Greenbelt or Brownfield? - Mainecyy.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/9/3/12935669/greenbelt_or_brownfield.pdf · Greenbelt or Brownfield? ... •By means of a plot ratio x 3 •It reduces 340+

Greenbelt or Brownfield?An Introduction and a Cost-Benefit Analysis

Edward Yiu

Legislator 2016-2020

Apr 5, 2017

Definitions of Green Belts

Origin• Ebenezer Howard’s (1898) Garden City• In the 1930s the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) campaigned for a clear

barrier of undeveloped land against ribbon development and urban sprawl.

Definitions• “a narrow strip of parkland more or less encircling part of a built-up metropolitan or

large urban area” (Osborn, 1969, p.182)

• “a zone of land around the city where building development is severely restricted”

(Amati and Yokohari, 2006, p. 125)

• http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/SiteCollectionDocuments/aboutcouncil/advisorypanels/ruraladvisorypanel/mee

tings/ruraladvisorypanelminatt20110325.pdf

• “The GB zone covers mainly slopes and hillsides, most of which is naturally

vegetated. Some GB areas are also designated as Country Parks.”(TPB PG-NO. 10)

http://www.info.gov.hk/tpb/en/forms/Guidelines/pg10_e.pdf

London’s Approach to the Green Belt

Importance of GB1. England’s 14 GB covers nearly 13% of England,2. Provide a breath of fresh air for 60% of the population – 30 million

people – living in the urban areas within GB boundaries3. New surveys show that 95% of people value the beauty of the GB 4. 58% have visited for leisure in the past 12 months

Fresh Approach to the GB1. Recognise and protect the Green Belt2. Invest in and improve the Green Belt3. Connect and network the Green Belt

Approach to Development• Brownfield First Policy

CPRE (2010) Green Belts: a greener future, http://welwynhatfield.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/green-belts-a-greener-future-summary.pdf

London’s Greenbelts

“The overall area covered by the designated Green Belt has doubled since 1978. In some cases this incorporates expansion of Green Belt intended to offset the loss of areas to new development.

http://welwynhatfield.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/green-belts-a-greener-future-summary.pdf

Planning Purposes of GB

• The main purposes of the GB zone include the following:

• To conserve existing landscape features, areas of

scenic value and areas of recognised “fung shui”

importance;

• To define the outer limits of urbanized districts and to

serve as a buffer between and within urbna areas; and

• To provide additional outlets for passive recreational

uses. (TPB PG-NO. 10)

• To primarily conserve the existing natural environment amid the built-up areas/at the urban fringe,

• to safeguard it from encroachment by urban type development,

• to define the limits of urban and sub-urban development areas by natural features,

• to contain urban sprawl as well as

• to provide passive recreational outlets,

• with a general presumption against development.• Sources:

• OZPs

• S.3.5.2, Ch. 10 Conservation, Hong Kong Planning Standard and Guidelines, Aug. 2010 Edition, HKSAR Government http://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_en/tech_doc/hkpsg/full/ch10/ch10_text.htm

Planning Intentions of GB

Green Belt Example in HK

Urban

Green belt

Countrypark

Current Greenfield Area in HK

Type of Greenfield Total Land Area (hectares) (ha)

Green Belt 16 302

Village Type Development 3 368

Agriculture 3 187

Site of Special Scientific Interest 1 136

Conservation Area 5 739

Coastal Protection Area 827

Country Parks 43 455

Various Conditions of GB

Various Conditions of GB

Appropriateness of Rezoning GB for Residential Use

GB

- Conservation

- City Boundary

- Recreational Uses

Residential

Use？

Rezoning

Are the original functions of the GB sacrificed?

Principles in Rezoning GB

GB should not be rezoned unless:1. It does not serve the required functions of a GB – devegetated,

deserted or formed land;

2. The new use can better serve the required functions – upgradedto SSSI, countrypark, etc.

GB policy should be reviewed by a long term strategy of territorial planning, rather than a piecemeal approach of rezoning.

