Representations and Further Representation on Draft Wan Chai OZP No. S/H5/26
Site bounded by Queen’s Road East, Monmouth Path, Star Street and Wing Fung Street, 2010 - 2011
Masterplan was commissioned to submit a number of representations to the Draft Wan Chai OZP No. S/H5/26 (the OZP). Three of which are related to the site bounded by Queen’s Road East, Monmouth Path, Star Street and Wing Fung Street (the Island Site). The three sites of representation corresponded to the sites of the three buildings on the Island Site. They were Three Pacific Place (3PP), Wing Fung Building and Regal Court.
On the OZP, there were two zonings on the Island Site. The site occupied by 3PP was zoned C(6) with a Building Height Restriction (BHR) of 180mPD, while those accommodated Wing Fung Building and Regal Court were zoned R(A) with a BHR of 100mPD.
The Island Site has been identified to possess great potential for commercial use by the land use review undertaken by the Planning Department in November 2008. The review is named “Land Use Review of the Area to the Southwest of the Junction of the Hennessy Road and Johnston Road included in MPC paper No. 28/08.
General Objection Reasons
The three representations in general objected to there being no prior consultation on the proposed amendment on the OZP. They also objected to the spot zoning approach applied to the Island Site as it was considered that the three sites had similar town planning characteristics. They also objected to the lack of legal basis of the setback requirement along Wing Fung Street.
Specific Objection Reasons
Three Pacific Place (R98)
One of the specific reasons of the 3PP representation is the voluntary provision of 1,650sqm public open space within the site had become mandatory. The provision of public open space at street level was a good design element proposed under the previous S16 planning application. The representor considered that the Draft OZP had made the provision of public open space mandatory was both unreasonable and undesirable.
Wing Fung Building (R99)
Specific reasons of the Wing Fung Building representation are the R(A) zoning and the low BHR.
Regal Court (R100)
Specific reasons of the Regal Court representation are the R(A) zoning and the low BHR. The representation stated that there was a S16 planning application related to the Regal Court site being processed by the TPB. The application was for an office building at 120mPD.
Proposals to meet the three Representations
The proposals to meet the three Representations included:
-Rezone the whole Island Site to “C” with 180mPD
-Alternatively, expanding C(6) to cover the whole Island Site, provided that the open space requirement currently proposed for the C(6)
zone will not be expanded by such expansion
-Or, C(6) for the 3PP site and “C” with BHR of 120mPD for the Regal Court and Wing Fung Building sites
-deletion of setback along Wing Fung Street
TPB Decision after hearing
The TPB decided to partly uphold the three Representations by applying a commercial zoning to the whole Island Site. The 3PP site remained as “C(6)”; while the other two sites were zoned “C(7)”. The “C(7)” was a conditional commercial zone requiring S.16 application for planning permission accompanying with a Traffic Impact Assessment for consideration by the Board.
Masterplan was again commissioned to object to amendment that had been made to the OZP after the hearing.
The three Representors held significant land interests in the Island Site. There was a long term plan to extend the 3PP into the “C(7)” zone. The extension would enable a more comprehensive design of a single Grade A office development instead of the existing 3PP Grade A office and two small office developments on the “C(7)” zone . Under the extension scheme, internal transport facilities would be provided for commercial use in accordance with the HKPSG which would not be possible for redevelopment of the individual Regal Court and Wing Fung Building sites.
The Further Representor considered that it was acceptable to have a commercial zone for the whole Island Site with BHR 180m for the 3PP site and 120mPD for the other two sites.
TPB Decision after further hearing
After the further hearing, the TPB agreed to expand the “C(6)” zone to cover the whole Island Site, and proposed Sub-area (a) for the 3PP site with BHR 180m and Sub-area (b) for the other two sites with BHR 120m.