Minutes of the 16th Meeting of the Traffic, Transport and Housing Committee of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council (2016-2019)

Date: 13 September 2018 (Thursday) Time: 2:30 p.m. Venue: Yau Tsim Mong District Council Conference Room 4/F, Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street Mong Kok,

Present:

Vice-chairman (Acting Chairman) Ms KWAN Sau-ling

District Council Members Ms WONG Shu-ming, MH Mr JO Chun-wah, Craig Mr CHAN Siu-tong, MH, JP Mr LAM Kin-man Mr CHOI Siu-fung, Benjamin Mr LAU Pak-kei Mr CHOW Chun-fai, BBS, JP Ms TANG Ming-sum, Michelle Mr CHUNG Chak-fai Mr WONG Kin-san Mr CHUNG Kong-mo, BBS, JP Mr YEUNG Tsz-hei, Benny, MH Mr HUI Tak-leung Mr YU Tak-po, Andy Mr HUNG Chiu-wah, Derek

Co-opted Members Mr CHUI Kin-man Mr LEE Chung-ming Ms FUNG Lai-mei Ms LI Suk-har Mr LAW Siu-hung, Paul, MH Mr POON King-wo, Alex

Representatives of the Government Miss CHUNG Ka-wing, Assistant District Officer (Yau Tsim Home Affairs Department Rainy Mong) (2) Ms CHUNG Wai-sze, Senior Liaison Officer (2), Yau Tsim Home Affairs Department Margaret Mong District Office Mr TONG Wing-po Senior Liaison Officer (Building Home Affairs Department Management), Yau Tsim Mong District Office Mr TAI Seung-kun Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei Transport Department Mr CHOW Ka-lok, Vincent Engineer/Yau Tsim Transport Department Mr TAM Ka-kei, Eric Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Transport Department Mong

Mr CHENG Wai-yuen Assistant District Operations Officer Police Force (Yau Tsim District) Ms YAU Hoi-yan, Leanne Inspector of Police, Operations Hong Kong Police Force (Mong Kok District) Mr LAU Chi-wing, Ringo Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Hong Kong Police Force Team (Mong Kok District) Mr LAU Hoi-wa Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Hong Kong Police Force Team (Yau Tsim District) Mr NG Chun-ling District Engineer/Mong Kok Highways Department Mr LAU Tak-yin District Engineer/Yau Tsim Highways Department Miss CHENG Kwok-lan Housing Manager/Kowloon West Housing Department and Sai Kung 3 Mr TANG Hung-wai, Benny Senior Structural Engineer/F1 Buildings Department

In Attendance:

Mr POON Yau-man, Senior Building Surveyor/Mandatory Buildings Department Norman Building Inspection 2-C (Acting) Ms WU Lai-fan, Grace Senior Health Inspector (Joint Joint Office of Buildings Office)/Mong Kok Department and Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Ms Peggy WONG Assistant Manager (Planning and Kowloon Motor Bus Development) Company (1933) Limited Mr LAM Yam-on, Jim Senior Project Surveyor/Kowloon Lands Department West (District Lands Office, Kowloon West) Mr Derek SUN Head, Planning and Development Cultural District Authority Mr Billy CHEUNG Senior Manager, Property West Kowloon Cultural Development District Authority Mr Vincent LO Manager, Property Development West Kowloon Cultural District Authority Mr TSUI Man-kwong, Wick Building Surveyor/Signboard Buildings Department Control 4

Secretary Ms YICK Alice Executive Officer (District Home Affairs Department Council) 1, Yau Tsim Mong District Office

Absent:

Mr CHONG Wing-charn, District Council Member (Chairman) Francis, MH Mr IP Ngo-tung, Chris, JP District Council Member Mr TONG Yik-kan Co-opted Member

- 2 -

Opening Remarks

The Vice-chairman welcomed Members, government representatives and those in attendance to the meeting. She said that the Chairman had other commitments and would not be able to attend and chair this meeting. She asked Members whether they agreed that she took over the chairmanship for this meeting. There was no objection.

2. The Acting Chairman reported that Mr Chris IP was unable to attend the meeting due to other commitments. In addition, Miss Katherine PONG, Assistant District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) (1), was unable to attend the meeting due to other commitments and Miss Rainy CHUNG, Assistant District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) (2), would attend the meeting in her place. She then welcomed Ms Margaret CHUNG, Senior Liaison Officer (2) of the Yau Tsim Mong District Office (“YTMDO”), Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei, and Mr Vincent CHOW, Engineer/Yau Tsim, of the Transport Department (“TD”) as well as Mr LAU Tak-yin, District Engineer/Yau Tsim of the Highways Department (“HyD”), for attending the meeting of the Traffic, Transport and Housing Committee (“TTHC”) for the first time. She said that later in the discussion on the agenda items, she would introduce the government representatives present and those invited to attend the meeting.

3. The Acting Chairman said that there were quite a number of items to be discussed and asked Members to keep their speeches precise. She then suggested that Members who had submitted papers be given two minutes to make additional remarks, and that each Member be allowed to speak twice on each item: two minutes for the first speech and one minute for the second one. There was no objection.

4. The Acting Chairman said that the audio record of the meeting would be uploaded onto the website of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council (“YTMDC”). Moreover, according to the Standing Orders, the Chairman could issue warnings to Members or members of the public attending or observing the meeting who acted in a disorderly manner and interrupted the proceedings of the meeting. If the warnings were not heeded, the Chairman could order such persons to leave the venue.

Item 1: Confirmation of Minutes of Last Meeting

5. The minutes of the last meeting were confirmed without amendments.

Item 2: Matter Arising: － “Cracks in the Ceiling Left to Deteriorate Continuously Nobody’s Problem Until People Get Killed and Building Collapse?” (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 59/2018)

6. The Acting Chairman said that the written responses of the Buildings Department (“BD”) and the Joint Office of Buildings Department and Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“Joint Office”) (Annexes 1 and 2) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed:

- 3 - (a) Mr Benny TANG, Senior Structural Engineer/F1, and Mr Norman POON, Senior Building Surveyor/Mandatory Building Inspection 2-C (Acting), of the BD; and (b) Ms Grace WU, Senior Health Inspector (Joint Office)/Mong Kok of the Joint Office.

7. Mr Norman POON briefly introduced the written response of the BD.

8. Ms Grace WU briefly introduced the written response of the Joint Office set up by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department and the BD.

9. Ms WONG Shu-ming raised the following views: (i) she thanked the department concerned for giving a serious response and conducting water seepage investigation at the subject location. Residents were worried that water seepage at the canopy would result in concrete spalling. However, she was dissatisfied that at the last meeting the department had said that the location suspected of water seepage was six metres above ground and no test could be conducted. She considered that the Government had abundant resources and tests should be conducted; (ii) she hoped that the department could follow up as to whether this “three-nil” building had executed the order. If the order was not executed before the deadline, the department should first carry out the works and then recover the expenses from the owner; and (iii) as this case had been reported by the media, she hoped that the department could seriously respond to Members’ questions in future.

10. Mr WONG Kin-san asked whether the case was followed up because Ms WONG Shu-ming and the media showed concerns or it was handled according to the departmental policy. He asked whether the department insisted on not conducting tests at any location six metres above ground.

(Mr Craig JO joined the meeting at 2:44 p.m.)

11. Ms Grace WU responded that according to the investigation procedures of the Joint Office, the complainants must assist the officers of the Joint Office in conducting investigation at the location affected by water seepage as far as possible. Due to building safety consideration, the Joint Office attempted to use a new method to measure the moisture content in this case. The trial result of the new method was satisfactory, and the Joint Office had referred the method to its task force for consideration. The task force would review the methods for water seepage tests from time to time. If there was any progress, the Joint Office would report to the public and Members.

