Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn Hon-ho told legislators on July 5 that the 32 hectares of land situated east of Fan Kam Road at the Hong Kong Golf Club in Fanling is categorized as short-term leasehold land.
Upon expiration of its lease at the end of August, management of this site will be transferred to the Leisure and Cultural Services Department.
Approximately 22 hectares of the site will be designated for conservation and recreational purposes, and open to the public for leisure activities.
The remaining area will be reserved for housing development, specifically for public housing projects.
It should be noted that only eight golf holes are involved in this land arrangement. The Hong Kong Golf Club currently has two 18-hole courses, and an “old” 10-hole course. It is believed that promoting golf activities does not necessarily require the use of these 32 hectares of land.
This lot falls under a short-term leasehold arrangement and is set to be returned to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government on Sept 1.
While the government has identified land sites to facilitate the provision of 360,000 public housing units over the next decade, I believe the proposed housing project on the land resumed from the Hong Kong Golf Club enjoys advantages as it is government land and vacant, requiring no clearance and resettlement of occupants.
A housing project on this site can be expedited much quicker than usual, thereby helping to shorten the waiting time for public rental housing.
Revisiting the historical context of the Hong Kong Golf Club land in Fanling will be helpful to understand the controversy surrounding the proposed housing project.
Admittedly, the actual site layout for housing projects may potentially result in a reduction in development scale. Nevertheless, it is crucial to uphold the fundamental principle of development — maximizing the use of land — which remains of paramount significance to the welfare of grassroots residents
During the previous government’s tenure, the Task Force on Land Supply was established in 2017 to address the issue of inadequate land for housing development. Following a five-month public consultation on 18 land options in 2018, the task force submitted a comprehensive research report to the SAR government, outlining eight priority land development options, one of which was to designate a portion of the Hong Kong Golf Club land in Fanling as recreational leasehold land.
The task force also recommended developing 32 hectares of land within the Hong Kong Golf Club. These recommendations were accepted by the government in early 2019.
The “Land Supply Debate”, as it was dubbed, underwent an extensive five-month consultation period, engaging widespread public participation and fostering fruitful discussions. The debate resulted in the identification of eight priority options, all of which were anchored in popular consensus.
Regarding the future use of the Hong Kong Golf Club in Fanling, the proposed plan was to build 12,000 public housing units on the said 32 hectares of land, with the remaining part of this lot earmarked for recreational and conservation purposes for the sake of striking a balance between housing development and environmental preservation.
The remaining 140 hectares of the golf club land will continue to serve as a venue for golfing activities to promote the sport.
Over the years, the scarcity of land for housing development in Hong Kong, coupled with protracted rezoning procedures, has resulted in a significant lag in housing development, particularly in the provision of public housing units, thereby falling short of the housing needs of the grassroots population.
Since the government’s announcement of its Long Term Housing Strategy in 2014, the tendency to focus more on future goals while neglecting immediate action remained, perpetuating a substantial shortfall in housing supply in the short term.
In its 2020 Policy Address, the government unveiled plans to secure 330 hectares of land for the construction of 316,000 public housing units, incorporating the reclassification of a portion of the Hong Kong Golf Club land in Fanling into the initiative.
Consequently, the impact of this particular project on realizing the objectives outlined in the “long-term strategy” on future public housing supply cannot be overlooked.
The task force regarded the said 32 hectares of land at the golf club as a short-to-medium-term land option. In addition to its potential to accommodate approximately 12,000 public housing units, it is projected to be completed as early as 2029. This underscores the land’s significance to addressing the pressing need for increasing public housing supply in the short term, given the project’s scale and time frame.
Data released by the Housing Authority as of the end of March reveal that the average waiting time for public rental housing stood at 5.3 years, while elderly applicants endured an average waiting time of 3.9 years.
A staggering 230,000 individuals found themselves queuing up, eagerly awaiting an opportunity to secure a public housing unit.
Unfortunately, the government’s commitment to achieving the “three-year waiting” target for public housing remains unfulfilled, with grassroots residents living in subdivided units, cubicle apartments, rooftop dwellings and other substandard living conditions having to continue to endure hardship.
Therefore, expediting and augmenting the supply of public housing stands as an imperative necessity that demands immediate attention.
Admittedly, the actual site layout for housing projects may potentially result in a reduction in development scale. Nevertheless, it is crucial to uphold the fundamental principle of development — maximizing the use of land — which remains of paramount significance to the welfare of grassroots residents.
The proposed housing project on the 32 hectares of land to be reclaimed from the Fanling Golf Course will benefit thousands of grassroots residents, affording them an opportunity to secure comfortable and permanent homes.
The author is a member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.