daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Skyscrapers > Proposed Skyscrapers



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 22nd, 2008, 10:12 AM   #101
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Mega Tower scheme could be scaled back
21 September 2008
South China Morning Post

Hopewell Holdings is considering scaling back the size of its controversial Mega Tower hotel project in Wan Chai.

Thomas Jefferson Wu, managing director of Hopewell Holdings, said its new flexible proposal was still in the works but would include the possibility of reducing the number of floors from the 93 storeys approved in 1994, or reducing the size of the project.

The company also unveiled plans yesterday to improve the road network to dispel criticism of the scheme.

The slope in front of Ruttonjee Hospital would be moved back, creating two more lanes on Queen's Road East. One would allow vehicles to turn left to the hospital and the other would allow traffic to turn right into Kennedy Road.

The footpath in Kennedy Road would be widened from 90cm to 2.75 metres. About HK$300 million to HK$400 million would be spent to develop a 5,575 square metre park - the size of Southorn Playground - near the hotel, which would be built between Queen's Road East and Kennedy Road.

A short film has been uploaded to the development's website, HopewellCentre2.com.

Concerns about traffic and the height of the proposed hotel have dogged the project since the idea was floated 20 years ago. Mr Wu said a taskforce would analyse public comments before the company came up with a proposal on the new hotel.

"We understand the concerns over traffic, that is why we put more effort on road-improvement work to dispel the concerns," he said.

He did not give a timetable but expected it would take five years to build the hotel. Hopewell obtained approval from the Town Planning Board to build it in 1994.

"We believe the project will bring benefits to Hong Kong, especially to the tourism industry. It will beautify the environment and create jobs," Mr Wu said, adding that it would increase the city's competitiveness.

He said the project had attracted support from Wan Chai residents, but the company would listen to concerns and try to address them.

"We will be willing to make some adjustments to the plans. We obtained approval after going through all the legal procedures.

"I do not think there will be lots of concessions. The height of the hotel is not the only concern."

Last month sources said the developer was poised to unveil a revised plan that reduced density by about 5 per cent and would cut the number of storeys by four or five floors.

Opponents of the project are concerned that the tall block will obstruct air flow and views from Mid-Levels and cause traffic congestion.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 16th, 2008, 12:05 PM   #102
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Green belt proposed for Mega Tower
Environmentalists target Wan Chai site

27 September 2008
South China Morning Post

A green group has proposed turning almost half the site for Hopewell Holdings' planned Mega Tower into a green belt in an effort to slash the size of the Wan Chai hotel development.

The Conservancy Association submitted an application to the Town Planning Board yesterday for the rezoning of government land that makes up more than 40 per cent of the site. It said such a move would not deprive Hopewell of its development rights because it could still develop the land it already owned.

"The hotel approved 14 years ago no longer satisfies current public aspirations," said the association's campaign manager, Peter Li Siu-man. "The greenery saved from the development can even function as the hotel's back garden."

In the rezoning application, the association said government slopes within the hotel site were densely covered by shrubs, mature trees and wall trees 50 to 80 years old, serving as a buffer in congested Wan Chai South. Saving the greenery at the site would also make the project more consistent with the character of old Wan Chai, in which old structures of east-meets-west style could still be traced.

Historic buildings such as Nam Koo Terrace and the Hung Shing Temple were also found in the neighbourhood, the association said, adding that the footpath connecting the wooded slope and heritage sites could be upgraded as a nature and culture walk.

Mr Li urged the government not to sell Hopewell the government land and return it to the community.

"There is no need to enlist the help of a developer to provide false public spaces that are neither open to the public nor spacious," the association said in the application.

The developer has launched a public relations campaign to repackage the controversial image of the Mega Tower, now renamed Hopewell Centre II. Newspaper advertisements also stressed the development would grow with the community and would contribute to it by offering more jobs and open space.

To press ahead with the 93-storey plan approved in 1994, Hopewell would have to acquire the government land within the site by paying a premium.