12. Mr Norman POON said that water seepage tests fell within the purview of the Joint Office and the BD had nothing to add.

13. Mr WONG Kin-san said that at the last meeting, the department concerned had said that the location of water seepage was more than six metres above ground and therefore no test and follow-up action could be taken, but he considered it a strange reason. He asked further whether the department would take follow-up action if the location of water seepage was again more than six metres above ground in a future case, or the department would refuse to take follow-up action because of the height.

14. Ms Grace WU responded that as she had just said, the Joint Office conducted the test with a new method this time. The method had been passed to the Joint Office’s task force for review, and the Joint Office would consider whether the method was suitable for carrying

- 4 - out tests at locations with high ceilings in future.

15. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant departmental representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 3: Request for Widening of Footpath beside Bus Stop at Kowloon Portal of Western Harbour Tunnel (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 66/2018)

16. The Acting Chairman said that the written responses of the TD, the Marine Department and the Western Harbour Tunnel Company Limited (Annexes 3 to 5) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei of the TD.

17. Mr Derek HUNG briefly introduced the paper.

18. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that there were many underground utilities at the location mentioned in the paper and the HyD had indicated difficulties in erecting a road sign. The HyD would conduct underground investigation and, if a suitable location was identified, erect a speed reduction sign according to the plan of the TD. The erection works were expected to be completed within one week’s time. The actual situation would depend on whether there was sufficient underground space for installing the sign post.

(Mr Benjamin CHOI joined the meeting at 2:50 p.m.)

19. Mr Derek HUNG hoped that the TD could continue to identify a suitable location for installing the sign. In addition, he asked if a sign could not be installed, whether a speed bump could be provided or a “Slow” marking could be painted on the road first.

20. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that regardless of a permanent or a temporary road sign, it must be fixed into the ground. Therefore, it would be subject to the locations of underground utilities. The facilities not fixed into the ground might collapse due to strong wind, which would affect traffic safety. Hence, the issue of safety must be taken into account for the provision of temporary facilities.

21. Mr Derek HUNG said that the department had misunderstood his meaning. He did not suggest providing temporary facilities and, on the contrary, considered that it was more desirable to provide permanent facilities. He reiterated that he suggested painting a “Slow” marking on the road or providing a speed bump.

22. Ms WONG Shu-ming considered that there would be no difficulty in painting a “Slow” marking on the road and hoped that the department could take action as soon as possible. She expressed understanding that underground utilities had to be taken into account for the erection of railings as difficulties might arise.

23. The Acting Chairman suggested TD officers and Mr Derek HUNG, who had submitted the paper, have a site inspection together to follow up on the situation.

24. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that he would inform the relevant officers to take

- 5 - follow-up action and contact Mr Derek HUNG for a site inspection to find out whether a road marking could be painted to remind drivers.

25. The Acting Chairman thanked the TD representative for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 4: Strong Request for Vigorous Police Action against Illegally Parked Vehicles at Junction of Shantung Street / Kam Lam Street (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 67/2018)

26. The Acting Chairman said that the written response of the Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) (Annex 6) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed:

(a) Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei of the TD; and (b) Ms Leanne YAU, Inspector of Police, Operation (Mong Kok District), and Mr Ringo LAU, Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Team (Mong Kok District), of the HKPF.

27. Mr HUI Tak-leung briefly introduced the paper. He added that the illegal parking problem at the captioned location had affected the elderly people walking past there.

28. Mr Ringo LAU responded as follows:

(i) From January to September 2018, a total of 375 fixed penalty tickets had been issued at the subject location by the Mong Kok Police District, more than the 253 fixed penalty tickets issued from January to July 2017. On average, 36.1 fixed penalty tickets were issued per month in 2017, while 41.6 fixed penalty tickets were issued per month in 2018.

(ii) Under the policy of Selected Traffic Enforcement Priorities, the Police would take resolute enforcement action against traffic contraventions. If illegal parking was found at the junction, the Police would instruct the driver to drive the vehicle away. If the driver was not there, the Police would issue tickets. If the situation was serious and affected the movement of other vehicles or the safety of others, the Police would tow away the vehicle.

29. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that after the discussion at a Council meeting last year, the TD had prepared a plan according to the established procedures, providing a 24-hour restricted zone before the crossing facilities at the junction of Kam Lam Street and Shantung Street. On 16 April this year, the TD had issued a works request to the HyD. According to the reply of the HyD, the works had been completed on 6 September.

30. Mr HUI Tak-leung raised the following views: (i) it was not difficult to paint double yellow lines, but the TD had been procrastinating on the matter; and (ii) at the crossroads shown in the photos in the paper, there was a barrier-free access for elderly people, wheelchair users and baby pram users. The figures provided by the Police were about the prosecution actions taken around Kam Lam Street rather than those targeted at illegal parking at the crossroads. He considered that it was selfish to park illegally at the crossroads as the needs of others were ignored. The public had to make detours, which would give rise to

- 6 - danger. He said that illegal parking was still found there, and he was pleased to have a site inspection with the Police if necessary. The Police should not take follow-up actions only after a paper had been submitted by a Member.

(Ms Michelle TANG joined the meeting at 3:01 p.m.)

(Mr Benny YEUNG joined the meeting at 3:02 p.m.)

31. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he shared the views of Mr HUI Tak-leung. He said that the TD should take forward the proposals of Members as soon as possible, rather than taking follow-up action only when a paper was submitted by a Member; and (ii) he was concerned about the illegal parking problem at the dropped kerbs for use by persons with disabilities. He asked whether the TD had any plan to legislate for the designation of such crossing areas as no-parking areas to ensure that the people in need could use the roads.

32. Mr Ringo LAU responded as follows:

(i) The figures provided by the Police were the prosecution figures of Kam Lam Street only, not involving any prosecution actions taken at other streets.

(ii) If a vehicle was found being parked illegally at a crossing, the Police would take a series of traffic control measures to handle the case. If the driver was not on site and the vehicle affected other road users, the Police would tow the vehicle away.

(iii) When Police officers took enforcement actions, they would move around the district but not station at one single location. The Police had launched a “barrier-free programme” (literal translation) to combat offences at the traffic black spots in the district.

(iv) Some drivers did not comply with the law and caused road traffic problems. If drivers exercised self-discipline, traffic problems would be reduced.

33. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that under the current legislation, stopping vehicles on the road (except designated parking spaces) was an offence, and the Police were empowered to issue tickets.

34. Mr Benny YEUNG said that drivers were particularly sensitive to double yellow lines, and he considered that the proposal of painting double yellow lines at the turn of the crossing in the paper was reasonable without technical difficulty. The department should take forward the proposal first.

35. Mr HUI Tak-leung said that the proposal of painting double yellow lines was to better facilitate the enforcement actions of the Police, but after one year, the department did not seem to know why the proposal was made by Members. He was dissatisfied that TD’s response did not address the core issue of the question.

36. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said that as explained by the TD representative, other than designated parking spaces, vehicles should not be parked on the road, otherwise it was an offence. In this case, he enquired about the meaning for providing single yellow lines and double yellow lines. He said that a number of Members suggested painting double yellow

- 7 - lines at the turn of the crossing, and hoped that the Police could step up enforcement and institute prosecution at the location.

37. Mr Ringo LAU responded that the Police would step up enforcement. If there was illegal parking, they would issue tickets without tolerance.

38. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant government departments for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 5: Calling for Enhancement of Public Transport Services for Increase and Improvement of Frequency of Public Bus and Green Minibus Routes Serving Tai Kok Tsui (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 68/2018)

39. The Acting Chairman welcomed Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD.

40. Mr LAU Pak-kei briefly introduced the paper. He supplemented that during morning peak hours, many residents would wait for green minibuses of Route No. 46 at Sham Mong Road, and he hoped that the TD and the minibus operator could seek to strengthen the service to meet the demand of passengers.

41. Mr Benjamin CHOI briefly introduced the paper. He supplemented that there had been no planning in Tai Kok Tsui district before, and no major public transport interchange was available. Although residents could walk to Prince Edward, Mong Kok or Olympic MTR Stations, those stations were not close to Tai Kok Tsui. Following a number of redevelopment projects in Tai Kok Tsui, together with the progressive completion of new buildings, the transport demands of residents would increase. As many related complaints had been received, he hoped that the TD could respond to their requests.

42. Mr Eric TAM responded as follows:

(i) The TD was aware of many new residential development projects in the West Kowloon area (including Tai Kok Tsui, Mong Kok West and Sham Shui Po), and the department was concerned with the operation of transport services and passenger demand in the district. If there was a significant passenger demand, the TD would have more bargaining power to negotiate with bus companies in operating or adjusting services in future, which in turn benefited the residents in the West Kowloon area as a whole.

(ii) The department was concerned with the bus routes stated by Members in the paper. Although bus companies hoped to adjust their services from time to time, the department would perform the gate-keeping duty to adjust service frequencies subject to actual circumstances in the bus route development plan.

(iii) As there were fewer and fewer new minibus drivers, the minibus operator said that while they hoped to enhance service, the prerequisite was the supply of sufficient drivers.

- 8 - After the legislation on increasing the seating capacity of minibuses to 19 seats had been enacted last year, Minibus Route Nos. 12A, 12B, 12S, 46 and 70 were seeking to replace the vehicles to increase carrying capacity and enhance services.

(iv) For the proposal of providing extra en-route stops for Bus Route Nos. 904 and 905, the TD understood the strong requests from the local community. The department would study the proposal, but the bus company was concerned with the impact on journey time, as well as bus operation and deployment. The situation was similar for Route No. A21. The bus company had to consider whether the re-routing would affect service frequency if extra en-route stops were provided.

(v) The TD noted the issue of carrying capacity of Minibus Route No. 46, and had studied different options with the minibus operator, including flexible service frequency and increase in the number of vehicles, but the community demand could not be met. Hence, the department had introduced a bus service, i.e. Route No. 20 operated by the Citybus Limited (“Citybus”) running between and Kai Tak, to enhance the connection between Kowloon East and Kowloon West, and cope with the transport demand in the vicinity of Argyle Street and Waterloo Road, so as to alleviate the pressure on Minibus Route No. 46 while providing another transport option for the community.

(vi) For the proposal of providing interchange concession, the Government had all along been encouraging public transport operators to introduce more concessionary interchange schemes and provide different forms of concession for passengers. Some minibus routes in the district were planning to provide new interchange concessions, and he hoped that other public transport operators would provide similar concessions.

43. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said that Bus Route Nos. 2E, 12 and 914 ran via his constituency. Every year in the review of the Bus Route Planning Programme, Members would express their dissatisfaction with the services of the above routes and request that improvement be made to the inadequate service frequencies. The issue had been raised for more than a decade, but there was still a large room for improvement. He urged the TD to discuss with the bus companies and instruct the bus companies to enhance the services of the above bus routes, so as to make improvement as soon as possible.

44. Mr LAU Pak-kei raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the service frequencies of Bus Route Nos. 2E and 18 were too low, and the waiting time for Bus Route No. 18 might take more than 20 minutes, so improvement should be made immediately; (ii) he understood that there was a shortage of minibus drivers, and asked whether the replacement progress for 19-seat minibus could be speeded up; and (iii) the residents in Tai Kok Tsui considered that there must be both departure and return trips for Bus Route Nos. 904, 905 and A21, so he hoped that the bus company would give due consideration. He said that as successful efforts had been made for the provision of both departure and return trips of Bus Route No. E21 serving Tai Kok Tsui, he believed that as long as the bus company indicated willingness, the bus services in Tai Kok Tsui could be improved.

45. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai said residents kept reporting that the waiting time for Bus

- 9 - Route No. 18 was too long, even more than 30 minutes. The waiting time was even longer than the journey time, which was highly undesirable. He hoped that the TD would continue to follow up and handle the issue. Moreover, he said that the service of Bus Route No. 2E was also unsatisfactory and requested the TD to follow up.

46. Mr Eric TAM responded as follows:

(i) The TTHC had discussed the service of KMB Route No. 18 earlier, but the response of the bus company was discouraging. The TD hoped to request improvement of service frequency together with Members.

(ii) The TD had all along performed its gate-keeping duty and had not approved the KMB to reduce the service frequencies of Bus Route Nos. 2E and 12. Apart from the demand for Route Nos. 2E and 12 in Tai Kok Tsui and Mong Kok West, the new development projects at the locations of the termini of the two bus routes (i.e. Pak Tin and Hoi Lai Estate) were expected to generate some passenger demand.

(iii) The TD would encourage minibus operators to actively speed up the pace of replacing their fleets with 19-seat minibuses. The pace of vehicle replacement for some routes in the district was satisfactory, while some was slow. It mainly depended on whether the minibus operators made active efforts in that or not.

47. Mr HUI Tak-leung said the TD officer had just mentioned that the department would perform its gate-keeping duty in respect of bus services but the responses of some bus companies were discouraging. He queried about the functions of the TD, what the punishment would be if a bus company did not listen to the suggestions of the TD, and whether the TD would cancel the bus company’s operating right of the bus route concerned. He was clear about the rules of the game that the department was only putting up a “show” and giving its own account of the matter. He considered that bus companies were under the management of the TD and the department had the right to terminate their services.

48. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said that Bus Route No. 2E would run via Hoi Wang Road, and it was the only bus route travelling to Jordan Road, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, To Kwa Wan and Hung Hom. Many members of the public would take this route, therefore he hoped that the TD could seek to enhance its frequency. In his view, if the bus frequency was enhanced, the route could attract more passengers.

49. Mr CHUI Kin-man considered that Bus Route No. 2E was more important than Bus Route No. 12, because Minibus Route No. 72 could replace the service of Bus Route No. 12 but only Bus Route No. 2E travelled to Jordan Road.

50. Ms FUNG Lai-mei said local residents opined that Bus Route Nos. 2E and 18 were as slow as a snail, and both the waiting time and the journey time were long. TD’s response showed that it seemed difficult for the department to manage the bus company, so she suggested that the operation of those routes should be taken up by another bus company.

51. Mr Eric TAM responded that the bus company would certainly hope to cancel the routes incurring losses, but the needs of residents took priority and the TD would not allow the bus company to cancel the routes at will. For the change of bus company, it was subject to the constraints of the relevant policy and bus franchise. As different bus companies

- 10 - joined in providing bus services in Mong Kok West, under market competition, he believed that it would increase the motivation of bus companies to improve their services.

52. The Acting Chairman thanked the TD representative for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 6: Strong Request for Frequency Increase on Bus Route No. 2E (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 69/2018)

53. The Acting Chairman said that the written response of the Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited (“KMB”) (Annex 7) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD; and (b) Ms Peggy WONG, Assistant Manager (Planning and Development) of the KMB.

