PDF《电话号码：》

10 years C this is lying as the Park has been used actively by residents for more than

10 or even

15 years 3. They want to decouple decontamination from Landuse planning, and apply funding in December

2015 from Legco to decontaminate the nearby area and the Park C this is non-sense as how to decontaminate and where to decontaminate depend on future landuse;

if it is to develop a park in the future, then why demolish a park now and put the park back in the future 4. EPD said unless the contaminated soil (now over 4m deep) goes to the surface of the ground, there is no risk ? When we asked what those future risks are, EPD cannot tell what they are ? Even though the park has contaminants underneath, it has no public safety risk if no one tries to dig out or disturb the contaminants, given it is so deep underground ? Despite government said their proposed decontamination method is proven, they indicated air pollution is a concern as they dig out the contaminants, with some level of noise pollution ? Residents have already shared serious concern about the risks during decontamination and prefer that land NOT to be developed (we do not want another lead water problem in Kennedy Town) 5. We asked why they do not consider using phytoremediation to decontaminate, CEDD said they have not studied it so that please help make sure they thoroughly check if phytoremediation can work or not 6. Our impression is that Development Bureau is the one who gives instruction and other departments seem accommodative, so we need your help to persuade Development Bureau to change their stance

3 Kennedy Town residents have significant concerns re development plan 1. Health Risk ? Health of citizens is most important and Health Risk ahead of development needs! ? Decontamination/ destruction of the Park will throw contaminants into the air! ? Unless Government assures there will be zero chance of pollution and zero chance of air pollution or project will be shut down. C Why disturb residents instead of developing into the sea? C Why risk poisoning air with contaminants if park is safe now? C Consider more environmental friendly, lower risk and cheaper phytoremediation method 2. Loss of a long-time Park ? Park trees are 50+ years old and impossible to replace ? Hong Kong and Kennedy Town do not have many old parks which Hong Kong should preserve where possible 3. Why residents opposition not important? ? There are around 1,400 and increasingly more signed signatures to conserve the Park ? There must be a proposal that allows saving the park! Allow Residents and Hong Kong to vote and find right solution! ? Residents are not convinced current Government proposal does any good C if government gives alternatives and allows residents to vote where to build, the Park will be among last place to develop! 4. Waste of Government funds! ? Why waste >

HK$1.1billion to develop small plot of land? ? Waste of Tax-payer money! Is it really no other plot of land to develop? 5. Slow and inefficient building of residential buildings ? Building residential will be immediate (HK$1.1billion to develop small plot of land, which take more than

7 years to do so? What is the plot behind? To sell to certain private property developer to make them richer? C Why develop Cadogan Street Park instead of other location for residential units? ? Should Government find other locations that have less opposition, are cheaper, or faster to develop first? ? Why cannot the Government to show flexibility to consider resident'

s proposal here, or alternative proposal to conserve the Park while developing the rest of the decontamination area for a win-win situation? ? Is it true that in Aberdeen, there are restrictions to build residential units near port/docks. If so, building residential units on the Park'