Community College of City University<br />DSS20002<br />Social Policy and Administration<br />SE Kowloon (Kai Tak) Plannin...
Background Information<br /><ul><li>July 1998 => Hong Kong International Airport  moved to Chep Lap Kok
Government started to plan the re-development of the area after the Kai Tak airport was closed.
Aim: To develop Kai Tak as a Heritage, Green, Sports and Tourism hub of Hong Kong</li></li></ul><li>Planning<br /><ul><li>...
Jun 1992 -> Planning Department conducted the South East Kowloon Development
Sept 1995 -> Feasibility Study for Southeast Kowloon Development
Nov 1999 -> Launched a new Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of Southeast Kowloon  
Jun 2002 -> Passed the Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of Southeast Kowloon</li></li></ul><li>Who a...
Sub-Committees<br />
Main issues of controversy<br />The development of a huge Harbor-front area<br />The prioritization of such space for resi...
New Mechanisms<br /><ul><li>Harbor-front Enhancement Committee(HEC)
Three Stage Consultation</li></ul>“In determining vision and key issue”<br />“Outline Concept Plans”<br />“ Preliminary Ou...
Three Stage Consultation<br />
After the Stage 3:<br />Business area                            <br />Sports hub*<br />Metro park*<br />Waterfront reside...
Sports Hub<br />Kai Tak City Centre<br />South Apron Corner<br />Metro Park<br />Runway Precinct<br />Tourism and Leisure ...
Evaluation(HEC, TPB, District Council)<br />
Evaluation<br />Overall view<br />Government->Conventional mode are important and good enough<br />CSO -> Conventional mod...
Evaluation(HEC, TPB, District Council)<br />
Institutional arrangement-Membership<br />HEC<br />CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Enhance the independent and reduce government...
 <br />TPB<br />     CSO: (Conventional)<br />Absent of grassroots and civil society because of government domination and ...
Institutional arrangement-Functions, powers, resources, and support<br />HEC<br />CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Resources are ...
Institutional arrangement-Agenda setting power and decision-making rules<br />HEC<br />     CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Gove...
Actors–Conceptions of engagement<br />Government: (Conventional)<br />Constitute meaningful civic engagement<br />CSO: (Co...
Reasons of different conceptions<br />The senior officials regard themselves are the guardians of public interest and they...
Actors-Interests and incentive<br />Government ->strong incentive :<br />Low popularity <br />Unexpected strong opposition...
Choice of chairmanship(HEC and sub committee)<br />Able to work effectively<br /><ul><li>Building more trust and understan...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

SE Kowloon (Kai Tak) Planning

784 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
784
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

