HKIP Comments on the Chief Executive’s 2020 Policy Address

The Hong Kong Institute of Planners (HKIP)

Comments on the Chief Executive’s 2020 Policy Address

HKIP’s comments and suggestions on the 2020 Policy Address are as follows:

 A.  Land and Housing supply

 1.  We appreciate the Government’s efforts in the successful identification of 330 hectares of land for providing 316,000 public housing units in the coming 10 years.  This is a visible demonstration of the commitment in addressing the housing problem.  We however recognize that even assuming smooth planning and implementation process, nearly two third of the aforesaid planned public housing production are longer term sites in the planning stage and is planned to be delivered in the later 5 years (i.e. 2025/26 to 2030/31).  We therefore urge for proactive Government cross-bureaux and inter-departmental coordination with a view to expedite and to streamline the planning and development process of these identified public housing sites in order to secure timely and effective delivery of the planned public housing production without delay, if not earlier.  We also urge the Government to continue her efforts in identifying more housing sites.

2.  While we understand that the complicated and diversified stakeholders’ interests in our community nowadays may not be conducive to smooth and straight forward planning and development process, we urge the Government to walk an extra mile to cultivate the general public’s understanding, confidence and trust, in particular to proactively initiate early and effective communications with District Councils and local stakeholder groups, in order to facilitate the community’s support for timely delivery of the public housing sites for the benefits of the community at large.  We are obliged to highlight that one of the yardsticks for a successful public housing programme, in the eyes of the public, would be a noticeable improvement to the current very long averaging waiting time (AWT) for public housing applicants, as compared to the Government’s target AWT of 3 years.

3. In parallel, we suggest that the Government in collaboration with Housing Authority should embark on a comprehensive strategy and plan for redevelopment/renewal of aged and probably sub-standard public housing rental estates to enhance the livability, safety and healthy living environment for the sitting tenants many of whom are elderly people.  Government should not only focus on the “quantity”, but also the “quality” of the living environment for the elderly population.

 4. While providing sufficient land and housing supply is an important first step in addressing our housing problem, we should give due weight to the ultimate community aspiration for a quality and livable built environment to sustain a life flourishing experience.  Whenever opportunity arises, we should continue to strive for improving the living standards and living quality for our citizens, such as ensuring a decent living space per person and enhancing quality public open space provision.  Transportation infrastructure and educational, community and welfare facilities should also be comprehensively planned and with timely delivery to ensure the well being of our community. 

 5.  It is noted that majority of the identified land supplies are from New Development Areas, brownfield sites and sites located at existing New Town’s fringe.  As stated in our previous suggestions in response to last year Policy Address, we reiterate the need of following the proven wisdom of comprehensive and co-ordinated town planning to ensure adequate and timely provision of infrastructure and community facilities for the well being of the planned community, thus avoiding scattered, socially segregated, and un-coordinated developments.  It is even better if the planned population could be matched with appropriate local job opportunities as far as possible in the planned development areas.  Public, subsidized sale and private housing provisions should also be carefully balanced in sizeable new developments, bearing in mind the merits of social inclusiveness and diverse economic activities.  We support the model of mixed development with both private and subsidized housing in the Siu Ho Wan Depot site for wider application in the Territory.

 6. As already voiced out in our previous position papers on Land Supply and Policy Addresses to the Government, we advocate that the Government should consider establishing a Land Supply Commission comprising members from different sectors of the community to accelerate and monitor land supply progress.  The Commission should be tasked to regularly review the rolling land supply programme in short, medium and long term.  The Commission should also facilitate public engagement, consensus building, and transparency enhancement on land supply issues, and hence to foster the political will for the long-term interests of Hong Kong. 

B.     Lantau Tomorrow 

7.  We support in principle the early commencement of the feasibility study of Lantau Tomorrow Vision.  Yet, we stress that this should not go down the path of a conventional planning and engineering study right away.  First of all, this should be a strategic and overview study targeting to answer the many questions already raised in the community which have intensified recently due to likely implications of the pandemic and climate change.  It should largely be a planning and design led study with extensive public engagement on the visions and future land uses, having regard to the community aspirations for a quality livable and sustainable built environment; the future role of Lantau Tomorrow in the context of Hong Kong and the region; and smart city technologies etc. 

 8.  Scenario testings, from economic, environmental, engineering and planning perspectives, on different scales and modes of land reclamation should be conducted, instead of championing of the magic figures at the outset.  Besides, the impact of extreme weather (largely due to global climate change) on coastal areas of the future reclaimed islands and the ecological impact during and after reclamation must be duly examined and addressed. 

 9.  The necessary transport infrastructure to maintain effective local as well as regional transportation connections warrant careful study too as Lantau Tomorrow’s future role as the double gateway to the Greater Bay Area should be strengthened.  Lantau tomorrow should be seamlessly connected to the national highspeed rail network, so as to bring long term economic benefits to the society.

C.    Railway and Major Roads beyond 2030+

10.  With regard to the proposed Comprehensive Transport Study (CTS), we urge that the study should focus on the following:

  i.            transport behavioral change because of flexible working hours and

work from home

  ii.            comprehensive land use and transport integration

 iii.            intercity and regional connectivity

 iv.            promoting and facilitating walking

 D.    Invigorating Island South 

11.  We support adopting a comprehensive approach to invigorate Island South.  While we support the rebirth of Ocean Park concept with tourism theme as well as the various measures to facilitate the industrial revitalization in the district, we consider a new mode with flexible mixed-use zoning should be promulgated.  Due to the experience from COVID-19, we now know that certain job nature could be handled through working from home and the traditional home and office separation becomes blurred.  In Island South, we can explore mixed use within the same unit in a proper home-office development.  Conversion or redevelopment of industrial or office buildings in Island South into home-office units would be able to help increase the number of flats while not significantly losing employment opportunities, subject to compliance with fire safety requirements and other government regulations.

12.  Ocean Park, and how it is to be salvaged may only be one of the various aspects in a comprehensive and long-term strategy to invigorate Island South.  The Government should not only strive towards Ocean Park’s re-birth in the short-term, but also to review the land uses holistically so that nearby sites may also be made of the immense potential and resources of Island South in respect of tourism, sports and cultural heritage, etc.  Since the studies would cover a wide range of aspects across many disciplines, the proposed establishment of a multi-disciplinary office is supported.  We also believe that the Government will undertake the necessary public engagement to solicit the community aspirations and views.

E.     Kowloon East

13.  We look forward to the smart city developments in Kowloon East.  Kowloon East should be the pilot in data analytics and digital infrastructure to provide useful and real-time information or trends to individuals and government for decision making.  The big data via 5G facilitates public transport management and helps travellers plan their journeys more efficiently.  Likewise, this technology will be able to facilitate shared use of public spaces and facilities. 

14.  We could also promote single site, multiple uses in Kowloon East with advanced enabling works to be provided at the beginning.  The proposed public park over underground carpark can be planned and developed with the flexibility of conversion to accommodate emergency uses such as quarantine centres.  Public spaces, parks, schools and community centres should be designed and managed to cater for multiple uses at different times of the day and different days of the week, to fully utilize the space and the facilities to closely knit the local communities. In times of emergency, the local communities will be able to efficiently respond to the adverse situations making use of the established social network and the available resources.

F.     Transitional Housing

15.  Government’s continuous commitment in providing transitional housing as an expedient and temporary means of meeting the housing needs of the needy in the community is appreciated.  We in principle support the Government’s continuous commitment and efforts on provision of transitional housing on the understanding that they are properly planned with the necessary community facilities for the needy.  We also urge the Government to explore the feasibility of converting some large and suitable transitional housing sites into permanent housing sites, by expediting the necessary planning and land administration arrangements.  Given that the provision of transitional housing is largely in stop-gap and expedient means, we urge the Government to gear up her utmost and dedicated efforts in addressing the land supply and housing problems as an ultimate solution.

16.  Regarding the study on tenancy control for subdivided units, we suggest the Government to take immediate actions to step up control on unauthorised sub-division of flats to ensure a healthy and safe living environment in particular proper drainage system and good ventilation.

G.    Public Welfare Facilities and RCHE

 17.  We urge the government to seriously review the design standards for the RCHE and recommend the government to formulate new policies to facilitate the middle-class elderly to age in retirement housing with self-contained units in a community setting with services provided through institutional support.  Consideration could be given to provide incentives such as bonus GFA or land premium reduction to private developers to provide such welfare facilities, RCHE and quality retirement homes. 

