Minutes of the 21st Meeting of the Traffic, Transport and Housing Committee of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council (2016-2019)

Date: 4 July 2019 (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, Kowloon

Present:

Chairman Mr HUI Tak-leung

Vice-chairman Ms KWAN Sau-ling

District Council Members Mr IP Ngo-tung, Chris, JP Mr JO Chun-wah, Craig Ms WONG Shu-ming, MH Mr LAM Kin-man Mr CHAN Siu-tong, MH, JP Mr LAU Pak-kei Mr CHOI Siu-fung, Benjamin Miss LI Sze-man 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 HUNG Chiu-wah, Derek Mr YU Tak-po, Andy

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

Representatives of the Government Miss PONG Kin-wah, Assistant District Officer (Yau Tsim Home Affairs Department Katherine Mong) (1) Ms CHUNG Wai-sze, Senior Liaison Officer (2), Yau Tsim Home Affairs Department Margaret Mong District Office Ms LO Wai-man, Mimi Senior Liaison Officer (Building Home Affairs Department Management), Yau Tsim Mong District Office Mr HUANG Hiu-chung, Engineer/Mongkok and Yaumatei Transport Department Sam Mr CHOW Ka-lok, Engineer/Yau Tsim Transport Department Vincent Mr TAM Ka-kei, Eric Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Transport Department Mong Mr LAU Hoi-wa Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Team Hong Kong Police Force (Yau Tsim District) Mr LAM Chi-wai, Mike Officer-in-charge, District Traffic Team Hong Kong Police Force (Mong Kok District) Mr NG Chun-ling District Engineer/Mong Kok Highways Department Mr LAU Tak-yin District Engineer/Yau Tsim Highways Department Ms LEUNG Kwok-mei, Housing Manager/Kowloon West and Housing Department Alice Sai Kung 11 Mr HO Wai-kuen Senior Structural Engineer/F1 Buildings Department

In Attendance:

Mr WU Man-kit Electronic Engineer/Project 1/1 Transport Department Ms CHIK Tsz-yan, Environmental Protection Officer Environmental Protection Vivian (Assessment and Noise) 63 Department Ms Betsy LEUNG Assistant Manager, Public Affairs The Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited Mr WAI Kam-choy Director Honest Profit Corporation Limited Mr CHEUNG Kin-hung, Senior Engineer/Major Projects 4 Transport Department Eric Ms WU Wing-yue, Engineer/Major Projects 8 Transport Department Phoebe Mr CHAN Kam-leung, Senior Engineer/Strategic Studies 5 Transport Department Jimmy Mr CHAN Ka-lai, Keith Engineer/Strategic Studies 3 Transport Department Mr FUNG Hon-wa, Deputy District Leisure Manager (Yau Leisure and Cultural Harris Tsim Mong) 1 Services Department Ms SUEN Pui-ling, Senior Executive Officer (Planning) Leisure and Cultural Sabrina Special Duty Services Department Mr HUNG Ho-man, Executive Officer (Planning) Special Leisure and Cultural Mason Duty Services Department Miss Joyce WAN Chief Public Affairs Officer Citybus Limited/New World First Bus Services Limited Ms KO Mei-yee, Bon Senior Professional Officer/Signboard Buildings Department Control 1

Secretary Ms LEUNG Suet-ying, Executive Officer (District Council) 1, Home Affairs Department Cherry Yau Tsim Mong District Office

- 2 - Absent:

Mr FUNG King-yiu Assistant District Operation Officer Hong Kong Police Force (Yau Tsim District)

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed Members, government representatives and those in attendance to the meeting of the Traffic, Transport and Housing Committee (“TTHC”). He said the government representatives and others invited to attend the meeting would be introduced when the respective items were discussed. In view of the lengthy agenda, he asked Members to speak as precisely and concisely as possible.

Item 1: Confirmation of Minutes of Last Meeting

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

Item 2: Matter Arising:

Completion of Mong Kok Footbridge Extension across Nathan Road Delayed Where Possible? (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 41/2019)

3. The Chairman said the written responses from the Highways Department (“HyD”) ----- and the Sun Hung Kai Properties Charitable Fund Limited (“Sun Hung Kai”) (Annexes 1 and 2) had been emailed to Members before the meeting for their perusal. He then welcomed:

(a) Mr Sam HUANG, Engineer/Mong Kok and Yaumatei of the Transport Department (“TD”); and (b) Mr NG Chun-ling, District Engineer/Mong Kok of the HyD.

