Blots on the landscape
High Court rulings in favour of developers may be based on legal documents but are they always in our best interests? Jack Robertson reports
If you were the chairman of a major property development company and your profit margin depended on your ability to build a new high-rise block, which would be easy to fill with residents but which would have an adverse effect on the surrounding neighbourhood, what would you do? Would you find a way to build at any cost or would you settle for building a mid-rise to further the greater good?
By appealing to the High Court to overthrow decisions made by the Town Planning Board over the scope of new residential buildings, many HongKongers feel developers are abusing the judicial system and adversely affecting our quality of life.
The High Court bases its decisions purely on legal documents like the Outline Zoning Plan (OZP) pertaining to individual sites — it does not take into account the cumulative impact of developments or social and environmental concerns. In other words it makes decisions based on the small print rather than the big picture, and this can work in a developer's favour.
Part of the problem of course is that many of Hong Kong's 108 OZPs are outdated. These should minutely detail the Town Planning Board's objectives and intentions for new buildings in a particular area, but over 50 percent do not have planning parameters specifying heights, plot ratios and gross floor areas. Moreover, relatively new concerns, like the visual and wind-flow barrier that overly tall buildings can create, do not as yet feature in most OZPs —and they need updating.
These issues came to the fore towards the end of last year when Swire Properties obtained a High Court ruling allowing a 54-storey development to be built across a Mid-Levels site abutting Seymour Road and Castle Steps. The judicial review pushed through a project that had been blocked by the Town Planning Board, Town Planning Appeal Board and Building Appeal Board since 2003.
Swire had repeatedly applied to have the 12-storey limit on the site removed, but the Town Planning Board argued that a tall building on this site would block the views enjoyed by neighbouring residents and greatly increase traffic congestion in the area.
Judge Andrew Cheung Kui-nung found that under the original Mid-Levels West OZP, the site (which had no direct street frontage) had been zoned for unrestricted residential development. In 1995, restrictions had been placed upon it because of concerns about access for fire services and refuse collection — not because of traffic or visual considerations.
The judge therefore accepted Swire's argument that, since the site is now included in a development which fronts the street, concerns about access were no longer viable and height limitations could be waived.
While the government is reviewing the judgement before deciding whether or not to appeal against the High Court ruling, Swire is going ahead with construction — and Mid-levels' residents are up in arms.
"There are three parties involved here — the court, the developer and the government — all with their own points of view," says Danny Lam of Hong Kong Properties. "But it's clear that existing Mid-Levels' residents object to the development of this project because it will block their view and possibly impede air flow."
Lam says that residents at Robinson Place on neighbouring Robinson Road are particularly worried, as their view of the harbour will be totally obstructed by the new development, nicknamed "the toothpick". Its opponents believe that the Swire building will not only be an eyesore, but that by blocking northerly winds it will add to the "wall effect" already apparent in the Mid-Levels.
Traffic congestion is also expected to worsen due to the influx of new residents, a serious concern when you consider that it can take 20 minutes to drive from Seymour Road to Hollywood Road in peak hours.
|
.jpg)
