TOWN PLANNING BOARD Minutes of 441st Meeting of the Metro ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

- 18 - guests at the site would generate adverse traffic impact. No local objection was received by the District Officer (Central & Western); and (e) the Planning Department (PlanD)’s views – PlanD had no objection to the application based on the assessment made in paragraph 11 of the Paper. The application premises were within an existing office building located at an area with a mixture of commercial and residential developments with commercial uses on ground floors, although the concerned street block was predominantly occupied by residential developments. The proposed hotel was considered not incompatible with the surrounding developments in terms of land use. In this regard, 8 hotel applications in the “Residential (Group A)” zone concerning 5 sites in the vicinity were approved with conditions by the Committee. The application was for conversion of 14 storeys of the existing 25-storey office building involving about 3,512m 2 of gross floor area (GFA) (about 56% of the total GFA) for hotel use. The application would not result in any increase in the physical bulk and building height of the building. The proposed hotel has only 50 guest rooms with no car parking and loading/unloading facilities. It would be served by the future MTR WIL. In this regard, the C for T and the Commissioner of Police had no comment on the application from traffic point of view. Moreover, the hotel would unlikely generate adverse environmental and sewerage impacts on the area. 26. In response to the Vice-chairman’s enquiry, Ms. April Kun confirmed that there was a previous application on the application site (Application No. A/H3/331) for partial conversion (7/F to 24/F) of the application premises from office to hospital use. The application was rejected by the Committee on 15.9.2006 for the reason that the proposed use would generate adverse traffic impact on the surrounding areas as no on-site parking and loading/unloading facilities were provided and the proposed arrangement for picking-up/dropping-off of patients and loading/unloading activities was not satisfactory. Deliberation Session 27. The Vice-chairman considered that the proposed hotel use was different from the
- 19 - previous hospital case in terms of their loading/unloading requirements. 28. After further deliberation, the Committee decided to approve the application, on the terms of the application as submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB). The permission should be valid until 6.5.2015, and after the said date, the permission should cease to have effect unless before the said date, the development permitted was commenced or the permission was renewed. The permission was subject to the following conditions : (a) the submission of a Sewerage Impact Assessment (SIA) to the satisfaction of the Director of Environmental Protection or of the TPB; (b) the implementation of the local sewerage upgrading/sewerage connection works identified in the SIA to the satisfaction of the Director of Drainage Services or of the TPB; (c) the submission and implementation of a landscape proposal to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or of the TPB; and (d) the provision of fire service installations to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire Services or of the TPB. 29. The Committee also agreed to advise the applicant of the following : (a) the approval of the application did not imply that the proposed non-domestic plot ratio (PR) of the proposed hotel development and the proposed gross floor area (GFA) exemption for back-of-house facilities would be granted by the Building Authority. The applicant should approach the Buildings Department direct to obtain the necessary approval. In addition, if GFA concession, in particular the non-domestic PR of the development, was not granted by the Building Authority and major changes to the current scheme were required, a fresh planning application to the Board might be required; (b) to note the comments of the Chief Engineer/Railway Development 2-1,
Page 1 and 2: Present TOWN PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Page 3 and 4: Agenda Item 1 - 3 - Confirmation of
Page 5 and 6: Agenda Item 4 Section 16 Applicatio
Page 7 and 8: - 7 - application site was granted
Page 9 and 10: - 9 - (a) background to the applica
Page 11 and 12: - 11 - approval to the satisfaction
Page 13 and 14: - 13 - (d) District Officer (Centra
Page 15 and 16: - 15 - such information was provide
Page 17: Agenda Item 8 Section 16 Applicatio
Page 21 and 22: Agenda Item 9 Section 16 Applicatio
Page 23 and 24: - 23 - demolish the Garage for open
Page 25 and 26: - 25 - (DO(C&W), HAD) advised that
Page 27 and 28: - 27 - new buildings, the applicant
Page 29 and 30: - 29 - (u) as regards the archaeolo
Page 31 and 32: - 31 - 34. A Member asked if more i
Page 33 and 34: - 33 - according to the technical c
Page 35 and 36: - 35 - deck at Old Bailey Wing and
Page 37 and 38: - 37 - (b) to note the comments of
Page 39 and 40: - 39 - 50. The Committee noted that
Page 41 and 42: - 41 - (c) departmental comments -
Page 43 and 44: Agenda Item 13 Section 12A Applicat
Page 45: - 45 - meeting. The Secretary expla

TOWN PLANNING BOARD Minutes of 441st Meeting of the Metro ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?