9 November 2010 (Tuesday) Time: 2:30 P.M

Minutes of the 19th Meeting of the HKSAR Third Term of Wong Tai Sin District Council (Summary Translation)

Date: 9 November 2010 (Tuesday) Time: 2:30 p.m. Venue: Conference Room, Wong Tai Sin District Office, 6/F, Lung Cheung Office Block, 138 Lung Cheung Road, Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon

Present:

Chairman:

Mr. LI Tak-hong, MH, JP

Vice-chairman:

Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP

Wong Tai Sin District Council Members:

Mr. CHAN Lee-shing Ms. CHAN Man-ki, Maggie Mr. CHAN On-tai Mr. CHAN Wai-kwan, Andie Mr. CHAN Yim-kwong, Joe Mr. CHOI Luk-sing, MH Mr. CHOW Ching-lam, Tony, MH Mr. CHUI Pak-tai Mr. HO Hon-man Mr. HO Yin-fai Mr. HUI Kam-shing Mr. KAN Chi-ho, BBS, MH Ms. KWOK Sau-ying Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP Dr. LAU Chi-wang, James, BBS, JP Mr. LEE Tat-yan, MH Mr. MOK Chung-fai, Rex Mr. MOK Kin-wing Mr. MOK Ying-fan Dr. SHI Lop-tak, Allen, MH, JP Mr. SO Sik-kin Mr. TO Kwan-hang, Andrew Dr. WONG Kam-chiu Mr. WONG Kwok-tung Mr. WONG Kwok-yan

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 1 Mr. WONG Yat-yuk Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH Mr. YUEN Kwok-keung

In attendance:

Mrs. TAN KAM Director of Home Affairs HAD ) Re.: Item Mi-wah, Pamela III(i) Dr. LEE Boon-ying Directory of the Hong Kong HKO ) Re.: Item Observatory III(ii) Mr. YUE Chi-kin, District Planning Officer / Kowloon PlanD ) Re.: Item Eric III(iii) & )(iv) Mr. TANG Man-bun, Head (Kai Tak Office) CEDD ) Re.: Item Stephen III(iv) Mr. Anthony LO Chief Engineer/Kowloon 1 CEDD ) Kam-yan Mr. Peter MOK Senior Engineer/2 (Kowloon) CEDD ) Pang-ching Mr. Tommy WONG Engineer/7 (Kowloon) CEDD ) Chi-wai Mr. IP Wing-cheung Chief Engineer/Project DSD ) Management Mr. TONG Kin-shing Senior Engineer/Project DSD ) Management 2 Ms. LAU Hoi-kun Engineer/Project Management 3 DSD ) Mr. CHEUNG Engineer/Project Management 8 DSD ) Chun-ning Ms. CHAN Pui-yee, Assistant Director (Estate LandsD ) Re.: Item Karen Management) III(v) Mr. LEE Ying-hung Principle Estate Office/Wong Tai LandsD ) Sin (District Lands Office, ) Kowloon East) Mr. LEE Wai-bun Chief Traffic Engineer/Kowloon TD ) Ms. LAM Wai-ling District Manager Shui On Properties ) Management Limited ) (consultant of LandsD) Mr. SIU Wai-chuen, District Officer (WTS) WTSDO William, JP Ms. NG Wing-yin, Dist Commander (WTS) (Ag.) HKPF Clara Mrs. SUNG Chief Manager/Management (Wong HD CHEUNG Mun-chi Tai Sin, Tsing Yi, Tsuen Wan and Islands) Mr. FAN Yung-kuen, Chief Transport Officer/Kowloon TD Vincent Mr. WONG Wai-wan, District Environmental Hygiene FEHD MH Superintendent (Wong Tai Sin) Ms. YAU Lai-sze, District Leisure Manager (Wong Tai LCSD Lizzy Sin)

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 2 Ms. WONG Sin-ying, Assistant District Social Welfare SWD Grace Officer (Wong Tai Sin/Sai Kung) Miss MA King-fan, ADO (WTS) WTSDO Kathy Mr. CHUNG SEO (DM) WTSDO Chan-yau, Patrick Ms. MAK Chui-fun, SLO 1 (Ag.) WTSDO Carol Ms. PANG Suk-wah, SLO 2 WTSDO Phyllis Mr. YAM Yiu-hung, EO I (DC) WTSDO Nathan

Secretary:

Mrs. SOH LEUNG SEO(DC) WTSDO Oi-wah, Teresa

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the 19th meeting of the Wong Tai Sin District Council (WTSDC), in particular Ms. Pamela TAN, JP, Director of Home Affairs (DHA) who attended the meeting fro agenda item III(i).

I Confirmation of the Minutes of the 18th Meeting of WTSDC held on 21 September 2010

2. The minutes of the 18th meeting of WTSDC held on 21 September 2010 were confirmed without amendment.

II Matters Arising from the 18th Meeting of WTSDC (WTSDC Paper 62/2010)

3. Members noted the paper.

III(i) Director of Home Affairs’ Visit to the Wong Tai Sin District Council

4. The Chairman welcomed Mrs. Pamela TAN KAM Mi-wah, JP, Director of Home Affairs (DHA) to WTSDC.

5. Mrs. Pamela TAN was pleased to attend the WTSDC meeting and exchange views on home affairs with Members. By giving a powerpoint presentation on home affairs, she invited Members to provide their valuable input on this subject. Highlights of the presentation were as follows:

(i) Vision and Practice

The Chief Executive (CE) emphasised that any initiative in governance should be underpinned by district administration (DA). Therefore, he often reminded officials of various levels, including bureau secretaries and department heads that smooth

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 3 governance was built on the solid foundation of well-developed district administration. He also took the lead to strengthen DA and attached high importance to the work of District Councils (DCs). To realise his visions for governance, CE had spearheaded the following initiatives to meet district needs:

(1) During the current DC term, CE hosted two Summits on District Administration to provide opportunities for DC members to voice their concerns to senior officials direct; (2) CE attached high importance to local matters. Therefore, he requested DHA to update him weekly on these matters, so that suitable policies and measures could be formulated to meet local needs; (3) CE had also urged bureau secretaries to place importance on DA. HAD held a monthly meeting with chairmen and vice-chairmen of DCs, during which respective bureau secretaries would introduce upcoming policies and major social issues for exchange purposes; and (4) during a DC term, department heads would take turns to attend DC meetings, in order to communicate with DC members direct. The abovementioned initiatives aptly showcased the Government’s holistic approach in facilitating DA.

(ii) Enhancing District Administration

Successful DA hinged on strong Government–DC partnership. HAD, as well as the entire Government, always regarded DCs as important partners. In the current DC term, the Government furthered the development of DA through increased funding support for district minor works projects (DMWPs), organisation of community involvement activities, and involvement of DCs in management of district facilities.

(a) District Minor Works Projects

In 2009-10, WTSDC had been allocated a total of $17,083,000 for implementing 24 works projects, among which 12 had been completed. The implementation of priority projects in the form of DMWPs could help realise the vision of DA. Also, the Government hoped that Members might, on top of the interests of their own geographical constituencies, consider matters from the perspective of the entire district. A case in point was the construction of the Wong Tai Sin Square, a major priority project in the district. The project had incurred a significant share of allocation under the block vote for DMWPs and fully lived up to the Government’s expectations of priority projects.

The Government considered that DMWPs should be relevant to the public, such as provision or improvement of covered walkways, amenity projects etc. that met public expectations for improved district facility

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 4 management and living environment. Also, the Government hoped that WTSDC could make full use of the district’s unique natural and cultural resources, and launch DMWPs accordingly, such as the construction of the Wong Tai Sin Square near the Wong Tai Sin Temple, a landmark of the district. Mrs. Pamela TAN also pointed out that there was a vacant site adjacent to the Wong Tai Sin Temple. In this connection, she solicited support from WTSDC Chairman and Members to, with funds from the DMWP allocation, develop the site into a major attraction which would help in the continuation of the district’s tradition and culture.

(b) Community Involvement Activities

A few decades ago, the Government had seen community involvement activities as carnivals, or performances during which the public would just sit back and relax. This was no longer true. Instead, activities today centred on public participation and, consequently, enhanced social cohesion. Given that many activities held in Wong Tai Sin were open to the general public, they lived up to the Government’s expectations of community involvement activities.

Some decades ago, management of district facilities used to mean opening community centres / halls punctually, keeping places clean etc. However, such management was now part of the Government’s holistic approach in reinforcing district management, in conjunction with implementation of DMWPs and organisation of community involvement activities. For instance, a DC might use DMWP allocation to update aged stage facilities as well as lighting and sound systems of an old community centre/hall, and then held community involvement activities in the centre/hall. These activities would encourage the public to use the centre/hall more regularly, and consequently enhance their social cohesion. The Government hoped that WTSDC would incorporate the said concept in management of district facilities. While a few new community centres/halls would be provided in Wong Tai Sin, upgrade/enhancement of the old ones in the district would also be made subject to availability of resources.

(d) Wong Tai Sin Community Arts Performance – Happy Tuesday

“Happy Tuesday” was an excellent example of combined

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 5 use of the district facilities management elements mentioned above. As all activities under this initiative were held on the last Tuesday of a month, the public might plan in advance and participate in accordingly. In view of the user-friendliness, the Government encouraged the other 17 DCs to make reference to this innovative arrangement, so that activities could be held regularly to facilitate cultural and sports development in all districts.

(e) Vibrant People, Harmonious Community Activities

In consideration of WTSDC’s excellent track record in holding community involvement activities, the Government considered it worth providing more resources to all DCs in this regard. In last year’s budget, the Financial Secretary had earmarked a large one-off allocation, amounting to $6m per DC, to enable them to hold additional community involvement activities. The objective of this allocation was to help DCs build brand names for the outstanding community activities they had held. Once successful, the public would be more eager to cooperate with DCs in organising activities even if the Government could not make large injection of fund again. The Government found that the above goal had already been achieved in the past few months, and DCs were handling related matters very successfully.

(iii) Territory-wide Policies

With the continuous addition of new roles and increasing importance, DCs no longer took care of district affairs only. The Government now relied much on DCs’ views and support in the introduction of territory-wide policies, such as the “Review of Columbarium Policy”. Therefore, Mrs. Pamela TAN called on WTSDC’s concerted efforts in this regard. On the other hand, the Government’s acknowledgement to DCs’ work and roles could also be evidenced in the facts that CE had personally hosted Summits on District Administration in respect of major social issues, and he had ordered bureau secretaries to visit and consult DCs. DHA looked forward to listening to Members’ views on DA.

6. Dr. WONG Kam-chiu thanked DHA for visiting WTSDC and listening to Members’ views on local affairs. As a widely-concerned initiative, the “Community Care Fund” (CCF) would require heavy involvement of HAD in the future. In his Policy Address, CE announced the CCF, to which the Government and the business sector would each contribute $5b to support people in need. He welcomed the proposal. Although Hong Kong had a sound security system, it failed to cover everyone in need, and there were always people not benefited from the Government’s “handing out money” or other welfare initiatives. CCF would aptly fill the void left

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 6 out by the safety net, help the underprivileged to meet basic subsistence needs, and even create opportunities of upward social mobility for youngsters. There were heated debates about CCF recently, and some even described it as an image-enhancing “Letter of Indulgence” for the tycoons. He disagreed with such criticism, as it was nevertheless a good idea to engage oneself in philanthropy and help those left out or left behind. As CE had said before, at present the society should not discuss whether CCF was needed, but how to set up CCF promptly and properly. In this stage, any responsible citizen of Hong Kong should discuss CCF in terms of its modus operandi, utilisation of resources, as well as appointment of its managing and supervisory arms. As the important issues above had yet to be addressed, the Government should expedite actions and work out the relevant details. In addition, Dr. WONG put forward four suggestions regarding modus operandi of CCF: (1) the Government should join hands with voluntary agencies, local organisations, DCs etc. to provide cash grant or new services to the elderly, the disabled, underprivileged children, new arrivals etc.; (2) the Government should inject money into the Hospital Authority (HA) and improve its Drug Formulary, so that patients suffering from cancer and chronic diseases might enjoy free or low-cost medication; (3) the Government should provide subsistence allowance to the tens of thousands of needy elderly who suffered from poverty but did not receive Comprehensive Social Security Assistance; and (4) to clear the public’s doubts and worries about CCF, the Government should downplay its leading role in CCF, so that members of the public would believe that the role of the Government was to provide matching grant, instead of outsourcing its responsibility to enterprises by means of a de facto tax. If the Government failed to achieve these, he believed that even Legco Members of the pro-establishment camp would not support the establishment of CCF by allocating a hefty sum of $5b. A sum of $100b was not a small amount, and could generate considerable returns if invested wisely. Therefore, he urged the Government to appoint professionals to draw up an investment programme for CCF, so that it could benefit more poor people.

7. Mr. CHAN On-tai thanked DHA for visiting WTSDC. He expressed his appreciation to the powerpoint presentation on territory-wide policy. Spanning a history of 20 years, DCs should no longer take charge of local leisure and cultural affairs only. Quality of DC members was ever increasing, and quite a few of them were even professionals, thus the Government might enlist their participation in greater extent when formulating territory-wide policies. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Hong Kong in 1997 was about $1,400b; but he estimated that the figure for 2010 would be around $1,500b only. In other words, there had not been much growth in the past 17 years, despite the rapid growth in population during the same period of time. Given the low GDP, it was impossible to improve Hong Kong people’s quality of life, so he suggested the Government try to boost the growth of local GDP by investing in infrastructure. This was a territory-wide issue that concerned all walks of life and warranted the Government’s serious attention. Another example was the very high property price. While worry-free habitation was the key to quality life, it did not mean that everyone should purchase his own flat. Besides private flats, there were other worry-free housing options. In this connection, he suggested annual provision of public housing flats be increased by 20,000-30,000 (i.e. from around 30,000 to 50,000), to help alleviate difficulty in home ownership facing Hong Kong people. Regarding infrastructure, as there were calls on the Government to increase tunnel toll of the Cross Harbour Tunnel (XHT) in Hung Hom, he suggested the Government answer these calls from policy perspectives. For instance, an additional tunnel could be built along with the construction of the rail harbour crossing for the Shatin to Central Link (SCL), or a

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 7 widened tunnel might be built to accommodate both rail and vehicular traffic at the same time, with a view to mitigating the traffic congestion at XHT. The Government should consider matters in advance, instead of rushing a solution only after a problem arose. The Government might also start to study the provision of connecting roads and service facilities at both sides of the proposed tunnel. In addition to their own knowledge, DC members were also advised by a lot of professionals. Therefore, Mr. CHAN urged the Government to attach more importance to Members’ views, and enlist their participation in the legislative proceedings of territory-wide legislation. To expand the roles and functions of DC members, he suggested, for instance, the Government consult the 500-odd DC members on legality of homosexual marriage, and upload their views to a website for public reference, instead of tasking a small committee to consider this issue.

8. Mr. HO Yin-fai welcomed DHA to WTSDC. In response to the possible upgrade of lighting and sound systems of community halls to be funded by the Government, he said many hirers considered the existing facilities in these community halls barely acceptable. For instance, the sound system in Choi Wan Community Hall had required an update for years. While the exterior of community halls was fine, the facilities were not. He urged the Government to revitalise these community halls, so that more activities could be held there. Recently, the Government had announced arrangements regarding members’ gratuity and medical benefit for the next DC term, and indicated that amount of accountable operational expenditure allowance (OEA) would be increased. He opined that the reimbursement arrangement for accountable OEA was a burden to members of the current DC term. The amount of OEA was $230,000 every year, which could only cover rental payment of one of his offices for 10 months only, despite the fact that he had two offices and hired two assistants. To provide effective services to the community, DC members had to pour additional resources by themselves. Mr. HO thought it strenuous. In addition, the current arrangement required DC members to pay the operational expenditures in advance, and then submit receipts in question to DC for reimbursement of OEA. As this implied that members would only reimbursed a certain period of time after making payment, they had to set aside a reserve fund before they could do anything for the DC – this was also a source of stress. He urged the Government to look into the said problems so that DC members would not suffer from shortage of fund when they were serving the community.

