Minutes of the 24th Meeting of the District Development and Environment Committee (DDEC) Southern District Council (SDC)

Date : 16 May 2011 Time : 2:30 p.m. Venue : SDC Conference Room

Present:

Ms MAR Yuet-har, BBS, MH (Chairman of SDC) Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP (Vice-Chairman of SDC) Mr WONG Che-ngai (Chairman) Ms CHEUNG Sik-yung (Vice-Chairman) Mr AU Lap-sing Mr CHAI Man-hon Mr CHAN Fu-ming Ir CHAN Lee-shing William, JP Mrs CHAN LEE Pui-ying Mr CHEUNG Siu-keung Mr FUNG Se-goun, Fergus Mr FUNG Wai-kwong Mr LAM Kai-fai MH Ms LAM Yuk-chun MH Mr LEUNG Ho-kwan MH Mr MAK Chi-yan Mrs MAK TSE How-ling, Ada Mr TSUI Yuen-wa Mr WONG Ling-sun, Vincent Dr YANG Mo, PhD Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN Mr CHAN Man-chun Mr KWAN Chung-chor, Joe Ms WONG Fo-kam Mr YUEN Chi-kwong

1 Absent with Apologies: Dr LEUNG Hip-hong Dr WONG Chun-yu

Secretary:

Miss MONG Tan-nei, Daniela Executive Officer II (District Council)2, Home Affairs Department

In Attendance:

Mr WONG Yin-fun, Alex, JP District Officer (Southern), Home Affairs Department Miss LEUNG Tsz-ying, Almaz Assistant District Officer (Southern), Home Affairs Department Ms LAI Yuet-yee, Elaine Senior Executive Officer (District Management), Home Affairs Department Miss LIN Ming Senior Executive Officer (District Council), Home Affairs Department Mr WONG Siu-wah, Pierre Senior Engineer 4/HKI 2, Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr CHAN Yiu-kin Senior Environmental Protection Officer/South 3, Environmental Protection Department Ms TAM Chi-man, Doris District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent/Southern, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr WONG Sun-man Housing Manager/HK 4, Housing Department Ms LOU Yin-yee, Joanne Senior Estate Surveyor/South, Lands Department Mrs CHAN LEUNG Ka-ling, Deputy District Leisure Manager (Southern)1, Sandy Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms YIU Yuk, Isabel Actg Senior Town Planner/HK1, Planning Department

2 Attending by Invitation (Agenda Item 2): Mr LAU Wing-fai, Wessex Sr Env Protection Offr(Sewerage Infrastructure)3, Environmental Protection Department Mr CHAN Hin-kau, Cyrus Env Protection Offr(Sewerage Infrastructure)33, Environmental Protection Department Ms CHEONG Chi-kun, Cecilia Engr/SI 1, Drainage Services Department Ms AU Yin-ping Engr/SI 2, Drainage Services Department Mr WAI Yiu-chung Senior Engineer / Sewerage Projects Division, Drainage Services Department Mr WOON Leung-him Engineer / Sewerage Projects Division, Drainage Services Department

Attending by Invitation (Agenda Items 3): Mr Ray NG Director of Estates, The Academy for Performing Arts Mr Sam TSEN Assistant Estates Manager (Projects), The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts Mr Carl YIU Supervisor (Estates), The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts

Attending by Invitation (Agenda Items 4): Ms POON Lai-yee, Rene Sr Health Insp(Cleansing/Pest Control), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Attending by Invitation (Agenda Items 7): Mr LEUNG Wai-kin Geotechnical Engineer / Engineering Geology 5, Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr KK. P ANG Associate Director, Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited Mr Andy NG Associate Director, Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited Mr TSIM CT, Douglas Senior Engineer, Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited Ms Candy KANG Project Engineer, Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited

Opening Remarks:

The Chairman welcomed Members, co-opted members of the Committee and representatives of government departments to the meeting.

3 2. The Chairman advised that prior to the meeting, Dr LEUNG Hip-hong had notified the Secretariat of his absence from the meeting due to other engagements and sought consent of absence from the meeting. The Committee noted and accepted his absence from meeting

(Post-meeting note: Dr WONG Chun-yu had not notified the Secretariat for absence before the meeting.)

3. The Chairman said that to facilitate smooth proceeding of meeting, according to Order 15(3) of the Standing Orders, all persons attending or sitting in on the meeting should switch off all devices which might emit sound, and should not use any telecommunications devices for conversation during the course of the meeting. Each Member would be allotted a maximum of two 3-minute slots to speak in respect of each agenda item.

Agenda Item 1: Confirmation of the Draft Minutes of the District Development and Environment Committee Meeting Held on 21 March 2011

4. The minutes were confirmed without any amendments.

Agenda Item 2: Request to Improve the Drainage System of the Villages in Southern District (Item raised by Ir CHAN Lee-shing, William, JP) (DDEC Paper No. 18/2011)

5. The Chairman welcomed below department representatives to the meeting for the discussion of agenda item 2:

Environmental Protection Department • Mr LAU Wing Fai, Wessex, Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Sewerage Infrastructure)3 • Mr CHAN Hing Kau, Cyrus, Environmental Protection Officer (Sewerage Infrastructure)33 Drainage Services Department • Ms CHEONG Chi Kun, Cecilia, Engineer/SI 1 • Ms AU Yin Ping, Engineer/SI 2

4 • Mr WAI Yiu-chung, Senior Engineer 4 / Sewerage Projects Division • Mr WOON Leung-him, Engineer 21 / Sewerage Projects Division

6. Ir CHAN Lee-shing, JP briefed the meeting on the reasons for proposing the agenda item. He said the Working Group on District Minor Works Projects (the Working Group) wished to, through discussion in the Committee, call on relevant departments to provide foul sewers to villages not currently served by public sewer, and upgrade the existing drainage systems to enhance environmental hygiene.

7. The Chairman said that drainage and hygiene problems of Village had been discussed in past meetings, and suggested including them into this agenda item for follow up. He invited Members representing individual villages in the District to explain the drainage problems of their respective village.

8. Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP explained with the aid of pictures (supplementary information) the drainage and hygiene problems of Pok Fu Lam Village. He pointed out some vacant lots in the village available for the construction of small pump houses and an about 300-square-meter site of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) that might be considered for a large pumping station. He did not agree with the previous suggestion by villagers to collect some of the village sewage via the existing public toilets, as the involved alterations requiring accurate calculation of the spare sewage handling capacity of the public toilets to prevent overflow of sewage could affect the environmental hygiene. He also requested that the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) should formulate a sewage disposal programme for Pok Fu Lam Village, and coordinate the relevant departments to follow up the rectification of pollution discharge at the village.

9. Mr FUNG Se-goun considered that, as the San Wai Village (San Wai) and Kau Wai Village (Kau Wai) lacked a comprehensive drainage system, many villagers connected their sewage to the stormwater drains, causing direct discharge of sewage into public stormwater drains, seriously affecting the environmental hygiene of the vicinity. In addition, regarding the six existing potable toilets in San Wai, he called on the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) to proactively consider and implement as soon as possible the replacement of the portable toilets by flushing toilets.

10. Mrs CHAN LEE Pui-ying noted that while the concerned departments were co-ordinating with each other to follow up the drainage and sewerage works at the

5 Village, mosquito problems were still serious there, causing growth of bacteria. She called on the departments to pay extra attention so as to improve the environmental hygiene of the village.

11. Mr LAU Wing-fai gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(a) In response to Member’s proposal to construct a large pumping station at the LCSD site, EPD and the Drainage Services Department (DSD) would invite, via the Southern District Office (SDO), the concerned DC members, villagers and Pok Fu Lam Village Sewage Disposal Concerned Group (the Concerned Group) to a site visit to the village and take follow-up actions; (b) The site visit, would also inspect other suitable locations as well as look into the engineering feasibility of replacing a single large pumping station with multiple small pump houses; (c) Regarding the previous suggestion by the Pok Fu Lam villagers to connection the sewage from some of the village houses to the sewage disposal system of existing FEHD public toilets, EPD had liaised and consulted with the departments responsible for the design and maintenance of the FEHD public toilets. It was found that after taking account of its daily operational disposal demand, the public toilets would only have limited spare capacity to handle sewage from a few of the nearby village houses; and; (d) EPD and DSD would follow up the proposal to explore the conversion of the FEHD public toilets at Pok Fu Lam Village to pump houses.

12. Mr WAI Yiu-chung stated that, the Sewerage Projects Division of DSD would co-ordinate with EPD to identify suitable sites in Pok Fu Lam Village for the construction of pump house(s). DSD would conduct site visit(s) with the DC, the Concerned Group and EDP, and then consider the design and works plan.

13. Ms TAM Chi-man gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(a) Before the villages were served by comprehensive drainage systems, FEHD would continue to step up their cleansing work, such as to strengthen the clearance of refuse after rainfall and encourage villagers to use public toilets; (b) FEHD supported improving the drainage systems of San Wai and Kau Wai, and would co-operate with relevant departments for follow up actions;

6 (c) The temporary toilet in San Wai is provided with flushing system. But the utilisation rate was low, as in the case of Pok Fu Lam Village. Since the space of the existing temporary toilets was limited, FEHD would study whether there were suitable sites nearby for development of a public toilets; and (d) Since the population of Kau Wai was relatively small and the villagers mostly used toilets built by themselves, the utilisation rate of public toilets was low. Therefore, allocation of resources to construct permanent public toilets was not recommended.

14. 11 Members, namely Mr AU Lap-sing, Mr CHAI Man-hon, Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP, Mr CHAN Fu-ming, Ms CHEUNG Sik-yung, Mr FUNG Se-goun, Mr LAM Kai-fai, MH, Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH, Mrs MAK TSE How-ling, Mr YUEN Chi-kwong and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquiries were summarised as follows:

(a) A Member enquired: (1) whether the Government had set a deadline for the drainage improvement works; (2) whether there was any plan to resume squatter areas for development; and (3) whether mechanism was in place to deal with land ownership disputes and compensation matters brought about by restructuring of drainage system, which involved private land ownership; (b) As the long-term development of Pok Fu Lam Village had been announced for a long time, the Government should actively consider the provision of drainage facilities for the village. In view of the remoteness and poor hygiene, the aqua privies at San Wai were not convenient for the elders to use at night. It was hoped that the department concerned would actively consider the provision of sewage systems to improve environmental hygiene of the villages; (c) Consideration should be given to the construction of sewerage despite the small population and geographic concerns. There were currently 200 residents in San Wai and around 100 in Kau Wai and they should be provided with flushing toilets. As the Government did not plan to develop the two villages, there should not be any difficulties in terms of policy. It was hoped that drainage facilities would be provided in the villages as soon as practicable; (d) The mobile toilets with flushing facilities in San Wai were highly utilised at night. FEHD should be praised for adjusting the time of cleaning services according to actual needs. However, poor lighting conditions in the

7 vicinity of the mobile toilets had caused much inconvenience at night and FEHD was requested to actively consider the provision of permanent toilets. Ms TAM Chi-man was welcome to visit the village to identify suitable sites for the provision of flushing toilets in the villages; (e) A Member enquired whether the squatter structures in Pok Fu Lam Village involved government land area and could be cleared for provision of drains; and if the structures were removed, whether there was a mechanism of compensation to the occupants affected. She also enquired whether there was a direct carriageway to an LCSD site in Pok Fu Lam Village and requested the department concerned to explain the difficulties of providing drainage facilities on the site (f) A Member opined that if the residents occupied the land legally at Pok Fu Lam Village, the department concerned should provide drainage facilities to ensure a hygienic living environment instead of considering cost-effectiveness only. He enquired whether the Government would compensate the villagers in case the provision of drainage facilities involved land resumption. He hoped that the department would explain the existing difficulties and identify solutions as early as possible; (g) A Member appreciated the efforts of EPD and FEHD in dealing with the drainage matters of Pok Fu Lam Village but considered the handling of the case of San Wai and Kau Wai inappropriate. He shared the view that EPD should take the lead in formulating the schedule for drainage improvement works in the villages; (h) A Member said substandard drainage facilities in the villages should be addressed so as to keep abreast of latest sewerage works; (i) A number of Members opined that drainage improvement works should be conducted to gradually improve the environmental hygiene; (j) A Member enquired whether EPD had formulated indicators to assess the suitability of providing drainage facilities in other villages of the district, and to identify drainage facilities convenient for villagers; (k) Hygienic problems arising from inadequate drainage system were also faced by Tai Hau Wan Village. Sewage from the village was discharged to the shore, affecting hygiene of the seabed or beach of Waterfall Bay; and (l) This agenda item focused on ways to improve the drainage system of the villages in the district. As the DC was short of expertise and resources to improve the drainage systems of all the villages, EPD should clarify who should be responsible for village drainage, provide schedule for regulation of drainage in Pok Fu Lam Village, set the time for working out solutions with

8 relevant departments and the villagers, identify suitable sites for pump houses and study ways to lay the drainage facilities. It was hoped that EPD would convene relevant departments to conduct feasibility study and launch the works as soon as possible.

