Submitted by 南丫島話 On Lamma:Our Chance on Lamma Island - by LegCo Member Miss CHAN Yuen-hanPublished today in am730
[Consolidated:
http://www.am730.com.hk/column-258012]
{L_ATTACHMENT}:
11102790_799686496766774_2228430857518609016_n.jpg [ 47.36 KiB | Viewed 3478 times ]
Translation by Charlie Chiu. Many thanks!兩天前入南丫島，希望就政府在索罟灣對開，前南丫石礦場的發展項目作更
深入了解。
I went to Lamma Island two days ago, hoping to know more about the SKW ex-quarry development project.
今次已是第四次因這個發展項目入南丫島，不過，所看的、所知的和所想的
，都跟前幾次有點不同。
This is my fourth trip to Lamma Island in relation to this project. But what I see, what I know and what I think are different from my previous visits.
其實，對於這個發展項目，我跟我的民間專業團隊，暫時都無具體概念。
Actually, me and my non-government professional team still have no concrete idea about this development plan.
然而我卻有很多問題，希望問政府、問居民甚至是問自己！
Yet I have many questions to ask the government, residents and myself!
我曾經試過以不同的位置去視察這個地方，包括乘政府安排立法會的考察船，以及由當地居民帶領我坐小船，沿著發展區的海邊視察。
I tried to inspect this place in different ways, including a LegCo inspection ship arranged by the government and small ship rides led by local residents. These trips were along the coast lines of areas included in the development plan.
不過，看得最清楚，還是登上石礦場後的山上，俯瞰整個區域的面貌，啟發而來的問題亦更多。
But the clearest view came when I reached the mountain behind the quarry, looking down to have a view of the whole area. Many more questions came to my mind.
到底，對於這片土地，政府該如何規劃呢？
How should we plan this land?
如此美景，政府最初當然想賣地用來建豪宅、建酒店，但這個為小撮人的享受而犧牲整個自然環境的做法，在立法會理性之同事也有不同意見，而我一班喜愛山水的人自然堅持反對！
With such a beautiful view, of course the gov't initially would want to send lands to build luxury housing and hotels. But sacrificing the whole natural environment for enjoyment of a few people received different opinion from rational colleagues in LegCo. Of course, nature lovers like us insist on opposing it.
政府顧問公司初步建議會建公屋、亦有居屋又或是青年旅社，目標是增加5千人口。
Gov't consultants initially suggest the building of public housing, housing under the Home Ownership scheme or youth hostels. The goal is to increase a population by 5,000.
聽起來好像不錯，但想深一層，為增加千多戶而犧牲一個不能取代、獨一無二、買少見少的環境，又好像不太划算！
Sound nice, but on second thought, it seems not a good deal to sacrifice an irreplaceable, unique, dwindling environment for 1,000 plus households.
抑或，政府索性「蒙著眼」，大規模地發展，又如何呢？性本愛丘山的當地居民一定跟你拼過！
Or, the gov't can turn a blind eye and develop in a large scale, what about that? Nature loving local residents are sure to fight against it.
那麼，不發展、保留原狀是否最好？
But then, is it the best to keep it as is and not develop at all?
但當地居民又未能因這個人口增加的機會，加強區內之基本設施和配套。
But local residents will be unable to grab this opportunity to strengthen basic infrastructure and supporting facilities in the area.
另外，又有居民建議，將南丫島發展成屬於香港人在大城市旁的一個假日休閒住宿旅遊點，但卻要經政府部門的五關六將，困難重重……
Besides, some local residents suggest to develop Lamma into a leisure tourist spot beside the big city. However, they need to go through all the obstacles in the gov't ...
眾多問題，未有答案。
Many question, no answers yet.
想來想去，按現時政府的規劃模式，任何方案都總是未臻完善，總是帶點缺失、帶點遺憾。
After much deliberation, based on the government's current planning model, any plan is always imperfect, there's always room for improvement and there's regret.
