辣俱成灰眼屎乾

천리길도 한 걸음부터. 千里之行,始於足下。

Archive for the ‘都市再發展’ Category

「都更釘子戶」背後的關鍵奧秘 5分鐘包您看懂士林王家-文林苑都更案懶人包

with 578 comments

(圖/文:台灣都市更新受害者聯盟‧歡迎自由轉載)

為了守護一個家、一片地和一種樸實生活方式,士林的王家人,從平凡的中產家庭,一步一步變成媒體口中要價兩億的「貪婪釘子戶」、變成了阻礙城市進步的「全民公敵」。

這兩家人究竟為了什麼?到底在他們身上發生了什麼事?為什麼與「都市更新」扯上關係後,原本寧靜的三代生活就像天外飛來橫禍一般,陷入前所未有的風暴?

兩年來,王家兩家人經歷各種抹黑與司法程序, 仍堅定地拒絕建商開出的華廈條件,他們要清楚向樂揚、北市府與社會大眾說:「饒了我們兩家49坪,請把我們家劃出去吧!我們不要錢,一塊錢都不要!我們願意完全無條件退出都更!」

台北市都市更新處面對38戶搬出去住戶的抗議壓力,也一度表示:「建商若願重新申請都更案的變更程序,可將王家劃出」。然而,建商不答應。北市府也沒辦法。士林王家面對態度堅硬的建商,現在面臨最緊急迫切的危險是,台北市政府不顧中央主管機關仍在進行協調輔導,便依都更條例36條,逕行發出強拆公文,準備2012年3月19日起,要求警察和公務單位強行拆除王家。

2011-8-13在王家前一起畫了"家,不賣也不拆"廣告看板

也許您現在還感覺不到都市更新與您的關係。看看以下王家遭遇的事情,值得所有人做為借鏡。

因為建商為都更暴利大肆圈地,很可能下一個就圈到你。


一、建商重金打造「釘子戶」形象背後,你看不見的事…

某個號稱是都市更新第一品牌的建設公司,從2012年2月起,屢次花費重金,購買全版、半版廣告,刊登不實內容和聲明稿不下十餘次。這些偽新聞形式的內容,把王家塑造為「大開獅口要兩億的貪婪釘子戶」、阻礙城市發展與效率的「全民公敵」,以及讓其他38戶住戶至今仍無法回家安居的「自私鄰居」。企圖塑造王家是釘子戶的社會印象,逼迫北市府強拆王家。

八十幾歲的王家老阿嬸眼角總噙著淚水,問我們:「可不可以叫勒羊把我們家劃出去?大家各退一步,以和為貴,為什麼一定非要我家的地?」老人家無法理解,為何尊重地主意願變更圖面設計,就可以不拆她家,而這樣一樁簡單的事,竟會這麼困難?

王爸爸已經六十歲,每天早上三四點就辛勤起床通車上班,自從遇到都市更新後,六十歲的王爸爸,才開始學怎麼上網,收信,找資料,也從原本不會用電腦,到可以自己打字寫陳情書。時常半夜整理自家資料,整夜沒睡,就要準備出門工作,身心俱疲。

您也許不知道,這兩家人究竟經歷了多少日夜的恐懼,睡不上安穩一覺,家中架設的監視器鏡頭被砸壞,建商時時派人徘徊攝影,市政府動輒發送公文恐嚇。

究竟一樁都更案背後,有什麼不公義的事實,讓王家全家人憤怒之餘仍願共體時艱,一起堅持這個孤獨的決定?而北市府與該建設公司又有什麼不為人知的「壓力」,得要靠官商合作強拆兩戶無辜人家來排解?當中的箇中緣由,我們即將為您暴露都市更新官商勾結的金權真相!

