SkyscraperPage Forum - HONG KONG | Victoria Harbour Reclamation

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)

- - HONG KONG | Victoria Harbour Reclamation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145137)

HONG KONG | Victoria Harbour Reclamation

Wow.. this is awesome! From the renderings I think it helps the environment by bringing some green into the foreground.

Man, in a hundred years the harbour will be just a small stream with all of this land reclaiming going on and all

Linking bypass and fate of road pricing is deceitful, say activists
31 March 2008
South China Morning Post

Anti-reclamation activists yesterday criticised the government for linking electronic road pricing with the controversial Central to Wan Chai Bypass.

Activists accused the government of using the road pricing issue to speed up reclamation of Victoria Harbour to build the bypass, a road aimed at easing traffic congestion on Hong Kong Island.

A Sunday Morning Post report said the second feasibility study on electronic road pricing had determined that if the government introduced the charge tomorrow it would have to sting drivers HK$90 for each trip to Central to achieve its aim of cutting traffic 20 per cent.

The study found drivers would need to pay only HK$40 to HK$50 if there was a bypass.

A vocal critic of the government's environmental policy, Albert Lai Kwong-tak, criticised the administration for trying to mislead the public.

"I cannot see a close relation between road pricing and the construction of the bypass. If our aim of having road pricing is to control pollution and ease traffic congestion, drivers can choose not to take private cars and use public transport if they think the fee is too high," said Mr Lai, a Civic Party member.

He said the government could still try road pricing without linking it to any "alternative route".

"For example, we can try it by starting to charge drivers on days with serious pollution or heavy traffic," Mr Lai said.

Legislator Kwok Ka-ki, convenor of the Action Group on the Protection of the Harbour, said: "The government simply wants to create an excuse to justify its reclamation of the harbour. Overseas experience is that building more roads will only encourage more people to drive and would thus result in road congestion in the end.

"Then we are locked in the cycle of building more roads and then more congestion, and then reclaiming more of the harbour."

The Central-Wan Chai Bypass is facing uncertainty and delays after the Court of First Instance blocked 10.7 hectares of temporary reclamation in and around Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter, saying it should be subject to the 1997 Protection of the Harbour Ordinance.

Oh wow! this i excellent news for HK! I really love this,I always wished that HK could have a more Chicago styled waterfront and parks,and it looks like your getting it. this is sweet,I bet itll offer really nice views of the skyline to. I also like the fact that it doesnt really take away much of the Harbour,just that already existing area.

Im really excited about this:P

Seize the chance for a world-class waterfront
17 May 2008
South China Morning Post

Hong Kong citizens have been badly conned over the Central Harbourfront. First we were told that there was an "overriding public need" for a Central-Wan Chai bypass and the MTR Sha Tin-Central rail link. This necessitated reclamation work, which destroyed such well-loved landmarks as the Star Ferry and Queen's piers.

Then we were told the bypass would go underground, which raised the question: why was the reclamation needed at all?

Now we are told that neither the bypass nor the MTR's cross-harbour section will go ahead, at least not until after the reclamation and the new government complex at Tamar are complete. At that point, the whole area will be dug up again for the road and rail tunnels to go in - but only if the government wins yet another judicial review to stop the underpass. The only winner is the government, which gets its grandiose new headquarters at Tamar.

Leaving all that aside, and accepting the central reclamation for what it is, Hong Kong is now offered a historic opportunity: a green-field site on which to create a world-class harbourfront. What city would not relish this opportunity? What government would not make sure of an optimal outcome, whatever it takes?

Let us consider what others have achieved: HafenCity in Hamburg, Darling Harbour in Sydney, Fishermen's Wharf in San Francisco, Boat Quay in Singapore and Baltimore's revitalised Inner Harbour - these are enormously successful and hugely popular districts. By contrast, the latest proposals from our Planning Department are embarrassingly amateurish.

The current outline zoning plan dates from the mid-1990s. At that time, the concept of carefully creating a world-class waterfront did not even enter the mind of planners. The latest proposals stick to the format of large-building footprints, high-capacity roads and large open spaces. Yet, the government is not entirely to blame. Because of calls from many people for even more open space, the current plan shows vast sun-drenched plazas, much of it paved in the usual Hong Kong manner. Planners around the world know from bitter experience that large open spaces on the waterfront do not work.

Because of knee-jerk reactions from district councillors against any commercial activity, there will be a dearth of attractions to encourage activity and public use on the harbourfront. There seems to be a fear that developers will profit from what is perceived to be a public asset. To which the answer is that, all of the hugely successful schemes mentioned earlier integrate smaller open spaces, piazzas and promenades with a dense network of restaurant, retail and leisure activities, to spectacular effect. The way to ensure fair business opportunities is to create smaller buildings on smaller sites and to encourage competition, rather than concentration in the hands of large developers.

The word that sums up this situation is "shame". It's a shame we are wasting a unique opportunity. And shame on our leaders for allowing this to come to pass.

Sticking to an outline zoning plan that guarantees a bad outcome; unrealistic transport assumptions driving bad design; design by a process of "least political objection" and the lowest common denominators of what various government departments have been able to agree on; throwing up design options and then asking for feedback from all and sundry: these are some of the major shortcomings.

There is no magic solution. Each of the cities mentioned earlier came up with different approaches. But it seems to me that a large part of the solution is to take the whole exercise out of the hands of the Planning Department and into the hands of an independent authority. This should consist of professionals, specialists and community leaders, a body entrusted by the public to deliver the world-class harbourfront it deserves.

Markus Shaw is chairman of WWF Hong Kong

Incredible. Its kinda looks like a mini Grant Park or something. HK never ceases to amaze.

Oh yay. More land that'll turn to mush in an earthquake. At least it's only a park on top. And a darn pretty one too.

Well ... HK is not in a seismically-active zone, and huge buildings will be anchored to bedrock anyway, so liquefaction won't impact their structural integrity.

But I don't think there'll be big skyscrapers planned on the reclaimed land.

Didn't know that. My knowledge of the seismic maps thataways is a bit fuzzy.

It's not the major skyscrapers that get the worst of it when liquefaction occurs. It's the little rowhomes, like the pretty ones in San Fran.

HK is such a stunning place