HK Golf Course Won't be Turned into Housing

High Court ruled the golf course not be turned into housing

When there was a consultation that recommended the government to take over the Hong Kong Golf Club at Fanling and build housing on the land in 2018, it immediately sparked a debate between the haves and have nots, as members, who are part of the elite class wanted to keep their prestigious club along with the green space, while those who waited for a roof over their heads are still waiting with no end in sight.

But it was finally decided when the High Court ruled against developing the city's oldest golf course into public housing. One could probably audibly hear the sighs of relief of Fanling golf club members.

That means 9.5 less hectares of land for flats

That means the government will have 9.5 less hectares to build housing, though Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu believes this setback won't have a significant effect on the overall housing supply, even though that means 12,000 fewer flats that were planned to be built on the golf course.

He spun it as a proposal by the previous administration.

"Now that the environmental assessment report is overturned, the government must do a comprehensive assessment and public consultation again," Lee said before meeting with the Executive Council.

"This will greatly affect the number of flats, the density and the completion date of the project."

But Lee believed the government was still on track to build 300,800 homes over the next decade.

Lee says the govt has enough land for housing

"The government has sourced enough land to construct more than 308,000 flats," he said. "The single change in the site's development will not have a huge impact on Hong Kong's overall housing supply."

So where else is Lee going to find more land to develop flats? It's an ongoing refrain that the city has numerous brown sites, land that has buildings that were for previous uses like schools or warehouses, and yet the government has not considered these, perhaps because they are too small.

But Hong Kong is not a place where it should neglect any possible sites -- land is scarce and any that is left vacant should be considered. Beijing is putting pressure on the Hong Kong government to house its citizens and in this case should comply with some creative solutions.

Over 40K Isolation Beds Collecting Dust in HK

The isolation centre at Lok Ma Chau Loop is empty

Remember when Hong Kong rushed to build Covid-19 isolation units, and even brought over mainland Chinese construction workers who built units that featured squat toilets? They had to be retrofitted with sit-down toilets after this were reported to the shock and horror of local residents.

While the pandemic is still ongoing but the latest variant, XBB.1.5 is not as severe though it is more infectious, the Hong Kong government has given up on forcing people into isolation, unless their living situation is such that they need to keep away from others for a few days.

Some were built with squat toilets at first

Only the facilities at Kai Tak and Penny's Bay are being used at the moment.

That means over 40,000 beds in an area covering 72 hectares (177 acres) are unused, the equivalent to 86 football fields.

Who knew the city had that much land -- remember it was suddenly donated by tycoons? Wonder if they want their land back now?

The facilities are in the New Territories in Tsing Yi, San Tin, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, Ma Sik Road in Fanling, Hung Shui Kiu, Tam Mi and in the Lok Ma Chau Loop.

Lawmaker Dennis Leung Tsz-wing said he understood the facilities had been closed for more than half a year, and that about 5,400 workers, including security guards and cleaners, were laid off last May. 

Units at Penny's Bay are still being used now

Not to mention it cost billions of dollars to build these units that were used for about a year, if that? And who paid for them?

Pro-establishment lawmakers (as they are the only ones in the Legislative Council these days), are pushing the government on this, suggesting these units not become white elephants, but be quickly repurposed into housing.

Some suggest it be used for low-income housing for individuals or families, or dormitories for large construction sites, or donated to other countries -- how benevolent. 

In response, some think it's too much trouble to repurpose them into housing units, while others say they should be moved elsewhere as some of these are in far-fetched locations.

Surely these units can be repurposed somehow?

Not even trying to repurpose these units just shows how wasteful the authorities are, and can't be bothered to challenge local architects and engineers to think of creative ways to reuse them.

It also reveals the government not even following its own mantra of telling people to reduce, reuse and recycle...