨後再訂出最終方案。

國金二期前面近四至六號碼頭的土地，政府建議興建兩幢分別為十八層高與三十層高的大廈。概念A是辦公室和酒店各一幢，概念B是兩幢辦公室，報告指概念A較受歡迎。其實，許多倡議者認為該土地臨近海濱，根本不應建高樓。例如中西區區議會便提出把土地綠化用作公園和公共設施，長春社提議用作大笪地，也有團體提議只建三層高的樓宇把面積轉移至其他地方而不在海邊建高樓。政府的回應是「可考慮減低建築物的高度」。即是說，團體的建議都不被接納。

方案另一缺點，就是那八綫行車，比干諾道中還要闊的地面P2幹道。寬闊的馬路把海濱與內陸地方隔絕，減低海濱的可達性，也不符合《海港規劃原則》。有專業團體認為，既然發展密度降低了，P2道路為甚麼不能收窄？政府的回應是「P2路可解決現時干諾道中與康樂廣場路口的交通擠塞；再者，降低將來的建築密度也不會影響現時對P2路的需要。」似乎答非所問，實在令人摸不着頭腦。問題不在P2路是否需要，而是可否減低闊度呀！

無計畫把碼頭原址重置

皇后碼頭是原址重置還是搬到海邊，意見也有分歧。明顯地，這是「尊重歷史」和「着重功能」之間的選擇。報告顯示，專業工作坊的參與者多支持原地重置；意見卡、面談訪問和公眾論壇的參與者多支持搬到海邊，十八區區議會亦支持後者。

結果可解讀為：香港人的選擇，功能比歷史重要。怪不得報告顯示，中環新海濱在「尊重文化歷史脈絡」的設計原則方面獲得最低的支持。

政府在回應文件中聲稱皇后碼頭原址與P2路重疊，要原址重置則要刊憲，阻礙興建道路的進度。哎，由皇后清場至今已超過一年，P2路建成了嗎？有心原址重置的話P2路刊憲修改早就完成了。

由此可見，政府自此至終都沒計畫把皇后碼頭原址重置，除了用作安撫保育人士保衞碼頭免被清拆的權宜之計。這樣又怎不會傷透保育人士和專業人士的心呢？

政府高層誓死要把皇后碼頭遷離原址的決心，從整個公眾參與的過程中可見端倪。眼見專業人士在工作坊中多數支持原址重置，部門便連忙找來自己的支持者，甚至游說與中區毫不相干的區議會通過捆綁式的動議，把碼頭搬到海邊。對此結果，筆者除了深感無奈，實在無話可說。一切是非對錯，惟待歷史判斷。

枉費倡議者另類方案

每個議題只有A餐與B餐的選擇，其他建議不作考慮，那便枉費了其他倡議者花盡心思的另類方案了。因此共建維港委員會建議舉辦公聽會，讓不同的倡議者和政府辯論，互相聆聽各項理據，讓政府也可以理服人（如果有的話）。

過去五年，市民對海港規劃的訴求起了重大的變化。從單一地反對填海，到追求一個以人為本綠意盎然，充滿活力和富歷史感的海濱願景。可惜《城市設計研究》卻一成不變的按過時的分區計畫大綱圖，設下大量不必要的局限。如此又豈能做到一個世界級的海濱呢？

政府過分小心，是恐怕一旦放鬆規限，隨時連規劃多年且飽受折騰的中環灣仔繞道都不保，筆者認為這是過慮了。

筆者擔心的，反而是到時海填了，路建了，海旁還是一片沙漠，海濱長廊卻遙遙無期。但願不是如此。

吳永順

註冊建築師

城市設計聯盟成員

http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/avincentng


----------



## hkskyline

Source : http://www.fotop.net/alvpoon


----------



## Phobos

Are there renderings of the new government building planned for the reclamation?
I remember seeing a render of a tower with a kind of baroque plaza in the entrance,but I guess it has changed since then.


----------



## hkskyline

Phobos said:


> Are there renderings of the new government building planned for the reclamation?
> I remember seeing a render of a tower with a kind of baroque plaza in the entrance,but I guess it has changed since then.


HONG KONG | Tamar Development Project News
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=456857


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong's battle to preserve waterfront *
5 February 2009
Financial Times

The last remaining bay in Victoria Harbour is likely to be saved from reclamation, writes Tom Mitchell

Six of the 14 stations on Hong Kong's Island underground railway line are named after bays or streams that no longer exist, obliterated decades ago by landfill projects that greatly diminished what had been one of the world's most beautiful harbours.

The government's original redevelopment plan for Kai Tak, the city's former airport, threatened to eradicate Kowloon Bay, the last vestige of the once spacious Victoria Harbour.

But when a 12-year, HK$100bn ($12.9bn, €10bn, £8.9bn) blueprint for Kai Tak was finally released last month, environmental activists were pleasantly surprised to find that the Hong Kong government had taken a "zero reclamation option".

"It is a major success - there will not be one square foot of reclamation," says Winston Chu, a solicitor who has led the fight to preserve what remains of the harbour. "This is the last bay left."

Mr Chu, who began his crusade in 1994 at the urging of his late mother, and his fellow campaigners owe much of their success to Hong Kong's independent judiciary and the rule of law, tools not available to would-be citizen activists in other Chinese cities.

Mr Chu has won five of seven lawsuits against the government. Another victory was the protection of the harbour bill adopted on the eve of the former British colony's return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997. It declared that the harbour "is to be protected and preserved as a special public asset and a natural heritage of Hong Kong people, and for that purpose there shall be a presumption against reclamation".

Six years later, a legal test case set a high bar for proposed reclamations, saying they could proceed only if they met an "overriding public need". One that did is a bypass expressway to be built on the controversial Central and Wanchai (Cantonese for "Little Bay") reclamation, which is in full swing and will reshape the waterfront of Hong Kong's main business district.

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong's secretary for development, calls it "the final, final piece of reclamation - that's it".

"We respect the law," Ms Lam says. "We should do much better on enhancing the waterfront because Victoria Harbour is such a natural asset . . . It's also about respecting the history of the place." Much of the damage to Hong Kong's harbour was in fact done decades ago by British rulers trapped by huge development pressures in the cramped colony and their fiscal dependence on land sale revenues. Roughly half of Kowloon Bay was lost to reclamations completed by 1977; the new plan for Kai Tak will preserve the bay's remaining 300 hectares.

Mr Chu jokes that Hong Kong's former rulers, perhaps homesick for the Thames, set out to turn Victoria Harbour into Victoria river. He compares the government sanctioned erosion of the harbour that is the city's raison d'être and gave it its name - "Hong Kong" is Cantonese for "fragrant harbour" - to the slow but steady mastications of a silk worm. "It's only one small bite at a time - chomp, chomp, chomp - but then the leaf is gone," he says.

While activists pledge to remain vigilant of future landfill encroachments, their focus is turning to the revitalisation of Hong Kong's dispiriting waterfront. Public promenades are piecemeal and often truncated by industrial installations.

These waterfront wastelands contrast sharply with Hong Kong's world class natural park system, which encompasses almost half the territory's land area. When people seek solace and natural beauty, they head to the hills not the harbour.

"There's no vision for what the harbour might look like one day," says Margaret Brooke, who chairs the best practice committee at the Harbour Business Forum, a concern group backed by many of Hong Kong's leading companies.

"Providing a [continuous] promenade is going to be a nightmare because you've got so much engineering stuff on the harbour . . . We just have to improve it inch by inch. It's a dead economic asset at the moment."

Ms Lam agrees: "We have tended to put a lot of functional things by the waterfront." She says she maintains "an open mind" about the possible creation of a more powerful harbour authority. But she also defends the government's current "bits and pieces" approach to harbour development, citing an HK$18m project to pedestrianise a 200-metre stretch along Kowloon Bay. "We don't want to lose any opportunity to make improvements."


----------



## hkskyline

*Clean harbour key to HK sea hub status *
More is being done to keep Hong Kong's coastline pollution-free, but efforts have to be updated and continuing
29 May 2009
South China Morning Post

Hong Kong can attribute a large part of its success to its deepwater port, but it is often accused of taking little care of the aquatic resources that have helped it generate vast riches.

Hong Kong has one of the busiest harbours in the world and more than 1,600km of coastal waters, but fish stocks in many areas have been depleted and the water polluted with human and industrial waste. Even pockets of unspoiled clean water in remote areas that support a diversity of marine life are under pressure from increasing recreational activities and illegal fishing.

Water pollution can be invisible to the naked eye, but the impact can be wide-ranging. Ecoli bacteria and other pollutants can make swimmers sick and contaminate or kill marine life.

Around Lau Fau Shan in Hong Kong's far north, home to what remains of the oyster farming industry, discarded plastic bottles, bags, styrofoam boxes and fast-food wrappers litter the shoreline.

"Pollution is a huge problem," said a spokesman from the WWF, which studies water and air quality. "Visit Lau Fau Shan and you will certainly be wary of buying oysters in Hong Kong. But it is the rubbish you can't see that's causing the real problems."

According to the United Nations, there are more than 100 million tonnes of plastic floating in the world's seas and oceans. The UN estimates that about 50 per cent of plastic waste comes from Asia.

In the Aberdeen typhoon shelter, more than 300 tonnes of floating refuse are collected every year, most of which is household rubbish including bottles, cans, bags and packaging. Floating refuse collected along Hong Kong's coastline is also on the increase.

Adding to the waste washed and blown into the sea from factories in the Pearl River Delta is the debris left behind by swimmers, beachgoers and litter from streets and storm drains. There is also rubbish dumped from fishing boats and vessel operations that adds to debris from landfill sites, household and construction.

According to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), the number of beaches meeting the Water Quality Objective for bathing water increased to 34 in 2006 from 26 in 1997.

The number of river monitoring stations with bad or very bad water quality dropped from 52 per cent in 1988 to less than 15 per cent in recent years. Programmes such as the Harbour Area Treatment Scheme - a strategy for collecting and treating sewage - have been credited with helping to reduce pollution loads.

Realising that Hong Kong's marine pollution problems are not entirely of its own making, the Hong Kong-Guangdong Joint Working Group on Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection has devised measures to reduce water pollution.

An EPD spokesman said: "Hong Kong shares its waters with Guangdong. It makes sense, therefore, that pollution control efforts be matched by both sides."

The sides set up a joint working group and in 2000 agreed on a 15-year plan to clean up Deep Bay and reduce pollution from existing sources and control future pollution. The two sides also initiated the first review of the regional water quality control strategy for Mirs Bay at the end of last year.

The EPD conducts monthly marine water quality monitoring at 76 sampling stations. It monitors water and sediment quality of 17 typhoon shelters, marinas and dockyards. The EPD carries out monthly sampling of phytoplankton in the water at 25 monitoring stations. Three main areas the EPD monitors are dissolved oxygen - needed to support marine life; ammonia - harmful to water quality; and bacteria - linked to raw sewage.

Water quality in Hong Kong harbour is expected to improve with the addition of the Stonecutters Island centralised sewage treatment plant. The new plant, capable of handling 1.7 million cubic metres of sewage each day has been built as part of the harbour treatment scheme.

Discarded plastic bottles, supermarket bags and other plastic items that end up in the sea might look unsightly, but they could also pose an even bigger problem for humans. Studies show that tidal movement and erosion grinds plastic waste into tiny non-degradable particles.

Doug Woodring, an environmental consultant for small businesses and founder of Project Kaisei, a global initiative which he started in Hong Kong, which aims to clean up the plastic vortex in the Pacific Ocean, said because these particles were petroleum based they attracted harmful chemicals such as DDT, PCBs and heavy metals dumped in the world's oceans. These are eaten by small fish as indigestible food and passed along the food chain until they are consumed by humans.

Mr Woodring said: "As large consumers of seafood, Hongkongers are quite likely eating toxic time bombs, particularly when they eat bigger and older fish, which tend to have larger concentrations of toxic particles.

"We have all seen plastic in our rivers and oceans and we can all do something about it," said Mr Woodring, who is organising a water clean-up project as part of the World Ocean Day with Hong Kong's surfing, diving, sailing and paddling community next weekend.


----------



## hkskyline

By *siuma * from dchome :


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> *Clean harbour key to HK sea hub status *
> More is being done to keep Hong Kong's coastline pollution-free, but efforts have to be updated and continuing
> 29 May 2009
> South China Morning Post
> 
> Hong Kong can attribute a large part of its success to its deepwater port, but it is often accused of taking little care of the aquatic resources that have helped it generate vast riches.
> 
> "Pollution is a huge problem," said a spokesman from the WWF, which studies water and air quality. "Visit Lau Fau Shan and you will certainly be wary of buying oysters in Hong Kong. But it is the rubbish you can't see that's causing the real problems."


After the U.S. news reported that Batman would be foregoing a flying over the harbor shot for "The Dark Knight" due to pollution concerns, I was both embarrassed and upset...


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> After the U.S. news reported that Batman would be foregoing a flying over the harbor shot for "The Dark Knight" due to pollution concerns, I was both embarrassed and upset...


Not trying to find an excuse, I wish Victoria Harbour were safe to jump in anytime, too. But the pollution problem by "The Dark Knight" was just propaganda, it were just like asking someone to just in the East or West River in New York, same thing. Water pollution in city's harbour isn't a Hong Kong only thing, plenty famous harbour face the same problem.

In fact, Victoria Harbour has gotten better and better over the past decade while our water sewage and drainage treatment have become better and better.

But water quality outside the harbour in area like the Deep Bay, Lau Fau Shan is really an outside pollution that we have suffered from pollutant originated from Shenzhen, upstream Pearl River and Guangdong. We can keep complaining, but the mainland has a long way on make the clean water return.


----------



## cornish pasty

Guangdong and Hong Kong both need to work together to get rid of the pollution across the entire Pearl River Delta. HK can't just blame the mainland for the pollution, while it is a big cause, there is also a lot that goes on in HK that doesn't help.


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong is taking action on locally-produced pollution, which is primarily due to vehicular emissions. However, the grey skies are caused by factory pollutants from the mainland. Guangdong province has recently been very pressing with new environmental legislation, much to the complaint of Hong Kong investors who saw the cost efficiencies erode with more legislation.


----------



## hkskyline

*Opinion : Cut back scale of harbour reclamation *
27 May 2009
South China Morning Post

Construction of the long-planned Central-Wan Chai bypass will start by the end of the year ("HK$28b bypass gets the green light", May 21).

I appreciate the bypass is necessary in order to reduce traffic congestion problems.

Anyone familiar with this area knows that congestion is getting worse.

At present, travelling by car from Rumsey Street, Sheung Wan, to Causeway Bay during the rush hour takes about 15 minutes.

If the bypass is not ready by 2016 the congestion will have got so bad that travelling the same distance will take 45 minutes, with maximum speeds of 5km/h for drivers.

Also if there is even a minor accident, for example at the Gloucester Road corridor, the risk of gridlock increases.

Also this corridor is heavily used and there will need to be major road repairs sometime in the next decade.

The bypass would have to be ready in time for such road repairs, or east-west traffic on this part of Hong Kong Island would grind to a halt.

I also support electronic road pricing in the existing corridor in Central.

I think such a scheme will restrict the number of cars entering Central.

However, I am concerned that the construction of the Central-Wan Chai bypass requires additional reclamation of part of Victoria Harbour.

Environmental organisations have criticised this reclamation plan by the government, saying that it is a form of non-sustainable development.

I can understand their concerns.

This reclamation work will lead to further narrowing of the harbour.

I am worried about what effect this will have on boats using the harbour.

Also, such reclamation degrades an important natural resource of Hong Kong. The narrowing of the harbour will mean its harder for pollutants to be washed out, thus leading to even more serious water pollution.

We will also lose more of our natural coastline.

I urge officials to look into this matter and try to strike a balance between the need to build the Central-Wan Chai bypass and the importance of protecting the environment.

They should make every effort to minimise the scale of the harbour reclamation.

Charlie Chan Wing-tai, Sha Tin


----------



## EricIsHim

hkskyline said:


> *Opinion : Cut back scale of harbour reclamation *
> 27 May 2009
> South China Morning Post
> 
> The narrowing of the harbour will mean its harder for pollutants to be washed out, thus leading to even more serious water pollution.
> 
> We will also lose more of our natural coastline.
> 
> Charlie Chan Wing-tai, Sha Tin


1. Narrower water body moves faster than the wider one, and it is actually harder for pollutant to settle. It will be somewhat cleaner. And the current half reclaimed north HKI shore has dead spot of water current where dirty water sits and get worse.

2. Majority of the harbour coastline has been artificial for over a century from being the natural. :lol:


----------



## hkskyline

True .. but is it possible a changing coastline will result in dead zones where water can pool so even though the harbour currents still move and the pollutants get flushed out, they may be flushed into these dead zones?

I'm thinking whether Hung Hom Bay would be one of these.


----------



## EricIsHim

hkskyline said:


> True .. but is it possible a changing coastline will result in dead zones where water can pool so even though the harbour currents still move and the pollutants get flushed out, they may be flushed into these dead zones?
> 
> I'm thinking whether Hung Hom Bay would be one of these.


The inner water at the end of Kai Tak river between the old runway and Kowloon Bay is a classic example, but it has nothing to do the ongoing reclamation project.

But in Central, where water just outside the Post Office HQ between the old Star Ferry and 2IFC used to be one of those dead zones. It was a dead right angle. No matter which way the current flowed. When current flowed from east to west, everything was pushed in against the land; when current flowed from west to east, the current passed by the edge of a streamline, and wasn't strong enough to carry anything out. Water in that corner didn't get flush out and bad stuff just sat there. Overtime, it got smelly on a hot day when water started to evaporate. Of course that corner is gone now so things shouldn't be as bad.

Pre-reclaimed condition:








Source: Google Map


----------



## hkskyline

*City to spend HK$4b transporting waste *
16 June 2009
South China Morning Post

Hong Kong would spend at least HK$4 billion over the next three years to transport construction waste from the city's massive infrastructure projects to reclamation sites across the border, officials said yesterday.

Talks were also under way with mainland authorities on opening up more and closer sites to receive the waste. A number of sites were being considered by the State Oceanic Administration, and officials hoped the sites chosen would be near Hong Kong to save on transport costs.

The only site currently designated to receive waste is Guanghaiwan in Taishan city , in the western Pearl River Delta.

The site is about 170km from Hong Kong and the waste has to be transported by sea. It has taken about 17 million tonnes of waste so far.

Hong Kong is expected to generate at least 28 million tonnes of waste in the next two to three years from infrastructure works, including rail projects that require excavation and tunnels. While some could be used in reclamation work in Central, Wan Chai and for the Hong Kong-Macau-Zhuhai bridge off north Lantau, officials said these projects could not use all of the material.

"A single site cannot handle the growing amount of material. We will need more sites to receive them as we do not have enough space to store them in Hong Kong," said Yip Sai-chor, head of the civil engineering office at the Civil Engineering and Development Department.

Mr Yip said that although the Taishan site had space to handle up to 90 million tonnes, logistical problems limited its use. The department had been operating two "fill banks" in Tuen Mun and Tseung Kwan O to store the reusable materials temporarily, but their capacities were nearly approaching the 12 million tonne limit. It was forecast that about 10 million tonnes of waste would need to be moved out of the city.

The department has already invited tenders for operators for the cross-border transport for the next three years, the cost of which is estimated at a minimum of HK$4 billion.

The department will finance the project from its recurrent account and there is no need to seek additional funding from the legislature.


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> *City to spend HK$4b transporting waste *
> 16 June 2009
> South China Morning Post


Is the HK Gov't encouraging green building? Like adopting the LEED system? NYC enacted a law in 2005 that required a majority of new city-funded buildings to be LEED Certified or Silver, and Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC also encourages private developers to be more enviro+energy friendly.


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> Is the HK Gov't encouraging green building? Like adopting the LEED system? NYC enacted a law in 2005 that required a majority of new city-funded buildings to be LEED Certified or Silver, and Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC also encourages private developers to be more enviro+energy friendly.


HK has a long way to go before implementing and enforcing something as sophisticated as the LEED system. But HK's do have something called the _Building Environmental Assessment Method_ (BEAM) (http://www.hk-beam.org.hk/general/home.php). I don't know much about this BEAM program, but I doubt it's as popular, powerful and recognized as the LEED does locally.

Developers do start to look at LEED as a reference for new buildings, for example the Hennessy Centre under construction claimes to be the first LEED Platinium pre-certified building in HK (see http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=36993496&postcount=43)


----------



## herenthere

EricIsHim said:


> HK has a long way to go before implementing and enforcing something as sophisticated as the LEED system. But HK's do have something called the _Building Environmental Assessment Method_ (BEAM) (http://www.hk-beam.org.hk/general/home.php). I don't know much about this BEAM program, but I doubt it's as popular, powerful and recognized as the LEED does locally.


From a quick glance, its credit system and requirements do seem very similar to the LEED system, with the addition of a landmark/cultural criteria. I'm glad that this system is there!


----------



## hkskyline

By *ll4007* from dchome :


----------



## hkskyline

By *oh_no_yes* from dchome :


----------



## hkskyline

*Legal fight to save harbour must be extended to all waterways *
3 July 2009
SCMP

The Society for Protection of the Harbour supports the letters from Peter Y. Wong, president of the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers ("Reclamation for delta bridge can be reduced", June 29) and Luiz Souza ("Hong Kong's outstanding areas of natural beauty must be saved", June 30), calling for protection of our shorelines and natural beauty.

What remained of Victoria Harbour (roughly a half) was only saved in the nick of time by the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, enacted in 1997, which was fortified by the judgment of the Court of Final Appeal in 2004 and the judgment of the High Court last year.

Hong Kong people should take note that, under the Foreshore and Seabed (Reclamations) Ordinance, the government can reclaim any part of Hong Kong waters, or even authorise developers to do so, without approval by the Town Planning Board or any other public body and without having to justify the reclamation to the public.

Our society was formed only to protect Victoria Harbour, as the task to take on the protection of all Hong Kong waters would have been too difficult and ambitious 15 years ago.

Now that the Hong Kong community has woken up to the importance of the environment, it is the right time to consider a law to protect all of the waters of Hong Kong. We urge public-spirited citizens and environmental groups to take on the task of persuading the Legislative Council to pass a similar ordinance so that the shorelines of Hong Kong will only be reclaimed if there is sufficient public justification.

Government officials who consider themselves qualified to lead Hong Kong must exhibit the wisdom and foresight to do so.

They should recognise that the natural beauty of Hong Kong and its position as a major cosmopolitan area centred within an archipelago is unique in the world and every effort should be made to preserve it.

Winston K. S. Chu, adviser, Society for Protection of the Harbour


----------



## hkskyline

*Opinion : Electronic road pricing is not the solution for new bypass *
26 May 2009
South China Morning Post

The Central-Wan Chai bypass has finally been given the go-ahead. Your editorial ("Bypass will cut jams - if we charge to use roads", May 22) says the approval should not be the end of the matter. You argue it has to be the spur for development of a comprehensive strategy for traffic flow in Hong Kong - with electronic road pricing at its heart.

Your editorial says at peak times the streets of Central are clogged, considerably lengthening travel times and charging for road use will convince a proportion of drivers to use public transport instead.

But as Central is the central business district of Hong Kong one can't imagine that people would simply drive there purposelessly. Obviously, vehicles go there because of a genuine business need and they will still go there - electronic road pricing or not - if the area remains the central business district.

Also, one can't imagine making commercial deliveries to Central by public transport, or chairmen of multinational companies coming down from The Peak to their offices at Central by bus, because of road charges. I tend to agree with the official argument that drivers heading for destinations beyond central business district would be unfairly penalised because they had no alternative but to use its streets. Building the bypass, which will go underground near the Two IFC office tower, eliminates this problem and hence road pricing would not be required.

When the bypass was adequately designed to divert unrelated traffic away from Central without the need for road pricing such a "highwayman's charge" was not even in the equation for reducing traffic congestion in Central. As such, what exactly is the motive to link electronic road pricing with the bypass?

Your editorial acknowledges that "road pricing has been controversial in most cities where it has been put in place". Why does Hong Kong now have to play "catch-up"? Do we really need to "keep up with the Joneses", irrespectively?

The bypass aims to reduce congestion but will achieve a minimal reduction in jams in other districts. Some other appropriate solutions are needed but not necessarily road pricing.

Alex Tam, Sai Kung


----------



## hkskyline

*Fill in the gaps to develop HK, professors say *
13 July 2009
SCMP

Two mainland academics say they have the answer to the city's land shortage - reclaiming the waters between Lamma, Cheung Chau, Peng Chau and two smaller islands.

The reclamation would create 25 sq km of extra land - roughly the amount of built up land on Hong Kong Island, they say. The ambitious plan would cost HK$11.2 billion.

The proposal comes from Lei Qiang, professor at the Centre for Studies of Hong Kong, Macau and the Pearl River Delta at Zhongshan University in Guangzhou, and Qian Zhaojun, a former deputy director of the Navigation Design and Survey Institute in Guangzhou.

They argue that Hong Kong faces an acute shortage of land and their plan would create plenty of valuable land for future development.

Professor Lei said reclamation of the waters near the islands, which have an average depth of seven metres, was technically feasible.

"It would create space for comprehensive development," he said. "Development on such a vast piece of land would be more cost-effective than on scattered pieces of land in other parts of Hong Kong."

Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen promised last month that the government would adopt "new thinking" to tackle the land shortage and enable development of six new economic "pillars".

Victor Sit Fung-shuen, director of the Advanced Institute for Contemporary China Studies at Baptist University, said: "[Their] holistic approach ... merits discussion but the plan is unrealistic in the short run."

He does not believe it could be carried out in the next 20 years.

Christine Loh Kung-wai, chairwoman of the Society for Protection of the Harbour, said: "The obvious question to ask is: is Hong Kong short of land? How much factory land is there in Hong Kong that is not being used or reused for commercial and residential uses?

"There is also the issue of costs. Reclamation doesn't come 'free'. I doubt vast reclamation like they suggest will stand up to scrutiny."

Professor Lei said one of the aims of the proposal was to stimulate discussion in Hong Kong on the city's future development.


----------



## caelus

Not surprised such idea came from mainland academics, i guess natural preservation never come across their mind.


----------



## EricIsHim

hkskyline said:


> *Fill in the gaps to develop HK, professors say *
> 13 July 2009
> SCMP


That must be the biggest joke ever from two highly educated professors.









Yes, we are running low on usable empty land, but if the government does better and land management, planning and redevelopment, we still have plenty of land before we really need to reclaim our water body from the outlying island paradise. 

