Video

Support Global Innovation Centre (GIC) on or before May 22!

 See more details

RJ       29th May, 2024 21:16

As a concerned citizen, I believe that this plan is highly inappropriate and should be reconsidered due to the following reasons: 1. Violation of Green Belt Zoning: The proposed site for HKU's Global Innovation Center consists of 4.72 hectares, of which 4.12 hectares (87%) are currently zoned as Green Belt (GB), designated as government land. The current GB zoning accurately reflects the vegetated nature of the steep sloping site, which acts as a crucial buffer between and within urban areas. Rezoning this green zone for construction purposes would lead to the removal of approximately 2,000 trees, significantly degrading the existing landscape and ecological value of the land. 2. Scale and Disproportionate Development: The proposed development has a total gross floor area (GFA) of 220,000 square meters with a plot ratio (PR) of 4.72. This scale of development is excessive, particularly when compared to the adjoining Residential Group 3 sites. The OZP's Explanatory Statement explicitly emphasizes the need to control over-development in the area, imposing plot ratio controls ranging from 0.6 to a maximum of 3 for the Residential Zone 3. The proposed project would fundamentally alter the existing character of the locality and is not in line with the OZP's guidelines. 3. Lack of Exceptional Circumstances and Alternatives: According to TPB PG No.10, applications for new development in GB zones, such as the HKU Global Innovation Center, should only be considered in exceptional circumstances and justified on strong planning grounds. Furthermore, applications for GIC/OU uses must demonstrate that the proposed development is essential and that no alternative sites are available. The chosen site for the Innovation Center appears to be primarily for the convenience of HKU's main campus, rather than meeting these exceptional circumstances criteria. However, an alternative site, the Lok Ma Chau Loop, is currently being formed by the government for the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation & Technology Park (HSITP), which is already zoned for research and development, education, and cultural and creative industries. This alternative location would be a perfect fit for HKU's facility and could serve as the centerpiece for this phase of the Technopole. 4. Disregard for Pok Fu Lam Moratorium and Traffic Concerns: The proposed development also disregards the Pok Fu Lam Moratorium, which has been in place since 1972 due to traffic concerns. The moratorium aims to prohibit excessive development until there is an overall improvement in the transport network in the area, which has not yet been achieved. The proposed 220,000 square meters of development, with a PR of 4.72, can be considered excessive given the current transport limitations and the need to preserve public views, amenity, and the character of the area. Considering the above reasons, I urge the Town Planning Board (TPB) to reevaluate the original decision and reject the rezoning proposal for the HKU Global Innovation Center. Instead, I strongly recommend directing this project to the more suitable location of the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation & Technology Park (HSITP) in the Lok Ma Chau Loop. This alternative site, already designated for research and development purposes, would provide a better fit for HKU's facility and align with the future development plans for Hong Kong's innovation and technology sector.

