|
Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design (HKIUD) Position paper on the Planning and Engineering Study on Development of Lok Ma Chau Loop Stage 2 Public Engagement (July 2012)
- The most important issues underpinning this proposed project should be related to the relevant policies, apart from the detailed design parameters. The main features proposed in the present study include the keeping of the building profile to low rise (with further lowering of the PODP proposal by 3 storeys); keeping the vehicular traffic outside or at the periphery; and adjustment to the building orientations to align with wind corridors; etc. These are all broad statement and could facilitate the setting of development control guidelines in a very limited and ineffective manner. In urban design aspect for the Loop area as a whole, the Technical Reports do not provide relevant parameters for the creation of vistas and landmarks, varieties of public spaces and the users friendly connectivity . There are also no further technical considerations which are essential for the compilation of detailed lease conditions. The present proposals of the study thus cannot be taken as a developed and implementable proposal with many undetermined factors, in particular the “interchangeability” between high-tech Research and Development (R&D) and Cultural and Creative (C&C) industries which is being introduced at this stage.
- There are no definitions of “high-tech Research and Development” and “Cultural and Creative industries”. There is no indication as to how they would be co-located in the same plot or adjacent to each other and how are the high-tech R&D and C&C industries interact with each other. Some of them might possibly involve manufacturing type of activities while others may be more akin to offices or mixed used operations. There is also no information whether the Loop area would be operated and managed by independent organization like a science park corporation or centralised coordinating agency for managing the whole Loop area, and why there is no provision of common conference, community amenities and exhibition halls which could be share used by all users/tenants.
- We expect the Study could elaborate with detail in this stage on how the mood of development and management in future, since the institutional mechanisms, capabilities and responsibilities of the development/management agents, owners, tenants and users, etc. are all important constituent factors in a comprehensive urban design process. These mechanisms are missing in the present study. There is no information as to how many educational or research institutions will there be. For the large institutions, the user may have his own user requirements which may not necessarily fit into the land plots /sites marked up on the RODP. However, if smaller institutions /users are to be involved at all, the responsibilities for developing and managing the very wide Amenity Area/Activity Corridors between the sites will require to be well defined and coordinated.
-
The Social Impact Assessments in the Study has been given a narrow sense and was taken mainly to describe the future state compared with the sparsely populated or unpopulated areas over the subject site. The social impacts were generally assessed to be nil or minimal, or a plus, because any institutional facility added would be positive compared to the baseline which is nil. There is a missing gap regarding how the groups of users in future may interact with each other, given that some come from HK side and the others coming from Shenzhen side, or via Shenzhen from beyond. These users have different cultural backgrounds and social behaviours. No assessment has been given on how they may fit into the proposed setting and hardwares.
-
Whilst there is no clear vision and mission about the “Creative industries” in a policy context, “Creative industries” is envisaged to have attractions for tourism. If it is intended to promote tourism for the “Loop” area, accessibility to the site should be improved substantially. As yet another potential resource, the Ecological Area might possibly be a scenic area with potential for eco-tourism as well.
-
Development envisioning education, employment and possibly tourism facilities at this scale must be provided with good public transport/Mass Transit access from both HK and Shenzhen. This issue has not been sufficiently addressed in the consultation paper aside from an indication of a notional corridor linking to the Lok Ma Chau MTR station (to be operated with a vague “road-based environmentally friendly public transport”). The restrictive accesses (with only one Western Connection Road (and an indicative Eastern Connection Road) must be reviewed, and provision should also be made for tourism related facilities such as parking, food and beverage venues, etc. The circulation and the users friendly and environmental friendly connectivity inside the future loop area is with vital important. The study/paper do not present any informative proposal apart from some weak and broad statement and “artist’s” sketches.
-
TR 5 – Urban Design
(a) Par. 7; Par. 10.2 and Figure 3 – Whilst the building orientations were recommended mainly to take account of the direction of wind corridors, the resultant building forms and frontages are not necessarily conducive to the purposes of the “Interaction Zone” in between groups of buildings at pedestrian level. The delineation of individual sites and the buildings on these sites, as well as the education institution campuses would likely end up with walls round their premises. A more elaborate urban design framework is required to address this issue of visual and functional integration in points, line and pane, as to how the spaces in the Interaction Zone and the landscape framework would, as stated in TR2B- the PODP of Nov 2010 : “become an integral part of the overall development and blends seamlessly with the built environment”. The current proposal fails to respond and address on this urban design principle.
(b) The Study did not provide adequate information on how Area B would be developed, how it may actually support the Loop area, and what built form the developments would take. The western part of Area B will have greater visual impact since it is adjoining the main access to the Loop area and may also have impact on the traditional villages close by. Further elaboration should be made.
HKIUD
July 2012
|
