Fragrant Harbour

Macau gets bigger

The Macau waterfront is soon to be transformed by a number of reclamation and development projects. Draft consultations are underway yet, despite local coverage, very little has been reported outside the Macau Special Administrative Region. More surprising is that few of the former Portuguese enclave’s half a million inhabitants really understand the extent of their government’s plans.
The coloured zones marked as B, C and D on the accompanying graphic (opposite page) will affect what
is known as the ‘riverside area’ among the three bridges. Work on these is progressing. The two zones on Taipa, marked as E1 and E2, are for the new and temporary ferry terminals . . . if the government can make a decision to relocate the old ferry terminal (more on that later).
But, certainly the area which will create the most impact is Zone A. This stretches along the east side of the Friendship Bridge to Gongbei in China and, when completed, will effectively increase the size of the Macau peninsula by 25%. It will also be where the Macau link to the Hong Kong–Zhuhai-Macau Bridge is located, and is likely to be the first of all the zones to be completed.
These projects, together with other waterfront developments, were presented to the public in November 2010. Consultation is open until the 8th of August but, like so many other important issues in Macau, there has been little or no concern shown for the loss of existing waterfront, sea area or, indeed, why there is a need for more land.
One thing is for sure, there are major changes afoot . . . starting on the starboard side of the ferry as you
arrive. Macau currently has a total land area of 29.2 square kilometers.
The reclamation will increase that by 12.3 percent to 32.81 square kilometers. Land created will amount to approximately 350 hectares. The projects, naturally, are given a positive spin and show little of what will be lost and, of course, say nothing about what could go wrong. There are all sorts of promises such as green corridors, links between new and old areas, preservation of historical sites, and so on.
The truth is (well, certainly with this writer) that few people really believe what the government says and are rightly suspicious of grand plans and glossy presentations.
More urgent than reclamation and construction projects would be a sensible and cohesive policy on the preservation and promotion of Macau for its maritime heritage. Sadly, the examples of mistreatment of historical buildings and structures are too many. Who can remember seeing the Guia Lighthouse (right) — an endearing icon of Macau — from all angles?
Over the past five years, infrastructural works and housing projects have all but obliterated its reassuring presence. In fact, Tap Seac and Golden Lotus Square are about the only two place where you can get a clear view of the 146-year-old structure. (Word is Macau has received another stern letter from UNESCO drawing attention to the city’s responsibilities in retaining World Heritage Site status for the lighthouse.)
Let’s not forget, Macau has always been a maritime city and has existed ‘facing the water’.
However, developments and unchecked progress in recent years have seen Macanese turn their backs on their history. And, as mentioned before, there is no real policy to recognize the city’s historical importance, or its potential.
Take commercial fishing, once an important sector of the economy. It is now virtually nonexistent.
And what about recreational boating? Another sorry story, and a mere shadow of what it was before 1999. There is only one marina, despite constant calls for more to be built. With more berthing facilities, Macau would be able to attract more boats, provide jobs, and attract visitors from around the region. There is much talk of an Asian superyacht circuit but for this there need to be destinations and facilities — Macau,
like Hong Kong, is missing a golden opportunity.
Macau Fisherman’s Wharf is a sad case of where a private venture has turned out to be a white elephant. Largely, because of dithering and a lack of support and understanding from the government. Furthermore, until such time as a decision is made on the old ferry terminal, pleasure craft simply can’t be allowed to navigate in and out of busy ferry lanes. The plan was to move the terminal to Taipa, and the developer went ahead with the basin for the marina. But since no decision has been made on a new terminal for the ferries, the developer has put further work in the marina basin on hold. A prime ‘riverside’ location abandoned because government won’t make a decision on the ferry terminal and has been distracted by questionable reclamation and development projects. Moreover, this indecision by the authorities has seen other missed opportunities. Whoever follows Macau affairs will remember that Stanley Ho prepared and presented, some years ago, a huge project called Oceanus. It was of a hotel that would occupy part of the area where the former New Yaohan mall was situated, crossing Friendship Avenue to the place where the old Palace floating casino was moored and even included part of the ferry terminal itself. This project was shelved, and the shopping centre turned into another casino.
Although the government has sponsored several public forums to discuss good use of the SAR’s waterfront and sea area, a higher level of debate is now needed. A multi-disciplinary team needs to address the many technical aspects of an ‘expanding’ Macau. The general population may know what it
wants but it is unlikely to know whether it is possible or feasible — this is where civil engineers, architects and town planners are useful.
Macau’s authorities do not pay enough attention to criticism, or even measured advice.
They doesn’t even listen to business and tend to act unilaterally. The results are plain to see in the shambolic planning of areas and general deterioration of the city. Artificial islands (Zone A) are not going to solve these problems. In fact, Macau could well end up with its own ‘West Kowloon Reclamation’ fiasco.
Let us all hope that needless reclamation and specious construction projects, together with the impact of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, do not bring any more problems to a Macau that should not be allowed to end up as just another Chinese coastal city. There is nothing wrong with reclamation, construction or bridges but there has to be a need for them. Will they make the air pollution worse, and what about the quality of seawater?
Macau has existed because of the sea, but its waterfront now faces an uncertain future. Attention is being paid to apartment blocks, casinos and new buildings but is this really necessary, especially when it is at the expense of a rich and important maritime heritage?