16
It is possible that other suitable areas may be found and a further study is being made to establish this. On the other hand if sites cannot be found which comply with the policy set out in paragraph 10, then it seems inevitable that consideration should be given to reguisitioning unused agricultural land. (for example in Lau Fau Shan area), on the basis that it is preferable to infringe title than land use. This kind of solution will inevitably take longer to implement but needs to be examined urgently so that accommodation can be made available to house a greater number of refugees should this be necessary or to release land sterilised in Kai Tak or Sha Tin for development.
17
Subject to the provision of funds and to resolving any security or other problems at Kai Tak, it is proposed that work should start as soon as possible on the Kai Tak camp and on detailed planning of Borrow area No 41, Plans for development would be based on the
following criteria:
(a) Construction would be phased in zones of accommodation
for about 5, 000 refugees in each zone; with a maximum of 5 - 6 zones per camp (i. e. 25 30, 000 refugees);
Jigs
(b) density would be about 750 to the acre;
(c) accommodation standards would be kept as low as
is consistent with the requirements of fire prevention, structural soundness, public health and, where possible, below those adopted in temporary housing
areas;
(d) communal toilet and cooking facilities would be
provided;
(e) rudimentary medical facilities would be included so
that early onset of disease can be detected and to reduce the need for refugees to leave camps to attend clinics etc, which would be the additional effect of overloading facilities used by the general public, thus causing resentment. However, no education facilities would be included at public expense; and
(f)
so far as possible costs would be kept low. As a rough guide it seems that the cost might be of the order of $1, 500 to $2,000 per refugee.
CONFIDENTIAL #