15. The responses of Mr LAU Wing-fai were summarised as follows:

(a) Pok Fu Lam Village was a low-lying area and the nearest trunk sewer was located at Pok Fu Lam Road on relatively higher ground. Therefore, the design of the communal sewer of the village could only commence after a suitable site to construct the pumping station had been identified for conveying the sewage collected to the trunk sewer. EPD would soon after the meeting invite the SDC Members, DDEC Members, villagers and the Concerned Group to conduct a site visit to identify a suitable location for the pumping station and seek practical ways for environmental improvement; and (b) EPD was determined to solve sewage problems from villages in Hong Kong. However, due to varied population and levels of environmental pollution of the villages, it would be necessary to have independent assessment for each village based on factors such as the actual site conditions, engineering feasibility of works, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of villagers. EPD would seek resources to improve environmental hygiene of the Pok Fu Lam Village and study approaches to improve the drainage condition of other villages.

16. Ms CHEONG Chi-kun replied that DSD would actively assist EPD to seek solutions, and its Sewerage Projects Division had been working closely with EPD with a view to solving the sewer problems as soon as possible. Before the drainage system could be improved satisfactorily, DSD would step up inspection and cleansing of main channels and were prepared to assist FEHD on cleansing. The above measures had been taken in Pok Fu Lam Village. If needed, villagers in the district might call DSD to request for assistance for cleansing drainage channel.

17. Ms TAM Chi-man replied that FEHD and its planning section had initiated preliminary work of the feasibility study on the provision of public toilets in San Wai. She would arrange a site visit at San Wai with SDC Members after the meeting and liaise with relevant departments to conduct the feasibility study.

9 18. Mr LAU Wing-fai added that the inspection of San Wai by EPD was only preliminary in nature.

19. Ir CHAN Lee-shing, JP said that the Working Group had laid sewers in Shek O Village but was told that the public trunk sewer was unable to accommodate the sewage discharged from the village. He hoped that DSD would explain the present condition of the trunk sewer in Shek O.

20. Ms AU Yin-ping said that SDO and SDC had conducted partial sewerage improvement works in Shek O Village last year. The sewerage of the village could now intercept most of the foul water from the village, except for a minority that still went through the septic tank of individual village house. Review was needed to assess whether the existing system was able to collect sewage discharged by village houses. As the diameter of sewer intercepting sewage was only 225 mm, according to the preliminary data of DSD, the sewer might not be able to accommodate the total volume of sewage and stormwater discharged from the village. Furthermore, the volume of sewage interception by Shek O sewage treatment plant was yet to be verified and accurate number of residents of the squatter areas was hard to be obtained. As it was difficult to estimate the volume of sewage increased, part of the proposed improvement plan was yet to be completed.

21. Mrs CHAN LEE pui-ying opined that since it was unable to enhance the sewage system in Shek O Village and the Working Group was worried that the trunk sewer might not be able to intercept discharge of sewage from the village drains, the department should conduct further study and review to improve environmental hygiene.

22. The Chairman said that the Working Group had discussed the drainage enhancement works in Shek O Village and the squatter areas. With development of the society, there were increasing demands for better quality of living and the Government had the responsibility to enhance district environmental hygiene. Though sewer problems of villages in the district varied in urgency and immediate improvement might be not possible due to topographical concerns, the departments concerned had promised to take active follow-up actions. EPD would work with various parties to actively identify a site for pump house in Pok Fu Lam Village and seek solutions to the problems. With the fruits of inter-departmental working meetings as well as the support of DDEC, it was hoped that the problem of construction of pump house could be solved as soon as possible. As for the problem

10 of the San Wai and Kau Wai, FEHD would continue to follow up with Mr FUNG Se-goun, Fergus. He suggested that as a consensus on this agenda item was reached among Members, this item should be included into matters to be followed up with a view to improving environmental hygiene of squatter areas in villages.

(Mr TSUI Yuen-wa, Mrs CHAN LEE Pui-ying, Mr FUNG Wai-kwong and Mr LEUNG Ho-kwan, MH joined the meeting at 2:39 p.m., 2:58 p.m., 3:06 p.m. and 3:22 p.m. respectively.)

(Post-meeting note: EPD and DSD invited Members and the Concerned Group through the Secretariat for a visit to the Pok Fu Lam Village on 21 June to search for a suitable site for the construction of pump house. FEHD had arranged a site visit at San Wai with SDC member FUNG Se-goun and relevant departments on 5.7.11.)

Agenda Item 3: Request for Early Implementation of the Enhancement of Slope, Gardens and Walkways of the Former French Mission (The Béthanie) for Public Access (Item raised by Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN and Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP) (DDEC Paper No. 19/2011)

19. The Chairman welcomed the following representatives from the Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts (HKAPA) to the meeting for the discussion of agenda item 3:

• Mr Ray NG, Director of Estates • Mr Sam TSEN, Assistant Estates Manager (Projects) • Mr Carl YIU, Supervisor (Estates)

20. Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN explained the reasons for raising this agenda item, and said that if the proposed project could be upgraded to Category A, a footpath would be provided to facilitate direct public access from Pok Fu Lam Road to .

11 21. Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP opined that not only did the aforesaid project facilitate teachers and students of HKAPA attending classes, it could also attract more people to visit the Academy’s Landmark Heritage Campus at the Béthanie conveniently

22. Mr Ray NG briefly introduced the background of the project.

23. Mr Sam TSEN introduced the proposed enhancement of slope, garden and walkways of the Béthanie campus with the aid of PowerPoint presentation, and explained that due to the rising costs of construction materials, an upward adjustment of the total project expenditure might be required in the range of $9 million to $10 million.