9. Mr. SO Sik-kin thanked DHA for visiting WTSDC, and expressed his appreciation to the Government for sending department heads to DCs and listen to members’ views, as mentioned by DHA in her presentation on DA. Since department heads could listen to views of DC members direct and relay the views to their own departments, problems could be addressed more effectively. District matters spanned a wide spectrum. For his own constituency, the major issue was the problem of stray dogs. Although stray dogs were still a problem in his constituency, it was largely mitigated and would be solved eventually. DHA’s visit was special to him because DCs and HAD were working partners. He was of the view that HAD should adopt the “people-based” principle, as it mainly dealt with livelihood issues. One of the major livelihood issues discussed by WTSDC was the SCL project, and a meeting on this topic had ended just before the DC meeting. The consultation carried out by Government departments, such as TD and PlanD, as well as the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) was very rudimentary, and these parties even asked WTSDC to accept a proposal without prior consultation with WTSDC. This proposal was rejected,

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 8 because Members were accountable to the public. In this connection, he urged HAD to convey the idea of “people-based” to other departments and ask them to adopt this idea when launching works projects. The said project had caused much trouble to Wong Tai Sin. Departments concerned had not adopted Members’ views and suggestions. Instead, they asked Members to accept their proposal anyway – how could Members make themselves accountable to the people if they had done that? Members were channels of communication between the Government and the public. Despite Members’ comments on the Government’s proposal on mass transit system, the Government did not communicate well with Members, so how could Members communicate with the people? Therefore, Mr. SO took the opportunity of DHA’s visit and asked her to promote the “people-based” concept among Government departments. On the other hand, one of the HAD’s functions was direct involvement in building management. Having served as a chairman of an owners’ corporation (OC) for more than a decade, he understood that building management was tedious, yet unrewarding. While many of the Liaison Officers of HAD were familiar with building management, they had to transfer to other posts regularly. The incoming officers might not be able to do the job equally well, and they might even be less knowledgeable than Members regarding building management. This was not desirable to effective building management, nor was it good for HAD. Therefore, he suggested that a new section be established under HAD to handle building management matters and to provide professional training to HAD staff in this regard. If HAD staff could help OCs in handling difficult issues in building management, everyone in the 18 districts would benefit, so he urged HAD to attach more importance to building management.

10. Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH said WTSDC had made a submission to HAD in 2006-2007 on proposed establishment of a new section in charge of building management, but nothing was heard since then. During Mr. TSANG Tak-shing, Secretary for Home Affairs’ (HAB) previous visit to WTSDC, Members enquired about the same but HAB had not replied to that. His recent enquiry to HAB revealed that HAD was following up on this proposal but the result was still unknown. The Government emphasised that by playing a supportive role under the existing legal framework, HAD could, in conjunction with the Judiciary’s Mediation Centre and the Hong Kong Housing Society’s (HKHS) Building Management Resource Centre, handle all building management problems. However, this was not true. Among the 400-odd building management cases referred to the Lands Tribunal in 2009, less than 90 were handled through mediation; less than half of them could reach an agreement and only a further half of these cases could be resolved. In other words, own a few cases could be resolved by mediation. The 18 District Offices received a huge number of cases annually. As a result, considerable lead time was needed before controversial cases and disputes could be handled, making trivial cases serious and serious cases catastrophic. He enquired how HAD determined its role in building management. Regarding the justification for WTSDC’s proposed establishment of a new section under HAD in charge of building management, he explained that Liaison Officers currently had an array of duties besides handing building management matters, such as organisation of community activities. For the sake of career development and fairness, it was inevitable that they would be posted to different offices regularly. On the other hand, building management required capable staff with legal knowledge, and these staff should be prepared to explain to people on controversial issues. The high staff mobility in HAD would make it difficult to deploy capable staff to handle building management matters. “Human resource” was an important element in building management. Management staff should be familiar with OC members and build up

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 9 good relationship with them before they could handle disputes successfully, as the mediators should be someone trusted by both parties involved in a dispute. Therefore, he suggested HAD establish a new section to handle building management matters effectively.

11. Mr. CHOI Luk-sing, MH was glad to hear that, as mentioned by DHA, the Government had put more resources on provision of community activities for residents’ enjoyment. Wong Tai Sin district was particularly active in organising cultural and recreational activities, and residents were very eager to involve in their community. There were a lot of voluntary agencies and elderly in the district, but only a few community centres were available to local bodies. Despite his repeated mentioning of the above problem, the Government had yet to propose any resolution. In the past, community centres had been managed by the Social Welfare Department (SWD). To mitigate the shortage of venue available to youngsters, classrooms and halls of public schools had been used to host activities for youngsters in the evening. In this connection, he opined that it was not necessary to build new community centres/halls for community activities, as these activities were mainly held on Sunday or in the evening. Instead, he suggested HAD and the Education Bureau (EDB) study the feasibility of hosting community activities in schools. Although this was an established practice, not all schools would open to activities. Therefore, he advised that the Government might implement the above administratively to mitigate the shortage of community activity venues in the evening. Currently, HAD selected community centre/hall users by means of balloting, so an applicant might fail to secure a venue and thus could not hold activities of continuous nature. To enhance social cohesion and encourage people to participate in community activities of academic, leisure and sport natures, he advised HAD to study carefully with EDB on ways to open schools to activity organisers in the evening.

(Ms. Maggie CHAN left the meeting at 3:30 p.m.)

12. Mr. HO Hon-man remarked that he would not talk about building management as this topic had been covered by other Members already. He thanked DHA for her appreciation to “Happy Tuesday” organised by the Wong Tai Sin Arts Council which had successfully encouraged district-based cultural activities. When he first became a DC member, he had already mentioned the lack of major performance venues in Wong Tai Sin. The Wong Tai Sin Community Centre at 104 Ching Tak Street was built 51 years ago, thus facilities inside were rather dilapidated. Rather than investing in renovation and a new sound system, HAD would better consider redeveloping the entire centre. As mentioned by Mr. CHOI Luk-shing, MH, the district did not provide enough venues for youngsters, so he considered that the large and strategically located Wong Tai Sin Community Centre of HAD could fill this gap. If redeveloped and provided with new facilities, such as major performance venues and equipment for youth activities, the centre would become an ideal place for holding community events and encouraging further provision of cultural facilities in the district. Therefore, he asked other Members at the meeting to support his proposal.

13. Mr. CHUI Pak-tai thanked DHA for her visit to WTSDC. Regarding the Government’s initiative to strengthen DCs’ functions, he concurred on the partnership between DCs and the Government, and believed that the Government was sincere about developing that underdeveloped partnership by further enhancing the functions and effectiveness of DCs. DCs might take up more roles in DA, but it failed to do so

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 10 currently due to various constraints, such as the limited power, limited influence to the Government, limited resources etc. He understood that the Government might think DC members knew little about its policy and operation, so enhanced reliance on DC might disrupt the Government’s efficiency and daily operation. Mr. CHUI opined that the worry was unfounded, and it would be detrimental to development of partnership. As such partnership was constructive, Mr. CHUI suggested the Government identify ways to remove impediments to partnership development. DCs could do more on various district issues, such as juvenile problems, family problems etc., and it could achieve good effectiveness with meagre resources. Therefore, the question centred on whether the Government had the courage to build on the strength of the said partnership and allow DCs to carry out their functions more effectively, so as to benefit the Government as well as the entire society. On the other hand, the Government should also seek ways to deepen DCs’ understanding of its administration practices for the purpose of conflict prevention.

14. Mr. HUI Kam-shing welcomed DHA to WTSDC, and said he would like to comment on her presentation on “Visions and Practice”. Regarding “Visions”, he pointed out that DCs had a history of more than two decades, and Wong Tai Sin was one of the participating districts in a pilot scheme aiming at strengthening the power of DCs, viz. involvement of DCs in the management of district facilities. In the current DC term, all of the 18 DCs had participated in the pilot scheme and managed facilities of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD). He enquired whether HAD would proceed further in this direction in terms of resource allocation, delegation of power, and involvement of DCs in policy-making. To enhance the roles and functions of DCs, the Government should provide more resources to DCs. He suggested the Government give more regard to DCs and increase their influence. As mentioned by DHA, CE and directorate grade officers would visit and show their regard to DCs. Given the abundance of statutory advisory and policy-making bodies, such as the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) and HA, he suggested the Government seriously consider appointing DC members into these bodies direct, or appointing mutually selected DC members into these bodies by HAB. No only could this address Mr. CHUI Pak-tai’s suggestion about using DC members’ knowledge to contribute to the society, but it would also allow DC members to feel the Government’s respect for their contributions and abilities. As there were lots of public housing estates in Wong Tai Sin, WTSDC Members had been appointed as members of HKHA until recent years. In this connection, he urged the Government to consider DC members’ involvement in these statutory bodies. Regarding “Practice”, as mentioned by Mr. HO Yin-fai, he hoped that DHA would introduce to Members the latest arrangements regarding the accountable OEA, medical benefit and gratuity.

15. The Chairman said latest proposal on the remuneration package for DC members had been forwarded to Members for reference.

16. Mr. LEE Tat-yan, MH thanked DHA for visiting WTSDC and listening to Members’ views. He would like to talk about matters related to building management in the capacity of a DC member of a district full of old private buildings. As he could not secure a chance to speak at the Summit on District Administration held in 2010, he would put forward his views on this occasion. He had previously reflected his views to DHA on OC executive members’ declaration arrangement. Currently, all OC executive members were required to make a declaration at a district office, and this procedure would involve disclosing their past experience. However, OC executive

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 11 members in older districts, especially those with lower education attainment, were wary about the very word “declaration”, and some were even afraid of it. Some of them even refused to serve in an OC because of the need for declaration. Although a Justice of the Peace might be invited to act as an administrator, Mr. LEE urged HAD to simplify the declaration procedures. For instance, self-signed documents of no criminal conviction and non-bankrupcy could be accepted as documentary proof to facilitate establishment of an OC. Regarding the procurement of third party insurance, Mr. LEE pointed out that a number of buildings in San Po Kong had yet to procure the insurance due to their OCs’ operational or funding problems. He proposed that the Government should review the Building Management Ordinance (Cap 344) regularly and punish irresponsible owners as appropriate. To help OCs which wished to manage the buildings properly but failed to do so due to funding problem, he urged HAD to amend the ordinance and tackle irresponsible owners. As some Members had just mentioned, forming a new section to handle building management matters could achieve a win-win situation for both HAD and DC members. It was important that HAD staff in charge of building management should possess relevant expertise. Therefore, he considered that a job posting involving building management should be lengthened, other the DC members might know more about building management than the HAD staff. At building management meetings, residents would like to listen to, and trust the views of HAD representatives. Finally, he reiterated that a job posting involving building management should be lengthened, and that the relevant staff should be very knowledgeable in building management.

17. Mr. MOK Kin-wing said functions of HAD included liaising local residents as well as facilitating the communication between departments and the residents, with a view to solving problems. Many community centres/hall in the district were built more than 30 years ago, the once state-of-the-art facilities, especially the sound systems, were now dated. As many well-received activities organised by local organisations were held in these community halls, these dated facilities would have detrimental effect to the quality of activities. Therefore, he urged HAD to provide regular upgrade and repair to these facilities. Among the entire Kowloon East, Wong Tai Sin was the only district without new and large community hall that was suitable for major activities. The largest one in the district, namely the Tsz Wan Shan Community Hall, could only accommodate a few hundred people. He thus suggested that a bigger community hall be built on the vacant site of the former Tai Hom Village. The abundance of aged buildings in Hong Kong had created a variety of building management problems. OCs were helpful in this regard, but it was difficult to form anOC. For instance, aged OC executive members might not know how to manage the buildings properly. Therefore, he suggested HAD consider relaxing the restrictions stipulated in Building Management Ordinance (Cap. 344), and take the lead to group buildings together and assist them in building management, rather than letting members of the public or non-government organisations (NGOs) to do so.

18. Mr. WONG Kwok-tung commented on matters related to maintenance of buildings. Last week, a concrete spalling case happened in To Kwa Wan which resulted in the arrest of the flat owner concerned. The revised Building Management Ordinance to be effective on 1 January next year required that all OCs should procure third party insurance for their buildings, or liable to fine and criminal prosecution. According to news reports, about 300 OCs in Hong Kong had still not procured third party insurance for their buildings. The Government should look into the reasons for this. Despite DHA had mentioned that she would endeavour to assist these buildings

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 12 in procuring insurance, but the crux of the problem was that if no insurance company was willing to provide insurance service in respect of a building, it implied that the building was problematic - probably because the OC had failed to remove illegal structures at the exterior wall and the Buildings Department had not provided any assistance in this regard. On the other hand, OCs that could not afford the insurance would be liable to fine from 1 January 2011 onwards. In this connection, Mr. WONG queried that if an OC could manage to raise a sum of money, how should it spend the money - to pay the fine or repair the building? He criticised that while the Government encouraged the establishment of OCs, it also required OCs to undertake criminal liability of the building in case of an accident. He objected to making OCs liable to criminal incidents because this would encourage people quitting the OCs. When the revised ordinance came to effect, the Police would summon the property management company, OC and owner in question in case of object fallen from height. From the legal point of view, “object fallen from height” was an “absolute offence of strict liability”, whereas the defendant might not be allowed defend for himself, and his legal representative could do nothing but to ask for mitigation. As the revised ordinance required that someone should bear criminal liability for an accident, it would inevitably disband OCs which were formed under the Government’s encouragement. HAD should thoroughly consider why it should revise the ordinance. If it intended to protect public safety, the Government should provide financial assistance to solve safety problems of buildings and recover the money from the flat owners afterwards. It might even sell the flats in question by auction if the owners refused to repay the money.

19. Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP thanked DHA for visiting DCs. Ten years ago in the Urban Council, Mr. WONG Kwok-tung and Mr. WU Chi-wah, MH had urged the Government to delegate power to DCs, but little had been done since then. At that time, the Government indicated that authority of FHED and LCSD in respect of licensing matters would be delegated to DCs, but such delegation was still very limited. It was reasonable to let DCs manage LCSD facilities, since DC members had to work closely with members of the public. As Members attending this meeting were aware, DCs had little power to manage district facilities. A case in point was the two-level public toilet in the Morse Park proposed by WTSDC. Due to the huge construction and recurrent cost to be incurred and WTSDC’s shortage of resources, the proposed project had to be abandoned. On one hand, the Government indicated that more power would be delegated to DCs so that they could take up new functions, but on the other hand it had not provided sufficient resources to DCs. As the Government had not surrendered its control over various supporting measures, resources allocation and management, such delegation of power was unsubstantial. The fact that WTSDC was unable to build a toilet had revealed how powerless DCs were – as lack of resources translated into lack of power. In addition, WTSDC had been discussing the provision of heated swimming pool in the Morse Park for years, and put forth many suggestions in this regard, but its completion day was not within sight. On the contrary, a previous project - construction of heated swimming pool in the Victoria Park – had not taken much time to complete. Facilities in Wong Tai Sin were dilapidated and required an urgent update. In this regard, he hoped DHA would ask CE to delegate more power and resources to DCs, so that livelihood improvement measures could be taken effectively. Despite the Government’s huge fiscal reserve, DCs only enjoyed a meagre amount of resources. Rather than considering how to allocate its fiscal reserve, the Government might simply provide more resources to DCs to upgrade district facilities and benefit the public.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 13

20. Dr. Allen SHI, MH, JP thanked DHA for visiting WTSDC and listen to Members’ views. He concurred on DHA’s appreciation to the district’s achievement in organising cultural and leisure activities. He talked about Members’ remuneration with DHA on another occasion. Currently, a DC member received a monthly honorarium of around $10,000, against the context of huge inflation and soaring up commodity prices and service charges. Therefore, he hoped that HAD would improve Members’ remuneration. Regarding the provision that required OCs to procure third party insurance for their buildings, he pointed out that the Government might sponsor the 20,000-odd owners who could not afford the said insurance, given the abundance of resources possessed by the Government. On the other hand, he remarked that high property price would affect quality of life of everyone in Hong Kong. If the price kept rising, the Government should consider re-launching the Home Ownership Scheme, part of the very successful Ten-year Housing Programme in the past. The lack of upward mobility within the grassroots had made their children suffer from hardship and stress. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measures, such as relaunching the Ten-year Housing Programme, would be a desirable. The prevailing high land-price policy was just another face of onerous tax as everyone needed a home, despite the high price. Under the influence of inflation, commodity prices would go up in the future. In addition, the second round of Quantitative Easing (QE2) by US meant further increase in supply of US money at no cost. Furthermore, as there might be QE3 or QE4 in the future, more hot money would be poured into the Asian market and further increase the property price. In this connection, he hoped that the Government would take contingency measures accordingly.

21. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP remarked that all Members had mentioned DCs’ shortage of resources. Given the annual allocation of around $15m, DFMC was responsible for myriads of programmes. Currently, it provided an annual allocation of $6m to LCSD, and more than $1m to community centres. In other words, only about $9m were available to DC. Although Members might comment on minor works projects in the district, any works costing $10m or more would largely exhaust the year’s funding, make it impossible for the DC to implement other projects or programmes. WTSDC would consider residents’ needs and carry out works projects accordingly, but many projects and measures had to be shelved due to shortage of resources. A case in point was the improvement works for facilities of the Morse Park as mentioned by Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP just now. In the past, DCs were only required to recommend improvement projects to LCSD, but now they had to manage district facilities with their own resources. When implementing a project or a measure, DFMC should strike a balance between the residents’ needs and resources available to DC. In case of shortage of resources, even projects with genuine needs would have to be shelved. Therefore, he hoped that DHA would consider increasing the annual provision of DC funds, so that DCs would have sufficient resources to carry out district facility management duties more effectively.

22. Mrs. Pamela TAN thanked Members for their views. Due to the time constraint, she would only response to matters related to building management. Highlights of her feedback were as follows:

(i) Purpose of requiring the procurement of third party insurance by legislation

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 14 The revised Building Management Ordinance would come to effect on 1 January 2011. Since then, all OCs would be required to procure third party insurance for their buildings. This legislation was not meant to impose harsh legislation and measures to the public, but to require flat owners to manage risk by procuring insurance, and share to the risk with insurance companies. If there was a concrete spalling case that caused injury or casualty, all flat owners of the building in question should hold liability (including civil liability) of the accident regardless of whether they had procure insurance or not, and this could incur huge amount of compensation. There were also previous cases that every owner of a building should bear a compensation amounting to a few hundred thousand dollars. Therefore, the Government required by legislation that every building should be covered by third party insurance, so that owners might share their risk with insurance companies and, in case of accident, they would not be required to undertake the compensation entirely by themselves, as a few hundred thousand dollars was a large sum of money comparing to the value of old building flats. Not only could the revised ordinance help owners, it would also protect the interest of people who sustained injury or death as the involvement of insurance companies could guarantee the availability of compensation to them or their family members. In other words, procurement of insurance was necessary from both owners’ and the public’s perspectives.

(ii) Helping owners’ corporatoins to procure third party insurance

It was not easy to procure third party insurance in relation to a building, unless it was properly managed and maintained. Since the procurement of third party insurance had become a statutory requirement, the Government had taken a number of measures to encourage OCs and owners to procure the said insurance, and the result was encouraging. Around 95% of building in the territory had been covered by third party insurance. For the remaining 5%, 30% of them would be covered by the insurance upon completion of maintenance works, and 20% were negotiating with insurance companies on insurance contract particulars. The government was confident that these building would eventually covered by suitable insurance policies. Albeit small in number, buildings’ failure to procure insurance was also a matter of attention of the Government. These buildings could be classified into two categories: (1) buildings which were previously rejected, or quoted a discouragingly high premium by insurance companies; and (2) buildings with OCs that failed to operate effectively and handle matters related to the procurement of third party insurance seriously. The Government would make focused efforts in helping these buildings to take out third party insurance:

(a) For buildings rejected by insurance companies, it was revealed that some OCs might have only asked not more

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 15 than three, out of some thirty insurance companies which provide third party insurance products for quotation. The Government was working closely with the Hong Kong Federation of Insurers (HKFI). OCs of buildings rejected by insurance companies might approach district offices and inform the latter of their difficulties in procuring insurance. HAD would refer their cases to HKFI, which would then study the cases with providers of third party insurance services on feasibility of insuring the buildings in question.

For OCs failed to take out insurance due to high premium, the Government revealed that these OCs had only asked one or two insurance companies for quotation. Under the principle of free market, some of the 30-odd insurers in the market might be willing to provide third party insurance services to the buildings in question at a lesser premium. Apart from asking for quotation from insurance companies direct, OCs might also look for suitable insurance companies and policies with the aid of brokers registered with the Professional Insurance Brokers Association (PIBA). These professional brokers would do marketing research, and assist OCs in choosing suitable and affordable insurance products. Both HKFI and PIBA had helped OCs solve insurance problems in respect of their buildings. Since the new measures was launched, HAD had referred more than 10 cases to HKFI and two of the buildings in question had already covered by third party insurance. HAD hoped that OCs having problems in procuring insurance could seek help from it proactively so that it could refer these cases to HKFI for following up.

(b) For OCs not functioning effectively, HAD would deploy staff and professional housing managers to help these OCs organise by-election of executive members. Once the vacancies were filled, a general meeting could be held to discuss matters related to procurement of third party insurance. In other words, HAD would try to help OCs take out insurance by changing the status of the OCs. In addition, HAD also actively helped poorly maintained buildings rejected by insurance companies. The Government would help, with the aid of professional housing managers, OCs in question apply for building maintenance loan under various schemes run by the Government, HKHS and URA. Upon completion of the maintenance works, the buildings should be eligible for procuring third party insurance.

(iii) Exemption Clause:

In response to Mr. WONG Kwok-tung’s comment on the

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 16 Government’s contradictory stances towards OCs, viz. members of OCs which did not take out insurance would be liable to fine after the revised Building Management Ordinance came to effect on 1 January 2011, DHA commented that she had mentioned in open that the revised ordinance was underpinned by an exemption clause that indemnified OC members from failure in procuring third party insurance, provided that they had endeavoured to do so. As she had mentioned before, the revised ordinance was not meant to create troubles to owners, but to help them manage risk of their properties by taking out third party insurance. HAD would not asked the Department of Justice to prosecute all OCs that failed to take out insurance immediately on 1 January 2011 when the revised ordinance became effective. In fact, this was not the way HAD handled matters. Since punishment alone would not solve any problem, HAD would rather focus on helping owners and OCs who had difficulties in taking out insurance.

When the revised ordinance was in place, OCs unable to procure insurance might seek help from HAD, which would work together with these OCs in carrying out building maintenance works. In addition, a grace period would be provided, viz. the Government would not take legal action against all buildings not covered by insurance policy on 1 January 2011. However, DHA specifically indicated that the length of grace period would be determined on individual merits and hence might differ from building to building. She also believed that the public would like the Government to pursue a hard line with OCs that did not maintain and manage the buildings nor enter into public liability insurance after the new ordinance became effective, if any accident involving their buildings occurred. Such accidents would not only make owners in question liable to compensation, but also claim valuable lives of people. In this connection, should any OC fail to proactively solve problems of its building and take out third party insurance, HAD would take an uncompromising stance and request the Secretary for Justice to summon the OC. She hoped that the clarification could give Members an idea of the department’s stance, and address Mr. WONG Kwok-tung’s concern, which was based on misconception. She also appreciated that most of the Members at the meeting actively promote the importance of building management. In particular, she expressed her gratitude to Mr. SO Sik-kin, who had taken up the post of an OC chairman and used his valuable spare time to delivery various building management duties.

23. The Chairman thanked DHA’s consolidated reply on the question of building management, and he looked forward to her response to the views of the other 15 Members. Due to time constraint, he suggested DHA relay her response to Members via DO(WTS), who would also forward Members’ further questions to DHA. The Chairman thanked DHA for her visit to WTSDC, and he looked forward to her revisiting to strengthen mutual cooperation.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 17 (Mrs. Pamela TAN, JP, DHA left the meeting at this juncture.)

III(ii) Director of the Hong Kong Observatory’s Visit to the Wong Tai Sin District Council (WTSDC Paper 63/2010)

24. The Chairman welcomed Dr. LEE Boon Ying, JP, Director of the Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) to WTSDC.

25. Dr. LEE Boon-ying introduced the work of HKO and its significance to with Wong Tai Sin with a powerpoint presentation. Highlights were as follows:

(i) Climate of Wong Tai Sin

The average annual rainfall in Wong Tai Sin was about 2 600 mm, and the territory-wide figure as measured by HKO was 2 300 mm. In other words, the annual rainfall in Wong Tai Sin was slightly above average. The district’s average temperature was about 23.5°C, which was similar to other districts.

(ii) Weather Stations in Wong Tai Sin

There were four weather stations in Wong Tai Sin, including two automatic weather stations and two rainfall stations. The Geotechnical Engineering Office had set up two rainfall stations in Tsz Wan Shan and San Po Kong respectively. Data collected would be sent to HKO for reference in issuing rainstorm and landslip warnings, for analysis of change in local rainfall, and for preparation of the rainfall map in the HKO website. After many years of operation, HKO’s Tate’s Cairn Meteorological Station was converted into an automatic weather station in 1997. Equipped with radar, the station could measure wind direction and speed, rainfall, rain intensity, air temperature, relative humidity, air pressure etc.. The Tate’s Cairn Meteorological Station and the Tai Mo Shan Weather Radar Station were both important meteorological facilities for collecting local weather information. Under the “One District One Station” programme, HKO set up the “Wong Tai Sin Automatic Weather Station” at the Nan Lian Garden in 2009 with the assistance of WTSDC. The opening ceremony, held in the HKO Headquarter, was officiated by DO(WTS) and Chairman of WTSDC. Wong Tai Sin Automatic Weather Station provided data of temperature in the district. To avoid possible impact of visitors on data collected, all equipment were located in secluded places within the Garden.

(iii) Community Weather Information Network

Established jointly by HKO and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, the network aimed at assisting schools and organisations in setting up automatic weather stations in the community, promoting education on metrology, and providing

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 18 comprehensive weather information to the public. Participating schools were only required to spend a few thousand dollars to install meteorological equipment in the campus, and then they could share information on temperature, wind speed etc. measured with members of the public via the Internet. Also, the data collected might help reduce energy consumption as the schools might make use of these data to determine whether it was necessary to turn on the air-conditioners. As at 20 October 2010, the network had 89 community participants, including Tak Oi Secondary School and LEE Kau-yan Memorial School in Wong Tai Sin. Three schools had also shown intention to join the network. HKO welcomed schools and organisations to install the equipment by themselves. Ten network participants had also installed equipment for measuring UV index. Their data, together with HKO’s own, provided updated district-based information on UV intensity. Also, HKO organised various activities for participating schools, such as study of heat island effect, UV experiment, analysis of meteorological data, visits to Nature Education Centre cum Planetarium, Tai Mo Shan Weather Radar Staion and HKO Headquarters etc. to allow wide dissemination of meteorological knowledge.

(iv) Meteorological Information

(a) Location-specific Lightning Alert Service

Launched two years ago by HKO, the service provided information on location-specific lightning risk through Internet, iPhone etc. When deciding the issuance of thunderstorm warning, HKO would take into account situation of all districts. The said service, however, helped members of the public make informed decision relating to outdoor activities, such as swimming, hiking, barbecue etc., by providing district-specific information. Users might simply select their current location, or up to three locations of interest in the Location-specific Lightning Alert webpage. An alert would be automatically sent out (with pop-up message and sound) when lightning was detected within the specified ranges. LCSD had reflected to HKO that this service had helped it determine whether it should close swimming pools in individual districts, instead of all swimming pools in the territory, when the thunderstorm warning was effective.

(b) Digital Weather Forecast Webpage

The webpage showed hourly changes in temperature, wind direction and speed at a resolution of 10 kilometres in Hong Kong and the neighbouring Pearl River Estuary region.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 19

With the aid of Geographic Information System (GIS), HKO enhanced its tropical cyclone track webpage with more detailed information on tropical cyclone positions and tracks. In addition, members of the public might zoom in or out the map and pan to their area of interest, and obtain detailed information of the tropical cyclone, including its latitude, longitude and maximum sustained wind.

(v) Weather Forecast

(a) “Rainfall Nowcast for the Pearl River Delta Region” Webpage

The webpage displayed computer-generated forecast maps of rainfall distribution within the next two hours over Hong Kong and the neighbouring Pearl River Delta region. It had a monthly hit rate of 400 000.

(b) Computer Forecast Weather Maps

To cater for the needs of enthusiast, HKO provided various computer forecast weather maps and courses on interpreting meteorological information.

To support the East Asian Games 2009, HKO launched this service and provided three-day forecast on wind direction, wind speed, air temperature, rainfall, cloud cover etc., with a view to facilitating arrangement for water sport events. The service had been opened to the public since beginning of this year, and it currently provided wind speed information of ten locations in Hong Kong.

(vi) Platforms for Disseminating Meteorological Information and Content of These Information

(a) MyObservatory – Weather at Your Location

HKO’s MyObservatory service launched in March this year. Through a dedicated webpage that accessible with PDAs or iPhones, members of the public might obtain latest weather information at their locations, provided by automatic weather stations nearby, as well as seven-day weather forecast.

(b) Greater Pearl River Delta Weather Warning Webpage

HKO worked together with the Guangdong Meteorological Bureau and the Macao Meteorological and Geophysical

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 20 Bureau and launched the Greater Pearl River Delta Weather Warning website in August this year. The website incorporated real-time weather warning information from 11 cities for people on the move in this region, including cross-boundary students.

HKO had started, on a trial basis, to provide latest weather alerts in details via Twitter since September this year.

(d) Video Clips on Weather at YouTube

HKO produced weekly programmes on weather in the past week and forecast for the coming week, introduction to the weather system in Hong Hong, practical meteorological knowledge, such as information on earthquake, tsunami, storm surge etc. These programmes were broadcasted at Youtube.

(e) Future version of the World Weather Information Service Website

Launched in April by HKO, the website provided official city weather forecasts under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organisation. With this initiative, Internet users might access to the latest official weather forecasts from 124 countries and territories in the world. The website had become a big hit when showcased in the “MeteoWorld” Pavilion at the Shanghai World Expo.

26. Dr. LEE Boon-ying invited WTSDC Members to visit HKO and explore collaboration opportunities.

(Mr. Tong CHOW, MH and Mr. CHOI Luk-sing, MH left the meeting at 4:30 p.m.)

27. Mr. HO Hon-man said whenever HKO issued Very Hot Weather Warning, Wong Tai Sin was hotter than other districts, and its temperature had once hit 38°C. In this connection, he enquired whether the high temperature was due to the lack of shoreline in the district. In addition, as WTSDC was discussing development of the Kai Tak River, he enquired whether a large artificial lake, if provided, could help cool the district.

