Question "LCQ5: Development Project of West Kowloon Cultural District" by the Hon James To and a oral reply by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Donald Tsang, in the Legislative Council

 

Following is a question by Hon James To and an oral reply by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Donald Tsang, in the Legislative Council meeting today (November 24):

 

Question :

 

With regard to the Development Project of West Kowloon Cultural District ("Cultural District"), will the Government inform this Council:

 

(a) given that many members of the public and the cultural sector have criticized the Government for its inadequate public consultations when launching the Cultural District Project, whether it will conduct any research to find out which cultural activities and facilities will meet the needs and expectation of the community;

 

(b) given that the plot ratios for buildings proposed in the three development proposals which have passed stage one of the assessment process are much higher than those stated in the Invitation for Proposals, of the measures it will take to prevent the Cultural District Development Project from becoming a real estate project, and to avoid commercial skyscrapers built in the Cultural District obstructing the views and screening off the ridgelines on both sides of the Victoria Harbour; and

 

(c) whether it will consider commissioning the management responsibility of the Cultural District to a new statutory body comprising members from various sectors of society?

 

Reply:

 

Madam President,

 

(a) The West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD) project has generated heated discussions in recent days. I am most grateful to Hon James TO for bringing up this issue and allowing me to clarify certain points and remove any unnecessary misunderstandings.

 

The first part of the question is related to the consultations and studies conducted for the WKCD project. As far as consultations are concerned, the Administration will soon launch a large-scale consultation exercise on the screened-in proposals. Starting from mid December, the proposals and models of the selected proponents will be put on exhibition at the Hong Kong Science Museum in Tsim Sha Tsui. Recently, there have been comments from some quarters that the original six-week exhibition period is too short. After careful consideration of public views and consultation with the three proponents, we have decided to hold another round of exhibition from early February to late March next year at the Hong Kong City Hall following the exhibition in Tsim Sha Tsui. The entire consultation will last for more than three months.

 

I must point out that a long process will be involved to take forward this project and we attach great importance to the views of the stakeholders at different stages. We held six consultation forums in 2002 to seek the views of the cultural sector about the WKCD project. After the invitation for proposals was announced in 2003, we also met people from the cultural sector many times to discuss the contents of the project and listen to their views. From end 2003 to early 2004, Home Affairs Bureau (HAB) had held one large-scale brainstorming session and eight sub-committee meetings. WKCD Development Project Co-ordination Office has also met leading professional bodies in Hong Kong to gauge their views. At the same time, government representatives also attended forums organised by other groups, including one organised by the Democratic Party on 21 December last year. The Administration had briefed Honourable Councillors on the progress of the project on a number of occasions. On the other hand, we received valuable views from the Cultural and Heritage Commission and Hong Kong Arts Development Council (HKADC) at different stages. A large-scale public consultation exercise is going to be launched next month to solicit views from the community on the specific proposals made by the three screened-in proponents for consideration in our final screening and this is unprecedented. This round of consultation will provide a golden opportunity for various sectors to air their views. To sum up the aforesaid, we consider that our consultation has been very comprehensive.

 

We have also done a lot in terms of surveys and researches. As early as 1996, the then Hong Kong Tourist Association (HKTA) conducted a large-scale survey on visitor arrivals and subsequently submitted to the Legislative Council in 1998 its proposal of providing additional new cultural and performing arts venues in Hong Kong. Two other reports, namely the "Cultural Facilities: A Study on Their Requirements and the Formulation of New Planning Standards and Guidelines" commissioned by the Planning Department in 1999 and the "Report of the Consultancy Study on the Provision of Regional District Cultural and Performance Facilities in Hong Kong" jointly commissioned by HAB and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) in 2002, came to the same conclusion that more cultural and performing arts venues should be provided in Hong Kong to meet the increasing demand. Furthermore, the Planning Department has also carried out extensive consultation among arts groups in the process. The study report by the Planning Department, which has taken into account proposals by the arts groups, put forward the idea of a "cultural district" for linear development with a view to producing synergy effects. In the "Study on the Feasibility of a New Performance Venue for Hong Kong" commissioned by HKTA in February 1999, the notion of the cultural district was further developed and the West Kowloon Reclamation recommended as the site for the district. The Planning Department's study also made the point that the existing operation of the cultural facilities by the arts groups was not flexible and more input should be brought in from the private sector. Some people then even cited the example of Lan Kwai Fong to illustrate the benefit of creating a harmonious style in an area under the operation of a sole owner. We have also carried out many other surveys on arts and cultural development. For example, thematic household surveys on cultural consumption carried out by the Census and Statistics Department; opinion polls to gauge public demand for cultural programmes and services by LCSD; art polls and artist demand surveys by HKADC. "A Study on Hong Kong Creativity Index" has also been initiated by HAB and an interim report was made public on the Second Asia Cultural Cooperation Forum which was closed last week. In our efforts to promote local arts and cultural development, we have indeed made reference to the findings of the above studies and surveys together with all stakeholders' views.

