Page 53 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
53
interchanges or along MTR lines. If we have good planning control when redeveloping godowns and factories into large commercial developments, we should in fact provide for high quality sitting-out space. Those who have been to Singapore or Japan will have seen concrete jungles there, but also well-planned lawns and resting spaces in the midst of the concrete jungles. Will the Council seek to improve the environment for the public, or sit back and wait for the donation of small gardens by developers or even the donation of a featured street view?
One more example. The Metroplan also proposes the redevelopment of suitable urban fringe areas for recreation use. I guess our colleagues of the Recreation Select Committee know about it, but participation is very limited. Members are aware that for various reasons, Central Government has an in-born tendency to put up land for sale. If the Council does not fight for land allocation to construct more recreational facilities, there will be the day when the land allocated to the Council for constructing a park is actually located at the fringe. We can see that if we don't fight hard to get land, the appearance of the city of Hong Kong will still be far behind Singapore and Japan 10 or 20 years from now.
My amended motion is to consider the Five Year Plan and the Metroplan together because I find our Five Year Plan forward-looking, directional, strategic and complementary to a medium or long-term development plan. I reiterate that the Metroplan is a document devised several years ago and one that is subject to continual refinement, so the Council should actively participate in medium and long-term outline planning. The Council should have a part to play each time when the Metroplan is subjected to revision and review. More opinions should be given in revising the Standards and Guidelines. We should not let Government act when we remain in the dark and then take over a piece of land allocated by Government for a certain usage.
Apart from medium and long-term outline planning, we can in fact base on the targets of our Five Year Plans to further devise medium-term land requests and short-term capital works projects. In fact, today's UC has many Five Year Plans. The problem is that we sometimes see trees but not the forest, in other words, we cannot see overall development and end up having problems. I hope Members will endorse my amendment so that the Urban Council and different government departments may join hands for the enrichment of our livelihood.
MR. CHAN CHOI-HI (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese):—The proposers of the original motion and amended motion have spoken. Following the order of speakers, first of all, I call upon Mr. PAO Ping-wing to speak.
Page 54 of 498
Page
Page 53 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
53
interchanges or along MTR lines. If we have good planning control when redeveloping godowns and factories into large commercial developments, we should in fact provide for high quality sitting-out space. Those who have been to Singapore or Japan will have seen concrete jungles there, but also well- planned lawns and resting spaces in the midst of the concrete jungles. Will the Council seek to improve the environment for the public, or sit back and wait for the donation of small gardens by developers or even the donation of a featured street view?
One more example. The Metroplan also proposes the redevelopment of suitable urban fringe areas for recreation use. I guess our colleagues of the Recreation Select Committee know about it, but participation is very limited. Members are aware that for various reasons, Central Government has an in- born tendency to put up land for sale. If the Council does not fight for land allocation to construct more recreational facilities, there will be the day when the land allocated to the Council for constructing a park is actually located at the fringe. We can see that if we don't fight hard to get land, the appearance of the city of Hong Kong will still be far behind Singapore and Japan 10 or 20 years from now.
My amended motion is to consider the Five Year Plan and the Metroplan together because I find our Five Year Plan forward looking. directional, strategic and complementary to a medium or long term development plan. I reiterate that the Metroplan is a document devised several years ago and one that is subject to continual refinement, so the Council should actively participate in medium and long-term outline planning. The Council should have a part to play each time when the Metroplan is subjected to revision and review. More opinions should be given in revising the Standards and Guidelines. We should not let Government act when we remain in the dark and then take over a piece of land allocated by Government for a certain usage.
Apart from medium and long-term outline planning, we can in fact base on the targets of our Five Year Plans to further devise medium-term land requests and short-term capital works projects. In fact, today's UC has many Five Year Plans. The problem is that we sometimes see trees but not the forest, in other words, we cannot see overall development and end up having problems. I hope Members will endorse my amendment so that the Urban Council and different government departments may join hands for the enrichment of our livelihood.
MR. CHAN CHOI-HI (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese):-The proposers of the original motion and amended motion have spoken. Following the order of speakers, first of all, I call upon Mr. PAO Ping-wing to speak.
Pag
Page 53 of 498
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.