By that time, the SARs may not even exist and people are free to move around and live in the PRD area.


----------



## hkskyline

We still have plenty of land in the New Territories to develop. It's just the government doesn't want to auction too much and affect their revenues!


----------



## hkskyline

*A greener Hong Kong - at a stroke *
17 July 2009
SCMP

Did you take part in the public engagement exercise on design options for the new Wan Chai ferry pier and government helipad? Maybe you didn't hear about it; I only found out it was happening because, as chairman of the Antiquities Advisory Board, I get sent material like this automatically. The consultation period ended last week, so it's too late now. But I think I can safely say that you didn't miss much.

The new pier will replace the existing Wan Chai ferry terminals after a new coastline is created further north. The helipad will replace the current temporary facility and will be near Golden Bauhinia Square, next to the Convention and Exhibition Centre. It will be for mixed government and private use, but smaller than the four-pad commercial heliport proposed by some business figures a few years back.

These new facilities are part of the Central-Wan Chai bypass project. It is a controversial plan because it requires reclamation of the harbour and is essentially intended to increase levels of road traffic. Most of all, opponents claim that public consultation on the plan, which dates back to the 1990s, was insufficient and officials rammed it through.

Perhaps to try and avoid such accusations, officials are offering citizens a choice of two themes for the new pier and helipad: "natural waterfront" and "modern city". In fact, the designs are identical. The choice is simply between synthetic timber and metal external decor for the pier, and two different arrangements for the green areas on the pier rooftop and next to the helipad. Apart from the noise barrier (described as "urban furniture"), the helipad itself just looks like a helipad, either way.

Basically, the consultation asked whether you would like the pier in brown or white, and how you would like some trees and patches of lawn laid out.

But the lawns are the interesting bit. The artist's impressions of the "natural waterfront" option and both the helipads show areas of what looks like grass, with people walking on them. Assuming that the Civil Engineering and Development Department is not planning to use Astroturf, there are several possible explanations.

One is that they really are going to put grass there, and you will be able to use it. Another is that there will be signs saying "keep off". Or maybe someone told the artist to paint green in the picture, even though it will be concrete in the end.

In recent years, lots of trees have started to appear on artists' impressions of government infrastructure plans. Current pictures and scale models of the future Central-Wan Chai waterfront, for example, seem to be bursting with green (though not quite as much as private developers' pictures of future residential blocks). But, beneath it all, it is the engineers' original plan. Someone has simply added a lot of trees and green in the gaps.

The government, as I have said here before, traditionally sees public space as a waste - precious revenue that it has sacrificed. But I know from experience that some officials are becoming more open to the idea that the opposite is true: revenue can mean the sacrifice of our precious quality of life. Even they, however, have a problem when it comes to grass.

Apparently it is an administrative headache; it is hard to grow here because of our weather and environment, and it requires a lot of maintenance. It is more economic in bigger areas like Victoria Park - and hopefully will be in the West Kowloon Cultural District - but it makes less sense in small areas.

So I have to say I am a bit sceptical about the artist's impression of the new Wan Chai pier rooftop garden and the area next to the new helipad. I would love to take my children to them to play and run around there, but something tells me it won't happen.

Providing lawns in such small areas for people to walk and play on costs money, and green artists' paint is cheap.

Bernard Chan is a former member of the executive and legislative councils


----------



## hkskyline

*Committee weighs competing pier designs *
18 July 2009
South China Morning Post

The Harbourfront Enhancement Committee will next week discuss two design options for the new Wan Chai ferry pier.

The designs, dubbed "natural waterfront" and "modern city", will both be low-rise structures not higher than 20 metres to respect the waterfront setting, with designs intended to avoid creating wall-like buildings, according to a paper submitted to the committee yesterday.

The new pier will be built on the future harbourfront after the existing two piers are demolished to make way for the Central-Wan Chai bypass and related reclamation.

The design plans also cover a government helipad at Golden Bauhinia Square, to be relocated from the existing site at a former public cargo working area, also because of the bypass project.

The government said the new pier would be linked to its hinterland with a landscaped area and would be developed as a harbour observation deck for the public. From the helipad, visitors would be able to take helicopter sightseeing tours run by commercial operators.

In the "modern city" plan, the glazed walls of the building would be covered by graphic images showing old and new scenes of the Wan Chai district. The pier would be supported by metal columns with braces branching out in a tree-like pattern.

The "natural waterfront" design would use synthetic timber to create paving arranged in a wavy pattern.

The options were put to a brief public consultation late last month. Public views are being analysed.

The Wan Chai District Council has, meanwhile, expressed preference for the modern design, which members thought was more compatible with the outlook of the Convention and Exhibition Centre.

Members also urged the government to connect the new pier to the future MTR station at the exhibition centre to increase usage, as the existing piers were underused.

In another paper submitted to the committee, the Central and Western District Council and the Caritas Mok Cheung Sui Kan Community Centre proposed developing a 3.7 kilometre waterfront area between Sheung Wan and Kennedy Town into five themed areas.

The themes would be a green park, a food plaza, a multifunction promenade, a cultural plaza and a sunset-viewing park.


----------



## hkskyline

EricIsHim said:


> That must be the biggest joke ever from two highly educated professors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we are running low on usable empty land, but if the government does better and land management, planning and redevelopment, we still have plenty of land before we really need to reclaim our water body from the outlying island paradise.
> 
> By that time, the SARs may not even exist and people are free to move around and live in the PRD area.


I think it's all a publicity exercise to keep reclamation on the headlines!


----------



## hkskyline

*灣仔繞道通風樓設計諮詢*
2009年07月16日

















方案一　以流線型屋頂設計，呼應會展的新翼設計。









方案二　以條板屏風為主題，並提供綠化天台。

【本報訊】中環灣仔繞道和東區走廊連接路年底動工，路政署正設計隧道通風大樓，稍後會諮詢公眾。顧問公司提出兩個設計方案，包括以流線型屋頂為設計主題，呼應灣仔會展新翼的設計，又或以條板屏風作主題，增加綠化面積，配合未來海濱長廊的發展，該項通風大樓工程預料二○一四年初動工，二○一五年底完工。

提供綠化空間

中環及灣仔繞道和東區走廊連接路長四點五公里，當中包括長三點七公里的隧道，連接中環林士街行車天橋至東區走廊，以紓緩區內交通擠塞問題。主幹道中的通風大樓位於灣仔，大樓作用是放置必需的機電設備，包括隧道通風、供電、防火及交通監察等系統設備。

顧問工程公司就大樓外觀設計提出兩個方案，方案一是以流線型屋頂為主題，採用金屬物料的流線型屋頂，如在海濱中展翅膀，高低不一的雙翼，可與灣仔會展新翼的屋頂相呼應。通風大樓周圍會栽種樹木及灌木，提供綠化空間，配合未來海濱發展，加添自然感覺。

至於方案二則以條板屏風為主題，利用條板屏風遮蔽通風大樓主體，構造出整齊而有變化之立面圖案，大樓主要通風口前將加上弧形屏風，大樓天台則進行綠化。


----------



## herenthere

EricIsHim said:


> Yes, we are running low on usable empty land, but if the government does better and land management, planning and redevelopment, we still have plenty of land before we really need to reclaim our water body from the outlying island paradise.


Oh absolutely, I used to praise HK's planning for how awesome the streets are and zoning, and how convenient it was to have all these pedestrian bridges...etc. But after I went back and reading all this reclamation stuff (and also how NYC grassroots campaigns are pushing for more 'livable streets'), I'm not too sure HK is making the right decisions in constantly expanding into the harbors.



EricIsHim said:


> By that time, the SARs may not even exist and people are free to move around and live in the PRD area.


A little _too_ optimistic...


----------



## hkskyline

*馬頭角擬建海濱長廊 *
19 July 2009

【明報專訊】繼中環新海濱、東區海旁及觀塘後，政府有意研究活化馬頭角海濱。路政署正進行城市設計研究，初步構思是把翔龍灣以南約3公頃的沿海土地活化，建造約400米海濱長廊，長遠希望能接駁啟德與海心公園，把海濱綠化率提升至三成；亦會研究在海心公園興建「向海的社區中心」，增加休憩空間。

綠化率升至三成 增休憩空間

擬建的中九龍幹線連接西九龍至九龍灣，全長4.7公里，當中3.9公里隧道穿越彌敦道、何文田及土瓜灣地底。路政署昨舉行公眾論壇，諮詢居民對中九龍幹線位於九龍灣段的意見，除重申臨時填海工程，署方表示正進行馬頭角城市設計概念研究，希望利用興建幹線的契機，改善當區環境。

負責研究、身兼建築師學會副主席的呂元祥建築師事務所有限公司董事黃錦星指出，現時由翔龍灣以南至海心公園的海濱，被驗車中心打斷，而且有關地皮因過往主要用作碼頭及驗車等，綠化率只有少於3%。

研究初步構思是把翔龍灣以南約3公頃的沿海土地活化，黃錦星建議遷移驗車中心，騰出土地大量綠化，希望該地與海心花園的整體綠化率提升至30%。研究建議提供有蓋的公共空間，亦會加設泊車位，方便前往。

至於九龍城渡輪碼頭、馬頭角公眾碼頭及已停用的汽車渡輪碼頭將全部保留，「汽車渡輪碼頭是以前未有海底隧道時常用的設施，設有天橋可讓上層車輛登船，希望可保留這碼頭及天橋，並展示汽車渡輪碼頭的歷史。」黃錦星說。

研究又建議在海心公園內興建一個被水體包圍的社區中心，除可飽覽海景，亦能看到公園內的魚尾石，重現昔日公園如「獨立島嶼」的特色。研究將於下月完成，路政署總工程師周進華指出，構思將不影響土地用途，作為向規劃署的參考。


----------



## hkskyline

*What land shortage? *
23 July 2009
SCMP

Is there an acute shortage of land in Hong Kong? It is perhaps obvious to some that, because of the high density of development, the city must be short of land. However, a quick search reveals that only 23 per cent of Hong Kong's land mass is actually built up. About 40 per cent is country parks, and the rest consists of non-country park grassland, woods and shrubland, agricultural land, fishponds and reservoirs.

According to government data, as of 2007, only 2.2 per cent of Hong Kong's total land mass of 1,100 square kilometres is industrial land, industrial estates and warehouse and storage space. This amounts to about 24 square kilometres of land, which may not sound like a lot. Of the city's 1,700 industrial buildings, nearly 1,400 were built before the 1990s - by which time, most of Hong Kong's manufacturing had relocated across the border. Most of these buildings are therefore underused and have been so for more than a decade.

This means that, if we had an effective urban renewal and regeneration policy, these buildings could be retrofitted or redeveloped for other uses. After all, only 0.3 per cent of our total land is used for commercial and business purposes - a very small amount for a financial and services centre - and less than 7 per cent for housing.

These figures tell another story: Hong Kong is full of high-rise blocks by choice. If less than 7.5 per cent of the land is used for housing and offices, no wonder we have to create very high structures. Many new residential complexes look like one tower has been put on top of another, and commercial buildings are now extremely tall, large structures. There have been a rising number of complaints in recent years about very tall, wide buildings creating a "walled" effect that block views and breezes from other residents.

Two mainland academics recently proposed that Hong Kong could ease its land shortage by reclaiming waters between Lamma, Cheung Chau and Peng Chau to create 25 square kilometres of land. The idea is to create space for "comprehensive development", and the aim was to stimulate discussion in Hong Kong on how the city might develop in the future.

Let's call this the "development-by-reclamation" model. This is, in fact, a lazy development model. Instead of examining current land use and seeing how certain areas could be renewed or regenerated, the adoption of such a model would probably divert attention away from some of our severe problems, such as the blight in the New Territories caused by the rampant illegal usage of agricultural land for container storage; the failure to find ways to convert old factory buildings for other uses; and the inability of the government to replace the small-house policy of land grants to male indigenous villagers.

The government made a weak attempt at the time of the handover to deal with the small-house policy - an administrative measure created in the 1970s to persuade indigenous villagers to sell their rural land to build new towns, in exchange for land for them to build homes - but it came to naught and it has prevented better planning in the New Territories. If these measures can be dealt with, a substantial amount of land would be freed up.

It is estimated that reclaiming the land between islands, which would lie outside the control of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, would cost HK$11.2 billion. It would change Hong Kong's harbour forever. No doubt, some people will support such a project to create more land under the mistaken assumption that there isn't enough.

Perhaps what the two mainland academics have achieved is to help us focus on the shortcomings of existing land policies. Changing these will be very hard if we use the same mindset that created them in the first place. The first assumption we need to get rid of is that Hong Kong has an acute shortage of land. And let's not forget that southeastern and West Kowloon are only two of the vast but existing urban areas slated for comprehensive development.

Christine Loh Kung-wai is CEO of the non-profit think tank Civic Exchange and chairwoman of the Society for Protection of the Harbour.


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> *What land shortage? *
> 23 July 2009
> SCMP
> 
> This means that, if we had an effective urban renewal and regeneration policy, these buildings could be retrofitted or redeveloped for other uses. After all, only 0.3 per cent of our total land is used for commercial and business purposes - a very small amount for a financial and services centre - and less than 7 per cent for housing.
> 
> Let's call this the "development-by-reclamation" model. This is, in fact, a lazy development model. Instead of examining current land use and seeing how certain areas could be renewed or regenerated, the adoption of such a model would probably divert attention away from some of our severe problems, such as the blight in the New Territories caused by the rampant illegal usage of agricultural land for container storage; the failure to find ways to convert old factory buildings for other uses; and the inability of the government to replace the small-house policy of land grants to male indigenous villagers.


If the research in this article is true, reusing existing land in Hong Kong should be actively encouraged. Not only is it cheaper than reclamation, but it also helps prevent sprawl by rejuvenating communities while preventing damaging the environment.


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> If the research in this article is true, reusing existing land in Hong Kong should be actively encouraged. Not only is it cheaper than reclamation, but it also helps prevent sprawl by rejuvenating communities while preventing damaging the environment.


The problem is redevelopment requires a very labour intensive and time consumption administrative process, from buying back property ownership from hundreds to thousands property owners, demolishing existing structures, and clean up. That process discourages many developers to pick up the cost and time, and not necessarily cheaper than just reclaim from the sea. Well, at least, we have established the URA these days to focus in this matter despite controversies on its redevelopment strategy in many recent projects from the Wedding Card Street, to Kwun Tong Centre, to Central etc.

Again, I see HK needs better land management and encourage redevelopment to come first way before the need to reach out to the outlying islands.

Sprawl is not a problem in HK with such a high density of population. Sprawl may actually be good for HK to decentralize our business from the Victoria Harbour cluster and dilute the extreme density in some districts. But with the well defined political boundary, lack of developable land and population density, the degree of sprawl will never be similar to any North Americans' cities we have seen.


----------



## herenthere

EricIsHim said:


> Sprawl is not a problem in HK with such a high density of population. Sprawl may actually be good for HK to decentralize our business from the Victoria Harbour cluster and dilute the extreme density in some districts. But with the well defined political boundary, lack of developable land and population density, the degree of sprawl will never be similar to any North Americans' cities we have seen.


I guess I was trying to say sprawl over sea haha.


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> I guess I was trying to say sprawl over sea haha.


Turn the clock back, and we had significant portion of the population lived on boats. :lol:


----------



## hkskyline

Well ... they've been trying to decentralize for decades with the new towns, although it's nowhere like sprawl!


----------



## Ribarca

A small update.


----------



## hkskyline

Looking good ... and the new red AIA sign!


----------



## Ribarca

More zoomed in.


----------



## Rachmaninov

That is a lot of land...


----------



## Ribarca

Probably the most expensive bit of land on planet earth. Glad that they can't put too much concrete on it this time.


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbour watchdog wants more teeth *
10 August 2009
SCMP

The harbour watchdog will recommend that the government replace it with a powerful commission, led by the chief secretary, to plan and manage the waterfront.

This follows a two-year study seeking a suitable management model for the waterfront, which has often been often criticised for lacking vibrancy and is plagued by problems arising from the involvement of several government departments.

The Harbour Front Enhancement Committee, which ends its second term this month, says it should be transformed into a commission that includes community members, organisations represented in the existing committee and government representatives. The commission would set up expert groups to advise the government on planning, engineering and design matters.

While formulating design plans for waterfront areas, the commission could be given power to propose budgets for waterfront projects and work with developers who own waterfront sites.

The design plans would be executed by government offices set up at district level. The existing harbour unit of the Development Bureau would become the commission's executive arm.

Patrick Lau Sau-shing, chairman of the Legislative Council's harbour planning subcommittee, said the recommendations would facilitate waterfront developments on private sites.

Members of the committee have met regularly to identify waterfront projects for public enjoyment since the committee was established in 2004. But no permanent waterfront project has been implemented in five years.

Committee chairman Lee Chack-fan, while not disclosing details, said the task force studying management options had drafted a recommendation report that would be finalised next week.

A person involved in drafting the report said: "We hope that with more power given to the commission and more involvement from the private sector, our waterfront can be revitalised in a more creative and less restrictive manner." The source said the Town Planning Board would consult the commission when it examined waterfront projects.

Waterfront planning became a controversial issue when large sections of Victoria Harbour were reclaimed and heritage features such as Queen's Pier and the Star Ferry Pier were removed to pave the way for highways like the Central and Wan Chai Bypass.

The government set up the committee in 2004 in response to public outcries. But its limited advisory role and the lack of co-ordination among government departments, which has delayed waterfront projects, have prompted calls for an independent harbour authority.

The committee's recommendation is seen as a "balanced and pragmatic option" by people familiar with the draft report. A commission under the chief secretary's leadership would be able to co-ordinate departments without the need to set up a statutory harbour authority that could be time consuming, they said.

Task force members inspected waterfront areas in Liverpool, London, Sydney, San Francisco, Vancouver and Singapore before drawing up the recommendations.

A spokeswoman for the Development Bureau said it would study the recommendation and announce the new term in due course.


----------



## hkskyline

*Waterfront's ambience at risk, harbour activists fear *
15 August 2009
South China Morning Post

Members of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee are worried that new pump rooms and utilities will ruin the ambience and accessibility of the new Central waterfront.

The members warned that diners at future restaurants along the harbourfront might not be able to eat outside if construction plans did not take into account the future possible uses for the area.

An aerial shot of the Central waterfront showed utility buildings and a few pump rooms, including one that was more than 170 metres long and about three metres high on the waterfront to the north of the Tamar site. An air vent for the Central and Wan Chai bypass will also be built in front of IFC One and Two.

The shot has prompted worries that the government is repeating mistakes made to promenades in West Kowloon and Kai Tak, where roads and air vents have ruined the look of the waterfront.

The Development Bureau said the pump rooms had been built underground. But their air shafts had to be above ground. Greenery would be planted on the roofs of the pump rooms to beautify the environment, the bureau's spokeswoman said.

Harbourfront Enhancement Committee member Vincent Ng Wing-shun said he was surprised to see utilities built along the waterfront as the government's consultant was still studying the plans for the Central waterfront. "We haven't decided where to put the alfresco dining," he said. "Can the pump houses structurally support a restaurant?"

Mr Ng said there were lots of cases where government departments had made the area around a waterfront less attractive.

He said one proposal received by the committee last month was from the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, which proposed parking garbage trucks temporarily at the North Point waterfront underneath the Island Eastern Corridor and enclosing the area with wooden boards.

"We need an overarching harbour commission to solve these problems," he said.

Another committee member, Paul Zimmerman, said there would not be much room for alfresco dining if the pump room were not able to support restaurants. The PLA berth would also occupy 150 metres of the waterfront, he said.

Greg Wong Chak-yan, who chairs the committee's task force to advise the government on the Central waterfront, said the pump rooms had replaced those knocked down during the reclamation.

He said the pump rooms might be able to support restaurants but careful design would be needed to take into account the undulating waterfront.

In a committee meeting on Monday, the task force will recommend that the government restores the Star Ferry Clock Tower and Queen's Pier in their original locations.

Most task force members, excluding government officials, would prefer the pier to be reassembled with a large lagoon built in front of it, making it a place for public activities. They would also like to maintain the historic proportions of the clock tower, City Hall and the pier.


----------



## The Terminator

According to today's news the former queen's pier will be relocated between Pier 9 and 10 if I got my understanding right.


----------



## EricIsHim

The Terminator said:


> According to today's news the former queen's pier will be relocated between Pier 9 and 10 if I got my understanding right.


that's correct


----------



## hkth

From news.gov.hk:
Star Ferry clock tower to be re-assembled


----------



## mjx729

that's great plan


----------



## hkskyline

The Terminator said:


> According to today's news the former queen's pier will be relocated between Pier 9 and 10 if I got my understanding right.


*Queen's Pier will not return to original site *
18 August 2009
The Standard

The government has decided not to reassemble Queen's Pier at its former site, Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said.

She told the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee yesterday that the majority of city residents would like to see the iconic colonial waterfront relic maintain its functional use as a pier.

This was indicated by comment cards, face-to-face interviews, telephone polls and community engagement forums, she said.

Lam added that the majority consensus is for the pier to be relocated between Central Piers numbers 9 and 10 along the waterfront instead of at its original site where it would be landlocked by the Central reclamation. In addition, the change of site would mean the work can be completed in 2013, one year earlier than planned.

The decision to relocate the pier had nothing to do with technical difficulties, Lam said. ``It is based on the majority of public responses.''

Lam said 49 percent of those filling in comment cards preferred the new location against 27 percent seeking a return to the original site. In face-to-face interviews it was 58 to 27 for the new site. Focus group workshops, however, were 39-16 for the original site.

It has also been decided to reassemble the clock from the Star Ferry Clock Tower at its original location, Lam said.

A gallery at the site will display various memorabilia salvaged from the old Star Ferry terminal.

The government has further agreed to lower the development density in front of Two IFC after rising concerns that the density was too high for a site close to the waterfront.

However, a Task Group on Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront insists that the majority of Hongkongers prefer Queen's Pier to be reassembled at its original location with a large lagoon created in front of it. They believe this will maintain the pier's historic connections with Edinburgh Place and City Hall.

The group also claims the support of architects and heritage concern groups. Engineers and surveyors on the other hand are in general supportive of the waterfront option.

Green Sense yesterday expressed disappointment at the decision to relocate the pier, saying it will diminish its historic value.

The removal of Queen's Pier in 2007 caused a public outcry and a wave of protests and litigation.

Two members of conservation group Local Action who sought a judicial review against the decision to dismantle it lost their lawsuit and were recently ordered to pay HK$270,650 in legal costs.


----------



## hkskyline




----------



## hkskyline

*Opinion : Harbourfront policy needs drastic rethink *
29 August 2009
South China Morning Post

Can the government fix its flawed approach to conceiving the Central waterfront before it is too late? Your report "Queen's Pier to be moved despite call of advisers", (August 18) makes me wonder. The government has opted to shoehorn the pier between Piers 9 and 10.

The other scheme would have returned Queen's Pier to its original site. You noted that "only workshops that involved architects, planners, engineers, and concern groups" (in other words, professionals who have spent thousands of hours studying the waterfront) favoured it. They sought, you explained, to restore the historic relationship between Queen's Pier, Edinburgh Place and City Hall.

In fact, a more compelling reason favours the original location. Queen's Pier could sit at the head of an inner harbour - the peaceful body of water that is the central feature of benchmark waterfronts in Singapore, Sydney and Baltimore. My team pushed the concept during the 2007 design competition, I presented it to the Planning Department a year ago (see www.queenspier.com), and the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee and other groups championed it, to no avail.

Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said restoring Queen's Pier to its original location would delay construction of a new road, stating: "I cannot postpone the project indefinitely. People would blame the government for being unable to make decisions". This shows how wrong-headed it is to have the Planning Department leading the conception of what is supposed to become a world-class waterfront. It is not equipped for the role.

We need to change the team and get a vision for the Central waterfront that relates it to the two other major waterfront sites. Benchmark leading waterfronts. Develop a comprehensive concept, focusing first on defining and positioning the anchor uses that must pull people to and along the waterfront. Then, plan the district and engineer the infrastructure.

We need political leadership. The Central waterfront is arguably the most important urban development site in the world, a strategic asset in the city's competition for tourism and business. The government needs to form the harbour commission that many have advocated. In the meantime, it should let Mrs Lam and her department off the hook, lest they dig us into a deeper hole.

Dick Groves, Wan Chai


----------



## Ribarca




----------



## hkskyline

9/3


----------



## EricIsHim

Location of the future Queen's Pier...


----------



## herenthere

EricIsHim said:


> Location of the future Queen's Pier...





hkskyline said:


> 9/3


Would property values decrease along the existing buildings adjacent to this new piece of land?


----------



## EricIsHim

herenthere said:


> Would property values decrease along the existing buildings adjacent to this new piece of land?


The lower levels of 2IFC may be impacted, since there suppose to have one lowrise in front of it, and one more on the east side of it. But they are the only two buildings going to be there. The rest of the area is going to be green space and park, so I won't think the higher levels would be impacted.

After all, this is Central, the property values will only go up if the whole market doesn't collapse.


----------



## herenthere

EricIsHim said:


> The lower levels of 2IFC may be impacted, since there suppose to have one lowrise in front of it, and one more on the east side of it. But they are the only two buildings going to be there. The rest of the area is going to be green space and park, so I won't think the higher levels would be impacted.
> 
> After all, this is Central, the property values will only go up if the whole market doesn't collapse.


Noted, thanks.


----------



## quanghuynhchung

So Beautiful!!! The MOST beautiful scenery on planet Earth!!   ^_^


----------



## hkskyline

By *jacobite * from dchome :


----------



## hkskyline

9/17


----------



## hkskyline

*Reclamation projects put squeeze on harbour *
2 November 2009
South China Morning Post

Hong Kong's image owes much to Victoria Harbour, but that body of water has been squeezed to less than half its original width - to a mere 910 metres - with the completion of the Central Reclamation Phase III.

The 18 hectares of new land outside Two IFC is big enough to build five blocks the size of Two IFC. That hefty footprint shrank the Tsim Sha Tsui-Central gap to less than 1km. More of the harbour will turn into land when the controversial Central-Wan Chai bypass begins soon.

Before any reclamation began, the gap between Kowloon and Hong Kong - from Johnson Road in Wan Chai to Chatham Road in Tsim Sha Tsui - was 2,300 metres. From 1996 to 2004, 80 hectares of harbour land was reclaimed - over 30 hectares of it in Central and Wan Chai - according to the Lands Department. A further 12.7 hectares of land will appear in the harbour from 2010 to 2016 under the Wan Chai Development Phase II project, between Wan Chai and Central.

