Appendix III - S Summaries of Written Representations

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

1 S01 – 4 (a) The representations The representation to transfer Block Kwai object to moving 12 of Kwai Shing East Estate Hing Shing Fung House and instead of Shing Fung House and Shing Hei House of Shing Hei House from S02 to S01 is S02 – Kwai Shing East accepted because: Kwai Estate from S02 to (i) the community ties of Kwai Shing S01, and suggest to Shing East Estate can be East maintain the whole of improved; and Estate Kwai Shing East (ii) the resultant population of S01 Estate in S02 because: and S02 will still fall within the (i) the two buildings permissible limits: are situated on a slope while the S01: 16,609 (-3.40%) rest of S01 is not; S02: 19,899 (+15.73%) (ii) the community integrity would be The representation to retain the impaired by whole Kwai Shing East Estate in separating Kwai S02 is not accepted because the Shing East Estate resultant population of S02 would into 2 DCCAs; be 22,793, which exceeds the upper and permissible limit (+32.56%). (iii) S01 comprises mostly private housing estates, which have different community concerns.

(b) One of the four representations proposes to even out the population of S01 and S02 by transferring Block 12 of Kwai Shing East Estate to S01 (instead of Shing Fung House and Shing Hei House) as it is an interim housing block and the residents’ sense of

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

belonging to the estate is relatively weaker.

2 S04 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Lower Tai supports the demarcation Wo Hau proposals for S04.

3 S08 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Shek Lei supports the demarcation Extension proposals for S08.

4 S08 – 3 These representations The representations are not Shek Lei suggest to: accepted because the resultant Extension (a) retain Shek Yan population of S08 would be 22,010, House of Shek Lei which exceeds the upper permissible S09 – Estate in S09; and limit (+28.01%). Shek Lei instead (b) move Shek Tai House of Shek Lei Estate from S09 to S08 to maintain geographical integrity.

5 S08 – 10 Ten representations object The representations are accepted Shek Lei to allocating Kwai Ching because: Extension House of Kwai Fong (a) the original S11 comprises the Estate from S11 to S15 whole of Kwai Fong Estate and S11 – because: some industrial buildings which Kwai (a) this would affect the are sparsely populated. The Fong unity of the whole local community ties estate, as all other established among residents of S15 – blocks are situated in Kwai Fong Estate could be Hing S11; and preserved by retaining Kwai Fong (b) the nature of Kwai Ching House (the only Ching House, which is separated block) in S11; a public housing (b) Greenknoll Court is physically block, and the needs separated from Kwai Fong of its residents would Estate by industrial buildings, be different from all but close to other residential others in S15, which settlements in S08; and are all private (c) if Shek Yan House of Shek Lei buildings. Estate is also retained in S09 under item 18, the boundaries One of the representations of the DCCAs of S08, S09, S11 also objects to transferring and S15 can remain the same as Greenknoll Court from those in 1999. S08 to S11 as it is

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

geographically far away In accepting these representations, from Kwai Fong Estate in the EAC has also taken the S11, and suggests retaining following into consideration: the existing DCCA (i) the resultant population of two boundary for S11. of the DCCAs would slightly exceed the 25% deviation limits: S09: 21,611 (+25.69%) S11: 21,745 (+26.47%); and (ii) there is a representation supporting the demarcation proposals for S08 (see item 3).

6 S09 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Shek Lei supports the demarcation proposals for S09.

7 S11 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Kwai proposes to transfer Kwai so as to preserve the community Fong Ming House from S11 to integrity of Kwai Fong Estate (see S15 to preserve item 5). S15 – community integrity and Hing the population distribution Fong between the two DCCAs.

8 S12 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Lai Yiu suggests to include because there has been a very strong Wonderland Villas in S12 and well established sense of S13 – instead of S13, because the affiliation of the residents of Lai Wah residents of Wonderland Wonderland Villas with the Villas share common community in this DCCA. transportation facilities and concerns over living environment with those of Wah Yuen Chuen and Regency Park in S12.

