位處香港心臟地帶的中西區土地寶貴，因此並沒有甚麼地方發展公屋，目前也只得西環邨和觀龍樓兩處而已。一些區議員卻一直爭取於區內興建更多公屋，照顧區內低下階層的住屋需要。由於西港島線的發展或會引致區內租金增加，當局最近終於明確回應有關訴求，指現正積極覓地興建公屋。在青洲填海計劃無法落實的前提下，中西區確實缺乏大型土地發展公屋。既然不能填海，筆者惟有提議移山，位置就是堅尼地城西部一帶。
筆者認為，位於堅尼地城西陲的前警察宿舍，以及其西面的前摩星嶺平房區（公民村），只要花錢進行開山及平整工程，其所產生的平地，再連同現時堅尼地城（西寧街）巴士總站的地皮，應該可以容納大約六幢公屋樓宇，大約可以容納一萬五千名公屋居民。在新屋邨落成後，當局便可以用作安置西環邨的居民，再將西環邨重建，以便提供更多的公屋單位。
不過，新屋邨的位置確實有點偏遠，距離將來的堅尼地城站逾600米，故此將來的居民未能直接受惠於西港島線帶來的方便。幸好，該處還有一個巴士總站，還可應付屋邨的交通需要，亦可安排專線小巴接駁堅尼地城站。
5 個意見:
I'm not sure. But I remember that there was previous discussion about reserving the former Police Quarters and Kung Man Village for the MTR's residential development to compensate for MTR's capital cost incurred for the West Island Line?? However, it might be now different, as the Government is directly subsidizing the capital cost.
回 wsyc：
港鐵公司之前是建議取得堅尼地城前警察宿舍（不包括公民村）發展鐵路物業（該處距離堅尼地城站約600米，稱不上是「上蓋物業」），但被當局拒絕，筆者猜想最大原因就是該處並非鐵路車站的選址，亦距離車站選址太遠。該處交通相對較為不便，平地又少，所以筆者始終覺得最佳的處理辦法是當局自行斥資拓展土地並興建公共房屋。
Thanks for the info. Very helpful.
However, regarding public housing, I think that it should be for the interest of public policy to stop building public housing in urban area (i.e. HK & Kln).
(1) The first reason I think is on social justice. It is not fair that the public should subsidize for public housing in premium (even, luxurious) areas. There was previous disputes regarding the development of Tung Yuk Court & Oi Tung Estate in Aldrich Bay. These specific residents of these two estates enjoy spectator harbour-view from their homes, at the expense of the taxpayers. It is also unfair if various public estate residents have very different housing conditions.
(2) The second reason is that it is beneficial for the public housing residents themselves. The HKHA is financially-autonomous from the HKSAR Government. Previously, its business model relied on profits from HOS to subsidize for PRH. However, this business model does not seem viable. Thus, if the HKSA was allowed to sell its land of its old estates to private developers at market prices, the profits from that could be used to subsidize further development of public estates.
Btw, I really hope you don't know mind me posting in English again. Sorry and thanks.
回 wsyc：
筆者倒不介意留言是中文還是英文，反而希望留英文的讀者不要介意筆者用中文回覆（最初筆者會用英文回覆配合，但後來還是豁出去用回較方便的中文）。
說回正題，有關應否繼續在市區發展公屋，筆者的立場可以參考今日發表的《公屋應否絕跡於市區？》。
發佈留言