This is what I think:
1) I like the romance of Foster's urban park- I can imagine sunbathing on its lawns like I would in New York's central Park. Otherwise the streets just feel like some new urban area in Singapore (and hey, this is not the same city)

2) I like OMA's willingness to engage with the local context, and kudos to their understanding of how people of HK interact with it's city. But as architects they have to take charge and provide a design. Don't leave it's design to the people. What are the new building typologies that would be created in their design? Another problem with it is connection within the scheme: how do the villages connect?

3) Rocco's design is sensitive and competent, and at first glance seems to be the best. But it is too tied down to specifics and way too resolved for this stage, I can see how it would be wrought with problems if it moves to the next.
Great idea to wedge culture between an active waterfront and old city. But the entrance to the district seem weak.

Well, there's my two cents. I hope people will see this stage of consultation for what it is: the architect's overall vision for the district, and not the specific architecture or site layout.

Perhaps WKCD authority can use his masterplan, but let Foster or OMA do the buildings inside. Nothing against him, but Rocco just simply isn't as good of an architect than these big players.