9 S14 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Cho Yiu supports the demarcation proposals for S14.

10 S19 – 2 The representations object The representation is not accepted Wai Ying to allocating Serene because: Garden to S21 because: (i) if Serene Garden is not S21 – (a) Serene Garden was in transferred out of the existing Greenfield the same constituency S19, the population of S19 with Greedfield would be 22,348, which

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Garden in 1994, but exceeds the upper permissible was then transferred to limit (+29.98%); and the existing S19 in (ii) geographically, Serene Garden 1999. Putting it back is contiguous to Greenfield to the constituency of Garden and Grand Horizon in Greenfield Garden S21. would break the community ties established with the existing S19 over the past years; (b) the residents of Serene Garden and those of S21 use different transportation and community facilities; (c) the work of the Owners’ Corporation would be more difficult with a consequential change of the responsible Area Committee; (d) the increase in population of the existing S19 is due to the recent completion of Tierra Verde but not Serene Garden; and (e) a low turnout rate for polling would be expected because there are residents not supporting the demarcation proposal. The representations also suggest retaining Serene Garden in S19 even though the resultant population of S19 would exceed the permissible limits, as this is also allowed for some other DCCAs.

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

11 S20 – 3 The representations The supporting views are noted. Tsing Yi support the demarcation Estate proposals for S20.

12 S22 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Cheung supports the demarcation Ching proposals for S22.

13 S23 – 1 This representation The representation is not accepted Cheung proposes to: because it would affect the unaltered Hong (a) transfer Hong Fung boundaries of S23 and S24. House of Cheung S24 – Hong Estate and Shing Ching Shing Court Hong from S24 to S23; and (b) transfer Mount Haven S25 – and Cheung Wang Tsing Yi Estate from S25 to South S24 because: (i) the resultant population of S23, S24 and S25 would be closer to the population quota; and (ii) the proposal can cater for the sharp population increase of Cheung Wang Estate by the end of 2003.

14 S25 – 2 Proposal (a) The proposals are not accepted Tsing Yi One of these two because: South representations objects to (i) although the proposed S25 allocating Cheung Wang covers a large area, its S26 – Estate and Mount Haven to population of 21,222 (+23.43%) Cheung S25 because: is within the permissible limits; Hang (i) the area covered by (ii) if Cheung Wang Estate is not the existing S25 is the transferred out of the existing largest in the district, S26, the population of S26 and the population of would be 22,959, which the proposed S25 is exceeds the upper permissible too large to be limit (+33.53%); and managed by one DC (iii) there are supporting views for member; S26 (see item 15).

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

(ii) the population of S25 The REO will take note of the would further increase representations when identifying the in the future upon location for the polling station in completion of the S25. remaining blocks of Cheung Wang Estate; (iii) because of the scattered population, there would be difficulties in allocating resources for community activities in the proposed S25; and (iv) it is difficult to find a suitable location for the polling station in S25 because of the scattered population.

Proposal (b) The other one representation proposes to maintain Cheung Wang Estate in S26 to preserve geographical integrity and improve the population distribution between the DCCAs.

15 S26 – 2 The representations The supporting views are noted. Cheung support the demarcation Hang proposals for S26.

Kwai Tsing District Oral Representations Received at the Public Forum on 24 January 2003

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

16 S01 – 1 Same as item 1. See item 1. Kwai Hing

S02 – Kwai Shing East Estate

17 S06 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Shek Yam supports the demarcation proposals for S06.

18 S08 – 2 The representations The representation to retain Shek Shek Lei suggest to: Yan House in S09 is accepted Extension (a) retain Shek Yan because: House of Shek Lei (i) by retaining Shek Yan House in S09 – Estate in S09 so as to S09, the community integrity of Shei Lei preserve the Shek Lei Estate can be community integrity preserved; of Shek Lei Estate; (ii) Shek Yan House is far away and from the major residential (b) if part of Shek Lei settlement in S08; and Estate in S09 is to be (iii) if Shek Yan House is retained given to S06, it may in S09 and Greenknoll Court is be better to give Shek retained in S08 under item 5, On House, Shek Tai both S08 and S09 can remain House, or one of the unaltered; two interim housing notwithstanding that: blocks instead of Shek (i) the population in S09 will Yan House, as the become 21,611 (+25.69%), latter is far away from which is marginally over the the major residential upper permissible limit; and settlement in S08. (ii) there are supporting views for the provisional proposals for S08 and S09 (see items 3 and 6).

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

19 S11 – 4 Same as item 5. See item 5. Kwai Fong

S15 – Hing Fong

20 S19 – 1 Same as item 10. See item 10. Wai Ying

S21 – Greenfield

21 S24 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Shing supports the demarcation Hong proposals for S24.

22 S25 – 1 This representation REO will take this into Tsing Yi suggests that there should consideration when identifying the South be one polling station for locations of polling stations for S25. each of the four major housing estates in S25 because they are located far away from one another.

