Tung O 6-star hotel has always been in the Baroque on Lamma plans. More about those ever-evolving plans later this year, I'd guess.

Only heard rumours about the Lo Tik Wan plans, probably a very long shot.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

I repeat: "SIX STARS???"
So completely full of shit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_rating
"Overall, as no traditional organization or formal body awards or recognizes any rating over five-star deluxe, such claims are meaningless and predominantly used for advertising purposes."

How much experience has Bobby Li had in building or operating world-class hotels?
None at all.

How much would it cost to build?
Billions.

But he has built a block of flats at the tannery that have been empty for 10 years.

The hotel would be built and operated by a major international chain of resort hotels. Don't recall the name. Yes, anything over 5 stars is meaningless. Dubai claims 7 stars!

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

It's not just a block of flats, it's a block of flats where toilets are located next to full-height windows so that people on the Pak Kok path could observe you shitting. It's the ultimate chic, isn't it. The guy's a pro.

Yeah, that's what he said..
And he was going to have a yacht marina and host the America's Cup.

He's full of it.

I've talked to a senior sewage engineer about the new Sok Kwu Wan sewage treatment plant a few months ago. He assured me that it's NOT adequate for any additional population in the ex-Quarry as it was designed and planned long before the quarry plans for just the 1,000 total population of all of South Lamma currently. It could be expanded a bit but not to the needed capacity for this new town as big as the rest of Lamma put together. So we'll need additional massive sewage infrastructure for this new town. See the detailed govt. proposal and plans in the study:
http://www.ex-lammaquarry.hk/download/ELQ_CE2-Digest_FINAL_LR.pdf
http://www.ex-lammaquarry.hk/eng-TheStudy7.htm

The mostly completed existing sewage infrastructure (except the additional 9km of sewage pipes all over North Lamma being put in over the next number of years.) has a total budget of almost half a BILLION for the current population of 6,000. How much taxpayer money will be needed for the future town is anyone's guess.

For all the additional taxpayer-paid infrastructure that will need to be put into this remote and wild area before a private developer would agree to build the houses, it might easily need a few more billions. A planned new Cable Road all the way to the Power Station, ferry pier, water supply, new roads to connect to Lo So Shing, Sok Kwu Wan and North Lamma, etc.

(By the way, despite what you may have heard, the actual population of Lamma is NOT more than 6,000 and probably quite a bit less as many residents counted in the recent population survey (5,950) don't even live here anymore, but only visit and vote here, like a considerable number of indigenous residents. I could name at least a dozen myself.)

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Deadline for comments on Environmental Impact Assessment study for the ex-Lamma Quarry housing project is this Friday, Mar 21!

This sample email to the EPD has been forwarded by 南丫島話 On Lamma, from http://www.inmediahk.net/node/1021640 (edited Google translation):

Environmental observers, walk the mountains!

Please go to the letter: against ex-Lamma Quarry's tall buildings and five thousand population increase.
Wednesday 2014-03-19

Editor's note:
The government has started the second phase of consultation on the feasibility study for the ex-Lamma Quarry site. The environmental impact assessment and consultation will be the first deadline to comment: March 21. The authors urge you to oppose the proposed increase in a letter to the 5,000 population development plans, instead pushing to use the former quarry for nature conservation and eco-tourism purposes.

---

Email: sdpd@pland.gov.hk, lamma@cedd.gov.hk

Subject: "Sok Kwu Wan, Lamma former quarry: Future Land Use Planning and Engineering Study - Feasibility Study"

I am opposed to the development plan and the study mentioned above, for the following reasons :

1.) Nature conservation:

Ecological survey of different conservation groups have carried out on the island were recorded up to one hundred species of birds , more than seventy kinds of butterflies and 10 species of dragonflies , Sok Kwu Wan also found the world 's unique Romer's Tree Frog . These rich ecological records to prove Lamma Island has a high ecological value. Future development plans should be based on the principle of conservation , to avoid any large-scale development.

2.) Balance Community Development:

Sok Kwu Wan and South Lamma have currently only less than one thousand people. Thousands of people moving into to the quarry would pose serious problems for the entire Lamma community; including the rule of safety, employment, education, transportation, recreation, and even waste disposal, air and light pollution, and so on. Impact on the rest of Lamma is missing in the study which is unacceptable.

3.) Transport facilities:

Yung Shue Wan, about six thousand of the population, between Central ferry also need government subsidies to tens of millions each year in order to maintain normal services. The consultancy research report no future Sok Kwu Wan on new ferry service; financial and operational feasibility may be composed of researchers, are serious deficiencies .

