1997 — Page 88

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed
Series Prev Next Source

Page 88 of 654

054

Page 88 of 654

86

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

application on no concrete evidence except for the worry of residents. For new establishments not yet in business, it is even harder for the Board to have evidence on their possible nuisance to residents.

Staunton Street is just an example. In fact, there was concrete evidence supplied by residents to prove the nuisance caused by bars there. People were often rowdy on the street, bar guests parked their cars all over the place, drunk persons threw bottles at each other and even fouled the street with urine. It is difficult for residents to submit cases of nuisance to the Board because it is not always possible for the Police to be around, check nuisance cases and take out prosecutions. Another thing is that even if the Police can take out prosecutions against the misconduct of drunk persons or illegal parking along the street, there is no evidence to tell which one of the large number of bars there actually caused the nuisance. The Board has no authority or policy to suspend the liquor selling license of any premises without concrete evidence of nuisance caused. More so, it is possible for the Board to continue issuing licenses to applicants of other establishments in the street. The result will be a situation out of control with residents complaining and the Board continuing to issue licenses. Therefore, I suggest that when considering applications, the Board should consider the 3 criteria as well as a limit for liquor licenses in residential areas. Make that the 4th criteria.

Mr. Chairman, some people will ask how to define residential areas, the limit of licenses and whether the setting of a limit will encourage speculation. I would like to respond to their questions. First of all, it is not difficult to define residential areas. No one has objected to classifying Staunton Street as one. We can also take reference from the outline zoning plans of the Town Planning Board. Secondly, on how many licenses should be issued for a certain district. At present, whether liquor selling premises will cause a nuisance is a criterion for issue of liquor licenses by the Board. For this criterion, the kinds and forms of nuisance have not been set out. The Board makes a decision according to individual circumstances. Reportedly, the Board is right now considering not to issue liquor licenses to applicants who intend to sell liquor in composite buildings if and when there is objection from the residents and in the event that there is no separate access to the residential units.

The number of licenses to be issued can be based on whether there is objection from the residents and whether the objections are concretely substantiated. For example, if a case of nuisance or misconduct involving drunk persons has occurred on a street, the Board should vet new applications or those for renewal separately. If the Board feels that bars in the street have caused nuisance to residents, it may mean that no more bar should be set up in the street. In such cases, the Board can make restriction on the number of licensed premises the reason for rejecting new applications or those for renewal.