23 S25 – 1 Same as proposal (b) in See item 14. Tsing Yi item 14. South

S26 – Cheung Hang

Views Expressed by District Council Members at the Meeting of the Kwai Tsing District Council on 27 January 2003

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

24 S01 – 2 Same as item 1. See item 1. Kwai Hing

S02 – Kwai Shing East Estate

25 S04 – 1 Same as item 2. See item 2. Lower Tai Wo Hau

26 S06 – 1 The representation suggests The representation is accepted Shek Yam to transferring the squatter because: area in S06 to S07 because: (i) the resultant population would S07 – (a) the area belonged to be within the permissible limits On Yam S07 in the 1994 District and the distribution would be Boards Election; and more even: (b) it is geographically S06: 19,889 (+15.67%) closer to On Yam Estate S07: 19,520 (+13.53%); and in S07 than S06. (ii) the geographical ties between the squatter area and On Yam Estate can be maintained.

27 S08 – 1 The representation objects to See item 5. Shek Lei transferring Greenknoll Extension Court from S08 to S11 because it has closer S11 – community ties with Shek Kwai Lei Estate rather than with Fong Kwai Fong Estate.

28 S08 – 1 Same as item 5. See item 5. Shek Lei Extension

S11 – Kwai Fong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

S15 – Hing Fong

29 S11 – 1 The representation suggests Proposal (a) Kwai to: The proposal is not accepted as no Fong (a) transfer substantial reason in support of Police Married Quarters improvements to community ties is S15 – from S12 to S15; and given. Hing (b) transfer Kwai Ching Fong House of Kwai Fong Proposal (b) Estate from S15 to S11. See item 5.

30 S12 – 1 This representation proposes The representation is not accepted Lai Yiu to: because: (a) transfer Lai King (i) no substantial reason in support S14 – Disciplined Services of improvements to community Cho Yiu Quarters from S14 to ties is given; S12; and (ii) it would affect the boundary of (b) transfer Kwai Chung S14 which is unaltered; and Police Married Quarters (iii) there is one representation from S12 to S15, supporting the demarcation because Lai King proposals for S14 (see item 9). Disciplined Services Quarters, as compared with Kwai Chung Police Married Quarters, are much closer to Lai Yiu Estate in S12.

31 S19 – 1 Same as item 10. See item 10. Wai Ying

S21 – Greenfield

32 S22 – 1 Same as item 12. See item 12. Cheung Ching

33 S22 – 2 These representations The representations are not accepted Cheung propose to: because: Ching (a) transfer Mayfair (i) the boundaries of S22 and S23, Gardens from S25 to which are both unaltered under S23 – S22; and the provisional Cheung (b) transfer Ching Yeung recommendations, would be Hong House and Ching Mui affected; and House of Cheung Ching (ii) Cheung Ching Estate would

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

S25 – Estate from S22 to S23 then be split into two DCCAs. Tsing Yi if necessary because: South (i) Mayfair Gardens is far away from Cheung Wang Estate in S25; and (ii) it would be difficult for the DC member of S25 to take care of the needs of all major estates therein.

34 S25 – 1 Same as proposal (a) in item See item 14. Tsing Yi 14. South

35 S26 – 1 Same as item 15. See item 15. Cheung Hang

36 Commun- 3 These representations Due regard has already been paid to ity suggest that community such factors. consider- integrity, local ties, ations community identities and geographical features should be considered in delineating constituency boundaries.

37 Designat- 2 These representations The REO will take these into ion of suggest the following: consideration when identifying polling (a) no more than one locations for polling stations. stations polling station should be designated for one housing estate so as to avoid confusion to residents; (b) the number of polling stations in S12 should not be increased even though the area covered is large, as candidates could hardly cope with the situation on the polling day in the event that there are too many polling stations; and

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

(c) the polling station to be designated for S23 should not be set up on the hilly slope as before and should be easily accessible and convenient to residents.

38 Boundary 1 This representation suggests The representation is not accepted Descript- that the estimated population because including the estimated ions of each major estate/area be population of only major estate/area included in the boundary in the boundary descriptions would descriptions for reference by not give readers a full picture of the DC members in the future. DCCA, while it is impracticable to include the populations of all settlements therein.

39 District 2 These representations The subject is outside the EAC’s Boundary suggest that the district jurisdiction. boundary between Kwai Tsing and Sham Shui Po, which bisects Nob Hill, should be reviewed.

40 Working 1 This representation suggests The location of polling station and principles that the following two voter turnout are not considerations for factors should also be in delineating DCCAs. demarcat- included as working ion principles for demarcation: (i) designation of polling stations; and (ii) the effect on the voter turnout rate.