Alan Tam, a shipping officer who has worked in a Tsim Sha Tsui office overlooking the harbour for over 15 years, said he felt "weird" at times when he looked out of the window. "It seems to me the distance between here and Hong Kong Island is getting narrower and narrower. A couple of times my colleagues joked that the government should build a bridge so we could walk across the harbour."

Winston Chu Ka-sun, founder of the Society for the Protection of the Harbour, which has opposed the government over reclamation since the 1990s, said far too much of the harbour had been reclaimed.

"The Central-Wan Chai bypass is just an excuse for the government to reclaim land in Central. The land reclaimed is for property development," said Chu, who says that no reclamation along Victoria Harbour should be used for commercial purpose.

"In many countries, city planning is for people's well-being, but in Hong Kong city planning is for money-making." Chu drafted the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, which was adopted by the Legislative Council and passed in 1997.

Now a new controversy is looming over reclaimed land. The government recently planned to change the designated use of a harbourfront site in Wan Chai - from public use to commercial - in compensation for the loss of commercial land in Central, after it announced a reduction in the development density outside Two IFC.

Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said last week that the move did not breach the harbour law, but Chu said the group may file a lawsuit against it. He said the land should be left for public use, and he would oppose the administration when it applied to the Town Planning Board for a change of land use in the months ahead.

Chu said he closely monitors the harbour every day, and pointed out that there are still many gazetted but unimplemented reclamation proposals. "I will go to court if the government wants to reclaim any more."

There are over 500 hectares of proposed reclamation, including plans to fill in the whole of Kowloon Bay and reclaim another 38 hectares of harbour off Central. Other plans are to reclaim 30 hectares at Tsuen Wan, 26 hectares at Wan Chai and for a giant promontory joining Green Island to the western tip of Hong Kong Island.

All these reclamations could be carried out as they are already gazetted. But they will probably be challenged successfully in court, after a number of key rulings on the harbour law. The government has pledged that no more reclamation will take place after the current works in Central and Wan Chai.

There have been seven legal challenges so far against the administration under the law.

Dr Ng Mee-kam, an associate professor in the department of urban planning and design at the University of Hong Kong, said the government and developers had always considered reclamation an easy way to increase land supply and resolve issues such as congested roads.

But now, Ng believes, it has become much more difficult for the government to reclaim harbour land because the opposition has grown stronger. "But there is still lots to be done to make the harbourfront become more accessible and more user-friendly," he said.

The harbour protection society is planning a demonstration from Central to Wan Chai on Sunday to promote the protection of the harbour.


----------



## hkskyline

*Development Bureau's response to Society for Protection of the Harbour's press release*
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Government Press Release

In response to the press release issued by the Society for Protection of the Harbour today (November 3), the Development Bureau made the following response:

The Society for Protection of the Harbour (the Society) said in its press release today that the suggested land uses of the New Central Harbourfront as announced by the government recently would lead to serious traffic congestion. This is not true. In its press release, the Society provided the data assumption used by the Transport Department in 2005 on the floor area that could be developed in the Central reclamation area. Such data was used by the Department when conducting a traffic impact assessment for the Central reclamation area and Central-Wan Chai Bypass. We have to point out that the assessment concluded that the capacity of the road network in the vicinity of the Central reclamation area would be sufficient to cope with the additional traffic flow brought by the new developments in the future. 

In fact, the gross floor area (GFA) in the latest design of the New Central Harbourfront is 41% lower than the data assumption in 2005. Therefore, the road network is expected to bring even less traffic impact when compared with the original assessment.

We also noted that the Society has used a sketch showing “Reclamation Plans of Victoria Harbour” in its press release, which contains a lot of incorrect information. For example, the plan on the sketch shows that the size of the reclamation for Wan Chai Development Phase II is 26 hectares when in fact the approved reclamation is 12.7 hectares. In respect of the Central Reclamation Phase III, the scope of the reclamation has also decreased from 38 hectares to 18 hectares. In addition, other reclamation plans depicted by the sketch have never been gazetted or have already lapsed, and the government will not pursue any more reclamation works on both sides of Victoria Harbour.

We understand that the public aspires for more open space. We will provide 18 hectares of open space in the New Central Harbourfront.

In the Stage 2 Public Engagement for the Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront, many of the public response we received indicated that the development density of Sites 1 and 2 should be further reduced. The Task Group on Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront of the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee (HEC) also held the same view. Moreover, in view of the demand for Grade A offices and the needs of economic development in Hong Kong, the Task Group made a pragmatic recommendation of redistributing the commercial GFA in Sites 1 and 2 to Site 5. This recommendation has the overall support of the Task Group and the HEC. The Government has accepted this recommendation.

We will continue to protect, preserve and beautify the harbourfront for public enjoyment and will endeavour to strike a balance between providing quality space, which is a growing public concern, and relieving the shortage of office space in the city centre.


----------



## hkskyline

*Exco backs relocation of high-rise projects from Central to Wan Chai *
4 November 2009
SCMP

The Executive Council yesterday approved harbourfront development changes in which 58,000 square metres of commercial use floor area, earmarked to be constructed at a prime site in Central, have been relocated to Wan Chai.

The government wants to move hotel and office developments adjacent to Two IFC to the area in front of Citic Tower in Wan Chai.

With the commercial high-rise buildings gone, two, two-storey blocks of buildings for retail, restaurant and exhibition uses would be built near the Central piers, the Development Bureau said yesterday. One and a half extra commercial floors for dining and retail would be added above Central piers four to six.

A six-storey block, housing cultural activities and shops, would be erected north of Two IFC by a public-private partnership.

The reduction of commercial floor area in Central would be compensated for by developments in Wan Chai. They would come in the form of a hotel and an office building from 13 to 16 floors high with a total gross floor area of 58,000 square metres, a bureau spokeswoman said.

The change of use from government to commercial in Wan Chai would not affect views and the government was not breaking any laws in doing it. "The density of the development and the maximum height would be the same as before the change of land use," she said.

Public opinion indicated most people wanted fewer offices on Central's harbourfront, she said. On the other hand, how land in front of Citic Tower should be used had not been set in previous plans. The government had conformed to town planning regulations and did not find reclamation in Central to be a violation of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance.

Central and Wan Chai were the only places where reclamation continued, she said. Previous reclamation plans for the northwestern tip of Hong Kong Island, Tsuen Wan and Kai Tak had lapsed or had been changed during the town planning process.

The Society for Protection of the Harbour, which has accused the government of breaking the law over its plan to change the Wan Chai land to commercial use, has urged the public to attend a "Walk for the Harbour" at the Central piers on Sunday.

"If offices shouldn't be built in front of Two IFC, why should they be built in front of Citic Tower?" former chairman Winston Chu Ka-sun said.

If the government proposed the change of land use to the Town Planning Board, the society would protest at the meeting, he said. It would take legal action against the government if the board approved the plan.


----------



## hkskyline

*Saving Victoria Harbour one small step at a time
*
The Standard
Monday, November 09, 2009

About 400 people, mainly children and youngsters, walked from the Star Ferry pier to Wan Chai yesterday to stop the government from further reclamation of the Victoria Harbour.

Society for Protection of the Harbour spokesman Winston Chu Ka-sun said the walk, on its fourth year, aimed to educate youngsters how to appreciate and care for the harbor.

Taking the government to court would only be a last resort to stop further reclamation, he said.

"I don't enjoy suing the government," Chu said. "The Court of Final Appeal took at least three years to judge a case ... I hope this would be the final step."

Sung Pui-yan, 11, said she joined the Walk for the Harbour because she thought there should be no more reclamation.

"We will lose the beautiful view and the wind if we continue to reclaim the harbor," she said, adding she would join again if organizers hold another walk next year.

Chu also criticized the government's recent decision to designate a 58,000-square meter area in Wan Chai for commercial use.

The legislator representing the architectural, surveying and planning sector, Patrick Lau Sau-sing, said the government must explain why the land is being used to compensate for the space in front of the IFC in Central which was originally intended for commercial purposes but changed to recreation area after a public outcry.

"The government may have conducted studies on the supply of office space and the projected value of shifting development from Central to Admiralty and Wan Chai. I hope the government would make such findings public, so that people would understand that conservation and development could be implemented simultaneously without incurring economic losses."


----------



## hkskyline

*Waterfront high-rises in protesters' sights *
9 November 2009
South China Morning Post

About 400 harbour conservationists staged a protest march in Central yesterday against further reclamation and government plans to build high-rises on the new waterfront.

They chanted such slogans as "Stop reclamation", "Stop land sales" and "Return the harbour to the people" as they marched 3km from the new Star Ferry pier in Central to Golden Bauhinia Square in Wan Chai, where they concluded with a fun fair.

It was the fourth annual "Walk for the Harbour" organised by the Society for Protection of the Harbour, which was set up in 1995 to fight reclamation of the harbour and which has successfully blocked government reclamation projects several times.

A participant in yesterday's march, Vivian Lai, 44, of Western, said: "We want to make it very clear to the government that Hong Kong people love the harbour. It is getting narrower because of reclamation. We fear one day it will become a creek if reclamation is not stopped."

Civic Party legislator Alan Leong Kah-kit, one of four legislators on the march, said: "The new waterfront should be used by the public and not be sold for developers to build high-rise office towers. What the people want is more public space on the waterfront."

Last week, the Executive Council endorsed harbourfront development changes in which 58,000 square metres of commercial floor area earmarked for the Central reclamation were relocated to the Wan Chai waterfront.

The society accused the government of changing the Wan Chai waterfront land to commercial use.

"We hope the government can withdraw its plan. If the Town Planning Board approves the plan, we shall take the case to court," society adviser Winston Chu Ka-sun said.

Society chairwoman Christine Loh Kung-wai said: "[The government] has taken a piece out of our Victoria Harbour. What we do not want to see is the government selling the land for building things we do not need."

A Development Bureau spokesman said the plan to redistribute commercial gross floor area to Wan Chai had the overall support of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee - a government-appointed body to advise the administration on land use on both sides of the harbour.

"A general consensus has been reached and it is also a pragmatic and balanced proposal," he said.

According to the bureau, there will be 18 hectares of open space on the new Central waterfront.


----------



## hkskyline

*Sites limited as Central expands *
18 November 2009
South China Morning Post

About 100 years ago the district of Central was confined primarily by the existing Connaught Road, which formed the northern boundary of the area fronting Victoria Harbour. However, over the past decades Central has expanded, mainly northwards through land reclamation.

With the completion of the Government Post Office in 1979, the harbour front moved to the area occupied by the former Star Ferry pier and was pushed further outward to the newly built Central ferry piers in the late 1990s.

Over the past 10 years, however, Central's business district has taken a different route in its expansion. Its defining boundary has leapfrogged the harbour to West Kowloon as a result of the exodus of a number of investment banks and financial institutions to the International Commerce Centre.

However, West Kowloon, which has now become the so-called extension of Central, is yet to develop a critical mass of commercial office buildings, as a minimum of 5.5 million square feet of office floor space is required to create a successful office node.

On Hong Kong Island, the expansion of Central proper towards the east started some years ago, well before the final confirmation by the government that it would move its headquarters to the Tamar site in Admiralty, when the Swire Group extended its portfolio at Pacific Place eastwards by completing Three Pacific Place on the edge of Wan Chai in 2004.

The expansion into Wan Chai did not stop there as the Tai Sang Building fronting Hennessy Road in Wan Chai was acquired by Swire in 2007, with plans to renovate the building as a modern commercial development.

In Wan Chai North (that is, north of Gloucester Road), Citic Tower next to Tamar was completed in 1996, marking the first step of Central's extension to the east. However, because of the disruption of development plans for the Tamar site in 2002-03, attributed partly to the unfavourable economic conditions and the outbreak of Sars, the expansion eastwards along Wan Chai North ceased temporarily.

Now, with the final confirmation of the government headquarters' move by 2011, the geography of Central will once again take on a different shape.

So, what will Central look like five years down the road?

First, new sites will be coming up for redevelopment in core Central but on a much reduced scale and density compared with the surrounding areas.

Second, Central will have gradually extended into adjacent sub-markets, including Admiralty, to form "Greater Central".

This will be driven by the redevelopment of existing office buildings and premises now occupied by government departments in Wan Chai, such as Revenue Tower and Immigration Tower, which will have been sold to the private sector for commercial use. While this expansion is under way, there will be no significant improvement in current supply over the short to medium term (say, in the next three years).

In Central, only two minor redevelopment schemes are scheduled for completion in 2011 and 2012 and will increase the total stock of commercial space by less than 400,000 sqft.

The trend in Central over the past 20 years showed the sub-market once had an average new completion of 450,000 sqft office space per annum.

So, before any real change is seen in the supply dynamics in Central, the existing supply gap will remain at least for the next three years and is likely to put additional upward pressure on rentals in the future.

Rentals will accelerate further if demand returns to levels seen during the last upswing from 2004 to last year and in our view, because of the lack of new supply and susceptibility to changing economic conditions, Central will continue to be the sub-market with the highest rental volatility.

Simon Lo is the director of Colliers International Hong Kong's research and advisory department


----------



## hkskyline

*Questions need to be answered on reclamation *
24 November 2009
South China Morning Post

The Society for the Protection of the Harbour wishes to remind the government that the only justification for reclamation of the harbour it gave to the public and the law courts was to build the Central Wan Chai bypass in order to relieve traffic congestion.

This was also the only justification that the Court of Final Appeal accepted as being an "overriding public need" and, hence, rendering harbour reclamation lawful.

Until the government's recent announcement of new plans for the Central reclamation, it had proposed constructing 9.24 million square feet of new office and commercial developments thereon in accordance with the current outline zoning plan. According to the Transport Department, these developments will attract an additional 7,623 vehicles to Central. This will worsen the traffic conditions and the air quality in Central.

Our society is pleased and grateful that the government has now reduced the development intensity in response to objections by the public and our society.

The government's review was also in compliance with a directive from the Town Planning Board and the recent policy statement of the chief executive "to return the harbourfront to the people".

Nevertheless our society must still ask the government the following questions regarding its new plans:

How much new office and commercial development is being planned for the Central reclamation?

How many more people and vehicles will be attracted to Central by these developments?

How much of the reclaimed land will be sold or given to real estate developers for these developments?

Why attract more traffic to Central and worsen traffic congestion when this is the complete opposite of the government's original justification for the Central reclamation?

Winston K. S. Chu, adviser, Society for Protection of the Harbour


----------



## hkskyline

*LCQ2: Development of waterfront sites*
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Government Press Release

Following is a question by the Hon Ip Kwok-him and a reply by the Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, in the Legislative Council today (November 25):

Question:

The authorities are now actively planning and enhancing the waterfronts of the Victoria Harbour. At the meeting of the Subcommittee on Harbourfront Planning held on the 9th of this month, the Secretary for Development advised that the Government intended to introduce public-private partnership (PPP) to develop Sites 1 and 2 at the new Central harbourfront. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) what criteria the authorities use in deciding whether to adopt a PPP approach or a government-funding approach to develop and enhance a particular waterfront site;

(b) apart from Sites 1 and 2 at the new Central harbourfront, what other waterfront sites the authorities also intend to develop using the PPP approach; which waterfront sites will be developed by the Government with its own funding, as well as which government department will be responsible for the development and management of those sites; and

(c) what policies the authorities have in place, on the one hand, to encourage developers to participate in the development of waterfront sites so as to implement the harbourfront enhancement projects and, on the other hand, not to arouse public query that the Government is transferring benefits to developers?

Reply:

President,

The development of Sites 1 and 2 at the new Central harbourfront is one of the projects under the initiative of “Conserving Central”, put forward by the Chief Executive in his Policy Address this year. It is also our most important endeavour to beautify and create a vibrant, attractive and accessible Victoria harbourfront. With reference to overseas and local experiences, we propose to develop this waterfront site (being 2.3 hectares in size) into a mixed-use precinct for cultural, recreational and leisure uses through public-private partnership (PPP) for public enjoyment. My reply to the three-part question is as follows-

(a) In considering whether to enhance the harbourfront through PPP, first and foremost we have to consider the location and business potential of a waterfront site. Generally speaking, it is more suitable to engage the private sector to design, build and operate those waterfront sites in commercial and tourist areas than in residential areas. Moreover, unlike the quiet and passive waterfronts that mainly provide an environment for people to stroll and enjoy the scenic Victoria Harbour, a vibrant and active waterfront with entertainment, retail and dining facilities would be even more suitable to have the participation of the private sector in the design and operation of the harbourfront.

Compared with the established Government practice of constructing waterfront parks or promenades by way of public works projects or minor works, and managing them by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department, the private sector is usually more creative, efficient and flexible in terms of planning, design, financing, development, operation and facilities management. We believe that the participation of the private sector can add vibrancy to our harbourfront.

In fact, there are many overseas examples of enhancing and developing waterfront sites through PPP. In the past two years, both the Task Group on Management Model for the Harbourfront of the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee and myself have separately visited many overseas waterfront sites, including the South Bank of London, Darling Harbour of Sydney as well as the Singapore River. I agree with the Committee’s view that we should select suitable waterfront sites for engaging the private sector to assist in developing and creating an ideal waterfront, for the enjoyment of both the public and tourists.

I would particularly like to point out that PPP is not only for business consortia or property developers. We also welcome non-governmental organisations and social enterprises to participate in harbourfront development.

(b) In deciding whether a harbourfront site should be constructed and managed by the Government or through PPP, we need to adopt a flexible mindset, taking into consideration factors such as site details and public expectation on a case-by-case basis. As far as the new Central harbourfront is concerned, currently only Sites 1 and 2 are planned to be designed, built and operated by PPP.

As regards the harbourfront sites in other districts, we have planned to carry out 15 harbourfront enhancement projects in the next five years, all of which will be financed, designed, constructed and managed solely by the Government. These projects are set out at Annex.

(c) In implementing any harbourfront enhancement projects, public interest is our primary concern. We will, in an open, fair and impartial manner, engage and select suitable partners. We will set out in detail the terms and conditions in the partnership agreement, to ensure that public interest is protected.


----------



## hkskyline

*New body can save our `ailing' harbor *
The Standard
Tuesday, December 01, 2009

Victoria Harbour is "an ailing business" that needs a dedicated authority to make it a truly world-class asset.
The Harbour Business Forum - which includes blue-chip companies among its members - proposes that a powerful agency be set up under a six-point integrated business plan to make the harbor a "genuinely vibrant, accessible and sustainable world-class asset." 

The proposals were made as part of the forum's latest search for an integrated approach to the planning, development and management of the harbor.

In presenting the study's findings, Fiona Waters, director of GHK (HK), said the harbor helps to differentiate Hong Kong from any other city in the mainland but that it is like "an ailing business." 

GHK, a consultancy firm, conducted the study for Harbour Business Forum in association with Townland and Urbis.

Waters said the current state of the harbor is undermining competitiveness. 

"Unfortunately, the reality is not that of a world-class waterfront," she said. This is because Hong Kong lacks the governance, planning and delivery systems to enact lasting change.

"We need more than just another land- use plan. We need an entirely new approach," she said. "Our proposed approach has six key components, all are necessary and all complement one another." 

These components are: a harbor policy; a vision; a strategic framework and plan; a single entity accountable for the harbor; and changes in the planning and delivery systems. The forum proposed that an interim harbor committee be set up next year and an autonomous harbor agency in 2014. 

The study found the harbor suffers from inappropriate land use, is generally inaccessible, lacks attractions and destinations along the waterfront, and has poor design and amenities.

"There are many opportunities ahead at Kai Tak, Central and West Kowloon cultural district but there is concern that Hong Kong is repeating many of the mistakes made in the past," Waters said.

HSBC Asia-Pacific chairman Vincent Cheng Hoi-chuen, a founder of the forum, said: "This is a business case for change through a step-by-step approach that will help us protect one of Hong Kong's greatest assets." 

Margaret Brooke, chair of the forum's best practice committee, said the study should not be taken as criticism of the government.


----------



## hkskyline

*Development chief backtracks over walk *
30 November 2009
South China Morning Post

With the harbour reclamation work all but finished, Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor thought it might be a good time to show good faith by joining activists on their annual waterfront walk.

But she changed her mind after protesters renewed their calls for the government to stop reclamation and cease using harbourfront areas for commercial activities.

"I thought this year was a good occasion for me to join the harbour day, to walk with them," she said, referring to the fourth annual walk organised by the Society for Protection of the Harbour. "I thought we had common ground.

"[But] I don't want to argue any more on reclamation. There's no more reclamation. The biggest challenge is to find ways to deliver a vibrant and beautiful harbourfront," she said. The protesters' stance "gave me no room to extend my goodwill, which is sad".

Lam insisted that old reclamation plans, such as the one proposed for the former airport site at Kai Tak, were no longer relevant as the areas were covered by new outline zoning plans endorsed by the chief executive and the Executive Council.

But she said the tradition of harbour day should continue. "It need not be a protest or finger-pointing occasion. It can be an occasion to remind ourselves that there's still a lot of work to do on the harbourfront."

Plans for the harbourfront have only become part of the chief executive's policy addresses in the past two years. This year, Donald Tsang Yam-kuen also endorsed what the Harbour Business Forum advocated while giving details of the actions proposed for conserving the Central area.

"If I'm not making a difference to Hong Kong, I will quit," the secretary said. "Why bother staying?"


----------



## hkskyline

*Carrie Lam deserves praise for waterfront improvement efforts *
10 December 2009
South China Morning Post

All those who care about Victoria Harbour and a better use of the waterfront should be grateful to Development Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor for putting harbourfront enhancement firmly on the government's agenda.

She is making a difference and the only reason she should be allowed to quit her job would be if she was appointed to a role that gave her even more responsibility for Hong Kong's development.

Her promises expressed via the 2009 and 2010 policy addresses are not new though.

What she is doing is to bring the promises ("A More Beautiful Harbour") made in the 1999 policy address back to life.

It is now 10 years since we were promised "promenades and walkways so that our citizens and visitors can stay away from the hubbub of the city, stroll along the promenades and enjoy the beautiful scenery and refreshing sea breeze".

We were promised open space on both sides of the Harbour "from Lei Yue Mun in the east to Kennedy Town in the west". The promises included open plazas, landscaped areas, marinas, shops, restaurants, as well as arts, recreational and entertainment opportunities.

Traffic corridors would be built underground to alleviate noise and air pollution as well as to improve the visual aspect. And to ensure that we achieved "a new look for our harbour in the new millennium", there were to be open competitions for local and international professionals.

Clearly, not all these promises can be delivered, as developments, infrastructure and utilities over the last decade have eaten into the last vacant waterfront areas.

It has also taken unfortunate legal battles to stop the government from further reclamation.

Despite the enactment of the Harbour Protection Ordinance the government gazetted 394 hectares of reclamation.

Alert readers of the 1999 policy address would have predicted the intention to ignore the ordinance: "Victoria Harbour is an integral part of Hong Kong that we all treasure. It deserves all our efforts to protect it and make it more beautiful. For this reason, we have decided to scale back the reclamation planned for the harbour."

There are, therefore, three fundamental tasks for Mrs Lam to complete in creating a magnificent Victoria Harbour for all future generations:

To scrap the unused reclamation gazette notices issued under the Foreshore and Seabed (Reclamations) Ordinance;

To put in place development control mechanisms which ensure that traffic along the harbourfront is forever contained and a sustainable reserve capacity of our road network is maintained; and

To put in place a continuous improvement process of the plans for all waterfronts, including taking seriously the proposals from residents and developers to stop the sale of the last remaining waterfront sites in the older districts.

Paul Zimmerman, founding member, Designing Hong Kong Limited


----------



## hkskyline

By *watermark* from skyscrapers.cn :


----------



## hkskyline

*Restored Queen's Pier can be part of a vibrant waterfront *
29 December 2009
SCMP

Alex Chan Tsz-wa questioned the value of preserving Edinburgh Place and Queen's Pier ("We have to draw a line at what deserves heritage status", December 18).

He doubts that "the architectural cluster that is Edinburgh Place could become a popular tourist space". I strongly disagree.

While groups like Heritage Watch and Designing Hong Kong have argued the properties be preserved for their historical significance and place in our collective memory, I have pushed a commercial case.

Shanghai will some day surpass Hong Kong as a financial centre, and this will have an impact on our prospects.

Fortunately, we have something Shanghai doesn't: scenic beauty, in our peaks and harbour.

Central waterfront is a strategic asset in our competition for international investment, business, and visitors.

Queen's Pier and Edinburgh Place should serve as Central waterfront's main address.

Singapore offers a useful example. It redeveloped Boat Quay and Clarke Quay, antiquated and undistinguished warehouses set on the Singapore River, into successful attractions that feature prominently in the city's global marketing.

For several years, I and others have pushed for an "inner harbour" that could anchor Central waterfront, citing the example of leading waterfronts in Singapore, Sydney, and Baltimore.

My scheme (at www.queenspier.com) restores Queen's Pier in its original location as the centerpiece of a significant collection of restaurants facing that inner harbour. "Queen's Pier" becomes shorthand for Central waterfront - which symbolises a cosmopolitan and creative Hong Kong that offers a superior quality of life.

Governments have long come under criticism for pushing the demolition of buildings of historic or architectural significance in the interests of progress.

Our government has managed to pull off something even more confounding - open water that could have been shaped into an inner harbour has been filled in.

No doubt, the planners would now maintain that it is impossible to excavate an inner harbour.

Sadly, our political leaders seem content to stand by while our bureaucrats execute a mediocre scheme on what is arguably the most important urban development site in the world.

Central waterfront seems likelier to become a testament to their inability to capitalise on a strategic opportunity, than a symbol of our city's imagination and talent.

Dick Groves, Wan Chai


----------



## hkskyline

*Pet lovers push for place in park *
The Standard
Friday, January 08, 2010










Animal welfare groups want a section of Victoria Park to become a haven for pets when the Wan Chai harborfront pet park closes at the end of the month.

Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals deputy director Michael Wong Ho-ming told The Standard that it plans to make the suggestion to Eastern District Council.

The organization also suggested two other locations in Wan Chai which could be used for the purpose - one a park near Ruttonjee Hospital and another near Fenwick Pier.

Wong said the Wan Chai District Council has been supportive and progressive in improving facilities for pet owners.

"But Victoria Park belongs to Eastern District and we need to raise our request to the council there," Wong said.

Victoria Park would be best choice because of its location, facilities and size, said Wong.

Society for Abandoned Animals chief executive El Chan Suk-kuen agreed Victoria Park would be an ideal location, especially for elderly people.

"It would be a waste if the government relocated the pet park to a remote area that most pet owners would find inconvenient and not visit," Chan said.

