Urban Renewal | Gov’t launches public consultation on plan for temporary housing

Lao Pun Lap

The government, through its Policy Research Office, has officially launched from today and for a period of 30 days, a public consultation on the “Juridical Regime of the temporary housing and trade housing units regarding Urban Renewal.” The legal framework will be used to implement the government projects for the renewal of old neighborhoods.

The interdepartmental group responsible for its creation presented the public consultation document yesterday in a press conference held at the Policy Research Office in Taipa.

The document presents two different methods on how residents can make use of the plan for the reconstruction of the old buildings (over 30 years old), and also establishes rules that will allow the buyers of the “Pearl Horizon” development in Areia Preta to acquire some of the housing units that the government plans to build on the very same land plot.

Although the document is one of significant relevance for the implementation of the Urban Renewal project, in fact it does not present many concrete measures, being mostly a general draft of the scope of the government’s intentions.

The office coordinator, Lao Pun Lap, during the presentation of the public consultation document, said that the document aims to establish “a balance between the public interest and the rights of the private owners” in the process of “revitalizing the old neighborhoods.”

As Lao said also in reply to the media’s questions, the government hopes that in the large majority of cases, the owner can proceed with the renewal of their housing buildings and continue to live in them, and “If they can go back to the original place that would be the ideal,” he noted while remarking that in some cases that might not be possible due to “matters of public interest.”

These matters of public interest would be land plots that might be targeted with government projects to add value to the city, such as the creation of new or widening of streets and roads, or the establishment of social equipment or public services.

In such instances, the government proposes two options: the payment of compensation to the owners who would use the money to find a new home in another building or another area of the city; or a trade-off, in which they would, instead, acquire one of the public housing units built by the government which would become privately owned units under this instance.

The document raised many questions, most of them unanswered despite the presence of several government officials from different bureaus. They justified their silence, saying that “such details should be a matter to be addressed by the legal regime or urban renewal,” in the words of Lam Chi Long, assistant commissioner for the Commission Against Corruption (CCAC).

Questioned also about the expropriation of the land plots for reasons of public interest, Lam replied, “The amount of the compensation to pay to the owner will be calculated according to the market value of the unit,” noting once more that details regarding the procedures of compensation or rehousing would, again, “be addressed by the legal regime of the urban renewal and not by this one, that is now in public consultation.” Although he admitted, “the owners might not have financial capacity to acquire a new housing with the [amount granted] by the compensation.”

On the topic, the Land, Public Works and Transport Bureau (DSSOPT) director Li Canfeng hinted that more than simply removing whole buildings, what is more likely to happen is the reduction of the  living areas of some buildings following the restoration or rebuilding works. According to Li, “the rebuilt [houses] can suffer a reduction in 20 to 30 percent in terms of size; this is a normal thing.”

Questioned by the media on which land plots the government would consider for building these temporary lodging houses or trade housing units for the project of Urban Renewal, Li noted that for the time being, the only land plot available which met the conditions is the former “Pearl Horizon” development. He added,  “in the future we will claim back more [land plots] and there will be some land plots that we can consider.”

Lam added also that the houses to be built by the government will have different rules from “normal” public housing in terms of the possibility of trade, sale and rentals, Lam also added the government “admits to giving some benefits and will not follow strictly the market criteria” as well as “the criteria for decoration will also be different when compared to the public housing units built.”

As a final note, addressing the topic of whether the government was establishing a criteria of preference for Pearl Horizon buyers, Lao added, “It’s not a preferential regime for Pearl Horizon, we are just creating the legal basis including the case [of Pearl Horizon] and other similar developments that might occur in the future.”