On behalf of the Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau, I refer to Christine Loh's article 'Ground control' (November 4). We strongly object to Ms Loh's statements, because they are not based on fact and are misleading.
She told the public that 'government has always used the harbour as a land bank to generate maximum revenues'. We have made it clear that our policy goals are the continued protection, preservation and enhancement of the harbour. We have pledged that apart from the existing Central Reclamation Phase III, Wan Chai Development Phase II and Southeast Kowloon Development, we will not consider any reclamation proposals within the harbour.
The government's determination to protect the harbour and to involve the public is exemplified by the setting up of the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee in May last year. It has created harbour planning principles.
Ms Loh also referred to the government's refusal to change the Central (Extension) outline zoning plan. We regret that she has not informed the public what the town planning process entails, in particular the plan in relation to the Central reclamation. The draft plan was first exhibited for public inspection in 1998. After considering public views and objections, the draft was revised to reduce the proposed scale of reclamation from 38 hectares to 23 hectares. The original land use proposals were also substantially amended. The revised plan was approved by the chief executive in council in February 2000. The plan has gone through several amendments, all of which had gone through the due process just mentioned.
Regarding the Central-Wan Chai bypass, we do not agree with Ms Loh's statement that the transport experts naturally support government plans from a traffic perspective. The bypass is the missing link in the strategic road network on the northern shore of Hong Kong Island. There is an essential need to build the bypass as the existing infrastructure cannot meet the current and future demand.
Ms Loh's comments on the Lands Department regarding Oil Street open space, and its stance on land sale in general, are also unfair. It is the department's job to dispose of land in accordance with its planned uses on behalf of the government. It is also tasked to advise the government on the value of land. It is common knowledge that a harbourfront site can fetch higher land premiums. There is nothing wrong in the department tendering such advice to the Town Planning Board.
Ms Loh misled the public by suggesting the department's advice to the board was government policy, without regard to the fact that the decision to reject the rezoning application was made by the board - a statutory body, where a majority of members are non-government officials. It will take a balanced view.
