Like Tree9Likes

Do your bit to help keep HK green! Takes 5 mins or less.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
  1. #1

    Do your bit to help keep HK green! Takes 5 mins or less.

    Below is the Town Planning Board website for an application to build 2 village houses. I strongly suggest we object to this application.

    http://www.info.gov.hk/tpb/en/plan_a...A_SLC_113.html

    Why? Because they are located in green belt in the Chi Ma Wan country park on Lantau.

    The location on the map shows they are to be built on the hillside in the country park. However, the developers have already illegally cleared this hillside and trees to facilitate the application and construction of these houses. The AFCD have already prosecuted an individual for the illegal clearance of forest.

    The Town Planning Board originally rejected this application. The site already as 2 approved houses but the applicant is applying to build 2 more houses on the site. After this application was rejected last year the applicant appealed against the decision, however they withdrew their appeal due to large amount of local objection.

    They are now resubmitting the application in the hope that a year has passed and people may have forgotten.

    It might be worth noting this application is not on behalf of local indigenous villagers exercising their right to a village house, but by private individuals looking to make a quick buck. Not really in the spirit of the small house policy!

    If you wish to object to this application, please click the link below:

    http://www.info.gov.hk/tpb/en/plan_a...A_SLC_113.html

    Click the 'Make Comments' section and write you would like to object.

    And give your reason. The main reasons in my view are that it is in Green Belt land and approving these houses would be condoning the illegal clearance of Country Park for private profit and gain.

    Thanks.

    JaredHK, Skyhook, Gatts and 2 others like this.

  2. #2

    Admin - Thanks for getting this approved!


  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    23,205

    hkgreenie,

    Forgive me if I am misreading my maps, but as I see it that site is not within the Country Park. Could you please point me to some online documents describing this "green belt" (a term I haven't come across with any legal meaning in Hong Kong) that you talk about. Thanks.


  4. #4

    Read the Town Planning Board's summary when rejecting the original application.

    PS Are you stalking me????


  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    23,205

    Not at all, but when you make statements like

    Quote Originally Posted by hkgreenie:
    approving these houses would be condoning the illegal clearance of Country Park for private profit and gain.
    when, as far as I can see, the land concerned is not within the Country Park then I feel it is reasonable to ask for clarification.

    And for what it's worth, as someone who hikes (and leads groups of hikers) several times a week I'm as concerned as anyone about destruction of HK's great natural resources. But protesting using false statements isn't the way to go about it.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Clear Water Bay (In Da Jungle)
    Posts
    9,968

    there is already a few village houses there and its not a country park area or even the govt wouldnt allow that.


  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by PDLM:
    But protesting using false statements isn't the way to go about it.
    Quite amazing. It is a 'false statement' because you say it is so? Why do you spend your time trying to put everyone else down and prove you are right?

    Quote Originally Posted by PDLM:
    Could you please point me to some online documents describing this "green belt"
    Rather than trying to constantly pick holes with everyone, why not take 20 seconds simply to click on the application link provided.

    You will see in the application details it is zoned, under section (e) as 'Green Belt'.

    If you take issue with that zoning, take it up with the HK authorities.

    The simple bottom line here is that:-

    a) This planning application to rezone green belt to domestic housing has already once been rejected by the Town Planning Board - there are some in HK who believe it would be wise to try to maintain countryside or at least try to slow down its eradication.

    b) The slope was illegally cleared resulting in a prosecution January last year of an individual for illegally removing trees. Again, there are SOME in Hong Kong who believe it may be a good idea to discourage that type of behaviour.

    Are you really trying to add something to this? If you do really hike on a weekly basis I would have thought you would embrace any efforts to try to preserve any aspect of Hong Kong's wilderness and would appreciate efforts made to bring some attention to this type of issue.

    Why not respond in the spirit of the original post instead of this seemingly constant need to prove you are more clever than anyone else?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by wtbhotia:
    there is already a few village houses there and its not a country park area or even the govt wouldnt allow that.
    Correct - it was rejected by the Town Planning Board last year. There were a fairly large number of objections lodged including a report submitted to the TPB by Captain Wong - the conservation officer of Kadoorie Farm.

    They did appeal but withdrew their appeal before it was heard by the TPB. I am guessing it was a case of waiting for the 'heat to die down' before resubmitting it.

    The planning application signs were also removed from the site over the weekend before the deadline for comments to be submitted.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    23,205
    Quote Originally Posted by hkgreenie:
    Quite amazing. It is a 'false statement' because you say it is so? Why do you spend your time trying to put everyone else down and prove you are right?
    No - it's a false statement because the maps outlining the case show that it is false. The site is clearly NOT within the Country Park.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    23,205
    Quote Originally Posted by hkgreenie:
    Why not respond in the spirit of the original post
    Because I believe the spirit of the original post (i.e. "let's lie about the issue to make it sound worse than it is and hope that no-one notices") is not the best way to achieve the goal of sensible and sustainable management of the countryside (or any other issue for that matter).
    leedseagle likes this.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast