PDF Format - Our Harbour Front

More documents

Recommendations

Info

- 12 -when other proposals were rejected for consideration under theOCP.3.16 In response, Mr Raymond Lee said that although relevantbureaux had previously provided the justifications for thesefacilities in Kai Tak, they would continue be invited to providefurther justifications for these facilities to address Members’concern. The Consultants were, however, focusing theirinvestigation on the technical aspects as how to plan for them inthe OCP, to address issues like “no reclamation” and impact onthe surrounding traffic and environment.3.17 Referring to the water sports centre option, Mr Raymond Leesaid that this idea had not been excluded as they were notconsidered incompatible with the other land use themes.However, the investigation on the water quality of the adjacentwater body would have a strong bearing on the provision ofwater sports facilities. Public comments received in the Stage1 Public Participation would be set out in the Stage 1 PublicParticipation report together with responses of why someideas/proposals were acceptable or otherwise.3.18 The Chairman believed that the people of Hong Kong werereasonable and would not expect all their proposals to beaccepted. However, it was important to acknowledge theirideas and to highlight the pros and cons of the proposals. Inthis way the community could be convinced of the reasons forrejecting particular ideas. The proponents would rally moresupport in the next stage of Public Participation, possibly withmore professional input and technical studies.3.19 In response to Mr Paul Zimmerman queried on the type ofmarine uses envisaged in the study area, Ms Iris Tam said thatthere was a session on marine facilities at the CM. At thisstage of the study, the OCP would examine different options inthe provision of marine facilities, for harbour operation andleisure purpose. The investigation on water circulation/qualitymight, however, affect the existing To Kwa Wan TyphoonShelter, as their breakwater constrained water circulation in thearea. Mr Paul Zimmerman pointed out that it was agreed inthe <strong>Harbour</strong> Plan Review Sub-committee that the marine usesshould be examined in plan preparation process. TheConsultants should elaborate their findings in the relevant
- 13 -technical reports.3.20 Mr Igor Ho supplemented that the Kai Tak Developmentwould be subject to the scrutiny under the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) and that the wholedevelopment would need to meet relevant environmentalstandards before proceeding to implementation.3.21 In conclusion, the Meeting noted the report on theCollaborators Meeting as submitted by the Consultants.Item 4Suggestions for Stage 2 Public Participation[SEKD SC Paper No. 6/05]4.1 In presenting the discussion paper, Mr Derek Sun said thattaking experience of the Stage 1 Public Participation and theneed to facilitate understanding of the development concepts,it was proposed to adjust the direction and format of publicparticipation, for example, to pursue more interactiveapproach, more visually enhanced presentation materials andencourage the involvement of youth groups.4.2 With the aid of PowerPoint slides, Mr Derek Sun said thatapart from the major activities undertaken under the Stage 1Public Participation programme, it was proposed for Stage 2Public Participation to focus on areas including preparation ofconsultation digest, arrangement of open discussion forums,promulgation of reference materials and public events throughwebsites. Multi-media presentations including PowerPoint,video clips of 3-D computer models and interactive computermodels would also be provided to facilitate the publicparticipation activities and enable easy understanding of theoutline concepts of the proposed Kai Tak Development.4.3 Mr Derek Sun further said that subject to availability ofadditional resources, materials such as public participationtoolkit, summary of technical issues and relevant analysiscould be prepared to enhance the public engagementactivities, more collaborators meetings/launching event/publicforums and exhibition/youth participation, and on-lineinteractive opinion collection form would be designed andposted in the Study website to provide a window for gaugingthe public feedbacks on the options of OCPs, and physical
Page 1 and 2: Minutes of 7 th MeetingTime: 2:30 p
Page 3 and 4: - 3 -inspections recently but did n
Page 6 and 7: - 6 -their consultation exercise, w
Page 8 and 9: - 8 -Kowloon Route (CKR) and Road T
Page 10 and 11: - 10 -working with the concerned de
Page 14 and 15: - 14 -models showing the proposed o
Page 16 and 17: - 16 -would be more effective but h
Page 18: Extract of Confirmed TPB minutes of

PDF Format - Our Harbour Front

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?