4. The paper submitter had no supplementary remarks on the paper.

5. Mr NG Chun-ling reported on the latest progress of the project:

(i) The foundation works had been completed. The contractor was currently connecting staircases to the footbridge deck and carrying out deck structural works. The road closure arrangements in relation to the lifting of footbridge structural units for the Nathan Road section had been preliminarily approved by the departments concerned. (ii) The study on the lifting and installation methods of the footbridge had been completed. The deepened details such as the transporting route, time and arrangements would be submitted to the Traffic Management Liaison Group for its confirmation at a meeting. (iii) According to the preliminary arrangements, the prefabricated units produced in a workshop would first be transported to Stonecutters Island Public Cargo Working Area before being transported to Nathan Road (near the junction with Mong Kok Road) via Container Port Road South, Lin Cheung Road, Tonkin

- 3 - Street and Lai Chi Kok Road. (iv) Regarding the road closure arrangements, full closure of the section of Nathan Road between Bute Street and Argyle Street as well as the section of Mong Kok Road between Shanghai Street and Nathan Road was necessary. (v) As large-scale road closures were involved, relevant traffic diversion measures would be implemented. For the southbound traffic, there would be signs at Bute Street and Prince Edward Road West to direct motorists to the south of Mong Kok and Yau Ma Tei via Sai Yeung Choi Street South and Sai Yee Street. For the northbound traffic, there would be signs at Argyle Street to direct motorists to Prince Edward Road West via Tong Mi Road. All road closure arrangements had been approved by the departments concerned. (vi) The contractor would assemble the prefabricated units of the footbridge section spanning Nathan Road in a workshop. After assembly, inspection and passing relevant tests, the prefabricated units would be transported to the works site. Lifting works were expected to commence in the third quarter of this year.

6. Ms WONG Shu-ming pointed out that there had been a programme reporting on the issue, and she believed that the traffic diversion arrangements had been formulated just because the departments could no longer make any delays. She also had the following enquiries: (i) to facilitate the lifting works of the middle section of the footbridge, how long all the traffic diversion measures would last; and (ii) when traffic diversions were made, how the departments would inform the nearby stakeholders of the arrangements.

7. Mr WONG Kin-san said after the TTHC had arranged to continue the discussion on this item, slight progress of the relevant matters could be seen, with at least two written responses received and route maps clearly showing the coming arrangements. However, he considered that the two maps were quite complicated, and as long-time road closures would be involved, more information was needed in this regard. He was afraid that it would be difficult to have a good communication with the stakeholders with the route maps only. Moreover, he asked: (i) whether the prefabricated units, about 30-odd metres in length, would be assembled after being transported to Mong Kok Road, or their assembly would be completed in the container terminal; and (ii) about the exact time periods when the road closures would take place.

(Miss LI Sze-man joined the meeting at 2:40 p.m.)

8. Mr Andy YU said the construction of the footbridge had commenced since 1998, but it had still not been completed after 21 years. He did not understand what made the construction of a 35-metre-long footbridge so difficult, and considered that clearly there were problems in the project. Many members of the public were dissatisfied with the delay. The carriageway had been partially closed since 2010 with only two lanes open for use, seriously affecting the nearby traffic. The media had reported that the public had already forgotten why the lanes were closed and what project was underway. He shared with Mr WONG Kin-san that communication was very important. The District Council had invited the Sun Hung Kai to meetings multiple times, but it had never send any representatives to attend the meetings. He asked the Chairman whether the District Council had the authority to invite the Sun Hung Kai to send representatives to attend meetings. Although the project was targeted to be completed in the first quarter of 2020, it was not known whether the project would be further delayed. He considered that Councillors could do little at present.

- 4 - 9. The Chairman strongly condemned that the Sun Hung Kai did not send any representatives to attend the meeting. Nevertheless, as the Sun Hung Kai was not a government department, the District Council had no authority to require that it must send a representative to attend the meeting. He said that as the Sun Hung Kai did not respect the District Council, if he was still the chairman of the Committee in the next term, he would not allow the Sun Hung Kai to send any representatives to meetings. Besides, he asked the HyD the following questions: (i) the Sun Hung Kai had mentioned in its written response that a number of areas in respect of the works still could not be completed, but the HyD had stated that the works would commence soon. Their responses were different. He hoped that the department could clarify the situation; and (ii) as the Sun Hung Kai had mentioned that there were a number of factors affecting the project, he would like to know whether it would continue with the project, and if it would not carry on with the project, what solutions the departments would have, whether the Sun Hung Kai would be required to demolish the items near the works site, or whether no further approval would be granted to its applications for deferment of works or road closures.

