Lamma.com.hk

LAMMA-ZINE - CLASSIFIEDS - EVENTS - GALLERIES - LINKS - Subscribe - Donate - Advertise - Contact Us - Facebook

  WHAT'S NEW? Race Report: 4 Peaks Race ~ Why Visit Lamma? ~ Missing woman falls & dies
  WHAT'S ON?    LNY lunch for Elderlies ~ Lamma Waste no mall ~ Lamma Dragons Newbie Day
  LAMMA-ZINE:  Nick the YouTube Star ~ LNY @ Tin Hau Temple ~ Rooster Dragon or Mutant Turkey 

It is currently Mon Jun 01, 2020 7:35 am

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:58 am 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10000
Location: Pak Kok Village
The signature campaign has been going on for several days now, including inside restaurants on Main Street and at the Lunar New Year Carnival last Friday.

There are two different forms to give a name and signature, one for visitors and one for residents.

The signature campaign is specific for the Library location of the Cycle Parking Area platform, not asking the more general question if you want a CPA in general, for example considering the illegal platform opposite the Post Office.

The only documentation provided for people is the Govt. announcement about the G.N. 130 project, see below. Plus the map of the project.

A stack of sheets of signature has been collected and quite a number of non-Chinese have signed as well. They seem to be trying to break the record of 3,000 signatures collected a few years ago on this subject.

Comments can be submitted till Mar 6, see below.

Image

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


Last edited by Lamma-Gung on Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:03 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
Yes I saw an old lady with a few young girls asking for signatures on Sat morning. Simply showed a map highlighting the new bicycle park. I walked away. Also saw a signature page outside the convenience store at the top of Tai Peng hill. I'm new to Lamma and quite disappointed with the govt spending money on useless things.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:23 am 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10000
Location: Pak Kok Village
Yes, a number of local shops and restaurants have joined in the signature campaign. One restaurant owner (not a biker) commented something like, "Bike park anywhere is good, money from govt. good for local economy, sign here!"

Image

There was some confusion about the size of the bike park, as the govt. announcement and map shown to everybody is only showing a huge, much larger "Works Area" extending half the ferry pier length, but not the actual CPA platform only. See maps below.

Image

Image

The former maps were talking about a "reclamation", creating a new seawall. But the latest maps only mention a "platform", not a reclamation anymore, leaving the seashore and the rocks below the platform. There's also a gap now between the current bridge and the platform, unlike the former maps which connected the reclamation to the seashore.
Maybe an effort by govt. to make the highly controversial project more acceptable to the passionate local opposition?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:55 am 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
Lamma-Gung wrote:
There's also a gap now between the current bridge and the platform, unlike the former maps which connected the reclamation to the seashore.
Maybe an effort by govt. to make the highly controversial project more acceptable to the passionate local opposition?


Of course not. They've completely ignored -- not even mentioned -- any alternatives or suggestions offered.

The gap allows them to have a what is effectively a reclamation, while it's not officially one, and so doesn't have to be gazetted under the Foreshore and Seabed Ordinance.

In any case, as I've said a hundred times over the last three years, the issue for me is that it will provide a worse parking than we have now, for free.

It'll create more problems for cyclists and pedestrians, and be the most expensive, and most useless bicycle park in Hong Kong. Quite likely, in the world.

The only reason all these businesspeople support of it is the money.
It's a pure porkbarrel project.

In the history of Lamma island, despite it being the most bicycle-intensive district in Hong Kong, the only form of transport here, there has never been a single public bike rack built anywhere.

Bikes are low-status and treated as toys or obstructions by the government, not vehicles. Parking bikes was never given a thought until it was realised it could be used to justify pouring concrete into the harbour.

If the government would just give out $10 million in lai see, spent $50,000 to build racks along the pier, they'd save $8 million and we could all be happy.

But Yu Lai Fan has been pushing this through all the committees for 10 years, she thinks it's her right to to get her $18 million project, so we're going to get this stupid slab of concrete in our harbour, and then force commuters to fight their way into and out of it every fucking day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
Thanks Allan for being vigilant on this for 3 years. I agree that the proposed bike park is overpriced, ugly and unnecessary. But how would it be worse? Do you mean in traffic flow, bottleneck etc?

What else can be done before March 6?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:51 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
ThomasL wrote:
Thanks Allan for being vigilant on this for 3 years. I agree that the proposed bike park is overpriced, ugly and unnecessary. But how would it be worse? Do you mean in traffic flow, bottleneck etc?


See my posts at the beginning of the thread.
The bottleneck is at the end of the pier, where the path becomes 2.2 metres wide, not on the pier, which is 6 metres wide.

It will certainly be worse for cyclists.
Of course, some just hate cyclists so that would be a plus for the scheme.

ThomasL wrote:
What else can be done before March 6?

You can submit a comment, or objection if you want, to the Transport Department as in the notice copied above.

Anywhere else in the world, a bicycle rack would be built routinely and in a way that is appropriate to the community that will use it. Here it's a huge issue, but parking bikes has nothing to do with it; cyclists aren't part of the plan at all. Our "representatives" would be just as happy to put a seashell collage there, as long as they got the same amount of concrete contracted. Unfortunately, the government isn't quite stupid enough to do that, so they pretend it's for parking bikes, and will force cyclists to use it regardless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
Just read the Living Lamma report dated Sep 2010. I will write a letter to the Transport Department but I doubt they will do anything if they are not doing anything AFTER reading the excellent Living Lamma report. Nothing more I can add in content. Anything more drastic or unorthodox like writing to SCMP or media, putting up notices etc? This is such a boondoggle!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:55 am 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
ThomasL wrote:
Just read the Living Lamma report dated Sep 2010. I will write a letter to the Transport Department but I doubt they will do anything if they are not doing anything AFTER reading the excellent Living Lamma report. Nothing more I can add in content. Anything more drastic or unorthodox like writing to SCMP or media, putting up notices etc? This is such a boondoggle!


Sign up for the Living Lamma mailng list if you haven't already.
We will be making some complaints about how this has been railroaded through.

I should write a letter to the Post myself.

However, we have to be low key locally, as YLF is mobilising her troops to get this through. She would love to turn this into a gweilos vs native sons issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:24 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
Here's an interesting document that just came to light.

In early 2009 Living Lamma had not officially been formed (that happened a few months after) and the government was looking for a registered "green" group to rubberstamp the CPA proposal.
They invited Green Lantau, who gave the response below.

This echoes the suggestions and objections I and several other Lamma residents had made at about the same time. The government never referred to any of these suggestions or correspondence in later meetings, and omitted any mention from their minutes or later summaries, which only said that the "stakeholders" (that being Chairman Chan Yu Lai Fan and, who coincidentally proposed the CPA) opposed any change (especially any change that didn't use the full $18 million in concrete).

This whole process demonstrates what a sham the "consultation" process is, and that there is no meaningful oversight into how government money is spent here. It's just seen as bounty that is distributed amongst those who support the local powers. None of them care what is wasted or destroyed in the process.

Green Lantau Association wrote:
From: "Green Lantau Association" <info@greenlantau.com>
Date: 19 February 2009 3:13:13 PM GMT+08:00
To: <nina_ss_yiu@had.gov.hk>, <gower@amghk.com.hk>, <cnoffke@netvigator.com>, "'Tracey Duggan'" <traceyduggan5@netvigator.com>
Cc: <oyeung@cedd.gov.hk>, <phyllis_sw_pang@had.gov.hk>, <ivy_kw_chan@had.gov.hk>

Subject: RE: Proposal of Providing a Cycle Parking Area at Yung Shue Wan Ferry Pier, Lamma Island

Dear Nina,

Thank you for your efforts at resolving differing views on the proposed construction of a cycle park near the ferry pier at Yung Shue Wan. Our thanks also go to the Rural Committee Chairman Mr. Chan Lin-wai, the Rural Committee Vice-Chairman Mr. Chow Hing-fook and the District Councillor for Lamma Island Ms. Yu Lai-fun for kindly being willing to take part in exchanges of views on this infrastructure planning issue.