二、士林文林苑都更案事件爭議點

1. 「都更預售屋」的問題:把你家的地賣掉,不用你同意

2006年,王家花了兩百多萬將全家從裡到外整修翻新。更早之前,他們就拒絕另一家建商協談合建的提議。當年六月,樂揚建設初步探知王家不願加入都更之後,董事長就殷切帶著另一份設計圖 (如下圖),說:「王家不加入蓋大樓沒關係,換兩棟二層樓透天厝給你」。換句話說,該建設公司從一開始就知道王家不願加入的意願卻未作登記;想勸他們把剛整修好的新透天厝推倒重練、換成兩棟兩樓透天厝,如果王家會答應,才真的叫做貪錢,或是頭殼壞去。可想而知,王家五兄弟堅決拒絕。

95.6.6 該建設公司董事長登門拜訪,得知王家不願參與合建,特別準備A方案。重建兩棟兩層透天厝,條件是換取王家未使用的地下容積。當時甫整修完畢,頭殼壞去才會答應。換言之,95.6當初建設公司明知王家不願合建,卻刻意不予記錄。

您以為禮貌說個「謝謝,不參加」就沒事了嗎?不是,在都更遊戲規則裡,就算是合法地主,也逃不過多數決計算的魔障(見下圖)啊。2007年5月1日都市更新事業概要核准,2009年6月16日事業計畫核定。這兩年間,王家連一次公聽會、審議都沒參加,更不知道文林苑都更預售屋,是怎麼如火如荼地在半年間100%完銷。在毫不知情也從未同意的狀況下,王家合法土地已經被建設公司賣掉了!!

王家陸續接到預售住戶的抗議電話,「樂揚建設說你們已經拿走了一億多還死不搬走,怎麼這樣厚臉皮?」王家人也是禮貌地邀請對方來家裡坐坐,表明沒拿過一文錢,不知道自己家在外面被汙衊得這麼難聽。

看看「多數決」可以怎麼透過有技巧的圈地,創造出來。

2.  二米五與三米三巷道旁,十五層高樓拔地起,一旦大火來臨,消防車進不來!

「文林苑」基地僅兩側臨路,另兩面各接二米五、三米三的狹窄巷弄,竟要蓋起15樓高房。

根據〈消防車輛救災動線指導原則〉規定,救助5層以下建築物時,至少應有3.5公尺以上淨寬之道路,讓消防車可抵達救災現場。救助6層以上建築物的規範更為嚴苛;依規定,至少應有4公尺以上淨寬之道路,讓消防車可抵達救災現場,且現場應至少有8 X 20公尺的作業空間,雲梯車才能順暢作業。然而,實際走訪文林苑預定地可發現,該更新基地後巷寬度,根本不滿2.5公尺。

問題來了,台北市消防局推派代表參加文林苑規劃案審議,結果文林苑的都更設計案不但過了,還拿到237.48平方公尺(法定容積6%)之消防容積獎勵。一邊是護航不符合消防規範的北市府,一邊是無視居住安全的消防局,我們要問,若是這裡因火災發生救難不及的重大傷亡,究責對象該是誰?

曾經發文指導八米以下道路消防問題須檢討的台北市政府,為了掩蓋爭議,台北市都更處不僅祭出強拆王家公文,對於消防爭議僅回覆:消防車可以單向開上郭元益博物館人行道、拔掉路招;另外,文林苑有退縮兩米人行道,消防車可原路倒車出去。

相關影音:

3. 一般市民:王家不是開價兩億!? 教您看穿兩億疑雲背後的天羅地網

雖然去年七、八月曾一度阻擋了強制拆除的威脅,但王家並未從另一場苦戰解脫,那就是─釘子戶的汙名。

因為建商買的業配新聞,以及連續在各大報登了十餘次的全版、半版偽新聞廣告,王家自然而然背上「貪婪釘子戶」的名號。

「什麼兩億?給我五億我也不搬!」當向王伯伯問起這件事時,他生氣的說。

「當初是政府下一份公文給我們,說我們一定要提價錢上的疑義,否則沒有其他救濟管道。」

這裡千萬看仔細!不然下一個中招、被罵作釘子戶的就是您!王家確實有算過價錢,但為什麼談錢?這是現行都更法令體制下,叫您不得不談錢的微妙圈套。

依據都更條例32條與36條,唯二兩條自力救濟的出路,都是被限縮在「權利變換」上爭取更多的錢(價值)打轉

「不參加?要多少錢你才要參加嘛~~多少錢嘛多少錢嘛~~」要麼,你可以抵死不從,坐等建商申請政府代拆。

要不然,你就得要議價阻止程序(其實根本阻止不了啊)。究竟是什麼樣的制度規範,讓提出不同意見的住戶,被簡化為人人眼中「唯利是圖」的釘子戶?

