Preserving Fanling golf course or building public housing is not a binary choice

Supporting more public housing does not mean we have to bulldoze what the elite have built, just as advocating for the golf course does not mean we are ignoring those in need
Officials should be looking for creative alternatives and realise that stepping back from a former administration’s proposal would show how we have evolved

Dennis Lee

Published: 7:30am, 25 Jun 2023

Why you can trust SCMP

I do not play golf and have not even taken a swing at a driving range. I have made golf jokes about how I did not want to spend my time hitting a small ball into a small hole very far away, or how golf commentators are always soft-spoken as they do not want to wake the television audience.

However, real knowledge is knowing the extent of one’s ignorance. Golf must be a great sport, given that so many people embrace it, and a great place to conduct business, with so many deals struck on the course – never mind the US$10 billion global market for golf clubs alone.

Architects and designers always have to learn new things, sometimes on a very steep learning curve, going from amateur to semi-expert in a short time. That was what happened to me when I had to design a golf course in my third and final year of graduate school. I learned about birdies and bogeys, fairways and the rough, as well as player handicaps.

Golf course design is a science even though it may not appear so, possibly because of the manicured grass and connection to nature. An 18-hole course needs to provide a variety of challenges, including each hole’s playing length, terrain, altitude and surrounding obstacles. Lose any of the holes and the course is ruined.

A truly great course with an appropriate legacy carries its value because of the full experience it offers. This is what attracts the Aramco Team Series, the World City Championship or any international golf tournament. This is the beckoning of “Hello Hong Kong”.

Hong Kong Golf Club general committee captain Andy Kwok Wing-leung has emphasised that keeping the three 18-hole courses at Fanling is critical in hosting reputable tournaments and bringing in the LIV Golf tour.

While we might not know the Saudi Arabia-backed LIV tour’s requirements for Hong Kong to become a host city, we do know that confirming such a deal would drive the economy and tourism much more than the signing of any symbolic memorandum of understanding during Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu’s Middle East trip in February.

Enter the question of public housing. To build or not to build? Build, of course, but why does it have to be that particular plot of land?

In a society where the wealth gap is wide and opinions are polarised, issues that involve the pastimes of the affluent and public well-being will be sensitive and destined to upset somebody, whether it is district councillors, environmentalists, golfers, the underprivileged or others.

No policy can please every stakeholder. However, in an open society, all voices should be heard and considered so decisions can be made using critical thinking and a balance of interests. This process warrants debate, negotiation and compromise.

If Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn Hon-ho merely denounces the opposing opinions expressed during the Town Planning Board’s recent public consultation hearing – as she believes only those who are against the government’s proposal attend such meetings – why host a hearing at all?

Linn also said that, “We expected to receive a lot of objections during the hearings. It’s not surprising and we should not change our original ideas only because there are more objections.”

If Linn learned anything from Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, who was development secretary from 2007-2012, she would know that making a firm, unwavering stance without listening does not make her strong and determined. On the contrary, stakeholders will view her as arrogant, stubborn and out of touch.

Bernadette Linn, secretary for development, speaks at a press conference for the government’s land sale programme, at Tamar on February 23. Photo: K.Y. Cheng

The best leaders are those who listen and make decisions after hearing all the evidence. We have learned hard lessons in recent years, and we should know that we are setting ourselves up for failure if we do not give ourselves room to back down and reconsider.

Withdrawing the requisition for land from the Hong Kong Golf Club would not be a concession but a considered, empathetic move. Stepping back from a former administration’s proposal would show how we have evolved and become smarter and more rational. Times have changed since the idea to build public housing on the golf course was proposed in 2018.

If Linn believes opposing voices are over-represented or mostly come from club members, she can consider forming an independent expert panel with the city’s best architects and urban planners, or study in detail the alternative proposals and sites put forward.

Perhaps a full disclaimer is necessary. I support public housing, social equality and the Society of Community Organisation and am not a member of any golf clubs. However, being supportive of public housing does not mean we have to bulldoze what the city’s elite have built, just as being supportive of keeping the golf course in its entirety does not mean we are turning our backs on people who need public housing.

If the government cannot find enough land to build the needed housing while keeping a legacy golf course with great ecological and economic value intact, it means we haven’t fully employed our problem-solving skills and creative thinking. This might be where an independent expert panel can offer fresh ideas for the Development Bureau and Civil Engineering and Development Department.

In this new chapter for Hong Kong, there is no need to punish anybody or any private clubs to prove a point. Housing and land-use issues do not have to be a zero-sum matter.

Dennis Lee is a Hong Kong-born, America-licensed architect with years of design experience in the US and China