However, the idea was shot down by Eastern District Council vice chairman Christopher Chung Shu-kun.

"The traffic is too busy near Victoria Park and it isn't easy for pet owners to park their cars there," he said.

"Also, Victoria Park is a prime site for many events and functions as well as a haunt for families with children.

"It is not an ideal place for animals." Instead, the council is set to open a pet park at the site of the former North Point Estate at the North Point harborfront.

The Wan Chai promenade, the city's first and most popular pet park, opened in 2007. But the 1.2 hectare area will be closed on January 27 to make way for the Wan Chai development and construction of the Central-Wan Chai bypass.

The SPCA insists the pet park is beneficial not only to pets, but also their owners.

"Dogs feel very happy when running unleashed in the pet park.

"Their happiness is like children enjoying ice- cream," Wong said.

A carnival will be held on January 17 to bid farewell to the pet park.


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbourfront promenade opened in Kwun Tong *
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Government Press Release










The Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam takes a walk at the Kwun Tong Promenade Stage 1 today (January 16). 

Another harbourfront enhancement project was completed with the opening of a promenade along the waterfront of the Kwun Tong area in Hoi Bun Road today (January 16) for public enjoyment.

The Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, Chairman of the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee, Professor Lee Chack-fan, and Chairman of Kwun Tong District Council, Mr Chan Chung-bun, officiated at the promenade's opening ceremony this morning.

Mrs Lam said that the Development Bureau, since its establishment, had been identifying measures to improve and beautify the harbourfront with a view to providing more open space for public leisure and enjoyment of the magnificent harbour view.

The completion of Kwun Tong Promenade (KTP) Stage 1 was the result of concerted efforts and co-operation between the Government and the community.

Mrs Lam expressed thanks to both the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee (HEC) and the Kwun Tong District Council (DC) for their full support for the project .

In addition to providing valuable advice, the Kwun Tong DC also funded through the District Minor Works Programme, the site clearance and paving works beneath the Kwun Tong By-pass vehicular bridge, and the dismantling of a wall that blocked the harbour view. These works had helped beautified the adjoining vacant government land to complement the promenade and provide an enlarged public space.

“Although Stage 1 consists of only a 200-metre promenade, it is significant as a positive response to local aspirations and an impetus to the revitalisation of the Kwun Tong industrial area taking account of the Government’s new initiatives in this area,” Mrs Lam said.

The 200-metre long promenade was formerly part of the Kwun Tong Public Cargo Working Area (PCWA). After a series of discussions with Kwun Tong DC and concerned parties, it was agreed that a 200-metre long section of the PCWA should first be released and converted into a promenade. The Government plans to commence construction of KTP Stage 2 immediately after the decommissioning of the remaining 700-metre section of PCWA scheduled for 2011.

The project, at a cost of $19.6 million, is funded by the Civil Engineering and Development Department while the Architectural Services Department is the works agent. The promenade will be managed by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department after its completion. The Transport Department and Highway Department have improved the footpath, pedestrian crossing and parking facilities in the vicinity with a view to attracting more visitors.

The promenade features various types of facilities for the public, including a children's playground, a multi-purpose plaza and seaside boardwalk. A performance stage and a spectator stand with 200 seats are also provided at the promenade to facilitate hosting of events by various organisations.

There is also a special tower landmark in the promenade with the design concept generated from piles of recycled paper at the former site of the PCWA. Music, special lighting features and mist effects at the tower will create a colourful atmosphere at night. 

Other guests attending the event included the Director of Civil Engineering and Development, Mr John Chai, Director of Leisure & Cultural Services, Mrs Betty Fung, Director of Architectural Services, Mrs Marigold Lau, and District Officer (Kwun Tong), Mr Au Hing-yuen.


----------



## hkskyline

*Projects take the costly route *
The Standard
Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Funding for the express rail link has finally been approved, and the HK$67 billion scheme is yet another example showing infrastructure projects can be very expensive.

Another pricey project now being undertaken is the Central-Wan Chai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link. At a cost exceeding HK$30 billion, the 4.5-kilometer dual three-lane trunk road may easily become one of the most expensive roads to be built in the world, on a per kilometer basis.

The high cost is due partly to the fact a section of the road will be running under the sea.

Recently, I spoke to construction industry veteran Thomas Ho On-sing, chief executive of Gammon Construction, about the Central-Wan Chai project.

Ho told me that to protect the harbor, the road alignment has been changed to go along the shoreline.

As construction involves reclamation and subsequent restoration, the cost is inevitably higher. But the advantage is that the harbor will be protected, and disruption to the public minimized.

When the undersea design was first proposed years ago, there were worries that sections may drop sharply, because the road has to go under the sea and come back up.

But Ho dismissed such fears, saying the final design is to build the undersea section on seabed supports with the tunnel close to the surface. Therefore, there will not be any gradient issues.

Over his career, Ho has taken part in many mega construction projects, one of which was the MTR in the 1970s, when busy Nathan Road - where the Tourism Board offices were located - was dug up.

The construction din prompted then board chairwoman Selina Chow Liang Shuk-yee to complain frequently to Ho, who felt sorry about the disruption to the public, as the noise level would be unacceptable by today's standards.

Construction has just started on the Central-Wan Chai Bypass, which when completed, will help handle the increased traffic volume associated with the new government headquarters.

Without the bypass, traffic congestion in Central will be unmanageable, Ho said.

But since the government headquarters will be completed in two years, while the target completion date of the bypass is 2017, road users in Central will have to endure severe traffic jams in the intervening years. Siu Sai-wo is chief editor of Sing Tao Daily


----------



## herenthere

hkskyline said:


> *Projects take the costly route *
> The Standard
> Tuesday, January 26, 2010
> 
> But since the government headquarters will be completed in two years, while the target completion date of the bypass is 2017*, road users in Central will have to endure severe traffic jams in the intervening years.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Well, this is a shining example for HK's immense amount of mass transit to say, "Take Me not only until 2017, but beyond that!"
> 
> China Officials Consider Bringing Back Biking


----------



## EricIsHim

^^ Well... The WCB was supposed to be done and in operation 4 years ago, not 7 years from now. It has delayed for 10 years due to various reasons. If it had had completed on schedule, traffic congestion would have been relieved by now, rather than facing another 7 years of congestion.


----------



## hkskyline

*Eviction strengthens dog owners' hand *
20 January 2010
South China Morning Post

Whether you love dogs or hate them, there is no disputing that these faithful friends are popular in Hong Kong and enhance the lives of their owners.

The need to take them for a walk provides a reason to get some exercise and the chance to socialise with other dog lovers. Evidence of that was in abundance on the Wan Chai Waterfront Promenade on Sunday when about 3,500 owners with 1,500 pets attended a carnival at the popular dog exercise spot.

Contrary to what people may have expected, the park was kept clean. Indeed, this was cited by special guest Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, secretary for development, as testament to the way dog owners valued the designated space.

Alas, in a city where living space is not at all dog-friendly, the promenade is to be closed next week to make way for the Central-Wan Chai bypass. Dog owners are powerless in the face of this kind of development when well-organised lobby groups opposed to the bypass have failed to stop it. And they knew all along that the park was only a temporary measure.

But their eviction strengthens their hand in the campaign for more open spaces in which to exercise dogs. Happily, the promenade's success has persuaded the government to plan other dog-friendly parks, with two having opened already at Sheung Wan and Yau Ma Tei, and more to follow at Tai Po, Sham Shui Po and Tseung Kwan O.

The SPCA plans a campaign to make them known to owners, especially the one at Sheung Wan. However, with dogs forbidden on trains and buses, an exercise area so handy to Wan Chai and Causeway Bay will still be missed. We wish the society well in its push for more dog-friendly parks, including reopening part of Victoria Park in Causeway Bay to dogs. It needs to convince opponents who regard them as a nuisance that a well-exercised dog makes less noise and is better behaved.


----------



## EricIsHim




----------



## hkskyline

They paved the road quite quickly. It's now connected to Man Cheung Street.


----------



## hkskyline

*First section of Lung Wo Road in Central to open tomorrow *
Government Press Release
Monday, February 22, 2010



















The first section of Lung Wo Road, which is part of the road network being constructed under the Central Reclamation Phase III (CRIII) project, will be open to traffic tomorrow (February 23). 

The CRIII project aims to provide land for the construction of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass (CWB) and other essential transport infrastructure. With the CWB built underground, much of the new land formed under the CRIII project will provide the opportunity for us to create a vibrant, green, accessible and sustainable waterfront promenade in Central for public enjoyment. This vision is now part of the Conserving Central initiative announced by the Chief Executive in his 2009-10 Policy Address.

After years of strenuous effort, the project has now reached an advanced stage. Reclamation has been substantially completed and construction of the CWB is now actively progressing. All works under the CRIII project are expected to be completed by the end of 2011.

Lung Wo Road extends from Man Cheung Street eastwards (See Plan A attached). It is part of Road P2 which is designed to connect the existing Man Cheung Street in Central Reclamation Phase I (between the Airport Railway Station and Two International Finance Centre) via the land formed under the CRIII and Wan Chai Development Phase II (WDII) projects with Hung Hing Road to be realigned under the WDII project (See Plan B attached). 

The first section of Lung Wo Road, between Man Yiu Street and Tim Wa Avenue in Central, will provide an alternative route for Wan Chai bound traffic to bypass the section of the very congested Connaught Road Central and avoid merging with other traffic heading for Admiralty and Mid-levels (see Plan C attached). This will provide some relief to the east bound traffic congestion currently encountered in the area.

Upon completion of the entire length of CWB from Rumsey Street Flyover to Island Eastern Corridor and the associated road networks scheduled for completion by 2017, Road P2 will distribute traffic from the strategic east-west traffic corridor formed by the CWB and the Rumsey Street Flyover to the neighbouring areas including Central, Admiralty, Mid-levels, Wan Chai, and vice versa from these areas to the corridor. The current traffic congestion problem at the Connaught Road Central-Harcourt Road-Gloucester Road corridor can then be resolved.

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201002/22/P201002220081.htm


----------



## EricIsHim

^^ I really don't like the suddenly sharpened curve on the eastbound (Wan Chai-bound) by the construction access. The more I look at the picture, the more I hate it.


----------



## hkskyline

10/31


----------



## hkskyline

*SDEV speaks on reclamation outside Victoria Harbour and rock cavern development*
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Government Press Release

Following is a transcript of remarks (English portion) by the Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, speaking to the media today (November 10) after attending the launch ceremony of the Stage 1 Public Engagement on Enhancing Land Supply Strategy:

Reporter: When is the revenue going to take place and how much revenue is expected by the Government?

Secretary for Development: It is too early to talk about revenue. We start at the Stage 1 of the public engagement on reclamation outside of the Victoria Harbour and cavern development. The purpose of a Stage 1 is perhaps to engage the community to agree on certain criteria, that is the need for doing reclamation outside of Victoria Harbour and cavern development, and we are going to use this approach, what are the key factors that the Government should bear in mind and whether there is a general community consensus. I think we will move into very definite site identification in Stage 2 of the exercise. But I can assure you that we will be extremely careful in selecting suitable sites for reclamation outside of the Victoria Harbour.

Reporter: What is the Government's preferred option? What do you think about the accusation that the Government has focused too much on commercialisation as to conservation?

Secretary for Development: First of all, I don't think it is fair to suggest that the Government has focused too much on commercialisation, as opposed to conservation. In recent years, whether it is in heritage conservation or nature conservation, the Government has made a lot of progress and initiatives. Indeed, even in creating land, it is not so much for commercialisation purposes. It is for meeting Hong Kong people's needs, particularly housing needs. That's why the Chief Executive has set a sort of target of trying to produce land that will be sufficient for providing an average of 40,000 housing units per year in the next 10 years. So, this is a very tall order for us, and that is why we need to find various means to produce land.

As to your first question, What is our preferred approach? In fact, as you can see from the gimmick that we have used for this public consultation, which is a puzzle made up of six pieces, I would say that we need each and every one of those six strategies in other to have a balanced and sustainable supply of land to meet Hong Kong's various needs.


----------



## hkskyline

12/2


----------



## hkskyline

11/19 - Wan Chai section


----------



## hkskyline

2/1


----------



## topota6009

thanks for the photos, but do not go very slowly with the works?, in which year end?


----------



## pookgai

The official sites still say 2011 (obviously need updating). I'm also curious as to when the park and buildings will be ready ontop of Phase III! The wait had better be worth it! It's been a construction site for so long...


----------



## iamawesomezero

seems like a lot of people forgot about the subway extension underground too.


----------



## hkskyline

*Extra care sunk into harbor bypass*
The Standard
Friday, February 10, 2012

Waters in the inner harbor may appear to be choked by filth, yet advanced construction technology will be used to build a tunnel on the Central-Wan Chai bypass to cut marine pollution.

Chun Wo Development managing director Clement Kwok Yuk-chiu noted the firm has three contracts to build the bypass from Central to North Point.

But it has decided not to build a tunnel with immersed tubes. Instead, advanced excavation methods will avoid dredging sediment and thus protect marine species.

And Chun Wo has scaled down the size of the construction site to minimize inconvenience to pedestrians and office workers. 

The bypass - a road and tunnel project along the north shore of Hong Kong Island - was delayed for several years because of a judicial review.

Protesters said the planned reclamation was against the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance.

But a Court of Final Appeal ruling in 2004 allowed the project to proceed if reclamation was scaled down.


----------



## hkskyline

*LCQ12: Population projection and land demand*
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Government Press Release

Following is a question by the Hon Kam Nai-wai and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, in the Legislative Council today (February 22):

Question:

The Government announced 25 proposed sites for reclamation outside the Victoria Harbour and consulted the public on the policy on developing land and enhancing land supply to meet, among others, the future needs for infrastructure and housing in Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) of the Hong Kong population projections for 2011 which were made by the authorities in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006; the discrepancies between such figures and the actual population in 2011; the reasons for the discrepancies, and whether they have conducted reviews and introduced improvement in respect of the discrepancies in such projections;

(b) of the Hong Kong population projections for 2030 which were made by the authorities in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006; the respective differences in results between each projection and the one immediately preceding it, and the reasons for such differences;

(c) of the respective percentages of permanent and non-permanent residents of Hong Kong in the population of 8.9 million people projected for 2039 by the authorities at present; the monitoring system and examination measures put in place by the Government to prevent over-development of land (including reclamation and over-development which cause unnecessary damages to the natural environment and ecology) due to serious errors in the estimation of future population;

(d) of the area and percentage of developed land in the 1 100 square kilometres of land in Hong Kong at present; the respective numbers of the lots used for public and private housing as well as commercial, industrial and agricultural purposes, and their respective areas and percentages in the area of brownfield sites; the number of industrial and agricultural sites among them which may be developed into sites for housing or commercial purposes; among the greenfield sites, the respective areas of sites which are subject to the Country Parks Ordinance (Cap. 208) and the regulations for special areas, as well as respective percentages of such areas in the total land area in Hong Kong; the number of remaining greenfield sites which are not subject to the Country Parks Ordinance or the regulations for special areas, the respective percentages of the areas of such sites in the total land area in Hong Kong, and the possible purposes of development for such sites;

(e) whether the authorities have conducted any comprehensive assessment of the land demand in Hong Kong, the territory-wide land-use planning and the progress of land development, e.g. development of long-abandoned quarries, idle government, rural and industrial sites (including former government quarters, vacant school premises and community facilities as well as expired short-term tenancy sites, etc.), as well as the remaining areas for development in Tung Chung, the new towns in the Northeast New Territories, North Lantau, Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan and the frontier closed areas, etc.; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether they have studied the development of existing greenfield sites to enhance land supply; and

(f) whether it has conducted any comprehensive study covering all aspects of society in Hong Kong on the various benefits and costs (e.g. employment, economic activities, construction costs and environmental costs, etc. arising from development projects) of reclamation vis-赋-vis those of developing dry land, so as to compare the overall benefits and costs between the two approaches; if it has, of the details, and whether it will make public the outcome and information of the study?

Reply:

President,

The Government is currently conducting a public engagement exercise on enhancing land supply strategy with a view to consulting the public on reclamation on an appropriate scale outside Victoria Harbour and rock cavern development and establishing the site selection criteria. During the consultation process, some opined that the preliminary site criteria were too abstract and sought specific examples of reclamation sites to facilitate public discussion. Having reviewed Hong Kong's shoreline and excluded severely constrained sites unsuitable for reclamation, we proposed 25 possible reclamation sites to facilitate the public's consideration of the site selection criteria from social, economic and environmental perspectives in accordance with the sustainability principle. To date, the Government has yet to reach a decision on the proposal for reclamation outside Victoria Harbour and the site selection criteria. The types and sites of reclamation are also subject to changes in the light of public opinion. In the next step, we will consider the public's views on reclamation, formulate the site selection criteria and identify possible sites before further consulting the public, and the local communities and organisations concerned. We aim to identify about 10 reclamation sites for detailed feasibility study and further public consultation.

My reply to the various parts of the question, having consolidated the information provided by the Census and Statistics Department (C&SD), is as follows:

(a) and (b): The C&SD published population projections in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2007, using the base populations of 1999, 2001, 2003 and 2006 respectively. The differences between the projected 2011 population in these population projection series and the actual population figure in mid-2011, and between the current population projection for 2030 and the previous projections are tabulated in Annex 1.

In compiling each series of population projections, the C&SD had taken into consideration the latest population, social and economic development conditions and the local trends in fertility, mortality and migration patterns. The differences between projections and the actual population were mainly due to unexpected changes in the trends of population, social and economic development of Hong Kong in different periods.

Since 2000, the C&SD has updated the population projections at intervals of two to three years, taking into account the latest population, social and economic development conditions. As shown in the information above, each successive update in population projections would further narrow the differences with the actual population figures.

(c) In 2010, the C&SD projected on the basis of the latest 2009-based population data that the 2039 population would reach 8.89 million. In other words, our population is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 0.8% for the next 30 years, which is lower than the actual average annual growth rate of 1.1% for the past 30 years. This population projection has not differentiated between Hong Kong Permanent Residents and Hong Kong Non-permanent Residents.

Our population projection methodology, which is internationally approved, applies appropriate statistical projection methods and makes reference to the latest population, social and economic development conditions, the latest trends in fertility, mortality and migration patterns, and input from the relevant bureaux and departments on the various assumptions of the population projection exercise. Moreover, as mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the C&SD will update the population figures according to the actual conditions from time to time to minimise errors in the population projections.

Implementing any developments, whether they be developments on land or reclamation projects, require a relatively long lead time for preparation work, including going through the statutory procedures, undertaking technical and environmental impact assessments and public consultation. At the preparatory stage, the projects are subject to continuous evaluation in the light of the latest conditions to assess their justifications and urgency. The projects would be planned and implemented in an orderly manner. As such, there would not be excessive development of land that would infringe the public interest and endanger the natural and ecological environment of Hong Kong.

(d) The total land area of Hong Kong measures about 1 108 square kilometres, which can be divided into built-up and non-built-up land. The respective areas of the various sites mentioned in the question are as follows:

(i) The built-up area measures about 263 square kilometres, representing 23.7% of the total land area in Hong Kong. There is no statistics on the number of land lots used for various purposes. Agricultural land is not classified as built-up land. (Annex 2)

(ii) The non-built-up land measures about 845 square kilometres and accounts for about 76.3% of the total land area in Hong Kong. (Annex 3)

It is worth noting that the remaining non-built-up land is mainly wetland, wetland conservation areas, wetland buffer areas, water gathering grounds, hilly land, slopes and woodland, etc. that cannot be or is not suitable for development and are subject to various development constraints. As far as the development of the agricultural lands is concerned, most of these lands are privately owned with fragmented ownership, and are lack of infrastructures. To meet the demand for development, we have identified agricultural lands with higher potential for planning and development, including parts of the land in the North East New Territories New Development Areas and Hung Shui Kiu New Development Area (NDA). We will also actively explore other available land including the ex-quarry sites, green belt areas that are devegetated, deserted or formed, as well as deserted agricultural land.

(e) Land demand is driven by population growth, economic development and public's aspiration for a better living environment. Population growth will increase demand of land for housing and public facilities. Economic development will increase the demand of land for commercial developments including offices and hotels. Improving the living environment including lowering the development density, increasing open spaces and protecting the natural environment can only be materialised with more land. With regard to land supply, the Government has assessed the supply under the existing land supply options (including resumption, redevelopment, rezoning, re-use of ex-quarry sites). We have reviewed all projects under implementation and planning stages, including property development projects above railway stations, urban renewal projects, revitalisation projects of industrial buildings, future land supply in the NDAs (including North East New Territories NDAs and Hung Shui Kiu NDA, the Kai Tak Development Area, Tung Chung and Tseung Kwan O) and rezoning of industrial sites, green belts and agricultural lands. Among these, the NDAs, rezoning of green belts and agricultural lands will involve the development of the currently non-built-up land, which are affected by the problems of land resumption, clearance, fragmented ownership, conservation of heritage, cultural and ecology, etc. It is difficult to ensure timely and sufficient supply of land to meet the demand. Therefore, if we simply count on land development under the current land supply options, the long-term land demand of Hong Kong cannot be met and a land reserve can hardly be built up for Hong Kong.

(f) We have conducted preliminary assessments on the impacts of reclamation and other land development options arising from the social, economic and environmental aspects, and have made a broad analysis. On the economic aspect, rezoning, redevelopment and resumption are all market driven with a high degree of uncertainties, whereas reclamation is suitable for building up a land reserve to alleviate the impact brought by economic cycles and the uncertainties in the market. On the social aspect, rezoning, redevelopment and resumption will affect the existing community and economic activities which require decanting sites, whereas reclamation can provide the required land and solution space. On the environment aspect, redevelopment will generate public fill, whereas reclamation can effectively collect the public fill. The above information has been released in the public engagement activities and uploaded onto the website for the public engagement at www.landsupply.hk. As for the benefits and costs of specific reclamation and land development projects, the assessment can only be made after conducting detailed planning and engineering studies. There is no comprehensive study at this stage.

Annex : http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201202/22/P201202220312.htm


----------



## hkskyline

*Greens slam reclamation over sinking marine life*
The Standard
Thursday, March 08, 2012

Reclamation projects have caused fish stocks to decline by 70percent over the past two decades, a green group claims.

Green Sense believes sand dredging and depositing - crucial processes when reclaiming land - inevitably disturb marine life and the spawning grounds that replenish it.

"Reclaiming land, and not overfishing, is the primary cause of habitat destruction which results in the loss of marine life," Green Sense president Roy Tam Hoi-pong said. He added that when reclaiming land, two separate sites are damaged since sand is normally dredged from one area and deposited in the zone to be reclaimed.

Hong Kong and Kowloon Floating Fishermen Welfare Promotion Association secretary Keung Siu-fai said since dredging began 20 years ago, fishermen have been complaining about a diminishing catch rate of 50 to 70 percent.

Also, the variety of fish caught is much smaller. Stocks of the yellow croaker fish and Chinese bahaba are almost depleted.

Ho Kin-chung, dean of science and technology at the Open University of Hong Kong, said reclamation causes erosion of the seabed as large quantities of mud are dumped into the sea, destroying the breeding ground of shrimps and small marine organisms that fish feed on.

Fish are also poisoned by chemicals released during dredging operations.

Tam said he will raise his concerns at the open hearing of the Legislative Council on Saturday.

The public consultation on the government's reclamation plans will end this month.


----------



## calaguyo

Oh this is the construction site I've seen when I was at Apple Store.


----------



## hkskyline

*Loss of internet blamed on cable cut by bypass diggers*
The Standard
Monday, April 16, 2012

Hong Kong Telecom (6823) has blamed the contractor responsible for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass for causing a breakdown in services to 17,650 commercial and personal users on Friday by damaging cables.

In a preliminary report yesterday, the SAR's leading telecom services provider claimed China State Construction Engineering (HK) damaged three cross-harbor fiber cable routings in Causeway Bay typhoon shelter at about 3:45pm on Friday.

By Hong Kong Telecom count, about 9,000 active commercial broadband and 4,500 One Communications customers were affected.

The company also said 4,000 consumer broadband customers in the west of the New Territories suffered a slowdown and that 150 NowTV customers were impacted. 

Some securities brokers also said they noticed access was slow and that some customers had needed to call in their orders during the last few minutes of trading on Friday.

Others affected included the new Government Headquarters in Admiralty as well as commercial users from Central to Quarry Bay, the south side of Hong Kong Island and Tung Chung.

Hong Kong Telecom diverted network traffic through redundant routings, and by 7:15pm more than 90 percent of commercial and residential broadband services had been restored.

The office of the Communications Authority received 16 complaints.

Hong Kong Telecom intends to file a claim for damages against China State Construction.

A spokeswoman for that company, which is part of state-owned China State Construction International (3311), declined to comment yesterday.


----------



## hkskyline

7/4


----------



## hkskyline

*Harbourfront development experiences shared in seminar co-organised by Development Bureau and Barcelona *
Government Press Release
Tuesday, July 17, 2012










The Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO) of the Development Bureau and the city of Barcelona jointly held a seminar entitled "A Different Waterfront Makes a City Different - Barcelona Experience" at the EKEO at Hoi Bun Road, Kwun Tong, this evening (July 17). Over 200 distinguished local advocates of harbourfront planning, architects, construction professionals and urban planning experts joined the discussion to share their ideas on harbourfront planning and urban development at the seminar.

Led by the Mayor of Barcelona, Mr Xavier Trias, the Barcelona delegation visiting Hong Kong paid a courtesy call on the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mrs Carrie Lam, this morning. With more than 20 years of experience in harbourfront development, Barcelona serves as a successful example of harbourfront transformation, and can offer invaluable insight for the Energizing Kowloon East initiative and help Hong Kong further enhance the development of harbourfront areas.

The seminar today was chaired by the Permanent Secretary for Development (Works), Mr Wai Chi-sing. Other attendees included the Chairman of the Harbourfront Commission, Mr Nicholas Brooke; the Director of Architectural Services, Mr Leung Koon-kee; the Director of Civil Engineering and Development, Mr Hon Chi-keung; the Director of Drainage Services, Mr Chan Chi-chiu; the Acting Director of Electrical and Mechanical Services, Mr Alfred Sit; the Director of Highways, Mr Lau Ka-keung; the Director of Planning, Mr Jimmy Leung; and the Head of the Energizing Kowloon East Office, Mr Ling Kar-kan.