24. The Chairman said that since the Home Affairs Bureau (HAB) and the Government Property Agency (GPA) had not sent representatives to the meeting, Members could refer to their written replies as set out in Annexes 3 and 4 respectively. According to the written replies, the Government was in support of the project which would be implemented according to the priority of various projects.

25. 9 Members, namely Mr CHAI Man-hon, Ir CHAN Lee-shing, JP, Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP, Mr FUNG Wai-kwong, Mr KWAN Chung-chor, Mr LAM Kai-fai, MH, Mr LEUNG Ho-kwan, MH, Mr TSUI Yuen-wa and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquiries were summarised as follows:

(a) A Member said that, (1) the project involved an access connecting Pok Fu Lam Road and the privately-owned property of Baguio Villa, thus necessitating to open part of the area of Baguio Villa for public use. He asked whether written consent had been obtained from the Incorporated Owners of Baguio Villa (IOBV). If not, it was not appropriate for the Committee to express support to the project; (2) the area of slope under the enhancement proposal was quite large, while the estimated project cost was $8.5 million as of last year, he had reservation on the latest estimated expenditure provided by HKAPA, having regard the rising construction costs; (b) a Member opined that the project was technically viable and its cost was not so much. Therefore, it was believed that SDC would be capable of taking up the related coordination work. He also suggested utilising the District

12 Minor Works Fund to finance more projects of different nature; (c) a Member pointed out that HKAPA had already approached IOBV and its oral support had been obtained. The proposed project would involve two aspects: slope garden enhancement works to be implemented by HKAPA, and discussion between HKAPA and IOBV on the feasibility of providing an access connecting the slope garden to Baguio Villa; (d) a Member agreed to the general concept of the project to bring greater convenience to the public, but he would pledge his support provided that Baguio Villa consented to open the road section connecting the Béthanie campus, and its long-term use could be guaranteed; (e) some Members said that the road section under discussion was located behind Baguio Villa, it was necessary to consider the privacy of the residents to avoid a convenience measure becoming a nuisance; (f) a Member held that the project could allow visitors to enjoy the scenic garden and facilities of the Béthanie, and provide convenience for the residents of Baguio Villa to use the garden facilities; (g) a Member said that the Committee would not object to any recommendations that could help upgrade the quality of living of local residents. However, careful consideration was needed before a decision was made to avoid impeding residents’ interests. Therefore, he suggested listening to the views of residents’ organisations and owners’ corporations first and soliciting their support to the project; (h) a Member opined that if SDC could show its vote of support for the project, the owners’ corporations concerned would feel comfortable to support the project; (i) a Member said that SDC did not object to the enhancement proposal but concerned with the wishes of the nearby residents. He opined that the residents of Baguio Villa and the owners’ corporation concerned should be consulted first; and (j) a Member enquired if the Committee could indicate in its concluding remarks that a consensus of no objection was reached for the underlying concept of the project.

26. The Chairman thanked the Members concerned for putting forward this agenda item and HKAPA representatives for introducing the contents of project. He also thanked Members for actively expressing their views. He opined that Members had already fully expressed their views on the proposed project, which would be referred to relevant departments after the meeting. According to the written reply of

13 HAB, the project had been graded Category B-. In determining the category of a project, the Government had to consider a wide range of factors, including urgency, cost-effectiveness, the views of local residents, etc., and its upgrading would be subject to deliberation under established procedures. In addition, GPA did not object to the proposed project.

27. The Chairman concluded that many Members had not spoken in the discussion, so the comments expressed by those who spoke could not represent the Committee as a whole, especially when the views diverged. He stated that the minutes of the meeting should be sufficient to reflect Members’ views to the departments concerned.

(Mr YUEN Chi-kwong and Mr CHEUNG Siu-keung left the meeting at 4:00 p.m. and 4:20 p.m. respectively.)

(Post-meeting note: The Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts clarified that it had not approached IOBV, nor had it received oral support from IOBV for the proposed project. The Secretariat received a copy of reply from the management company of Baguio Villa to Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN dated June 7, revealing that IOBV and the Main Management Office of Baguio Villa would not consider the suggestion of connecting the premises with the garden of Béthanie based on security concern and technical considerations for slope maintenance The Secretariat had forwarded the opinions of the Members to HAB and GPA on 16 June 2011.)

Agenda Item 4: District Action Plan 2011-2012 (Item raised by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department) (DDEC Paper No. 20/2011)

28. The Chairman welcomed FEHD representative, Senior Health Inspector (Cleansing/Pest Control), Ms POON Lai-yee, Rene to the meeting for discussion of Agenda Item 4. FEHD distributed a booklet entitled “Common Food/Goods Items and Service Trades in Public Markets” (the Booklet) in the meeting.

14

29. Ms TAM Chi-man gave an introduction on District Action Plan 2011-12 and reviewed the work in the district in 2010-11. She added that FEHD had set up additional Oviposition Traps (ovitraps) in the Bays Area to strengthen the surveillance and control of mosquito problems in order to prevent the spread of Dengue Fever. On the regulation of food industry, the department would introduce new licence types and formulate specific enforcement action plans in accordance with the need of individual districts.

30. Ms POON Lai-yee, Rene presented with the aid of PowerPoint (supplementary information) the District Action Plan and invited Members to the healthy eating activities and exhibitions to be held in three markets in the district on 16, 20 and 23 May respectively. The department had also taken a series of district-specific actions. These included 48 prosecutions against seafood trucks which spilled seawater onto the roads, foreshore marine refuse scavenging activities co-organised with the Marine Department, as well as joint actions with the Police against illegal expansion of business areas by shops.