Development Bureau’s Approach

Review Standard

Phase I Phase II

Devegetated Area > 0.5ha, Slope < 20⁰

Deserted Next to developed area

Formed Land Next to transportation means

Lower value in limiting boundary

and conservation

〈局長隨筆〉http://www.devb.gov.hk/tc/home/my_blog/index_id_80.html

http://www.devb.gov.hk/tc/home/my_blog/index_id_80.html

Private Applications for GB Rezoning were mostly Rejected

Application for GB Rezoning (1997-2014) – by districts

District Approved Rejected TotalRejection

Rate

HKI 3 4 7 57.14%

Wong Lai Chung 0 2 2 100.00%

North Point 0 1 1 100.00%

Pokfulam 1 0 1 0.00%

Peak 2 0 2 0.00%

Quarry Bay 0 1 1 100.00%

KLN 0 0 0 --

NT 4 26 30 86.67%

SS/Fanling 0 9 9 100.00%

Tsuen Wan 0 2 2 100.00%

Tsuen Wan W 0 4 4 100.00%

Tai Po 1 2 3 66.67%

Shatin 1 1 2 50.00%

Ma On Shan 0 1 1 100.00%

Kwun Tong S 0 2 2 100.00%

Sai Kung 0 2 2 100.00%

Lantau I S 2 0 2 0.00%

Tuen Mun 0 2 2 100.00%

Yuen Long 0 1 1 100.00%

全港 7 30 37 81.08%

30 out of 37 applications were rejected (81%)

Rejection Reasons

15

10

11

10

10

11

1

8

5

5

19

24

1

9

10

2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

與「綠化地帶」的規劃意向相違背

發展過度密集

影響景觀/砍樹

影響交通

影響污水/排水/基礎設施

影響環境

山泥傾瀉的風險

影響城市設計/視覺效果

影響政府、機構或社區設施

影響休憩用地的供應

資料不足

不良先例

涉及政府土地

在規劃研究完成前改劃為時過早

危害完整的土地規劃

減少為應付丁屋發展需求的土地供應

Number of Applications

否決

原因

Rejection Reasons

Violation of the planning intentions of GB

Set bad precedents

Insufficient Information

Case Study

Functions GB

Conservation Woodland, next to countrypark, important habitat

Buffer Limiting urban encroachment into countrypark

Passive

RecreationPopular hiking trail

Performing the Functions of GB

Buffer between a countrypark and the developed area

http://www2.ozp.tpb.gov.hk/gos/default.aspx

Ecological Value of GB

Limnonectes

Polypedates_megacephalus

marsh frog

https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAUQjhxqFQoTCPCig_u02sYCFYETlAodRicNYQ&url=http://www.wikiwand.com/vi/Limnonectes&ei=e-SkVbD5K4Gn0ATGzrSIBg&psig=AFQjCNFFpRi4xr7h41RayBKqhYHlnfV4SQ&ust=1436956140884392

https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAUQjhxqFQoTCMmjqpO12sYCFUKKlAodaUUE5A&url=http://www.froghome.idv.tw/html/class_1/polypedates_megacephalus.html&ei=ruSkVcmUKsKU0gTpipGgDg&psig=AFQjCNH1XQEYn98Nf7Kd_zdCciCnYr2ofw&ust=1436956202269274

Public Opinions on GB

Study Area：

Period：Mid

Jun 2014

No. of

Sample：312

Method：

Public Opinion Survey Results

96.8%

2.9%

0.3%

A. Conservation Function

有

無

無意見 78.5%

19.9%

1.3% 0.3%

B. Limit Urban Sprawling

有

無

無意見

不一定

85.6%

13.1%1.3%

C. Passive Recreational Function

有

無

無意見

Opinion of GB Rezoning?

22.8%

6.7%

74.0%

1.6%

Agree or Disagree with the Govt’s

GB Rezoning Application?