這就像是…都更居民沒有不下嫁建商的權利,只有談聘金高低的問題。

對於從頭到尾根本拒簽同意書的王家,當都更一切程序跑完,仍有異議情況下,只能透過都市更新條例32條,提出對於自己部分權利價值的異議。「那是唯一的辦法,為了要讓建商知難而退」王伯伯懊悔的說,就因為這件事,王家仔細試算了100%分回王家應得產權(換言之,完全不支付共同負擔)的方案。在王家這份土法煉鋼手寫計算的公文裡,第一頁即明白表示的「不參加合建」(見下方圖)完全被忽略,價值異議卻被建商斷章取義登廣告,不僅送給王家「貪婪釘子戶」的名號,還催眠社會大眾,說王家是阻礙更新發展的「全民公敵」。

這般折磨與疲勞轟炸,長達三年之久。

被迫寫的兩億天價陳情書
(君不見王家寫了那麼多個「不願意參與合建」!?)

三、排除王家是不可能的任務?輕鬆破解無良建商的「技術性」撒謊

王家是土地及建物合法所有權人,他們也反對都更,為何仍被納入呢?

建商曾陸續引用不同法條,表達可以排除別家,就是不能免除王家。台北市政府不僅未否認這些理由,協調會上也屢屢幫建商背書。

請往下再拉一點點,就能看到,到底是哪些理由?

理由一》王家土地未臨建築線,依法不得單獨建築。

事實:讓咱們依法來論法。王家楊阿嬸家裏(前街五巷18號)有臨建築線。另一戶被指稱未臨建築線的王廣樹伯伯家,家前臨接一小片水利地。依照〈台北市畸零地使用規則〉第6條第4項,王家雖然是畸零地,但「地界線整齊,寬度超過第四條規定,深度在十一公尺以上者」,無礙建築設計與市容觀瞻,工務局得核准建照。所以並非依法無據。

況且,根據臺北市都市計畫書《變更北淡鐵路沿線土地為交通用地計畫案》,「陸、其他」特別載明「交通用地兩側其他使用分區之建築線得以其鄰接之交通用地境界線指定之」。官方屢次說不行,假專業之名睜眼說瞎話,強力護航建商至此,我們實在不懂到底為什麼?

理由二》依法不得排除王家,否則造成同街廓其他相鄰土地無法都更(違反台北市都更自治條例§14)

事實:若是這法條說得通的話,那麼台北市政府就叫做一區兩制啦!同樣一條法規只套用在士林王家兩戶身上,卻避談同一街廓裡被排除的A、B、C三區建物,還不是被弄得破碎得無法單獨自成都更單元?!

2月10日營建署會議上,曾討論出三個能扭轉僵局的重大決議事項。迄今台北市政府不僅不正面回應,直接發出強拆公文,並以最高行政法院已駁回上訴之由,拒絕仔細審查爭議。明顯蔑視中央主管機關內政部營建署、委員們的秉公建議,也根本刻意迴避眾多都更災民心聲,不敢面對都市更新的實質問題。

一旦王家被強拆,以後,就算您所掙得的土地房子再合法,

面對建商蠻橫無理的要求,也只能眼睜睜看著家園被拆。

此惡例一開,居住人權中的最後一道看似最安全保守的私人財產權防線,也將隨之動搖。

如果您看完故事,願意支持士林王家、願意支持罷黜強拆惡法,您可以採取下列行動:

1. 加入線上連署【拒拆士林王家‧支持都更正義】  按此進入

2. 三月18日下午至晚上,來士林王家走走、看看,

參與 別拆我們家!蝦米戶保衛戰宣誓大會!【守護居住正義‧和平音樂講談派對】

3. 三月19日起一週間,將會是王家隨時可能被強拆的高峰期。願意加入我們的巡守人力(任選可參與時段),

請來信tajur2011@gmail.com 或聯絡郭同學0922-309-333

廣告

Written by chy7211

03/17/2012 at 1:08 下午

[Column] Testing S. Korea’s democracy with urban redevelopment

leave a comment »

我在這篇短評裡面介紹了一點關於韓國現今的住屋政策、租屋條件與反迫遷運動碰撞下的背景。

附上一些遍地皆是的韓國縉紳化APT(公寓)景象..