But the Development Bureau indicated earlier that the land acquisition could commence only after the community and the Transport Department gave a green light to the traffic improvement measures proposed by the developer. Last week, Hopewell's managing director, Thomas Jefferson Wu, announced measures to minimise the congestion created by additional traffic flow introduced by the hotel project. The HK$400 million package would include creating two more lanes on Queen's Road East and widening a pedestrian area on Kennedy Road.

A minimum of HK$80 million would also be spent to create a public park of 5,880 square metres.

A spokesman for Hopewell Holdings said the company respected different voices from the community and would respond to the association's application according to the town-planning procedures.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2008, 06:40 PM   #103
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Opinion : What do you think of the green-belt plan for the Mega Tower site?
6 October 2008
South China Morning Post

What do you think of the green-belt plan for the Mega Tower site?

A basis for the introduction of the Kennedy Road/Ship Street comprehensive development area zoning in 1985 was to facilitate the relocation of the land zoned as public open space to the western boundary for a 5,880-square-metre public park at Ship Street.

In a series of planning applications the developer, Hopewell Holdings, has continually moved the goalposts and by 1994 the mega proposals had absorbed 3,850 square metres of the public park for private developer plot ratio (there will be a public park area of 2,030 square metres and private park of 3,850 square metres).

The developer has reneged on the original deal and our government weakly kowtows before major commercial interests, forgetting that it represents the public.

The Conservancy Association is to be commended, and supported, for making a Don Quixote-style effort to redress the balance for the community good.

Your report "Green belt proposed for Mega Tower", September 27, mentions the Hau Fung Lane granite walls and steps that provide the original passage from the heritage-listed Nam Koo Terrace to Hung Shing Temple.

These are worthy of protection as they provide one of the best remaining examples of a historic Hong Kong feature.

The impressive residence of Nam Koo Terrace is now increasingly falling into a state of disrepair, so perhaps a King Yin Lei scenario is developing?

Hopewell is the owner, so if its recent "Wan Chai and Hopewell are one" promotion is to be believed, surely it can afford to protect this beautiful property fully.

Christian Rogers, Mid-Levels
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 18th, 2008, 06:50 PM   #104
gladisimo
If I could be anyone...
 
gladisimo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF, FC, HK
Posts: 2,525
Likes (Received): 39

Environmentalists demanded their thing, and conservationists demanded their own thing... geez

How many historical heritage sites does Hong Kong need? It seems like every other development nowadays is running into problems with one or the other (if not both) of these groups.

I'm all for conservation and environmental awareness, but sensibly done, so HK doesn't become Denmark.
__________________
I left my <3 in HK

RIP Dopey - 9/2005 - 20/2/2008
gladisimo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 21st, 2008, 01:38 PM   #105
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Mega Tower's biggest problem is not really on heritage conservation, but rather the effect of putting such a huge development in an already congested area. I think the other arguments are just noise and would not play a prominent role in the opposition. Yet at the same time, Hopewell's plan was approved, so technically they're allowed to carry on even though they waited so long.

I think an outcome that should arise is for the planners to put a time limit deadline on when construction should start and finish after approval has been granted. Approvals should lapse if no actions are taken after some time.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 05:00 AM   #106
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Opinion : Hopewell hotel approval saga warrants independent inquiry
10 October 2008
South China Morning Post

Kay Chan's letter ("Hopewell legal rights must be respected", October 1) appears to be confused on the background of this [Mega Tower] project.

Every experienced developer is aware, or should be aware, that persistently attempting to exploit any bureaucratic system is like holding a kangaroo by the tail, eventually it will turn round and kick you where it hurts and leave you gasping for breath.

The high-pitched squeaky voices from the Hopewell camp now complaining about unfair treatment from the public and government are an indication that our bureaucratic kangaroo may have delivered at least one painful kick.

Recently, the development secretary acknowledged that the government is under no statutory obligation to agree to a land exchange with the developer. In addition, it is now apparent that the 1994 scheme had a statutory deadline and although an attempt to perpetuate the scheme was made by the secretary of the Town Planning Board, by issuing a letter seven weeks after the deadline, that letter was written without the required delegated authority. If statutory procedures have been bypassed, what legal rights are government and the public being asked to "respect"?

