From Privately Managed Public Open Space to Private Open Space: A Case Study of a Private Residential Complex in Hong Kong Darren Man-wai Cheung Abstract: Privately owned and managed public open space is a key research topic. Hong Kong is not an exception. This article aims to identify the problems of public open space in private management in Hong Kong. Drawing upon a case study of a private residential development, the Metro Harbour View, the article finds that the existing mechanism is inadequate in enforcing public open space in private ma- nagement and coordinating public open space provision. The article also suggests that the privatization process is a confluence of the effort from the government, the private developers and the expectation of the residents. Keywords: Open space, privatization, Hong Kong, Metro Harbour View [Submitted as Research Note: 20 September 2011, Acceptance of the revised reviewed manuscript: 31 October 2011] Source of all pictures: Man-wai Cheung 10 Pacific News #37 • January/February 2012 Privatization of public open space is getting more popular among cities with a high popu- lation density. In the recent years, developers are urged to share social responsibilities to provide more facilities for public access in private owned land to ease the shortage of open space provision in congested urban areas. The developers, in return, may gain increased floor area ratio for development in their sites. This case study investigates the issue of public open space in a private owned and managed development, the Metro Harbour View, in Hong Kong. Through examining newspapers accounts, commentaries and interviews conducted by the media, this article attempts to find out how the podium garden of Metro Harbour View, a privately managed public open space, undergoes the privatization process. As it unfolds, the case illustrates the loophole of the existing enforcing mechanism and the threat of the residents, the developers’ intention not to comply with the lease condition, and the percep- tion of the open space as a privately shared area amongst residents. The complaint of the residents then leads to the negotiation between the residents and the government in turning the public open space into a truly private one. This article aims to reveal that privatization of open space is not a sole consequence of either the effort of the government or the private developers, but the mingled influence of the two together with the expectation of the resi- dents. In doing so, the article will open with a brief introduction of research examining the privatization of open space. The second section highlights the policy governing public open space in private developments in Hong Kong and the policy concerns. The following section discusses the issue of the podium garden of Metro Harbour View. The article closes with a discussion and suggestions for further study. Privatization of Open Space Public Open Space in Private Revisited the norm of privately managed public Developments: An Overview Conventional research on open open space with overt surveillance is The incorporation of public facilities space suggests that open space cannot particularly pervasive, owing to the ab- in private developments has been put be thoroughly evaluated by means of sence of a democratic politics and the into practice since the 1980s. The po- economic analysis. Berry (1976) pro- wealth creation mentality of traditional licy intends to integrate design and op- poses open space to be evaluated in Chinese. Open space planning, under timize land use for better planning of six dimensions, namely utility, functio- this circumstance, is empowered into development, to utilize public facilities nal, contemplative, aesthetic, recrea- a means of social control (Cuthbert, for the need of the wider public, and to tional, and ecological value, whether 1995; Cuthbert & McKinnell, 1997). envisage residents brought by a private the open space is public or private, ur- The increasing surveillance and con- development (Panel on Development, ban or rural, or large or small. In the trol over usage, behaviours, and access Legislative Council, 2010). Public fa- 1980s, public utilities gradually became by the private management also leads cilities in private developments can targets of privatization and eventually to the limited function of public open be categorized fourfold: government, public space was considered as a pos- space in political, social and democra- institution and community facilities, sible ground for such process. Loukai- tic contexts, diminishing the sense of public open space, public transport tou-Sideris (1993) conducted one of publicness (Mitchell, 1995; Németh, terminus, and public access facilities. the early studies, which shed light on 2009; Németh & Schmidt, 2011). Where provision of public facilities in the characteristics of privatized public open space. She attributed the priva- tization process of public open space to three factors: The desire to utilize private resources to ease burdens on government