HKIUD Position Statement:

Planning and Engineering Study on Future land use at Ex Lamma Quarry Area

Feasibility Study

Stage 2 - Community Engagement Digest

HKIUD representatives attended:-

• Focus Group held on 23^rd April 2014

HKIUD published their position statement regarding the Stage 1 Community Engagement Digest in February 2013 outlining our main concerns. We considered that there was a fundamental mismatch between the intended site development and the unique characteristics, position and opportunities of the site. Review of the updated Stage 2 development proposal suggests that any changes have been largely cosmetic and that the development concept remains significantly flawed.

HKIUD would note the following:-

We would support smart and sustainable development of the site and we consider the environmental concerns of the site to be manageable. However we DO NOT support the currently promoted development proposal since we consider that it falls significantly short of the aspirations of the Institute as well as the best interests of the Hong Kong public at large. The comments provided at stage 1 remain in place and we would further highlight the following:-

• The proposed small scale housing development (up to 5000 people) neither adequately addresses Hong Kong’s critical housing shortage, nor is it able to secure the key facilities required by the island, particularly schools, significant policing and healthcare facilities. Fundamentally the development lacks the critical mass required to guarantee regular, affordable and sustainable transport connections to HK Island which form the lifeblood of any future community. In the context of the closure of ferry services to Ma Wan, the ongoing difficulties in procuring tenders for existing, loss making Lamma routes and the project assertion that connections to the MTR at Ap Lei Chau are not feasible, we consider that providing a sufficient high quality ferry service that is able to attract and develop a thriving community is both wishful and fanciful. Without the backbone of such a service the development cannot grow or ultimately succeed;

• The development potential for the site lies in its educational, leisure and tourism opportunities, as well as acting as a gateway for the whole of Lamma Island. Carefully envisaged development can act as an island, regional and national provider and not merely as a standalone housing / hotel development. Sensitive and well considered growth should utilise education and leisure tourism opportunities as the “driver” for development, where housing and commercial aspects are able to form the supporting role. Such development should clearly be unique, aspirational and founded on robust financial and transportation models;

• The current proposal fails to provide significant local jobs nor adequately build interconnected opportunities on Hong Kong Island south or at nearby villages including Lok Chau, Lo Tik Wan, Pak Kok Tsuen, Lo So Shing and Sok Kwu Wan.  There already exists considerable underutilized housing stock on Lamma Island, coupled with deserted hamlets and aging rural populations which are completely disregarded by the proposal. The development merely acts as a newly formed commuter settlement rather than attracting investment or creating jobs and falls woefully short in “enhancing the role of Lamma as a leisure destination” as per the stated planning intention for the Island.

Most importantly it remains questionable whether any of the stated “four guiding principles” of “Development Need, Local Aspiration, Environment or Infrastructure” are adequately met by the proposal. Critically, under “Development Needs’, the project fails to:-

Unleash the potential of the site;

Synergise with existing local character and recreation / tourism resources;

Help to meet housing demand; or

Enhance visitor appeal.

HKIUD consider that the site must be developed within a wider planning horizon to fully integrate the facilities as a part of the whole of Lamma Island, whilst the site development itself is primarily conceived and driven by leisure and tourism stakeholders rather than housing developers. There is a definite opportunity to incorporate housing development, however this should aim to primarily support the local recreation and tourism industry associated with wider district development. Strong and well conceived transport connections associated to similar industries on Hong Kong Island south are paramount in ensuring the success of the development whilst reinforcing the leisure and tourism identity of the district and these should be strongly researched and put in place prior to any site planning.  The area should not be considered as a stand-alone resort development.

We consider that the current planning proposal drastically lacks vision, is over-optimistic in its outcomes and has little or no metrics to substantiate development goals. A definitive development creative, robust connectivity solutions and lack of identified managing stakeholders are glaring in their absence.

The Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design

15 May 2014