I am a retired surveyor and believe the planning system is supposed to protect the public interest, but has been seriously defective against the commercial skills of developers.

An intrinsic weakness in the system is the appointment of a government planning official to the post of secretary to the board. Such officers usually have been entrenched within the planning department and are unlikely to have the independence of mind to handle this important job.

T. Farnworth, Mid-Levels
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 10:30 AM   #107
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

合和翻版 柴灣重建恐現屏風樓 高密度規劃早年獲批 類似發展區遍全港
10月8日 星期三 05:05

【明報專訊】灣仔合和中心二期(前稱Mega Tower)的逾90層高摩廈規劃,激起地區人士強烈反對,事件揭露發展商可利用早年獲城規會批准的高密度方案發展地皮,毋須回應近年的低密度訴求。但原來這類已被「放生」的綜合發展區全港有多達51個,並分佈港九各區。其中柴灣中巴車廠重建獲批以一字排開式興建4幢逾50層高住宅,被區議員炮轟製造「屏風」,明言將於區議會 上提出反對。

「綜合發展區」泛指可進行住宅、商業及休憩設施等綜合用途的地皮,但發展商發展前,須向城規會呈交「總綱發展藍圖」。現時全港共有112個綜合發展區,當中有51個發展藍圖已獲批,發展商完成收地和補地價後便可動工。

51個項目中,不少藍圖早在01至02年間已獲城規會批准,並設下約4年發展限期,發展商延期動工可申請續期,例如備受爭議的合和中心二期逾90層高摩廈方案,規劃早在94便已獲批。另外新鴻基地產 的元朗錦田沙埔項目,雖然涉及濕地保育問題,但規劃於2001年已獲批,去年新地申請將發展期限伸延至2010年亦獲批准,可以繼續推展。

建一排式53層住宅 方案05年獲續期

已空置多年的柴灣中華巴士車廠,發展商中巴公司於2002年2月獲批准以約6倍地積比率,以一字排開方式興建4幢約53層高的住宅,總發展樓面多達93萬平方呎,提供1300個單位(見圖)。其中4幢住宅將建於一個3層高的架空平台上,並伸延至鄰近的巴士站政府地皮,總樓宇高度達192米,地下則重置巴士站和公園。

事實上,柴灣車廠的02年規劃方案,原應在2005到期,發展商在2004年12月和今年1月兩度申請續期發展並獲批准,令該方案可應用至2011年。現時中巴正與政府商討換地,完成補地價談判後便可動工。

區議員轟城規會把關不力

東區區議會副主席鍾樹根及區議員黎志強均批評,發展商利用5至6年的落後規劃發展土地並不合適,城規會並無把關嚴防屏風樓,兩人均會在區議會跟進。黎志強指出,中巴車廠位於柴灣通風廊上,屏風樓會影響區內空氣。鍾樹根斥發展商將公園設在摩天住宅後方,休憩空間如被「私有化」,居民難以察覺和享用。

發展局發言人表示,城規會考 慮規劃續期申請,會研究自原來規劃批出後,規劃情况是否有任何重大改變,將限期延長是否合理,或在規劃上帶來不良的影響等。另外,若有發展商申請多次續期,總累積延長期限亦不得超過原來核准規劃的發展期。就中巴車廠個案,地政總署 已原則上接納發展商提出換地申請,申請仍在處理中。

明報記者 賴偉家
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 01:11 PM   #108
SilentStrike
Registered User
 
SilentStrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wassenaar
Posts: 1,756
Likes (Received): 192

pfff still proposed?

this hopewell thing is taking wayy tooo long
SilentStrike no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 01:15 PM   #109
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,656
Likes (Received): 28199

Design looks good, I hope they will build it, despite the economic trouble.
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 02:04 PM   #110
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

This project would've survived several downturns 1997/2003/now.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 03:18 PM   #111
EricIsHim
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,397
Likes (Received): 28

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Mega Tower's biggest problem is not really on heritage conservation, but rather the effect of putting such a huge development in an already congested area. I think the other arguments are just noise and would not play a prominent role in the opposition. Yet at the same time, Hopewell's plan was approved, so technically they're allowed to carry on even though they waited so long.