----------



## hkskyline

_Note the dredgers along the coast to reclaim the Wan Chai - Causeway Bay stretch._

Source : http://www.fotop.net/Rudy


----------



## hkskyline

By *dc925* from a Hong Kong photography forum :


----------



## hkskyline

*Speech by SDEV at Construction Industry Council Conference 2012 *
Friday, September 28, 2012
Government Press Release

Following is the speech delivered by the Secretary for Development, Mr Paul Chan, today (September 28) at the Construction Industry Council (CIC) Conference 2012 "Manpower Sustainability of Construction Industry cum Zero Carbon Building Development in Hong Kong":

S S (Chairman of the CIC Mr Lee Shing-see), distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,

This is an important conference and also a very good opportunity for old friends and partners to meet again. For myself, I am both honoured and humbled to be going back to my roots, as the old adage goes. I say this because, as some of you may be aware of, about three decades ago I started off my career as the Chief Accountant and Secretary to the Council at the Construction Industry Training Authority (CITA).

I am most delighted to see that, since then, the industry has made tremendous progress. What was once a fragmented, unregulated industry is now an integrated whole that strives for excellence.

Let me briefly recap. The CIC was established in 2007 to become the construction industry co-ordinating body. Encompassing all sectors of the construction industry, the CIC has a strategic mission to spearhead reforms and sustain momentum to achieve continuous improvements across the construction industry. A year later, the CITA amalgamated with the CIC, putting training and trade-testing under its purview. In June this year, we passed a bill at the Legislative Council that paved the way for the amalgamation of the Construction Workers Registration Authority with the CIC. I am glad to learn from S S that the logistics work for the amalgamation is well under way. May I take the opportunity here to sincerely make an appeal: the CIC is a collaborative industry-wide platform established for us all. We should all make full use of the CIC to propagate improvements across the entire industry.

Back to the conference, the two subjects discussed today are pivotal to the future of the industry. I understand that you had a fruitful discussion this morning on manpower, which is the cogwheel that drives forward the industry. Zero-carbon buildings, about which we will hear extensively from experts after the lunch, will play an increasingly important role in future projects.

The Government will champion policies and initiatives in this direction, but we certainly need the support from industry stakeholders. For future development, we will adopt a dual-pronged strategy - on the one hand we will strive to enhance land supply, and on the other we will continue to invest in infrastructure. I believe this is conducive not only to the sustainability of the construction industry, but also to the long-term competitiveness of Hong Kong.

On enhancing land supply, let me start off with a wake-up call. We definitely need more land to underpin Hong Kong's development in the coming years. Land is a scarce resource. We are already facing a housing shortage. Our local population is expected to increase to 8.47 million by 2041. No doubt, this will inevitably drive up the demand for housing, health care, education and employment opportunities. At the same time, we will need to maintain a quality living environment. Hence, an important element of our development strategy is to enhance land supply as a backbone to sustain our development.

We have been working hard developing a land reserve to ensure a stable supply of land without being affected by economic fluctuations and societal changes. Even during times when demand for land declines, potential sites will continue to be identified, formed and reserved in advance. The land on reserve can be released for development to meet housing, social and economic needs and unexpected opportunities within a short time, thereby enhancing our flexibility to respond to changes.

*Reclamation was once the main solution to the land shortage problem in Hong Kong. Over 6,800 hectares of land in Hong Kong, that is 6 per cent of our land, were created from reclamation. Reclamation within Victoria Harbour to create new land is now legally constrained under the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance. We therefore need to explore possible alternatives to expand land resources, while staying prudent in pursuing reclamation on a limited scale.

Our strategy is to adopt a flexible mix of land supply options, including measures to generate new land, as well as measures to optimise the use of existing developed land. This broadly boils down to four "R"s - rock cavern development, reclamation outside Victoria Harbour, rezoning of under-utilised land and releasing industrial land for other uses. I will spend more time on the first two "R"s today, as they both involve capital works and are therefore more relevant to the construction industry.

Our first "R" is rock cavern development, which many consider a novel concept. Sixty-four per cent of the land area in Hong Kong is particularly well-suited for rock cavern development. In fact, we have developed rock caverns before to accommodate public utility facilities, such as the Island West Refuse Transfer Station, the Stanley Sewage Treatment Works and the Western Salt Water Service Reservoir. More recently, we have relocated the Western Salt Water Service Reservoir into a cavern and its original piece of land has been developed into the University of Hong Kong's Centennial Campus. But these projects have only been done on a project-by-project basis without a long-term strategy.

To fully utilise the potential of cavern development, we have embarked on a feasibility study this year to map out a long-term strategy for cavern development and to devise a cavern master plan for the territory. We will evaluate tangible economic costs and benefits as well as the intangible social and environmental costs and benefits of the development proposals in the feasibility study.

Reclamation is our second "R". While we will not contemplate reclamation within Victoria Harbour, reclamation at suitable locations outside the harbour on a controlled, appropriate scale should be considered.

When pursuing reclamation, one major concern is its potential impact on the physical environment, marine ecology and the fisheries industry. We will advocate the deployment of cutting-edge technologies and the use of suitable environmental mitigation measures during the construction stage. With the support of industry stakeholders in developing and adopting clean technologies, negative impact on the environment will be minimised.

Reclamation can, in fact, be considered a suitable option of land supply. The large amount of public fill generated from redevelopment and infrastructure projects, as well as contaminated mud dredged from fairways, can be used in local reclamation. Using public fill in local reclamation is a cheaper and more environmentally friendly alternative than the delivery of the fill to Taishan in the Mainland for reclamation.

Reclamation and rock cavern developments are indeed two of the measures of the Government's six-pronged approach to increase land supply as announced in the 2011-12 Policy Address. We have also been stepping up efforts to build up a sustainable land reserve through the release of industrial land for non-industrial uses; looking into the use of green belt areas that are devegetated, deserted or formed; examining Government, Institution or Community (GIC) sites; and exploring the possibility of converting some degraded rural areas in North District and Yuen Long into housing sites.*

Remarkable progress has been made in identifying land. For example, from our latest round of review on industrial land, about 30 hectares of industrial land in Tsuen Wan, Yuen Long, Tuen Mun and elsewhere have been recommended for residential use. Thirty-six GIC sites and government sites have been identified as suitable for residential development, providing a total of about 11,900 private and public housing units. The Planning Department is now actively following up on these sites and will consult the community on the required rezoning. The Government is also pursuing studies on degraded rural areas in North District and Yuen Long. These innovative measures will help expand Hong Kong's land resources to help us respond to the future opportunities and challenges.

I have spent some time covering our measures to sustain land supply. While they will provide the basic ingredient for development, we also need to invest in infrastructure to enhance connectivity and to keep up our overall competitiveness. The annual expenditure on capital works has undergone a threefold increase from $20.5 billion in 2007-08 to an estimated $62.3 billion this year. We are also anticipating annual expenditure of over $70 billion in the next few years. This is the result of the implementation of the strategy of promoting economic growth through infrastructure development.

Each year the World Economic Forum publishes a Global Competitiveness Report. The report ranks the competitiveness of economic entities around the world by assessing a number of indicators including the infrastructure index. As Asia's world city, Hong Kong has consistently been one of the forerunners in the ranking. In the latest report released earlier this month, Hong Kong was ranked ninth among 144 economies and achieved the best score in the world on the infrastructure index. This is the best ranking for our city since the establishment of the index. The high level of competitiveness of Hong Kong will certainly help attract businesses and foreign investment.

These commercial activities will need to be sustained and supported by the construction of prime office towers, hotels and conference venues. In the coming years, one of our main objectives is to ensure a steady and adequate office supply. To this end, we are dedicated to creating a new central business district in Kowloon East to support Hong Kong's economic development. The supply of office space will be increased by 4 million square metres. This includes 1.1 million square metres at the Kai Tak Development and 2.9 million square metres in Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay. Taking into account the existing stock of 1.4 million square metres of office space in this district, Kowloon East has the potential to supply a total of 5.4 million square metres of office space. This would be twice as large as the existing office space in Central.

We will also improve the connectivity of Hong Kong with other economies. For land routes, the Hong Kong and the Shenzhen authorities are building a seventh land-based boundary control point at Liantang/Heung Yuen Wai, which will be the first boundary control point directly accessible by both pedestrians and private vehicles. This is a major project under the 12th National Five-Year Plan, and is scheduled for commissioning in 2018. For air routes, to cope with air traffic demand up to 2020, the Airport Authority is taking forward a midfield expansion project at the Hong Kong International Airport to provide a new concourse, additional aircraft stands and apron facilities. These measures, when completed in 2015, will increase the annual handling capacity of the airport to 70 million passengers and 6 million tonnes of cargo. Environmental impact assessment for the third runway is under way and is expected to complete by the end of 2014.

Infrastructure projects will also create jobs and sustain the healthy development of the construction industry. Benefiting from a number of capital works, the unemployment rate in the construction industry dropped by nearly 9 percentage points from a post-financial tsunami peak of 12.8 per cent to the current low level of about 4 per cent.

In order to sustain a robust and skilled workforce to deliver infrastructure projects in a timely manner for the economic growth of Hong Kong, we strive to nurture quality and sufficient local construction manpower. To this end, we have secured a total of $320 million to support the CIC for attracting new blood and further enhancing training for the construction industry. With the support of and collaboration with the construction industry stakeholders, the efforts have started to deliver encouraging results. The total number of registered construction workers has increased from about 271,000 in April 2010 to over 294,000 in September 2012, an increase of about 8 per cent in just two years. Among recently recruited trainees under the CIC's enhanced training programme, about 60 per cent are aged under 35 and most of them are new entrants to the industry. We envisage that the demand for construction manpower can largely be met by the local workforce. There may be cases of labour shortage occasionally on novel construction methods or due to short-term exceptionally high demand for a particular trade. We will not consider importation of labour lightly.

We all know that sustainable development is not simply about having sustained economic growth. We will continue to attach importance to our heritage, our quality of life and our environment. Partnerships are continuously forged in conservation of heritage and revitalisation of historic buildings. Walls and facades of many of our skyscrapers are now decorated with shades of green through adoption of skyrise greening technologies. Construction projects are gearing towards a more eco-friendly, low-carbon regime by devising innovative and creative solutions. I understand that the Permanent Secretary for Development (Works), Mr C S Wai, briefed you this morning on the Government's low-carbon initiatives and I will not repeat them here.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is beyond dispute that stable and adequate investment in terms of land and manpower resources is fundamental in sustaining the healthy and long-term development of the industry. On stability, the local construction industry has experienced booms and busts over the years. This cyclical pattern is also common in other advanced economies including Australia and Singapore. During high tide, there are more projects than the industry could take up, but this could transition quickly into a low tide when there are too few projects. It is understandable that we have heard calls from the industry for evening out construction workload. However, before this can even be contemplated, we must aim to have a complete picture of the total planned construction output of the entire industry. Statistics indicate that the public sector to private sector ratio of construction workload has been about 4 to 6 over the years. While the Government can manage our share of public works as far as the public sector is concerned, we alone cannot turn the tide. We need collaborative efforts from the private sector for better sharing of information on future workload, such that the entire industry can work hand in hand to capitalise on this golden age of construction.

On adequacy of resources, I have outlined the Government's measures to sustain the future development of the construction industry and Hong Kong at large. From a wider policy perspective, I have been asking myself this question: Are we doing enough? The construction sector contributes 3.5 per cent to Hong Kong's gross domestic product and employs about 8 per cent of our workforce. This achievement is the result of massive investment of public resources over the past few years. However, when compared to countries such as Australia, Japan and Singapore, Hong Kong's construction expenditure only takes up a modest share of our GDP. In the Hong Kong context, we can ask ourselves how many resources should be put into the construction industry in the future, bearing in mind changing economic and social circumstances and other priorities. This is not an easy question. I do not have an answer. I do not want a ready answer now. I certainly will welcome views and suggestions from you and engage in dialogue for the better future of the industry.

Last but not least, I wish you all a fruitful discussion this afternoon. For our overseas visitors, do enjoy Hong Kong. Shop until you drop. And for everyone, good health.

Thank you.


----------



## hkskyline

*Worker dies in pipes tragedy*
The Standard
Tuesday, October 30, 2012

A construction worker was killed and three others injured, one seriously, in a suspected explosion at a construction site in Wan Chai.

The site is part of the Wan Chai Development Phase II - at the crossroads of Hung Hing Road and Wan Shing Street, close to the shoreline.

At about 4pm yesterday, construction workers heard a loud bang from a water-filled trench - four meters deep and five meters long - into which two workers, wearing diving equipment and other safety gear, had ventured.

Cheng Chi-wai, 56, was declared dead while a 35-year-old worker of Nigerian nationality, who has been working in Hong Kong for four years, was taken to Ruttonjee Hospital.

He was later transferred to Queen Mary Hospital, where his condition is serious. Two other workers were slightly injured.

Bosco Chan Bun-pui of the Civil Engineering and Development Department for Hong Kong Island said the workers were attempting to connect new and old submarine sewage pipes.

The deputy project manager said he had not received any report about an explosion and will investigate.

Meanwhile, Hong Kong Construction Industry Employees General Union chairman Chow Luen-kiu believed that an inflatable PVC ball, which served as a plug between the two pipes, may have exploded. "It may have happened when water from the other side rushed in," Chow said.

Cheng, who had been working at the same site for two years and who received HK$1,500 for each session, is survived by his wife and daughter.

In a separate accident yesterday, a 35-year-old construction worker fell to his death while cleaning windows at a flat in Sham Shui Po.


----------



## hkskyline

_Not part of the main Victoria Harbour but the nearby waters leading to it : _

*LCQ19: Reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan*
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Government Press Release

Following is a question by the Hon Albert Chan and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Mr Paul Chan, in the Legislative Council today (November 7):

Question:

The Chief Executive has indicated in his election manifesto that he plans to restart, eight years later, the reclamation plans for which feasibility studies have been completed, including the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan which the Government decided to shelve in 2003. On the other hand, I have learnt that Tsuen Wan Bay is located within the Victoria Harbour, and that according to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (Cap. 531) and the relevant judgment handed down by the Court of Final Appeal, the authorities must establish that there is an overriding public need for reclamation before it may implement reclamation plans within the Victoria Harbour. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) whether it has decided to restart the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan eight years later; if so, of the reasons and justifications for that;

(b) whether it has studied, in making the decision mentioned in (a), if there is an overriding public need for the reclamation plan in Tsuen Wan; if the result of the study is in the affirmative, of the details; if the result of the study is in the negative, why the Government can restart the plan eight years later; and

(c) whether it will undertake to uphold the policy adopted by the Government of the previous terms to permanently shelve the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan, in order to ensure that the living environment of the residents in the district will not deteriorate; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

The manifesto of the Chief Executive sets out the guiding thoughts and objectives on Land, Planning and Transportation. On increasing land supply, he affirms that land underpins all social and economic activities because land is required for resolving housing problems, developing trades and industries, and providing public and community facilities. As such, it is critical to provide land resources in a timely manner and on an appropriate scale for the sustainable development of Hong Kong. In view of the strategic and visionary nature of land planning and utilisation and the need to break out from the silo mentality, the manifesto sets forth short, medium and long term measures. They include identifying short term usable land (to be completed in 2 to 3 years), expediting land supply in newly developed zones (to be completed in 3 to 8 years) and planning for long-term land supply (to be completed after 8 years). Moreover, a multi-pronged approach shall be adopted for expanding land resources. This includes identifying land which has supporting infrastructure and can be developed readily, developing land with development potential, implementing new development areas for land supply and exploring reclamation outside Victoria Harbour, with a view to increasing land supply in a flexible manner and building up land reserves to meet the development needs of the community, enhancing our competitiveness, raising the quality of life and housing progressively, and meeting the future demands arising from economic re-structuring and demographic changes.

The reply to the three parts of the question is as follows:

(a) The manifesto of the Chief Executive has mentioned restarting the reclamation plans for which feasibility studies have been completed as a guiding thought on long-term land supply after 8 years for maintaining the sustainable development of Hong Kong. These reclamation plans for which feasibility studies have been completed cover areas scattered all over Hong Kong and the manifesto has quoted some districts such as northern Lantau and Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan for illustration purpose. The manifesto also mentions actively exploring the feasibility of other reclamation areas outside Victoria Harbour in order to meet the long-term land demand.

(b) and (c) The present status of the reclamation plans in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan as referred to in the question is as follows:

(i) The reclamation plan in Tsuen Wan refers to the study entitled "Tsuen Wan Bay Further Reclamation - Area 35 Engineering, Planning and Environmental Investigation" and the proposed works lie within Victoria Harbour. The Government appreciates the ardent aspirations of the public to protect and preserve Victoria Harbour, which is an invaluable natural asset of the people of Hong Kong. Therefore it announced the cancellation of a number of proposed reclamation plans within Victoria Harbour, including the one in Tsuen Wan, in October 2003 having regard to the enactment of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance and a judgment of the Court of Final Appeal on reclamation. For any proposed reclamation plan within Victoria Harbour, it is foremost to tackle the issues on the overriding public interest.

(ii) The reclamation plan in Sham Tseng of Tsuen Wan District refers to the "Planning and Engineering Feasibility Study for Sham Tseng Development". The Study was for a proposed housing development located outside Victoria Harbour and was completed in 2003. The Government did not take forward the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng on the basis of the then housing demand of Hong Kong. However in view of the insufficient land supply situation of Hong Kong in recent years, the Government commenced the Study on Enhancing Land Supply Strategy: Reclamation outside Victoria Harbour and Rock Cavern Development last year and launched the stage 1 public engagement activities. This Study includes reviewing reclamation plans for which feasibility studies have been completed, identifying other suitable reclamation sites, and listening to the views of the public on reclamation site selection criteria for conducting preliminary technical studies. The views of the public collected during the stage 1 public engagement revealed that there was general consensus on the site selection criteria that encompassed social, environmental and economic effectiveness, with emphasis on the impacts on the community, environment and marine ecology. We will select potential reclamation sites carefully according to the above selection criteria and are planning to put forward several potential reclamation sites in the first quarter of next year for commencing the stage 2 public engagement.


----------



## hkskyline

3/4


----------



## hkskyline

*Question day dawns on reclamation*
The Standard
Thursday, March 21, 2013

Members of the public will start to be asked today for their views on various reclamation projects for housing.

The consultation exercise covers five coastal reclamation areas that could provide 600 hectares of land on which to build about 90,000 homes.

It is understood the authorities are particularly keen on sites at Siu Ho Wan and Sunny Bay on Lantau. Planning is already under way at both places.

The other sites are at Lung Kwu Tan, Ma Liu Shui and the southwestern part of Tsing Yi in a consultation exercise that will last for three months.

The reclamation of areas that win approval will likely start as early as 2016. In addition to the actual sites, the projects will require roads and bridges to connect them to existing facilities.

But experts say that even if all sites are approved they will do no more than meet land demands for two years.

It is reckoned Hong Kong needs 3,000 hectares over 10 years to meet housing demand, meaning about 300 hectares on average annually.

Sources also say that the east of Hong Kong is seen as a back garden with relatively little space for reclamation.

But with the the airport and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, opportunities for development on the western side are seen to be considerable.

Reclamation at Siu Ho Wan could offer 100 to 150 hectares of land for residential or university use.

Sunny Bay could provide a further 60 to 100 hectares. Since it is close to the airport, it would be suitable for commercial and entertainment projects.

But sources also say that some of the sites being eyed could cause environment-based controversies. On that, officials are working on limiting the impact on white dolphins.

In his January policy address, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said that to build up a land reserve "we will actively press ahead with reclamation outside Victoria Harbour while endeavoring to keep the impact on the environment and marine ecology to a minimum."

And in his budget speech, Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah said he will allocate HK$4.5 billion over five years for land planning and design work.


----------



## hkskyline

2/17 


DSC_1426 copy by bigeye902004, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

4/7 - Wan Chai


Hong Kong. by Frankfurt, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*Opponents of PLA site under attack*
The Standard
Monday, April 22, 2013

The development minister has opened fire on those opposing a Central waterfront site designated for military use.

In his blog, Paul Chan Mo-po describes claims by the Society for the Protection of the Harbour as ridiculous.

The society wants the site earmarked for a People's Liberation Army dock to be open to the public.

Chan said the dock plans were clearly set out in 1994, and the public has accepted them. 

"The public has every right to know the truth and not to be misled." 

The Sino-British deal suggested the government should "leave free 150 meters of the eventual permanent waterfront in the plans for the Central and Wan Chai Reclamation ... for the construction of a military dock after 1997."

Chan said: "The SAR is taking responsibility to implement the treaty."

The PLA has promised to open the dock to the public when it is not in use.

The government need not sign any land grant or memorandum with the PLA, as it is governed by the Garrison Law.

Construction of the dock is entering the final stage and "will be what it looks like today." 

There are four one-story buildings on the site to support operations. 

The society recently criticized the government decision to hand over a 3,000-square-meter strip of the newly reclaimed Central harborfront to the PLA instead of opening it up to the public. 

Government plans to rezone the site from "open space" to "military use" have angered concern groups who want an unobstructed, continuous promenade for public enjoyment.

Winston Chu Ka-sun, adviser and former chairman of the society, said he will go to court as a last resort if petitions are ignored.


----------



## hkskyline

*Blog spells out need for land*
The Standard
Tuesday, April 02, 2013

The development secretary said the government has no choice but to reclaim land if it is to solve a supply shortage.

In his blog, Paul Chan Mo-po said the reduction in the amount of reclamation in Victoria Harbour over the past 10 years is one reason why land is in such short supply.

A three-month public consultation began last month on reclaiming sites in Siu Ho Wan and Sunny Bay on Lantau Island, Lung Kwu Tan in Tuen Mun, Ma Liu Shui in Sha Tin and southwest Tsing Yi. It was projected that 90,000 homes could be built on 600 hectares of land at the sites.

"Apart from Victoria Harbour, the areas along the country and marine parks and sites that are high in conservation value, there are still many others that can be considered for reclamation," Chan wrote.

He stressed that it may take the government up to 10 years to convert a reclaimed site for use.

Although some potential sites have been identified, it will still take more than five years to conduct in-depth studies, including environmental impact assessments and design works, to prepare for the commencement of reclamation.

The government will then need to spend at least four or five years seeking funding from the Legislative Council, initiating tenders and launching the reclamation work.

"We have to map out a long-term plan in advance," said Chan, citing a Chinese proverb that it is not good to wait until one gets thirsty before digging a well.

Some critics claim the reclamation work may endanger the Chinese white dolphins, which are thought to be still active in Siu Ho Wan and Sunny Bay.

In his blog Chan said it is rare for the dolphins to appear in those areas proposed for reclamation.

This conclusion was based on government records of dolphin activities.


----------



## hkskyline

6/1


ICC SKY100 by tomosang R32m, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*PLA free to build on entire waterfront plot*
The Standard
Monday, June 17, 2013

A senior government official claims a People's Liberation Army pier on the Central waterfront will be only one-story tall, but admits the military will be free to build additional structures.

Speaking at City Forum, Deputy Secretary for Development Thomas Chan Chung-ching said the pier is part of a military agreement in 1994.

The outline zoning plans in 2000 indicated that 150 meters of the coastline will be reserved for the PLA pier and the location was officially confirmed later.

He stressed the PLA has promised to open the area to the public when it is not in use.

"I have to explain that the construction of the pier will not affect the promise on public access," Chan said.

Albert Lai Kwong-tak of the Central Harbourfront Concern Group accused the government of handing over the waterfront to the PLA.

"The pier was listed in the outline zoning plans 13 years ago, but it was designated for military use only in February this year," Lai said.

Chan said the pier will cover about 220 square meters but admitted the military has the authority to use all 3,000 square meters assigned and the government has no right to intervene.

Separately, more than 200 conservationists marched from Wan Chai to the Central Government Offices and Legislative Council in Tamar to condemn the rush to reclaim land and farmland for residential development at the expense of the environment.

Some protesters carried dolphin-shaped balloons as they accused the government of destroying the habitat of Chinese white dolphins off Lantau Island.

Others beat small wooden houses with golf clubs, claiming the government has wrongly used land in the New Territories.

Central and Western Concern Group chairwoman Katty Law Ngar-ning said it should consider the resumption of land used for other purposes instead of kicking out those living in small villages.

Laurence Kwan said his family has lived in Nga Tsin Wai Tsuen in Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon, for more than 10 years only to be told to move out by May 22.

"We just want to preserve our home and live in peace," said Kwan, adding there are about 18 premises and families in the village.


----------



## hkskyline

7/18


Untitled by johnlsl, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

8/5


----------



## hkskyline

Wanchai
8/5


off Wanchai by 飯窯, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

8/27


----------



## hkskyline

Admiralty

By *TAGTAGTAG72* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

*Government still has goal for world-class harbourfront*
28 August 2013
South China Morning Post

I refer to the letter by Winston Chu, adviser of Society for Protection of the Harbour ("Government keeps breaking pledges on precious harbourfront", August 14).

The government is firmly committed to protecting and preserving Victoria Harbour.

We have also been making great strides in recent years to enhance the harbourfront.

The West Kowloon Cultural District is a 40-hectare waterfront site at the southern tip of the West Kowloon Reclamation. A total of about 22.8 hectares of open space was planned before the Chief Executive in Council ordered the review in 1999 for the development of a world-class integrated arts, cultural and entertainment district on the West Kowloon Reclamation.

In accordance with the latest approved West Kowloon Cultural District Development Plan, a total area of not less than 23 hectares of public open space shall be provided in the cultural district, including a city park, three hectares of piazza areas and a waterfront promenade not less than 20 metres in width. It has not shrunk.

Regarding the zoning amendment for the Central military dock site, the government has explained the background in various forums, including Legco, in the past few months.

The provision for and construction of the military dock arose from the Defence Land Agreement between the Chinese and the UK governments and has gone through many public consultation and engagement exercises over the years.

The present Central District (Extension) Outline Zoning Plan, first approved in 2000, has clearly marked the presence of the military dock at its present location subject to detailed design. The rezoning exercise under way is a technical amendment to amend the zoning in the outline zoning plan to reflect the final delineation and land use of the military dock.

The government has reiterated publicly the garrison's agreement that it would open the area of the military dock site to the public as part of the waterfront promenade when it is not in military use, having regard to its operation and the need for protecting the military dock. The military dock has been designed to integrate with the promenade.

This arrangement will accommodate the need to both provide the military dock for the garrison and provide the public with a waterfront promenade.

I would like to reassure Mr Chu and the public that the government will continue to work with the Harbourfront Commission and other stakeholders in creating a world-class harbourfront for public enjoyment.

Paul Chan, secretary for development


----------



## hkskyline

Wanchai - Sept. 7, 2013


----------



## spicytimothy

I see grass!


