Secretary for Development's speech at Harbour Business Forum Luncheon (English only)

Following is the speech by the Secretary for Development, Mrs Carrie Lam, at the Harbour Business Forum Luncheon, today (May 9):

Vincent (Cheng), Jon (Addis), Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for the invitation to join you for lunch today. Or more accurately, I thank the Harbour Business Forum (HBF) for granting me my request to come to speak to you on a subject very close to our hearts, following the launching of the Stage 2 public engagement on the Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront. It is always a pleasure, and an enlightened experience for me to meet people who care deeply about Hong Kong and share a passion for our most precious natural resource, the Victoria Harbour.

Since its establishment several years ago, the Harbour Business Forum has played an important role in promoting new ideas on how best to manage the harbour from a holistic perspective. I am particularly grateful to the Forum, as primarily a research driven think tank, for its productive output and significant contribution to the HKSARG’s work in enhancing the harbourfront since the setting up of the Development Bureau last July. Within a few months, HBF has published three very readable and relevant reports, namely the “Land Use Study for Hong Kong’s Harbour-front entitled “What is on Hong Kong’s Harbour”; Sustainable Transport Opportunities for the Harbourfront entitled “Balancing the Need to Travel with the Need to Improve Our Quality of Life”; and Organisational Structures & Harbourfront Management entitled “Managing the Vision”. The tasks ahead of us to deliver the vision in these reports are daunting. But I can assure you that these reports will not be left to dust in the “too difficult tray”. They will be valued as guiding documents for our harbour conservation work.

But let me now focus on the Government report setting out our design vision and concepts for the New Central Harbourfront which, I hope, will help to bring the various stakeholders closer together. As I stated in the Foreword of the Consultation Digest of the Stage 2 public engagement of the Urban Design Study for the New Central Harbourfront, “our vision is to create a vibrant, green and accessible waterfront in Central matching our target to develop Hong Kong into a quality global metropolis”. This vision reflects a broad consensus in society that preservation of the Harbour should be a priority.

Some people tend to view preserving the Harbour to be at odds with economic progress. I do not agree with this view. Rather, I concur with Jon when he said at the preface to one of the HBF reports mentioned above that “making the harbour an accessible and enjoyable place to visit is not only important in its own right, but also in the context of securing the range of benefits that the harbour provides to society and the economy”. Just imagine the huge tourism benefits that can accrue from a vibrant harbourfront that we can all be truly proud of. And economic value is not just about crunching numbers or seeking more public revenue. An iconic waterfront will raise the profile of Hong Kong as an international city; it will attract people to come and live here. It is also a valuable resource for recreation and leisure for many people. Summing up, our harbour is, in the words of Professor Bill Barron, an economic asset not fully realised.

For some who have been closely following our work on the Central Harbourfront’s Urban Design Study, you may be aware that the launching of the Stage 2 consultation has been put back by a few months. This is justified such that we can take into account our latest initiatives in reducing development density as announced by the Chief Executive in his 2007 Policy Address, in enhancing air ventilation, in better controlling total GFA, etc. It is well intended such that we could find inspiration from the community-driven design competition undertaken by Designing Hong Kong, and supported by HBF, which has attracted very high quality local and international entries. The refined urban design framework and the planning parameters for specific sites in the New Central Harbourfront included in the Stage 2 document have also reflected public views collected in the Stage 1 public engagement and has responded to public aspirations.

The refined framework has embraced six urban design principles. They are –


1. Diversity and vibrancy
2. Development intensity in harmony with the Harbourfront
3. Respecting the natural context and existing urban fabric
4. Ease of access and pedestrian connectivity
5. Respecting cultural heritage
6. Promoting environmentally friendly design and greening.

 

More specifically, we are envisaging –


- a 2 km continuous waterfront promenade of 11 ha (65% of the total size of Victoria Park) stretching all the way from the Central piers to the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre in Wan Chai, supported by one to three storeys structures for related commercial and leisure uses;
   
- a total GFA which is 25% less than what is permissible under the statutory OZPs and built-in safeguards that the building bulk and mass would not be subsequently inflated by GFA exemptions or bonuses;
   
- once and for all forgoing the Groundscraper concept in favour of smaller blocks of no more than 10 storeys high on reduced footprint featuring cascading designs, setbacks, with enhanced visual connectivity and accessibility to the harbour;
   
- plans to build an additional floor on piers 4 to 6 for alfresco dining, caf and other leisure and tourism uses and relocate the Hong Kong Maritime Museum to Pier 8 to enrich the harbourfront experience; and
   
- a wide view corridor from City Hall to the Harbour and outdoor performance area and open theatre on sites north of Citic Tower and HKAPA to create an arts and cultural precinct.
   

