Government backs away from Stanley Car park controversy

For some years Stanley residents, have been watching in horror as the prospect of government plans for a multi-story car park looms ever larger. But there are indications that the madness of this scheme is becoming apparent to government and Howardwinnreports, understands that it is attempting to distance itself from the project.

Readers will recall that the initial proposal was for a multi-story car park right in the middle of the town on the site of the main bus terminus. There were to be 140 car parking spaces because, according to the Transport Department (TD), traffic in Stanley at the weekend and public holidays was intense and more spaces were needed.
Another feature of this proposal was to reverse the direction of the traffic flow on Beach Road, and to convert the current metered car parking spaces along the road next to the beach into parks for coaches. The government estimated that it would take about three years to complete the car park which would result in unimaginable disruption in the middle what is still one of Hong Kong’s more scenic and pleasant spots to visit.

Unsurprisingly these proposals have met stiff local opposition, apart that is, from the Southern District Council representative for Stanley, Mrs Chan Lee Pui-ying, who just happens to own four properties in the nearby shopping area. The prospect of coaches disgorging hordes of tourist more or less on their doorstep has some shopkeepers rubbing their hands with glee.

Residents question the need for more car parking, saying Stanley is only crowded at weekends and on public holidays. Indeed a car park on Carmel Road, behind Stanley Plaza, which is open at weekends has to be closed during the week because it is not economical to keep it open, such is the decline in traffic.

The TD has not covered itself in glory over this. Last year the ombudsman criticised the department for its prevarication in sharing its so-called “traffic assessment” plan for the area. This was because the “assessment” amounted to little more than a stroll around Stanley by department officials.

In February the TD responded to the opposition by noting in a circular to objectors that since the car park was not a ‘tourist attraction,’ it would not attract more visitors to Stanley. It therefore requested residents to drop their objections.

Residents were unimpressed and in yet another survey of residents which took place between March and June this year almost 1000 residents responded to a survey of local opinion with 97% opposing the plan. Maxine Yao a member of The Stanley Residents Concern Group who coordinated the survey said the results were sent to the TD. Shortly afterwards she had a meeting with Alan Tam Chung-on, a senior engineer with the TD. Yao says that Tam said that despite what everyone had been led to believe, neither the Transport Department nor the Planning Department supported the scheme for the car park. The impetus for the scheme, he said, had come from the Southern District Council. It was only because of the ‘pressure’ from the district council that the government had spent so much time and effort on planning the car park. After looking at government statements and actions on this project, one can only say it has given a very good impression over the years of being strongly in favour of the project.

According to Tam, since the plan had met with such fierce opposition the government would not proceed with the proposal. However the car park proposal is not yet dead since a request for funding has been sent to the Legislative Council. Yao says she has written to the Secretary for Housing and Transport , Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, asking him to extricate it from Legco. Her letter has been acknowledged but the government has yet to leap into action on this.

Meanwhile Yao says she hopes to kill the project dead in the Southern District Council. She will be running in the District Council elections in November in the hope of unseating Mrs Chan Lee Pui-ying, who has been the incumbent Stanley representative for the past 16 years, despite her brush with the law some years ago over her irregular approach to attracting votes.



3 thoughts on “Government backs away from Stanley Car park controversy

  1. Andrew Maxwell

    It’s always the same – in my humble opinion – when it comes to matters of traffic-residents-visitors/tourists. Tourists can’t be blamed for wanting to visit Stanley, Sai Kung, or anywhere scenic for that matter. I would too if I weren’t fortunate enough to live in Sai Kung and don’t need to escape. But, the government has again missed the obvious. That for me is, take the cars out of the town centre, or, provide an alternative means of transportation.

    If people want to see Stanley, or wherever, so badly, then they should be prepared to walk a reasonably short distance, or take a bus (park & ride), in order to get to their destination in the quickest, hassle-free way.

    It’s too easy for them to sit in their cars and wait, horns blaring in many examples, rather than look at alternatives to private vehicles. The government don’t seem to be able to get their heads round proposals for any possible effective alternatives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.