4.) Lamma should develop eco-tourism:

Yung Shue Wan and Sok Kwu Wan's connecting hiking trails have become a popular activity for travelers visiting Lamma Island. Lamma Island has a unique multicultural community life, beautiful natural environment. Quarry should focus on the development direction for ecological tourism. It could develop into an ecological park with nature education, ecological experiences, environmental art, outdoor activities, natural science researchers, etc., establishing the region as a unique ecological environmental education park for all of Hong Kong, as quiet, interesting tourist attraction.

---

請去信：反對前南丫石礦場建高樓 增五千人口
週三 2014-03-19 山牛

編按：政府正就前南丫石礦場用地的可行性研究作第二階段的諮詢，其環境影響評估諮詢將率先於3月21日截止，作者呼籲大家去信反對這個擬增加5000人口的發展大計，要求保育前石礦場作自然生態旅遊的用途。

電郵：sdpd@pland.gov.hk, lamma@cedd.gov.hk

有關「南丫島索罟灣前南丫石礦場未來土地用途發展規劃及工程研究－可行性研究」

本人反對以上的硏究所提及的發展規劃，理由如下：

1）自然生態保育：

不同的保育團體曾在島上進行的生態調查，分別記錄了多達一百種鳥類、七十多種蝴蝶及十多種蜻蜓，索罟灣亦發現世界獨有的盧文氏樹蛙。這些豐富的生態記錄証明南丫島擁有極高的生態價值。將來的發展計劃應以自然保育為原則，避免任何大型的發展。

2）平衡社區發展：

索罟灣及南丫島南部目前只有不足一千人口，石礦場一旦移入數千人口，必然會對整個南丫島構成嚴重的社區問題；包括冶安、就業、教育、交通、康樂、以至垃圾處理、空氣及光汚染等等。相關硏究只以石礦場為硏究重點而急略對整個南丫島的影響，是不能接受的缺失。

3）交通設施：

榕樹灣大約有六千人口，來往中環的渡輪每年也需要政府補貼數千萬元才能維持正常服務。有關顧問硏究報告完全沒有就將來索罟灣新的渡輪服務；有可能構成的財務及營運進行可行性硏究，是嚴重的缺失。

4）南丫島應發展生態旅遊：

索罟灣連接榕樹灣的健行步道，已經成為到訪南丫島旅客的熱門活動，加上南丫島獨特的多元文化社區生活，美麗的自然環境。石礦場應以生態旅遊作重點發展方向，大可以發展成一生態公園，以自然教育、生態體驗、環境藝術、戶外活動、自然科學硏究等等，建立亞洲區一處獨特的生態環境教育公園，亦為香港增加一有趣閒適的旅遊景點。

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Problem is that when they get to the "Environmental Impact Assessment" they have already made their plan. You can only comment on the impact of that plan, not propose alternatives.

They held the usual bogus "consultations" last year, ignored everything anyone said except those that supported this plan. It's all a charade.
The government wonders why the "Occupy" movement has so much support, why people march on June 4. It's because there is no way to get this government to listen if you go through official channels. They've redefined all the words so they have the form of democracy, the practice is they just make decisions based on what is good for the businessmen who have influence.

A few full-size photos from today's Lamma-zine story:

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Hi all -

I'm living in Sok Kwu Wan and walked by the ferry pier yesterday to find a new set of boards posted on the development that this post has been following. I checked out this forum today to update y'all on that and write some ideas.

Here's the most recent website put up by the relevant HK Gov. departments: http://www.ex-lammaquarry.hk/ - good information there.

Of course, this project has already received a lot of opposition. It's pretty much a reality that something's going to happen with this land and real estate developers are pretty powerful people - not to mention HK has some very pressing population issues.

Look - Lamma already has a very small wind farm and there are some buildings in HKU that are Leed Silver or better, like HKU's Centennial Campus. Instead of outright opposition - straight up 'NO', why not build a proposal from what the Planning & Civil Engineering Dev. Departments already have put together? If this "Baroque" concept could be a highly sustainable eco-community, that would be awesome. There is capacity and ability to realize modern sustainability practices in waste management, wind/wave/solar energy, and farm coop/permaculture that, with the right effort & direction - a project like this one could become something very positive for South Lamma. Instead of being a drain on resources it could be a generator.

We've been trying to do that for years.
At the consultations last year many suggestions like that were made

They nodded and thanked us, put all our comments and suggestions into a filing cabinet somewhere and and now they're going ahead with their original plan. The only feedback they ever reference is that agreeing with them. Everything else is ignored or discounted.

Making suggestions and presenting alternative plans is just futile.
I've tried it over and over, the process is simply a charade. They just go through the motions, tick the box marked "consultation" as done, and then move on to building what they decided before it was ever made public.