----------



## hkskyline

*Time limit set for military berth critics in public hearing*
*Anger as overwhelming response to plans to hand over public open space results in each person getting just 10 minutes to speak*
29 October 2013
South China Morning Post

Critics of plans to rezone part of the Central harbourfront for military use will get only 10 minutes each to air their objections at a series of sessions meant to hear public views, town planners say.

The unofficial time limit has been set by the Town Planning Board to deal with nearly 10,000 people who have written in to oppose rezoning the open space where a berth for the People's Liberation Army is being built.

The requirement could trigger a legal challenge, said Society for Protection of the Harbour adviser Winston Chu Ka-sun. "The board should act reasonably and provide a fair hearing," he said yesterday.

Chu said he would not rule out launching a judicial review against the new requirement as he estimated he would need two hours to make his case. "The documents and my correspondence with government officials on this matter have piled up to more than a foot high. How can I explain everything in 10 minutes?"

Like many critics, it is not the creation of a PLA dock that is the problem, but the handing over of the rights to the 0.3 hectare strip of land from the public to the military.

On another front, the Central waterfront concern group - comprising 13 green groups and urban planning organisations - said they had asked the board to remove the time limit.

They also offered to help those who had submitted views but could not attend the hearings to record their submissions on video to be shown at the sessions.

The board invited views from the public in a two-month exercise that began in February and the hearings are expected to start next month. With more than 10 sessions slated, town planners may be looking at their longest series of hearings in history.

The Development Bureau said in May that construction of the berth was almost completed. The bureau emphasises that the army has pledged to open the promenade to the public when there are no military activities.

The explanation failed to allay public concerns as no schedule for opening times were given.

At the hearings, the board chairman may request a speaker not to repeat arguments already presented by others, according to guidance notes. There is no mention of a time limit.

But in a letter sent to a scheduled speaker last week, the board said each speaker would be allotted only 10 minutes "because of the large number of comments received". A representative authorised by three speakers would get 30 minutes to speak.

Albert Lai Kwong-tak, convenor of the policy committee at think tank Professional Commons, said the group had asked that the hearings be chaired by a non-official board member instead of the bureau's permanent secretary, Thomas Chow Tat-ming, to ensure fairness.

A planning board spokeswoman said the 10-minute arrangement was fair given everyone will get the same amount of time. She said the board would take account of all considerations before making any decision.


----------



## hkskyline

*Top harbor activist quits in PLA pier row*
The Standard
Tuesday, November 05, 2013

Activist Winston Chu Ka-sun has resigned as adviser to the Society for Protection of the Harbour, the group he founded 18 years ago. 

Chu also announced he has retired from all public affairs.

His decision yesterday came seven hours after an acrimonious meeting of the Town Planning Board, during which the microphone of a lawmaker was turned off 10 minutes into his speech.

Chu said recent events, including a government plan to designate part of the Central waterfront for a People's Liberation Army military pier, have forced him to "leave the stage to wiser and better people" to fight for Hong Kong.

Earlier Chu, Civic Party lawmaker Kenneth Chan Ka-lok and several others protested at a decision by Town Planning Board chairman Thomas Chow Tat-ming decision to limit speeches to 10 minutes.

"Since joining the legal profession in 1960, I have spent my life contributing to the rule of law, promoting education and protecting the environment, especially Hong Kong's Victoria Harbour," Chu said. 

"Unfortunately, recent events have forced upon me the conclusion that it will not be possible for me to make any further contribution to the public affairs of Hong Kong."

In the early 2000s, the society launched a lawsuit against government reclamation work for the Central-Wan Chai bypass.

In 2004, the Court of Final Appeal ruled in favor of the society, saying that any reclamation must satisfy the test of overriding public need and be supported by cogent and convincing materials.

Chu founded the society in 1995 and served as chairman until 2003, when he stepped down and became its adviser. 

Chow, who is also permanent secretary for development, introduced the 10-minute limit at the public meeting to discuss the government plan to rezone an area of the harborfront for military use.

The board had received more than 19,000 written submissions, with nearly 1,000 people saying they would attend the meeting. 

Chan and other activists walked out in protest after his microphone was switched off.


----------



## hkskyline

11/7


----------



## hkskyline

*Pressure over budgets aftercost blowout *
Government's request for extra HK$7.9 billion in funding to build the Central-Wan Chai bypass leads to demands for better cost projection
16 November 2013
South China Morning Post

The government is facing increasing pressure to review its method of estimating the construction costs of public projects, as it urged lawmakers yesterday to approve an additional HK$7.9 billion in funding for the Central-Wan Chai bypass.

The extra funding is a 28 per cent increase from the originally budgeted HK$28.1 billion, estimated in 2009, to build the 4.5 kilometre dual three-lane road.

The bypass, of which 3.7 kilometres is a tunnel, will cut a 15-minute trip from Central to North Point to just five minutes.

Undersecretary for Transport and Housing Yau Shing-mu said the extra money was needed because of a significant underestimation of costs. His remark triggered lawmakers' comments that the government's method of projecting construction costs was in need of a review.

"This is a special case as the global economy was having a hard time in 2009," Yau told transport panel lawmakers. "The estimation was a difficult one."

Statistics showed the government assumed an annual cost increase of 2 per cent and 3 per cent over the period from 2009 to 2013 and 2014 to 2019, respectively. But the actual increases recorded in 2011 and last year were 5.9 per cent and 6.3 per cent.

Chief highways engineer Lawrence Ho Kai-ming said the deeper bedrock profile, which was not expected at the design stage, also added to costs.

Lawmakers expressed concern that the request for the additional funding would not be the last unless the government took steps to improve its cost estimation for such projects.

"The bureau should study if there is room to improve the formula for estimation," said Tony Tse Wai-chuen, who represents architects and surveyors. "We are talking about spending HK$80 billion a year on public projects. An 0.5 per cent increase would be an extra HK$400 million."

This is not the first time that the government has underestimated the cost of a project.

Last year, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor revealed that the cost of the arts hub's Xiqu Centre had more than doubled from HK$1.3 billion to HK$2.6 billion. In 2008, a surge in construction costs also forced the administration to seek an extra HK$2.8 billion from the Legislative Council to complete 35 major public works projects.

The University of Hong Kong's real estate and construction chair professor Chau Kwong-wing said the government should have foreseen the rise in labour and material costs as a result of the significant increase in public projects over a short period of time.

Hang Seng Management College's business professor Raymond So Wai-man said the government could introduce a more flexible pricing mechanism from the private sector, which estimates costs according to a project's characteristics.

"They can look at whether the project is labour-intensive, or which material would be used more, which will give a more precise projection," So said.

A Development Bureau spokeswoman declined to say whether it was reviewing its cost estimation method, but said the process was standard practice in the construction industry.


----------



## pookgai

hkskyline said:


> Elevated walkway along the harbour? No. Should be a waterfront park stretching to Wan Chai at least.
> 
> 
> 
> Construction photos are not up-to-date but I see some parts of the site are recently-updated : http://www.criii-cedd.com/background/history.htm
> 
> There is some light vegetation on the site now but not really a true park with big trees and such yet.


Thanks hkskyline! 

Am looking forward to seeing the park completed. Will be amazing to sit outside in the middle of the harbour with a drink/coffee in hand!


----------



## hkskyline

*Public will wait 40 years for full access to Victoria Harbour, says study*
27 February 2014
South China Morning Post	

The public will have to wait 40 years for access to the full length of the Victoria Harbour shoreline if the government fails to up the pace of its waterfront improvements, a new study has found.

While the government has long touted plans to open up the full length of the iconic harbour as a "world class" leisure facility, the research by students from the Worcester Polytechnic Institute in the United States found only slow progress towards the goal. The students were commissioned by urban planning group Designing Hong Kong and the Harbour Business Forum to examine the accessibility, connectivity, quality and popularity of the city's waterfront areas and compare their findings with a similar study in 2008.

They found that the area of waterfront accessible to the public had increased to 21.4 kilometres, from 13.4 kilometres in 2008. But at a rate of just 1.3 kilometres per year, it would take until 2055 for the full 74.3 kilometres of harbourfront to be opened up.

"The government has been making progress on the connectivity of the harbourfront," said Designing Hong Kong founder Paul Zimmerman.

"But the progress is very slow. It needs to work harder."

The team walked through every promenade in the city, rating the waterfronts at Tsing Yi, Admiralty and Tsim Sha Tsui as the harbour's best, with Cheung Sha Wan promenade considered the worst.

The Cheung Sha Wan waterfront, close to Nam Cheong MTR station, was condemned for being covered with rubbish and offering few facilities other than a wholesale fish market.

"Nothing has changed in Cheung Sha Wan," said team member Alfred Scott. "The government has no recommendation for people to go there, because they don't know what to do with it. I don't know what to do with it. There's nowhere to sit and nothing to do there."

There was also criticism of a route along the Wan Chai waterfront near the Convention and Exhibition Centre, which the group said had remained narrow and unsafe for pedestrians since the 2008 study.

The team spoke highly of the promenade at Tsing Yi, praising its easy access, outstanding quality and plentiful activities for visitors.

The Tsim Sha Tsui promenade was rated highly in activities, quality and popularity, but less so for accessibility as the routes from the nearby MTR stations were long, indirect and congested.

Another concern the team identified was the high number of people flouting localised bans on certain activities, including fishing, cycling and dog walking.

The team listed 14 activities banned on various parts of the waterfront, and suggested that the widespread flouting of the bans should lead the government to reconsider the rules.

"The traditional view of Hong Kong's promenades is that they are parks, which are under the pleasure ground regulations," Zimmerman said. "But promenades are not pleasure grounds. They are walking spaces, footpaths. They should be treated as pedestrian roads."

The team, selected because students from the university had previously taken part in similar studies, will shortly submit a detailed report to the Harbourfront Commission under the Development Bureau.

A spokeswoman for the Development Bureau said many harbourfront areas were already occupied by public facilities, homes or businesses, while other areas were needed for port operations.

She said the government had been looking into various solutions to construct an uninterrupted promenade along Victoria Harbour, and it would take time to address all the challenges.


----------



## hkskyline

4/11


----------



## hkskyline

*Giant wheel forecast to turn in $93m*
The Standard
Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Hong Kong's 60-meter-tall ferris wheel could bring in HK$93 million in economic benefits in its first year, says the operator.

However, Swiss AEX says bad weather in the past six months has delayed construction and an opening date has not been fixed.

The firm, which operates a ferris wheel in Bangkok, won the three-year contract from the Hong Kong government in May last year and started building the Hong Kong Observation Wheel in front of Central Pier No 9.

Swiss AEX director Leon Snep expects about one million highfliers, residents and tourists, will visit the wheel annually.

He said based on the firm's Bangkok experience, this could translate into at least HK$93 million in economic benefits.

The ride will be priced at HK$100 for adults, HK$70 for children and a proposed HK$50 for those eligible for special discounts.

"We have not included the revenue from the restaurants operated by us," Snep added.

The wheel will have 42 gondolas, each holding eight to 10 passengers. A ride takes 15 to 20 minutes.

Swiss AEX senior construction manager Cedric Tam Chi-shing said the opening of the 20-story tall wheel is expected to be delayed by one month because of the heavy rains of the past six months.

After completing the foundations and installations of the wheel and gondolas, scheduled for late September, the operator still needs to wait for clearance.


----------



## hkskyline

7/19


----------



## pookgai

Is this the new Wanchai pier?


----------



## pookgai

*Central Piers 4, 5 and 6 Upgrades*

Have anyone come across this rr have pictures of the construction work on Central piers 4, 5 and 6?










Source: http://www.construction-post.com/public-works-contracts-worth-hk80-billion/

Hong Kong, Industry News, Slider 04 Mar 2013
No comments
New public works contracts worth HK$80 billion
Public works projects with a total value of nearly HK$80 billion are set to awarded in the new financial year as the government maintains its high level of capital works expenditure.

According to the estimates included in the government budget for the financial year 2013/14 delivered by Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah last week, the estimated cost of new projects set to start totalled HK$92.53 billion.

However further checking by Construction Post revealed that about HK$12.75 billion of this cost for four projects has already been awarded recently, leaving about HK$79.78 billion worth of public works still to be awarded.

Keen interest is expected for the biggest single item, the Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link construction works with a rough estimate of cost of HK$44.81 billion.

Highways Department invited prequalification submissions for the project’s Northern Connection – Subsea tunnel section in May last year with a view to calling tenders later in September.

Reclamation for Central-Wanchai Bypass under construction in February 2013 (Danny Chung) 
Reclamation for Central-Wanchai Bypass under construction in February 2013 (Danny Chung)

Other big ticket items with estimated cost include the Reprovisioning of Yau Mau Tei Police Station (HK$1.16 billion), Reconstruction and rehabilitation of Kai Tak nullah from Tung Kwong Road to Prince Edward East (HK$1.36 billion) and the Widening of Tolo/Fanling Highway between Island House Interchange and Fanling (HK$3.39 billion).

Other big projects include Kai Tak development stages 3A and 4 infrastructure at north apron area of Kai Tak Airport (HK$2.26 billion), Reprovisioning of Yaumatei Specialist Clinic at Queen Elizabeth Hospital (HK$1.89 billion) and the Establishment of Centre of Excellence in Paediatrics (HK$13.82 billion).

Architectural Services Department invited prequalification submissions for Yaumatei Police Station and Yaumatei Specialist Clinic in March last year with tendering scheduled to start later in about August.

Contractors can expect the Tseung Kwan O to Lam Tin Tunnel project to start perhaps during the 2014/15 financial year as the government is looking to tender out detailed design and site investigation for the project at an estimated cost of HK$196 million for a scheduled start in the third quarter of 2013/14.

Those contractors with access to dredging equipment may be interested in a project for providing sufficient water depth for Kwai Tsing Container Basin and its approach channel with an estimated cost of HK$488 million with start date scheduled for the last quarter of this year.

The government will be looking to improve the existing ferry piers at Central with a project for additional floors at Central Piers 4, 5 and 6 costing an estimated HK$559 million.

A section 16 planning permission application was submitted in July last year but the Town Planning Board is still mulling over the plan which calls for adding one and a half floors on top of the existing Central Piers 4, 5 and 6 and to convert the upper decks of the piers to commercial use.

This project to add additional floors was put forward originally by Hong Kong Ferry (Holdings) (0050), an associate of leading developer Henderson Land (0012), in around 1998 but fell through after disputes over payment for foundation work carried out by the government and then a tussle over land premium.

Artist's impression of Central Piers 4, 5 and 6 upon completion of redevelopment (Town Planning Board)
Artist’s impression of Central Piers 4, 5 and 6 upon completion of redevelopment (Town Planning Board)

Budding chefs in Hong Kong will have a dedicated facility to train in if the government goes through with a project for the development of the Vocational Training Council International Culinary College costing an estimated HK$658 million and scheduled to start work in the second quarter of 2013/14.

The government is already busy in calling tenders for some projects.

Currently under tendering are projects such as the various infrastructure contracts for the Liantang/Heung Yuen Wai Boundary Control Point, the Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection Viaduct Section and Kai Tak Development Stage 3A infrastructure at former north apron area.

Contractors already have their hands full with mega-projects such as the Hong Kong section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, Shatin – Central Link, Central – Wanchai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge.

The total forecast spending in 2013/14 for these four projects alone is HK$30.87 billion.

Apart from mentioning that the government was committed to spending over HK$70 billion annually on capital works expenditure for the next few years, the Financial Secretary said he was looking to increase land supply.

To that end, the government is planning on spending HK$4.5 billion over the next five years on studies and design work on reclamation outside Victoria Harbour, opening up new development areas and development of caverns.

It would also make further studies on a proposed desalination plant in Tseung Kwan O.

“The former [caverns) has logic as a strategy to free up land space but the latter is a mystery. Is this a test case in preparation for when China turns our water supply off?” one cost consultant said.

Danny Chung


----------



## hkskyline

pookgai said:


> Is this the new Wanchai pier?


Yes. Looks almost done although they need to work on the connection to the existing waterfront. The new pier is actually not too far offshore from the current one.


----------



## skykings

hkskyline said:


> *First section of Lung Wo Road in Central to open tomorrow *
> Government Press Release
> Monday, February 22, 2010
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first section of Lung Wo Road, which is part of the road network being constructed under the Central Reclamation Phase III (CRIII) project, will be open to traffic tomorrow (February 23).
> 
> The CRIII project aims to provide land for the construction of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass (CWB) and other essential transport infrastructure. With the CWB built underground, much of the new land formed under the CRIII project will provide the opportunity for us to create a vibrant, green, accessible and sustainable waterfront promenade in Central for public enjoyment. This vision is now part of the Conserving Central initiative announced by the Chief Executive in his 2009-10 Policy Address.
> 
> After years of strenuous effort, the project has now reached an advanced stage. Reclamation has been substantially completed and construction of the CWB is now actively progressing. All works under the CRIII project are expected to be completed by the end of 2011.
> 
> Lung Wo Road extends from Man Cheung Street eastwards (See Plan A attached). It is part of Road P2 which is designed to connect the existing Man Cheung Street in Central Reclamation Phase I (between the Airport Railway Station and Two International Finance Centre) via the land formed under the CRIII and Wan Chai Development Phase II (WDII) projects with Hung Hing Road to be realigned under the WDII project (See Plan B attached).
> 
> The first section of Lung Wo Road, between Man Yiu Street and Tim Wa Avenue in Central, will provide an alternative route for Wan Chai bound traffic to bypass the section of the very congested Connaught Road Central and avoid merging with other traffic heading for Admiralty and Mid-levels (see Plan C attached). This will provide some relief to the east bound traffic congestion currently encountered in the area.
> 
> Upon completion of the entire length of CWB from Rumsey Street Flyover to Island Eastern Corridor and the associated road networks scheduled for completion by 2017, Road P2 will distribute traffic from the strategic east-west traffic corridor formed by the CWB and the Rumsey Street Flyover to the neighbouring areas including Central, Admiralty, Mid-levels, Wan Chai, and vice versa from these areas to the corridor. The current traffic congestion problem at the Connaught Road Central-Harcourt Road-Gloucester Road corridor can then be resolved.
> 
> http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201002/22/P201002220081.htm



good


----------



## hkskyline

*Soft coral found living in Victoria Harbour points to cleaner water*
18 August 2014
South China Morning Post	

Hopes that Victoria Harbour will recover from decades of land reclamation and serving as the city's sewage disposal system have received a boost after evidence emerged that soft coral might have colonised the seabed.

It comes after soft coral was accidentally hauled aboard a fishing boat off Kowloon Bay last week.

Coral experts said while the species was not uncommon in local waters, they were not aware of it having been found so close to the central harbour before.

However, they said verifying the existence of a coral colony in the area could be difficult.

"It might be in an area with a strong current and past coral surveys may not have covered it," said Professor Ang Put-o of Chinese University's school of life sciences.

Most of the corals recorded in the harbour were hard corals - which have a stony skeleton - and they have been found nearer the coastline.

The soft corals were found by Diaoyu Island activists last week in what they described as a trial outing aboard their fishing vessel the Kai Fung No 2, which took protesters to the disputed islands two years ago.

Under close surveillance from marine officers, the activists sailed out of the Shau Kei Wan typhoon shelter towards the anchorage area off Kowloon Bay, where they decided to do some real fishing and laid nets.

What surprised them was not just the meagre harvest - a few small fish, including two baby rays, plus a dozen crabs - but a 25cm clump of bright-red coral entangled in the net.

"We never expected to see this coming out of the water," Tsang Kin-sing, who was among the activists on board, said. "We released it back into the water as it was alive," he said.

Liu Shen, a mainland-based documentary maker who was on board gathering information on Hong Kong's Diaoyu protection movement, confirmed the catch was from the anchorage area off Kowloon Bay. Fishing is allowed in the harbour provided it is not in the navigation channel.

Ang said the species looked likely to be Dendronephthya, known as carnation-tree coral, which is tolerant to turbid water as it is non-photosynthetic so does need sunshine to survive. But it cannot stand heavily polluted water either, he said.

"The corals might be over three years old and I would not be surprised if there is a large colony under the water," he said after studying a picture.

Samantha Lee Mei-wah, a marine conservationist with WWF Hong Kong, suspected there could be either "several colonies or a giant colony" in the harbour. Lee said the species was commonly found in eastern waters and did not grow in mud.


----------



## hkskyline

By *EDCH* from dcfever :


----------



## pookgai

hkskyline said:


> By *EDCH* from dcfever :


Great photo but oh dear - that ferris wheel is so utterly pointless. Why bother when you have The Peak?


----------



## hkskyline

By *HARRYCHIK* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *遊閒人* from dcfever :


----------



## gakei

More ...


----------



## hkskyline

By *sky4082* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *APO Sonner* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *ckman0302* from dcfever :


----------



## archilover

Great place to enjoy HK Skyline on the ferris wheel!how tall is it?


----------



## hkskyline

archilover said:


> Great place to enjoy HK Skyline on the ferris wheel!how tall is it?


The best view would be from the world's highest hotel across the harbour at the Ritz Carlton.


----------



## hkskyline

*New round of talks on harbor body under way*
The Standard
Friday, September 26, 2014

A second round of public consultation was launched for the establishment of the Harbourfront Authority yesterday.

"Despite the way we try to deliver on our harbourfront at the moment, we need a major reform," said Harbourfront Commission chairman Nicholas Brooke. "We could and we should and we all want to do it better. We've now drawn out a detailed proposal setting out the framework for the future authority."

The consultation will last three months until December 24.

Brooke said the commission realized it would not be feasible for the proposed authority to take up and manage the entire 73-kilometer Victoria harborfront at the outset.

He said the commission and the Development Bureau agreed to propose that the authority should start modestly and conservatively.

"Upon the establishment of the authority, priority should be given to sites that are ready for development," Brooke said. "The government can consider allocating to it newly reclaimed land or sites primarily zoned as open space that are available for development in phases over the next five to 10 years."

Proposed sites include the harborfronts at Central, Wan Chai to North Point, Quarry Bay, Kwun Tong and Hung Hom.

A fund would be set up that is roughly sufficient to cover the capital costs for the development of designated sites.

"The authority may seek Legislative Council approval to draw resources from the dedicated fund when a project is ready for implementation," he said.

Chairman of the commission's core group Vincent Ng Wing- shun said the authority should have major functions, including governance and management, advisory, advocacy and executive. The first phrase of public consultation was conducted from October last year to January.


----------



## gakei

archilover said:


> Great place to enjoy HK Skyline on the ferris wheel!how tall is it?


around 60m


----------



## hkskyline

By *Nikon-man* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *jcnlau* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *dos622* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

By *aaoo.* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

*World-class vision for harbor outlined*
The Standard _Excerpt_
Thursday, November 20, 2014 

Hong Kong has the opportunity to not only have a world-class waterfront, but also be a world leader, the chairman of the advisory Harbourfront Commission said.

Nicholas Brooke was speaking to The Standard from Sydney, where he was invited to attend an international summit on the urban renewal of a A$25 billion (HK$167.5 billion) harborfront precinct in the Australian city.

"Hong Kong can really stand out from the crowd. I don't believe Hong Kong should be like Singapore or Sydney. We want to have our own experiences and attractions to make our harborfront unique," he added.

Improving food and beverage options such as restaurants, bars and cafes along the harborfront is a priority.

The choices along the waterfront are quite appalling, Brooke said. "The waterfront lends itself to people enjoying a drink, having a meal or having a coffee. Every waterfront in the world has a strong food and beverage offering."


----------



## kunming tiger

That is a valid point , generally speaking if I want to enjoy a beer harbor side I need to find a 7/11 then take away. Few things are better than a nighttime view of HK island.


----------



## hkskyline

*There’s a new big wheel in town*
6 December 2014
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_ 

Some 40 tourists and local residents queued at 5pm yesterday to be among the first to ride the long awaited harbourfront Ferris wheel.

Wheel operator Swiss AEX originally said the Hong Kong Observation Wheel would open in September, more than a year into its three-year tenancy to run the attraction next to the Central ferry piers.

“Safety is the number one priority of the Hong Kong Observation Wheel, and the best things in life are always worth waiting for, and we are proud to say we have now received every necessary licence and permit,” said Timothy Peirson-Smith, spokesman for Swiss AEX.

Passengers ride the 60-metre-high wheel in 42 gondolas, each holding eight people. Tickets are HK$100 for adults.

Prices for a VIP glass gondola have yet to be confirmed.

Swiss AEX has been criticised for leaving the site vacant for so long without signs of construction, and rival bidders have questioned why the government had turned down their higher offers.

The company was awarded a three-year lease by the Lands Department at a monthly rent of HK$850,000.

A ride lasts up to 20 minutes, and operators expect to carry one million passengers a year.


----------



## hkskyline

By *arsenal0331* from dcfever :


----------



## JmSepe

Nice image there.


----------



## hkskyline

By *NALeung* from dcfever :


----------



## kunming tiger

Wan Chai?


----------



## hkskyline

kunming tiger said:


> Wan Chai?


Yes, and you can see the new Star Ferry terminal on the right.


----------



## kunming tiger

When will the waterfront project be completed?


----------



## hkskyline

kunming tiger said:


> When will the waterfront project be completed?


http://www.devb.gov.hk/reclamation/en/basic/plans_and_maps/project/index.html

For this section - 2017.


----------



## 001vetinh

Me too. Also, I wonder is there any other 200+m projects in Tsim Sha Tsui (core or East) like Hanoi Road.


----------



## kunming tiger

I am going to assume that once completed the promenade will link directly to the hinderland via a system of pedistrian subways and elevated walkways ?


----------



## hkskyline

kunming tiger said:


> I am going to assume that once completed the promenade will link directly to the hinderland via a system of pedistrian subways and elevated walkways ?


I think they can do at-grade crossings rather than bridges and tunnels.


----------



## kunming tiger

hkskyline said:


> I think they can do at-grade crossings rather than bridges and tunnels.


 They don't tend to do things in half measures there. I would expect a combination of all three.

The proposal was an extension of the existing elevated walkways in Wanchai and Causeway Bay to the promenade once complete.

Obviously that is subject to change.


----------



## Sukino

nycsoho00 said:


> i really wish to see more greenery, trees and public spaces for ppl to enjoy.


never been to HK, have you


----------



## hkskyline

#Central #Panorama #iPhone #iPhone6Plus #blackandwhite #bnw #monochrome #instablackandwhite #monoart #insta_bw #bnw_society #bw_lover #bw_photooftheday #photooftheday #bw #instagood #bw_society #igersbnw #bwstyleoftheday #monotone #monochromatic #Discover by Duncan Tang, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

The Standard _Excerpt_
*CY dives in with Central swimming vision*
March 9, 2016









_信報_

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying wants office workers to enjoy time out, so he is proposing a swimming platform on the Central waterfront.