I think an outcome that should arise is for the planners to put a time limit deadline on when construction should start and finish after approval has been granted. Approvals should lapse if no actions are taken after some time.
If Hopewell is going for the original plan, all Hopewell needs is to put in an building permit application with the Building Department. Once it's approved, technically Hopewell can begin construction without legal issues despite the social controversies. This is talking about only weeks of time.

Moving forward, the planning board approval should really have an expiration if the developers do not move forward. A design that was done 14 years ago probably won't fit in today situation; especially for those off-site roadway improvements.
__________________
EricIsHim
My PhotoBucket
EricIsHim no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2008, 06:22 PM   #112
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricIsHim View Post
If Hopewell is going for the original plan, all Hopewell needs is to put in an building permit application with the Building Department. Once it's approved, technically Hopewell can begin construction without legal issues despite the social controversies. This is talking about only weeks of time.

Moving forward, the planning board approval should really have an expiration if the developers do not move forward. A design that was done 14 years ago probably won't fit in today situation; especially for those off-site roadway improvements.
If I were the government, I would never expect a developer would sit on an approval for so long! I'd expect construction to start and finish asap and sell the units to book the profits.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2008, 06:35 AM   #113
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Mega Tower plan hits traffic obstacle
93-floor hotel's transport impact study rejected

25 October 2008
South China Morning Post

The proposed 93-storey Hopewell Centre II hotel in Wan Chai hit a hurdle yesterday when its transport impact assessment was rejected. The transport chief asked the developer to provide more details.

In response to independent legislator Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee's query on the development, formerly known as the Mega Tower, Commissioner for Transport Alan Wong Chi-kong said his department was not satisfied with the transport impact assessment report.

"We made a careful assessment of the report they submitted in mid-September, and we returned it through the Lands Department adding in our suggestions on traffic flow and traffic projection," Mr Wong said. "I can say that {hellip} their report does not pass our assessment."

In general, approval of a transport impact report is crucial for the endorsement of a major project, including an application for land exchange. The developer is required to estimate the project's impact on the district's traffic with formulas that take into account the number of floors and flats of the building, whether it is a commercial building, hotel or public utility; its distance from major roads; and an estimated growth rate in the area's traffic.

Sources familiar with the study said the Hopewell report would have to consider more factors in terms of the growth rate and traffic projection, and it was expected the adjustment should not take more than a month.

Mr Wong said the Transport Department had notified the developer of its decision on Tuesday.

A Hopewell Holdings spokeswoman said the developer would supply the required information as soon as possible.

She did not explain what part of the report needed clarification.

Wan Chai district councillor Peggy Lee Pik-yee said area residents had always hoped the government would conduct a traffic study on its own.

The government does not conduct the assessment for projects, but requires developers to do so, and would review the criteria and formula regularly, Mr Wong said yesterday to a question raised by Mrs Ip.

The developer submitted the updated assessment in September to project the 2016 traffic situation, because the hotel completion date was expected to be delayed from next year to 2014 or 2015. The developer has proposed widening Kennedy Road and Queen's Road East to accommodate the increase in traffic.

Hung Wing-tat, associate professor of engineering at Polytechnic University, said the existing road network in Wan Chai was close to capacity. "Unless development density is reduced, the road networks will hardly be able to sustain the traffic."
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2008, 06:50 AM   #114
EricIsHim
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,397
Likes (Received): 28

Not surprised at all. Traffic is usually the easiest arguments from the public since everyone thinks there were experts.
__________________
EricIsHim
My PhotoBucket
EricIsHim no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2008, 04:32 PM   #115
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Opinion : What do you think of the Mega Tower transport plan?
1 November 2008
South China Morning Post

What do you think of the Mega Tower transport plan?

The rejection by the Town Planning Board of the proposed "road-improvement work" on Kennedy Road by Hopewell Holdings came as a pleasant surprise ("Mega Tower plan hits traffic obstacle", October 25).

The developer initially sought approval of the project in a Wan Chai District Council meeting in April.

The project in essence was a means by which the developer could pave the way for the approval of its 93-storey Mega Tower on Kennedy Road.