贊成發展作公營房屋

贊成發展作私營房屋

不贊成

無意見

會破

壞生

態

減少

綠化/

公共

休憩

空間

危害

郊野

公園

城市

會過

度擴

張/發

展

其他沒有

列明

不贊成的原因 67.5% 72.7% 39.0% 39.0% 19.5% 1.7%

67.5% 72.7%

39.0% 39.0%

19.5%

1.7%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

百分

比(%

)

不贊成的原因

Disagree

Agree to build private housing

Agree to build public housing

Opinions on Other Land Supply

市區重

建填海

重建政

府、機

構/社區

用地

（如學

校及社

區會

堂）

發展棕

土（如

露天貨

櫃場及

停車

場）

發展岩

洞（如

搬遷沙

田污水

處理

廠）

開發鄉

郊土地

發展綠

化地帶其他

增加土地供應以配合未來發展的方法 59.3% 12.2% 30.4% 40.1% 7.4% 18.9% 4.2% 5.4%

59.3%

12.2%

30.4%

40.1%

7.4%

18.9%

4.2% 5.4%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

百分

比(%

)

UR Rec GIC BF Car Rur GB Oth

Opinions on GB Rezoning Application

91.3%

7.1%1.6%

GB should be protected?

應該

不應該

無意見

12.8%

86.2%

1.0%

GB rezoned to private

housing?

贊成

不贊成

無意見

Should

Should not

What is NT Brownfield?

• Underused industrial and commercial facilities which was formerly greenfield

Why NT Brownfield Should be Developed?

• Dr Ng Cho-nam, a former town planning board member and an associate professor of geography at the University of Hong Kong:

• “In a city where the value of land is so high, it is amazing such a wasteful use of land [for brownfield] still exists.”

• “The government needs to take into consideration that society is paying more for inefficient land use and pollution,”

• industrial buildings and logistics centres along highways would be a cleaner, tidier and more efficient way to house the brownfield businesses.

• Jacky Lau Yiu-shing, director of the Hong Kong Recycle Materials and Reproduction Business General Association

• up to 80 per cent of the recycling operations on brownfield sites were importing garbage from overseas, taking away valuable materials and dumping the rest of the garbage into landfills, which he said should not enjoy any support and deserve penalty for further pollution.

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/economy/article/2025361/hong-kong-brownfield-site-saga-rolls-calls-rise-banish

Why Brownfield First?

Win-Win-Win Solution for HK1. Clean the polluted

area2. Provide land for

development3. Rectify Melhado

Case drawback

History of NT Brownfield in HK

• Non-agricultural developments, such as container ports, are carried out on agricultural land in the New Territories since the 1970s.

Area of NT Brownfield

29

• 1,192 ha• For Agricultural Use• Now Container Ports, etc

Background of the Cause

30

• 1898, the New Territories was leased to the British

• Block Crown Leases were granted to replace the China one

• A Schedule in the BCL shows the uses and conditions

Melhado Case

31

• The Privy Council held that the Schedule showed the current uses and not the permitted uses

• Town Planning Ordinance was enacted in 1939 for urban areas only

• OZP did not include the New Territories• The govt lost the case in 1983, but did not

seek any law amendments for years• An amendment bill was submitted to LegCo

only in 1990• And was passed in 1993, but no enforcement

power

(Attorney General v Melhado Investment Ltd. [1983] HKLR 327

Further Amendments of TPO

32

• Add DPA in the NT to introduce enforcement power

• But no retrospective power• For sites zoned with OZP but

never DPA, PlansD would have no enforcement power on them

http://www.info.gov.hk/tpb/en/list_of_plans/coverage_enlarge.html

My First Private Bill in LegCo

• Try to provide enforcement power to PlansD on non-DPA sites

https://wordpress.com/post/ecyyiu.wordpress.com/9252

Distribution of Uses in NT Brownfield


Accommodating BF Operations in High-Rise Building


Current Uses Area (ha) Can it be accommodated in High Rise Bldg?

Storage, Recycling 472.7 Partially (say 200)

Container Port 305.7 Partially (say 150)

Carparking 171.5 Yes

Others 242.1 Unknown

Total 1192.0

• About 500 ha brownfield can be accommodated in High-Rise Bldg

• By means of a plot ratio x 3

• It reduces 340+ ha brownfield (it satisfies all the extra requirement of residential land)

Total Industrial Land Area in HK (2015)

• Industrial Land Area = • 9.5% of developed area (268 sq. km)

• 2.3% of total territory (1,014 sq. km)

• 25.46 million s.m.