54. Mr Andy YU briefly introduced the paper. He asked why this paper was not combined for discussion with the previous item. He supplemented that Bus Route No. 2E had commenced service in 1961, with a history of 57 years. In March 2017, the TD had agreed to the frequency reduction by the KMB, while the Kowloon City, Sham Shui Po and Yau Tsim Mong District Councils had all raised objection at that time. With profits of $1.3 billion, the KMB still applied for a fare increase of 8.5% in September, but there was no improvement to the service. On 3 September, the first school day, he had observed many members of the public taking Bus Route No. 2E at Hoi Wang Road, which had reflected the keen public demand for the service of the route.

55. Ms Peggy WONG responded as follows:

(i) She clarified that the KMB had to increase or reduce the frequencies of its services in accordance with TD’s requirements and guidelines, and did not agree that the KMB only reduced service frequencies without increasing.

(ii) As bus-only lanes were not available on every road, buses had to share the same road with other vehicles, and were thus affected by traffic congestion or diversion from time to time. The KMB had found operational problems with Bus Route No. 2E early this year, and adjusted the schedule in March accordingly in order to provide a stable bus service for passengers. The KMB had been closely monitoring the service of Bus Route No. 2E. After the implementation of the new schedule, the lost trip rate had been reduced, and the stability of service frequencies in different time periods had been greatly increased.

(iii) Some Members hoped that the frequency of KMB Route No. 2E could be increased, and the KMB was closely monitoring the impact of the newly-completed West Kowloon Station of the Express Rail Link (“XRL”) and the Pak Tin Estate redevelopment project on the patronage of the route. If the patronage met TD’s guidelines for frequency increase, the KMB would propose frequency adjustment.

- 11 -

56. Mr Eric TAM responded that same as the KMB, the TD was closely monitoring the impact of the XRL Station and the Pak Tin Estate redevelopment project on Bus Route No. 2E. If there was an increase in passenger demand, the department would request the bus company to increase the service frequency of the bus route.

57. Mr HUI Tak-leung said the KMB stated that service frequencies were adjusted according to TD’s guidelines, while the TD stated that it had urged the KMB to make improvement, yet the KMB’s response was undesirable. He considered that both parties actually shifted their responsibilities, and Members were at a loss as to which side they could trust. He asked the Chairman to clarify the role of the department, otherwise the discussion would be fruitless. He also suggested the Chairman ask the TD and the KMB which party actually exercised monitoring.

58. Mr Andy YU agreed to clarify the role of the monitor first, otherwise it would be a waste of time to carry out discussion.

59. The Acting Chairman said that the TD had clearly expressed its role as a monitor, while the KMB executed the decisions of the TD. However, whether the TD had fully exercised its monitoring power would be left to Members to comment.

60. Mr HUI Tak-leung supplemented that the TD representative had requested the KMB to make service improvement, but KMB’s response was undesirable. However, the KMB said that the adjustment of bus frequencies were made according to TD’s guidelines. He opined that the TD and the KMB shifted their responsibilities and fooled Members.

61. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said that the responses of the TD and the KMB were disappointing. The TD was responsible for monitoring the operation of bus services, while the KMB acted according to TD’s guidelines. The TD representative had all along listened to the complaints on Bus Route No. 2E relayed by Members. He asked the TD representative to clearly request the KMB to enhance the frequency of Bus Route No. 2E at the meeting, followed by a response from the KMB representative.

62. Mr CHOW Chun-fai said that the TD had the responsibility to monitor public bus companies, and Members hereby requested increasing the frequency of Bus Route No. 2E as many Members had received complaints from residents on the service of the route. He requested the TD to report the number of departures of Bus Route No. 2E (including peak and non-peak hours). For Members’ request for frequency increase, it should be clearly recorded in the minutes. The TD should instruct the KMB to increase frequency. If the KMB failed to do so, the TTHC should deal with the matter at a higher level.

63. Mr LEE Chung-ming said that the request for frequency increase of Bus Route No. 2E had been discussed for more than a decade; however, there was no frequency increase but reduction. As there seemed to be unspeakable reasons in KMB’s response, he asked what the problem was actually.

64. Mr Derek HUNG asked about the performance pledge set by the TD and the bus company, and whether the bus company had fulfilled its pledge. If frequency increase was required due to an increase in passenger demand or a change in the commuting patterns of passengers, it was reasonable for Members to carry out discussion again. If frequency increase was required, he believed that the KMB would have to seek resources.

- 12 - 65. Mr Andy YU raised the following views and enquiries: (i) in KMB’s response, there seemed to be unspeakable reasons; (ii) the stability of bus frequency seemed to be increased, but the actual fact was that the intervals between departures had been extended, allowing the bus company to make deployment of buses; (iii) according to the past YTMDC papers, from January to March 2016, the highest occupancy rate of Bus Route No. 2E had been 79.1%. After the commissioning of the Kwun Tong Line Extension, the highest occupancy rate had dropped to 58.3% in November 2016. In the written response provided by the KMB this time, according to the latest patronage statistics, the highest patronage in an hour was 61%. He asked when the latest statistics stated in the KMB’s response were obtained. From November 2016 to the present, the occupancy rate had increased from 58.3% to 61%. As there was no reduction but an increase in the figure, he asked whether the increase in patronage reflected that the frequency should be increased; and (iv) he asked whether the TD would object to the application for fare increase submitted by the KMB in September.

66. Mr CHOW Chun-fai opined that the TD had to consider a basket of factors in the increase or reduction of bus frequencies, including the profits and services of bus companies. He asked, for example, that whether an increase of five departures of Bus Route No. 2E would result in the reduction of five departures from other routes.

67. Mr Eric TAM responded that the KMB had adjusted the frequency of Bus Route No. 2E early this year because the operation of the route on roads had become less stable, failing to meet the scheduled frequency as a result. In addition, in view of district development, there was a higher demand for the service of the route from passengers. The TD was clear about the strong requests of Members and the local community for service enhancement of Bus Route No. 2E. The department had relayed the views to the TD officers responsible for bus route planning for consideration in the formulation of the Bus Route Planning Programme for the next year.

68. The Acting Chairman hoped that the TD could enhance monitoring this year.

69. Mr Eric TAM responded that the TD was concerned about the passenger demand for this bus route. As there were some new development projects along the bus route, the department would closely monitor the service of the bus route.

70. Ms Peggy WONG responded as follows:

(i) The occupancy rate stated in the written response was obtained from a survey in 2018.

(ii) The KMB adjusted bus frequencies according to TD’s guidelines, and the annual Bus Route Planning Programme of the TD was also formulated based on the same guidelines. The criteria for an increase in bus frequency were that the highest occupancy rates of the busiest half-hour and the busiest hour of the route reached 100% and 85% respectively. According to the latest patronage statistics, the occupancy rate of Bus Route No. 2E in the busiest hour was 61%. Hence, the current frequency could largely cope with the passenger demand.

(iii) The KMB expected that in the near future, there might be situations which would affect the occupancy rate in the district. The KMB would closely monitor whether there was an increase in the occupancy rate. If there was an

- 13 - obvious change in the occupancy rate, the KMB would apply to the TD for the adjustment of frequency or service time.

71. The Acting Chairman hoped that the KMB could serve the public with heart rather than just reducing frequencies, while the TD should continue to monitor the bus company. If the bus company had made an unreasonable request, the TD should adopt a hard approach in dealing with the matter.

72. Mr CHUI Kin-man pointed out that the TD and the KMB had said that the redevelopment of Pak Tin Estate would result in a decrease in patronage. He suggested using single-deck buses to reduce the carrying capacity and minimise the lost trips of Bus Route No. 2E.

(Mr HUI Tak-leung left the meeting at 4:01 p.m.)

(Mr CHOW Chun-fai left the meeting at 4:02 p.m.)

73. The Acting Chairman explained that more residents would move in after the redevelopment of Pak Tin Estate, and the KMB therefore considered that the number of passengers would increase in future.

