Mediation is most suitable solution for urban renewal

    Updated: 2013-05-14 13:57

    By Andrew Mak(HK Edition)

      Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

    On last Sunday it was reported in the foreign press that tension has been bubbling in two western mainland cities as opposition grows against planned industrial facilities. The reason is growing public concern over the environment that threatens to derail projects that central government officials say are needed for economic growth. On the same day in Hong Kong, we had concerns over the Urban Renewal Authority taking action in West Kowloon to recover possession of land-using powers under the Land Resumption Ordinance.

    The Urban Renewal Authority and its predecessor, the Land Development Corporation was set up to expedite urban renewal. It is a statutory body vested with powers to resume private land under the Land Resumption Ordinance. Under the statutory regime, compensation was to be paid to the private owners of the land resumed and it can be a judicial process. It appears that the Lands Tribunal has more than 20 years' experience in dealing with land compensation cases.

    Prior to the 1980s, Hong Kong had relied mostly on private redevelopment efforts to regenerate urban areas. They were piecemeal and profit-driven. Only in the late 1980s had the government begun to, systematically, intervene in urban renewal through the formation of the Land Development Corporation (LDC) to prevent urban dilapidation in older districts. By the mid-1990s, the LDC was considered to have been too weak and too slow in renewing the urban fabric. Supply of residential flats through redevelopment continued to decline throughout the 1980s and 1990s, and was exacerbated by the Asian financial crisis in 1997. The Urban Renewal Authority was therefore created with broader powers and a somewhat more flexible financing model.

    There is no doubt that urban renewal is in the public interest. Urban renewal addresses problems of overcrowding, fire hazards, inadequate transport infrastructure, and a lack of public amenities in older districts.

    Somehow, the involvement of major property developers has led some landowners to think they should be entitled to a proportionate share of the profit that might be generated by redevelopment. The argument tends to forget about the inability of small land owners to redevelop large projects and the risks involved in any development when a major financial crisis emerges. However, the problem has been that major financial crises are few and far between. Experience has shown that private developers in joint venture with the Urban Renewal Authority were able to acquire highly profitable developments. Further, investors willing to take more risks would often be happy to be the last unit for resumption so as to extract the highest return. There is no shortage of such cases that went to the Lands Tribunal. But against the high profits made in redevelopment, it is difficult to take a moral judgment and suggest the actions of those investors willing to take a higher risk is somehow wrong.

    Valuation is often an art and not a science. Different valuation experts take singular views on valuation of the same property and sometimes the disparity can be substantial.

    This brings me to the question of what is the best way of resolving the problem. Litigation is of course one solution. The drawback is the time and cost involved. However, the properties may be valuable, especially if the one in question is a retail store. Litigation however, can only resolve the level of compensation. Litigation does not allow flexibility, for example, in terms of participation by landowners in the proposed development.

    Mediation would appear the more suitable alternative solution. So far we do not have a compulsory mediation regime in Hong Kong for land compensation cases. This idea should be considered seriously. However, more efforts from all sides, including the government and the Urban Renewal Authority, are required to provide the solutions in resolving the land-supply shortage in older districts, and the more glamorous goal of urban renewal.

    The author is a barrister and chairman of the Hong Kong Bar's Special Committee on Planning and Policy.

    (HK Edition 05/14/2013 page1)

    天堂资源中文最新版在线一区| 精品人无码一区二区三区| 无码日韩精品一区二区人妻| 亚洲精品无码国产| 最近的中文字幕大全免费8| 久久中文字幕无码专区| 日韩乱码人妻无码中文字幕 | 久久久精品人妻无码专区不卡 | 国产成人无码AV一区二区| 日韩精品中文字幕无码一区| 国产亚洲美日韩AV中文字幕无码成人| 婷婷五月六月激情综合色中文字幕| 亚洲 欧美 国产 日韩 中文字幕 | 久久中文字幕人妻丝袜| 国产亚洲?V无码?V男人的天堂 | 国产AV无码专区亚洲精品| 亚洲国产精品无码中文字| 欧美日韩毛片熟妇有码无码 | 精品国产aⅴ无码一区二区| 最近高清中文字幕免费| 一本大道香蕉中文在线高清 | 精品亚洲AV无码一区二区| 中文字幕在线视频网| 亚洲成人中文字幕| 精品久久久久久中文字幕人妻最新| 乱人伦中文无码视频在线观看| 亚洲人成人无码网www国产| 精品久久久久久无码中文野结衣| av无码专区| 精品无码国产自产拍在线观看蜜 | 中文字字幕在线中文乱码不卡| 无码国内精品久久人妻麻豆按摩| 日韩视频无码日韩视频又2021| 免费a级毛片无码免费视频| 精品人妻少妇嫩草AV无码专区| 无码国内精品久久人妻麻豆按摩 | 中文精品久久久久国产网址| 最近2019中文字幕免费直播| 日本无码色情三级播放| 亚洲av中文无码乱人伦在线播放 | 久久无码人妻精品一区二区三区|