31. 11 Members, namely Mr CHAI Man-hon, Mr CHAN Fu-ming, Mrs CHAN LEE Pui-ying, Ms CHEUNG Sik-yung, Mr FUNG Wai-kwong, Mr KWAN Chung-chor, Joe, Mr LAM Kai-fai, MH, Mr WONG Ling-sun, Vincent, Mr TSUI Yuen-wa, Dr YANG Mo and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquires were summarised as follows:

(a) A Member thanked FEHD for taking enforcement actions to clamp down on illegal expansion of business areas by shops and hoped that the department would enhance the management and hygiene condition of the markets, and resolve the problem of narrow stalls and inadequate ventilation of markets. The Member also urged the department to address the littering problem in Aberdeen; (b) On the Government’s decision to freeze market rental for 18 months, a Member said that some stallholders proposed to have the lease of stalls extended to two or three years. Besides, some stallholders had reservations on the settlement of air-conditioning charges based on a user-pay principle. They hoped that the charges could be standardised in other forms (e.g. air-conditioning surcharge), so as to avoid creating unfairness due to the co-existence of new and old leases with different terms and conditions. In addition, stallholders in general were worried that if there was no rental

15 freeze, rental might climb up to the market level. They hoped that the department would conduct a detailed consultation with the tenants and draw up leases that were acceptable to them and the public; (c) A Member summarised the major public health incidents happened last year, including flu, radiation and food safety. He proposed that FEHD take the lead to arrange visits to the Nuclear Power Stations at Daya Bay to let Members have an understanding of the safety facilities of the stations. The department should also make use of the Booklet to raise public awareness on food safety, e.g. knowledge on and safe use of food additives; (d) A Member pointed out that there were frequent littering and other cleanliness offences near the pavement of the former area. FEHD should urge the contractors to step up cleansing efforts; (e) A Member asked how FEHD would avoid conflicts with public cleanliness offenders during its enforcement actions. Besides, the public wished that the department could exercise discretion during its law enforcements and be lenient with hawkers who wanted to make a living, so as to strike a balance between maintaining environmental hygiene and protecting the freedom of the trade; (f) A number of Members considered the Booklet useful in helping the ethnic minorities, employers and domestic helpers to get to know the food, goods items and service trades commonly found in the markets. They hoped that a second print would be issued with added below the Chinese characters, hence facilitating communication between expatriates and stall operators; (g) A Member hoped that FEHD could set up additional small refuse collection points in the district for household waste and small construction waste. The department should also consider drawing up slope clearance plans and co-ordinate with the Highways Department and DSD to conduct annual slope clearance; (h) A number of Members requested FEHD to resolve the problem of spilling seawater onto the roads from seafood trucks and possible damage to the tyres of other vehicles using the roads; (i) A Member said that there was already legislation in place to regulate the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks. If members of the public notice such irregularities, they might jot down information such as the registration marks of the vehicles, as well as the material time and place, etc. to facilitate subsequent prosecutions by the relevant departments. Besides, noting that FEHD’s refuse collection vehicles had spilled foul water when travelling on

16 steep roads, he hoped that the department could look into ways for improvement; and (j) A Member requested the department to step up its efforts to clean the public toilets and eliminate mosquitoes in Stanley during the renovation of Stanley Plaza. But the use of excessive anti-mosquito liquid should be avoided to prevent causing an impact on the ecology.

32. Ms TAM Chi-man gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(a) FEHD would further inspect the ventilation of Aberdeen Market and work with the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (EMSD) to study the feasibility of installation of ventilation fans and enhancement of the horsepower at suitable positions of the ventilating system. Stallholders should bear the air-conditioning charges if air-conditioning facilities were installed. Moreover, FEHD staff had often advised the stallholders not to obstruct passageways, but the space in the old-styled Aberdeen Market was relatively limited. The department would step up its enforcement actions and request the stallholders to place their goods properly in order to avoid obstruction of exits; (b) Members’ views on tenancy of stalls would be reflected to the Policy Branch. Since policies on market would affect the distribution of interest among old and new tenants, new policies in general would first be implemented on the new tenants so as to avoid impact on the old ones; (c) Food safety was the department’s concern. The Centre for Food Safety had issued a number of leaflets and publications in this regard. Members were invited to give their views, which would be forwarded to the Centre for Food Safety; (d) The department would consider adding Cantonese pinyin in the Booklet and suggest the Policy Division to create an e-booklet for public access on the Internet or downloading. Members would be informed of the distribution venues of the Booklet through the Secretariat when it had been reprinted; (e) Inspection on hygienic condition of allies and streets near Welfare Road as well as cleaning of public toilets on Stanley Main Street would be strengthened; (f) When conducting anti-mosquito operations, there would be controlled use of atomiser and other anti-mosquito aids to minimise harm on the environment; (g) FEHD staff would conduct regular inspection on various hygiene and street obstruction blackspots and carry out enforcement as well as issue summons

17 against offenders. With the experience and determination of the enforcement officers, the department was confident in fulfilling its duties of safeguarding environmental hygiene and food safety, despite the difficulties involved. The department would provide its frontline staff with appropriate counselling and training. Meanwhile, provided that safety of road users would not be compromised, the department would exercise flexibility in management of hawkers selling dry goods in low-density areas. Nonetheless, to ensure food and environmental hygiene, the department would not, in any case, permit hawking of cooked food at any spots; (h) Both FEHD and the Police concerned the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks and had regularly reported the enforcement progress in the District Management Committee meetings. When irregularities were observed, members of the public might complete the report form or call 2868 0000 and provide information including the vehicle registration mark of the subject seafood truck as well as the time and place when such offence was observed. The person reported the case should leave his/her contact number for future contact and follow-up actions, hence facilitating prosecution. Members of the public might also report blackspots of the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks, so that the department could step up its inspection. The department would attempt to distribute leaflets to truck drivers at Fish Marketing Organisation, reminding them to avoid overfilling of seawater in the truck to reduce the chance of spilling; (i) The setting up of small refuse collection points should be responded by EPD, which was responsible for the regulation of construction waste. As to the clearance of slope, Members might inform FEHD the lots requiring clearance after the meeting to see whether special cleaning action could be arranged or whether the cleaning work of such grey areas should be added in new cleaning service contracts; and (j) FEHD would inform its Transport Section of the leakage of foul water from refuse collection vehicles. It was hoped that the public would provide the location of the leakage so that the department could trace the route and model of the vehicles.

33. Four Members, namely Mr AU Lap-sing, Mr CHAN Fu-ming, Mr FUNG Wai-kwong and Mr WONG Ling-sun, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquires were summarized as follows:

18 (a) It is hoped that the Booklet would be distributed through the markets under the Housing Department; (b) The problem of deliberate spilling of seawater from seafood trucks should be tackled without delay, and the design of refuse collection vehicles should be improved; and (c) FEHD staff should shut the door of the Tsung Man Street Refuse Collect Point as soon as the refuse was collected to prevent the stench from wafting around.