But we are not complacent to suggest that we have already got it right ourselves. In the coming months, we look for feedback and views on the refined design framework particularly options on different concepts we have prepared for more focused discussion, notably on the location for re-assembling Queen’s Pier and re-constructing the Star Ferry Clock Tower; on whether access to the harbourfront should be at grade with improved road crossings and elevated walkways or through unimpeded landscaped decks separated from vehicular traffic; and on whether the promenade should be marked by more greenery or more conventional park facilities.

Getting a broadly agreed design framework is only the beginning of a long process. The real test lies in our ability to deliver. While the institutional capacity of the newly formed Development Bureau, with nine departments from planning and lands to works agents all under one roof, is better placed than any of its predecessors in assuring success in implementation, we are not immune to problems haunting the efficient delivery of public services both locally and overseas, such as compartmentalized administration, fear of making mistakes and an erosion of passion. As the Secretary for Development, I regard it as my pivotal responsibility to overcome such difficulties and to provide the needed advocacy within the Administration and leadership to deliver an accessible, vibrant and enjoyable harbourfront.

One of the implementation issues that we have asked the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee to address and advise is management model for the harbourfront. Here, we have been presented with a range of options based on overseas experience. There is no doubt in my mind that a single entity able to pull together, not necessarily command, different levels and functions of government and to harness the support of the community is highly valuable. Indeed, a couple of weeks ago, with the formal approval of the Legislative Council, we have set up in Development Bureau an Office of the Commissioner for Heritage which is exactly performing that “pulling together” and “community focus” functions. We will review this experience down the road to see its applicability to managing the harbourfront.

While the public engagement, planning and institutional discussions are going on, we are looking for some “quick wins”. These will give people a real chance to get to enjoy the harbour without further waiting and watching. A good example of a “quick win” is the Wan Chai Promenade, developed on the former Wan Chai Public Works Cargo Area. We sometimes call this the “Pet Garden” because it is designed with pet owners in mind and has rightly become very popular with people out walking their dogs.

I am pleased to have been personally involved in establishing the “Pet Garden” initiated by the Wan Chai District Council in my former capacity as the Permanent Secretary for Home Affairs. Although this is on a relatively small scale and has some inherent accessibility limitations, it has brought a lot of enjoyment to people, not only just pet owners and lovers. It is a rare chance for people to get close to the waterfront. I have invited several District Councils to work with us in identifying similar “quick win” projects. I am confident we can come up with more of these so that more people can enjoy the harbourfront.

To give my colleagues and me further inspiration in this area of work, I took them on a visit to the North Tsing Yi Promenade on a Saturday morning last month. This particular promenade is commended in HBF’s Study as a good example of vibrant and accessible harbourfront area – it is very popular and is a joy to walk down by residents as well as visitors. It is the creation of public private partnerships, and the envy of people living along the waterfront on the Tsuen Wan hinterland. With good advance planning and suitable joint efforts with private developers, I think this success can be replicated elsewhere.

As some of you will know, this is my second time to work on harbour issues. As Permanent Secretary for Planning and Lands for a short while between 2003 and 2004, I was involved in the two legal battles on harbour reclamation and I announced the setting up of the HEC to provide a much needed forum to forge understanding and build consensus. Although regrettably we are still embroiled in some litigation over reclamation, I take comfort in noting that overall views about the way forward in preserving the harbour have converged over recent years. And the HEC has served a useful role in public engagement and consensus building. There are still differences, but I am confident we are well placed to find a common path to creating a world-class harbourfront environment.

These days, I suppose nobody envy the job of a senior official. The growing demands and pressure placed on us, the sheer scale and complexity of government work, the diverse interests we need to balance and a very vigilant media we need to handle sometimes prompt me to ask why one would still like to take this position. I think I have got the answer from an article entitled “Why on Earth would you join the Civil Service in the 21st Century” written by a former UK Permanent Secretary, Sir Philip Hayden. In concluding his article which was published in a collection of essays to celebrate the 150 years of the UK Civil Service Commissioners system, Sir Philip said that people would still join the civil service now as he did several decades ago because they are still able, as individuals, to make a difference to the real world. For harbour protection and conservation work in Hong Kong, I would want to be that individual making a real difference.

Thank you.


Back