Letters | Golf course or housing: why not tear down village houses instead?

Readers discuss the need to break the impasse over the small-house policy, travel visa woes, and the legal tussle over a protest song

Reading Time:3 minutes

An aerial view of village houses in Yuen Long in 2019. Photo: Winson Wong

Published: 11:30am, 7 Jul 2023

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.

To declare my interest, I’m a retiree and a lover of golf but without any golf club membership. I’ve only played on the Fanling golf course a handful of times. While playing there, I felt Hong Kong should be proud of such a great course.

Many Hongkongers, including myself, would like to believe that Hong Kong is a world-class city. Shouldn’t a world-class city possess a world-class golf course?

Admittedly, a great golf course is only one of the myriad features of a great city. While other features could be restored if lost, once the land a golf course occupies is used for public housing, it is well-nigh impossible to recapture its original splendour.

Although I’m not one of those waiting for a public housing unit, I fully agree that the housing issue in Hong Kong is a top priority. But is putting public housing on a great golf course the most workable solution?

I live in a high-rise building in the New Territories that is surrounded by countless village houses. It is amazing to note the huge discrepancy in population density levels between high-rise apartment buildings and village houses.