74. Mr Andy YU hoped for the good news of frequency increase of Bus Route No. 2E. The objective of fare increase by the KMB was to ensure the financial stability of the company after fare adjustment so as to provide efficient and appropriate bus services. He hoped that if the fare increase was approved, the bus company would be able to provide efficient and appropriate bus services in future.

75. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo pointed out that as the waiting time was too long, members of the public would prefer taking other circuitous routes, and the situation was undesirable. He reiterated that after frequency increase, there would certainly be more passengers taking this bus route.

76. Mr Benny YEUNG said that if the frequency of Bus Route No. 2E was enhanced, many residents living in would choose to take this route, and he believed that the patronage would increase.

77. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 7: Strong Request for Relieving Problem of Illegal Parking at Dundas Street / Fa Yuen Street (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 70/2018)

78. The Acting Chairman said that the written response of the HKPF (Annex 8) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed:

(a) Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei of the TD; and (b) Ms Leanne YAU, Inspector of Police, Operation (Mong Kok District), and Mr Ringo LAU, Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Team (Mong Kok District), of the HKPF.

- 14 -

79. Mr LAM Kin-man briefly introduced the paper.

80. Mr Ringo LAU briefly introduced the written response and supplemented as follows:

(i) A survey had been conducted by the Mong Kok Police District in July last year to come up with ten locations in the district in which more traffic complaints had been received, and the junction of Dundas Street/Fa Yuen Street was one of them. The Police had later commenced a “barrier-free” traffic programme to deploy more police officers to enforce the law during peak hours. On weekdays, there would be about seven uniformed police officers and four traffic wardens enforcing the law.

(ii) If an illegally parked vehicle was found to cause obstruction, the Police would instruct the driver to drive the vehicle away to resume smooth traffic flow. If the driver was not on site, the Police would issue a ticket. If the vehicle caused serious obstruction or danger to other vehicles, the Police would make arrangement to tow away the vehicle.

(iii) As there were many traffic black spots in the Mong Kok District, the Police was unable to take enforcement action at all black spots in one day; however, they would visit different places in turn to take enforcement action.

81. Mr LAM Kin-man raised the following views: (i) he did not understand why the TD did not give any response. He had earlier discussed with TD officers the improvement of road markings there, and requested the TD to paint double yellow lines there in the paper, but the TD did not even provide a written response. He expressed disappointment and anger over TD’s handling approach; and (ii) he asked the Police to note that the problem of illegal parking was serious in evenings, especially on weekends, but no enforcement action by the Police was noticed during the said period of time.

82. Mr Ringo LAU responded that the Police had been sending officers to take enforcement action there. When unimpeded traffic was restored there, police officers would go to other locations for enforcement. He noted Members’ views and would step up enforcement efforts in the said period of time.

83. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that a section of Dundas Street from Fa Yuen Street to Sai Yeung Choi Street was a restricted zone from 7:00 a.m. to the midnight. For the proposal of designating a 24-hour restricted zone, the TD had to strike a balance between the needs of the local residents and those of other road users on loading/unloading activities.

(Mr Craig JO left the meeting at 4:18 p.m.)

84. The Acting Chairman suggested the Police and Mr LAM Kin-man conduct a site inspection together. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant departmental representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

- 15 - Item 8: Proposed Gazettal to Release Portion of Central Median and Related Land Strata above and below U-shaped Road for Development of West Kowloon Cultural District (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 71/2018)

85. The Acting Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Jim LAM, Senior Project Surveyor/Kowloon West (District Lands Office, Kowloon West) of the Lands Department; and (b) Mr Derek SUN, Head, Planning and Development, Mr Billy CHEUNG, Senior Manager, Property Development, and Mr Vincent LO, Manager, Property Development, of the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority (“WKCDA”).

(Mr Paul LAW joined the meeting at 4:20 p.m.)

(Ms FUNG Lai-mei left the meeting at 4:20 p.m.)

86. Mr Billy CHEUNG briefly introduced the paper with the aid of PowerPoint presentation (Annex 9).

87. Mr Derek HUNG understood that the proposal put forward by the WKCDA was necessary, and he agreed to the proposal; however, he considered that the WKCDA was not required to break down the project into parts to submit to the YTMDC. The location proposed to be included in the West Kowloon Cultural District (“WKCD”) in this application was actually within the area of the WKCD.

88. Mr Benjamin CHOI asked whether the gazettal item was an original design of the plan, or the U-shaped road was required to provide support for the building development. He would like to know whether the YTMDC was consulted because there were amendments to the building design, or the YTMDC would be consulted phase by phase when the original plan was being implemented.

89. Mr Derek HUNG considered that the captioned proposal was to provide columns in support of those buildings in the original design. He asked whether there were substantial amendments to the building plan and whether the amendments would involve additional costs.

90. The Acting Chairman said that the WKCDA had consulted the YTMDC earlier, and asked whether the submission of this paper was to consult Councillors on the use of a part of the U-shaped road for temporary traffic diversion measures.

91. Mr Derek SUN responded as follows:

(i) This proposal was included in the outline zoning plan (“OZP”). According to the OZP, development could be carried out above the road. In view of the large number of development projects in the WKCD, some consultation items might be relatively minor. The WKCDA acted according to government procedures and consulted the YTMDC because of gazettal. This proposal did not involve an increase in floor area or building height, and the density and height of the buildings to be constructed were the same as those in the approved plan, only the proposal must be subject to the gazettal

- 16 - procedures and the contents of the land leases must be dovetailed with the proposal (to clearly express that the WKCDA was allowed to carry out construction projects above the road). The gazettal item did not involve additional costs, because the ACE development package would be carried out through tendering under the public-private partnership approach. The construction costs would be borne by the partner without the use of public money.

(ii) If there was a need for traffic diversion, the WKCDA would discuss with the TD and explain the arrangements to the YTMDC if necessary. There was no specific traffic diversion arrangement at this stage.

92. Mr CHAN Siu-tong understood that amendments to details might be required for large-scale projects. He was concerned about the issues of repair and maintenance as well as management responsibility after the road section had been included in the WKCD. He quoted the example of Kowloon Station that when there was damage or illegal occupation of roads, the unclear responsibility had resulted in many disputes. He enquired about the future repair and maintenance responsibility, or when there was illegal parking or an accident, whether the WKCDA would take full responsibility.

93. Mr Derek SUN responded that during the construction of the ACE development package, if the works involved temporary traffic diversion, the WKCDA would make an application to the TD. After the completion of the ACE development package, the road section would be kept as a government site and the HyD would be responsible for its repair and maintenance. If there was illegal parking, it would be dealt with by the Police.

94. The Acting Chairman asked Members whether they supported the captioned gazettal arrangement. There was no objection. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 9: Amendment to Re-routing Arrangements for Citybus Route No. E21 (Island Harbourview Bound) (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 72/2018)

95. The Acting Chairman welcomed Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD.

96. Mr Eric TAM briefly introduced the paper.

97. Mr LAU Pak-kei raised the following views and enquiries: (i) many Members and residents hoped that an en-route stop could be provided outside without cancelling the en-route stop at Sham Mong Road. He supported the amended proposal raised by the TD; (ii) he asked when the proposal would be implemented; and (iii) as the amendment would extend the interval between each departure, if the operation of the route was smooth in future, he hoped that the TD would request the bus company to increase frequency.

98. Mr Eric TAM responded that the proposal was expected to be implemented in early October. The TD would request the Citybus to actively consider the proposal of frequency

- 17 - increase.