After a while you realise you're expending huge amounts of time and effort, and sometimes money, and the only result is that the government uses your participation to claim they have "taken concerns on board", "consulted with stakeholders", etc. ad nauseam. They're totally insincere.


No, we we have housing issues. Affordable housing in places where people want to live is in desperately short supply. This project will be expensive flats bought by investors. Not affordable housing in places where people can get to work and school. Like the NT where the Kuk and real estate moguls hold huge tracts of land and wait for their chance to cash in. The only reason the quarry is all go is because the government already has the land without any obligations. Not because it's a good place to build a new community.

What it will actually result in is those who live on Lamma now being forced out or made to spend an ever larger proportion of their income on housing as rents rise as a result of this luxury housing pushing up the "market" rate. This has already started to happen. My rent has almost doubled in my last lease, God knows what it will be like when I have to renew it.

Of course the local real estate interests and the politicians who they support love this idea.


More than awesome, completely unbelievable.
Baroque is Bobby Li 's project on Tung O, not the Quarry project.
He's been greenwashing it with waffle about "eco-community" and other buzz words, it's just a real estate development.
Look at his Tannery development near Yung Shue Wan and see what he builds.
Expensive flats that he can't find buyers for.
Look above and this "eco community" is also supposed to have a "6 star hotel", a yacht marina, and 100 car parking places.

Whatever, none of that would really happen, he would just put up flats, sell them, take the money and run.

I just got a photo of the display panels at Sok Kwu Wan ferry pier that rhhertz has mentioned above.

These will also come to Central Ferry Pier 4 and YSW Main Street next month, see http://www.ex-lammaquarry.hk/eng-PublicEngagement2.htm.

All the info on these panels and much more is also on the official project website:
http://www.ex-lammaquarry.hk

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

That sailbox, Bounty, caused quite a stir in Sok Kwu Wan bay and anchoring at their ferry pier!

This is from the second set of photos I received within an hour. Thanks, Jo and Charlie!

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Letter from Green Power, Eco-Education & Resources Centre and Living Lamma:

Objections to the development of Ex-Lamma Quarry Area at Sok Kwu Wan:

"We, Eco-Education & Resources and Green Power Centre ( ERC& GP), write to lodge strong objections to the proposals contained in the captioned ‘Planning and Engineering Study on Future Land Use at Ex-Lamma Quarry Area at Sok Kwu Wan, Lamma Island – Feasibility Study’ based on the following grounds:

(A) Adverse impacts on Green Turtle breeding and hatching from light pollution
(B) Threats to biodiversity and winter birds migration
(C) Incompatibility of land uses in surrounding areas
(D) Floodgate effect of over–development on Lamma Island"

Read more...

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Good article written from Green Power, Eco-Education & Resources Center and Living Lamma. Share it across all social media channels.

Look at how the real estate developers have pushed their initiative forward. The language they use is written as if the completion of these projects on Lamma is inevitable.

We should frame our arguments in the same way. Speak as if this will just be another failed attempt to develop a future country park. Lamma is a future country park (that's a start).

We should also reach out to the SCMP and conduct some interviews so they can write an article to represent some of Lamma's anti-development community.

Spread the word about this stuff to the rest of HK. If we're just posting to each other on some forums and complaining about it in the bars in Yung Shue Wan,... nobody else is going to know or care.

Then, everyone needs to show up on May 3 to the public forum and *correctly* speak to the developers & Arup. If people show up and curse, whine & fuss -- they won't take that seriously.

Being against an inappropriate development doesn't mean you are "anti-development".
That's a description that falls into the way the government and developers want to frame the debate, so they can dismiss us as a bunch of greenie hippies.
We don't want to dance around barefoot with flowers in our hair and live in bark huts and eat wild fruit.
(Not all of us, anyway.)

There were plenty of "green" development proposals made for the quarry.



I went to the last two public forums on this, and many other on other projects.
I didn't curse, whine & fuss. Neither did anyone else.
Where did you get the idea anyone did that?

When I'm writing here I may vent and be blunt, but I'm not an idiot, I won't abuse them to their faces. I'm sure they are equally uncomplimentary about me after meetings.

We present reams of detailed reports. We present alternatives and ask questions.
The problem is not that we don't "*correctly* speak to the developers & Arup".

That isn't why they don't take us seriously. They don't take us seriously because they don't want to listen to anything that gets in the way of their plans. And they don't have to.

The consultation process, whatever it says on paper and whatever was its original intent, is a rubber stamp. They will find people who support their plan, cite them to assert their plan "has "broad community support", without even mentioning how many people had opposing views. They will ask us to spend hours discussing alternatives and then say how interesting it is and that they will get back to us. Then nothing for a month or two until they gazette their original plan.

