市建高峰會聯署行動 Co-signing action on URS summit

高峰會參與者的共識如下：

我們不單支持《市區重建策略》文件的檢討，更希望按下述原則全盤檢討市區重建的管治架構和機制：

原則
 市區重建必須是個具高透明度的民主參與城市規劃過程，應有全面的民眾參與，由社區自發和主導。居民有選擇權，整個過程反映程序公義，由下而上、內至外，以促進社區的可持續發展為目標。
 市區重建是為了改善市民的生活質素，利用法定機構賺取利潤絕非市區重建的原則。
 市區重建必須照顧不同持份者的權益，包括長者、小東主、租客及天台屋住戶等。
 市區重建應以復修和活化為主，推土式的重建必須是最後的選擇。

政策
 市區重建是全方位的政策，必須與其他政策一併考慮及融合，如環保、社會福利、房屋、運輸、工業及本土經濟政策等。
 相關的城市規劃條例、建築條例等也必須檢討、革新和修訂。

機制
按上述原則，市區重建的管治、機制和過程必須由社區決定，如紐約、台北及其他大城市，由社區主導更新的方法、模式和內容，再由各政府部門或法定機構從旁協助和配合。

即時行動

市建局每天都在策劃新的項目，兩年的檢討委實太長。自檢討開始後，民間對下述三個議題有清晰的共識，我們要求發展局盡快執行，不用等待檢討的結束：
 就即將開展的市建局項目，給予受重建影響的居民足夠選擇權，提供「樓換樓、舖換舖」的原區安置選擇；
 檢討市區重建局過去八年的工作，充分公開及披露市建局以項目為單位的財務、決策、研究和數據資料，並將之對比《市區重建策略》文件，評估市建局的工作是否符合《策略》的要求；
 就已開展或即將開展的市建局項目，委約和進行全面和綜合的持續發展影響評估(comprehensive sustainability impact assessment)，以社區為本，考慮重建為當區和鄰近社區帶來的影響。

過去數年，地區領袖、專業人士、社區持份者和眾多的香港市民，都看到了市區重建在管治、政策、機制及策略方面的缺失，並認同市區重建策略有需要作出全方位的改革。我們希望，在檢討的「下半場」，能有機會與發展局和市建局進行深入的對話。

簽署團體及人士：

Our demands –time for a fundamental rethinking
We, the undersigned civil society organizations, support a more fundamental review of not just the Urban Renewal Strategy, as a document, but also the entire governance and mechanism of urban renewal, based on the following principles and policy objectives:

Principles

1. Urban renewal should have full public participation. It should be initiated by the community, from the bottom up and from the inside out for the sustainable community development. Hence, it should fully realize democratization of urban planning, and should be conducted in full transparency.

2. Urban renewal aims primarily at improving people‘s quality of living and the sustainability of local community. Profit making should never be the primary principle governing urban renewal.

3. Urban renewal should take care of the rights of different stakeholders, including senior citizens, rooftop residencies, small proprietors, tenants, shop owners, etc.

4. Repair and renovate instead of bulldozing. Redevelopment in the form of bulldozing should always be the last resort.

Policy Objectives:

1. Urban renewal and other related policies, such as policies on environmental protection, social welfare, housing, transport, industrial, economic and so on, should be holistically considered and made work together.

2. Relevant Town Planning Ordinances and Building Ordinances have to be reviewed, revised, and reformed.

3. In accordance with the above principles, the entire governance, mechanism and process of urban renewal have to be reformed, rendering community the authority to decide and devise their urban regeneration plan with the assistance of relevant government departments or statutory bodies.

Actions to take immediately

While reviewing the entire urban renewal policy and mechanism, there are some concrete measures that we demand the government and the URA to take IMMEDIATELY, instead of waiting for the result of the Review. They include:

1. Residents should NOW be given adequate choices, including relocation within the redeveloped community, choices of “flat for flat” and “shop for shop”, etc.

2. Review the works of URA in the past 8 years IMMEDIATELY. It should be done by engaging the community and the civil society. Thus, all relevant materials, researches and financial reports that have never been disclosed should be made available and accessible to the public for this endeavor.

3. Start conducting comprehensive and all-rounded social and sustainability impact assessment of the current redevelopment projects NOW. The assessment should take into consideration the impact of redevelopment on the nearby neighborhood of the redeveloped site and guide the redevelopment work that follows.

In recent years, local leaders, professional practitioners, community stakeholders, and, more importantly, residents/citizens of Hong Kong have recognized the deficiencies of the existing governance, policy, mechanism and strategy/approach of urban renewal in Hong Kong. All recognize the need to address a broader issue of urban regeneration and to reform the governance, policy, mechanism and strategy/approach of urban renewal. We hope that, in the second half of the Review, there will be opportunities for genuine dialogue with the Development Bureau and URA.

Co-signing Organizations and Individuals: