Response to media enquiries on Planning and Engineering Study for Wang Chau
***************************************************************************
When releasing the P&E Study, an introduction to the study to give an account on the objectives and constraints of planning and engineering studies in general, as well as some background information of the Wang Chau project, was attached (www.thb.gov.hk/eng/popup/wangchau_report.htm). The introduction and earlier replies in response to media enquiries have already addressed some of the recent questions by the media. The relevant information is summarised here for public reference.
When the study was first started, the original plan was to develop Wang Chau Phases 1, 2 and 3 as well as the Yuen Long Industrial Estate Extension as one works project. However, the scope of the study was adjusted in accordance with the Government’s strategy. In early 2014, the Government decided to launch Wang Chau Phase 1 development first. The P&E Study had to add in content on technical assessments specifically required for the rezoning of Phase 1. In this connection, we had instructed the consultant to extract appropriate information and make necessary updates, thereby producing an additional of five technical reports and two technical data summaries.
As the Government decided not to develop Phase 1 along with Phases 2 and 3 and the Industrial Estate Extension in one go, the P&E Study did not pursue further on subjects associated with a joint development, such as public consultation or environmental impact assessment required for a joint development. According to the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance, environmental impact assessment reports are required for engineering feasibility study of urban development projects with a study area covering more than 20 hectres or involving a total population of more than 100 000. Since the Phase 1 development only involves a site of about 5.6 hectres with a future population of about 12 000 persons, an environmental impact assessment is not required.
Besides, although the P&E Study had suggested at an early stage that public consultation and community engagement were required when developing Wang Chau Phases 1, 2 and 3 and Yuen Long Industrial Estate Extension in one go, the Government decided in early 2014 to develop Phase 1 first. Thus, the P&E Study, in the end, did not recommend the implementation of consultation specifically for the concurrent development of Wang Chau Phases 1, 2 and 3 and Yuen Long Industrial Estate Extension. Instead, informal consultations, as well as using about two months to consult the Rural Committee and District Council, were suggested.
In respect of informal consultations, we had clarified to the media that the two informal consultations as mentioned on paragraph 3.2.1.2 of the TR-4B report of the P&E Study should have taken place in July and September 2013, not July and September 2012. The correct dates can be found on paragraph 3.4.1.1 of the same report which also touched on the two informal consultations. These two informal meetings were exactly the two informal consultations on July and September 2013 mentioned by the Secretary for Transport and Housing at the press conference on September 21, 2016. Please refer to the following link for details (Chinese only): www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201609/21/P2016092100721.htm.
The completion time estimated by the P&E Study for various types of work was based on the original assumption of developing Wang Chau Phases 1, 2 and 3 and Yuen Long Industrial Estate Extension in one go. In addition, the estimate was generally made on the assumption that the relevant procedures would proceed smoothly, which is not necessary to be the case in reality.
The conclusion of the P&E Study was that there was no "insurmountable" difficulty in the development of Phases 1, 2 and 3. It was exactly on this basis that we had all along considered that the public housing development in Phases 2 and 3 should go ahead. Yet the P&E Study showed that each of Phase 1, 2 and 3 had to overcome their own respective difficulties and the difficulties facing Phase 2 and 3 were more complicated. The time needed to overcome the difficulties in Phases 2 and 3 will be longer than the time needed for Phase 1. Thus, we decided to go ahead with Phase 1 first and Phases 2 and 3 later.
There are views that the P&E Study had not taken into consideration of households and brownfield operations within the project area. In general, the objective of planning and engineering study is to assess the technical feasibility of a project. As a project is still at an early study stage and having taken into account the factor of confidentiality, a consultancy firm will collect necessary information for study, including conducting site visits to count the number of structures and making enquiries with government departments concerned (such as Land Registry). However, this will not include detailed household survey, number of families and so on and registration of brownfield operators. Government departments concerned will undertake related surveys or registration at an appropriate time after the implementation programme of the project is confirmed.
As regard the scope of the housing plan in Wang Chau, the P&E Study did suggest the exclusion of some green belt sites and adding three other green belt sites. The Government agreed to these changes. The removed green belt sites included some Village Environs (VEs). According to established government policy, generally speaking, considering that VEs have existed for a long time (VEs refers to a 300-feet radius from the edge of the last village type house built before the introduction of the Small House Policy on December 1, 1972), its original intent is to cope with the implementation of the Small House Policy. Any suggestion of shrinking or even canceling the VEs would inevitably induce demand for compensation for other lands. In general, it is suggested that the lands within the village boundaries will not be included in development areas. In the planning of Wang Chau, VEs was also not included in the proposed public housing development areas.
These adjustments, as well as media questions on the highway plan within Wang Chau Phase 1, have nothing to do with the private development located to the west of Phase 1. In fact, the private development application has direct conflict with Phase 1. Just like what was stated in the Government’s response to media enquiries on September 30, 2016, when the Planning Department consulted various government departments on the planning application by the private developer, the Housing Department (HD) raised objection on the ground that ingress of the road proposed by the private development would encroach into the boundary of the Phase 1 public housing development at Wang Chau and the original design of the public road for Wang Chau Phase 1 had not taken into account the private development. With regard to a proposal by the private developer of changing the west end of the public road to a roundabout for the access of the private development, the HD had expressed that the suggestion would affect the road design of the public housing development and hold over its development progress. Therefore, the private developer should plan an alternative road. The government departments had also raised various other views, including the Government had no plan to extend the proposed public road, to be constructed for the public housing development, to the private development; and that the proposed sewerage facility for public housing development just caters for sewage discharged from the public housing.
Regarding the cause of road design adjustment, the Government had already pointed out in the press release issued on September 30, 2016 that the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD), in a paper submitted to the Traffic and Transport Committee of the Yuen Long District Council on May 21, 2015, had fully explained the change of the road routing: "by optimising the road design and relocating it northward within the development area, it would be convenient for the public to get in and out of the burial area , which is located on the north outside the development area, without the need to pass through the future estate area."
As we understand, the application of the private development has not yet been approved. The private developer submitted revised information on rezoning application to the Town Planning Board (TPB) on September 29 this year. The Government will give its views again to the TPB accordingly.
Ends/Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Issued at HKT 22:45
Issued at HKT 22:45
NNNN