Lamma Forums :: View topic - More railings on footpaths

Pointless work on Lamma footpath

Recently, near my home on Lamma, a simple village footpath that winds between a lychee orchard and some open fields was raised with concrete about 20cm in height over a stretch of more than 40 metres.

Apparently there had been a puddle at one end.

It seemed like overkill for a simple puddle (I had never noticed a puddle in six years of walking daily along this path), but I decided to let this "improvement" go since the damage had already been done.

That was until last month, when I noticed a sign from the Lands Department stuck to a lamp post saying that they were now going to add a handrail along the full length of this grass-edged path, presumably because it had been raised in height.

Could the department please explain, through these columns, the reasoning behind the initial approach to removing what must have been a small puddle? Wouldn't a slight curve in the path surface remove excess water? And how can they now justify spending what must be hundreds of thousands of dollars more, on adding handrails to a 20cm-high path, raised in height by them, when it didn't need raising in the first place?

Yet again, this really does smack of jobs for the boys - something we've been seeing way too much of in recent years on the outlying islands.

Edward Williams, Lamma

Author:	Alan [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:48 pm ]
Post subject:	More railings on footpaths
This letter was in today's SCMP. Anyone know where this path and proposed railings are? {L_QUOTE}: Pointless work on Lamma footpath Recently, near my home on Lamma, a simple village footpath that winds between a lychee orchard and some open fields was raised with concrete about 20cm in height over a stretch of more than 40 metres. Apparently there had been a puddle at one end. It seemed like overkill for a simple puddle (I had never noticed a puddle in six years of walking daily along this path), but I decided to let this "improvement" go since the damage had already been done. That was until last month, when I noticed a sign from the Lands Department stuck to a lamp post saying that they were now going to add a handrail along the full length of this grass-edged path, presumably because it had been raised in height. Could the department please explain, through these columns, the reasoning behind the initial approach to removing what must have been a small puddle? Wouldn't a slight curve in the path surface remove excess water? And how can they now justify spending what must be hundreds of thousands of dollars more, on adding handrails to a 20cm-high path, raised in height by them, when it didn't need raising in the first place? Yet again, this really does smack of jobs for the boys - something we've been seeing way too much of in recent years on the outlying islands. Edward Williams, Lamma We all know the govt will put railings on any path if they receive one letter requesting it. Aside from being ugly and usually unnecessary, they can be a hazard. Paths on Lamma aren't solely for pedestrians. If a VV is coming at you you can't jump aside to avoid getting smeared. A bike can catch its handlebar in railings and cause a very nasty spill (as has happened to me). They're only justified if there is a steep fall beside the path.

Author:	Lamma-Gung [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:
I'll ask Ed directly. On my way to the new Pak Kok Market yesterday, I enjoyed his wife's cookies, sold outside the former Mr Kebab to finance their young son's hockey tournament in the US this summer.

Author:	Lamma-Gung [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:
Just found out from Ed's wife: The location is in Tai Peng, on the path to Pak Kok, just after the place with the life-size Caribou in the garden. Photo shoot to follow soon...

Author:	princess buttercup [ Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:56 pm ]
Post subject:
The path in question "flooded" a few years ago when the landlord - a prominent local construction contractor - of a nearby property emptied his septic tanks during a heavy rain storm. In ten years of using this path, this was the only time to my knowledge that it flooded. There have been many worse rainstorms before and since the raising of the path wihout this problem recurring. The same landlord was awarded the contract to raise the path. Won't be surprised to hear that he is also awarded the contract to errect the railings too, making it a nice little earner all round. The beautification of our island paradise continues apace!

Author:	skankin [ Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:21 am ]
Post subject:	Tellme@1823.gov.hk
That's good to know Princess Buttercup. I'll include something to that effect in the email I am going to send to Tellme@1823.gov.hk. I'm hoping more than just me will also raise objections to this...

Lamma Forums https://lamma.com.hk/forum-OK/

More railings on footpaths https://lamma.com.hk/forum-OK/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=12632	Page 1 of 1

Author:	skankin [ Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:15 am ]
Post subject:	Update:
I have just got off a call from Mr. Mok at the District Lands office, Islands, to tell them that someone has removed their sign ( i.e. an A4 piece of paper sellotaped to a lamp post), and asking if they will replace it so that everyone can be informed about their intended works. Mr. Mok told me that they have now decided not to put handrails up along this path after inspecting it (although in a previous conversation he did tell me that he had already visited the site and was familiar with the location)! Although this sounds like a victory, I still won't believe it until I see this in writing, which I have asked him to do. I would also like to follow up with them on who made the initial complaint about flooding, and who the contractor was who was awarded the initial project... Princess Buttercup - could you possibly email me directly (ed@edwardwilliams.com) with the name of the contractor?

Author:	Alan [ Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Update:
skankin {L_WROTE}: I have just got off a call from Mr. Mok at the District Lands office, Islands, to tell them that someone has removed their sign ( i.e. an A4 piece of paper sellotaped to a lamp post), and asking if they will replace it so that everyone can be informed about their intended works. There should also be a notice outside the police box in Main Street. But the District Office takes care to give no more information to the public on projects than they absolutely have to. They refuse to simply put all their notices on their website, for instance. They could just dump PDFs of such notices to their website with a minimal index. But instead, you have to watch for the notices sticky taped to trees, and even when they do put them on the main notice boards, often they are covered up or simply disappear the same day, though they will blandly claim they have been displayed for two weeks. Then you find construction starting on some project and it's too late to even try to object.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC + 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/