G.S. 84
XCR(78)249
RESTRICTED
4
the letter in his name. A new village type house on Lot No 1893 in Demarcation District No 7 is registered in the name of Mr Man and it will be affected by the proposed undertaking. As the lot in question is a new grant building lot, the owner will be offered a site in exchange and a new house under the terms of the village removal policy. As it is believed that Mr Man is deceased and if this can be established, the offer will be made to the administratrix of his estate.
16
This objection is not related to any specific property affected by the proposed undertaking. The objection is made on the general ground that the proposed undertaking will necessitate the resumption of land and demolition of buildings. Since compensa- tion will be payable for land resumed and village-type houses on building land cleared will be reprovisioned under the village removal policy it is recommended that the objection should not be upheld.
Objection from Lam Kwok-pui (Objection No 6) (Annex H)
17
The objector is the owner of Lot No 1047C Remaining Portion in Demarcation District No 7 which consists 1,042 square feet building land and 8, 817 square feet agricultural land, and he operated the Tai Po Kennels at the above premises, which operation has now ceased. He objects to the proposed undertaking and suggests that the design of the 6 metre-wide rural feeder road, which forms part of the road improvement scheme, be amended so that his property will not be affected.
18
The objector's suggestion has been examined by the Director of Public Works and it is concluded that it would cause considerable engineering and construction difficulties if the present alignment were shifted sideways so that the objector's property should not be affected. In addition, other properties not at present affected would be affected by this shift. It is therefore concluded that the objector's request cannot be acceded to. As the land in question will be resumed, the owner will be offered compensation in accordance with the provisions under the Crown Lands Resumption Ordinance (Chapter 124). Rehousing and ex-gratia allowance will also be offered by the Housing Department according to existing policy.
19
The objector has been informed of his entitlements and the reasons why his objection cannot be met but has not yet withdrawn his objection. The District Officer, Tai Po advises that the objector has already terminat ed his kennel business and sold his properties on 15th August 1978. In view of the above, it is recommended that the objection should not be upheld.
RESTRICTED