34. Ms TAM Chi-man responded that the design of refuse collection vehicles would be examined according to the practical requirements lest the environmental hygiene would be affected by the foul water leak. The problem of Tsung Man Street Refuse Collection Point would be followed up. Regarding the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks, meetings would be convened when necessary and Members concerned as well as representatives of the industry would be invited to discuss how to tackle the problem at source.

35. The Chairman indicated that the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks had all along been addressed and followed up by law enforcement departments together with the District Management Committee. Relevant prosecution figures over the past year would be provided after the meeting for Members’ reference. The Committee approved and expressed appreciation of the operations conducted by FEHD in the district. It was hoped that the environmental and hygiene problems of the district would continuously be monitored.

(Mr YUEN Chi-kwong and Mr CHEUNG Siu-keung left the meeting at 4:00 p.m. and 4:20 p.m. respectively.)

(Post-meeting note: On 6 July, the Secretariat forwarded to Members the statistics of enforcement actions against the spilling of seawater from seafood trucks over the past year.)

Agenda Item 5: Anti-mosquito Campaign 2011 (Phase II) in Southern District (Item raised by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department) (DDEC Paper No. 21/2011)

19

36. Ms TAM Chi-man presented the results of Anti-mosquito Campaign 2011 (Phase I) and the details of Phase II.

37. The Chairman advised that Members might contact FEHD after the meeting to follow up the situation of various blackspots in the district.

38. Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP and Mr TSUI Yuen-wa spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquiries were summarised as follows:

(a) A Member gave recognition to the efforts of FEHD in mosquito prevention; and (b) A Member enquired about the latest readings of ovitrap index. He attributed the increase in number of adult mosquitoes to the breeding in stagnant water instead of ovitraps, thereby affecting the ovitrap readings collected.

39. Ms TAM Chi-man responded that the ovitrap indices for three surveillance locations in the district in March were all “0” and those for April would be released upon observation, checking of ovitraps and data collation. Ovitraps aimed to attract Aedes albopictus or other adult mosquitoes to lay eggs inside. The number of the eggs of Aedes albopictus would be counted for assessing the prevalence of Aedes albopictus in the district. The “0” index reflected that there was no transmission risk of dengue virus. FEHD staff who had recently conducted a visit at the slope behind Pok Fu Lam Village and Chi Fu Fa Yuen considered that the habitat of mosquitoes in the thick undergrowth, or inaccessible locations where cleansing work could hardly be conducted, might account for the increase of mosquitoes. FEHD would make recommendations for elimination of mosquitoes upon studying the condition of individual sites.

40. The Chairman urged FEHD to step up mosquito elimination and prevention work in view of the impending rainy season.

（Mr CHU Ching-hong, JP and Mr FUNG Se-goun left the meeting at 4:30 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. respectively. Mr FUNG Wai-kwong and Mr CHAN Fu-ming left the meeting at 5:28 p.m.）

20 Agenda Item 6: Progress Report of Tin Wan Concrete Batching Plant Monitoring Group (DDEC Paper No. 22/2011)

41. The Chairman briefed Members on the report of the Monitoring Group.

42. Mr AU Lap-sing and Mr CHAI Man-hon raised comments and enquiries with details as follows:

(a) a Member said that at the meeting of the Monitoring Group, a number of members had commented that the plant should arrange staff to regulate the traffic if its mixer trucks planned to turn right onto Tin Wan Praya Road, which was double white lines, after leaving the plant to ensure traffic safety; and (b) as the plant would be put into operation this June, that would be before the next DDEC meeting, a Member enquired about the monitoring arrangements after the commissioning of the plant, so that the Monitoring Group could take immediate follow-up action in case of improper practice.

43. The Chairman said that at the previous meeting of the Monitoring Group, it was requested that the plant should consult the Transport Department (TD) on the en-route arrangement of mixer trucks leaving Tin Wan, so as to study how to avoid mixer trucks turning left onto Wah Kwai Estate, thus affecting the traffic at the bus terminus there. Although the tenure of the Monitoring Group would end with the expiry of the current DC term, the Monitoring Group would still arrange on-site inspections at the plant to keep in view of its operation. It was believed that under the existing legislation and the efforts of the Monitoring Group to monitor the situation, the plant would comply with environmental standards as stipulated in the contract. As for the monitoring arrangement in future, the next DC term would set up a new working group to follow up.

(Mr TSUI Yuen-wa and Ms CHEUNG Sik-yung left the meeting at 5:35 p.m. and 5:40 p.m. respectively.)

(Post-meeting note: On 4 July 2011, the Secretariat had arranged Members and the members of the monitoring Group to inspect the operation of the plant.)

21

Agenda Item 7: Progress Report on Planning Works in Southern District (DDEC Paper No. 15/2011)

Progress of Hotel Development Projects in Wong Chuk Hang Business Area being Approved by Town Planning Board

44. Mr CHAI Man-hon pointed out that although the planning permission for hotel development of some sites was lapsed, some of the sites had been converted to commercial uses instead. For example, 2 Heung Yip Road had been developed into an office building. In this connection, he asked whether the latest development of those sites could be provided in the progress report.

45. Ms YIU Yuk responded that some applicants were indeed forsaking their hotel development plans after planning permission was granted. Under the “Other Specified Uses” annotated “Business” zone, Town Planning Board’s approval was required for hotel development, which was a Column 2 use, but not for commercial development, such as office. However, the applicant had to apply to the Lands Department (LandsD) for lease modification. The Planning Department would, in consultation with LandsD, g incorporate the latest development in respect of the hotel sites in the next progress report.

Progress Report on Other Works in Southern District Landslip Prevention and Mitigation Programme Natural Terrain Hazard Mitigation Works at Queen Mary Hospital

46. The Chairman welcomed Mr LEUNG Wai-kin, Geotechnical Engineer/Engineering Geology 5 of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD), and the following representatives from Fugro (Hong Kong) Limited (Fugro) to the meeting for the discussion of this item:

• Mr KK. PANG, Associate Director • Mr Andy NG, Associate Director • Mr TSIM CT, Douglas, Senior Engineer • Ms Candy KANG, Project Engineer

47. Mr LEUNG Wai-kin introduced the landslip study on the natural hillside

22 behind Queen Mary Hospital (QMH).

