Full-time doctor the answer, not more concrete
Apr 30, 2011

So the planning and civil engineering and development departments want to reclaim a further four square kilometres of existing natural bay to create a clear emergency vehicle access (EVA) to the ferry pier from the clinic at Yung Shue Wan, based on 15-year-old logic and plans.

Interestingly, so far, about 70 per cent of the phase one reclamation remains derelict and the remainder is an industrial eyesore for visitors and residents alike, and that phase was probably finished five years ago. However, let's look at the proposed EVA.

There is a clear, existing EVA from the clinic to the helipad, which is how medical emergencies leave north Lamma. Before the helipad, emergencies were mostly taken by police launch, with minor injuries travelling by ferry.

Interestingly, the proposed site of the new police station is adjacent to the helipad EVA with its deep-water landing.

This completely removes the need for the existence of an EVA between the clinic and the ferry pier. From a community point of view, shouldn't we look at needs? What we don't have is a fully manned clinic with a qualified doctor - a shortfall in emergency care that has already cost lives.

If an injury is minor enough for you to wait for a ferry, it isn't going to kill you. HK$55 million to save five minutes on an hour's journey is irrelevant. What I don't want to wait for is the conclusion of a panic call to an off-island doctor to ask about major blood loss or a severed limb.

Let us get a full-time resident doctor who will help the whole community in a way that pouring money, like concrete, into a few pockets never can, even if our district councillor, who admits there has been no consultation since 2003, thinks it will. Should we ask who our councillor serves, because it increasingly appears she is out of touch with residents' needs, aspirations and expectations?

Nick Bilcliffe, Lamma

"East meets West: Lamma fisherwoman and frogwoman come together over a love of daiquiris and abhorrence of harbor reclamation."

Lamma islanders ought to be involved in plan
May 02, 2011

For a government that claims to be so open and transparent, the lack of public consultation over plans to reclaim a chunk of the bay beside the Lamma Island village of Yung Shue Wan comes as a surprise. It is a proposal that has been twice rejected by residents, yet is back on the drawing board with few being aware of its existence. Businesses and lives will be affected, the character of the area will be changed and tourists, a lifeblood for restaurants and shops at weekends, could end up staying away. That is a pity, as involving the community in the project would be beneficial for all concerned.

As it is, the HK$55 million plan for a 400-metre concrete emergency access road and pedestrian walkway is creating enemies instead of friends. It was unveiled unheralded on the Civil Engineering and Development Department's website. Details were not posted on the village's community notice board. The first the owners of restaurants with outdoor seating beside the waterfront that will be directly affected heard about it was by word of mouth from other residents.

The way in which authorities have gone about the process has led to suspicion and mistrust. Similar reclamation proposals were withdrawn in 1995 and 2003 amid objections. The government has long been criticised by some residents for its haphazard, unco-ordinated and irrational approach towards the island. This is despite the potential to create an attractive part of our city that could be a genuine draw for tourists from near and far.
Lamma is a peaceful, uncrowded part of our city. It does not have cars and its environment is largely unspoilt. They are features that should be enhanced and promoted, not ignored by bureaucrats in far-off city offices who have little understanding of the island and its ways.

The islanders are not anti-development - they just want to be involved in matters that directly affect them. By working with them rather than shutting them out, the government can ensure that the island's character and charm will be retained for all to enjoy.

"That's an editorial"

Oh - it must be fact then.

Members of the Fourth Estate are every bit as unelected as the small inner circle (SIC) of expats complaining on this forum - and in this case they sound suspiciously like they are one and the same.

Contrary to what SCMP would have you believe, the only elected representative for the area DOES accurately reflect the wishes of village representatives at Board meetings, and this includes a pro-development platform. So all you SIC people out there, get yourselves elected, if you can. Cards are stacked against you I hear you say? well, you'll have to start convncing your electorate then, instead of spouting off to your SIC buddies.

Alan only thinks I am being obtuse.

Looks good for anyone who doesn't like the Sampan seafood restaurant or the drinking pit opposite the bait shop that the fishermen use.

I reckon that no one could f**k up the shoreline of YSW as bad as it is already.
But perhaps I underestimate the HK Government

Back on the island after a while abroad, it's increasingly obvious that the "yes" lobby constitutes a handfull of individuals who seem able to do little except slag off the current state of the harbour while blithely assuming the government plan will improve it.

I must have missed the surveys that went round which is a shame.

Meanwhile it seems the SCMP and Apple Daily have come on board ...

Lamma plan nothing like Stanley revamp
4 May 2011
Anton Ivanov says that the objections to the Lamma harbour reclamation are made by "overzealous activists" ("Reclamation is good for island", April 29).

If this is the case, then why do 85 per cent of the restaurants on Main Street object to the scheme? Are these people overzealous activists?

A similar scheme back around 2001 foundered when polls found that up to 90 per cent of visitors objected to it. Were all these people overzealous activists?

The concerns Mr Ivanov raises are shared by many people on Lamma. We would all like a pretty harbourfront, tidy and clean and free from graffiti.

To tidy the front, clean it and make it free of graffiti should be a simple matter. But to cure the problem by erecting a rubble mound sea wall in front of the restaurants? It's like prescribing a lobotomy as a cure for a headache.

Perhaps Mr Ivanov is under the impression that the reclamation will turn Yung Shue Wan into a kind of Stanley? Unfortunately, the project plans reveal this will not be the case. The purpose in Stanley was to construct a boardwalk for promoting tourism.

The purpose on Lamma is to construct an emergency vehicular access. They get a cantilevered boardwalk and glass panel walls. We get a rubble mound. Stanley gets a plaza, Lamma gets a building "not to exceed six metres in height".

The project is for a road along the waterfront. This is what was asked for and this is what Lamma will get. I would love it if the project plan for a road was to magically transform into an elegant, tourist-friendly waterfront. But that is optimistic to the point of delusion.

One does wonder how town planning officials managed to go forward with such a fatally and obviously flawed plan. If they had consulted anyone at all (the last recorded consultation was in 2003) they would have realised that perhaps there were going to be problems.

Indeed, the fact that the project plan contains a map with a major section of the existing waterfront missing makes me wonder if anyone even visited Lamma.

The one department that comes out well in all this is the Environmental Protection Department. It is a breath of fresh air in an ocean of insanity. It appears to have recognised that the original plan was somewhat controversial and, in its environmental impact assessment brief, it requires the assessment both to justify the need for the reclamation and also the scope and type of reclamation.

I look forward to seeing the company tasked with this brief consulting the local community and talking to ordinary people about what it is that they need and want.

This is what should have been done right at the beginning and it is only this consultant that can dig town planning officials out of the awful mess they have got themselves into.

Jos Vernon, Lamma