His idea was given an immediate thumbs down by experts because of the harbor's filthy water, though writing in his blog yesterday Leung had claimed local waters have "leisure and athletic values" and the Harbour Area Treatment Scheme means the sea can be used for water-friendly activities.

In pointing to a modern facility on the waterfront near the International Finance Centre in Central, Leung said "one would be able to swim for 20 minutes after lunch" - apparently forgetting swimming on a full stomach is dangerous.

But swimming would be a good alternative to going to the gym, he said.

Apart from swimming, Leung also suggested people could go fishing, following on from the idea of three angling zones that he mentioned in his 2016 policy address.

"After having a simple meal during lunch hour, for the remaining 45 minutes office workers in Central could sit by the shore and fish," Leung said. "It is a very good way to relax."

He said the Leisure and Cultural Services Department will have the three angling zones set up as early as next year, taking in Tsing Yi, Tai Po and the Central waterfront. The zones will have shelters and chairs and other facilities.

Harbourfront Commission member Paul Zimmerman thought Leung's idea about swimming is creative but not feasible, and harbor traffic and poor water quality would make it doubly unsafe off Central.

He added that Victoria Harbour's waters are so poor it could take 10 to 20 years to improve conditions and make it safe for swimming.

That would also require much hard work, Zimmerman added, such as stopping people from pouring sewage into the harbor.

Zimmerman was also put out that such ideas were being floated without the Harbourfront Commission being informed.

There was more gloomy readings on Leung's thinking from Chan King-ming, director of the environmental science program at the Chinese University of Hong Kong's School of Life Sciences.

Victoria Harbour's water quality "is not suitable for swimming," he said. The water near Western is cleaner, he added, "but the current is strong there."

He added that water quality required for swimming is high, with hazards such as E.coli and salmonella to be faced.


----------



## hkskyline

*Design options for Queen's Pier ready for review*
10 March 2016
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_




























Nearly nine years after the controversial demolition of the historical Queen's Pier, the government has unveiled three options to resurrect the site in Central with plans to start as early as this year.

But rebuilding the pier consistent with the architectural styles of two nearby piers was still under discussion, according to a document recently released by the Central and Western District Council.

In a study conducted by the Planning Department in 2007, the government decided to reassemble the pier, which was originally located in front of City Hall and demolished in 2008 at the waterfront area between Pier 9 and Pier 10 in Central. The study was followed by extensive government consultations.

Three proposals were being considered. One option was to replace the cambered roofs atop Piers 9 and 10 with pitched roofs to be consistent with the resurrected Queen's Pier. This would mean disassembling both cambered roofs, which were assembled in 2007 and made of glass. The cost could be HK$55 million.

Another option was to establish a new entry for Piers 9 and 10 to distinguish them from Queen's Pier, placing a glass roof atop the resurrected pier to link it to the other two.

A third option was to do minor construction on existing covered walkways near the piers.

Dating to 1925, the site served as a public pier and a place of high-profile ceremony for the arrival and departure of Hong Kong's governors before the government decided to close it for land reclamation in 2007.

The controversial demolition of Queen's Pier drew strong opposition from the public. The government's subsequent attempt to resurrect the pier at the new waterfront instead of at its original location also sparked criticism.

After the demolition, the government preserved a few of the pier's disassembled parts in a Kau Shat Wan explosives warehouse on Lantau Island.

Were a plan to be approved by the Town Planning Board, the government would apply for funding from the Legislative Council at the end of this year. If that were to happen, rebuilding could start this autumn and finish in around two years.


----------



## hkskyline

Ferry Terminal Walkway, Central HK by Taomeister, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

By *kaikuen* from dcfever :


----------



## hkskyline

Evening at Central-Wan Chai Bypass Construction site by johnlsl, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*Hold that construction: Hong Kong officials to halt works in Wan Chai for Zhang Dejiang’s visit*
Security cited as police to deploy 6,000 officers daily to protect state leader
13 May 2016
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_

Construction work in Wan Chai will be suspended for four days next week as part of security measures officials deem necessary for state leader Zhang Dejiang’s three-day visit to Hong Kong.

The Central-Wan Chai Bypass and Sha Tin to Central Link construction sites are located near the Convention and Exhibition Centre – where Zhang is to deliver a keynote speech at the Belt and Road Summit – and the Grand Hyatt, where he is booked to stay from May 17 to 19.

The Highways Department confirmed that construction work on the bypass from east of Lung Wo Road to west of new Wan Chai Ferry Pier, as well as work on the Sha Tin to Central Link north of Wan Chai from east of Lung Wo Road to the former Wan Chai North bus terminus, would be suspended from next Monday to Thursday as requested by police.

Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok said all operations planned by the police were carried out after being deemed necessary.

“The summit will be attended not only by a state leader, but also by visitors from all over the world,” Lai said. “The police must adopt all necessary measures to ensure participants’ safety and a smoothly run conference.”


----------



## hkskyline

Hazy Hong Kong by Tyler Sprague, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*Giant water slide in heart of Hong Kong meant to help halt slipping tourist figures*
16 June 2016
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_









_資料圖片_

Hongkongers bracing for the sweltering summer months might take solace in the news that a giant water slide will be installed along Victoria Harbour in two months' time.

Returning to the city for a second consecutive year, the 10-metre-tall slide is to be installed at Central Harbourfront Event Space from August 24 to 29, with organisers expecting high numbers of both tourists and local residents to flock to the attraction.	

Tourist arrivals in the city were down 8.8 per cent in the first four months of this year compared with the same period last year. Authorities have sought to entice visitors with more programmes.

It is the second time Hong Kong has played host to Slide the City, which last year was assembled at Kai Tak terminal, the former site of the city's airport. The US-based initiative has toured 200 cities worldwide since it launched in 2013.


----------



## hkskyline

By *lighterjason* from dcfever :


----------



## kunming tiger

great pics

are there any specific plans to make use of the reclaimed land along the waterfront?


----------



## hkskyline

kunming tiger said:


> great pics
> 
> are there any specific plans to make use of the reclaimed land along the waterfront?


It will mostly be parkland with a highway underneath.


----------



## hkskyline

Windows by johnlsl, on Flickr


----------



## kunming tiger

i assume the waterfront will be accesible via elevated walkways from the hinterland?

I mean along its entire length.


----------



## kunming tiger

delete


----------



## kunming tiger

This map should give you a better idea of the network of elevatd walkways near the central promenade

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32511953#map=16/22.2851/114.1568


----------



## hkskyline

kunming tiger said:


> i assume the waterfront will be accesible via elevated walkways from the hinterland?
> 
> I mean along its entire length.


No. You can cross the street at various points. There are crosswalks in place already.


----------



## hkskyline

*Scale it up: Calls for planned fishing zone to be even bigger*
28 July 2016
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_ 

Facilities for city's anglers near Tamar Park scheduled to open in March, costing HK$3.5m

The government's plan to use 200 square metres of Central Promenade to build a fishing zone should be widened, two members of a panel assessing the harbour's development said yesterday.

Their comments came a day after the Leisure and Cultural *Services *Department handed a detailed plan to Central and Western District Council for a trial scheme first mooted by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying in his policy address in January.

The zone in *Central will open to the public in March next year. It is at the tip of Tamar Park in Admiralty, north of the Legislative Council complex.

Workers will start installing it in October at a cost of around HK$3.5 million, with planned running costs of around HK$900,000 per year. It will have tables, wash basins and storage.

The government will make similar zones in Tsing Yi and at Pak Shek Kok Promenade, Tai Po.

But members of the Harbourfront Commission, a body *supported by the government to oversee planning, development and management of Victoria *Harbour, expressed doubts over the plan's efficacy.

Commission member Ivan Ho Man-yiu, an architect with the Hong Kong Institute of Urban *Design, said the zone should be extended. Speaking on RTHK yesterday, Ho said he supported the pilot scheme but asked: "Is it possible to have these kinds of facilities in other parts of the *harbourfront?


----------



## hkskyline

New land is being claimed in Hong Kong all the time - I wonder if they will connect both sides of the water one day? View from my hotel room! #hongkong #kowloonbay #kowloon #wanchai #wanchaihk #wanchaipier #wanchaiferry by Felix Gottwald, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Good morning, #HongKong by Miguel Bernas, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
*Hong Kong government pushes for wider harbourfront boardwalk*
Proposal follows calls from public for more space but some question if move will violate law safeguarding harbour from reclamation
October 19, 2016










The authorities have proposed a wider harbourfront boardwalk linking North Point to Quarry Bay to satisfy public demands for more space, as well as to attract cyclists and anglers, a document submitted to the Harbourfront Commission showed.

The original proposal for building the 2km boardwalk beneath the Island Eastern Corridor, which would include a pedestrian walkway, a cycling track, a fishing platform and food kiosks, was put forth during a public consultation earlier this year.

The Civil Engineering and Development Department now suggests extending the boardwalk by 2.5 metres to 10 metres after gathering feedback from the public who called for more space, according to the document. “They demanded a wider boardwalk in order to ... ensure proper and conflict-free enjoyment of the harbour by [both pedestrians and cyclists],” the Department wrote.

During a Harbourfront Commission meeting yesterday, some members called for the government to clarify whether the deck and floating structures, which would cover over 13,550 sq m of a water strip along Victoria Harbour, would pose legal implications. The Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, which preserves the harbour from reclamation, can be rebutted if there is a proven “overriding public need for reclamation”.

“I believe the first public engagement has demonstrated there’s a very strong public support for the plan, which hasn’t been shown before,” Ivan Ho Man-yiu, a member of the task force on harbourfront developments for Hong Kong Island, said.

Ho, however, added that the detailed design plans will still need to prove that it would have minimal effect on the harbour and only to a necessary extent.

Out of 1,306 questionnaires, the Department said the majority of the general public agreed there was a “compelling and present need” for the boardwalk, and the plans would be compliant with the ordinance’s requirements.

Most members urged the government to carry out construction as soon as possible. “We hope [the project] can proceed as soon as possible ... we’ve been talking about this for 10 years,” Ho said.

No completion date has been set yet, while a second public consultation will be conducted from late next month to January on the refined plan.


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong Island by Reto Fuchs, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Sunny Sunday...perfect winter weather! by Roger Price, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

hkskyline said:


> *‘Shipwreck’ dredges up delay fears*
> 28 March 2015
> South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remains of a large suspected shipwreck have been found in the sea bed off Wan Chai during dredging works for the construction of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass.
> 
> The discovery, about six metres below the sea bed near the old Wan Chai Ferry Pier, was made late last year. If it is determined to be of historical significance it could prompt an investigation which would delay the project.
> 
> The Wan Chai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link has an estimated total cost of HK$36 billion.
> 
> The Civil Engineering and Development Department announced the discovery yesterday, which was made during dredging works to prepare for land reclamation in Wan Chai and the tunnel works for the bypass. Further dredging and measurements taken later confirmed that the object was 40 metres long, 20 metres wide and two metres high.
> 
> “According to the initial information gathered so far, there is a possibility that the object is part of a shipwreck.
> 
> “More details and the impact on related works are subject to further investigation and assessment,” the department said in a statement.
> 
> Frogmen were examining the area yesterday.
> 
> The age and model of the ship is not yet known. Some possibilities are that the vessel could have been sabotaged during the second world war or it sank during a typhoon, local historian Cheng Po-hung said.
> 
> “Before the major reclamation works in 1964, the Wan Chai coastline lay on the present Gloucester Road. The location [where the remains were found] was part of the harbour with busy traffic,” he said.
> 
> Judging from the proximity to war-time military facilities including an arsenal, dockyard and military camps, he said the discovery could possibly be one of the British ships which were sabotaged during the 18-day Battle of Hong Kong to repel Japanese invaders.
> 
> The most famous ship scuttled at that time was the HMS Tamar, after which the area Tamar was named. Cheng added that many ships also sank in major typhoon disasters in Hong Kong in 1874, 1906 and 1937.


South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
*Harbour wreckage very likely Hong Kong’s most famous military ship, HMS Tamar, report finds*
A marine archaeologist will be commissioned to confirm identity of scuttled vessel and determine its heritage value
March 2, 2017

Wreckage found during harbour dredging in Wan Chai in 2014 is very likely the remains of HMS Tamar, Hong Kong’s most famous military ship, which was scuttled by the British navy in 1941 to prevent her from falling into Japanese hands, according to a belated government-commissioned preliminary study.

However, without the ship’s bell, name plate or other unique identifier, the identity of the vessel, 40 metres long, 11 metres wide and two metres high, cannot be confirmed pending further investigations, the report said.

The preliminary assessment of the metal object, commissioned by the Civil Engineering and Development Department in March 2015, was finally published on Tuesday, 18 months after its completion in September 2015.

The department said it would shortly commission a marine archaeologist to conduct a detailed investigation to ascertain the wreckage’s identity and heritage value.

The wreckage, described in the report as “clearly the remains of large sunken ship”, was discovered by a government contractor in late 2014 about 6.5 metres under the seabed during dredging works near the old Wan Chai Ferry Pier.

It was moved 100 metres from its original location to allow waterfront reclamation and development to continue for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass.

The report by SDA Marine, an international specialist consultancy, showed 777 artefacts were found as of April 30, 2015, of which 238 were scrap iron ballast known as “kentledge” and the other 539 pieces were “special finds”, including copper alloy items, iron objects, ceramic tiles and pottery vessels.

One of the most significant discoveries was a copper alloy replica of a Royal Navy commodore’s pennant (flag), it said.

More : http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/.../harbour-wreckage-very-likely-hong-kongs-most


----------



## insular

is there any image of the before and after?


----------



## hkskyline

North Point - 5/30


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong 9283_DxO.jpg by Gabriel Leboff, on Flickr


----------



## Oasis-Bangkok

Central Plaza by James Wong, on Flickr

Sunset from Central Plaza by James Wong, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

9H2A7997 by jeremyMak, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Sunset Afterglow at Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter, Hong Kong by johnlsl, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong by Alex Chen, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong Sunset by Jaye Foster, on Flickr


----------



## Oasis-Bangkok

Development by William Chu, on Flickr

Cross Harbour by William Chu, on Flickr


----------



## mimi1995

Mặc định


----------



## hkskyline

kowloon peninsula, HK by bennychun, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

DJI_0196 by Ian Lo, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong Observation Wheel to reopen with HK$20 rides, down from HK$100*
New tenant will partner with insurance giant to also build a wellness park at the site
November 1, 2017
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_

The troubled Hong Kong Observation Wheel will reopen with rides priced at a fifth of the original cost at HK$20, according to its new operator, which announced a three-year tenancy on Wednesday.

The Entertainment Corp Ltd (TECL) said there would be discounts for the elderly, while children under the age of three would ride for free.

In a statement, the company said it was partnering with insurance giant AIA Group to operate the wheel and the date for an official opening ceremony would be announced in the coming weeks.

The popular attraction was embroiled in a dispute last month when previous tenant Swiss AEX suddenly closed the ride without warning or explanation from the Tourism Board. It cited a disagreement with TECL over payment and handover issues.

Officials then said the wheel could be demolished if the two companies could not reach a settlement.

On September 6, the two companies struck a deal, saving the structure.

“The wheel will be enhanced by an adjoining, newly created AIA Vitality Park, resulting in a unique destination for visitors to the Central Harbourfront,” TECL said in the statement.

“The park will host, free of charge, a range of health and wellness-related activities and events for the public, starting in 2018 and throughout the year.”


----------



## hkskyline

Hongkong skyline by Philipp Salveter, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Untitled by LaTur, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*We pray to see Victoria Harbour in its rightful beauty in our lifetimes*
Will Hong Kong finally break the spell since 1998 when every piece of public infrastructure project had broken the budget and gone overtime?
December 10, 2017
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_

For as long as I have known Hong Kong, I have heard the same old joke: “It will be great when it is finished.”

The joke erupted, sudden and unwelcome, as I was being briefed last week on “Site 3”, which seems soon likely to be put out for tender.

For those who may have forgotten, Site 3 is the 157,000 square metre “groundscraper” portion of the eight-part Central Waterfront Development Plan. It will consume the General Post Office and stretch alongside IFC2 up to the ferry piers. In theory, it does not engulf the lonely Ferris wheel sitting lifelessly by Pier 9, but it comes close.

As the briefing unfolded, the joke erupted, and morphed painfully into not a joke. It was fuelled first by a fearful imagining that this huge and iconic site might never be finished – not in my lifetime at least – and secondly by the concern that unless our leaders become uncharacteristically inspired, it may end up not being great either.

The importance of this site simply cannot be underestimated. By 2050, what is being created today on Site 3 will define how the world perceives Hong Kong. It will be on postage stamps, and will provide the backdrop to international TV broadcasters as they talk to the world about Hong Kong. Whether Hong Kong stands out as “Asia’s World City” or by then is just another Asian or Chinese city, will be determined by what we create.

This project is “imbued with cultural and historical significance,” our former Chief Executive Donald Tsang said in his 2008 Policy Address. “Victoria Harbour is an icon of our city. All Hong Kong people cherish it as our precious asset. I hope that our beautiful harbour will remain a symbol of our city that can be enjoyed by all.”

More : http://www.scmp.com/business/articl...ria-harbour-its-rightful-beauty-our-lifetimes


----------



## hkskyline

Untitled by jbjelloid, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Sky100 at ICC, Hong Kong by jenn chan, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong Analog by Yenting Chen, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Hong Kong - Winter 2017-312 by Alan Cuypers, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Img618858nx2 by veryamateurish, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

View west from the ferris wheel, Hong Kong Island by Jonathan Whiteland, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Hong kong by Simon Long, on Flickr

Hong Kong by Simon Long, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Grand Hyatt Hong Kong View 1 by Philip Bloom, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Night at Central-Wan Chai Bypass construction site, Hong Kong by johnlsl, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Reclaiming Causeway Bay by martyr_67, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Central to Wanchai Bypass, Hong Kong by Jamie Lloyd, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

wan_chai_L1030065 by Mark Nockleby, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

have a good day hong kong! by hugo poon, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

hkskyline said:


> Hong Kong Analog by Yenting Chen, on Flickr


*Central-Wan Chai Bypass in Hong Kong to open on January 20 after decade of delays and cost overruns *
Launch of HK$36 billion project will be in two phases, with tunnel section put into operation first
Features include world’s largest air purification system
December 28, 2018
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_

Hong Kong’s long-awaited HK$36 billion (US$4.6 billion) Central-Wan Chai Bypass will open to traffic on January 20 next year after about 10 years of construction plagued by delays and cost overruns.

The 4.5km link, comprising a flyover and a 3.7km tunnel, is expected to ease chronic congestion between North Point and Central. Authorities said it would cut travelling time from about half an hour to just five minutes.

Taxi drivers and commuters, who have lived with the construction site since 2009, welcomed Friday’s news. But some suspected the notorious Causeway Bay bottleneck on the Island Eastern Corridor would not go away.

“That’s very good, we have looked forward to the completion for a long time,” Hong Kong Taxi Owners Association chairman Wong Po-keung said. “Fewer traffic jams mean we can do more business.”

The opening was scheduled to commence in two phases, with the eastbound tunnel section to be in service first. With its launch, traffic lanes in the same direction along the Rumsey Street Flyover leading to Connaught Road Central will be closed.

This will be followed by the westbound carriageway, where work is still required to connect it with the Rumsey Street Flyover, which is expected to take about a month.

A commissioning ceremony for the bypass is set for January 19 in Central.

More : https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...ral-wan-chai-bypass-hong-kong-open-january-20


----------



## hkskyline

Jan 7, 2019 
Hong Kong Economic Journal _Excerpt_
*No need to fret over water seepage in new road link: govt*

After nearly nine years of construction work, the Central-Wan Chai Bypass, designed to ease traffic congestion on Hong Kong Island, is set to partially open to the public later this month.

Marking the first phase, the eastbound portion of the 4.5 km alternative road, which connects the Rumsey Street Flyover in Central with the Island Eastern Corridor and cost HK$36 billion to build, will be commissioned on Jan. 20, according to a government press release.

As preparations get underway, authorities have to sought to dismiss concerns regarding water seepage problem reportedly observed in an underwater tunnel.

Of the 4.5 km stretch of the bypass that is set to open, as much as 3.7 km is covered by a tunnel, and reports have said that water was seen dripping from the ceiling at some sections. 

On Sunday, Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan Fan said there is nothing to worry, and that small amount of water seepage is normal in such projects.

The underwater tunnel is safe, the official insisted, while attending a ceremony to flag off the “Community Chest 50th Anniversary Walk for Millions” event. 

The event, whose starting ceremony was also officiated by Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, and Beijing’s liaison office chief Wang Zhimin, drew about 20,000 participants.

During the walk, participants started from Edinburgh Place in Central and walked 5.3 km, including on the bypass, to finish at the Oil Street in North Point, the Hong Kong Economic Journal reports.

While some participants claimed they saw water stains on some parts of the ceiling and walls of the underwater tunnel, Chan explained that what people may have perceived as “cracks” on the ceiling was actually fire-retardant paint.

According to the transport chief, seepage in a small amount is not uncommon in tunnels, and concrete is also not totally waterproof.


----------



## kunming tiger

hopefully the surrounding areas can at last be connected to the waterfront via footbridge?


----------



## hkskyline

Why footbridge? The bypass is underground.


----------



## kunming tiger

I mean over the existing roads in the area.


----------



## hkskyline

*Lester Shum challenges harborfront PLA berth *
10 Apr 2019 
The Standard _Excerpt_

Lester Shum says the the Hong Kong government had promised that the new Central harbor promenade is solely for public use.

Pro-democracy activist Lester Shum has applied to the High Court for a judicial review of the government's decision to zone a stretch of the Central harborfront for use by the People's Liberation Army, RTHK reports. 

The government approved the rezoning of the 0.3 hectare berth for military use at the end of January and said it will hand over the site to the PLA Garrison "as soon as possible.''

While the dock will be administered by the PLA and covered by Garrison Law, SAR officials say the public will be allowed to enter the area when it is not in use. 

However, Shum says the decision goes against the public interest and accuses the administration of breaking an earlier promise it made.

“This is a written promise made by the Hong Kong government to the Hong Kong people that the new Central harbour promenade is solely for public use," he said on Wednesday.

"If this decision is carried out, that the related area of the Central harbour promenade is to be given to the PLA, then the usage of the public will be in serious question."


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong’s Harbourfront Commission approves plan for eco-friendly footbridge linking central Wan Chai to Victoria Harbour*
The 190-metre-long West Landscaped Deck includes covered walkway, open-air gallery and viewing deck
Construction to begin in 2020 with completion expected in 2024
May 29, 2019
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_









_Ming Pao graphic_

The proposed design of an eco-friendly footbridge meant to provide a faster, more enjoyable walk from central Wan Chai to the waterfront has been approved by Hong Kong’s harbour oversight body.

The Harbourfront Commission’s Hong Kong Island task force was in favour of the project on Tuesday, asking the government to merely fine-tune the proposed walkway with an eye to additional features such as food and drink concessions and more cover.

The 190-metre-long (623-foot) footbridge would connect a future waterfront promenade with a roof garden near the Grand Hyatt Hong Kong. The hotel has access to Wan Chai MTR station and Gloucester Road, the road that separates central and northern Wan Chai.

The new walkway, called the West Landscaped Deck, includes a covered passage at least four metres wide, an open-air gallery and a viewing deck. In the proposed design, most of the footbridge will be covered with grass.

Compared with the current routes, the footbridge would allow pedestrians to reach the harbourfront promenade three minutes faster from the Wan Chai station and eight minutes faster from Gloucester Road.

“The deck is different from an ordinary footbridge,” said Rosalind Cheung Man-yee, principal assistant secretary of the Development Bureau. “It doesn’t just enhance connectivity: it also has its own features.”

The cost of building the footbridge is covered by the HK$4.6 billion (US$586 million) Wan Chai Development Phase II project, which aims to expand Wan Chai and improve its infrastructure.

Construction of the deck is expected to begin in 2020 and be complete by early 2024. The footbridge will follow the completion of the new 560-metre (1,837-foot) harbourfront promenade between Central and Wan Chai, which is expected to be operational by 2021.

More : https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...g-kongs-harbourfront-commission-approves-plan


----------



## hkskyline

New Avenue of Stars

Avenue of Stars by Pexpix, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*Protesters and police in tense new stand-off at site of PLA dock on Hong Kong harbourfront*
Lawmakers and conservation group challenge officers guarding 150-metre strip of land alongside Victoria Harbour
Clash comes hours after riot police clear hundreds of protesters from site
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
June 29, 2019



























_on.cc_

Several lawmakers and a group of conservationists were barred from entering a Central harbourfront site on Saturday morning, some 11 hours after riot police cleared a site that now belongs to the People’s Liberation Army.

Opposition lawmakers Eddie Chu Hoi-dick, Ted Hui Chi-fung, and Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, along with a handful of members from the Protect the Harbourfront Alliance concern group, were kept outside a fence as about 30 police officers stood guard at the 0.3-hectare strip.

“Return the harbourfront to the Hong Kong people! No PLA pier!” the group chanted.

The group was protesting against the government’s move to hand over the prime 150-metre stretch of land to the PLA Hong Kong Garrison.

More : https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...and-police-tense-new-stand-site-pla-dock-hong


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong marine ecologists lead ‘eco-shoreline’ project to reshape city’s seawalls and pave the way for future reclamation projects*
Project tests how modifying artificial shorelines boosts biodiversity – and could be template for future reclamation projects.
Government-funded HK$5 million project to run until 2021
July 1, 2019
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_

Scientists are seeking to strike a delicate balance between man and nature by creating “eco-shorelines”, concrete seawalls that can protect marine life and set an environmentally friendly example for Hong Kong’s future land-reclamation projects.

Under a government-funded project, experts at the University of Hong Kong and Polytechnic University are currently testing specially designed, eco-friendly concrete blocks and panels that can be attached to seawalls at three coastal locations in the New Territories.

The panels and blocks have grooves and ridges that mimic rocks eroded by weather and seawater, allowing room for organisms to hide from predators and harsh conditions.

“During midday, temperatures can be as high as above 50 degrees Celsius [on the seawall] and can cook the organisms alive and kill them,” said Kenneth Leung Mei-yee, a professor of aquatic ecology and toxicology at HKU who is leading the project.