• It Includes industrial land, industrial estate, warehouse and open storage.

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr16-17/english/panels/dev/papers/dev20170124cb1-461-1-e.pdf

IND (ha)CW 0.62E 6.19S 9.88WC 0KLS 0KT 0SSP 4.44YTM 1.85WTS 0ISL 0KT 46.6N 56.8SK 0ST 46.28TP 0TW 22.78TM 42.18YL 24.66Total 262.28

http://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_sc/press/exam14/pdf_c/PL0938-214c.pdf

Current Industrial Land AreaSite Area (ha) Developed GFA (sm) Vacant GFA (sm)

Private Flatted Factories 262 16,900,000 (IFA) 845,000 (5.0%)

Private Storage 3,600,000 (IFA) 151,200 (4.2%)

Private Industrial/Offices 580,000 (IFA) 39,440 (6.8%)

Tsing Yi Special Industrial Area 147.87

Tai Po IE, Yuen Long IE, TKOIE 217 3,000,000 (Developed 53% of pr2.5)

0%, 1%, 7%

Cyberport 33

Hong Kong Science Park HKSP 22 330,000 62,700 (19%)

InnoCell 0.28

Sub Total 682.15

Other Storage and Industrial Area 1,863.85

Total Industrial Land Area 2,546

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr16-17/english/panels/ci/papers/ci20170321cb1-677-4-e.pdf


http://www.pland.gov.hk/pland_sc/press/exam14/pdf_c/PL0938-214c.pdf

New and Planning Industrial Land Area

Site Area (ha) To be Developed GFA (sm) Remarks

Expansion of Tai Po IE, Yuen Long IE, TKOIE 2,495,500 Residual GFA

Lak Ma Chau Loop 87 Co-dev w SZ

Liantong/Heung Yuen Wai 56

Wang Chau IE

KTN NDA, Hung Shui Kiu NDA, Yuen Long South

NTN, ELM

Lam Tei Quarry, Tsing Yi, Ma Liu Shui, Lung Kwu Tan

Lung Kwu Tan reclamation 200 Under P&E study

Science Park Expansion Programme SPX1 1.18 70,000

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr16-17/english/panels/ci/papers/ci20170321cb1-677-4-e.pdf


CBA – A Case Study

39

Lau, T.L. (2015) Cost-benefit analysis of residential development in brownfield and greenfield, FYT, GRM, CUHK (supervised by CY Yiu)

CBA Framework

40Lau, T.L. (2015)

CBA: Brownfield v Greenfield

41Lau, T.L. (2015)

Economic Benefits Comparison

42Lau, T.L. (2015)

Social and Environmental Benefits Comparison

43

Lau, T.L. (2015)

Benefits Comparisons

44Lau, T.L. (2015)

CBR Comparison

45Lau, T.L. (2015)

Brownfield Greenfield

Economic Cost $2,204,405,090 $1,769,460,000

Economic Benefit $7,932,049,200 $3,054,371,407

Economic CBR 1:3.60 1:1.73

Brownfield/Greenfield

Economic CBR Ratio 2.08

Total CBR Ratio 3.75

Brownfield First Policy in the UK and US

Brownfield First Policy in the UK and US

Would HK Govt Adopt Brownfield First Policy?

• Govt starts a 2-year survey on brownfield

• Govt emphasizes the importance of brownfield operations to the economy of HK

• Sites for reallocation of brownfieldoperations are required

• No freezing survey nor any actions of stopping the expansion of brownfield, as the govt regards them legal and good for the economy

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201702/08/P2017020800376.htm

unlike squatters, there is at present no government policy to tolerate the temporary existence of brownfield sites that contravene the law or lease conditions. Hence, there is no need for the Government to carry out survey for brownfield sites akin to the 1982 SCS.

49

The End

comments are welcome.Enquiries to:

[email protected]