SE Kowloon (Kai Tak) Planning

  1. 1. Community College of City University<br />DSS20002<br />Social Policy and Administration<br />SE Kowloon (Kai Tak) Planning <br />(T02) Team C & D<br />Group Members: Lau Hiu Tung, Winnie<br />                        Ip Mei Sz, Grace<br />                        Lai Kwok Yiu, Antonio<br />                        Ip Pak Wing, Micky<br />                        Chan Wai Cheong, Hale<br />                        Wong Sze Yuen, Oscar<br />                        Lam Wing Hei, Eric<br />
  2. 2. Background Information<br /><ul><li>July 1998 => Hong Kong International Airport moved to Chep Lap Kok
  3. 3. Government started to plan the re-development of the area after the Kai Tak airport was closed.
  4. 4. Aim: To develop Kai Tak as a Heritage, Green, Sports and Tourism hub of Hong Kong</li></li></ul><li>Planning<br /><ul><li>Sept 1991 ->Passed the MetroplanSelected Strategy by the Executive Council
  5. 5. Jun 1992 -> Planning Department conducted the South East Kowloon Development
  6. 6. Sept 1995 -> Feasibility Study for Southeast Kowloon Development
  7. 7. Nov 1999 -> Launched a new Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of Southeast Kowloon  
  8. 8. Jun 2002 -> Passed the Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of Southeast Kowloon</li></li></ul><li>Who are involved?<br /><ul><li>Government</li></ul>Territorial Development Department<br /><ul><li>Harbor-front Enhancement Committee (HEC)</li></ul>Non-Governmental Organization(NGO)<br />
  9. 9. Sub-Committees<br />
  10. 10.
  11. 11. Main issues of controversy<br />The development of a huge Harbor-front area<br />The prioritization of such space for residential, sports and tourists purposes<br />The preservation of a treasured historical site.<br />The issue of economic development<br />The connectivity between the future Kai Tak Development and neighbor districts<br /> The issue of reclamation<br />  <br /> <br />
  12. 12. New Mechanisms<br /><ul><li>Harbor-front Enhancement Committee(HEC)
  13. 13. Three Stage Consultation</li></ul>“In determining vision and key issue”<br />“Outline Concept Plans”<br />“ Preliminary Outline Development Plan”<br />
  14. 14. Three Stage Consultation<br />
  15. 15. After the Stage 3:<br />Business area                            <br />Sports hub*<br />Metro park*<br />Waterfront residential area<br />Tourism hub with a cruise terminal and heliport at the tip of the former Kai Tal runway<br />Mixed use area at the south apron<br />Kai Tak City Centre<br />Sports hub<br />Metro park<br />Runway Precinct<br />Tourism and Leisure Hub<br />South Apron Corner<br />More Green Open Space<br />Stadium and Cruise Terminal <br />CANCEL<br /> 200M High-rise Hotel<br /> heliport<br />Draft preliminary outline development plan<br />Finalized preliminary outline development plan<br />
  16. 16. Sports Hub<br />Kai Tak City Centre<br />South Apron Corner<br />Metro Park<br />Runway Precinct<br />Tourism and Leisure Hub<br />
  17. 17. Evaluation(HEC, TPB, District Council)<br />
  18. 18. Evaluation<br />Overall view<br />Government->Conventional mode are important and good enough<br />CSO -> Conventional mode is ineffective<br />
  19. 19. Evaluation(HEC, TPB, District Council)<br />
  20. 20. Institutional arrangement-Membership<br />HEC<br />CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Enhance the independent and reduce governmental domination<br />Check and balance effect <br />Government : (New mechanism)<br />Repeat on the same issue<br />Time consuming because CSOs attend different meeting with different representatives.<br /> <br />  <br />
  21. 21.  <br />TPB<br /> CSO: (Conventional)<br />Absent of grassroots and civil society because of government domination and appointment<br /> Government: (Conventional)<br />Ensure the impartiality of management and secretariat service to be provided to the Town Planning Board(TPB).<br /> District Council <br /> CSO: (New Mechanism)<br />Limited professional knowledge, little training and technical support by the government<br /> Government: (New Mechanism)<br />Different views, difficult to fully incorporate the views of CSOs.<br /> <br />
  22. 22. Institutional arrangement-Functions, powers, resources, and support<br />HEC<br />CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Resources are provided by the government <br />Less information can be accessed<br />Less resources to undertake impartial research on planning issue<br />Government does not fully provide the financial and administrative support<br />
  23. 23. Institutional arrangement-Agenda setting power and decision-making rules<br />HEC<br /> CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Government was only keen on its own agenda<br />Government was far less responsive to harbor related issues<br />
  24. 24. Actors–Conceptions of engagement<br />Government: (Conventional)<br />Constitute meaningful civic engagement<br />CSO: (Conventional)<br />Regard that the bureaucratic domination and ”professional arrogance” lead the official reluctant to release information to the public<br /> CSO: (New mechanism)<br />Have a role in shaping the initial agenda and they could have a say in the earliest phase of planning<br />
  25. 25. Reasons of different conceptions<br />The senior officials regard themselves are the guardians of public interest and they have to balance the need for the whole community<br />CSOs are simply advocating their own sectoral or business interests. Thus they cannot fully balance the pros and cons in planning projects<br />Officials are responsible for the policy and accountable to the community<br />CSOs agree with what the officials think but the local resistance should not be ignored and local interests do not necessarily coincide with broader societal interests<br />
  26. 26. Actors-Interests and incentive<br />Government ->strong incentive :<br />Low popularity <br />Unexpected strong opposition to the previous OZPs<br />Political groups and Legislative council criticize the government for not allowing adequate public participation<br />CSO ->strong incentive:<br />Professionals<br />They have professional standards and concerns<br />They may want to get the contracts for particular projects<br />Political parties<br />Put pressure on the government <br />
  27. 27. Choice of chairmanship(HEC and sub committee)<br />Able to work effectively<br /><ul><li>Building more trust and understanding</li></ul>Planning through interactions<br />Allowing the HEC to conduct some civic engagement activities and less domination on the agenda setting<br />Officials follow the CSO's promise and request<br /><ul><li>Transparency and feedback</li></ul>HEC attends high degree of transparency<br />Immediate feedback<br />Engagement process-Factors of Facilitating Civic Engagement<br />
  28. 28. Six Recommendations<br /><ul><li>Emphasizing the value of public engagement in developing the harbor
  29. 29. Streamlining the three-stage programmeinto a two-stage programme
  30. 30. Better time management
  31. 31. The phasing of engagement activities of different reviews/studies to avoid "consultation fatigue"
  32. 32. The use of different formats
  33. 33. The use of different aids</li></li></ul><li>Government should....<br /><ul><li>Provide more impartial information as early as possible
  34. 34. Allocate more resources to hire more consultants
  35. 35. Set up a fund to offer independent and professional advice</li></li></ul><li>HEC should improve.....<br />Prioritizations of issues <br /><ul><li>Time management
  36. 36. Consensus building</li></ul>Allocation of more resources<br /><ul><li>Establishment of an independent secretariat serving the HEC
  37. 37. Insistence of a small number of representatives which could render the deliberation unproductive
  38. 38. Meetings are not repeatedly debated
  39. 39. Enhancement of trust among the participants</li></li></ul><li>Advisory and Statutory Bodies Should..<br />Coordinate more with other existing advisory and statutory bodies to avoid overlapping<br />The TPB should explore whether it should have and independent chairman, an independent secretariat, a different mode of operation and different rules for membership appointment<br />
  40. 40. Thank You!!<br />

×