48. Mr K.K. PANG briefly introduced the “Natural Terrain Hazard Mitigation Works” (mitigation works) at the aforesaid natural hillside with the aid of PowerPoint presentation (Supplementary Information). According to the project programme, the access point to the work site would be located to the north of QMH and the bus stop there would be occupied temporarily. However, this would not affect the traffic at Pok Fu Lam Road. There was another bus stop about one minute’s walk from the affected bus stop, people could use it to obtain bus services.

49. Four Members, namely Mr CHAI Man-hon, Mr LAM Kai-fai, MH, Mr LEUNG Ho-kwan, MH and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquiries were summarised as follows:

(a) a Member was in support of the mitigation works and deemed it necessary to ensure the safety of QMH and its nearby slopes. He also opined that the works should be implemented before the expansion project of QMH commenced. Noting that the many traffic accidents that occurred at the junction of Pok Fu Lam Road and Sassoon Road, he reminded the construction vehicles to exercise due care to the traffic conditions on the road section concerned when travelling in and out of the work site. Moreover, he requested the works department concerned to take this opportunity to enhance the pedestrian walkway by the slope, or open a new footpath to connect Pok Fu Lam Road and Hong Kong Trail; (b) as the mitigation works would affect an extensive area of QMH, a Member opined that CEDD should obtain prior consent from QMH before project commencement, and coordinate with QMH on various project items to be implemented at different phases, such as traffic arrangement of dump trucks in the premises of QMH. Additionally, the area at the rear of Block K of QMH had suffered serious flooding during rainy season, CEDD should draw up a contingency plan to prepare for the unstable weather; (c) a Member said that the 2 bus stops to the north of QMH were just 150 metres apart, and suggested that TD should consider combining the 2 bus stops. In addition, he also agreed to the recommendation on connecting Pok Fu Lam Road to the hiking trails; (d) a Member clarified that the 2 bus stops to the north of QMH served different purposes, one of which was to facilitate grave-sweeping during

23 the Ching Ming Festival. Moreover, many QMH staff had made use of the bus stop which would be temporarily closed during project period, so thorough consultation would be needed for any changes in bus stop location; (e) due to the natural terrain of the aforesaid hillside, debris flow occurred easily. A Member considered that it was necessary to take the precaution to carry out mitigation works as soon as practicable. However, it needed to discuss the detailed arrangements with QMH to avoid disrupting the operation of the hospital; and (f) since the expansion project of QMH would need a relatively large area of land, a Member opined that the hillside could provide additional land for the expansion of the hospital.

50. Mr K.K. PANG gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(a) Fugro had consulted QMH, and been in close liaison with the hospital. In addition, the requests of QMH, such as the control on air, noise and water pollution levels, had been incorporated in the contract, which would be monitored by a task force under the construction team; (b) to minimise debris flushing off the slope, works would not take place in the vicinity of natural stream in the rainy season; (c) according to the preliminary plan, the bus stop located to the north of QMH would only be closed for a short period, and whether it would be closed permanently was outside the scope of the mitigation works; and (d) information showed that there was no hiking trail within the area of QMH, only a hiking trail on its northern slope connecting to its entrance at Pok Fu Lam Road in the north. Most sections of the aforesaid hiking trail were not within the project coverage area.

51. Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN requested CEDD to provide information on footpaths in Pok Fu Lam area and the related repair and maintenance after the meeting.

52. Mr LEUNG Wai-kin responded that he would further discuss the matter with the Member concerned after the meeting.

53. The Chairman concluded that Members had agreed that it was necessary to implement mitigation works. Yet he reminded that CEDD and the contractor should

24 keep contact with QMH and the affected residents nearby, so as to ensure that the operation and hospital service of QMH would not be affected.

Progress Report on Public Housing Works in Southern District Wah Fu (I) & Wah Fu (II) Estate Rewiring inside Domestic Flats (RDF)

54. Mr WONG Sun-man suggested and the Committee agreed to delete this item from the report as the project had been completed.

Repair works to cantilever corridor slab in Wah Fu (I) & (II) Estate

55. Mr CHAI Man-hon enquired whether this project could be completed on schedule; and in case of works delay, whether the Housing Department (HD) would expedite its progress so as to catch up with the original completion date. He requested HD to give a written reply on the progress of the project concerned.

56. Mr WONG Sun-man responded that HD would closely monitor the progress of works, and would take appropriate measures to address any impediments to project progress. As of end of April, information showed that the project could be completed in June. He would update the latest developments at the progress report for the next meeting in case the project could not be completed as scheduled.

57. The Chairman asked HD to note Member’s concern, and update the latest status of the project in the progress report.

Addition of Lift Towers in Wah Fu (I) & (II) estates

58. Mr WONG Sun-man said that the addition of lift tower had been included in the report at Members’ request.

59. Mr CHAI Man-hon asked why project periods of Wah Fu (I) and (II) Estates were different despite that their project scopes were the same, and was concerned whether the project could be completed as scheduled.

60. Mr WONG Sun-man said that the project period of individual project items could be affected by many factors such as geographical location. Therefore, even if the project nature was the same, the project periods of different projects could be different. HD would further discuss the matter with Mr CHAI Man-hon at a separate

25 meeting after this meeting in the evening.

Follow Up Items Shek O Quarry Site

61. The Chairman said that at the last meeting, Members had discussed how to better utilise the quarry site before it was rendered a work site. Some Members had suggested to opening the site for flying kites, or in the simplest way for public use, and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) was asked to study on the feasibility of the aforesaid uses. Prior to the meeting, the Secretariat had invited the Members concerned to a special meeting to explore the feasibility of various utilisation modes for the site. He invited LCSD to supplement on the feasibility of opening the site for public use in the simplest way.

62. Mrs CHAN LEUNG Ka-ling said that at present, Shek O Quarry Site was a government land under “Unspecified Use”. Under the current practice, if LCSD wished to use the site for recreational purposes, it needed to apply to the Lands Department (LandsD) which took around 4 to 5 months to process the application. Following that, LCSD would publish the proposed land use in the gazette, which took around 6 to 9 months to complete, and could manage the recreational venue under the Pleasure Grounds Regulation if the gazette met with no objection. Yet the site would be surrendered to LandsD in 2013 for use as a temporary work site for MTR to precast immersed tube units. In view of the short period available for use, LCSD did not recommend to use the site for short-term recreational purposes.