99. The Acting Chairman thanked the TD representative for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 10: Progress Report on District Traffic Improvement Projects Completed, Under Construction or Under Planning by TD / HyD in the Past Two Months (as at 28 August 2018) (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 73/2018)

100. The Acting Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr NG Chun-ling, District Engineer/Mong Kok of the HyD; and (b) Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei of the TD.

101. Mr NG Chun-ling briefly introduced the paper. He supplemented that for the traffic improvement measures for the section of Man Wai Street between Ferry Street and Man Sing Street, the relevant officers had conducted a site inspection with the Councillor concerned in early September. After discussion, the TD was amending the works plan. Upon receipt of the plan, the HyD would prepare for the commencement of the works as soon as possible.

102. Mr LAU Pak-kei raised the following views and enquiries: (i) after the painting of double yellow lines at Fuk Tsun Street near Walnut Street, residents had reported that goods vehicles still parked illegally there, causing obstruction and danger. He hoped that the Police could step up enforcement at the location; and (ii) he asked whether the improvement works at the junction of Tai Kok Tsui Road and Tung Chau Street was the provision of a “right-turn” road marking at the junction of Tai Kok Tsui Road/Chui Yu Road/Sycamore Street. Traffic accidents occurred there frequently, so he hoped that the works could be completed as soon as possible.

103. Mr NG Chun-ling responded that he noted Members’ concerns about the traffic improvement works at the junction of Tai Kok Tsui Road and Tung Chau Street. The HyD expected that the works would be completed in mid-October.

104. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 11: Concern over Road Safety Problems and Noise Nuisance Caused by Speeding / Modified Vehicles in the District (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 74/2018)

105. The Acting Chairman said that the written responses of the TD and the HKPF (Annexes 10 and 11) had been emailed to Members for perusal before the meeting. She then welcomed:

(a) Mr TAI Seung-kun, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei of the TD; and

- 18 - (b) Mr CHENG Wai-yuen, Assistant District Operations Officer (Yau Tsim District), and Mr LAU Hoi-wa, Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Team (Yau Tsim District), of the HKPF.

106. Mr CHAN Siu-tong briefly introduced the paper.

107. Mr CHENG Wai-yuen responded that the Police would coordinate with the TD to identify suitable locations for the installation of fixed speed enforcement cameras (“enforcement cameras”) in the district. The Police would continue to conduct anti-speeding operations after the commissioning of the XRL to reduce speeding.

108. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that the TD was preparing for the installation of a new batch of enforcement cameras, and would make reference to the views of the Council to review the criteria for location selection. The review was expected to be completed within 2019.

109. Mr Derek HUNG raised the following views: (i) he had received complaints from the residents of Kowloon Station in his constituency from time to time that race cars would drive pass at high speed at late night, creating noise nuisance. After the completion of the XRL, proper planning had been made to the nearby roads, so he hoped that when studying the installation locations, apart from the locations near the station, the TD could first study the down ramp section of Route 3, the underpass, as well as the sections with multiple traffic lanes or fewer traffic lights; (ii) Wui Man Road was close to the new bus terminus with wide roads as well as Man Wah Sun Chuen, and he hoped that the department could step up enforcement there; and (iii) as the speed of some vehicles was not particularly fast but loud noise was generated, he hoped that the Police would investigate whether such vehicles were illegally modified and institute prosecution.

110. Mr CHUI Kin-man hoped that the TD and the Police could discuss the locations for the installation of enforcement cameras as soon as possible and complete the study by late March 2019.

111. Mr CHAN Siu-tong said that he trusted the professional opinions of the TD and the Police on the selection of installation locations for enforcement cameras; however, the department said that the study on location selection would be completed in 2019, and if the installation would only be carried out after that, the time required would be too long. He asked whether the study could be completed in 2018 and the installation be carried out in 2019.

(Mr CHAN Siu-tong left the meeting at 5:01 p.m.)

112. Mr Derek HUNG said that according to the Police’s written response, no complaint on “illegal modification of vehicles” at the captioned location had been received in the past two years. In general, members of the public complained about vehicle noise without knowing whether the noise was generated by vehicles that were illegally modified. It required Police’s action to prosecute the offenders.

113. Mr TAI Seung-kun noted Members’ requests, and he would relay to the responsible officers of the TD that the Council hoped that the review could be completed by late March 2019. The TD would also consult the Police.

114. Mr CHENG Wai-yuen responded as follows:

- 19 -

(i) The Police would continue to cooperate closely with the TD and raise the traffic black spots of speeding in the district for the installation of enforcement cameras.

(ii) The Police would take action before complaints were received. He supplemented that the Police had successfully prosecuted 80 speeding offenders in the past two years, among which 19 offenders were involved in illegal modification of vehicles.

115. The Acting Chairman hoped that the department could complete the study as soon as possible to minimise the impact of speeding and illegally modified vehicles on the nearby residents. The Acting Chairman thanked the relevant representatives for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 12: Progress Report on Handling of Dangerous and Abandoned Signboards in YTM District by BD (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 75/2018)

116. The Acting Chairman welcomed Mr Wick TSUI, Building Surveyor/Signboard Control 4 of the BD.

117. Mr Wick TSUI briefly introduced the paper.

118. Ms WONG Shu-ming said that as a typhoon was approaching Hong Kong, members of the public were worried about the collapse of unauthorised structures or signboards. She asked whether the BD had put in place special guidelines in times of typhoons. For the signboards in respect of which “Dangerous Structure Removal Notices” (“Notices”) had been issued, if there was immediate danger, she asked whether the department would first remove those signboards mandatorily.

119. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai said that some signboards were installed under minor works projects, and he would like to know how the BD would exercise regulation. He was aware that some signboards were damaged or dropped soon after installation. He asked whether the signboards were subject to annual inspection by the owners or the BD would conduct random checks to ensure that the signboards were safe.

120. Mr Wick TSUI responded as follows:

(i) The BD had been conducting street inspection regularly to inspect whether the signboards were safe. For the dangerous/abandoned signboards in respect of which Notices were issued, if the signboards were not removed after a time period of 14 days, the BD would arrange for a contractor to remove the signboards.

(ii) For the signboards installed under minor works projects, the BD would check whether the signboards were safe through regular street inspection. If a dangerous signboard was found, the department would issue a Notice to request the owner to remove the signboard. Besides, the department would carry out random checks on minor works projects for validation.

- 20 -

121. Ms WONG Shu-ming noted the regular procedures of the BD, but she would like to know whether the BD had put in place special guidelines in times of typhoons. If not, she would urge the departmental representative to relay the request to the senior management as to whether the formulation of special guidelines was required.

122. Mr Wick TSUI noted Members’ views and would discuss with the officers of the BD.

123. Mr Benny TANG supplemented that in addition to the provision of 24-hour emergency service on a regular basis by the BD, when the Gale or Storm Signal No. 8 was in force, the Emergency Control Centre of the BD would be activated to deal with emergencies related to building safety (including dangerous signboards). For the super typhoon that was approaching, several government departments had held joint meetings to discuss appropriate measures.

124. Ms WONG Shu-ming hoped that the department could conduct inspection before the arrival of typhoons and deal with dangerous signboards in advance. She understood that the frontline officers would be exhausted in times of typhoons.

125. Mr Benny TANG responded that no information on the inspections conducted before typhoons was available for the time being, but the BD would have manpower to deal with dangerous signboards in times of typhoons.

126. The Acting Chairman hoped that the department could take priority in dealing with the signboards that were about to collapse before typhoons to avoid injuries caused by falling signboards due to typhoons. The Acting Chairman thanked the BD representative for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Acting Chairman closed the discussion on this item.

