Hopewell continues ducking and diving at Town Planning Board
Hopewell Holdings is continuing its crafty game of ducking and diving at the Town Planning Board over its application to build what it calls a hotel with convention and exhibition facilities near the Hopewell Centre in Wan Chai.
Its plans were supposed to be considered at a meeting of the board on January 2, but the board once again agreed to the company's request for the matter to be deferred until later this month. Readers will be aware that this matter has a long history.
Hopewell agreed in 2008 to reduce the size of the 93-storey hotel it proposed to build to 55 storeys in exchange for a land swap. It also dropped the massive "wall block" design of the building in favour of a "Y-shaped" building. However, to the dismay of local residents, the firm submitted plans in August last year to the board that sought to reintroduce elements withdrawn in the 2008 agreement.
It submitted an application, then amended it, and asked the board to defer consideration of the plan. Then in November, it submitted a new application but has now asked for a further deferral. The latest application has dropped the "wall" design in favour of the original "Y-shaped" proposal. Another key change to the 2008 plan is that Hopewell has introduced significant convention and exhibition facilities into the design.
Opponents to the scheme argue that rather than building a hotel with convention and exhibition facilities, Hopewell is building a convention and exhibition centre with a hotel attached. The distinction is important. Under the terms of the Comprehensive Redevelopment Area in which this project falls, convention and exhibition facilities are not allowed.
They argue that if Hopewell wants a convention centre, it should make a rezoning application for a convention and exhibition centre, which is a much longer process. Indeed, many are wondering why the board has not made Hopewell do this. The proposed hotel is already the biggest in town and approaches the size of some of Macau's casino convention centres.
We have already commented on Hopewell's salami slice approach to the planning process. It keeps coming back to get what it wants a slice at a time. It is an approach that was roundly criticised by former judge William Waung in a letter to the board accusing Hopewell of abusing the planning process. Meanwhile, local residents have to keep their eyes glued to the board's website to ensure they are on top of Hopewell's latest wheeze.
Our attention has been drawn to the curious case of a Hong Kong bicycle rider who recently was clipped by a car-wing mirror while out training. Fortunately, he was not injured but the incident was captured on his GoPro cameras. The driver was charged and prosecuted for dangerous driving. The cycling community welcomed the outcome. But there was some surprise that the driver remained anonymous and was only referred to as the driver of RY5825, and was only fined HK$800.
Readers may recall the case of cycling activist Martin Turner who in 2012 was knocked off his bike in Central by a car driven by Spencer Foo Tsun-kong, a former senior assistant police commissioner. Turner was prosecuted for careless riding but found not guilty. At the same time, in an unusual display of vigilance on the part of the authorities, he was prosecuted for not having a bicycle bell. He pleaded guilty and was fined HK$1,000.
How is it you may wonder that not having a bell attracts a higher fine than dangerous driving? Small wonder cyclists feel unloved by the authorities.
Have you got any stories that Lai See should know about? Email them to [email protected]
