Looking for land

Looking for land

We need a new way to discuss land supply options.

The government invited a developer, the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS), to study the development potential of two areas extending into the Tai Lam Country Park and Ma On Shan Country Park – one near Pat Heung and the other near Shui Chuen O.

But surely we should first agree the rules. 

Country parks are a special asset of Hong Kong. Any decision to make them smaller must be taken very carefully. We have a law for creating parks. We have a law for managing parks. But we do not have a law that says how to cut parts off a country park.

We can learn from another special asset: Victoria Harbour. 

To reclaim land, you must prove that there is a public overriding need, that there are no reasonable alternatives and that only the minimum is taken away. The same can be agreed for country parks, with one additional rule - zero-net loss. This requires another area to be added as compensation. 

In 1995 we did exactly this to build Route 3 to Yuen Long. Instead of digging a road through Tai Lam Country Park, we limited the damage by building a tunnel. Only two hectares were lost for the approach road and an area of around 40 ha was added to the park elsewhere. In 2003, the extension of the Tseung Kwan O landfill was carefully planned to have minimal impact on the Clearwater Bay Country Park, and again another piece of land was found to be added elsewhere as compensation. 

But this time, developers are being invited to consider country parks when there are sites ready for development nearby. Why?

The Planning Department completed a land use review of Kam Tin South and Pat Heung in 2015. It identified opportunities for the development of at least 33,000 residential units on top of and in the vicinity of Kam Sheung Station and the Pat Heung Maintenance Centre. There is also an abundance of “abandoned agricultural land” along Kam Sheung Road now used for open storage, temporary carparks and other brownfield uses. And next to Shui Chuen O is a large green belt area which could be studied. All these sites have good access to rail and road. Why have these not been offered to HKHS for a development study, before the country parks? 

The other issue is the study brief.

The government instructed the developer to use ecological and landscape values as criteria. This makes no sense. Country park areas near existing developments suffer noise, light and traffic, but they buffer the rest of the country park. Accept these criteria and we will be forever eating up country parks until no park is left.

Carrie Lam promised to establish a dedicated task force steered by professionals to engage stakeholders and the community on a macro review of our land supply options. 

Green groups have written to Carrie and asked her to rescind the invitation to HKHS and set up the task force as soon as possible with a broad representation.  

We need a more equitable, fair and sustainable process for discussing land supply options. Green groups consist of regular people who suffer the same problems as everyone else. Yet, they recognize that our country parks are a unique asset which should be safeguarded for future generations.

盲搶地？

政府近日邀請了房協用發展商身份研究郊野公園的發展潛力，而納入研究範圍的，包括鄰近八鄉的大欖郊野公園，以及在水泉澳邨附近的馬鞍山郊野公園。郊野公園作為香港珍貴的資源，任何縮小他的舉動都應三思而後行。然而，香港現時只有成立和管理郊野公園的條例，卻沒有任何規管發展郊野公園的法規。因此，政府在研究發展郊野公園之先，應和市民約法三章。

事實上，我們可借鑒維港填海的相關程序。要在維港進行填海工程，首先要證明該計劃有絕對的公眾需求，亦沒有任何可行的替代方案。另外，更要盡可能減少填海範圍。而保護我們的郊野公園，除需要以上準則外，政府亦都要保證在發展郊野公園後，會將與發展面積相若的土地撥入郊野公園以作補償。（Zero-net-loss）

以上發展郊野的準則，過去政府亦曾採用。1999年發展三號幹線進入元朗路段時，政府原來計劃在大欖郊野公園之上興建公路。但後來為了減少對郊野公園的損害，改變計劃為興建穿過大欖郊野公園的隧道。最終相關計劃只造成兩公頃的郊野公園損失，而為了作出補償，政府更新增了約四十公頃的郊野公園土地。2003年，將軍澳堆填區擴建時，工程規劃盡可能減少了對清水灣郊野公園的破壞，而工程過後政府亦有將若干的土地撥入郊野公園範圍。

然而，是次政府委派了房協研究的郊野公園，附近其實有其他可用的非郊野公園土地。規劃署在2015年完成了對錦田南及八鄉的土地用途檢討，並指出錦上路站上蓋及其周邊地區，以及八鄉維修中心附近的土地，足以發展超過三萬三千個住宅單位。而錦上路一帶亦有大大小小的荒廢農地，現時被用作貨櫃場、露天停車場等棕地用途。另一邊廂，水泉澳邨附近亦有一大片綠化帶，政府大可研究其發展用途。以上的土地與主要道路及鐵路系統連接，交通方便，為何政府要捨易取難，提出發展郊野公園？

除此之外，是次研究方向亦大有問題。政府委託房協以生態及土地價值為準則，評估以上郊野公園土地的發展潛力，實在是誤導公眾。位處已發展地區邊陲的郊野公園地帶飽受來自城市的空氣及光污染，其生態價值難免會較低，但他們卻為其餘的郊野公園地區帶來緩衝，以保護其生態環境。假若我們單純片面地以生態及土地價值作為準則，結果只會無止境地開發我們的郊野公園，直至資源耗盡的一日。

林鄭承諾會成立一個由專業人士帶領的工作小組，透過不同持份者及地區人士的參與，全面檢討現時的土地供應。環保團體已經去信林鄭，要求她停止房協的研究，並確保新成立的工作小組能夠更廣泛吸納不同人士嘅意見。研究土地供應需要公均及可持續的討論，環團的人和普羅大眾一樣，飽受住屋問題的困擾，但郊野公園是香港不能取代的資源，不論為了自己，抑或我們的下一代，他都值得我們歇力守護。

(An edited version of the English was published in the Fast Media’s July editions of Southside, Sai Kung and MidLevels. An edited version of the Chinese was first published @ theStandNews.com)