We have given our views based on our preference for preserving the last section of natural coastline in Yung Shue Wan and on our experience with the cycle parking situation in Mui Wo. We had hoped to thereby contribute to a solution whereby a cycle park of sufficient size and convenience could be provided along with preserving the coastline and the tranquillity of the LCSD Yung Shue Wan Public Library while at the same time proceeding with long needed ferry pier renovation and enhancement works.

From our perspective the value of protecting natural coastline is self-evident and we have no additional views to contribute on this.

Regarding the location of the proposed cycle park our experience in Mui Wo is that many cyclists ignore traffic arrangements and the safety and convenience of others just for the sake of being able to park their bicycles as close to the pier entrance as possible, often seconds before the ferry is due to leave. This has led to a situation where some of the cycle parking areas in Mui Wo remain under-utilized even though they are nearer to the pier than would be the case with the proposed cycle parking area next the Yung Shue Wan Public Library.

It would be best in our view to build a cycle parking area at a location that is both suitable and likely to actually be used by cyclists. There is scope in Yung Shue Wan for the proposed cycle park to be beneficially integrated with a covered and widened pier access as explained in earlier communication and at the meeting we had at your office last year. This would enable cyclists to park near the pier in covered conditions, would retain the tranquillity of the library environs and would preserve Yung Shue Wan's last remaining stretch of natural coastline as a visually pleasing amenity for the enjoyment of residents and visitors alike. We think the option we propose would provide the required cycle parking capacity at a convenient location while also being sympathetic to the local environment.

Having thus expressed our views, we would like to excuse ourselves from participation in the planned meeting. We are happy to leave a decision on this matter to the people of Yung Shue Wan and are confident that with your diligent encouragement a beneficial agreement will be reached among the participants.

We are sorry for being unable to attach a Chinese version of these views and would be grateful if you could help by translating and printing out this message for the convenience of the Chinese speakers at the meeting.

With Best Regards
Fabian Pedrazzini)
Green Lantau Association


Here we had the chance to learn from the experience of users of the CPA at Mui Wo. Theirs is open in three sides, is roofed, and is larger, yet is still too inconvenient for cyclists to use willingly. Our wonderful, $60,000 per space CPA will be more crowded, further from the gate and accessible from one side only.

The government completely ignores the issues related to PARKING BICYCLES, which you might think would come up in the planning of a "Cycle Parking Area". But there hasn't been one word, and I've been trying to talk to them about this for three years.

But as long as the concrete is bought and paid for, who cares.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
I've just mailed an objection letter re-re-reiterating the points of useless, expensive, and ugly. Really nothing new to add in content but just another opposition voice. We'll see...

I'm up for more drastic group action though. Would putting up bilingual notices help? The proper channels don't work that well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:38 am 
Offline
over 100 messages posted
over 100 messages posted

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:40 pm
Posts: 168
The public enemy No. 1 is now collecting signatures from Filipinos and random passer-bys in the Main Street. It takes them a second - "just sign here" - but they don't even know what they are signing for and they have no chance to review the actual project of the parking.

This will enable the PE No. 1 to legalize her scheme by saying "look how many people actually support the bike parking platform".

What we need is to collect as much signatures as possible by providing a realistic view on the parking platform:
- price per parking space
- how much extra time will be spent each day on parking a bike and then walking from there
- how the platform will take over a huge part of the bay and spoil the sea view that you can enjoy while walking to the ferry

I've seen that somebody used to organize petition-signing by just hanging the signing book somewhere outside the ferry. This requires very little effort. Anyone?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: A second Booth?
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 11:17 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Hong Kong
Is it possible and legal to have a table outside next to the other table educating people about how bad of an idea this actually is?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:48 pm 
Offline
over 400 messages posted
over 400 messages posted

Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 10:46 pm
Posts: 457
Location: yung shue long
let them collect signatures....who cares. They collected them before, and they are worth nothing because the bike park issue is misrepresented and the methodology used in the survey is rubbish.