63. Seven Members, namely Ms MAR Yuet-har, BBS, MH, the Chairman, Mr CHAI Man-hon, Mrs CHAN LEE Pui-ying, Mr LAM Kai-fai, MH, Mr LEUNG Ho-kwan, MH and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN, spoke on this agenda item. Their comments and enquiries were summarised as follows:

(a) a Member opined that the only possible option to open the land for public use was for LandsD to invite interested parties to submit an expression of interest and then considered the applications for short-term use submitted; (b) a Member enquired whether the site could be granted to charitable organisations under the arrangement of temporary government land allocation on a renewable basis, so as to encourage charitable organisations or individuals to apply for use of the site. In addition, since street lighting was provided at the quarry site, he opined that FEHD and

26 the Police could take up cleansing services and security work respectively so that the site could be available for public enjoyment; (c) the Chairman said that due to time constraint, it was necessary to confirm how to make good use of the site and examine its feasibility at the meeting; (d) the Chairman asked LandsD the time needed for processing applications for short-term land use submitted by voluntary organisations; (e) a Member wished to make good use of the site, but opined that as it took 3 months to process the application submitted by charitable organisations, and might be even longer for applications from other organisations or individuals, also, it needed to restore the land to its original state before surrendering it to LandsD, the period available for use was indeed very limited. In this regard, she suggested that the development of the site for recreational purposes should be kept on hold until the final stage of construction at the temporary work site for the Shatin to Central Link (SCL); (f) a Member pointed out that the crux of the issue was whether the proposed use was feasible for implementation. The site was quite remote and the duration of availability was very limited, also it was still unknown whether charitable organisations were interested in leasing the land. He suggested that Members should gauge the intentions of local charitable organisations before putting forward recommendations to the department concerned; (g) a Member said that the site had already been reserved as a temporary work site for SCL from 2013 to 2018. Under this circumstance, it was unlikely that the site could be used for recreational purposes by 2013; (h) a Member held that the feasibility of using the site for short-term use depended on the proposed use and the decision of the department concerned. Nevertheless, there should be ways to let the public know that the site could be available for short-term use; and (i) a Member opined that consideration could be given to opening the site as public space for public enjoyment, but did not agree to invest extra resources for this purpose.

64. The Chairman reminded that the following points should be considered in opening the quarry site for public use: (1) the quarry site was government land available for temporary usage, and would be used as a work site in the near future. In case it was open for use, public safety should be considered and that it should be done in compliance with the relevant regulations; (2) at the last meeting, LCSD was

27 asked to examine the feasibility of various options proposed by Members and it was concluded that the proposals were not quite feasible; (3) the approach to utilise land resources was correct, only that the duration of availability of the site was far too short; and (4) LandsD welcomed any organisations or parties to apply for the use of the site and all applications submitted would be processed according to the established procedures.

65. Ms LOU Yin-yee, Joanne responded that the there was a lack of supporting infrastructure facilities for the quarry site and the said site would be available for temporary use for one year so. In the light of these circumstances, the chance of developing the site by the private sector was dim, while an invitation of expression of interest could not possibly change the circumstances of the site mentioned above. Nevertheless, LandsD was open-minded about the proposal for temporary uses of the quarry site and would process applications from charitable organisations or individuals according to the applicable procedure. It would take about 3 to 6 months for LandsD to process such application when received from charitable organizations for simple case. However, for more complicated cases such as the quarry site, it would take perhaps 3 to 6 months or even longer to process such application depending on the views of different departments when the applications were circulated for comments.

66. Mrs CHAN LEUNG ka-ling responded that LCSD was responsible for managing pleasure grounds and their amenities and its authority was limited. Besides, the Pleasure Grounds Regulation had its own limitation. Given the tight manpower and other resources of her department, it would be difficult for LCSD to manage a facility of such a large size.

67. The Chairman said that having considered all relevant objective factors, the related department concluded that the short-term use of the site was not practical. In view of this, it was decided that there was no longer any need to follow this up at the next meeting.

Concern on the Barrier-free Facilities of the Yue Kwong Road Market Entrance on Shek Pai Wan Estate

68. At the last meeting, a Member proposed to re-open the lift of Yue Kwong Road Market, install CCTV at the lift lobby on Yue Kwong Court podium and strengthen security measures at the said podium. Mr WONG Sun-man presented

28 HD’s follow-up report on the feasibility of the above proposals and reported the latest development.

69. Ms MAR Yuet-har, BBS, MH and Mr WONG Ling-sun raised comments and enquiries on the related matters. Details were summarised as follows:

(a) a Member said that most of the residents in Yue Fai Court opposed to re-opening the lift of Yue Kwong Road Market for fear that it would bring about problems like “young night drifters” or noise nuisances. If there was a genuine need for re-opening the lift, he hoped that the related departments could consult the local residents before implementation; and (b) a Member said that the original purpose of re-opening the lift was to bring convenience to the elderly and the disabled in the neighbourhood. She had proposed to construct an elevator as an alternative to re-open the lift, but was objected by the stall tenants in the market. In this connection, she had written to the Owners’ Corporation of Yue Fai Court to explain the reasons for re-opening the lift and would also explore other viable alternatives to bring convenience to the residents.

70. The Chairman asked HD to continue to follow up on the installation of CCTV on the lift lobby at Yue Fai Court podium and strengthening of security measures.

Progress Report on Lands Department Temporary Government Lands Allocation

71. The Chairman said that LandsD had included an updated report on the recently approved applications or renewed cases for temporary government land allocation in Annex 7 of the paper. Given the numerous items under each area, Members were advised to contact LandsD directly for detailed information on individual cases.

Agenda Item 8: Any Other Business

72. The Chairman said that there was no other business.

(Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH, Mrs MAK TSE How-ling and Ir CHAN Lee-shing, JP left the meeting at 6:16 p.m., 6:20 p.m. and 6:42 p.m. respectively.)

29

Part II – Items for Information

Street Management Report (as at 30 April 2011) (DDEC Paper No.24/2011)

73. The Committee noted the contents of the report.

Agenda Item 10: Date of Next Meeting

74. The Chairman said that the 25th DDEC meeting would be held on Monday, 18 July 2011 at 2:30 p.m. at SDC Conference Room.

75. There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:38 p.m.

Secretariat, Southern District Council June 2011

30