IN
SATURDA, JUNE 29, 1985
WHEN THE SITE UNDER DEVELOPMENT WAS BEING CLEARED, THE LDC WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REHOUSING AND RESETTLING THOSE AFFECTED BY THE SCHEME.
MR TODD SAID THE LDC WOULD NOT BE A LARGE ORGANISATION BUT WOULD HAVE A SMALL PERMANENT STAFF. IT WOULD HAVE A DEVELOPMENT SECTION, WORKING MAINLY THROUGH CONSULTANTS, A BUILDING MANAGEMENT SECTION AND A REHOUSING SECTION.
HE POINTED OUT THAT SO FAR AS INITIAL PLANNING WAS CONCERNED THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR APPROVING DEVELOPMENT SITES AND ENSURING THAT SCHEMES WERE WELL DESIGNED WOULD CONTINUE TO REST WITH THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD,
THE DESIGNATION OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS WOULD BE PUBLISHED UNDER THE TOWN PLANNING ORDINANCE AND THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO THESE PROPOSALS.
MR TODD TOLD THE SEMINAR THAT OWNERS OF PROPERTY TO BE RESUMED WOULD HAVE A CHOICE OF SELLING THEIR PROPERTY OUTRIGHT OR SURRENDERING IT FOR SHARES IN THE SUBSIDIARY COMPANY UNDERTAKING DEVELOPMENT.
IF THEY TOOK THE LATTER CHOICE, THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE PREFERENTIAL RIGHTS TO BUY FLATS IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT.
THE AIM IN REHOUSING WOULD BE TO PROVIDE ACCOMMODATION IN THE SAME AREA AS THE REDEVELOPMENT.
MR TODD SAID: THESE PROVISIONS WOULD, I BELIEVE, MEET THE NEED TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF THE OWNERS AND THE TENANTS AND ALLOW FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE PLANNING PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT COMMUNITY NEEDS WERE NOT OVERLOOKED.+
HE CONTINUED: +TO ESTABLISH THE LDC ON A SOUND FINANCIAL BASIS, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY INITIALLY FOR THE CORPORATION TO UNDERTAKE PROJECTS WHICH WERE POTENTIALLY PROFITABLE.
+HOWEVER, IN THE LONGER TERM PROFITS MADE BY THE LDC WOULD BE USED TO FUND PROJECTS WHICH WERE NON-PROFITABLE BUT DESIRABLE IN TERMS OF URBAN REDEVELOPMENT.+
/3 ..