 

(b) As to part (b) of the question, we are as deeply concerned as members of the public about the development density of WKCD. The objective of the project is to build a world-class arts and cultural district. The Administration has decided to develop West Kowloon in a consolidation mode with the inclusion of commercial and residential elements. This mode is adopted in the hope that the operator will meet the construction cost of WKCD, while drawing on its commercial knowledge and experience to develop and run the whole WKCD on self-financing basis, in order to achieve the target of maximizing land use and ensuring the appropriate utilization of land resources. Under this principle, we have three considerations. First, the developer successfully selected is required to build the specified arts and cultural facilities and operate them for 30 years as well. Second, we have set a plot ratio parameter for the WKCD site, and any departure from this parameter must be justified. If necessary, the Administration will negotiate with the proponents on plot ratio and any other aspects under an established mechanism. Third, the draft development plan of the WKCD project will be gazetted for public comments. Approval of the Town Planning Board (TPB) will then be sought before submitting the project to the Chief Executive in Council for final endorsement. The whole process will ensure that the project is carried out under the close scrutiny of the public and TPB, and will not in any way be reduced to a property project.

 

As such, the proponents must propose a development density which they deem appropriate, taking account of the actual market situation and in line with the self-financing principle. The baseline plan, including the plot ratio, laid down by the Administration is not set in stone. However, I must stress that the screened-in proposals will not be accepted in toto. We will study whether the commercial/residential element is over-weight, and consider whether an adequate proportion of the revenue generated therefrom will go to the development and operation of the cultural facilities to ensure their sustainability. We will listen carefully to the views expressed by the public during the consultation period on this point. If members of the public have strong views against high-density development and the proponents fail to justify their proposed development density, then the Administration will not accept their development proposals.

 

The planning of the whole Cultural District must be endorsed and approved by TPB. In the public consultation to be conducted next month, the Administration will invite the proponents to elaborate on their respective proposal to TPB for the Board to have a face-to-face meeting with them and understand their respective planning ideas and development consideration. Before selecting the successful proposal, the Administration will go back to TPB for their views. Contents of the screened-in-proposals, including plot ratio, gross floor area of buildings of different uses, maximum building height and sitting-out areas etc have to be approved by the TPB before the Administration would sign the provisional agreement with the successful proponent. The Administration would then formally submit the proposed development parameters to TPB. TPB will incorporate these development parameters into the relevant draft outline zoning plan and gazette the plan pursuant to the Town Planning Ordinance for public inspection. Members of the public may give comments on or raise objections to the draft plan. On the part of TPB, it will consider and process all the views received in accordance with the normal statutory process. At the end of the day, TPB will submit the draft plan to the Chief Executive in Council for approval. The approved outline zoning plan has the force of law. Without prior approval from the Administration and TPB, the successful proponent will not be allowed to make any changes to the development parameters. We believe, and members of the public may rest assured, that the above objective and transparent process provides the best guarantee in rolling out the WKCD project.

 

(c) Regarding the future management mode of WKCD, I wish to point out that one of the focal points of the project is to provide different kinds of cultural facilities which will cater for the need of our community. With this in mind, we will require that its management and operational mode can:

 

- promote the long-term cultural development in Hong Kong;

 

- win the support from different sectors and the general public, and provide different sectors with the opportunities to take part in the management and be accountable to the Administration and the public;

 

- maintain a close liaison and good communication with the Administration;

 

- ensure that the facilities can operate in an effective, flexible, highly efficient and commercially viable manner up to the international standard; and

 

- make legal and financial commitment and operate on a sound and responsible basis.

 

We hope that the proponents will be able to introduce some mode of operation different from that now being used in respect of facilities under LCSD. This will enable the two to complement each other and provide more diversified services to the general public. In fact, it has not been compulsorily required in the Invitation for Proposals that proponents should set up a statutory body to run the core cultural facilities. In addition, on top of the government model or statutory body model, there are quite a number of other feasible alternatives (such as those employed by trust funds and non-profit-making companies) for the operation of the facilities. Members may also appreciate that different arts and cultural facilities could make use of different modes of operation. As such, in terms of management mode, there is a wide range of feasible options available for discussion. As a matter of fact, each of the screened-in proponents has proffered their own management options and modes for public comments. I sincerely hope that Members and the general public would participate actively in our upcoming consultation exercise and express their views on the management options of the proponents. The Administration would like to listen to more comments from members of the public on this particular subject.

 

Ends/Wednesday, November 24, 2004

NNNN


Back