Developer Hegemony / 地產霸權

響應美國“佔領華爾街”行動，香港也有示威者發動“佔領中環”行動﹐佔領中環匯豐總行地下。由於港政府並無用納稅人的金錢幫助銀行﹐參與佔領行動的港人大多數不滿的是樓市及地產霸權﹐相反於“佔領華爾街”﹐是次行動被批評為缺乏理據及不合理。

事實上﹐金融霸權及地產霸權兩者只不過是因與果的分別。資本家利用現時的 credit system 集資繼而壟斷﹐令地產市場不存有公平競爭。多方面的壟斷使地產商能夠全面控制市場走向﹐eg. 將手頭上土地存之不用或只興建豪宅﹐令房屋供應量大幅減少﹐產生房地產抄賣的現象。香港的地產商更以不同的形式介入市民的基本生活﹐包括柴米油鹽﹐甚至上市集資向政府買地﹐再向社區進行投資。總括來說﹐沒有現今資本主義的 credit system﹐房地產投資根本是沒可能進行的﹐“佔領中環”的反地產霸權其實與環球佔領行動的推翻金融體系是一致的。

Beach Spike / 熱浪球愛戰

上星期終於抽空看了一部其待已久的電影 - 熱浪球愛戰。 這部所謂青春愛情電影﹐撇除水過鴨背般交待的愛情故事及對女性胸部仔細的描述外﹐其實是一部有關香港階級矛盾以及草根階層反對地產發展的電影。

<熱> 以貝浪灣為背景﹐描述在那兒成長的周秀娜及傅穎如何為保育貝家欲收回發展的沙灘苦練排球﹐最終以沙排賽事作為收回沙灘與否的關鍵。

電影讓我想起去年西貢大浪西灣被開發興建私人別墅的工程。被喻為香港十大勝景之一的大浪西灣﹐遭富商魯連城的開發工程破懷。發展商傾倒建築廢料污染附近石澗溪水，原本翠綠的自然景觀生態被污泥染成一片灰黃。事件迅速引起廣大市民關注﹐各環境團體向漁護署請願，要求政府叫停工程﹐地區最終被政府納入規管﹐未得城市規劃委員會批准不得作任何發展工程。

雖則我絕對認同大浪西灣與及香港其它少有的大自然受保育﹐但說實話﹐個人認為在這保育潮下有部份市民對大自然及建築的保育是過於偏激的﹐又或許是政府根本未能夠預知有關市民的心聲﹐先提出解决問題的城市規劃方案。

單看香港的跨境設施﹐多項有關發展因社會未能達致平衡發展與保育的共識，以致進度未如理想。港段高鐵去年終於獲立法會通過，較原訂足足遲了一年﹔港珠澳大橋，前年正式動工，目前卻陷於環評問題耽誤工程進度﹔機場第三跑道，最近剛開始了諮詢工作，已爭拗不斷﹔另外蓮塘/香園圍口岸，目前則仍處於初部研究階段。

Localism & Regional Development / 地方主義下的地方發展

In preparation for the Part 3 interview in just over a week I have been studying the Localism Bill, laid before Parliament last December and due to be enacted by the end of 2011.

The aim of the bill is to fundamentally change the English Planning System by decentralising control from Central and Regional Government to local authorities and local neighbourhoods.

The main measures of the bill can basically be summarised under the following headings:

1/ Local Government

While there are currently only a dozen elected mayors in England, the Localism Bill will give more cities the opportunity to decide whether they want a mayor. This is in my opinion hugely beneficial in terms of raising the profile of English cities and strengthening the importance of urban planning.

London for example, would not have been the same without Ken Livingstone, who appointed Richard Rogers as Chief Advisor on Architecture and Urbanism. His expertise in the field and intuitive understanding of how cities and people interact have contributed greatly to London's recent development and hence his continued role as design advisor to Boris Johnson.

2/ Communities/Individuals

The Localism Bill is aimed at giving local communities groups the right to express an interest in taking over the running of a local authority service.

In consideration of the vast number of trained architects in the country, this will better allow proactive members of the profession with good educated ideas to put them forward and drive improvement at a more local level, potentially reviving the diminishing role of the profession.

3/ Planning Reform

This is in my opinion one of the most controversial part of the bill. The bill highlights that the current planning system does not give members of the public enough influence over decisions that make a big difference to their lives, and contains proposals to make the planning system more democratic. However, a careful balance will need to be struck between democracy and development in order not to slow development and jeopardise the global status of some of England's cities.

The proposal for neighbourhood development plans would be beneficial for smaller cities and towns where the bottom-up approach can sure be applied.

4/ Social Housing

I am most in favour of this section of the bill, which exposes the fundamental flaws of the current social housing system and proposes reforms that will mean more decisions about housing are taken locally, and to make the system fairer and more effective.

Currently, social landlords are normally only able to grant liftime tenancies. As exposed on national news, this can mean that people acquire a social home at a moment of crisis in their life, and continue to live there long after their need for it has passed. 人神共憤. This is only unfair and represents a poor use of valuable public resources.

In summary of the above, I am largely in favour of what the Localism Bill promises. In connection with the issue I had highlighted in my previous post - Rioting & Urban Planning - the bill will make it easier for people to take part in the development of the their communities and hence foster a personal sense of attachment and purpose.

Rioting & Urban Planning / 暴亂與城市規劃

'It is a question of building which is at the root of the social unrest of today: architecture or revolution' - Vers une architecture (1923), Le Corbusier

While poverty and culture are undoubtedly amongst the underlying reasons behind the mass rioting earlier this month in the UK, I strongly believe that these events have an intimate relationship with the urban planning of our cities. Britain is not alone in this problem, and historically, cities such as Paris have been reconstructed following the 1848 revolution.

The Haussmann Plan, initiated by Napolean III in the 1860s, encompassed all aspects of urban planning, both in the centre of Paris and in the surrounding districts. Strict regulations were imposed on facades of buildings, public parks, city facilities and public monuments, to create the Paris we know today. The most relevant aspect of the plan was in the widening of streets, constructed to facilitate troop movement and prevent easy blocking of streets with barricades. The straightness of the streets eased firing on rioting crowds and their barricades, while large open street intersections allowed for easy control - obviously influenced by the city's history of street revolutions.

Is a different kind of urban development form needed in Britain's cities? Strict urban strategies have been in place in London to prevent it from sprawling like LA, yet the tensions and ignored dividing lines have been so clearly exposed in the riots.

Of course I do not believe that the Haussmann Plan approach of attempting to make our cities riot-proof is the solution to the problem, we must instead create urban environments that provide young people with more appealing opportunities to build a deep personal sense of attachment and purpose, ie. investing in the prevention of further rioting. As a start, the careful planning of shared daily infrastructures may be able to bridge and integrate lives across the class divides.

Relevant research project: Camanchaca Fog Harvester (2009) - an investigation into infrastructure as a means of bridging social divides in the city of Iquique, Chile.