• Sat
  • Jul 12, 2014
  • Updated: 7:48pm

Lung Mei beach

A controversial proposal to turn, by 2015, a stretch of coastline near Tai Po, in the New Territories, into a 200-metre-long artificial public beach. Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chung-ying gave the plan the go-ahead in October 2012, but environmentalists and green groups argue the project is a disaster for the 200 marine and bird species inhabiting the area. 

 

CommentLetters

Eco-friendly ideas for Lung Mei

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 13 November, 2012, 12:00am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 13 November, 2012, 2:15am

The Hong Kong Civil Servants General Union urged the government to carry out the development of an artificial beach in Lung Mei, located along Tolo Harbour, as quickly as possible ("Activists decry support for beach at Lung Mei", November 8).

The union said the established due process must be respected or many development projects would stall. The development of this beach has gone through statutory town planning, reclamation, and environmental impact procedures. The local district council was consulted often, and Legco approved the funding of HK$200 million.

The environment secretary and director of environmental protection have received substantive information from members of the "Save Lung Mei" alliance, including Designing Hong Kong, identifying endangered species and alternative sites that have not been reviewed.

The members have requested a review of the environmental permit for the beach under section 14 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance. The secretary and the director must now decide whether information about the project's impacts was concealed, and whether there is cause to suspend, vary or cancel the permit.

I appreciate concern over due process and mounting frustrations over stop-starting of projects and policies. We need to find out how it is possible that despite rigorous due process we are to develop an artificial beach on top of ecologically valuable mud flats along the Ting Kok coast.

There are alternative locations along the nearby sandy coastline of To Tau Wan and Wu Kai Sha where bathing beaches could be gazetted for enjoyment by residents of the east New Territories. And to attract the visitors landowners in Lung Mei are after, boardwalks and an eco centre can be built to enable the enjoyment of the local ecology.

How come that Hong Kong's institutions involved in the process failed as gatekeepers? Take, for example, the Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) which accepted the EIA in 2008. The artificial beach proposal was controversial. Unusually for ACE, it went to a vote and was deadlocked until the chairman cast his tie-breaking vote in favour despite grave misgivings.

The precautionary principle should have prevailed. Has ACE been emasculated with the appointment of persons with little connection or interest in nature conservation?

Is our EIA process a development tool, rather than a sustainable planning and conservation tool? Does the process guarantee insufficient common sense for the community and decision makers to rely on it?

Paul Zimmerman, CEO, Designing Hong Kong

Share

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

This article is now closed to comments

megafun
in response to "Is our EIA process a development tool, rather than a sustainable planning and conservation tool?"
Paul, must make public, and repeat it over-and-over again, that all EIA consultants employed by the Government - including and especially ARUP, are failing to carry out proper EIA !!!
HKIE whom administer professional ethics is alot worse than the medical professions, and I have yet to see ARUP or anyengineering consultants taken to task openly. Maybe, HKIE is no longer able to be gate-keeper?
 
 
 
 
 

Login

SCMP.com Account

or