Item 13: Any Other Business

(1) 16th Report on CCTV Systems of Mong Kok Pedestrian Precinct (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 76/2018)

127. Ms WONG Shu-ming said that despite the abolition of the Mong Kok Pedestrian Precinct (“MKPP”), some Members might consider that there was still a heavy pedestrian flow at the road section and it was necessary to retain the closed-circuit television (“CCTV”) systems. She considered that the department should carry out a review on the CCTV systems and report the future follow-up work to the TTHC.

128. Mr Derek HUNG would like to discuss the temporary bus terminus near To Wah Road, while the Acting Chairman suggested discussing the matter later.

129. Miss Rainy CHUNG responded that the MKPP along Sai Yeung Choi Street South in Mong Kok had been abolished since 4 August this year. Other departments were reviewing the operation of the road section after the abolition of the MKPP, including the TD was conducting a survey on the pedestrian and traffic flows, the statistics obtained from which would be reported to the YTMDC in due course. After the statistics were available, the YTMDO was pleased to review the operation and efficiency of the CCTV systems with the relevant departments and Members.

- 21 -

130. Members noted the information paper.

(2) Mong Kok Road Footbridge System at Sai Yee Street - Extension Across Nathan Road (Progress Report as at 28 August 2018) (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 77/2018)

131. Ms WONG Shu-ming said that she had submitted a paper at the last meeting to instruct the department to follow up on this project. She was very dissatisfied that the anticipated completion date in this paper was postponed to the end of the fourth quarter of 2019/early first quarter of 2020, while the reasons stated were astonishing as the department said that the delay was caused by some underground problems. Time had been reserved for underground investigation back then, and she asked whether the responsible officers had checked the records. She pointed out that as underground investigation had been carried out back then, it was impossible that there would be unforeseeable underground problems resulting in delay. After the passage of ten years, the footbridge had still not been completed. She considered that the Government had lost its credibility, and the case should be referred to the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate whether the department was in serious dereliction of duty. She urged the department to complete the project as soon as possible.

132. Mr WONG Kin-san said that he had pointed out at the last meeting that he had not seen workers carrying out the works for a long time, but on the day of this meeting, he had seen some workers working there. However, lifting works for the footbridge deck were required, and Nathan Road had to be closed for the works. At the last meeting, the department had responded that the contractor had been requested to submit a report to the TD in late July, but in this paper, it was said that the study was still underway. He asked the department how long the study would take, and regretted that the completion date was postponed again and again.

133. Mr NG Chun-ling supplemented that after the last meeting, the consultant of the Sun Hung Kai & Co. Foundation Limited (“Sun Hung Kai”) had submitted a report on design revisions in late July to the HyD for approval. The HyD had provided a response in August, and the consultant had submitted supplementary information in respect of the suggestions made by the HyD. The Sun Hung Kai required more time to review the design, and thus notified the HyD of the postponement of the completion date. The HyD understood that Members hoped that the footbridge could be completed early, and would maintain close contact with the Sun Hung Kai and its consultant.

134. Ms WONG Shu-ming did not understand why the design had still to be reviewed as the design of the footbridge had been completed for a long time. If the design required review, she asked whether it was because the department had made mistakes in calculation. The department should have clearly recorded the footbridge design when approving the relevant plan back then. She queried whether the department had performed its regulatory duties and whether the department was derelict of duty. She continued to say that if the matter was referred to the Office of the Ombudsman for investigation, the department could not evade its responsibility.

135. Members noted the information paper.

136. Mr Derek HUNG said that the temporary bus terminus near To Wah Road would be

- 22 - relocated to the new West Kowloon Station Bus Terminus on 16 September, and apart from relocating the existing bus routes, there would be three new bus routes at the new bus terminus, while Bus Route No. 271 would also be relocated there. He requested the TD and the Police to closely monitor the operation of the bus terminus and the traffic condition nearby during the relocation and the early stage of the opening of the new bus terminus.

137. Mr TAI Seung-kun responded that the TD would closely monitor the operation of the West Kowloon Station Bus Terminus after its opening and would carry out improvement measures as soon as possible if necessary.

138. There being no other business, the Acting Chairman closed the meeting at 5:26 p.m. The next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 15 November 2018 (Thursday).

Yau Tsim Mong District Council Secretariat September 2018

- 23 - Only Chinese version is available Annex 1

2016-2019年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第 59/2018號文件的回應

九龍太子道西139號 的 樓宇安全

屋宇署就油尖旺區議會黃建新議員及黃舒明議員提呈上標題文件 於 2018 年 7 月以書面回應及出席第十五次會議回答議員提問， 現 更新屋宇署 的工作進度及補充資料如下:

就上址大廈的情況，屋宇署已於 2017 年 9 月根據《建築物條例》 第 26(1)條的規定，向上址所有業主發出命令，着令他們須於 2018 年 3 月前就 1 字樓核准露台的底部進行所需的修葺工程。

其後，屋宇署再派員視察，發現上址 1 字樓核准露台的底部有混 凝土破損，並對公眾構成危險，因此署方 於 2018 年 1 月根據《建 築物條例》第 26(4)條的規定，指示政府承建商代為進行清除鬆脫 及破裂的混凝土，而有關工程費用會向有關業主追討。

及後屋宇署 分別於 2018 年 5 月 及 8 月 再 派員到上址視察，均 未發 現 1 字樓核准露台的底部有即時危險，由於所需的修葺工程仍未 展開，屋宇署於本年 8 月 24 日向上址業主發出警告信，着令他們 安排進行命令所需的修葺工程， 屋宇署仍會繼續監察業主跟進有 關命令的情況。

另外屋宇署已經在本年8日 1日發出強制驗樓通知，着令業主委聘 註冊檢驗人員就整幢大廈進行訂明 檢驗。

文件的提問1及提問2涉及滲水調查事宜，屬食物環境衞生署及屋 宇署合組的聯合辦事處（聯辦處）的工作及職權範圍，會由聯辦 處 另行回應 。

屋宇署 2018年 9月 Only Chinese version is available Annex 2

油尖旺區區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員第 59/2018 號文件

九龍太子道西137號大廈露台滲水及石屎橫樑裂痕事宜 (正確地址為太子道西139號 )

多謝油尖旺區區議會黃舒明議員及黃建新議員就上述標題事 宜提呈文件，並要求食物環境衞生署/屋宇署聯合辦事處（下稱 「 聯辦處」）作出回應。聯辦處現按職權範圍就文件內提出的問 題回覆如下：

1. 聯辦處人員於8月 2日 到上址跟進及量度濕度，發現樓底天花 懷疑滲水位置的濕度低於35%，亦未發現有滴水情況，故不 存在滲水滋擾。因此，聯辦處根據既定程序，不擬作進一步 的調查。如滲水情況出現變化，聯辦處會繼續監察及跟進。

2. 聯辦處是根據香港法例第 132 章 《 公眾衞生及市政條例》 所 賦予的權力和政府相關部門的專業知識，配合有關業主／住 戶的合作，以有系統的測試方法，找出滲水的源頭，使有關 業主進行維修，以解決滲水滋擾的問題。若滲水問題影響樓 宇結構安全，聯辦處會轉介屋宇署跟進。

食物環境衞生署/屋宇署聯合辦事處 2(旺角) 2018 年 9 月 Only Chinese version is available Annex 3

2016 至 2019 年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第十六 次會議

有 關 要求擴闊西隧九龍出口巴士站旁行人路 (第 66 /201 8 號文件)

運輸署及路政署的書面回應

運輸署 已於 2018 年 3 月及 9 月 向路政署發出施工通知書，於西區 海底隧道九龍出口往尖沙咀及九龍站商住區的支路的 行人路 進行探井 挖掘工作及設 立 速 度 限 制標誌。