Those who oppose the project are not against bike racks along the pier, for instance.
And those who are in favour of the project don't even know what alternative proposals were presented by Living Lamma (portrayed as "gwailos who don't want a bike park")

Only if people were asked to choose their preferred solution out of three (1. Yu Lai Fan's beloved concrete platform, 2. bike racks along the pier, 3. a long, landscaped parking area along the path leading to the pier, in place of the existing illegal structure) we would have a proper consultation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:01 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
foreign body wrote:
let them collect signatures....who cares.


The government -- Home Affairs at least, is in the DAB's pocket and will certainly use this -- they did before and cited the "3000 signatures" that YLF supposedly presented in 2006. Doesn't matter that no one could know what they were signing for, years before the plan was announced. And of course, they still don't.

The government has just totally ignored any comments that aren't in support. The purpose of the consultation is to tick a box before pouring the concrete. They will "consider" alternatives and then reject them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:47 am 
Offline
over 100 messages posted
over 100 messages posted

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:40 pm
Posts: 168
I suggest that people who are concerned with this issue print out this letter and send it to the address shown there.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1143915/objection.doc

It costs just HK$1.40 to send, but the value is so much bigger.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
Thanks Anton. I've mailed something of my own last week but have not received a response. I might email them to chase.

Maybe we should do an online signature petition for objection based on this letter. Or get people to sign and we mail for them. I'm happy to sponsor the stamps!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 10:50 am 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10000
Location: Pak Kok Village
Jens wrote:
Regarding the bicycle parking area, I have not seen what counter proposals have been submitted but why not just widen the pier in the direction of the library? The width could be made flush with the steps near the terminal.

That shouldn’t be too costly and would add about 2 metres width for pedestrians, fire services vehicles and VVs. That should take of the argument about parked bikes obstructing passage surely.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 11:12 am 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
Lamma-Gung wrote:
Jens wrote:
Regarding the bicycle parking area, I have not seen what counter proposals have been submitted but why not just widen the pier in the direction of the library? The width could be made flush with the steps near the terminal.

That shouldn’t be too costly and would add about 2 metres width for pedestrians, fire services vehicles and VVs. That should take of the argument about parked bikes obstructing passage surely.


Widening the pier was my preferred option. It was also what Green Lantau suggested.

Since the pier is about 50 years old and will be refurbished or replaced eventually, it makes sense and would be relatively cheap if done as part of that.

But they don't care about making sense, Yu Lai Fan just wants to get her $18 million ASAP and Home Affairs is happy to oblige. What we end up with having to use is immaterial to this aim.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:23 pm
Posts: 57
I saw a banner objecting the CPA opposite the government's one at the proposed platform area. It was enacted by Land Justice HK (which Living Lamma is a member of after looking at the website). Good job!

Meanwhile, my objection letter to the Transport bureau has been forwarded to Home Affairs... blah blah blah. I emailed HAD today to add pressure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 7:05 pm 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10000
Location: Pak Kok Village
Here's a photo of the banner .. and scans of the flyer stuck onto all bikes at the ferry pier today:

The photo on the banner shows the wrong size of the platform - it's less than half as long - and it doesn't show the connection of the platform to the Library. See the map on the flyer for the correct size and layout.

Deadline for comments: Tuesday, Mar 6!


Attachments:
!DSC04170-wp.jpg
!DSC04170-wp.jpg [ 181.87 KiB | Viewed 1513 times ]
Flyer1.jpg
Flyer1.jpg [ 290.95 KiB | Viewed 1513 times ]
Flyer2.jpg
Flyer2.jpg [ 273.39 KiB | Viewed 1513 times ]

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


Last edited by Lamma-Gung on Thu Mar 01, 2012 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 199 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group