"Public consultation" is defined by the government as "telling the public what they're going to do".


I don't want to discourage you from participating, but until you have and seen for yourself how it works, please do not lecture others on how to do it.

This is a political process. The only hope of having an impact is if the people who live here register to vote and vote to change our village representatives and district councillors. These are the "stakeholders" as defined by the government. While they are all solidly DAB and friends of real estate developers, they will prevail.

We managed to stop the YSW reclamation back in the 90s with a big campaign, but our local "representatives" are now planning to do it regardless.

I don't just "post on forums and talk in bars". I registered to vote 20 years ago, I encourage others to do so, even campaign for suitable candidates.

All we can do now is marginally slow some projects down by forcing them to follow the legal procedures. But none of our positive suggestions and alternatives will ever get traction without powerful sponsorship.

Radio 3's Backchat had a discussion on cronyism in Hong Kong this morning.



I sent this in which got read on air:



Program archived here.

Alan's description of a public consultation is quite accurate, and I should know because I've seen at least one government consultation from the inside. If anything they are even more of a scam than he suggests, with the final decision/s being taken by an individual or a 'star chamber' of individuals with little or no regard to what was said during the 'consultation' process.

The reality of most consultations is that the variety of opinions expressed (from 'crazy' to 'great-but-too-innovative-for-HK') unfortunately gives the government adequate leeway to claim that the final decision complies with at least some of the views ventured - usually those of the bland or basic variety. Having said that, the consultation I witnessed ended with a single individual making a decision (and carrying it out) that had absolutely nothing to do with the consultation process. It was a complete waste of time and money and served solely to give the impression that public and expert opinion had been heeded.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

They don't take us seriously because they are after bang for the buck, and the proposals that have been submitted against the less environmentally-friendly residential plans have little or no financial return. These real estate moguls consider this land an investment. They'd be more willing to work together with us if we can respect the fact that they have invested time and money and that this development project constitutes part of their livelihood. If we want to change their plan from "The Baroque"-style residential developments, we have to (i) teach them about conservation & the value of a biodiverse ecosystem and (ii) present viable alternatives that still offer impressive financial returns.

It can be done while developing part of the land for residential use and preserve other parts. There is negotiating room to conserve a large chunk of South Lamma in exchange for responsible residential development on the ex-Quarry site. We, here, know the options for environmentally-friendly development (green roofing, wind farms, solar-powered lighting in public spaces, efficient energy usage for public lighting, etc. etc.). We have to make sure to communicate these practices in a way that shows cost savings, presents a solid public image for the development project, and actually conserves the natural environment.

This can be done.



To take this approach is already to admit failure. I disagree wholeheartedly. We can do more than slow projects.

First, we can educate real estate developers in modern practices of land conservation and real estate development (see my response above). I didn't see any mention of LEED in current development plans. Informing on this is one big step.

Yes, powerful sponsorship is needed. There are plenty of environmental organizations and conservationists in Hong Kong, Southeast Asia and the rest of the World (UNESCO?) that would possibly support or back a movement to conserve South Lamma. While many politicians may not want to get involved, a concerted campaign may turn up some unexpected support.

You wrote 500 words in support of your ego and why a conservation effort won't succeed.

With your history here, I challenge you to write 500 words on why you are one of the people who can help to lead a conservation movement, what you can do, what you need others to do, and how we can make it succeed. I'm here to help, too. Let's work together, progressively, man.

This is a government project on government land.
The "moguls" don't own it (yet). They have "invested" NOTHING in this except to lobby the government to let them build and sell flats.

The "bang for the buck" is benefit to the people of Hong Kong, not maximising profit for moguls.
At least, it's supposed to be.

I don't feel the slightest obligation to help millionaires who see this as a chance to make a bigger fortune and destroy my "livelihood" and home in the process.


Really? Who do we negotiate with?

It won't be "this and no more", it will be a foot in the door.

Didn't you read the Green Power et al. submission: "(D) Floodgate effect of over–development on Lamma Island"?


In response you asserting that all we had done was talk in bars, curse, whine & fuss.
Sorry, I wasn't going to let that be uncontested.

I didn't say it won't succeed. I said that your claim that we were just not being polite enough was not the problem.

Reasoned rational arguments are just ignored.
I know this because that's what I've been doing for the last 20 years and getting a very bruised forehead in the process.

What is needed is political power.


That's a job for a politician, and I'm clearly not one.
I rub people the wrong way.

That's why I have supported the politicians who stand against the DAB incumbents in every election here.

The one thing I will tell you to do is register to vote. Tell everyone you know to register to vote. The DAB has all their grannies lined up to post their votes, it ships in people who don't live here any more to vote. Meanwhile most of the people who actually do live here can't be bothered to register.