28. Dr. James LAU, BBS, JP quoted the “Code for Seismic Design of Buildings” published by the Mainland government in 2010, which set out that buildings in Tangshan and Wenchuan should be able to withstand an earthquake intensity of 8.0 magnitude, and 6.0 and 7.0 for Shenzhen and Hong Kong respectively. In other words, certain aseismatic designs should be adopted in buildings of Hong Kong. However, the general public of Hong Kong had no idea about earthquake resistance, nor had the local buildings adopted any aseismatic design. Although typhoon-resistant designs were adopted in local buildings, these features had nothing to do with earthquakes.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 21 Many buildings in Hong Kong were formed by precast segments, including “transfer plates” of low earthquake resistance. On the other hand, the Hong Kong Government had yet to formulate a comprehensive contingency plan for earthquakes, so any earthquake happened in the territory could be devastating as suspension of electricity and gas supply, as well as fire might be resulted. Therefore, he suggested HKO enhance people’s awareness of earthquake, and urged the Government and property developers to include aseismatic designs in new buildings. Also, he suggested the Government draw up a contingency plan for earthquake.

(Mr. CHAN Lee-shing left the meeting at 4:35 p.m.)

29. Mr. Joe LAI was concerned with the three earthquake faults discovered by the Shenzhen Municipal Seismological Bureau, among which one extended to Hong Kong. Although no significant earthquake had happened in Hong Kong in recent years, he opined that HKO might increase people’s awareness of earthquake risk by providing correct information in this regard. In addition, he enquired about the authenticity of the so-called “Li’s Field”.

30. Mr. MOK Ying-fan commented the light pollution had made stargazing impossible in the urban area. Given that the defuncted Urban Council had suggested provision of stargazing instruments in the countryside, he asked if HKO currently provided any stargazing service in the countryside.

(Mr. WONG Kwok-tung left the meeting at 4:40 p.m.)

31. Mr. CHAN On-tai appreciated that the HKO website was rich in information, and he enquired whether the website provided information on direction of water-flow, tidal time and emission of greenhouse gases by district as well.

32. In response to Members’ opinions and enquiries, Dr. LEE Boon-ying said-

(i) The high temperature of Wong Tai Sin might be caused by its offshore location. Some other places in Hong Kong, such as the New Territories North and Ta Ku Ling, were also rather hot in summer.

(ii) Artificial lakes or rivers might help lower temperature of an area, but it was difficult to change the intrinsically hot climate of Wong Tai Sin, even though a pond was provided at Nan Lian Garden. However, rooftop and vertical greening might help cool the district.

(iii) HKO would forward data on earthquakes to works departments, such as the Geotechnical Engineering Office, Buildings Department etc. The engineering sector was positive about increasing earthquake resistance of buildings, and departments concerned were also planning to tighten restrictions on earthquake resistance of future buildings.

(iv) The earthquake faults had been discovered a few decades ago at the onset of the geological survey. HKO had invited local and

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 22 mainland experts to look into its implication on Hong Kong. To strike a balance between cost and risk, aseismatic designs for buildings should be subject to further discussion.

(v) In the past 20 years, HKO had recorded five or six minor earthquakes in the territory, and received reports of earthquake felt (i.e. “felt earth tremor”) about twice a year. No significant earthquake had even happened in Hong Kong.

(vi) HKO had formulated an earthquake contingency plan, and this was made public via its website, leaflets etc. Also, the Security Bureau had issued guidelines on contingency measures to be taken in case of an earthquake, including immediate announcement of the incident through radio and TV.

(vii) Regarding the so-called “Li’s Field”, Dr. LEE opined that from a scientific point of view, no individual could change the weather. Tropical storm warnings had been issued in November and December in the past, but such tropical storms had posed little threat to Hong Kong.

(viii) The Government provided an Astropark with various stargazing instruments in Sai Kong. In addition, HKO joined hand with the Hong Kong Space Museum and uploaded astronomical information (such as pictures of comets) onto a website. HKO would continue to provide more astronomical information.

(ix) Recently, HKO had started to collect data of water current in Tai Tam with the instrument used in the East Asian Games, and this service would gradually be extended to provide real time measurement of water current in various districts. Currently, HKO provided generic data on water current. If accurate and detailed information was needed, HKO would have to procure some advanced instrument and install buoys on the sea. This was not easy as such efforts might create safety implications, among other issues.

(x) Plan was in hand to measure emission of greenhouse gases, and Dr. LEE hoped that such data could be available to the public as soon as possible. Amount of greenhouse gases emitted in different districts was roughly the same, except Sai Kung and the Southern District where less urban activities were evidenced.

(Mr. WONG Kwok-yan left the meeting at 4:45 p.m.)

33. Dr. Allen SHI, MH, JP appreciated the work of HKO. He praised HKO for the transparency of its work that resulted in accurate and comprehensive meteorological information. He asked Dr. LEE to share some amusing episodes of working in HKO, and enquired whether those hearsay on UFO and aliens were true.

34. Dr. LEE Boon-ying replied that HKO had installed telescopes, among other

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 23 instruments, to detect changes in space weather. It had also set up a webpage on space weather, which also provided information on solar storms. Dr. LEE commented that that was no need to worry about space weather’s impact on Hong Kong. As there was a solar storm every 11 years, it was likely that another solar storm would arise in 2012 – 2013. Solar storm would affect power stations and communication satellites, especially those serving places of high latitude. As Hong Kong was not a place of high latitude, it had never been severely affected by solar storm. However, HKO would be well-prepared and communicate well with powers stations and telecommunication companies in this regard, and publicise latest news about solar storm. HKO received reports of UFO from time to time, but investigations revealed that these incidents were all about human activities. To address public concern, HKO would try to clarify every one of these incidents. Regarding amusing episodes, Dr. LEE said once the rainfall station at Haven of Hope Hospital in Sai Kung had recorded an extraordinarily high reading. After investigation, it was revealed that data was corrupted as patient visitors had poured left over soup into the raingauge. Since then, all newly installed raingauges would be located at secluded places to avoid recurrence of similar incidents.

35. The Chairman thanked Dr. LEE Boon-ying for visiting WTSDC. He looked forward to strengthening cooperation with HKO, and asked the Secretariat to contact HKO to arrange for the visit.

(Dr. LEE Boon-ying left the meeting at this juncture, whereas Mr. KAN Chi-ho, BBS, MH and Mr. Andrew TO left at 5:00 p.m.)

III(iii) Amendments to the Approved Wang Tau Hom and Tung Tau Outline Zoning Plan No. S/K8/19 (WTSDC Paper 64/2010)

36. The Chairman welcomed Mr. Eric YUE, District Planning Officer / Kowloon of PlanD who attended the meeting for this agenda item.

37. Mr. Eric YUE of PlanD introduced the paper with the aid of a powerpoint presentation. Highlights were as follows:

(I) Objective of the Amendments

The primary objective of the amendments was to impose a building height (BH) restriction to buildings in Wong Tai Sin, so that ridgeline of the Lion Rock, as viewed from vantage points at the Quarry Bay Park and Sheung Wan would not be blocked, on top of preserving the three view corridors of the Lion Rock (with vantage points at the Morse Park, the proposed Kai Tak Park and the Lok Fu Service Reservoir) as far as possible. In addition, the amendments had incorporated considerations given to town planning guidelines, overall topographical features, district-specific situations, ventilation of the district, BH profile of existing buildings, views of the ridgeline of the Lion Rock, and the need for maintaining design integrity among buildings. In addition, PlanD had commissioned a consultant to carry out air

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 24 ventilation assessment to gauge the possible impact of the proposed BH on the pavement.

(II) Major Proposals It was suggested that existing open space be preserved and passageways in major housing estates be rezoned as “Roads” to enhance ventilation. The Outline Zoning Plan (OZP) in question comprised three sub-zones, namely Tung Tau, Wong Tai Sin and Wang Tau Hom.

(a) Tung Tau

This sub-zone comprised public housing including Tung Tau Estate, Block 22 of Tung Tau Estate, Mei Tung Estate and Mei Yan House at Tung Tau Cottage Area West; as well as private residences including the Kam Kwok Building, Luen Hop Building and Le Billionnaire. PlanD proposed that the height of the two buildings in Mei Tung Estate be capped at 60mPD and 80mPD respectively, so that the estate, upon redevelopment, would not cause any visual impact on Kowloon Walled City Park. On the other hand, BH restrictions for Tung Tau Estate along Kai Tak Nullah were 80mPD and 100mPD; 120mPD for Tung Tau Cottage Area and the vicinity of Heng Lam Street; and 140mPD for Le Billionnaire.

(b) Wong Tai Sin

This sub-zone comprised Lower Wong Tai Sin (I) Estate and Lower Wong Tai Sin (II) Estate, both were public housing estates; as well as Kai Tak Garden, a Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) estate built under the Private Sector Participation Scheme (PSPS). In line with the BH restrictions for the vicinity of Kai Tak Nullah, it was proposed that height of buildings in this sub-zone be capped at 100mPD.

The sub-zone comprised two public housing estates, namely Wang Tau Hom Estate and Lok Fu Estate; six HOS estates, namely Hong Keung Court, Tak Keung Court, Fu Keung Court, Ka Keung Court, Tin Ma Court and Tin Wang Court; and an HOS estate built under PSPS, the Chui Chuk Garden. The proposed BH restrictions in the sub-zone would ascend in a south-to-north manner, viz. from 60mPD for Lok Fu Centre, 80mPD and 100mPD for Lok Fu Estate, 100-140mPD for Wang Tau Hom Estate, to 150-180mPD for estates north of Lung Cheung Road. It was anticipated that height of future developments would be on par with that of the existing ones. would be on par with that of the existing

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 25 ones.

(d) Overall Building Height Restriction in Wong Tai Sin

To preserve view of ridgeline of the Lion Rock as seen from Quarry Bay Park, the concept of stepped height would be adopted and a 20% Building Free Zone would be provided below the ridgeline.

(III) Nga Tsin Wai Village

As the village would be developed by the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), the BH restrictions to be imposed by PlanD was proposed by URA. The gatehouse and the stone tablet of “Hing Yau Yu” in the middle of the village, the Tin Hau Temple and the eight structures along the main axis would be preserved and converted into a Conservation Park, with a BH restriction of 15mPD; whereas northern and southern parts of the village would be used for residential development, as planned by URA.

(IV) Kai Tak Nullah

As part of the future “Kai Tak River”, Kai Tak Nullah flowed from the upstream and midstream in Wong Tai Sin to the downstream in the Kai Tak Development Area, and both sides of the nullah would be purpose-zoned. For instance, the Choi Hung section would become part of Kai Tak River and connect other cultural attractions; whereas the Drainage Services Department (DSD) would construct a cover over the upstream of the nullah, viz. the section between Shatin Pass Road and Tai Shing Street, where amenity area, piazza, walkway and improved traffic arrangement would be provided. To reflect the latest planning intention, this section of the nullah would be rezoned from “Government, Institution and Community” into “Open Space (1)”. Midstream of the nullah, viz. the section between Tai Shing Street and Prince Edward Road East, would be rezoned from “Government, Institution and Community” into “Undetermined”. Its use would be determined by findings of public engagement activities carried out by PlanD, CEDD and DSD, during which Members’ and the public’s views would be collected. Two 10m strips of non-building area (NBA) would be provided at both sides of the nullah, and future developments would be separated from the nullah, so that members of the public might stroll along the “Kai Tak River”.

(V) Land Zoned as “Government, Institution and Community” and “Other Specified Uses”

Schools, refuse collection points and other facilities would be provided in these area, with BH restrictions that reflected height of existing and planned developments, including the Kowloon

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 26 City Baptist Church (KCBC) to be reprovisioned from Argyle Street in Kowloon City to Tung Lei Road in Wong Tai Sin, with BH capped at 64mPD. In addition, PlanD would rezone part of public housing estates as “Roads” to provide breezeways for Wong Tai Sin, with a view to improving ventilation of the district. Other suggestions aimed at reflecting existing uses of land, such as rezoning areas in housing estate on which schools were built as “Government, Institution and Community”.

(VI) Public Consultation

The Town Planning Board (TPB) had gazetted the Wang Tau Hom & Tung Tau Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K8/20). A public consultation exercise was being held and members of the public might make written submission to TPB by 17 November 2010.

38. Mr. Joe LAI welcomed PlanD’s proposed amendments to the approved Wang Tau Hom & Tung Tau (KPA 8) Outline Zoning Plan (No. S/K8/19), including rezoning of NBA B1, B2 and B3, Open Space at area F, and street D1 into “Roads”. Regarding PlanD’s proposed rezoning of area F on the OZP, viz. the open space at the junction of Junction Road and Heng Lam Street from “Roads” to “Open Space”, he enquired whether it would involve the road near the buildings.

(Mr. WONG Yat-yuk left the meeting at 5:20 p.m.)

39. Mr. Eric YUE replied that the open space was zoned to reflect the location of the existing sitting-out area.

40. Mr. MOK Ying-fan said in a bid to preserve views of the ridgeline, PlanD proposed BH restrictions of 60mPD and 80mPD for the redeveloped Mei Tung Estate, which translated into buildings of more than 20 stories, i.e. taller than the existing ones. He enquired whether buildings being constructed at the site of the former Pui Man Estate conformed to the said restrictions, and pointed out that BH of the Kai Tak Garden were already more than 120mPD. In addition, he enquired about BH restrictions for South and North Towers in the Nga Tsin Wai Village Redevelopment Project (NTWVRP).

41. Mr. Eric YUE replied that BH restriction for the North Tower in NTWVRP was 106mPD. The South Towers would comprise two buildings, whereas BH restrictions for the eastern and western blocks were 100mPD and 134mPD respectively. The former Nga Tsin Wai Village site was zoned as “Residential (Group A)”, with maximum plot ratios of 7.5 (domestic) and 1.5 (non-domestic). As a Conservation park would be provided in the middle of the site, the plot ratio in question would be transferred to the North and South Towers, thus relaxing the BH restrictions accordingly.

42. Mr. HO Hon-man was concerned with development of the vicinity of Prince Edward Road East. Given the importance of Longin Bridge as a relic witnessing modern Hong Kong history, he had previously suggested linking up the bridge with Kowloon Walled City, and reserving Shek Ku Lung Road Playground and the adjacent petrol filling station to facilitate development of the bridge, to provide interconnection

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 27 between historic relics even though they were separated by the Prince Edward Road East.

43. The Chairman said BH restriction of the site on which the new KCBC building would be located was 60mPD. Adjacent to Tung Tau Estate, this was one of the breezeways in Wong Tai Sin, therefore the Housing Department had consulted WTSDC four times and conducted wind tunnel test in respect of redevelopment of Tung Tau Estate Phase 9. Given the BH restriction of 60mPD, he was concerned with the possible screen effect caused by the building, which might block wind blowing from Kai Tak to Tung Tau Estate, Lok Fu, Wang Tau Hom etc. as The Lattitude and Le Billionnaire did. While WTSDC was neutral about land use by any organisation, it was worried about the possible impact on the district’s ventilation caused by the 60mPD building.

44. Mr. Eric YUE replied that Longin Bridge was covered in the Kai Tak Development OZP and the first phase of public engagement activities had been completed. After consolidated the findings, CEDD would carry out second phase of public engagement activities with the introduction of Longin Bridge Conservation Plan, which would link up the bridge, Kowloon City and Kai Tak River and preserve them as a whole, so that the public might stroll around these areas with ease. PlanD noted Members’ views in this regard. In addition, BH restriction for the KCBC building was determined by PlanD after thorough consideration. While the KCBC building was somewhat tall, it would not cause significant impact on ventilation in Wong Tai Sin as other buildings in the vicinity, including the Shek Ku Lung Playground in the west and the Lee Kau Yan Memorial School in the east, were rather short.

45. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP remarked that representative of KCBC had contacted individual WTSDC Members and said that airflow enhancement features would be incorporated into design of the building.

46 Mr. Eric YUE said he would continue to follow up with KCBC on design of the building.

47. Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP supported PlanD’s proposed reservation of land along “Kai Tak River” and its proposed BH restrictions of 80mPD and 100mPD for buildings thereon. However, he opined that further investigation was required for the proposed decking at upstream. He had all along objected to NTWVRP, and queried that the BH restrictions concerned, viz. more than 100mPD, were not tally with the proposed BH restrictions for structures along the “Kai Tak River”. Also, he thought the BH restrictions for NTWVRP, viz. 106-134mPD, rather odd. According to the BH restrictions for nearby structures proposed by PlanD, BH restriction for NTWVRP should be 80 or 100 mPD. A BH restriction of more than 100mPD would be unacceptable – not to mention the BH restriction of 134mPD currently proposed. Given that BH of Tung Tau Estate were 80m, he opined that no new building should be taller than that. Therefore, he objected to NTWVRP, and opined that BH for project, if implemented, should be capped at 80mPD.

48. Mr. HO Yin-fai was concerned with preservation of the Longin Bridge. As revealed by the position of the bridge pier, the bridge was at a distance away from the Kowloon Walled City Park. CEDD had indicated that the relic would be preserved and become a museum. As the bridge was located at one of the breezeways of Wong Tai

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 28 Sin, no building should be build in the vicinity of Shek Ku Lung Road Playground; and the site near Lee Kau Yan Memorial School, currently occupied by several petrol filling stations, might be used for recreational purposes upon expiry of the relevant leases, in order to link up Longin Bridge and other relics.

49. Mr. MOK Ying-fan concurred on Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP’s views and opined that buildings involved in NTWVRP were too tall. As PlanD imposed BH restrictions of 60-80mPD to structures around Nga Tsin Wai Village, buildings involved in NTWVRP should not be taller than 100mPD as well. He enquired whether he should make a written submission to TPB by 17 November this year, or the District Planning Officer would relay his objection to TPB.

50. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP commented that WTSDC had already endorsed URA’s NTWVRP, but it might still raise objection to the BH restriction of 134mPD. However, if WTSDC raised any objection now, URA could withdraw the proposed preservation works in the middle of the site, previously endorsed by WTSDC, and build short and wide buildings to provide the same number of flats. The current NTWVRP provided ventilation openings at three sides of the site to minimise impact on airflow, as requested by WTSDC. URA would only turn tall buildings wide to provide the same number of flat if it was asked to change the design.

51. Mr. Eric YUE replied that URA had consulted WTSDC and obtained its endorsement on NTWVRP on 27 September 2007, and then designed the buildings according to the endorsed plan. PlanD agreed that BH restrictions for NTWVRP were different from that imposed on the buildings nearby, whereas the odd, tailor-made building retrictions (not multiplies of 10) were determined on the BH endorsed by WTSDC on 27 September 2007. No building in the redevelopment project should be taller than that. In consideration of airflow in the district, PlanD would also provide an NBA between the west end of the site and Chi Tak Public School, to ensure that NTWVRP would not affect developments nearby. PlanD noted Members’ concern, and had determined BH restrictions for NTWVRP in a prudent manner.

52. Dr. James LAU, BBS, JP commented that the current design seemed different from the one submitted by URA. According to the original design, there would be a building on the NTWVRP site, while the current design revealed that centre of the site would be left vacant and three buildings would be built. He did not object to the new BH restrictions, but opined that URA should adhere to the original design as it had already been endorsed by WTSDC. He was concerned with the changes made in the current design.

53. Mr. Eric YUE said according to the design submitted to PlanD by URA, BH restriction for the North Tower was 106mPD, and 100 and 103mPD for the South Towers. The gatehouse, the tablet of “Hing Yau Yu”, the Tin Hau Temple and eight structures in the middle would be preserved in the Conservation Park.

54. The Chairman said URA had not submitted any updated layout plan to WTSDC and informed it of the new BH restrictions. He requested PlanD to inform URA that it should consult WTSDC again on the current design if it was different from the one endorsed by WTSDC previously. If no change had been made to the design and BH restrictions, WTSDC would respect its own decision made in 2007, whereas Members might reflect their views on the redevelopment project to departments

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 29 concerned.

55. Mr. SO Sik-kin said Nga Tsin Wai Village was built more than 600 years ago. Quoting the Shanghai Chenghuang Temple as an example, he suggested that structurally sound buildings and “Three Treasures” of the village, namely the Tin Hau Temple, the gatehouse and the stone tablet of “Hing Yau Yu”, be preserved. Buildings in question would be elevated about 40 ft off the ground. As WTSDC had already granted approval in this regard, it should continue to support the redevelopment project and preservation of the historic relics.

56. The Chairman sought HAD’s assistance to enquire URA about latest position of NTWVRP, and inform URA of the need to consult WTSDC again if there was any significant change in design and BH restrictions. He also requested PlanD to note Members’ views on this agenda item, and remarked that Members might continue to reflect views to TPB during the consultation period.

(Mr. CHUI Pak-tai left the meeting at 5:35 p.m.)

III(iv) Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River (WTSDC Paper 65/2010)

57. The Chairman welcome Mr. Stephen TANG Man-bun, Head (Kai Tak Office), Mr. Anthony LO Kam Yan, Chief Engineer, Mr. Peter MOK Pang-ching, Senior Engineer and Mr. Tommy WONG Chi-wai, Engineer of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD); Mr. IP Wing-cheung, Chief Engineer, Mr. TONG Kin-shing, Senior Engineer, Miss LAU Hoi-kun, Engineer and Mr. CHEUNG Chun-ning, Engineer of the Drainage Services Department (DSD); and Mr. Eric YUE Chi-kin, District Planning Officer / Kowloon of the Planning Department who attended the meeting for this agenda item. He invited Mr. Stephen TANG to introduce the paper.

58. Mr. Stephen TANG said CEDD, DSD and PlanD were conducting a public consultation exercise on design of greening and amenity features of the Kai Tak Development. The paper was primarily about the public engagement activities in relation to the conceptual scheme of Kai Tak River.

59. Mr. Peter MOK introduced the paper with a powerpoint presentation. Highlights were as follows:

(VII) Background

Kai Tak Nullah was about 2.4 km in length. It flowed from Po Kong Village Road along Choi Hung Road, passed Tung Tau Estate and San Po Kong, into Kai Tak Development Area before discharging into the Victoria Harbour. The nullah was one of the major flood relief drainage channels in East Kowloon area. As the water quality had improved significantly in recent years, members of the public now called the nullah “Kai Tak River”, and hoped that the nullah could be reinstated as a characteristic

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 30 green river channel that served amenity purposes. Also, some community organisation had put forward various proposals, such as “Revitalisation of Kai Tak Nullah”, “Kai Tak River Green Corridor Community Education Scheme”, etc.

In 2008, WTSDC had been consulted on improvement works to Kai Tak Nullah. Currently, DSD was drawing up the relevant designs on the basis of the agreement made with WTSDC. It was anticipated that flood prevention and decking works would be carried out in the upstream in 2011, so that flood relief capacity of the section could be improved as soon as possible. In response to public expectation, these works would also provide room for greening and improved traffic. Taking the opportunity provided by the improvement project, CEDD, DSD and PlanD were currently consulting the public on greening and landscape design of Kai Tak Nullah.

2. Vision

It was intended to turn Kai Tak Nullah into a green river corridor in urban areas that would serve flood protection and traffic improvement purposes while providing space for leisure and public activities required by the community.

3. Design Principles

Kai Tak Nullah was primarily a drainage channel and its capacity should be adequate to accommodate the storm water collected, and the treated effluent discharged under the Tolo Harbour Effluent Export Scheme (THEES). By enhancing visual quality and image, the Government intended turn the nullah into a green river channel in urban areas that integrated with the adjacent areas and the Kai Tak Development Area. Also, public space along Kai Tak River would become a place of interest for activities such as leisure, recreation, education and community art and match with the adjoining land uses and developments.

(a) Upstream of Kai Tak Nullah (Po Kong Village Road to Tai Shing Street)

This section was about 400m in length and 5m to 10m in width. The drainage capacity of this section was found inadequate. Flooding occurred in the surrounding areas during heavy rains. Therefore, DSD had planned to carry out improvement works to this section to avoid occurrence of flooding, and to provide room for greening and traffic improvements. Decking on the nullah would serve greening, amenity and leisure purposes, to provide townscape enhancement and improved connection with adjacent areas. Also, it would provide room for improving the traffic condition at Choi Hung Road. As the Kai Tak

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 31 Nullah was rather narrow, the design of landscape, greening and facilities would be limited by to existing buildings and roads on both sides of the nullah.

(b) Midstream (Tai Shing Street to Prince Edward Road East)

This section was about 700m in length and 10m to 20m in width. It ran along Morse Park, Nga Tsin Wai Village and Tung Tau Estate. Enhanced connection between Nga Tsin Wai Village, Tung Tau Estate and Morse Park was being considered. In addition, more public space would be provided at strategic locations for landscape, leisure and community purposes. Although this section was wider than the upstream, there were still design restrictions due to existing buildings and roads on both sides of the nullah. In addition, the water depth increased significantly during heavy rains and might pose hazard to people. Moreover, although water quality was improved, it was not suitable for direct human contact due to public health consideration.

This section was about 1.3km in length and 20m to 30m in width. The fact that the section flowed into the Kai Tak Development Area provided flexibility in design for better integration into other sections of Kai Tak Nullah. More public space would be allocated for leisure or other community purposes. Commercial sites, station square and residential areas in different themes would be available in this area, forming a landscape axis bridging old and new districts. The water depth in this section increased significantly during heavy rains and posed potential hazard to people, and water quality was also a matter of concern.

4. Local and Overseas Examples

(a) Cheonggyecheon, Seoul, South Korea

Elements of community arts and landscaping had given the area a characteristic look. This might serve as a case of reference.

(b) Sumida River, Tokyo, Japan

A static landscape design was adopted for the long river. The area was somewhat quiet on weekdays but a popular tourist attraction during weekends. There were displays of community and environmental education at both sides of the river.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 32

Contrary to usual concrete-lined watercourses, the Pai Hong Runway completed not long ago featured some unique landscape designs. Representatives of CEDD and DSD had conducted a site visit to the runway.

(d) Shing Mun River, Shatin, Hong Kong

Public space was provided at both sides of the river for jogging and cycling. Although cycling was not desirable in San Po Kong, this case might still serve as a reference.

(VIII) Public Engagement

Public engagement activities would be held in two stages. Stage 1 was mainly about soliciting public’s views on the project, and Stage 2 would centre on consensus building. In this connection, two community envisioning workshops would be held in Lee Kau Yan Memorial School from 2-5 p.m. on 11 December 2010 and 18 December 2010 respectively.

(Mr. Joe CHAN left the meeting at 5:40 p.m., and Ms. KWOK Sau-ying left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.)

60. The Chairman remarked that a submission by Mr. CHOI Luk-sing, MH titled “Views on kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River” (Annex I) was tabled. Since Mr. CHOI had to leave the meeting earlier to attend to some important business, he invited Mr. Rex MOK to introduce the paper on Mr. CHOI’s behalf.

61. Mr. Rex MOK introduced the submission. Mr. CHOI welcomed the Government’s initiative in launching the “Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River”, but he was aggrieved that construction of “Living Water Garden” (LWG) was not mentioned at all. East Kowloon District Residents’ Committee proposed LWG more than a decade ago, with a view to improving water quality of “Kai Tak River” and its environment in general. Inspired by a similar garden built by the Government of Chengdu Municipal, Sichuan more than 20 years ago as an improvement project for Funan River, LWG was more than just an ordinary park. Instead, it was a river training project that purified and revitalised the river with the aid of modern technologies, including biological and physical treatment facilities. Moreover, it was also a park that served educational, environmental protection and leisure purposes. Currently, the “Kai Tai River” was not merely a floodway serving Lion Rock and Tsz Wan Shan, it was also an outlet of secondary sewage from Sha Tin Water Treatment Works. Secondary sewage was not clean. In fact, the Tolo Harbour had been polluted when such sewage was discharged into it previously. Due to the difference in terrain height between Po Kong Village Road and Shatin Pass Road, sewage passing through the watercourse between the two roads was stirred up, thus aerated and revitalised. Consequently, this made the midstream and downstream areas of “Kai Tai River” a scenic spot abundant with birds and fishes. Hence, Mr. CHOI suggested the Government build an LWG at the Tai

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 33 Hom Village site of Diamond Hill, in order to facilitate the revitalisation process taking place at the upstream section and improve the environment in the vicinity of Diamond Hill.

62. The Chairman remarked that a submission by the East Kowloon District Residents’ Committee and the Community Alliance on Kai Tak Development titled “Suggestion about Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River” (Annex II) was tabled. He invited Mr. HO Hon-man to introduce the submission.

63. Mr. HO Hon-man introduced the submission. The East Kowloon District Residents’ Committee and Community Alliance on Kai Tak Development welcomed the “Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River” jointly launched by CEDD, DSD and PlanD, and the two organisations were also glad to see that Government departments had adopted the name “Kai Tak River”, which was previously called Kai Tak Nullah. Residents and Members of WTSDC had all along been concerned with traffic and odour problems in the vicinity of the river. Given that the traffic condition in the upstream area of “Kai Tai River” would be improved by provision of an additional traffic lane and rationalisation of bus stops near the Choi Hung Road Police Station, the two organisations opined that the Government might consider not decking of upstream of “Kai Tai River”. Regarding the odour problem, treatment provided by THEES and the natural aeration of water caused by the terrains along “Kai Tak River” had helped improve water quality and prevented the Victoria Harbour from being polluted. Hence the two organisations suggested an LWG and an education centre be provided at upstream and downstream areas of the river respectively, to show people how turbid water was clarified and revitalised. Besides interacting with the Kai Tak River, the public might also learn history of the river and the process of river water purification in the LWG and the education centre. Moreover, the message of recycling and saving water can be disseminated through these facilities. On the other hand, Wong Tai Sin was one of the hottest districts in the territory. As the Director of Hong Kong Observatory who had just visited WTSDC remarked that such high temperature might be caused by district-specific reasons and agreed that lakes or other man-made facilities might help lowering the temperature [see para.32(ii) above], he believed that besides amenity values, LWG might also help cool the district.

64. Dr. WONG Kam-chiu welcomed the Government’s two-stage public engagement activities on design and planning of “Kai Tak River”. Once a smelly nullah heavily polluted with industrial and domestic waste, “Kai Tak River” had benefited from the Government’s water treatment efforts and was being revitalised gradually. He hoped that the Government, the local community and the general public could join hands and turn “Kai Tak River” into a green river channel. Hence he suggested the Government step up its publicity efforts on the public engagement activities and collect public’s views through channels like Facebook etc., so that the development of “Kai Tak River” could follow public opinions more closely. In addition, he enquired CEDD about the starting and completion dates of the public engagement activities.