budgets; the willingness of private developers to provide pub- lic open space in private developments in return for additional floor area ratio; and the increasing demand of privately managed open space in view of the threat of crimes and the presence of undesired groups in conventional pub- lic open space. Development pressure to achieve sustainable urban growth and the prevailing trend of public space under support and management by corporations are some other factors suggested, resulting in the accentuated control over use in privatized open space and spatial fragmentation of ur- ban areas (Defilippis, 1997; Schmidt, 2004). In the context of Hong Kong, View of the Podium Garden Pacific News #37 • January/February 2012 11 View of the Podium Garden private development is applicable, the adequate pedestrian facilities and gree- walkways are built to connect each re- corresponding Government Bureaux/ ning. In most cases, the open space sidential block to the podium garden. Departments may propose to include within private developments is desig- There is also a stairway connecting the planning conditions for a specific site ned to fulfil merely the minimum re- garden (located on the 4th floor) to in the statutory town plan, or to in- quirements of the conditions and ma- the neighbouring street, and a gate ins- clude land sale conditions in the land ximize gains in development potential talled to bar entry from the street. The lease (Ibid). A recent study finds that (Luk, 2009). Despite these early acade- podium garden was for long conceived social facilities, including open space, mic concerns, the issue of public open as a private area dedicated only to the and public access facilities have the space in private developments did not enjoyment of local residents. While highest percentage to be incorporated draw much public attention in Hong many studies have pointed out that into leases (Yung, 2011). The effective- Kong. This rapidly changed when two proximity to permanent open space ness of planning and lease condition, incidents were reported in 2008. Speci- will significantly increase property va- in particular the provision of priva- fically, Times Square, a shopping mall lues (e.g. Geoghegan, 2002), empiri- tely managed public open space, has providing public open space for public cal study shows that Hong Kong pro- been widely discussed in academic re- access in an old district in Hong Kong, perty buyers are willing to pay higher searches. One aspect of research focu- has abused the user rights by renting prices for private space and publicly ses on the issue of non-compliance of out part of the public open space for accessible space is considered undesi- conditions and the planning enforce- profit, whereas Metro Harbour View rable and to exert downward pressure ment. Most researches seem to stress has not opened the public open space to property values (Chan, So, Tang, & on the uncertainty of planning enfor- since the completion of the develop- Wong, 2008). As such, it is probable ceability of the Town Planning Ordi- ment (e.g. Kwan, 2011; Tse, 2008). that the podium garden is designed nance and the ambiguity of liability in purposely by the developers as a pri- case of non-compliance (Lai, Ho, & Metro Harbour View: Public vate area to maximize revenues from Leung, 2005; Tang & Leung, 1998). It Space or Private Amenity? the residential development. is also believed that in the absence of In 2003, a private housing estate was Nonetheless, it was not until early direct enforcement measures, devel- developed in Tai Kok Tsui, West Kow- 2008 that the developers were found opers will comply with the planning loon, a densely populated urban area in by a local newspaper for not comply- conditions as far as compliance can en- Hong Kong. As a popular residential ing with the lease condition. The news hance the values of the development, complex design in Hong Kong, the es- discovered that the developers achie- while mere negligence may also be a tate is situated on a shopping compo- ved an agreement with the govern- possible reason for non-compliance site with a podium garden on the roof. ment to provide public open space in (Lai, Yung, Li, & Ho, 2007). Apart With no less than 9,800 square metres exchange for the land exchange appli- from the compliance issue, the qua- in size, the podium garden is regar- cation to be approved for the develop- lity of privately managed public open ded as well designed with maintenance, ment of Metro Harbour View. Under space is another focus of research. comprising a garden plaza, fountains, the lease condition, the developers of Evaluation on the existing policy sug- two playgrounds and two clubhouses Metro Harbour View are required to gests that developers tend to provide in which various leisure and recreati- construct and maintain no less than corridors and passageways without onal facilities are provided. Covered 9,800 square metres of public open 12 Pacific News #37 • January/February 2012 Podium Garden at a Glance space for public access (i.e.