Page 67 - ENGLISH_FullText
P. 67

residence like youth hostels). Langham Place is one such precedence, at
              which the indoor cooked food centre is situated at the podium level in a tall
              development.

                     We suggest the government to further review such sites in the
              urban area and consider short-term solutions like the ones described
              above. We hope that these land resources could provide at least a
              temporary relief for the inadequately housed. Alternatively, these land
              resources can at least be considered to support a denser development of
              other public facilities, such as community centres.


              Streamlining Approval Processes

                     We are glad to see that the Development Bureau has
              communicated with the industry to discuss a set of improvements to the
              current approval mechanism. Some of the discussed proposals are similar
              to what we have raised in our first Research Report, for example a set of
              clearly pre-defined parameters (“Core Points”) to be included in the approval
              of the “Design, Deposition and Height” submission and a standardised
              format of “Master Layout Plan” in accordance with the Practice Note. We
              hope that the government could actively strive to follow-up with these
              proposals.


                     We also reiterate our concern with the existing mechanism of land
              premium determination. This is especially the case when the “Pilot Scheme
              for Arbitration on Land Premium” which was introduced back in 2014 has
              only completed the abitration for one such case to date, involving a small
              amount of $39.3 million. We suggest the government to comprehensively
              review the said mechanism such that it can reflect the impact on
              development costs in response to latest changes in market situations and
              / or regulatory environment.

                     During the six fiscal years 2010/11 to 2016/17, the recurrent expenditure
              in the area of Planning and Lands rose by 43.3%, whereas aggregate
              recurrent government expenditure actually expanded by 55.7% over the
              same period. We urge the government to review its budgetary principles
              and allocate sufficient resources in accordance with the increasing needs
              of the policy area.


























                                                                                                                  67
   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72