由於該路段行人路地底有較多的地下設施，因此要尋找合適位置安 裝 速 度 限 制標誌有一定困難。經研究及實地視察後，路政署相信已經 尋找到合適的安裝位置。路政署將會儘快於該位置進行探井挖掘工 作，如確定不會對地下設施構成影響，會隨即安裝速 度 限 制 標示。該 工程一般可於一星期內完成。

2018 年 9 月 6 日 Only Chinese version is available Annex 4

海事處就以下提議的回應

油尖旺區議會

交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 要求擴闊西隧九龍出口巴士站旁行人路

就 有關要求擴闊西隧九龍出口巴士站旁行人路一事，海事處預 期 該建議會有可能對現時正在全面運作的新油麻地公眾貨物裝 卸區（"裝卸區"） 構成影響。基於現時未有相關資料作參考， 待有關方 面提供更 詳 細 的設計概 念時，海事處樂意就有關建 議 提供意見，並在有需要時協助諮詢相關裝卸區業界的 持份者。

海事處 2018 年 9 月 Only Chinese version is available Annex 5

Only Chinese version is available Annex 6

本署檔號： 香港警務處 來函檔號： 旺角警區 電 話：3661 8641 九龍太子道西 142 號 圖文傳真：2397 8819

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處 轉交 許德亮議員：

強烈要求警方嚴厲打擊 山東街/甘霖街交界違泊車輛

就油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處轉交許德亮議員所要求警 方嚴厲打擊山東街/甘霖街交界違泊車輛。本署現就閣下的查詢及要求，回覆如下：

(1) 有關甘霖街一帶自去年 9 月來違例泊車的檢控數字，截至今年 5 月，於 9 個月間共發出 375 張定額罰款告票。 (2) 旺角警區由 2017 年 8 月開始了一個新的交通項目「順路通」，透過重點打 擊區內的交通投訴黑點，加強教育道路使用者及執法，使區內交通暢順。 此外，近年甘霖街附近有不少改變，多了新建築物，例如酒店，亦帶來新 的交通問題。有見及此，旺角警區警民關係組已與附近商戶加強溝通，以 期透過重點交通執法及警民合作，多方位改善區內交通問題。 (3) 本署一直採取重點交通執法項目政策，如在上址發現任何交通違例問題， 本署定必採取果斷執法，以確保上址居民及其他道路使用者安全。

感謝許德亮議員提出的查詢及要求，如有進一步查詢，可致電 3661 8658 與旺 角警區交通隊劉志榮警署警長聯絡。

旺角警區指揮官

( 張蕾 代行 )

二零一八 年 九 月 三 日 Only Chinese version is available Annex 7

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會

九龍巴士(一九三三)有限公司之回應

有關強烈要求 2E 巴士服務增加班次

就有關要求 2E 巴士服務增加班次，現謹回覆如下︰

我們備悉議員對2E號線之建議。九巴不時檢視各路線之服務水平，並因應路面交通情況， 乘客使用率，公交市場變化等不同因素向運輸署提交建議，以使各線服務能應付乘客需 求。有關議員提及本年三月初2E號線之新服務時間表乃因應路面交通情況持續變差及不 穩，我們為確保車長在每一程車有足夠行車及休息時間，同時為乘客提供足夠及穩定的 服務而製訂。根據最新客量統計2E號線之最高一小時載客率為61%。數據顯示目前提供 之班次整體可應付客量需求。 隨着香港高鐵西九龍站於下月落成及附近道路修整完畢，佐敦一帶交通情況或會有改善。 2E號線途經渡船街及佐敦道，乘客量及行車時間或會有改變，我們會繼續密切留意交通 流量及乘客量的變化並適時作相應運作安排。

2018 年 9 月 Only Chinese version is available Annex 8 本署檔號： 香港警務處 來函檔號： 旺角警區 電 話：3661 8641 九龍太子道西 142 號 圖文傳真：2397 8819

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處 轉交 林健文議員：

強烈要求改善登打士街/花園街非法泊車問題

就油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處轉交林健文議員所要求改 善登打士街/花園街非法泊車問題。本署現就閣下的查詢及要求，回覆如下：

(1) 旺角警區由 2017 年 8 月開始了一個新的交通項目「順路通」，透過重點打 擊區內的交通投訴黑點，加強教育道路使用者及執法，使區內交通暢順。 而登打士街/花園街是該項目其中一個重點打擊的交通黑點。 (2) 有關上述地點一帶違例泊車的檢控數字，於三年間共發出 4,199 張定額罰 款告票。 (3) 有關登打士街/花園街三年來的交通意外數據，於三年間涉及過路行人的交 通意外共有 5 宗，傷者的傷勢均為輕微。 (4) 本署一直採取重點交通執法項目政策，如在上址發現任何交通違例問題， 本署定必採取果斷執法，以確保上址居民及其他道路使用者安全。

感謝林健文議員提出的查詢及要求，如有進一步查詢，可致電 3661 8658 與旺 角警區交通隊劉志榮警署警長聯絡。

旺角警區指揮官

( 張蕾 代行 )

二零一八 年 九 月 三 日 Only Chinese version is available Annex 9

㝻巿䍉摚⒉⇜㡋導⃬㠖▥●⏶Uㇱ恾䤓 捷⒕₼栢⒕椣ヅ♙䦇桫䤓⦿槱✛⦿ㄤ䴉 栢⇫䤋⻤䞷抣⒙㑁

⒙㑁乓⦜亰⅚⦥

2 ACE 䤋⻤俓⚗䯉㎞⦥ (⹵椪岼岗尥⃝䤋⻤⟕岼岗㡈㫗)

MPV

CONVENTION CENTRE EXHIBITION CENTRE

3

嶬嶬

4 Only Chinese version is available Annex 10

2016 至 2019 年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第十六 次會議

關注區內超速/改裝車輛引致交通安全及噪音滋擾 (第 74 /201 8 號文件)

運輸署 的書面回應

運輸署與警務處已開始籌備安裝新一批固定偵察車速攝影機。相關 部門會檢討選址準則，並根據制定的準則及資源的分配，決定新一批 攝影機的數量及位置。屆時，有關的路段和其他地點會一併考慮。

2018 年 9 月 6 日 Only Chinese version is available Annex 11 本署檔號： 香港警務處 來函檔號： 油尖警區 電 話：3661 9370 九龍彌敦道 213 號 圖文傳真：2770 3597

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處 轉交 孔昭華議員及陳少棠議員：

D1A(N)路、佐敦道及連翔道一帶超速/改裝車輛引致交通安全及噪音滋擾 回覆

就油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會秘書處轉交孔昭華議員及陳少棠 議員就 D1A(N)路、佐敦道及連翔道一帶超速/改裝車輛引致交通安全及噪音滋擾查詢 及要求。現特此回覆：

(1) 在過去兩年，就上述地點警方没有接獲任何「車輛非法改裝」的投訴。就 「超速駕駛」而言，警方共接獲兩宗「超速駕駛」投訴，分別發生在佐敦 道及連翔道一帶。同時，警方在上述地點執行 143 次的反「車輛非法改裝 或超速駕駛」行動，並成功檢控 80 名違法人士。

(2) 警方過去不時在上述地點設置路障檢控超速和違法改裝車輛人仕及會密切 留意情況，如情況有惡化，會加強執法。

(3) 警方會繼續在上述地點設置路障、巡視及加強執法以維持交通秩序及道路 安全。

感謝孔昭華議員及陳少棠議員提出的查詢及要求，如有進一步查詢，可致電 3661 9525 與油尖警區交通隊劉海華警署警長聯絡。

油尖警區指揮官

( 鄭偉元 代行 )

二零一八 年 九 月 十 日