JL       29th May, 2024 20:42

I support the plan for building the Global Innovation Centre("GIC") but strongly oppose its location with the following reasons:- 1. Huge Traffic Problem 1.1 There are numerous planned development and construction sites along Pokfulam Road and Victoria Road, such as the HKU High West Development, Wah Fu Estate Redevelopment, Cyberport Expansion Project, Queen Mary Hospital Redevelopment and Ebenezer School Redevelopment etc. The road traffic demand during the construction period and after the population in-take will be huge. 1.2 Traffic is already very busy on Victoria Road and Pokfulam Road and traffic jam there is not uncommon. Traffic congestion will unavoidably deteriorate severely after the commencement of this giant project. The largely increased numbers of road users (including construction workers, existing residents and all new users of the new buildings) during and after all those constructions will rely on road transport (by private car or public transports like buses and minibuses) as there is no MTR in Pokfulam. Residents in Pokfulam will suffer from severe traffic congestion every single day. 1.3 It is anticipated that the construction access would be in Victoria Road and one lane of the road has to be closed during the site formation and construction period. Given Victoria Road is with only one lane for each direction and is already very busy during peak hours, any road closures, even temporary, would be disastrous during long construction period. 1.4 Lack of public transportation support has been a long-standing unresolved problem in Pokfulam. The GIC development did not propose any additional public transport provision and no MTR would be available to alleviate the already congested area. 1.5 According to HKU’s estimation disclosed during the Briefing Session held by HKU on 13 May 2024, there will be around 15,000 users in the GIC after completion. This will no doubt substantially increase the load of existing insufficient public and road transportation. 1.6 There are fire stations, hospital and rehabilitation centres in Pokfulam. Any delay in the delivery of emergency services due to traffic congestion would be life threatening and unacceptable. 1.7 The Traffic Impact Assessment (“TIA”) commissioned by HKU and submitted in February 2024 has the following errors and should NOT be valid:- a. The GIC is a facility designed for a capacity of 15,000 people according to HKU’s spokesperson. However, according to the Planning Report by HKU and the MPC Paper on 1.3.2024, the estimated population is only 7,340. There is a huge discrepancy on the tested population and the intended population and this would make the technical assessments and their conclusion not reliable. b. Victoria Road is a two-lane road, which is not designed to accommodate a large number of vehicles. None of the proposed works submitted by HKU include any road network/ traffic improvement measures. c. Moreover, it is clearly stated in the TIA that there is inadequate capacity in certain road junctions which due to physical constraints are unable to widen or improved. The results of the junction capacity analysis have demonstrated that all 18 selected junctions (excluding J1, J8, J16 and J17) can operate satisfactorily with ample junction capacity in both 2032 reference and 2032 design scenarios. The as-built retaining walls and private land lot boundary etc. have restricted the road hinder for road widening proposal to achieve a higher reserve capacity for J16 junction. This junction can only be improved if there are large-scale re-development of the adjacent lots to facilitate the provision of additional traffic lanes or construction of grade-separated pedestrian crossing facilities by set-back of private land lot boundary. As J17 is far away from the proposed development site and insignificant amount of traffic generated/attracted from the development will have negligible effect on this junction capacity performance. No junction improvement proposal will be undertaken by HKU for this junction. d. For the GIC, two separate vehicular access points are proposed at Victoria Road for different usages: one for goods vehicles only; and one for private vehicles and goods vehicles. The vehicular access at Pokfulam Road is only for private car. There will be no internal vehicular connection between Victoria Road and Pokfulam Road due to the excessive level difference of over 80m. The TIA assumed that 65% of private vehicle traffic will use Pokfulam Road access; 20% will use No.5 Sassoon Road access and 15% will use the Victoria Road access. However, given the bulk of the GIC and that the carpark is located at the podium along Victoria Road, it is doubtful that only 15% of the trip generated would use the Victoria Road access. In reality, it is expected that majority of the vehicle trip would use Victoria Road as the main access which is completely different from the TIA findings. e. Vehicular/pedestrian count surveys and public transport occupancy surveys were carried out on a normal weekday in May/July/December 2022 during the morning (07:30 to 09:30) and afternoon (17:00-19:00) peak periods – Despite Transport Department’s query on the survey period, no details were given by the traffic consultant on the exact date of survey. Apart from the pandemic effect on the form of teaching and work pattern in 2022, it is also common knowledge that May / July / December would well fall within school examination, summer holidays and Christmas / Winter break holidays (Mindful that many schools, especially international schools have a very long summer and winter breaks). The validity of the baseline traffic count in one of those days is undermined, and any traffic forecast built on that should not reflect the real traffic situation. f. The data does not account for the new developments in Wah Fu Estate, Cyberport, Pokfulam Road and Sassoon Road. Although an HKU representative verbally argued during the Briefing Session that they forecasted such differences, there is no supporting evidence to confirm this. The lack of detailed