原文載於Hankyoreh 2009.09.01

Seven months have passed since the Yongsan tragedy. It has widely been considered as a critical chapter that stands testament to South Korea’s acute housing problem. In the meantime, the Lee Administration has announced a package of housing policies to help the low-income families; however, without offering a comprehensive resettlement plan, whether for residents affected by development and the New Town projects or Greenbelt projects and this is hiking up anxiety and insecurity among ‘possible evictees’ elsewhere.

The Yongsan people’s struggles are not merely a popular struggle for tenants’ housing right or a claim for the justice of evictees. It has much to do with the increase in the polarization in housing and the leaking of democracy in South Korea under neoliberal ism. In order to make this claim, let us briefly examine the context of the dynamic of housing policy that has taken place.

South Korea’s current housing policy

The current housing situation in South Korea requires a close examination. While Seoul has been listed as experiencing the third highest rate of real house price increases among Asian cities since 1999, it is also considered more affordable now than compared to the early 1990s, says the latest IMF report. However, this optimistic claim fails to consider inequality in household income and how South Korea’s rental market functions, which makes up 44 percent of the housing stock nationwide. When we consider the prevalence of the cheonse system, making up 68 percent of the rental market, that requires a deposit or ‘key money’ of 60 percent to 75 percent of the price of the house or the wueolsesystem that requires 10 times to 20 times the monthly rent as a rental deposit, both signify a high threshold that is only possible for those who possess high financial sufficiency to meet. For many, the only option left is to rent a goshiwon (a room around three square metres or 1.5 pyeong that may involve access to a shared bathroom and kitchen on the same fall or somewhere in the building )or a hasuk (boarding-style house typically located near universities) and neither of these are suitable for most families or households with multiple members.

In the past two decades, the critical issue affecting housing conditions in South Korea is the commoditization of housing rights. It has evolved with two main challenges. First, the task of the government should be to solve the housing shortage for low-income households while placing restrictions on the inflation of housing prices. Second, the government has had to minimize the bursting of temporary real estate bubbles and stagnation in the construction industry. However, while curbing soaring property prices and bolstering the construction industry, the government has aggravated tensions around its housing policy. Since the inauguration of the Lee administration, measures have been introduced to raise capital gains tax from redevelopment projects and providing public rental housing to curb speculation. In addition, as the launching of the New Town projects in 2007 illustrates, it has attempted to revitalize slumps in the real estate market by providing various incentives in redevelopment projects and provisions. Now, the administration‘s objectives seem to have found a temporal convergence in its plans to release more greenbelt land for raising the housing supply.

梨花女大站另一隅 小屋沿坡爬

梨花女大站另一隅 小屋沿坡爬

Whose New Town dream is it?

Notwithstanding the endeavors of the government’s new housing policy, there has not been any direct reaction to address the housing rights issue of the dispossessed within the ongoing New Town Project or the Greenbelt Project. Ironies about in the beautiful New Town dream in terms of affecting the government‘s resettlement plan, the amount of both newly designated parcels and unsold parcels. While an intention has been expressed towards meeting people’s housing needs, the New Town projects have also caused the displacement of hundreds of thousands of residents without proper implementation of a resettlement plan. Moreover, the supply-demand discrepancies are being mended by allowing private builders to construct apartments on formerly restricted greenbelt land. As the government aims to implement policy to address the problem it has caused and produce an estimated 320,000 units of housing by 2012, an alarm over last year’s over-supply of gentrified apartments has yet to melt into air. To top it off, the expense for all of this is being absorbed by tax payers.

天安市朋友家附近的公寓簇群(距首爾市中心車程一小時多)

天安市朋友家附近的公寓簇群(距首爾市中心車程一小時多)

To go beyond supply-demand housing policy

How are we to imagine the future landscape of the Seoul Metropolitan Area under such gigantic amounts of construction? And, when the `damaged‘ greenbelt area is fill in by more and more apartments, what will this then lead to? When one juxtaposes the New Town Project with the Greenbelt Project as a first step towards implementing the Land Ministry’s plan announced last year of setting aside 1.5 million units for low-income households or Bogeumjari apartments by 2018, it becomes apparent that housing policy will continue to be utilized as an urban growth machine, but not for the people the city once housed. Although the government has released rescue-packages to lower the housing prices for low-income families there are still large numbers of victims that have been and will continue to be affected by the synchronized ‘displacement projects.’ The government should upgrade its housing policy orientation from a simple supply-demand calculation based on a top-down perspective to the seeding of grounded democracy in the current housing policy. Moreover, evictees’ housing rights need to be restored and recognized through a collective place-making process, and the resettlement plan for people to be able to actually live in the possible redevelopment/ reconstruction areas needs to be realized.

