Land supply? Follow the money Three core issues are starting to crystallise as the consultation process about Hong Kong’s land supply moves along. And the options will definitely not be cheap. Let’s look at who is chasing the money. Reclamation The beneficiaries of the funds will be the contractors and engineers. And the Government will generate land premiums from the land sales. The proponents’ argument is that resolving the issues involved in developing the New Territories will take too long. Opponents are concerned that, besides the damage to the marine environment, the fact that so much money is tied up with this mega-project means there will be no resources left to clean up the New Territories. Brownfields Many of the landowners, however, want the right to develop their own land. Some are suggesting a compromise solution, with Public Private Partnership developments. The cost of land resumption to be paid to owners is lower than the cost of building the artificial island, but it will require more government manpower to negotiate with the many parties involved. Our “lazy” government prefers writing a tender for a reclamation project and then leaving it with the contractor. Military land Article 13 of the Garrison Law promulgated by the NPC in 1996 allows exactly for this negotiation to take place between the Hong Kong Government and the PLA. It also sets out how to deal with the associated costs and the compensation to be paid. Given the clamour for land, both parties have a serious responsibility to weigh military versus public uses for each site. Article 15 explains how such a discussion is to proceed. The above are the three big items. Other options are near-shore reclamations (these are generally supported, but there are local objections), the use of golf courses (there’s endless debate over privileges, but we do lack sports facilities) and moving the container port (or consolidating it with other ports in the Pearl River Delta). (Article published in Southside Magazine - September 2018 issue)
土地發展 利益為先 隨着土地供應公開諮詢進入大直路階段,當中的核心問題亦逐漸浮現。眾所周知造地成本不菲,剩下的問題只是涉及的龐大利益會由誰涉足染指。 填海 棕地 軍事用地 以上三個主要選項外,其他選項還包括近岸填海(社會普遍支持但地區人士反對)、高爾夫球場(討論將無止境延續,而事實上我們的運動場地亦不充足)、遷移貨櫃碼頭(或與其他珠三角地區的碼頭合併) 最後讓我以郊野公園的近況作結。政府已經摩拳擦掌變更郊野公園邊界,他們並不打算正視郊野公園的特殊地位,反將郊野公園視為可隨意動用的土地儲備。亦有些人提出開發生態價值較低並毗鄰交通基建不多於2%的郊野公園用地;更有人指出開發郊野公園別無選擇,只能無奈接受,卻無視劃定現時的郊野公園邊界花費了近20年的持續努力。 政府已從云云郊野公園中選出兩塊用地,邀請了房委會研究其開發的可行性,與此同時正剔出另外十幅郊野公園用地作將來的進一步研究。環保團體拒絕參與評估這兩幅用地的生態、園境及文娛價值,原因非常簡單——程序錯誤。無錯,以上準則適用於衡量應否將一幅土地納入郊野公園保護範圍,但一旦土地被納入範圍,想將其抽出就要考慮更多因素:是否有絕對的公眾需要凌駕土地價值?有沒有其他替代方案?有沒有盡可能減少開發範圍?有沒有盡可能降低開發活動對周邊郊野公園的影響?有沒有對郊野公園用地的補償方案?環團非常重視以上行之有效的制度,亦會盡全力捍衛。與此同時,一旦去到無可避免要開發郊野公園的一步,相關動作亦要相當謹慎。 |
||
www.designinghongkong.com | Donation | Facebook | Contact |
Land supply? Follow the money.