evidence and studies was also raised by District Counsellors on 17 January 2024 at the Southern District Council Development Planning Committee. g. The design year 2032 was adopted for the TIA study. However, as stated in: i. MPC Paper No. 3/24 discussed by Town Planning Board on 1 March 2024, the GIC will be developed by three phases and the first phase will be tentatively completed by 2028. The remaining phases will be developed thereafter. No information is given for the full completion year. ii. HKU representatives at the Briefing Session on 13 and 14 May 2024 were unable to provide any information on when the whole development would be completed. iii. As the full completion of the proposed GIC is uncertain, the design year of 2032 chosen for TIA is unable to give an accredited forecast to the traffic condition for Pokfulam area. iv. In view of the above, the validity of the TIA result is not reliable and should be challenged. 2. Pokfulam Moratorium 1972 2.1 Pokfulam is currently governed by the Moratorium which prohibits any new intensive development in Pokfulam. The Moratorium is an administrative measure that the Government can and should use to control excessive development such as the massive GIC in order to protect Pokfulam from over developing which would result in serious overcapacity on an already strained road network. It is imposed on traffic grounds to prohibit excessive development of Pokfulam until there is an overall improvement in the transport network of Pokfulam. 2.2 Developments in Pokfulam shall be subject to, in the interim, the restrictions of the Moratorium while it is still in force. The transport network in Pokfulam has to be substantially improved (which apparently has not yet happened) before any rezoning is to be considered. 3. Green Belt Zone 3.1 The site of the proposed GIC is a heavily vegetated slope with about 2,250 trees between Pokfulam Road and Victoria Road at a level difference of about 80m. The major habitats within the Site are the mixed woodland and five watercourses running through the Site from Pokfulam Road to Victoria Road. Over 2,000 trees would be felled (including 22 large mature trees) for the GIC and only a total of 854 new/compensatory trees would be planted. The compensatory planting ratio is less than 1:0.5 in terms of quantity, needless to say the size and maturity of the trees. The loss of the mature mixed woodland would severely affect the habitats and ecology well established at the site (including an amphibian, Quasipaa exilispinosa (蝌蚪 (小棘蛙)), with conservation interest recorded at watercourse W2. The Chief Town Planner/Urban Design and Landscape, Planning Department (CTP/UD&L, PlanD) admitted that a significant change of the landscape character from a woodland to a building development would be involved. 3.2 The Green Belt (which is in fact narrow in shape) acts as a ventilation corridor between Blocks 19, 20 and 21 of Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court. It also acts as an important barrier against the noise and dust between Pokfulam Road and Victoria Road, especially the section near Upper Baguio Villa. 3.3 The removal of the Green Belt is entirely contrary to the idea promoted by HKU in its GIC website about Sustainability. It would be ridiculous to promote Sustainability by first destroying a massive Green Belt full of mature trees and biodiversity. 3.4 The large-scaled removal of trees will seriously degrade the existing ecological value and landscape of the land. Large number of wild animals, butteries and birds will lose their natural habitat. 3.5 Hong Kong has 10% of the world’s population of endangered cockatoos and many of them are residing along Victoria Road and at the Green Belt Zone in question. We can actually see the cockatoos living happily in the woodland from Blocks 19-21. These endangered birds will lose their habitat with the removal of the Green Belt. 3.6 The removal of the Green Belt is also not in line with the Government’s carbon reduction goals. 4. Stability of Slope 4.1 A fatal landslide occurred from the slope next to Baguio Villa in 1992 in which 4 people were killed. The massive construction on the steep slope may seriously weaken the stability of the slope, which will endanger residents’ lives. We cannot accept such kind of tragedy to be happened again at the slope here. 4.2 We cannot imagine what would be the result of a massive 220,000 sqm construction to be built on a steep slope causing massive soil erosion by cutting over 2,000 trees. Together with the effect of climate change, more frequent heavy torrential rains and typhoons will cause serious soil erosion, debris, trees, water and slush etc. to roll down as mud avalanche from a high elevated point at such high speed and ferocity that if it strikes Blocks 19, 20 and 21 of Baguio Villa, it may cause unimaginable death and destructions which is far more destructive than what happened in 1992. Who will be responsible for such disaster? Have we not learned any lesson from the tragedy in 1992? 4.3 The question of slope stability given the height differential between the top and the bottom of the proposed site is a matter of serious concern. 4.4 The Geotechnical Review Report submitted by HKU is only a desktop study without any support from ground geological investigation works carried out on site. The preliminary conclusion that the proposed development as presented in the preliminary Master Layout Plan is considered as a geotechnical feasible scheme is founded on no solid evidence. 5. Viability of the Project 5.1 The proposed site is located on a very steep vegetated slope with 80m level difference. The cost and time required for the extensive site formation work for this massive and difficult site will be extremely high and should be avoided. Apart from the high construction cost, the long-term management and maintenance cost for a huge retaining structure should be taken into account when considering the suitability of the site. 5.2 There is NO discussion on the viability of the project in the whole submission by HKU and no COST and ESTIMATE report available for the proposal. As a public funded university, almost 60% of the recurrent income of HKU is borne by the HKSAR Government, any of its proposal required massive funding should be scrutinised by the Government as taxpayers’ money should be spent wisely. 