Lastly, is apartment development in the now declassified green zones the only solution for South Korea? The imagination of ‘redevelopment’ requires further effort and deliberation, and housing needs to be revisioned as a social project that requires a solution to house diverse types of housing needs and to stop further polarization.

富川市的新市鎮開發街景

富川市新市鎮開發後製造了一塊突兀的縉紳化街區(p.s.這系列建築主題叫The State咧)

Written by chy7211

09/03/2009 at 5:12 下午

{轉貼} Stop forced evictions and further death in South Korea

leave a comment »

In South Korea, 5 people died while protesting against an imminent forced eviction

1. Summary of the Incidence
At 6 a.m. on 20th January, people who were asking for solutions to avoid eviction in February in Youngsan-Gu, Seoul lost their lives as a consequence of violent oppression from the police. A 1500 strong police force was dispatched to disperse about 50 protesters. The police actions taken toward these protesters were similar to those taken in times war. Less than a day after those facing eviction started protesting and without further conversations or an effort to discuss the issues, the government dispatched a special police force and staged an anti-terror operation. After the police entered the building where the protesters were, a fire broke out and the circumstances became dangerous. However, without taking any safety measures, the police proceeded with the operation which resulted in the death of 5 protesters and 1 police officer.

Dispatching a special police force for an anti-terror operation in less than 24 hours is a rare case even in South Korea. Since the Conservatives took power however, the police have often cracked down on protesters in a violent way. This incidence also happened under this context.

A place to pray for the dead was set up at the spot of the incident. Despite of it being the Korean New Year holiday, visits from people continue. A fact finding committee composed of civilian organizations is carrying out investigations whilst the government is trying to close the case as soon as possible.

2. Background and Characteristics
It is well known that there are many problems coupled to rapid re-development projects in South Korea. Existing solutions (such as compensations, providing temporary place to stay etc) are neither realistic nor properly implemented. It is especially worrisome that forced eviction, which is prohibited under international human rights law, is being pursued under the auspices of the government.

South Korea, who is a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, was requested twice by the Committee on the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to provide protection to victims of forced evictions. However, as shown in this case, the South Korea government violated its obligation to respect the right to an adequate housing and to not being forcibly evicted. It also violated its obligation to protect the safety and the life of victims of forced evictions.

For over a year, lodgers in the re-development project area demanded the Yongsan-Gu Office for appropriate protection. The Yongsan-Gu Office provided no opportunity for talk or negotiation. Local lodgers went to the Youngsan-Gu Office to file an appeal but got rejected. During this appeal process, private security officers hired by the construction company threatened the lodgers and sexually harassed them. However, the police did not take any action against the private security officer’s practices. Despite the fact that eviction in the cold season requires the taking of special measures prior to the eviction, the Youngsan-Gu Office approved the construction company’s request to initiate the re-development from February. Lodgers faced with forced eviction entered the empty building to stage protests against this process and lost their life due to violent police operation.

Lodgers living in re-development areas are excluded from both the process and results of re-development projects as they do not own a property in the area. Re-development to improve the housing condition causes inequality in housing as many lodgers have to move into a place worse than their previous housing. A serous problem is that in the previously re-developed area, only 10~15 % of local residents will get to stay in that same area.

Lodgers suffer a serious violation of their housing rights during the re-development process. The aim of re-development projects should be in improvement of housing conditions and relieving poverty for the people living there. The government is obliged to provide necessary information and guarantee participation for people living there regardless of their ownership of the housing. However, these demands are ignored by the government and the construction companies who get benefits from the re-development in South Korea.

On the other hand, the investigation carried out at the government level is criticized for being biased. The police carried out autopsies of the bodies of the victims without the consent of their families. The police report on the incident was revealed to be false in light of a variety of evidence reported by the major media. The police attitude, which is neither democratic nor transparent, creates deeper mistrust. A fair and impartial system for the investigation is urgently required. Rather than trying to close the case as soon as possible, an effort to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening again and a guarantee of democratic participation are required.