既然如此，我們是否有需要注入新的思維，棄掉舊有的一套觀念，將意想不到的、聞所未聞的，在這片土地作一個新開始呢！
That being the case, is there a need for us to inject new thinking, abandon the set of old ideas, and let the unexpected and unheard have a new start in this land.
你或許會問，那即是甚麼？即是不排除任何新概念！
You might ask, what is it then? That is not ruling out any new concept!In Lamma Island two days ago in the hope that outside Government in Sok Kwu Wan, Lamma quarry before development projects more in-depth understanding.
I went to Lamma Island two days ago hoping to know more about the SKW ex-quarry development project.
This is the fourth time for this development project to the Lamma Island, however, and want to read and understand by is a little different. This is my fourth trip to Lamma Island in relation to this project. But what I see, what I know and what I think are different from my previous visits.
In fact, for this development project, I talked to my private professional team, currently there are no specific concepts. Actually, I and my non-government professional team still have no concrete idea about this development plan.
Yet I have a lot of problems, and would like to ask the Government, asked the inhabitants even ask yourself! Yet I have many questions to ask the government, residents and myself!
I would have tried a different location to visit this place, including by government arrangements for the research vessel And by the local population lead me by boat, along the development area of the beach visits. I tried to inspect this place in different ways, including a LegCo inspection ship arranged by the government and small ship rides led by local residents. These trips were along the coast lines of areas included in the development plan.
However, most clearly seen, still after landing on quarry Hill, overlooking the entire region faces, inspire the question comes more. But the clearest view came when I reached the mountain behind the quarry, looking down to have a view of the whole area. Many more questions came to my mind.
Really, for this piece of land, how can Government plan? How should we plan this land?
Such beauty, the Government initially wanted to sell to build mansions, built hotels, but for a small group of people. At the expense of the entire natural environment practices, rational colleagues of this Council have different views, and ws, as a group of lovers of landscapes naturally object!
With such a beautiful view, of course the gov't initially would want to send lands to build luxury housing and hotels. But sacrificing the whole natural environment for enjoyment of a few people received different opinion from rational colleagues in LegCo. Of course, nature lovers like us insist on opposing it.
Government consultant initial proposals will build public housing and HOS flats or hostels, the goal is to increase the population by 5,000. Gov't consultants initially suggested the building of public housing, housing under the Home Ownership scheme or youth hostels. The goal is to increase a population by 5,000.
Sounds good, but thought one step for increased sacrifice thousands of households that cannot be replaced, the only non-
Second, the fewer environments, and isn't a very good deal! Sound nice, but on second thought, it seems not a good deal to sacrifice an un-replaceable, unique, dwindling environment for 1000 plus households.
Or, the Government simply "blindfolded", developed on a large scale, what about? Ài qiū shān, residents must have told you fight! Or, the gov't can turn a blind eye and develop in a large scale, what about that? Nature loving local residents are sure to fight against it.
So, not to develop, retain the status quo is the best? But then, is it the best to keep it as is and not develop at all?
But local residents have not been due to the population increase in opportunities, strengthening regional infrastructure and facilities. But local residents will be unable to grab this opportunity to strengthen basic infrastructure and supporting facilities in the area.
In addition, residents suggested that development as belonging to the people of Hong Kong, Lamma Island a holiday accommodation and leisure tourism in the big cities, but five of six government departments will be difficult ... but some local residents suggest to develop Lamma into a leisure tourist spot beside the big city. However, they need to go through all the obstacles in the gov't ...
A number of issues, no answer yet. Many question, no answers yet.
Want to go, according to the Government's planning approach is always room for improvement in any programme, is always a little bit short, lose, with a touch of regret. After much deliberation, based on the government's current planning model, any plan is always imperfect, there's always room for improvement and there's regret.
In that case, do we have the need to inject new thinking, discard old ideas, unexpected, unknown, in this piece of land for a new beginning! That being the case, is there a need for us to inject new thinking, abandon the set of old ideas, and let the unexpected and unheard have a new start in this land.
You might ask, which is what? That does not rule out any new concept! You might ask, what is it then? That is not ruling out any new concept!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
