HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
75
MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in Cantonese):—I will try to answer. If my answer is incomplete, I hope the Chairman will supplement it.
With regard to noise abatement, this topic was in fact included in the agenda for each meeting of the Hong Kong Stadium Board of Governors. We also tried placing different sound systems at different directions and angles, but the results were not yet satisfactory. I wish to add that, apart from the consortium, several other companies have submitted proposals stating that they would pay for the construction. As a matter of fact, these involved many complicated issues and huge costs. They were therefore all rejected. Mr. Chairman, if you feel that my answer is incomplete, please add to it.
MR. AMBROSE CHEUNG WING-SUM (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, allow me to follow up on this. In considering other measures to deal with the noise issue, as far as I understand, the consortium and other companies took the initiative to make recommendations to the Board of Governors. May I ask if the Board itself has ever taken the initiative to liaise with contractors for investigation work? What is the cost for building a retractable roof? How much time and what sort of investment would be involved? The thing is that the Board never took the initiative to collect information and consider the proposal. This is my first follow-up question.
My second follow-up question is that, since this proposal was temporarily shelved and we are still seeking solutions to this noise problem, is the Board of Governors keeping up the discussion and will the option continue to be considered? If not, will the Board follow up on the feasibility of the option?
MR. RONNIE Wong Man-chiu (in Cantonese):—In fact, about the initiative to contact contractors, the Board of Governors is doing so through the management company. Mr. Cheung asked if the Board would continue to actively pursue ways of noise abatement. I believe Mr. Cheung has been sitting on the Board for quite some time and he should be aware that the issue has been discussed many times at meetings of the Board.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese):—Let me just add that the Hong Kong Stadium Board of Governors has done work on this. In fact, the Board has been looking for new technology to reduce the nuisance caused by noise, for example improving the sound system of the Stadium and trying out the turbo sound system at last year's Famine 30 concert, which proved to have kept the volume of the music under control and the noise only exceeded the level set by the Environmental Protection Department by several decibels. As I understand it, the noise limits were exceeded on that day because of the half hour of applause and chanting by the audience. As for the other option of enclosing the Stadium, like the Sky Dome in Toronto which could be drawn or retracted, the idea is feasible but many more factors would have to be considered.
Page 78 of 498
Page 78 of 498
Page 78 of 498
Page 78 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
75
MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in Cantonese):—I will try to answer. If my answer is incomplete, I hope the Chairman will supplement it.
With regard to noise abatement, this topic was in fact included in the agenda for each meeting of the Hong Kong Stadium Board of Governors. We also tried placing different sound systems at different directions and angles, but the results were not yet satisfactory. I wish to add that, apart from the consortium, several other companies have submitted proposals stating that they would pay for the construction. As a matter of fact, these involved many complicated issues and huge costs. They were therefore all rejected. Mr. Chairman, if you feel that my answer is incomplete, please add to it.
MR. AMBROSE Cheung WING-SUM (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, allow me to follow up on this. In considering other measures to deal with the noise issue, as far as I understand, the consortium and other companies took the initiative to make recommendations to the Board of Governors. May I ask if the Board itself has ever taken the initiative to liaise with contractors for investigation work? What is the cost for building a retractable roof? How much time and what sort of investment would be involved? The thing is that the Bourd never took the initiative to collect information and consider the proposal. This is my first follow-up question.
My second follow-up question is that, since this proposal was temporarily shelved and we are still seeking solutions to this noise problem, is the Board of Governors keeping up the discussion and will the option continue to be considered? If not, will the Board follow up on the feasibility of the option?
MR. RONNIE Wong Man-chiU (in Cantonese):-In fact, about the initiative to contact contractors, the Board of Governors is doing so through the management company. Mr. Cheung asked if the Board would continue to actively pursue ways of noise abatement. I believe Mr. Cheung has been sitting on the Board for quite some time and he should be aware that the issue has been discussed many times at meetings of the Board.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese):-Let me just add that the Hong Kong Stadium Board of Governors has done work on this. In fact, the Board has been looking for new technology to reduce the nuisance caused by noise, for example improving the sound system of the Stadium and trying out the turbo sound system at last year's Famine 30 concert, which proved to have kept the volume of the music under control and the noise only exceeded the level set by the Environmental Protection Department by several decibels. As I understand it, the noise limits were exceeded on that day because of the half hour of applause and chanting by the audience. As for the other option of enclosing the Stadium, like the Sky Dome in Toronto which could be drawn or retracted, the idea is feasible but many more factors would have to be considered.
Page 78 of 498
Page 78 of 498
Page 78 of 498 .
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.