5.3 In the current times of budget deficit and economic downturn, the Government should pay extra caution on financial viability and suitability to ensure that any new development and its support infrastructure (in this case the GIC) to be sited where it will best serve the whole future of Hong Kong and at the lowest cost. 5.4 Building the GIC in other flat land such as San Tin Technopole will save valuable tax revenue through much lower site formation and construction costs during a time of budget deficit. This will also cut out a massive recurrent cost on management and maintenance on extensive slope protection. 6. No prior Consultation 6.1 No public consultation to local residents was conducted for HKU’s proposal, especially on the selection of site prior to the gazettal of the OZP amendments. Residents in Baguio Villa were shocked to know about the GIC project just about 10 days before the deadline (22 May 2024) of the representation to the Town Planning Board. Residents have NEVER been informed or consulted before that. 6.2 HKU failed to comply with its commitment to the Town Planning Board, which requires prior consultation. HKU did not contact/inform the Incorporated Owners, managers or residents of residential buildings in Pokfulam about the GIC. 6.3 Southern District Councillors also failed to inform and conduct any prior consultation with residents of Pokfulam, totally ignored resident’s voice and opinions. 6.4 Two briefing sessions on the proposal were held on 13 and 14 May 2024. The meeting was time-limited and not all the queries could be answered or addressed. The spokesperson was unable to give response or information to the questions raised. With such limited time and information given to local residents to express their views and concerns, the so-called public consultation was actually just a tick-box exercise. 7. Extent and Design of the GIC 7.1 The maximum building height for the proposed buildings of the GIC is 158 mPD, which is 20M above Pokfulam Road level. An extensive elongated platform would be formed along Victoria Road, with the core B2 Tower (residence) located just next to Blocks 19, 20 and 21 of Baguio Villa at Victoria Road and Woodbury Court at Pokfulam Road. The scale and extent of the proposed site is excessive, and the proximity to Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court will create unacceptable visual impacts to the said blocks of Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court, most importantly, together with the feeling of claustrophobia. 7.2 The placing of the Nitrogen Tank near Blocks 19 and 20 is unreasonable and unacceptable. 7.3 The said residence building of the GIC which is unreasonably close to Blocks 19, 20 and 21 of Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court should not be built within the site in any event. HKU should better use its many residential properties around Pokfulam (including but not limited to Pine Court, Tam Villas, Middleton Towers, Rodrigues Court and the High West Development) as residence of GIC instead. 7.4 The GIC project will be split into 3 phases and that the land closest to Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court will be Phase 1. The remaining phases will be developed thereafter without solid plan for the time being. So why Phase 1 has to be the land which is closest to Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court and that will cause the biggest disturbance to residents? It is unreasonable and unacceptable. 7.5 The part of the Green Belt between Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court should NEVER be part of the GIC site. 8. Safety of Residents nearby 8.1 The proposed location for Nitrogen Tank, dangerous goods and laboratories will be just next to Blocks 19 and 20 of Baguio Villa. These facilities will pose potential danger and health hazard to nearby residents and should never be built close to residential area. 8.2 There is already a Petrol Station near Blocks 19 and 20 of Baguio Villa on Victoria Road which makes it even more dangerous for the residents. No risk assessment was conducted by HKU regarding their proposal. 8.3 One of the goals of the GIC is to research disease and vaccination. We can reasonably assume that the laboratories would be graded as BSL-3 (the second highest grading). Such laboratories are required to be inaccessible by general public and all infectious waste to be decontaminated before disposal. Such kind of laboratories should entirely be kept away from residential area. The Government should give priority to health and safety of citizen whenever approving a development. 9. Wrong location and other alternatives available 9.1 The proposed location of the GIC is purely for HKU’s own convenience being close to HKU campus to enlarge their kingdom. The representatives of HKU could not provide us with other reasons for such location during the Briefing Sessions which took place on 13 and 14 May 2024. 9.2 The GIC is not primarily a teaching facility and there is no need for a large number of students to travel there from the main campus, there is no absolute need for it to be close to HKU and in Pokfulam. 9.3 The proposed site is in a Green Belt Zone, very close to residential buildings such as Baguio Villa and Woodbury Court etc. Upon completion, Blocks 19, 20 and 21 of Baguio Villa will be directly facing the GIC structures from a stone-throw away, which is extremely unacceptable. 9.4 It is also close to many schools, safety of children is concerned especially when there is blocked road and big construction cars during construction. 