Public Affairs Committee
The Hong Kong Institute of Planners
January 2021

有關「綜合發展區」的討論摘要

本立場書旨在澄清一些對「綜合發展區」的誤解，並探討可能的未來方向。當局於一九七六年開始把「綜合發展區」地帶納入分區計劃大綱圖內，其主要目的是促使市區重整，以及逐步淘汰互不協調及不符合規劃意向的用途。訂立「綜合發展區」時，會詳細考慮各方面因素，例如當局在有關地點的規劃意向、土地類別、業權，以及其他發展限制（包括落實發展的機會）。只會在沒有其他更理想的機制可達致規劃目標的情況下，才會把某幅土地指定為「綜合發展區」地帶。因此，「綜合發展區」的訂立為我們帶來更好、更全面的城市規劃。事實上，已經有部分「綜合發展區」成功實施。問題的關鍵在於併合土地和提供基建設施方面有重大困難，各「綜合發展區」也需要適時檢討。

1.          「綜合發展區」地帶的規劃意向

 「綜合發展區」的規劃目標是實現綜合規劃藍圖和混合土地用途發展，包括其他地帶內個別發展未能提供的社區設施和休憩用地。

大部分現有的「綜合發展區」地帶實際上是由政府和私營機構提議，以促進重新發展。這個土地用途地帶為發展商提供了併合土地進行重建的機會。

2.         「綜合發展區」地帶的成功例子

事實上，許多 「綜合發展區」已經全部或部分落成。大型住宅發展項目包括鰂魚涌太古城和紅磡黃埔花園。位於中環的國際金融中心 (IFC) 是「綜合發展區」下商業發展的一個成功例子。近期的分期發展項目則包括九龍站及北角繼園街柏蔚山。繼園街「綜合發展區」項目的第一期發展，並沒有影響將來位於該地帶的其他地段的發展潛力或整體規劃目標。另一個正在籌備的「綜合發展區」發展項目為廣深港高速鐵路西九龍站上蓋項目。

3.         提供基建設施和土地行政的難題

現時土地供應推展緩慢的難題在於土地合併和提供基建設施時遇到困難，從而影響已規劃的發展項目。問題並非源於訂立「綜合發展區」地帶。因此，社會的討論重點應放在解決提供基建設施和土地行政的問題上。

香港規劃師學會提倡以全面綜合的規劃和以人為本的方式來制訂整體土地用途和發展綱領，並輔以土地用途圖則和規劃綱領，以促進發展和指導基建設施的提供。延後鋪設鐵路和公路等基建設施，不但會影響發展進度，也為市民的日常通勤帶來不便。

在土地行政和併合土地方面，私人發展商可利用《土地(為重新發展而強制售賣)條例》作為土地合併的工具。就「綜合發展區」地帶而言，《城市規劃條例》第 4(2) 條亦載有為落實「綜合發展區」發展而收回土地的條文。對此，政府應探討如何妥善執行有關條文，以加快落實和增加土地供應。

 4.         檢討各「綜合發展區」的規劃研究

 除了由規劃署每兩年一次所進行的「綜合發展區」地帶檢討，香港規劃師學會建議進行一項規劃研究，以檢討現有各幅「綜合發展區」以及毗鄰的地區，研究保留作「綜合發展區」地帶的適切性，並對周邊的土地用途地帶作整體規劃。

5.         加快實施的未來方向

 為加快「綜合發展區」發展，香港規劃師學會建議訂立簡化程序，鼓勵發展商在提交發展建議作批准前，與相關政府部門作更廣泛的討論。

 至於新界鄉郊地區的「綜合發展區」項目，如能成立一個類似市區重建局的法定機構，可能有助加快收回土地以進行重建。該些重建地區，包括已劃為「綜合發展區」的地帶，應準備土地用途圖則供城市規劃委員會核准，並作為實施和提供基建設施的基礎。

 建議制定審查機制，以省視私人發展商所提交的公私營合作混合房屋發展的建議是否符合規劃要求和公共用途，以獲取政府支持該些土地合併方案。

 部分香港規劃師學會的關注已列於我們就土地供應向政府提交的文件中。我們認同收回土地能加速發展；然而，在未有適當的保障和諮詢的情況下，利用市建局的土地收回能力以協助私人發展商合併土地的相關討論並不成熟，亦無助解決現時迫切的土地供應問題。

公共事務委員會
香港規劃師學會
二零二一年八月十八日