Hong Kong golf course vs housing debate is really about fair use of land

Broad support for the government’s decision reflects a sense of social injustice, especially with elite clubs paying lower than market rates to rent public land
Other than building flats, the government can explore options like opening up the Old Course to the public except when needed for tournaments

Lucy Kwan

Published: 8:15am, 6 Jul 2023

Why you can trust SCMP

Discussions over the fate of 32 hectares of meticulously manicured land on which Asia’s second oldest golf club was built, in 1911, have become feverish, with the government lease granted to the Hong Kong Golf Club expiring at the end of August.

In this populous, land-scarce city, demand for affordable housing has never been more pressing, and the government has rightly decided to put the land to better use than the exclusive enjoyment of a privileged elite.

The Fanling Old Course, to be taken back, involves eight holes of an 18-hole course, and the area designated for public housing spans about 9 hectares on the northern, generally flat area where ecological concerns are least sensitive and no major site formation is needed. Hong Kong Golf Club currently operates three 18-hole courses in the area.

The government’s decision is in line with its strategic goal to provide public housing. But as noted at the recently concluded town planning hearings, an overwhelming majority of submitted public views disagree with the Fanling housing plan, citing concerns over the loss of a consequential golf and tournament venue, and conservation and environmental worries.

To get a more accurate picture, The Tanner Hill Workshop initiated a study of sentiment in social media on the Fanling housing plan. The study, which used keywords, was conducted by analytics agency Datago from May 1 to June 12. It returned 40 posts with 2,257 associated comments, with 70 per cent from Facebook, 18 per cent and 8 per cent respectively from the forums Lihkg and HK Discuss. The analysis showed broad support – more than half – for the government decision.

Separately, I conducted 20 informal but structured face-to-face interviews with people from different walks of life over the past two weeks. Half were neutral on whether the land should be used for housing, and six supported the proposal. Overall, there was a common perception that the current arrangement, a historical legacy, is based on inequitable access to public land.

People visit the Lunar New Year fair on January 19 at Victoria Park in Causeway Bay. Any publicly funded venue should be open for public enjoyment, like Victoria Park. Photo: Sam Tsang

Any publicly funded venue should be open for public enjoyment, like our Victoria Park, while a private club should pay market rent for using the premises.

We understand that farmland rentals in Hong Kong can fetch HK$1-10 per square foot, depending on location. This means a fair market rental for the Hong Kong Golf Club should start from HK$38.4 million per year, instead of the HK$8-9 million a year it currently pays in government rent and rates.

We believe the government should resume control of the 32 hectares of golf course to optimise land use and address social perceptions, real or imagined. The government is well within its rights not to renew the lease.

Still, the issue does not need to be viewed so contentiously.

The area’s unique quality stems from its golf legacy and the ecological value of its southern areas, conservation of which is already in the gazetted plan. When the area returns to the government’s full control, there are two options.

One, stick to the plan for 12,000 public housing units. Or, preserve the eight holes of the golf course and open golfing to the public. Instead of housing, build training facilities and food kiosks.

In the latter case, the government may collaborate with or assign a management contract to the Hong Kong Golf Club or other competent parties to ensure the Old Course is enjoyed by the public most of the time and closed off for international golf events when necessary. Thus, the Fanling golf course can continue to participate in the Hong Kong Open and other Asian tours.

Building public flats or preserving Fanling golf course not a binary choice

Added to our options is the recently floated proposal by Heung Yee Kuk to build more than 12,000 flats on 8.5 hectares of land in Ping Kong village. The kuk has stressed that the proposal is not meant to be an alternative to the government’s plan. Research-based proposals to supplement, if not replace, the original government public housing scheme should be studied.

The policy goal of providing affordable housing on government land should be applauded. Let good intentions find the best implementation paths.

At the same time, efforts to host international sports events where Hong Kong has a competitive edge should be reinforced. A reconfiguration of an 18-hole competition course from existing resources for an international tournament should not be a daunting task for our professional talent.

Let us put our heads together to work out viable solutions backed by evidence-based studies to improve Hong Kong’s land use.

Lucy Kwan is chairman of The Tanner Hill Workshop