[sustran] Hong Kong's proposed large reclamation of the Harbour for abypass of Central

[Regina Manzo]

Dear SusTran -

sorry to resend - I don't think the message text came through before.

Gina


From: "Regina Manzo" <reginamanzo at hotmail.com>

About one million square feet of reclamation into the harbour in Hong Kong 
is being proposed and contested by the public, the rationale for which is 
the disputed need for a road bypass of Central and Wan Chai.  The 
reclamation is way in excess of what would be needed to support the bypass, 
and 5.1 hectares will be sold to developers for commercial development.  An 
existing "Protection of the Harbour" law has been used to try to stop the 
proposed reclamation, as well as transport analyses saying the road is not 
needed.

The below letter from the group Save Our Shorelines (SOS) illustrates the 
latest legal developments.  And asks for assistance.  The slightly garbled 
text at the end explains more of the recent legal appeals.  For your 
information, and if anyone can assist.

Gina Manzo, AICP
Singapore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>From :
Save our Shorelines <hksos at aol.com>
    To :
"John Bowden" <JohnBowden at rb.com.hk>
   Subject :
Call for letters and volunteers
   Sent :
Thursday, March 11, 2004 1:39 PM

Dear SOS members and friends,

A lot has happened in the last few days and in short, it isn't over yet. The 
newspapers may have given the impression that this week's judgment allows 
the Central Reclamation to proceed, but actually it didn't rule directly on 
that at all.  What it did say is that the Chief Executive, through ExCo, is 
within his legal rights, and can make any decision he wants to with the 
project, but does not necessarily need to return it to the Town Planning 
Board.  Meanwhile, the Wanchai sections are being re-planned by the Town 
Planning Board.

(Christine Loh's summary is at the very bottom of this email)

Some pundits may have stated that there is no point in people rallying or 
protesting about these things because the decision lies in the hands of ExCo 
and the CE who will do what they think is best for Hong Kong and that 
confronting them only makes them dig their heels in. This isn't right.  No 
one in government can be expected to make decisions to satisfy the community 
if the community don't let them know what they want.

SOS, in accepting the Court Ruling, believes that we must go to the top. If 
the ultimate decision on the future of the Harbour is in the hands of Mr. 
Tung we would like to be sure that he is receiving the best advice and 
guidance on the matter.  We don't want to 'beat' the government, or to make 
it lose face in the public view.  Instead we would prefer to see a mature, 
responsive government that can take in what people are saying to it and 
model its decisions accordingly, even if this means changing direction to 
serve the people.  We believe that those people will have more respect for a 
government that says "OK, we have heard your calls and although it means 
making a few changes we are willing to compromise"  Admitting to a mistake 
is often better than adding to it.

To show that the issue is still very much open and that the final form of 
Hong Kong's harbour shoreline can still be influenced by your opinions SOS 
will be holding an ENCOURAGEMENT DRIVE this Friday afternoon (Mar 12) and 
Saturday to collect letters, poems and ribbons from the public to give to 
Mr. Tung to help him in deciding that the reclamation is illegal and should 
be postponed, when he next meets with ExCo.  Naturally we hope that he will 
acknowledge the depth of public feeling on the issue, the fact that the 
project is illegal, and decide for himself - despite the poor counsel he is 
getting from some ExCo members, to postpone and scale back the reclamation 
project in Central. But he needs to hear that from you.

Please join our SOS representative at any time between 1pm and 6pm on Friday 
March 12th and 10 am to 6pm Saturday March 13th near Queens Pier in Central 
and drop your messages into the SOS box. Ask us questions if you want to 
know more about the shoreline issues at stake here. Mr. Tung needs your 
advice to make the right decisions for Hong Kong's Harbour.  You can also 
reply by email, and we'll drop it in the box for you.

SOS members, we would very much like Chinese speaking volunteers to join us 
at Queens Pier, this is your chance to support the association if you can 
spare just a few minutes on Friday or Saturday.

LOOK FOR THE SOS BANNER

John Bowden
Chairman
Save our Shorelines

www.sos.org.hk



Society for Protection of the Harbour Limited

保 護 海 港 協 會 有 限 公 司

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]-->

              2006, One Pacific Place,      Tel    (852) 2845-8138

              88 Queensway, Hong Kong    Fax    (852) 2845-5964

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

                        Re:                        Central Reclamation Phase 
III

HCAL 102 of 2003

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

The Central Reclamation Judicial Review was necessitated by the recent Court 
of Final Appeal (“CFA”) Judgment in respect of the Wanchai Judicial 
Review.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

The CFA Judgment pronounced that the Government has been using the wrong 
interpretation and application of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance 
and that the decision affected all reclamation proposals by the Government.  
This CFA decision therefore also affects the Central Reclamation Outline 
Zoning Plan (“the Plan”) which was unlawfully made and needs to be 
reviewed in accordance with the ‘overriding public needs’ test 
prescribed by the CFA Judgment.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

The Harbour Society had written to the Chief Executive-in-Council 
(“Exco”) that the Plan be reviewed by the Town Planning Board (“the 
Board”) which was the maker of the original Plan.  Exco refused to do so.  
The Harbour Society therefore had no alternative but to institute the 
Central Reclamation Judicial Review to seek the Court’s assistance to 
order the Government to send the Plan back to the Town Planning Board for 
review in order to ensure that the Plan will properly complied with the 
‘overriding public need’ test.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

The Society based its case on the following grounds:-

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1.           <!--[endif]-->As the Plan was 
unlawfully made, it must be reviewed by the Board as the original maker of 
the plan.  Under the Town Planning Ordinance, the Board is the only 
authority empowered by law to make outline zoning plans for Hong Kong and 
not Exco.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2.           <!--[endif]-->Exco’s decisions are 
made behind close doors and there is no opportunity for public objections 
whereas the procedure under the Town Planning Ordinance (“TPO”) provides 
for public participation in the plan making process by the Board.  Under the 
TPO, the Board must consult the public and give the public an opportunity of 
raising objections. Such public participation and public objections 
procedure are not available in Exco’s decision making process.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]-->

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3.           <!--[endif]-->Exco is the applicant of 
reclamation and should not be the judge of its own cause.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]-->

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4.           <!--[endif]-->The plan includes one 
million square feet of reclamation.  It is not needed for the Central 
Wanchai Bypass which is being used by Exco to justify the Central 
Reclamation.  Furthermore 5.1 hectares are for commercial use and will be 
sold to developers for commercial development.  The ‘overriding public 
need’ test requires Exco to show that there is a compelling present need 
for reclamation which must be the minimum and there must be no reasonable 
alternative.  Therefore the Plan on the face of it does not comply with the 
CFA Judgment as the proposed reclamation is excessive.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

The present Judgment does not pronounce the Central Reclamation to be lawful 
nor that the Plan complies with the test prescribed by the CFA Judgment.  
The present Judgment only pronounces that Exco has no legal duty to refer 
the plan to the Board for review.  Nevertheless in Paragraph 98 of the 
Judgment.  The Judge said: “It may well have been preferable to remit the 
Plan to the Board, at least regarding the extent of reclamation”.  
Therefore even the Judge could see the good sense in Exco referring the plan 
to the Board for review even if Exco had no legal duty to do so.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->

Our Society is examining the present Judgment and seeking Counsel’s advice 
on the possibility and advisability of an appeal.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->



<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->

_________________________________________________________________
One-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – download MSN Toolbar now! 
http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/