Missing Option: Research on Temporary Use and Vacant Government Land in Hong Kong

● Research background:

The government has claimed that due to scatteredness, odd
shapes, long-term development programmes or traffic constraints, most of temporary use
government land (namely, Short-term tenancy sites and Temporary Government Land
Allocation) and vacant government land cannot be considered as valid land supply options in
the current land supply consultation, a.k.a. The “big land debate”. However, such claim has
yet to be substantiated by rigorous research and information disclosure. Hence, the current
research aims to compile a database on the abovementioned “under-utilized government
land”, and thereby examining their conditions and exploring the possibilities of development.

● Research method:

Through various map tools, a list of under-utilized government land
parcels is compiled, which is then verified by satellite images, site visits and official papers. It
is found that in March 2018, 493 government land parcels (with a total area of 264 hectares)
were not included in any development programmes. While there are development
programmes planned for 39 government land parcels (with a total area of 37 hectares), none
of them has definite implementation timetable, and so they could be put to temporary uses in
the meantime. These under-utilized government land parcels, totalling at 301 hectares, is
tantamount to the size of 1.7 Fanling Golf Course.

● Four potential alternative uses: The Research Team proposes the following alternative uses for the 532 under-utilized government land parcels:

• Interim housing such as container homes: According to the Hong Kong Council of
  Social Service, 90 container home units can be provided on a land parcel with a size
  of 0.1 hectare. Under this development density, 90,000 container home units can be
  built in a relatively short period of time by only reserving one-third of the under-
  utilized government land parcels (100 hectares), servicing the majority of 92,700
  households currently living in sub-divided flats.
• Community facilities: reserving 50 hectares of the vacant or under-utilized
  government land parcels zoned as “Government, Institution or Community” uses
  could provide up to 120,000 quotas for Community Care Service and Residential
  Care Services for the elderly and those in need. These will be enough to fulfill the
  need in the coming 30 years as stipulated in the Elderly Services Programme Plan.
  In respect of the shortage of community facilities in rural villages, this can be met by
  utilizing the 30 hectares of government land currently zoned as “Village-type
  Development”.
• Recreation and sports facilities: its persistent shortage is not unknown issue, and this
  can be suitably fulfilled by the under-utilized government land parcels in the
  neighbourhoods. According to the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, to
  tackle the issue it is required to reserve 30 hectares of underutilized government land
  parcels for building 43 Sports Complexes.
• “Single site, multiple use”: adopt multi-storey development approach in redeveloping
  under-utilized government land parcels by assembling current uses into multi-storey
  buildings built on those land parcels so as to vacate land for other more effective
  uses.

● Tackle medium-to-short term land demand: The Research Team found a sizeable
number of under-utilized government land parcels are zoned as “Government, Institution or
Community” and “Open Space” uses, and they are conveniently located in the urban centres
or are easily accessible by roads. They can be suitably developed into community and
sports facilities without having to go through rezoning procedures, or they can be developed
as interim housing to meet the acute need of people living in substandard conditions.

● Case studies and observations: The Research Team identified the following issues
through case studies-

• Land parcels locked up by red tape: no single government is well-informed of the
  condition of the all the land parcels, let alone having the authority to coordinate the
  assessment and reuse of the under-utilized government land parcels. As a result,
  many community and sports facilities are not realized despite years of planning: there
  are up to 128 hectares of land parcels zoned as “Open Space” or “Government,
  Institution or Community” uses either left vacant or under-utilized, making up to more
  than 40% of the total stock found by the Research Team.
• Temporary uses made long-term: it is commonplace to lease or allocate government
  land for short-term uses, but in real practice they have been turned into some form of
  “land tenure”. Take the example of car parks leased out by short-term tenancy, many
  of them have been renewed for a number of times and literally the temporary uses
  have become permanent: up to 87% of the car parks occupying 68 hectares of
  precious land on short-term tenancy, have been there for more than 5 years,
  practically shelving long-term planning, if there are any.
• The neglected logistics land: the Research Team has identified 5 land parcels with a
  total size of 18.5 hectares near Kwai Tsing Container Terminus zoned as “Other
  Specified Uses (Container Terminal)” that have been left vacant. One of the land
  parcels have even been left idle for 25 years. They should be suitably used as port
  back-up uses or even to resite brownfield operations affected by development
  projects in the New Territories.
• “Land grabbing” in the name of temporary uses: the Research Team found out that a
  small portion of government land has been grabbed by private entities for private use
  by short-term tenancy. It does not only raise the issue of fair use of public land, but
  also exacerbates the shortfall of “Open Space” and “Government/Institution or
  Community” land.

● Policy Recommendation

• Relisting under-utilized government land parcels as an option for medium-to-
  long term land supply: these 301 hectares of land resources are sizeable and
  accessible by roads, and therefore should be relisted as one of the land supply
  options. There is no valid reason for the government to discredit its development
  potential without rigorous research or disclosure of related information.
• Disclose spatial data of under-utilized government land parcels: in order to
  better manage the information, increase transparency and accountability, and also to
  assess and evaluate usage of government land on a continual basis, the government
  should first stocktake the land resources and set up a comprehensive database on
  their actual status, locations, number of leases, lease conditions and tenure, etc. The
  database should be disclosed in entirety and no information should be withheld.
• Thoroughly review all existing land resources: apart from under-utilized
  government land parcels, there are also land resources of which their usage are in
  urgent need of review, for instance, Temporary Government Land Allocations used
  as work sites, brownfield sites that are excluded from existing development projects,
  all sites under Private Recreational Leases and military land (excluding Castle Peak
  Firing Range). Reviewing the development potential of these land resources totalled
  at around 2,800 hectares could considerably ease the pressure to adopt destructive
  land supply options such as reclamations.
• Develop interim housing or community facilities: it is recommended to reserve
  100 hectares of under-utilized government land parcels for development of 90,000
  container home units to tackle the imminent housing crisis. The government should
  also re-initiate planned development programmes of community facilities that were
  shelved for bureaucratic reasons by high-level coordination.
• Adopt compact/vertical development model: while reusing under-utilized
  government land parcels, the government is recommended to adopt compact
  development model wherever possible so as to increase the land use efficiency and
  vacate land for other uses.
• Adopting the principle of “putting public land into public use”: the government
  should reuse the under-utilized government land parcels according to the principle of
  “putting public land into public use”, and disclose all related decision-making process
  for public inspection.