65. Mr. SO Sik-kin urged the Government to listen to people and make “Kai Tak River” a leisure ground for their enjoyment. As midstream of the river was adjacent to Nga Tsin Wai Village, which would be redeveloped and preserved, it would be desirable

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 34 to adopt matching design that would underpin Wong Tai Sin as a tourist attraction. He opined that development of “Kai Tak River” might follow the example of Xihu Lake, where extensive greening was applied to its shore. For instance, dawn redwood and other suitable plants might be planted along Kai Tak River, and cafeterias, bars and decorative lightings be provided in the public space in both sides of the river. Together with the LWG, a tourist attraction would be formed for public enjoyment. He also proposed extensive use of arch bridges or wooden bridges in the development of “Kai Tak River”, to eliminate the stark and rigid feeling associated with commonly used concrete bridges. As a unique feature of the district, these bridges might become tourist attractions and leisure venues.

(Mr. Andie CHAN left the meeting at 6:00 p.m.)

66. Dr. James LAU, BBS, JP was of the view that it would be worth to take a look at the design of Cheonggyecheon, Seoul, South Korea. While the river was world-renowned, it was not environmentally and traffic friendly as it was filled with water from Han River. “Kai Tak River”, on the other hand, would not suffer from these problems as the Government would address traffic problems, and only sewage, instead of clear water pumped in purposefully, would flowed. Also, entertainment and educational features, museums etc. could be introduced in “Kai Tak River” as Cheonggyecheon did. For instance, preserved village houses in the Nga Tsin Wai Village might be turned into a museum showing organisms in “Kai Tak River”. The successful conversion from a “smelly nullah” to a beautiful watercourse would make “Kai Tak River” a more famous watercourse than Cheonggyecheon.

67. Mr. LAM Man-fai, JP welcomed the Government’s initiative to rename Kai Tak Nullah as “Kai Tak River”. He commented that four principles should be adopted in the design of the river: to maximise the width and water-flow of the river for enhanced flood relief and cooling; to provide education on conservation and revitalisation; to foster local culture; and to include commercial elements. He had supported decking the upstream in the past, but this was no longer necessary because of the environment and traffic condition had already been improved. Instead, it was now necessary to widen the river, to build an LWG in the Tai Hom Village site, and to extend the Choi Hung Road Playground and Morse Park where the river would pass through, so that people might contact the clear water treated by the LWG. On the educational front, given the abundance of organisms in “Kai Tak River”, it might be used to teach students that clarified water could be touched and even used to keep fishes. Given that there were also a host of unique cultural features and folk culture groups in Wong Tai Sin, Mr. LAM opined that vacant space in front of Nga Tsin Wai Village and Longin Bridge might be used for performances and cultural activities. Commercial elements could also be included in the development of “Kai Tak River”. The recent exhibition of “Riverside Scene at Qingming Festival” had been a big hit because it had combined commercial and cultural elements. Therefore, the Government might wish to handle “Kai Tak River” matters flexibly to make the best use of the river.

68. Mr. MOK Ying-fan was of the view that development of “Kai Tak River” could become a priority project of the district. It was widely perceived that a river should not be a straight watercourse. However, a linear design was adopted for the nullah-turned “Kai Tak River”, as it was used primarily for delivery of water. Despite the presence of bends in “Kai Tak River”, it was not as zigzagging as ordinary rivers. In ancient China, all villages were built by riverside, so the Kai Tak River could be

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 35 considered as a treasure of Tung Tau Estate. Having said that, he hoped that the revitalisation efforts would result in a true river, instead of a linear watercourse that had been trained. On the other hand, he supported preservation of Longin Bridge, and hoped that the Government would put various relics of modern history into a whole picture of culture and history. Due to a recent discovery of relic, a highway project in Chifeng, China had to be changed significantly. As there were only a few relics in Hong Kong, the Government should pay more attention to preservation.

69. Mr. MOK Kin-wing remarked that besides support from the public and DCs, the “Building Our Kai Tak River” project should be underpinned by concerted efforts of DSD, CEDD, PlanD and TD. As rationalisation of traffic lanes and bus stops at Choi Hung Road would help ease the traffic in the upstream area (near the Police Station), decking might no longer be necessary for this section of the river, so that the river could be preserved in its entirety to facilitate the development of LWG at west of Tai Hom Village. For the downstream area, space in the vicinity of Kai Tak Station might be opened to art groups in San Po Kong. Cafeteria and stalls selling work of art might also be provided at both sides of “Kai Tak River” to provide business and job opportunities to youngsters. Since there would be private development at both sides of the downstream area, he urged the government to reserve adequate space for amenity purposes, such as provision of jogging trails, cycling tracks or green belts that would turn the area into a tourist attraction. In addition, as inspired by the exhibition of “Riverside Scene at Qingming Festival”, Mr. MOK also suggested the Government consider designating the water between the downstream of “Kai Tak River” and the typhoon shelter as boating area to facilitate tourism.

70. Mr. WU Chi-wah, MH welcomee the public engagement activities on “Kai Tak River”, but he queried whether the original project proposal had been abandoned completely so that the consultation should start anew. Moreover, as the Government did not provide any information about the extent of alteration acceptable, views collected in the public engagement activities could involve excessively imaginative alteration to “Kai Tak River”. He remarked that the Government had consulted WTSDC on development of Kai Tak Nullah in the past and submitted a preliminary layout plan, but it started the consultation exercise afresh with the public engagement activities. Therefore, he questioned why DSD had abandoned the original plan, which would have been the basis of future development, and consult the public again. Mr. WU was of the view that DSD and CEDD were wasting time and money of the public.

71. Mr. CHAN On-tai said environmentally friendly materials should be used in the “Kai Tak River” project. In addition, attention should be paid to lightings that set the ambience. He also remarked that design of lightings should match the surrounding facilities.

72. Mr. HO Yin-fai said the Government had consulted the public on a Kai Tak development plan. The development in question this time was mainly about the Kai Tak Development Area and the Longin Bridge. He commented that the Government might consider developing Longin Bridge, “Kai Tak River”, Kowloon Walled City and even the LWG somewhat farther away as a whole, so as to create a new landmark for Wong Tai Sin and Kai Tak. He had conducted a site visit with CEDD to the relics of Longin Bridge and Pavilion for Greeting Officials, and learnt that the pavilion had been demolished in the Qing Dynasty. He opined that the Government should explore ways to let people know this particular piece of history, and adhere to the previous proposals

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 36 in respect of preservation of “Kai Tak River” and cooling of Wong Tai Sin.

73. In response to “Consultation forums or workshops will be held again in mid-2011 to disseminate findings of stage 1 and consult the public on proposed greening and landscaping options” as set out in the paper, Mr. LEE Tat-yan, MH commented that this implied indefinite delay in the commencement date of work, and said DSD should first address the flooding problem before implementing any green and amenity works to “Kai Tak River”, to ensure that San Po Kong would not suffer from serious flooding again next year. In addition, the Government should also address the traffic problem Wong Tai Sin Police Station by rationalising the traffic lanes and bus stops as soon as possible. The design of downstream area of “Kai Tak River” was not of primary importance. Instead, the Government should first start the said road works to ease the traffic, before discussing the need to deck the upstream section of “Kai Tak River”. He emphasised that flooding and traffic problems should be addressed before discussing the amenity matters.

74. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP was worried that the diversity of views among Members might delay the project for a further 5 years. He had suggested decking of Kai Tak Nullah as early as 1985. More than 20 years later, the Government was consulting the public again on “Kai Tak River”. He enquired about when the works for this section would start, and opined that the Government should first solve the traffic problems, such as the congestion at the junction of Shatin Pass Road and Choi Hung Road. Mr. WONG enquired the completion date of the relevant improvement works, as well as the time frame for widening Kai Tak Nullah as a mitigation of the flooding problem. Besides urging the Government for early submission of the work schedules, he also said that the Government should implement the Kai Tak Nullah project according to the original proposal, and inform WTSDC of the works commencement date. Meanwhile, the Government should work on the traffic congestion at the junction of Shatin Pass Road and Choi Hung Road caused by loading/unloading activities at the bus stops. In addition, he supported the construction of LWG at the Tai Hom Village site, but added that two additional traffic lanes should be provided to accommodate the massive traffic and pedestrian flow at Choi Hung Road towards the New Territories and other districts in the future, so that roads in Wong Tai Sin would not be overloaded upon completion of the Kai Tak Development. He hoped that the Government would commence the works soon after consulting WTSDC. The works should be expedited as the relevant discussion had lasted for more than 6 years.

75. Pointing out that the odour problem of Kai Tak Nullah had been solved and rationalisation of traffic lanes and bus stops might mitigate traffic problem, the Chairman enquired whether it was still necessary to deck the upstream section of Kai Tak Nullah. He also enquired whether any saving could be made if there was no need to deck the sections of nullah near Wong Tai Sin Police Station and between Tai Shing Street and Shatin Pass Road, and whether this would delay the works.

76. Mr. Stephen TANG thanked Members for their views, and replied to their questions as follows:

(i) Additional Greening and Water Body

He agreed that both might help cooling the district, and said it was planned to provide greening to “Kai Tak River” and preserve

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 37 water body as far as practicable. He believed that with concerted efforts of the Government, WTSDC and members of the public, the once polluted river course could be turned into a green river channel; and it would be more environmentally friendly than Cheonggyecheon because there was no need to fill the upstream with downstream water by pumping – an energy-consuming process.

(ii) Functions of “Kai Tak River”

CEDD noted Members’ request for developing the riverside in a way relevant to people’s daily lives. Besides such relevance, “Kai Tak River” would also serve leisure, recreational and educational purposes.

(iii) Contacting “Kai Tak River”

“Kai Tak River” was a flood relief channel thus there would be influx of water anytime. For the sake of safety, it would not be open to the public. However, the Government would consider providing water bodies at suitable locations along the river, such as infinity pools that visually merged into the river.

(iv) Decking the Upstream Section of “Kai Tak River”

Due to the bad odour, many people and WTSDC Members had requested decking of the upstream section of Kai Tak Nullah in the past. Currently, the water quality had been improved to a level acceptable to the public. Not only had the number of birds and fishes risen, people also agreed that the nullah had changed a lot. In view of the current condition of the nullah, the Government would consider changing its plan, and it would continue to listen to views of the public and Members.

(v) Flooding and Traffic Problems

DSD was working on the detailed design for the improvement works. Having obtained endorsement from WTSDC, it would apply for funding from the Legislative Council (Legco) and implement the works as soon as possible. DSD, PlanD and TD would continue to discuss ways to address the traffic problem and would try their best not to deck any water body.

77. Mr. IP Wing-cheong said the department had consulted WTSDC in 2008 on improvement and redevelopment works of Choi Hung Road section of Kai Tak Nullah, and obtained WTSDC’s approval to deck section of the nullah between Po Kong Village Road and Tai Shing Street, with provision of amenity features and leisure facilities thereon. Hence, the department had drawn up detailed design for the works. It was anticipated that application for funding would be submitted to the Legco in 2011 for implementing the works in the same year. As part of the advance works, the traffic improvement works to be carried out at the upstream area of Kai Tak Nullah, viz.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 38 rationalisation of traffic lanes and bus stops near the Wong Tai Sin Police Station would be implemented by DSD’s Drainage Project Division. The said works had been endorsed by WTSDC and a contract had been awarded. It was anticipated that the works would commence in late 2010 and last for about one year. DSD would report progress of the works to WTSDC’s Working Group on Government and Public Utilities Works Projects.

78. Regarding the said improvement works to be carried out near the Wong Tai Sin Police Station, The Chairman requested DSD to introduce the concept and concrete arrangements at the Traffic and Transport Committee (T&TC) meeting to be held on 30 November 2010.

79. Mr. IP Wing-cheong agreed to ask officers of the division to attend the T&TC meeting to be held on 30 November 2010, and continued to comment on Members’ opinions. Tasked to address flooding problem, among others, DSD hoped that improvement works relating to flood relief capability of upstream section of Kai Tak Nullah could commence as soon as possible. Cleansing efforts would be stepped up during the works period, in other to maximise the nullah’s existing flood relief capacity. Mr. IP said DSD would submit application for funding and commence the works in 2011 according to the proposal endorsed by WTSDC in 2008. At today’s meeting, he realised Members’ call for not decking Kai Tak Nullah, in consideration of the improved environment along the nullah and the improved traffic condition at Choi Hung Road resulted from the advance works. In this connection, he drew Members’ and the public’s attention to the following points:

(i) Water depth of the nullah might increase greatly and suddenly during a storm, so it was not desirable to admit members of the public in the nullah even if it was undecked;

(ii) Without the decking, the narrow upstream section would not be as visually appealing than the downstream section;

(iii) On the other hand, the decking might be used for amenity and leisure purposes;

(iv) Kai Tak Nullah was primarily a drainage channel. Therefore, even without decking the upstream section, it was impossible to provide extensive greening and major amenity features. Otherwise, its flood relief capacity would be affected, making its vicinity more likely to flood; and

(v) As DSD had to review the feasibility of not decking the nullah, as well as project planning and design for the works at the upstream section, it was inevitable that commencement date of the improvement works would be postponed.

80. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP enquired about duration of works for both options, as he was worried about possible delay caused by abandoning the 2008 proposal and starting the design phase anew. He also commented that the area between the Wong Tai Sin Police Station and Tai Shing Street Market was inadequate for greening purposes, and the privately owned Kai Tak Garden would not be opened to

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 39 the Government for greening as well.

81. Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH further enquired whether the Government had abandoned the 2008 proposal and launched another consultation exercise. According to DSD’s 2008 proposal, Kai Tak Nullah would be decked, with six box culverts installed under the decking. Passive recreational facilities would be provided above the decking, which would be decorated into a water feature park. Despite the Government’s publicity efforts, the nullah-turned Kai Tai River carried fixed amount of water from the Shatin Sewage Treatment Works. In other words, widening of the “watercourse” could only be justified by increased throughput from the treatment works. However, as the Government had depicted the nullah as if it had independent water source, members of the public might cherish high hope to that and, consequently, request the Government to develop it into a world-class “watercourse”.

82. Mr. Stephen TANG said flood relief and amenity matters could be handled separately - flood relief capacity of upstream section of Kai Tak Nullah should be increased first, and to provide greening and amenity features at two sides of the nullah at a later stage. Although water discharged from the Shatin Sewage Treatment Works was not quite suitable for plants, but adequate greening space had been provided along the nullah. Also, bends would be introduced to the nullah as far as practicable. The Government would consult members of the public, DC members, as well as green and other concern groups invited in workshops to be held on 11 and 18 December 2010. During the consultation exercise for Longin Bridge (Stage 1), some people who were against the project had adjusted their expectation after attending the workshops and listening to other participants’ views. Having consolidated views collected from the consultation exercise on Kai Tak River, the Government would propose concrete amenity options and, at the same time, DSD would carry out the improvement works concerned. He reiterated that the Government had not abandoned the previous plan. Instead, it was trying to refine it by further consultation.

83. Mr. IP Wing-cheong said although DSD had not conducted any comprehensive assessment, the department estimated that leaving the upstream section of Kai Tak Nullah undecked would not incur additional cost. On the other hand, as DSD had designed the project according to the proposal endorsed in 2008, extra time would be required if the department had to review the project with a view to adopting the deckless design requested by WTSDC and members of the public. While DSD would try to complete the review as soon as possible, the review would inevitably postpone the commencement date of the flood relief works for the upstream section. However, even if change in design was required, leaving the nullah undecked would not lengthen duration of works. In any case, DSD would endeavour to apply for funding and commence the works in 2011.

84. Dr. Allen SHI, MH, JP enquired whether the public engagement activities had been launched. He commented that discussion about the project had undergone for a long period of time, and hoped the works could commence as soon as possible, regardless whether a decking would be built at the upstream portion of the nullah according to the 2008 proposal. He also enquired about the lead time required from consultation to implementation of works in general. Some Members mentioned that the Kai Tak project had started 20 years ago, and a few years had passed after the endorsement of the 2008 proposal. In this connection, Dr. SHI voiced his concern about the absence of concrete action, even though the Government said the works was

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 40 all along in progress.