Edit History

2026-05-16 02:49:41 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Page 88 of 654 054 Page 88 of 654 86 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL application on no concrete evidence except for the worry of residents. For new establishments not yet in business, it is even harder for the Board to have evidence on their possible nuisance to residents. Staunton Street is just an example. In fact, there was concrete evidence supplied by residents to prove the nuisance caused by bars there. People were often rowdy on the street, bar guests parked their cars all over the place, drunk persons threw bottles at each other and even fouled the street with urine. It is difficult for residents to submit cases of nuisance to the Board because it is not always possible for the Police to be around, check nuisance cases and take out prosecutions. Another thing is that even if the Police can take out prosecutions against the misconduct of drunk persons or illegal parking along the street, there is no evidence to tell which one of the large number of bars there actually caused the nuisance. The Board has no authority or policy to suspend the liquor selling license of any premises without concrete evidence of nuisance caused. More so, it is possible for the Board to continue issuing licenses to applicants of other establishments in the street. The result will be a situation out of control with residents complaining and the Board continuing to issue licenses. Therefore, I suggest that when considering applications, the Board should consider the 3 criteria as well as a limit for liquor licenses in residential areas. Make that the 4th criteria. Mr. Chairman, some people will ask how to define residential areas, the limit of licenses and whether the setting of a limit will encourage speculation. I would like to respond to their questions. First of all, it is not difficult to define residential areas. No one has objected to classifying Staunton Street as one. We can also take reference from the outline zoning plans of the Town Planning Board. Secondly, on how many licenses should be issued for a certain district. At present, whether liquor selling premises will cause a nuisance is a criterion for issue of liquor licenses by the Board. For this criterion, the kinds and forms of nuisance have not been set out. The Board makes a decision according to individual circumstances. Reportedly, the Board is right now considering not to issue liquor licenses to applicants who intend to sell liquor in composite buildings if and when there is objection from the residents and in the event that there is no separate access to the residential units. The number of licenses to be issued can be based on whether there is objection from the residents and whether the objections are concretely substantiated. For example, if a case of nuisance or misconduct involving drunk persons has occurred on a street, the Board should vet new applications or those for renewal separately. If the Board feels that bars in the street have caused nuisance to residents, it may mean that no more bar should be set up in the street. In such cases, the Board can make restriction on the number of licensed premises the reason for rejecting new applications or those for renewal.
Baseline (Original)
Page 88 of 654 054 Page 88 of 654 86 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL application on no concrete evidence except for the worry of residents. For new establishments not yet in business, it is even harder for the Board to have evidence on their possible nuisance to residents. Staunton Street is just an example. In fact, there was concrete evidence supplied by residents to prove the nuisance caused by bars there. People were often rowdy on the street, bar guests parked their cars all over the place, drunk persons threw bottles at each other and even fouled the street with urine. It is difficult for residents to submit cases of nuisance to the Board because it is not always possible for the Police to be around, check nuisance cases and take out prosecutions. Another thing is that even if the Police can take out prosecutions against the misconduct of drunk persons or illegal parking along the street, there is no evidence to tell which one of the large number of bars there actually caused the nuisance. The Board has no authority or policy to suspend the liquor selling license of any premises without concrete evidence of nuisance caused. More so, it is possible for the Board to continue issuing licenses to applicants of other establishments in the street. The result will be a situation out of control with residents complaining and the Board continuing to issue licenses. Therefore, I suggest that when considering applications, the Board should consider the 3 criteria as well as a limit for liquor licenses in residential areas. Make that the 4th criteria. Mr. Chairman, some people will ask how to define residential areas, the limit of licenses and whether the setting of a limit will encourage speculation. I would like to respond to their questions. First of all, it is not difficult to define residential areas. No one has objected to classifying Staunton Street as one. We can also take reference from the outline zoning plans of the Town Planning Board. Secondly, on how many licenses should be issued for a certain district. At present, whether liquor selling premises will cause a nuisance is a criterion for issue of liquor licenses by the Board. For this criterion, the kinds and forms of nuisance have not been set out. The Board makes a decision according to individual circumstances. Reportedly, the Board is right now considering not to issue liquor licenses to applicants who intend to sell liquor in composite buildings if and when there is objection from the residents and in the event that there is no separate access to the residential units. The number of licenses to be issued can be based on whether there is objection from the residents and whether the objections are concretely substantiated. For example, if a case of nuisance or misconduct involving drunk persons has occurred on a street, the Board should vet new applications or those for renewal separately. If the Board feels that bars in the street have caused nuisance to residents, it may mean that no more bar should be set up in the street. In such cases, the Board can make restriction on the number of licensed premises the reason for rejecting new applications or those for renewal.
2026-05-16 02:49:41 · Baseline
View content

Page 88 of 654

054

Page 88 of 654

86

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

application on no concrete evidence except for the worry of residents. For new establishments not yet in business, it is even harder for the Board to have evidence on their possible nuisance to residents.

Staunton Street is just an example. In fact, there was concrete evidence supplied by residents to prove the nuisance caused by bars there. People were often rowdy on the street, bar guests parked their cars all over the place, drunk persons threw bottles at each other and even fouled the street with urine. It is difficult for residents to submit cases of nuisance to the Board because it is not always possible for the Police to be around, check nuisance cases and take out prosecutions. Another thing is that even if the Police can take out prosecutions against the misconduct of drunk persons or illegal parking along the street, there is no evidence to tell which one of the large number of bars there actually caused the nuisance. The Board has no authority or policy to suspend the liquor selling license of any premises without concrete evidence of nuisance caused. More so, it is possible for the Board to continue issuing licenses to applicants of other establishments in the street. The result will be a situation out of control with residents complaining and the Board continuing to issue licenses. Therefore, I suggest that when considering applications, the Board should consider the 3 criteria as well as a limit for liquor licenses in residential areas. Make that the 4th criteria.

Mr. Chairman, some people will ask how to define residential areas, the limit of licenses and whether the setting of a limit will encourage speculation. I would like to respond to their questions. First of all, it is not difficult to define residential areas. No one has objected to classifying Staunton Street as one. We can also take reference from the outline zoning plans of the Town Planning Board. Secondly, on how many licenses should be issued for a certain district. At present, whether liquor selling premises will cause a nuisance is a criterion for issue of liquor licenses by the Board. For this criterion, the kinds and forms of nuisance have not been set out. The Board makes a decision according to individual circumstances. Reportedly, the Board is right now considering not to issue liquor licenses to applicants who intend to sell liquor in composite buildings if and when there is objection from the residents and in the event that there is no separate access to the residential units.

The number of licenses to be issued can be based on whether there is objection from the residents and whether the objections are concretely substantiated. For example, if a case of nuisance or misconduct involving drunk persons has occurred on a street, the Board should vet new applications or those for renewal separately. If the Board feels that bars in the street have caused nuisance to residents, it may mean that no more bar should be set up in the street. In such cases, the Board can make restriction on the number of licensed premises the reason for rejecting new applications or those for renewal.

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.