After installation is completed in July, the HK$5 million (US$639,942) eco-shoreline project will run until mid-2021.

More : https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...ong-kong-marine-ecologists-lead-eco-shoreline


----------



## hkskyline

Wan Chai, Hong Kong Skyline by Tony Shi, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

New Avenue of Stars

Avenue of Stars by Jason Tong, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Central, Hong Kong (view from the Ferris Wheel) by snapcat101, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

公眾觀景台public observation deck by kman L, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

Vacant Lot by Wayne, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

New Tsim Sha Tsui Waterfront

2019-03-13 01 Harbour Prominade with view of Hong Kong Island--Victoria Harbour, Hong Kong.jpg by Dave Richards, on Flickr

2019-03-13 03 Strolling along the Harbour Prominade.--Victoria Harbour, Hong Kong.jpg by Dave Richards, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

*政府推中環海濱地 估值920億 最快第三季招標 未必價高者得 *
明報 _Excerpt_
2020年2月28日星期五




























政府公布下年度將推6幅商業地皮，共涉逾893萬方呎，其中以包括郵政總局的中環新海濱3號地皮最矚目，可建逾184萬方呎樓面，直逼同區地標商廈國金2期總樓面（約195萬方呎），地皮估值逾920億元，有力問鼎本港新地王。財政司長陳茂波日前公布新一年度財政預算案，預料財赤會持續數年，出售上述地皮能為庫房帶來龐大收益。另方面，政府表示中環海濱3號地將以「雙信封制」招標（見另稿），地皮有可能並非價高者得。

項目最快今年第三季推出，發展局長黃偉綸昨在記者會表示，有關用地是中環新海濱能作地標式發展的罕有商業用地，發展商除興建寫字樓、零售等商業設施，亦要發展大型公眾休憩用地和貫穿整個地盤和海濱的行人園景平台，政府十分重視用地的建築設計，故採用雙封信形式招標。

整個中環新海濱商業項目橫跨耀星街、龍和道及民耀街，地皮面積516,312方呎，預計可建樓面逾184萬方呎，地皮前臨維港海景，料大部分寫字樓可享海景。項目鄰近現時國金中心2期及港鐵香港站，盡享地理之便，加上是區內罕有的大型發展商業項目，發展潛力被看高一線。

_Synopsis : The government plans to tender a large parcel of land, which includes a section of the Central reclamation, which can be used to build commercial buildings with a gross floor area of 1.84 million square feet. Noe that neighbouring 2IFC has a gross floor area of 1.95 million square feet._


----------



## hkskyline

* Money is not everything, says Hong Kong government as it adopts rare approach to selling prime site in heart of Central *
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Feb 28, 2020

In a vote of confidence in Hong Kong’s property market despite the economic downturn, the government is adopting a rare approach to sell a prime commercial site in the Central business district that will take into account not just developers’ cash bids, but also their proposed designs.

Described as the “last strategic business site in Central” and located next to the International Finance Centre along the harbourfront, it is one of 21 residential or commercial lots on the land sale programme for 2020-21.

While the design requirement was not expected to deter interest, the ailing business environment amid the social unrest and the coronavirus crisis could lower developers’ bids in general by 10 to 15 per cent, according to some analysts.

Announcing the details of the programme on Thursday, Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun said the government intended to sell the 4.76-hectare New Central Harbourfront Site 3 using a two-envelope approach by assessing both price bids and design proposals from developers. This would deviate from the usual practice of awarding sites based on the highest bid alone.

“If you look at Central as it stands now, this … site is the last site that is so strategically located and iconic,” he said. “Its proper design and utilisation is very important to our future economic development. Money is not our only consideration.”

The plot sits on land reclaimed from Victoria Harbour nine years ago, and has held entertainment and sports events such as the Hong Kong ePrix of Formula E, the Wine and Dine Festival, and carnivals.

The winning developer will be required to devote half of the area to green public space and enhance connectivity between the harbourfront and inner Central.

More : https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...y-not-everything-says-hong-kong-government-it


----------



## hkskyline

"hong kong... another day of social distancing" (i) by hugo poon, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

View from office in Hong Kong by anilegna, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

* Departure from ‘highest bid wins’ tender means Central harbourfront reclamation project can really meet its potential *
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Apr 14, 2020

The government recently decided to amend the tendering approach for the Central reclamation project’s “prime site 3” land parcel to embrace a “two-envelope” bidding process.

This marks a welcome departure from long-standing policy in Hong Kong, where invariably such tenders were awarded to the highest bidder without regard for the quality of the proposed development.

However, while the administration deserves credit for recognising that dollar value is not the only way to assess a winning bid, there is still plenty left to do to ensure site 3 meets its potential.

While the essence of the two-envelope bid is that it balances both financial and design aspects, in reality there are a host of other factors that come into play, including sustainability, connectivity, community access, and public consultation.

What is important now is that the details are quickly hammered out in an equitable way. Developers will then know where they stand, while the rest of the community can be assured that Hong Kong will get the iconic statement that the city deserves.

More : New tender system gives waterfront development a chance to shine


----------



## hkskyline

Untitled by C.H Lam Photography, on Flickr

Untitled by C.H Lam Photography, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

hkskyline said:


> *政府推中環海濱地 估值920億 最快第三季招標 未必價高者得 *
> 明報 _Excerpt_
> 2020年2月28日星期五
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 政府公布下年度將推6幅商業地皮，共涉逾893萬方呎，其中以包括郵政總局的中環新海濱3號地皮最矚目，可建逾184萬方呎樓面，直逼同區地標商廈國金2期總樓面（約195萬方呎），地皮估值逾920億元，有力問鼎本港新地王。財政司長陳茂波日前公布新一年度財政預算案，預料財赤會持續數年，出售上述地皮能為庫房帶來龐大收益。另方面，政府表示中環海濱3號地將以「雙信封制」招標（見另稿），地皮有可能並非價高者得。
> 
> 項目最快今年第三季推出，發展局長黃偉綸昨在記者會表示，有關用地是中環新海濱能作地標式發展的罕有商業用地，發展商除興建寫字樓、零售等商業設施，亦要發展大型公眾休憩用地和貫穿整個地盤和海濱的行人園景平台，政府十分重視用地的建築設計，故採用雙封信形式招標。
> 
> 整個中環新海濱商業項目橫跨耀星街、龍和道及民耀街，地皮面積516,312方呎，預計可建樓面逾184萬方呎，地皮前臨維港海景，料大部分寫字樓可享海景。項目鄰近現時國金中心2期及港鐵香港站，盡享地理之便，加上是區內罕有的大型發展商業項目，發展潛力被看高一線。
> 
> _Synopsis : The government plans to tender a large parcel of land, which includes a section of the Central reclamation, which can be used to build commercial buildings with a gross floor area of 1.84 million square feet. Noe that neighbouring 2IFC has a gross floor area of 1.95 million square feet._


* Hong Kong to sell ‘iconic’ site on Victoria Harbour in coming quarter to boost market confidence * 
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
June 26, 2020

The Hong Kong government will sell a site along the city’s Victoria Harbour to boost market confidence in the coming quarter, it said on Friday.

The 4.76 hectare (512,362 sq ft) site, called New Central Harbourfront Site 3, is sandwiched between City Hall to the south, the Central Ferry Piers to the north, and IFC to the west. As big as about 38 Olympic-sized swimming pools, the site can yield about 1.6 million sq ft in gross floor area for commercial purposes.

The government will drop its traditional approach of highest bidder wins for the sale. “Money is not our only consideration, but the government will not sell the land at a huge discount. Bids will be weighed 50-50 for design and price,” Michael Wong Wai-lun, the city’s Secretary for Development, said.

“Although commercial rents are dropping and office vacancy rates are rising, we cannot leave commercial plots to gather dust – that will damage Hong Kong’s competitiveness as an international financial and business centre,” he added.

“It is the last site that is so strategically located and is so iconic. Its proper design and utilisation is very important to our future economic development.”

More : Sudan submits letter to UN Security Council on Renaissance Dam crisis - Egypt Independent


----------



## hkskyline

* Central waterfront dock handed over to PLA garrison *
RTHK _Excerpt_
Sep 29, 2020



























_on.cc_

A 150-metre-long military dock on the Central waterfront has officially been handed over to the Hong Kong Garrison of the People's Liberation Army, making it off-limits to the public, despite earlier pleas by environmentalists to turn it into an open space.

The Hong Kong government announced that the Central Military Dock had been delimited as a military restricted zone from 7am on Tuesday. It will be managed and used by the PLA Hong Kong Garrison from now on.

At a handover ceremony on Tuesday, Chief Executive Carrie Lam said that while the dock has strong military and defence purposes, the Garrison has agreed to consider opening up non-restricted areas to the public on a discretionary basis.

More : Central waterfront dock handed over to PLA garrison - RTHK


----------



## hkskyline

Wanchai / Admiralty - 10/24


----------



## hkskyline

A few aerials of the space taken on 10/25 :

DJI_0311 by Egg Jeffrey, on Flickr

DJI_0305 by Egg Jeffrey, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

hkskyline said:


> *政府推中環海濱地 估值920億 最快第三季招標 未必價高者得 *
> 明報 _Excerpt_
> 2020年2月28日星期五
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 政府公布下年度將推6幅商業地皮，共涉逾893萬方呎，其中以包括郵政總局的中環新海濱3號地皮最矚目，可建逾184萬方呎樓面，直逼同區地標商廈國金2期總樓面（約195萬方呎），地皮估值逾920億元，有力問鼎本港新地王。財政司長陳茂波日前公布新一年度財政預算案，預料財赤會持續數年，出售上述地皮能為庫房帶來龐大收益。另方面，政府表示中環海濱3號地將以「雙信封制」招標（見另稿），地皮有可能並非價高者得。
> 
> 項目最快今年第三季推出，發展局長黃偉綸昨在記者會表示，有關用地是中環新海濱能作地標式發展的罕有商業用地，發展商除興建寫字樓、零售等商業設施，亦要發展大型公眾休憩用地和貫穿整個地盤和海濱的行人園景平台，政府十分重視用地的建築設計，故採用雙封信形式招標。
> 
> 整個中環新海濱商業項目橫跨耀星街、龍和道及民耀街，地皮面積516,312方呎，預計可建樓面逾184萬方呎，地皮前臨維港海景，料大部分寫字樓可享海景。項目鄰近現時國金中心2期及港鐵香港站，盡享地理之便，加上是區內罕有的大型發展商業項目，發展潛力被看高一線。
> 
> _Synopsis : The government plans to tender a large parcel of land, which includes a section of the Central reclamation, which can be used to build commercial buildings with a gross floor area of 1.84 million square feet. Noe that neighbouring 2IFC has a gross floor area of 1.95 million square feet._


* Govt invites tender for prime harbourfront site *
RTHK _Excerpt_ 
Dec 18, 2020

The government says it is inviting tenders for an iconic harbourfront site in Central which has an area of about 4.76 hectares.

The plot, referred by authorities as 'Site 3 of the New Central Harbourfront', is sandwiched between City Hall to the south, the Central Ferry Piers to the north, and IFC to the west.

Equivalent to around 38 Olympic-sized swimming pools, the plot can be developed into about 150,000 square metres (1.6 million square feet) of gross floor area.

Authorities say the site is designated for non-industrial purposes, and stringent building height restrictions will be in place.

The successful bidder will be required to provide at least 25,000 square metres of public open space, as well as a bridge to link up the harbourfront and the core business district in Central.

More : Govt invites tender for prime harbourfront site - RTHK


----------



## jchk

Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I paid the recently opened section of the Wanchai waterfront a visit:






















Am thrilled at the amount of open space there is, and the views really are rather lovely, but am otherwise underwhelmed. The design reminds me of the stretch of waterfront around Sun Yat Sen Memorial Park, which is simply not good enough for such a prominent location; even just some greenery would improve things vastly. The whole area is admittedly a massive construction site at the moment, so it might be too soon to judge...

Doesn't help that the only way to access it at the moment that does not involve jaywalking is through this nondescript gap at the back of the temporary bus terminus:


----------



## hkskyline

This is the right place for it since that stretch is reclaimed from the harbour. It's right behind the new bus terminus that was previously at Harbour Centre?


----------



## hkskyline

11/28 - Wanchai section

DJI_0395 by Egg Jeffrey, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

12/30









































































More on my website : Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Wanchai's New Waterfront


----------



## hkskyline

* Prime harbourfront plot in Central should become world-class destination blending commerce with public spaces, designers say *
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_ 
Jan 13, 2021

A parcel of prime land at Hong Kong’s Victoria Harbour to be sold in a rare tender process that values design merits as much as cost is likely to be transformed into a vibrant waterfront hub blending office and retail facilities with bustling public spaces, say industry experts.

Under the government’s “two envelope” approach for the sale of New Central Harbourfront Commercial Site 3, submitted bids will be evaluated based on the quality of their design as well as the estimated cost of development.

According to the Planning Department’s zoning plan, half of the 516,316 square foot site will be allocated for public open spaces.

More : Public spaces will transform Victoria Harbour plot, designers say


----------



## hkskyline

* Hong Kong’s harbourfront in Central could be on par with Sydney with the right blend of cafes, arts and cultural attractions, says designer*
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Mar 10, 2021

When design director Amarindra Rana walks along the bridge next to the International Finance Centre (IFC) in Central every day, he feels sad to see a near two-kilometre harbourfront left empty for almost 10 years. So he decided to try to do something about it.

So Rana, of Atkins’ Hong Kong design studio, came up with a vision to create a world-class, vibrant and accessible harbourfront in Central that would be on par with the likes of Sydney, London and Copenhagen. Although not yet involved in an official capacity, the company is keen to take on an advisory role in the redevelopment of the several parcels of land that make up the stretch.

The waterfront area extends from the IFC and Star Ferry Pier in Central through to Tamar Park in Admiralty and on to the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre in Wan Chai.

More : Is Hong Kong’s Central harbourfront any match for Sydney?


----------



## hkskyline

*Hong Kong’s ‘land king’ may fetch as much as US$7.1 billion as Central harbourfront site goes for tender*
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_ 
June 15, 2021

The prime Central harbourfront site, the last mega plot to go on sale in Hong Kong’s core business district, is likely to set a record as the most expensive in the city’s history, according to property consultants.

Under the government’s “two envelope” approach for the sale of New Central Harbourfront Commercial Site 3, submitted bids will be weighed equally for design and price. The tender for the 516,316 commercial site, which could yield a total gross floor area of 1.6 million sq ft, closes on Friday noon.

“Considering the plot’s strategic value, serious bidders will be submit high prices as well as innovative designs, as it is the last commercial site along the waterfront in Central,” said Vincent Cheung, managing director of Vincorn Consulting and Appraisal.

More : Hong Kong’s priciest commercial plot goes on sale at US$7.1 billion valuation


----------



## hkskyline

* MTR Corp says Central harbourfront site bid did not involve government board members to avoid conflict of interest*
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_ 
June 21, 2021

Government board members were absent from meetings related to the discussion and decision to bid for a prime site in Central, the MTR Corp said to allay public concerns about conflict of interest.

The rail operator and property developer, in which the Hong Kong government holds a 75 per cent stake, issued a statement in response to media queries over potential conflict of interest after it said it had taken part in the government land tender for the New Central Harbourfront Commercial Site 3. The decision to bid was based on purely commercial consideration, it added.

It was the first time since the MTR’s formation in 1975 that the company had taken part in a government land bid. It formed a consortium with Wharf Real Estate Investment Company, a unit of the Woo family’s Wheelock and Company, and Chinachem Group, to submit a bid for the plot.

More : MTR Corp says it followed right protocol over Central land bid


----------



## MelbourneHK

Tender awarded for Site 3 of New Central Harbourfront
******

The Development Bureau announced today (November 3) that the tender for Site 3 of the New Central Harbourfront (Site 3) (i.e. Inland Lot 9088) has been awarded to Pacific Gate Development Limited (parent company: Henderson Land Development Company Limited) on a 50-year land grant, following a two-envelope open tender.

The Government adopted a two-envelope approach in the tender to take both design and premium into consideration. Equal weighting for premium and non-premium proposals, i.e. 50:50, was adopted in this two-envelope approach. The Tender Assessment Panel (TAP) assessed the tender proposals in accordance with the requirements stipulated in the tender document, and Pacific Gate Development Limited attained the highest marks for its premium and non-premium proposals, with the overall mark totalling 100 (the maximum mark would be given to the top performer in the respective assessment of the premium and non-premium proposals). The TAP therefore recommended to the Central Tender Board to accept this tender and the recommendation was approved. The premium proposal of the successful tender is $50,800,000,000.

The Government received a total of six tenders. Among the six, four did not conform with the requirement that a tender has to attain the passing mark for both the premium and non-premium proposals in the two-envelope approach. In other words, two (including the successful tender) are regarded as conforming tenders fulfilling both the premium and non-premium requirements, and the successful tender was given a higher total mark and hence awarded the tender. The Government will release the combined scores, the premium offer and the gist of the design proposal of the other conforming tender after the completion of transaction procedures.

A spokesperson for the Development Bureau said, "Our vision is for Site 3 to become a new landmark for Hong Kong, exemplary in terms of people-centric design and emphases on sustainable and urban design considerations as well as integration with the surroundings. The successful tenderer's proposal is based on the idea of 'a bridge' and aims to curate a world-class iconic landmark in Hong Kong, enhance the connectivity between the hinterland and harbourfront in Central, and create a vast amount of green and public spaces. The development is expected to achieve good integration with the surrounding environment and vitalise the harbourfront area."

The successful tenderer proposes to build three buildings with a view to accentuating Hong Kong's image as Asia's World City. The block closest to the harbour will be multi-functional, whereas the other two will be office buildings. Adequate separation is proposed among the buildings as ventilation corridors and city windows, in order to ensure that the development will have sufficient natural ventilation and lighting. The Public Open Space proposed will exceed the minimum of 25 000 square metres as required in the tender document. The Horizon Park, a platform at the roof level, will connect the three buildings. The public will be able to enjoy panoramic views of the Central cityscape and Victoria Harbour from there. The platform, to be greened as an urban forest, will provide a lawn, jogging routes and outdoor space for public use. The proposal also provides a pedestrian network to link up the existing routes in Central, connecting its hinterland with the harbourfront and the vicinity. There will be a pedestrian connection with Central MTR Station. The artist's impressions of the proposal are in the Annex.

Site 3's tender period ran from December 18, 2020, to June 18, 2021, longer than ordinary cash tenders, to allow sufficient time for preparation of proposals. In line with the established stores and procurement procedures, the TAP was set up and chaired by the Permanent Secretary for Development (Planning and Lands) and comprised senior directorate officers from the Works Branch of the Development Bureau, the Planning Department, the Architectural Services Department and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department. The Government appointed a number of experts from the fields of architecture, landscape architecture, planning, building surveying, urban design, creation of public realms and social development as independent Technical Advisors (TAs) for the tender. The TAs provided professional advice to the Government on the assessment criteria for the non-premium aspect of the tender and on the non-premium proposals received. The Government appreciates their contribution.

The development of Site 3 has gone through years of preparation. Following two stages of extensive public engagement, the Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront was completed in 2011. Subsequently, the Town Planning Board (TPB) approved the Planning Brief for the site in 2016, which provided important guidance for the development parameters and design guidelines for the site and the basis for this tender. After the completion of land sale procedures, the successful tenderer needs to prepare a master layout plan in accordance with its non-premium proposal for approval by the TPB. In accordance with the Conditions of Sale, the completion of Site 3A and Site 3B is required by December 31, 2027, and December 31, 2032, respectively.

Artist’s impressions have been published. https://gia.info.gov.hk/general/202111/03/P2021110300605_380283_1_1635931600705.pdf


----------



## hkskyline

*New stretch of Pierside Precinct at Wan Chai Harborfront opens up *
The Standard _Excerpt_
Nov 26, 2021

More of the Wan Chai Pier Harborfront has opened up on Friday! This newly opened section of the Pierside Precinct provides a nostalgic harborfront leisure space with a panoramic view of Victoria Harbour for the general public. 

The newly opened space is located to the east of Wan Chai Ferry Pier on a harbor site reclaimed for the construction of the Central-Wan Chai Bypass and is about 4,600 square meters in size. 

This is also the 12th Harborfront leisure space opened in the city since October last year. 

The Precinct, which mainly comprises simple fair-faced concrete and wooden structures with a spice of photo frames and neon lights, features installations reminiscent of Hong Kong's past. 

The Precinct is decorated with traditional, Hong Kong-style metal gates with brightly colored mailboxes hanging on them. It showcases the lifestyles of Hong Kong in the past and offers check-in spots for visitors to take photos. 

More : New stretch of Pierside Precinct at Wan Chai Harborfront opens up

Photos taken from government press release : 灣仔海濱「渡輪碼頭畔主題區」進一步開放（附圖）


----------



## hkskyline

* Breakwater leads 'friendly' designs *
The Standard _Excerpt_
Nov 29, 2021

The breakwater at the East Coast Park Precinct on the harborfront below Fortress Hill has received positive feedback, says Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun.

Phase one of the precinct opened on September 25 - the first breakwater within Victoria Harbour.

People can also enjoy a 360-degree panoramic view of the harbor from the end of the breakwater.

Harbourfront Commission chairman Vincent Ng Wing-shun has cited the breakwater adopting a fence-free design, with only slopes along the sides of its 100-meter length.

It is the third in a four-stage approach to promoting a water-friendly culture, Wong said.

More : Breakwater leads 'friendly' designs

_Government Press Release Photos_ : East Coast Park Precinct (Phase 1) in Fortress Hill to officially open this Saturday (with photos)


----------



## hkskyline

000024590007 by Fai Redefined, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

9/20

PANO0001-全景 by Alex Mak, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

* Henderson’s US$6.5 billion bid 37 per cent higher than next best offer*
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Dec 9, 2021

Henderson Land Development paid an eye-watering HK$13.7 billion (US$1.75 billion), or 37 per cent more than the next best bid, for a harbourfront plot in Central last month.

Pacific Gate Development, a unit of Henderson had bid a record HK$50.8 billion to bag a 50-year land grant for the New Central Harbourfront Commercial Site 3 in front of the old General Post Office and next to the International Finance Centre.

Only two of the six bids, including Henderson’s, met the reserve price for the 516,316 square feet site, while all proposed designs passed the requirement, the Development Bureau said in a statement on Wednesday.

More : Central harbourfront site: Henderson bid US$1.75b more than runner up


----------



## hkskyline

* Victoria Harbour steps give Hongkongers a chance to get close to water as extension boosts promenade length to 7.4km *
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Dec 24, 2021

Hongkongers got the chance to enjoy a new harbourfront experience on Christmas Eve after a stretch of promenade opened to the public with a fence-free stepped area to the water’s edge and pedal boat rides.
The new 280-metre extension in Wan Chai brings the continuous length of the Victoria Harbour promenade along the north shore of Hong Kong Island to 7.4km by linking two existing sections. People can now walk along the waterfront all the way from Shek Tong Tsui to Fortress Hill.

Located in the 5,200 square metre Water Sports and Recreation Precinct (Phase 2), the extension features the harbour’s first fence-free, stepped-down design to the water’s edge, allowing people to get closer to the sea and watch events from a shorter distance.

More : Walk this way: Victoria Harbour steps offer new experience to Hongkongers


----------



## hkskyline

*East Coast Park Precinct*

While in recent years some improvements have been made with more public space along the coast looking at the highway bridge, a new park opened in September 2021 in front of the highway with unobstructed skyline and harbour views.

Phase 1 of the East Coast Park Precinct is about 9800 square metres large and was formerly a construction site for the Central-Wan Chai Bypass. It includes the first breakwater open to the public in the harbour, stretching about 100m long towards the bypass' ventilation shaft.



























































































More photos : Hong Kong Photo Gallery - East Coast Park Precinct


----------



## hkskyline

*Wanchai*

12/26

_DSC1040 copy by Alan Pong, on Flickr

_DSC1045 copy by Alan Pong, on Flickr

_DSC0984 copy by Alan Pong, on Flickr


----------



## hkskyline

* M+ owner plots next chapter for West Kowloon project, buoyed by record winning bid for Hong Kong’s Central Harbourfront site *
South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
Dec 29, 2021

Hong Kong’s West Kowloon Cultural District Authority said the response to the HK$50.8 billion (US$6.5 billion) New Central Harbourfront Commercial Site 3 plot had boosted its confidence in inviting bids from developers to construct and operate three office and entertainment buildings.

The authority issued tenders for the Artist Square Towers Project – the first commercial district in West Kowloon – in late November, two weeks after the opening of M+, the city’s first visual-arts museum, which it owns. The tender is expected to close in February, while the approval will be granted in March or April.

“Across the harbour, Central Site 3 was a good insight for us. It turns out … a waterfront, high-quality with ease-of-accessibility project is attractive to developers,” said Wendy Gan Kim-see, the authority’s deputy CEO (District Development).

More : Buoyed by US$6.5 billion Central site, M+ owner plots new West Kowloon project


----------



## hkskyline

hkskyline said:


> *Protesters and police in tense new stand-off at site of PLA dock on Hong Kong harbourfront*
> Lawmakers and conservation group challenge officers guarding 150-metre strip of land alongside Victoria Harbour
> Clash comes hours after riot police clear hundreds of protesters from site
> South China Morning Post _Excerpt_
> June 29, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _on.cc_
> 
> Several lawmakers and a group of conservationists were barred from entering a Central harbourfront site on Saturday morning, some 11 hours after riot police cleared a site that now belongs to the People’s Liberation Army.
> 
> Opposition lawmakers Eddie Chu Hoi-dick, Ted Hui Chi-fung, and Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, along with a handful of members from the Protect the Harbourfront Alliance concern group, were kept outside a fence as about 30 police officers stood guard at the 0.3-hectare strip.
> 
> “Return the harbourfront to the Hong Kong people! No PLA pier!” the group chanted.
> 
> The group was protesting against the government’s move to hand over the prime 150-metre stretch of land to the PLA Hong Kong Garrison.
> 
> More : Protesters and police in tense new stand-off at site of PLA dock


* PLA raises flag at Central military dock*
The Standard 
Jan 30, 2022

Around 300 officers of People’s Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison on Sunday conducted a national flag raising ceremony at Central Military Dock for the first time.

After the ceremony, garrison officers sent their Lunar New Year blessings for mainland citizens and wished prosperity for the nation and a better future for Hong Kong.

The military dock at the Central Waterfront Promenade and the military site were handed over to the garrison on September 29, 2020. It was the last military facility which the SAR had to rebuild and hand over to the garrison.

More : PLA raises flag at Central military dock


----------