9.5 The current plan is to take a significantly longer and difficult path to pursue the project. It is contrary to the objective to fast-track the technology development of Hong Kong. 9.6 The proposed GIC project may take 10 years for phase 1 to complete, then phases 2 and 3 will take another 10-15 years (HKU was unable to confirm during the Briefing Sessions). Altogether it would take 20-25 years for the GIC to be in full force to compete with the world. To take a significantly harder and longer path to pursue the GIC project is not helping the cause to fast-track Hong Kong technology development. We really don’t have a better site in terms of readiness for this? Back in 2021,the idea of having an innovation centre in Hong Kong was brilliant, but then our current Chief Executive has the vision to put all upstream and downstream technology together in the North, being geographically privileged to connect to our motherland and theKong was brilliant, but then our current Chief Executive has the vision to put all upstream and downstream technology together in the North, being geographically privileged to connect to our motherland and the rest of the world, which is clearly stated in his Policy Address. 9.7 It will be more cost effective to build the GIC in other flat, immediate available and isolated locations, suggestions as follow:- a. HKU is pursuing a site in Pokfulam based upon their own, in-principal proposals to our Government to provide land for deep technology research. As such, the formers Chief Executive’s Policy Address 2021, para 60, made reference to “a 4-hectare site” in Pokfulam without actually providing details. However, subsequent to that, our current Chief Executive announced the development of the San Tin Technopole in his Policy Address 2022. This initiative aims to provide better, more cost efficient and more integrated developments that serve the Central government and aspirations of The Greater Bay Area integration by facilitating upstream and downstream facilities in the San Tin Technopole. b. HKU has made it clear that the GIC is designed to connect researchers from other Universities and talent from both China and globally. In comparison to the San Tin Technopole location, Pokfulam is isolated when considering this stated goal. The proposed Pokfulam site is not close to any MTR stations and limited to a small, selected number of buses and minibuses. The San Tin Technopole in contrast is located in the Lok Ma Chau loop, residing at the border close to Shenzhen and within walking distance to Lok Ma Chau MTR Station. Nearby Kwu Tung MTR Station is also set to complete in 2027. c. The San Tin Technopole location will also provide flexibility with land for future expansion of the GIC by HKU. d. The San Tin Technopole location is already zoned for the right purposes: Research & Development, Education and Cultural & Creative Industries. There will be about 38.6 hectares land made available so it would be a perfect fit for GIC. e. It is stated in the San Tin Technopole website that it supports upstream Research and Development, so it perfectly matches with GIC’s goal. f. The San Tin Technopole location can enable a better connection and integration with other HKU facilities in Qianhai (the newly opened HKU Techno-Entrepreneurship Academy) and Shenzhen (including but not limited to The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital). g. With this GIC being a centerpiece at Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation and Technology Park, it will help attract middle and lower end research to the San Tin Technopole, thus increasing its overall value. h. Building the GIC in San Tin Technopole will save valuable tax revenue through much lower construction costs during a time of budget deficit. i. Apart from the San Tin Technopole location, HKU may also explore and consider other locations such as the land of the Ex-Lamma Quarry Area on Lamma Island or Lei Yue Mun Village Complex near Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital and opposite to the Hong Kong Museum of Coastal Defence. 10. Nuisance/damage caused during construction period of 10-25 years 10.1 It is unknown how long the GIC construction work will take place. During the Briefing Sessions offered by HKU on 13 and 14 May 2024, the representatives of HKU were able to answer the question of when the GIC project would be completed. 10.2 However, given the scale of GIC and that the GIC project will comprise of multiple phases, it would normally be an extremely long-term project which would take about 10-25 years to complete. The nuisance, construction dust and noise caused by the construction machine and traffic of this massive project will be unacceptable and will adversely affect the health and wellness of the residents, and will certainly cause anxiety. This is exactly contrary to what Mr. Xia Baolong (Director of Hong Kong and Macao Work Office) always said: Beijing Government always wants Hong Kong citizens living in a happy and harmonious environment. 11. Conclusion 11.1 Many questions being asked in the HKU Briefing Sessions on GIC on 13 and 14 May 2024 could not be answered by the representatives of HKU. It shows that the whole GIC project is not well planned and holistic consideration on site selection in wider area has not been carried out. The opinions and grave concerns from the residents of Pokfulam should be taken into account and the proposed rezoning for the site should not be proceeded. 11.2 I am not opposing to the development of the GIC project itself. I am opposing the development of the GIC of the proposed scale and at the proposed location.

Sachin Tipnis       22nd May, 2024 23:27

This will be a game changer for the future development of Hong Kong. As innovation and technology has become synonymous with growth, such initiative will provide the right impetus for Hong Kong to become a hub to nurture and shape the next leap forward. I am glad my alma mater is leading this project.

Pradeep Halebeedu Prakash       16th May, 2024 17:06

I appreciate the University of Hong Kong and the government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. This will foster research and bring pride to Hong Kong. I strongly support this great project and I wish all the best to the entire team who are working tirelessly to make it happen. All the best!!