3. Demands
․ Guarantee participation of civil organizations in the investigation process to secure a fair and thorough investigation.
․ Punish those responsible for the incidence.
․ Review current re-development projects which do not guarantee the right to housing of the lodgers.
․ Guarantee the right to housing as a human right.

4. Action for everyone
We would like to show international support at the second pan-national memorial for the dead. Please email us your supporting messages and let us know whether you would sign our statement by noon of the 30th January. Please also send us a copy of your complaints for those responsible. Sending complaints for those responsible continues until mid February.

Email to Sarangbang Group for Human Rights : humanrights@sarangbang.or.kr

1) Send us your supporting messages.
2) Please sign the statement below.

We urge the South Korean government to protect victims of forced evictions and to carry out a thorough investigation and punish the responsible for the deaths that occurred during the police action in Youngsan-Gu, Seoul 20th January 2009

We pray for the repose of the deceased who protested to secure the right to housing. With sorrow and anger about the deaths, we send our warmest regards to the family. We feel devastated with the reality that a demand for a living with dignity turned into a death and send our support to the family and people in South Korea who resist against the government.

We pay attention to the fact that this incidence was rooted in the problems of the re-development process in South Korea and resulted from a unilateral over-use of public power. We regret that the South Korean government has attacked its citizens who protested against forced eviction and tried to protect their right to housing. Dispatching a special police force is an act of labeling its citizens as a terrorist group, which is contrary to the state’s obligation to respect and protect the rights of its citizens. The government further damaged its fairness and trust by trying to close the case as soon as possible and in carrying out autopsies of the bodies without consent of the family’s concerned. We urge the South Korean government to apologize to the families concerned and come up with measures to prevent a similar case happening again in future. We demand the acceptance of responsibility for this incident from Seokgi Kim, the head of the Seoul Police, Sehoon Won, the minister of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security, Jangkyu Park, the head of the Yongsan-Gu Office, Dongsan Baek, the head of Yongsan Police

We confirm that the aim of re-development projects should lie on improving the right to housing. We are concerned that the re-development process in South Korea has become a means to earn more money for certain groups, such as construction companies, rather than follow an approach based on international human rights law. Under the international human rights perspective, forced evictions are a clear violation of human rights. Despite the fact that the South Korean government should, as a signatory to the ICESCR, take steps to prevent forced evictions, the government itself used police force against citizens who tried to realize their right to housing, resulting in the death of five citizens and one police officer. According to human rights organizations in South Korea, for over a year demands by lodgers in the re-development project area for appropriate protection, talks and negotiations were rejected by the Yongsan-Gu Office. They had asked several times to make plans for re-settlement but received no answers back. Out of desperation prior to the forced eviction, these people staged protests that cost them their lives. We urge the South Korean government to review any re-development projects that do not provide protection to the lodgers and that do not guarantee the participation of citizens.

Sending our support and expressing our solidarity to those in South Korea demanding a thorough investigation and punishment of the responsible, we urge the following:

* Guarantee participation of civil organizations in the investigation process to secure a fair and through investigation.
* Punish those responsible for the incidence.
* Review current re-development projects which do not guarantee the right to housing of the lodgers.
* Recognize housing as a human right and guarantee this right to housing.

3) Please, send any protesting messages to the following addresses:

Myung-bak Lee, the president of South Korea
http://www.bluehouse.go.kr/kr/index.php

1 Sejongno Jonno gu
Seoul Korea(110-820)
Tel +822-730-5800
Fax: +822-770-4943/+822-770-2440

Sehoon Won, the minister of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security
http://www.mopas.go.kr
Tel +822-2100-3000
Fax: +822-2100-4001

Seokgi Kim, the head of the Seoul Police
http://www.smpa.go.kr
Tel +822-720-3993
Fax: +822-754-7000

Sehoon Oh, the Mayor of Seoul (Metropolis)
http://www.seoul.go.kr
Tel: +822-731-6060
Fax +822-737-8688

Jangkyu Park, the head of the Yongsan-Gu Office
http://www.yongsan.seoul.kr
Tel: +822-710-3333
Fax +822-718-0333

Written by chy7211

01/29/2009 at 10:07 上午