85. Mr. Stephen TANG replied that DSD had started the design stage as soon as WTSDC had endorsed the decking works in 2008. The initial proposal had been refined and a tendering exercise would be conducted very soon. Besides consulting WTSDC on the flood relief works, DSD would also like to seek WTSDC’s support for, and comments on beautifying the nullah and making the “Kai Tak River” a world-renowned watercourse.

86. The Chairman pointed out that most of the matters related to mid and upstream areas of Kai Tak Nullah would be handled by DSD, which had put forth a number of proposals on flood relief and greening. On the other hand, CEDD would take the charge of Kai Tak Development. To eliminate the possible inconsistence in design between up and downstream areas, the Government hoped that departments concerned would co-ordinate and develop the entire nullah as a whole. Opinions of WTSDC had little implication to duration of works. He concluded that WTSDC was concerned with three major issues: (1) Flooding caused by the Kai Tak Nullah – the Government should consider the design of advance work regarding the nullah. WTSDC had endorsed DSD’s proposed construction of box culverts at Prince Edward Road East, and it was hoped that the Government would pay extra attention to the area between Shatin Pass Road and Po Kong Village Road, with a view to avoiding recurrence of flooding that affected people’s daily lives; (2) Traffic problem – WTSDC was glad to see that DSD had launch a tendering exercise relating to the improvement works to be carried out near the Wong Tai Sin Police Station. He hoped that the works could start and complete as soon as possible. Moreover, he thanked TD for relocating the bus stops as requested by WTSDC. He urged DSD to report latest position of the works to the Working Group on Government and Public Utilities Works Projects, and concept and concrete arrangements to T&TC; and (3) Odour problem – water quality of “Kai Tak River” would continue to improve as DSD kept raising the bar for sewage standard with reference to exemplary practices all over the world. In addition, the provision of LWG would also be helpful in this regard. He asked CEDD and other departments concerned to update WTSDC on the Kai Tak Nullah project, and to note and follow up on Members’ views.

87. The Chairman thanked representatives of CEDD, DSD and PlanD for attending the WTSDC meeting.

(Mr. Stephen TANG, Mr. Peter MOK, Mr. Tommy WONG, Mr. IP Wing-cheung, Mr. TONG Kin-shing, Mr. LAU Hoi-kun, Mr. CHEUNG Chun-ning and Mr. Eric YUE left the meeting at this juncture.)

III(v) Management Scheme for the Display of Roadside Non-commercial Publicity Materials (WTSDC Paper 66/2010)

88. The Chairman welcomed Ms. Karen CHAN, Assistant Director (Estate Management) and Mr. LEE Ying-hung, Principle Estate Office/Wong Tai Sin (District Lands Office, Kowloon East) of LandsD, Ms. LAM Wai-ling, District Manager of Shui On Properties Management Limited, a consultant commissioned by LandsD and Mr. LEE Wai-bun, Chief Traffic Engineer/Kowloon of TD to the WTSDC meeting.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 41

89. Ms. Karen CHAN introduced the paper. LandsD had reviewed the Management Scheme for the Display of Roadside Non-commercial Publicity Materials (Management Scheme), and would like to consult Members on findings. She introduced the Management Scheme with the aid of a powerpoint presentation. Highlights were as follows:

Background

(i) The Management Scheme was launched in 2003. In accordance with the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap 132), no bill or poster should be displayed or affixed on any private land, except with the written permission of the owner or occupier thereof; or on any Government land, except with the written permission of the Authority. Otherwise, the person displaying or affixing a bill or poster committed an offence. A bill or poster that was not maintained in a clean and tidy condition as required in Section 104B(1) of the said ordinance might be removed by personnel under the delegation of the Authority, viz. Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene (DFEH), who would recover the cost of removal from the person displaying the bill or poster as a civil debt; and

(ii) To facilitate implementation of the Management Scheme, DFEH had delegated some LandsD staff to approve applications for displaying roadside non-commercial banners in accordance with Section 104A(1)(b).

The Existing Management Scheme

(i) Members of the Legco, DCs, Committees under DCs, as well as Government departments and NGOs might apply for displaying banners at designated spots;

(ii) Content of Publicity Materials:

(a) The total size of the names and logos of sponsors should not be larger than one tenth of the area of a banner;

(b) A banner might contain names of other persons, apart from that of the applicant;

(iii) The size of the banners to be displayed should not exceed 1m in height and 2.5m in length;

(iv) Currently, designated spots would not be located:

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 42 (a) Within 30m on the traffic upstream side of pedestrian crossings/road junctions;

(b) Central divider of roads within 30m from road junctions/pedestrian crossings.

Ombudsman Findings

(i) The Office of the Ombudsman (Ombudsman) had received complaint about unclear rules and abuse of the Management Scheme. For instance, some banners carried only vague identification, if any, of the owner of the designated spot, as if the spot had been loaned out or transferred. The Ombudsman then initiated a direct investigation in 2008;

(ii) The Ombudsman had observed that the Management Scheme was not underpinned by clear statement of objective, nor did it contain any provision against transfer of designated spots. In addition, the Implementation Guidelines on content of banners were not written in a systematic manner, and the public had not been duly consulted before the Management Scheme was implemented. The Ombudsman hence suggested LandsD to articulate the objective of the Scheme for public information, to prohibit transfer, loaning out and assignment of designated spots, and to require clearly visible acknowledgement, on a banner, of the individual or organisation allocated the designated spot. On the other hand, LandsD was required to give a clear indication in practical terms what contents might be allowed and what not for banners, and seek views from the public at large or interest groups before consulting LegCo and DCs; and

(iii) The Ombudsman also revealed that some of the roadside banners were unsightly and would cause sightline obstruction. On top of being a distraction to motorists, these banners might be loosened due to wear and tear and cause traffic accidents, threatening both motorists and pedestrians. Therefore, LandsD was suggested to delete or replace designated spots at central dividers of roads or close to pedestrian crossings.

Relevant departments, including LandsD, TD, HAD, FEHD, DOJ etc. had reviewed the existing Management Scheme and proposed the following:

(a) To formulate a statement of objective for the Management Scheme, and to revise the Implementation Guidelines with a view to providing clear definition of acceptable contents;

(b) To replace all designated spots at central dividers of roads; and

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 43 junctions.

Proposed Management Scheme

(i) Objective

The display of bills and posters, including roadside publicity materials, on Government land was an offence unless such display was with the written permission of the Authority by virtue of section 104A(1) of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap.132. The Management Scheme aimed at ensuring that the display of roadside publicity materials:

(a) was for the purpose of the promotion of public awareness of matters of general and significant community interests of non-commercial nature. In this connection, priority would be given to such display which was by LegCo and DC members to communicate with their constituents, which sought to promote public awareness or participation in matters of district administration and community building, and which was by the Government to promote important public events and campaigns such as the East Asian Games, “Keep Hong Kong Clean” and “Anti Drug Abuse”;

(b) was permitted in an orderly fashion for those classes of persons specified in the Management Scheme at spots designated by the Authority;

(d) was subject to such other terms and conditions provided in the Management Scheme such as the maintenance and removal of the banners.

(ii) Content of Publicity Materials

(a) Priority would be given to display which was in line with the objective of the Management Scheme;

(b) The information imparted must also follow the requirements below:

(1) The information must not promote any commodities, services provided at a fee, fee paying training courses and activities. (However, the restriction does not apply to services, training courses and activities co-organised by government departments. For these cases, written confirmation from concerned government

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 44 departments was required.);

(2) Transfer, loaning out or assignment of the designated spots was not allowed;

(3) There should be conspicuous acknowledgement of the individual or organisation allocated the spot. The individual or organisation must be the chief beneficiary of the display; and

(4) The contents of the publicity materials to be displayed should be in compliance with the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. No publicity materials of an obscene or objectionable nature should be displayed.

(c) The approval of applications did not imply the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region or its officers approved the contents of the publicity materials; and

(d) No commercial advertisement was permitted.

(iii) Reasons for proposed deletion of designated spots on central dividers:

(a) Banners installed at central dividers were distractions to drivers at the far side lane adjacent to central divider;

(b) These drivers tended to drive faster. Given their higher speed, the likely consequence of a traffic accident could be more severe;

(c) There could be additional road safety and traffic disruption during the installation or maintenance of banners at these locations; and

(d) When these banners became loosen, they were hazardous to road safety.

(iv) Reasons for proposed deletion of designated spots within 10m of the traffic downstream side of pedestrian crossings/road junctions:

(a) Young children might suddenly step into the pedestrian crossing from behind a roadside banner;

(b) These banners might distract pedestrians’ attention to the traffic conditions;

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 45

(d) These publicity materials could distract drivers’ attention during turning movement.

(v) Designated Spots in Wong Tai Sin

(a) In Wong Tai Sin, there were a total of 1 275 spots (number of spots required was 960), including 76 at central dividers and 37 close to (i.e. within 10m on the traffic downstream side of) pedestrian crossings/road junctions. In other words, 113 designated spots would have to be replaced;

(b) The consultant was identifying replacement spots at different locations, and indicated that sufficient replacement spots were available in Wong Tai Sin; and

(c) Some WTSDC Members displayed banners at spots beyond their geographical constituencies, so they were less likely to be affected by the locations of replacement spots.

(vi) Consultation

(a) The Government had conducted a public opinion survey on the existing Management Scheme in May 2010. The findings collected from 1 011 respondents aged 18 or above were summarised below:

(1) About 70% of respondents were in favour of the proposal to move the existing banners at central dividers and those close to pedestrian crossings/road junctions to other roadside spots;

(2) About 60% of respondents considered that transfer, loaning out or assignment of designated spots should be prohibited; and

(3) About 90% of respondents agreed that there should be conspicuous acknowledgement of the individual or organisation allocated a spot.

(b) The Government had consulted all chairmen and vice-chairmen of DCs on a preliminary basis on 17 June 2010;

(c) TD had sought the views of motorist associations/road safety concern groups and academics. In consideration of road safety, most of them supported the proposed replacement of the existing designated spots at central dividers and those within 10m on the traffic downstream side of pedestrian crossings/road junctions; and

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 46

(d) A consultation exercise had started in August 2010 to collect views of DCs. Members were welcomed to comment on the proposals.

90. Mr. SO Sik-kin welcomed and supported the Management Scheme. He agreed, as set out in the paper, that some of the banners were rather dilapidated, and some billboards, cloth-made banners and fastening strings were loosened due to wear and tear or damaged by typhoon. These dilapidated, loosened or damaged publicity materials not only threatened motorists and pedestrians, but also eyesores themselves. He thus urged LandsD to manage and regulate these materials properly. Also, he also denounced the unauthorised display of loan advertisements by financial companies at pedestrian crossings, remarking that these advertisements would attract those who were bad at financial management to apply for loan they could not repay. In this connection, he asked if LandsD would regulate the said publicity and carry out regular inspections. In addition, he was also of the view that departments concerned should take stringent actions against such irregularity, and prosecute/punish offenders in question, instead of removing the non-complying publicity materials only.

91. Mr. Joe LAI questioned about authenticity of certain parts of the paper. As mentioned in the paper, the Ombudsman had revealed that only Legco and DCs had been consulted during the drafting stage of the existing Management Plan, and the lack of consultation was the reason behind the mismanagement. While querying that the Ombudsman and LandsD were trying to shift the responsibility of mismanagement to each other, he had the following comments and questions regarding the paper:

(i) While he agreed that billboards should be displayed in a neat and tidy manner, he had reservation towards the comment that untidy billboards were visual pollution, as set out in the paper;

(ii) Regarding the lack of statement of objective, he would like to know exactly what LandsD’s statement of objective on banner management was;

(iii) The paper accused that LandsD had not drawn up any rule to prohibit transfer or loaning out of designated spots. As the consultation paper was mainly about non-commercial publicity materials, and most of these materials belonged to Legco / DC members, it might imply that the said non-compliance was associated with them. If this was true, LandsD should point this out more explicitly;

(iv) The investigation revealed that vague wordings regarding content of banners were used in the Implementation Guidelines. As this might imply that LandsD would impose censorship to content of banners, he was worried about the presence of “devil in the details” in the paper;

(v) Wong Tai Sin did suffer from the problem of non-complying banners described in the paper. As case in point was display of

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 47 banners of Falungong, which had been a problem for long. He urged the department to tackle the problem promptly and seriously;

(vi) Annexes I to VIII of the paper set out that display of banners might cause traffic accident. He would like to know whether such claim was supported by data of TD or HKPF;

(vii) Phrases like “events of public interest”, “non-commercial activities”, “promotion of community services”, “provision of general information that may be interested by or beneficial to the public” etc. in paragraph 11, Annex I of the paper were prone to dispute as these phrases could be interpreted in a variety of ways. Rewording was required for clarity’s sake. In addition, as banner was a means of communication between DCs and voters, the content restrictions set out in the paper might be controversial; and

(viii) The paper also set out that LandsD had only consulted Legco and DCs on the Management Scheme, which was inadequate. However, as Legco and DC members were all beneficiaries, the comment was unfair. Since some of the Members might not display posters in public housing estates, they could only use banners. It would be unfair to them if LandsD cut the number of designated spots. In a nutshell, he was deeply aggrieved by the paper.

92. Dr. Allen SHI, MH, JP considered that Hong Kong had too many banners at the streets. Some banners even covered the entire building, and there were light boxes projecting from buildings at both sides of the road. Due to lack of regulation, there were more and more banners and light boxes, even in pedestrian precincts, affecting the pedestrians. He suggested LandsD classify publicity materials into two categories, namely temporary or permanent. The former one should be removed after the event in question or a specific expiry date, whereas the permanent ones would be subject to size restriction. Regulation should also be tightened to limit the amount of publicity materials at the street, so as to minimise the nuisance caused to the public.

93. Mr. MOK Kin-wing hoped that the consultation exercise would help clarify the following: (1) given that the new Management Scheme was formulated on the basis on the Ombudsman’s investigation report, he would like to know if it had incorporated any input by members of the public or organisations; (2) regarding the proposed ban on transfer or loaning out of designated spots, he enquired if transfer and loaning out of spots within a political party were acceptable, and whether it was a must that a banner should carry acknowledge of the spot user; (3) he enquired whether it was necessary to include three horizontal slits on a publicity material for air-venting purpose; and (4) upon his enquiry, LandsD had replied that ten spots were assigned to every Member for display of banners, and these spots might be located beyond one’s own geographical constituency. In this regard, he would like to know if this practice was also applicable to other districts. If so, he enquired if the practice could be included as an objective of the Management Scheme.

94. Mr. YUEN Kwok-keung felt helpless about the problem of non-complying

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 48 banners in the district. He had once found that one of his designated spots was occupied by a banner of Médecins Sans Frontières, so he removed that banner, but the organisation displayed another banner soon afterwards. He had lodged a complaint to the LandsD contractor responsible for banner matters, but the latter replied that there were not enough banners to warrant an operation. Therefore, Mr. YUEN had to remove the banners solely by himself. In addition, due to lack of management and regulation, banner problem in Tsz Wan Shan was out of control too. It was not unusual to see unauthorised display of banners at pedestrian crossings in the district. Members could find nowhere to lodge complaint, and the contractor failed to perform its duty and remove the banners. In this connection, he enquired how LandsD would tackle the said problems.