Residents on Kennedy Road expressed fury over the project at two meetings.

At those meetings, representatives from various government departments were reluctant to directly answer many of the questions regarding the project and the methodology employed in their assessment process.

The Transport Department provided projected traffic-density figures only up to next year, which are at least five years before the Mega Tower project would be completed and which were used in the assessment of the proposal.

Further, the department would not detail the criteria used in its assessment, nor would it consider an independent assessment of these developer-supplied figures.

It took another four months before the Development Bureau finally provided a reply to a number of questions raised during the meetings.

However, many of these answers were vague and the methodologies employed in the assessment were not transparent.

A number of important questions remain unanswered.

What exactly are the criteria employed in the assessment process?

Why were the assessment points only at the junctions of Queen's Road East and Kennedy Road, and Queen's Road East and Spring Garden Lane, when the whole of Queen's Road East is already heavily congested with traffic, and further expansion of that road to alleviate the problem is impossible?

Why was an independent assessment of the traffic figures supplied by the developer not granted?

The government and Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen owe the public honest and detailed answers to many of these questions to curb the increasing belief that secret deals are being engaged between them and the developer.

A. Young, Mid-Levels
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2008, 08:45 PM   #116
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,506
Likes (Received): 6525

i hope that tower will become reality, HK needs another supertall
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2008, 08:59 PM   #117
montesky
is Loading! Please wait..
 
montesky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Podgorica
Posts: 4,508
Likes (Received): 233

it looks like eco building...really modern indeed. i prefer these kind of buildings due to their profound appearance...if i may say so
__________________
MONTENEGRO
montesky no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2008, 03:40 AM   #118
EricIsHim
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,397
Likes (Received): 28

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Opinion : What do you think of the Mega Tower transport plan?
A. Young, Mid-Levels
I would love to read the traffic impact assessment.
__________________
EricIsHim
My PhotoBucket
EricIsHim no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 07:48 AM   #119
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,491
Likes (Received): 17804

Wan Chai needs diversity at street level
13 November 2008
South China Morning Post

In a letter ("Hotel project benefits all", November 5) John Cheng informs us that the "developer is negotiating to scale back the size of the hotel to cope with the environment". This is an interesting admission and begs the question as to who the developer is negotiating with. Certainly not with the residents of Kennedy Road and Wan Chai.

It is embarrassing to see how the government is paving the way for Hopewell Holding's version of Times Square and Pacific Place, aptly called Mega Tower. The discussion has been changed from whether Mega Tower is a land use suited for Queen's Road East and Kennedy Road to one of fine-tuning the design and traffic details of this development. Watch this newspaper for further softening up with news about minor adjustments.

Don't be surprised by the final dictated glorious conclusion that "the public aspirations have been taken into account, the plan has been adjusted to reduce the traffic impact, it will generate jobs, we can sell land and earn money, we have balanced all interests, it's a go-ahead".

Before the government sells land to Hopewell, it must prove that Wan Chai will be a great place to live, work and commute through. The public must ask for basic facts. Why rely on individual traffic impact assessments when, for example, Times Square proved that these are entirely inadequate to prevent road congestion? Where is the overall plan for development and transport demonstrating Wan Chai will be a sustainable quality environment to live and work in?

The outline zoning plan does not guarantee that the aspirations of the public for a quality and diverse street-level environment are catered for [with this project]. Nobody has shown what Wan Chai will be like once the Urban Renewal Authority and private developers have completed all permitted developments. There is an urgent need now to widen footpaths and create more pedestrian areas and public space. District councillors and their constituents complain about traffic congestion and want more road space which simply does not exist.

Rather than controlling development, the government is promoting some disjointed plans to take pedestrians off the pavements and force them into tunnels and on to footbridges, foregoing any plan or effort to create and guarantee a street-level environment which promotes community-building, interaction and a pleasant experience for visitors.

Paul Zimmerman, founding member, Designing Hong Kong
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2008, 02:29 PM   #120
_00_deathscar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,047
Likes (Received): 217

Just flip a flipping coin already for crying out loud.

Anyway, isn't this in the wrong section regardless?
_00_deathscar no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu