In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

J What KindOf Harbour City Do We Want? Ted Pryor and Peter Cookson Smith IINTRODUCTION For some time, there has been a growing ground swell of public concern about how our harbour city is changing character and, in the process, is increasingly portraying an erosion of its historical vibrancy and sense of place. In particular, there continues to be a never-ending game of ping-pong played between those for an d those agains t harbour reclamations . There seems to be no clea r way forward fo r resolving a number of key issues that keep returning to the public arena whenever new plans are unveiled by the government. The latest proposals for the redevelopment o f the former airport site at Kai Tak and the associate d reclamation o f the highly polluted Kowloon Bay are a case in point, havin g been recently the subject o f animated discussio n by the Planning, Lands and Works Panel of the Legislative Council. Because of the complexity of the issues involved an d th e polarizatio n o f views , man y concerne d peopl e i n ou r community must now find it difficult t o 'see the wood for the trees'. 62 I T . Pryor and RC. Smith A question that must therefore now be asked is, 'what kind of harbour city do we want?' While there i s no eas y answer to offe r i n return, i t is an issu e that shoul d no t b e allowe d t o resolv e itsel f b y default . A t th e hear t o f th e matter i s the unarguabl e nee d fo r mor e urba n lan d an d it s disposition ; th e need for the restructuring of obsolete parts of our harbour-based city; and the need to improve the city by better three-dimensional design and by the greater provision o f better planned an d integrated ope n spaces, leisure activities an d waterfront amenitie s for the benefit o f city dwellers and tourists alike. Related to thes e issue s i s th e proces s b y whic h plan s fo r ne w urba n developmen t schemes are produced. The following thoughts are presented in an endeavour to point a new way forward, whil e recognizing , however , tha t ther e ar e man y othe r view s tha t also need to be heard. I SOM E POINTS OF PRINCIPLE To state the obvious , the urba n environmen t i n which we live is mostly th e product o f human enterprise . O n that account , th e presen t configuratio n o f our harbour, particularly the central part, is not solely the product of being a 'natural asset'. To a very large extent, the shape of the harbour is the result of human endeavour s ove r man y years, arisin g fro m a rather a d ho c serie s o f reclamations. In many ways, it represents the dramatic image of the city as a whole, and might perhaps be seen as a testimony to the creative abilities of the Hong Kong people. The historical roots of Hong Kong have been firmly linked to the harbour, which initially provided a safe anchorage for trading vessels. The central part of the harbour between Hong Kong Island and Kowloon was, for many years, the hu b o f por t activitie s wit h wharves , godowns , tradin g house s an d shi p repair yard s alon g man y stretche s o f th e coastline . Fro m th e earl y day s o f British rule , reclamation s ha d t o b e undertake n t o provid e ne w lan d fo r development. Suc h reclamation s were , b y an d large , relativel y smal l an d dispersed. Changes to the profile of the shorelines had little overall impact on the aesthetics of the harbour . In recent years, we have faced a radically different situatio n largely du e to the industrialization o f the Pearl River Delta and the consequential growt h of Hong Kong as an entrepot. This coincided with the advent of containerization in the early 1970s and the use of deep-draught ships, leading to the development of meg a containe r terminal s a...

Share