95. Mr. HO Hon-man said he was both a motorist and a DC member, so he understood that no banner should be displayed at upstream side of a pedestrian crossing as this would obstruct sight line of drivers and prevent young children from seeing and being seen. He had once lodged complaints against unauthorised display of banner but, as experienced by Mr. YUEN Kwok-keung, to no avail. In fact, the guidelines already contained all the necessary provisions, so the crux of the problem was whether the department would enforce them. Mr. HO also pointed out that WTSDO had failed to designate sufficient spots for displaying banners of the “Lantern Festival in Wong Tai Sin District”, an activity sponsored by WTSDC, so most of the banners in question were displayed at spots loaned out by Members. Therefore, if LandsD intended to prohibit loaning out of designated spots to local organisations which helped district offices organise non-profit-making activities, it should provide clear guidelines so that these organisations could prepare for such prohibition in advance. After all, local organisations could only promote their activities through roadside banners as they could not afford to advertise on TV or radio. He also accused LandsD for not indicating locations of designated spots properly – despite the provision of a map showing locations of spots designated to a DC member, the map only showed the approximate positions, and markings on railings were either faded or blurred, if not missing. As a result, Members were unable to display banners to the exact standards of LandsD even if they wished to do so. He commented that LandsD only required Members to display banners at locations designated by it, but did not back its request with the necessary support and assistance. Therefore, he urged the department to properly manage itself before trying to manage Members, organisations and other users.

96. Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH remarked that such policies could only regulate those abided by law, but not any offenders, so he requested LandsD to review its regulatory work. He commented that LandsD should invest more in street management and ban the display of publicity materials of various designs, in order to underpin the said regulatory work. In this connection, he suggested the department consider the practice of Kwun Tong District Council, which marked designated spots with steel plates or frames. If the department did not address the problem seriously, the review of Management Scheme was merely done to send off the Ombudsman, and vague and directionless discussion like this was merely a waste of WTSDC’s time. Without clear indication of spots and their serial numbers, Members and other users would not be able to observe the relevant regulations. Therefore, he suggested LandsD install standard frames for the 18 000 odd designated spots, in order to help users observe the regulations.

97. Mr. HO Yin-fai commented that LandsD’s regulatory work only exerted

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 49 control to law-abiding citizens but not offenders. He requested the department to suggest avenue where complaints against unauthorised display of banners could be lodged, and to comment on whether any enforcement action would be taken in response to the complaints, since some other Members had lodged complaints against unauthorised display of loan advertisements but yielded enforcement action by any department. Although the Management Scheme was intended to regulate offenders, it failed to do so and only law-abiding users were affected. There were lots of non-complying banners in Wong Tai Sin, such as those displayed by Falungong, but the department had not taken any enforcement action. He commented that LandsD should not produce a new Management Scheme by copy-and-paste the Ombudsman report, and said the consultation paper was meaningless as it failed to address real problems.

98. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP said he seldom displayed any banner, so most of his designated spots were loaned out to Area Committee or local organisations at no charge - he enquired if what he did had breached the new Management Scheme.

99. Ms. Karen CHAN thanked Members for their enquiries and comments. Her response was summarised below:

(i) The department would seriously consider Members’ views and improve its work;

(ii) LandsD would review its work with reference to the Ombudsman’s report and suggestions. Also, the department would review the existing Management Scheme with a view to identifying any room for improvement. She would relay Members’ views to the working group responsible for the review for follow-up actions;

(iii) LandsD designated 10 display spots for every DC member, including Members of WTSDC;

(iv) The Management Scheme mainly concerned with publicity materials of non-commercial nature. By virtue of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, LandsD was only authorised to approve display of non-commercial roadside publicity materials at designated spots. Those of commercial nature and displayed beyond designated spots would be removed by FEHD. As the legislation provided that FEHD was the enforcing department for removal of illegal publicity materials, she invited representative of FEHD to comment on the prosecution actions concerned;

(v) Objective of the Management Scheme was still a draft. The existing scheme also covered provisions in respect of identity of applicants. About 100 spots in Wong Tai Sin were provided for the use of non-profit-making bodies. Approval of using these spots would only be granted to applications involving promotion of community activities and social issues of non-profit-making nature;

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 50 (vi) The existing guidelines for the Management Scheme provided that approval granted to DC members would cover the tenure of their term. Members who supported a certain activity might have their names shown on the banners clearly. The new guidelines would carry similar provisions in this regard; and

(vii) Discussion on banner design was still undergoing.

100. In response to the presentation which mentioned that LandsD had consulted chairmen and vice-chairmen of the 18 DCs, the Chairman commented that he and the Vice-chairman had raised strong objection at the consultation session. He opined that the Ombudsman had investigated management issues of both authorised and unauthorised roadside banners. As LandsD was the Authority of this matter, people’s comments were mostly directed to the department. In this connection, he asked the representative of FEHD whether the department knew the locations of spots designated by LandsD, and whether FEHD had taken any enforcement action.

101. Mr. WONG Wai-wan, MH replied that the department did not have any information on locations of designated spots because relevant applications were considered and approved by LandsD. The two departments would take three joint operations every fortnight, during which staff of FEHD would remove non-complying banners identified by LandsD and recover the cost of removal from beneficiaries, if their identity and contact information were borne on the banners.

102. Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH commented that Mr. WONG had already pointed out the crux of the problem – FEHD and some of the publicity material owners had no idea about what kind of banners was acceptable, nor did they know the exact locations of the designated spots. In addition, some people would display a new banner soon after the department’s operation, so that their publicity material could be displayed for a longer period of time. In fact, most of the Members would abide by the regulations and display their banners at designated spots. If LandsD intended to step up its enforcement action, it should clearly define the locations of designated spots where publicity materials could be displayed legally, and provide additional resources to install frames for these spots, so that enforcers of FEHD would know which publicity materials were legal and which were not, and remove the latter immediately.

103. Mr. SO Sik-kin enquired whether FEHD had ever prosecuted anyone who displayed an unauthorised banner. He queried that such legislation could only affect law-abiding people, but not finance companies which placed banners casually in areas with high pedestrian flow. Also, he commented that FEHD had turned a blind eye to people’s repeated complaints, thus he urged the department to step up its inspection and regulatory efforts, and to work closely with other departments.

104. The Chairman said since an unauthorised banner would not bear owner’s name and address, it would be difficult for FEHD to trace the owner. However, with name and address borne on his banner, a DC member might be subject to complaint if he did not know the correct location of his designated spots. Therefore, he enquired about how LandsD and FEHD would tackle this problem.

105. Mr. WONG Wai-wan, MH replied that there had been publicity materials of finance companies, as mentioned by Mr. SO Sik-kin, in San Po Kong previously.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 51 HKPF had removed and disposed of these materials, and prosecuted the finance companies in question according to legislations that regulated loaning activities. Publicity materials that did not bear any identity of beneficiary would be detained by FEHD for 14 days before forfeiture. If anyone wished to claim back the materials during that period, he/she would be asked to make a statement to FEHD, which would recover the cost of removal and consider taking prosecution action. Publicity materials of non-commercial nature would be removed in the FEHD-LandsD joint operations taken thrice every fortnight.

106. Mr. YUEN Kwok-keung concurred on proposed framing of designated spots put forward by Mr. WU Chi-wai, MH. He also enquired about actions to be taken by LandsD and FEHD against non-complying and dangerous banners before the proposal was realised.

107. The Chairman emphasised that LandsD should address the problems at hand, before moving onto the consultation exercise. He also invited Ms. Karen CHAN to comment on ways to tackle the problem of non-complying banners.

108. Ms. Karen CHAN explained that locations of all designated spots were clearly marked, and there were clear definitions of non-commercial/commercial publicity materials. The LandsD contractor had all along been cooperative to FHED in taking enforcement actions. The two departments would continue to cooperate in the future and hold meetings to discuss possible actions against the irregularities.

109. Mr. HO Hon-man enquired whether LandsD would take immediate action if only one unauthorised banners was involved.

110. Dr. Allen SHI, MH, JP unauthorised publicity materials should be removed immediately, leaving behind those approved by LandsD, to avoid illegal occupation of land. In addition, he was concerned with the fact that no enforcement action was taken against irregularities of certain organisations, such as the Falungong. Certain designated spots at strategic locations were prone to illegal occupation, but the department did not remove such illegally placed publicity materials. Furthermore, there were even speculations of well placed designated spots. Dr. SHI hoped that LandsD would look into these problems squarely, and take action against unauthorised publicity materials.

111. The Chairman hoped that Ms. Karen CHAN would forward Members’ opinions to her department for follow-up actions, and suggested LandsD address the problem of unauthorised publicity materials before working on the consultation exercise.

112. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP suggested a funding application be submitted to DFMC for installing aluminium frames that indicated the positions of designated spots.

113. Mr. HO Hon-man hold reservation to Mr. WONG’s suggestion, and opined that frames installed by the Kwun Tong District Council were mainly used to secure publicity signboards. Given the high cost of these frames, he was of the view that Mr. WONG’s suggestion might not applicable to Wong Tai Sin, and said clear marking on railing should be sufficient to indicate spot positions.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 52

114. The Chairman said DFMC might discuss the need for framing the display spots when necessary.

115. Mr. CHAN On-tai reflected that DC members of certain districts had more than ten designated spots. He would like to take this opportunity to ask LandsD to increase the number of display spots assigned to Members of WTSDC.

116. Mr. WONG Kam-chi, MH, JP opined that there was no need to increase the number of designated spots assigned to a DC member as the current provision should be sufficient.

117. The Chairman clarified that Ms. Karen CHAN had indicated that every DC member, regardless of district, had been allocated with 10 designated spots. He thanked Ms. Karen CHAN and representatives of TD for attending the WTSDC meeting, and urged departments concerned to follow up on Members’ views.

(Ms. Karen CHAN, Mr. LEE Ying-hung, Ms. LAM Wai-ling and Mr. LEE Wai-bun left the meeting at this juncture.)

III(vi) Changes in the Membership of the Committees under the Wong Tai Sin District Council (WTSDC Paper 67/2010)

118. Members endorsed the paper.

IV Progress Reports

(i) Progress Reports of the 18th Meeting of the Community Building and Social Services Committee held on 28 September 2010 (WTSDC Paper 68/2010)

119. Members noted the paper.

(ii) Progress Report of the 18th Meeting of the District Facilities Management Committee held on 5 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 69/2010)

120. Members noted the paper.

(iii) Progress Report of the 18th Meeting of the Traffic and Transport Committee held on 12 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 70/2010)

121. Members noted the paper.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 53

(iv) Progress Report of the 18th Meeting of the Finance, General and Economic Affairs Committee held on 19 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 71/2010)

122. Members noted the paper.

(v) Progress Report of the 17th Meeting of the Housing Committee held on 26 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 72/2010)

123. Members noted the paper.

(vi) Progress Report of the 18th Meeting of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Committee held on 2 November 2010 (WTSDC Paper 73/2010)(on table)

124. Members noted the paper.

(vii) Progress Report of the 1st Meeting of the Task Force on Shatin to Central Link held on 19 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 74/2010)

125. Members noted the paper.

(viii) Progress Report of the Wong Tai Sin District Management Committee held on 22 October 2010 (WTSDC Paper 75/2010)

126. Members noted the paper.

V Date of Next Meeting

127. The 20th meeting of WTSDC would be held on 4 January 2011 (Tuesday) at 2:30 p.m.

128. There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

Wong Tai Sin District Council Secretariat Ref: WTSDC 13-5/5/53 Pt.16 December 2010

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 54

Note: Should there be any discrepancies between the Chinese and English versions, the Chinese version shall prevail. This English summary translation is for reference only.

20101213-3_DC[M19]-e 55 Office of District Council Member CHOI Luk-sing, MH NO 105 LUNG POON CRT COMM CTR DIAMOND HILL WONG TAI SIN KLN Tel.: 2324 9090 Fax: 2323 3616

To: Civil Engineering and Development Department Drainage Services Department Planning Department

9 November 2010

Dear Sir / Madam,

Views on Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River

I welcome the Government’s initiative in launching the “Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River”.

However, I am deeply aggrieved that the consultation paper does not mention “Living Water Garden” (LWG) at all.

The concept of LWG was proposed to the Government by the East Kowloon District Residents' Committee more than a decade ago, with a view to improving water quality of Kai Tak River and its environment in general. Inspired by a similar garden built by the Government of Chengdu Municipal, Sichuan more than 20 years ago as an improvement project for Funan River, LWG is more than just an ordinary park. Instead, it is a river training works project that purifies and revitalises the river with the aid of modern technologies, including biological and physical treatment facilities. Moreover, it is also a park that serves educational, environmental protection and leisure purposes.

The Kai Tai River today is not merely a floodway serving Lion Rock and Tsz Wan Shan, it is also an outlet of secondary sewage from Sha Tin Water Treatment Works. Secondary sewage is not clean. In fact, the Tolo Harbour was polluted when such sewage was discharged into it years ago. But why secondary sewage discharged through Kai Tai River does not pollute the Victoria Harbour? One of the reasons lie within the difference in terrain height between Po Kong Village Road and Shatin Pass Road, which stirs up sewage passing through the watercourse between the two roads. As a result, the sewage is aerated and revitalised, and consequently makes the mid and downstream area a scenic spot abundant with birds and fishes.

As the Kai Tak Development project proposed by the Government will also cover the upstream area of the Kai Tak River, I strongly request the Government to build a LWG at the Tai Hom Village site of Diamond Hill, in order to revitalise the upstream watercourse of the river and improve the environment around Tai Hom Village, Diamond Hill.

CHOI Luk-sing Member of Wong Tai Sin District Council

To: Civil Engineering and Development Department Drainage Services Department Planning Department

8 November 2010

Suggestion about Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River

The East Kowloon District Residents' Committee and Community Alliance on Kai Tak Development welcome the “Kai Tak Development – Public Engagement Activities in Relation to the Conceptual Scheme of Kai Tak River” jointly launched by the Civil Engineering and Development Department, the Drainage Services Department and the Planning Department. We are also glad to see that Government departments are adopting the name “Kai Tak River”, which was previously called Kai Tak Nullah. Regarding the improvement project for the Kai Tak River, the concerns of residents and District Council Members in Wong Tai Sin centre on traffic and odour problems in the vicinity of the river.

It comes to our attention that a road widening project will be carried out at Choi Hung Road. Given that the project will effectively improve the traffic condition there, we query whether the decking of upstream (of Kai Tak River) is still necessary.

The Government launched the Tolo Harbour Effluent Export Scheme many years ago. By flushing the Kai Tak River with treated effluents from the Sha Tin Water Treatment Works, it is hoped that odour problem of the river can be alleviated. Secondary sewage effluent is not clean. However, due to the difference in terrain height near the Kowloon Walled City Community Hall, sewage passing through the watercourse there is stirred up, aerated and purified into revitalised water. This not only improves water quality of the Kai Tak River, as evidenced by the abundance of egrets and fishes there, but also prevents the Victoria Harbour from being polluted by the discharge. We hope that this natural revitalisation process can be strengthened, and therefore propose Living Water Garden (LWG), a sewage treatment and revitalisation facility in the form of a park. To purify and revitalise sewage in Kai Tak River, we suggested that two LWGs be built at the vacant site of Tai Hom Village and at the end of the river respectively. In addition, artificial wetland-cum-biological water treatment system, as well as environmental education centre can be provided in the LWGs to show people how turbid water is clarified and revitalised. Besides interacting with water of the Kai Tak River, the public may also learn history of the river and the process of river water purification in the LWGs. Moreover, these LWGs may also serve public education and engagement purposes, through which the message of recycling and saving water can be disseminated.

On the premises of zero traffic impact on Wong Tai Sin and proper handling of sewage, we opine that the Kai Tak River should be treasured and preserved. Therefore, we should be grateful if the Government would consider the above proposal and, consequently benefit the community.

East Kowloon District Residents' Committee Life President LEE Tat-yan President LI Tak-hong Chairman HO Hon-man

Community Alliance on Kai Tak Development CHENG Ping-hung