10. Mr NG Chun-ling responded as follows

(i) The lifting works of the prefabricated units of the footbridge section at Nathan Road would approximately take a night’s time. According to the preliminary estimation, the road closure arrangements would take place between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. to minimise the impact on the residents and traffic in the vicinity. The department would ask the consultancy company to fully inform bus and minibus companies, nearby residents and on-street shops of the special traffic arrangements at that night in advance after the confirmation of the transporting and lifting time. (ii) The prefabricated units would be assembled in a workshop first. As the prefabricated units would be 30-odd metres in length and 70 to 80 tons in weight after assembly, consideration must be given to the length and weight of the transporting vehicles, and attention must also be paid to whether the bends along the route had sufficient space for the passing through of the transporting vehicles. The department would communicate with the consultancy company on all the details and request the company to pay attention to the relevant matters so as to ensure the smooth transportation of the units. (iii) The contractor was currently carrying out the deck structural works and constructing a work platform. After the lifting of the prefabricated units, the works for the footbridge deck would still be underway, so a temporary work platform would be needed for workers to carry out the remaining works on the deck safely. For the safety of the workers and the public, as well as some aloft works to be carried out, it was not suitable to reopen the pavement sections under the footbridge at this stage. (iv) Nevertheless, the department would pay close attention to the works arrangements. When the relevant conditions were met, the department would ask the consultancy company and the contractor to reopen more pavement sections for public use.

11. Mr Sam HUANG responded that the TD would continue coordinating with the HyD and provide views for the Traffic Management Liaison Group on the road closure arrangements. Besides, the department would also deploy officers to inspect the closed road sections from time to time in order to observe and assess the traffic condition of the roads. If any abnormal traffic condition was noticed, or if it was found that the reopening of the closed

- 5 - road sections had little impact on the works progress, the department would inform the HyD and the developer and request them to consider temporarily suspending the road closure arrangements.

12. The Chairman asked the Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) the following questions: (i) how long the road closure arrangements applied for could last; (ii) if a project could not be completed before the deadline, which department would be responsible for following up on the penalty and monitoring issues; (iii) when the approved works period of the Sun Hung Kai would end; and (iv) regarding that the project had not been completed before the deadline, whether government departments had imposed punishment and post-deadline monitoring on the developer. He said the Traffic Wing of the Police should be responsible for granting the relevant approval, and asked the Police to provide the relevant information after the meeting if they could not provide it at the time being.

13. Mr Mike LAM responded that no such information could be provided by the Mong Kok Police District for the time being. He would have a detailed communication with the Traffic Kowloon West, hoping that relevant information could be obtained for a reply.

14. The Chairman hoped that the government departments could submit papers after the meeting to provide supplementary information on the approved works period and the relevant penalties. The Chairman said that penalties would surely be imposed on other cases of works delays, so he did not understand why the Sun Hung Kai was given special treatment.

(Mr Craig JO joined the meeting at 2:46 p.m.)

15. Ms WONG Shu-ming said the Government had got a gift given by the developer into the current condition, which was ridiculous and ludicrous. She suggested that the Chairman write to the Secretary for Transport and Housing, with the minutes of this meeting being attached, to raise three requests: (i) provision of the exact completion date of the project at the next meeting; (ii) full communication with the users or the nearby stakeholders on the traffic diversion arrangements; and (iii) urging the Sun Hung Kai to fulfil its social responsibility by the Secretary, so that the public would not consider the Government a “toothless tiger”.

16. The Chairman asked Members whether they agreed with the said three requests. There was no objection. Besides, he hoped that the HyD would provide the relevant information after the meeting. The Chairman thanked the government representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

(Post-meeting note: The Chairman wrote to the Secretary for Transport and Housing in the ----- name of the Committee on 15 August 2019 (Annex 3) to express the requests of Members.)

Item 3: Concern over Traffic Congestion in Vicinity of Canton Road, Austin Road and Scout Path (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 52/2019)

17. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong, and Mr Vincent

- 6 - CHOW, Engineer/Yau Tsim, of the TD; and (b) Mr LAU Hoi-wa, Officer in charge, District Traffic Team (Yau Tsim District) of the HKPF.

18. Mr Alex POON provided supplementary information on the paper. He pointed out that the residents in Jordan and Tsim Sha Tsui had long been plagued by the traffic congestion problem at the road sections concerned, especially at peak hours when the problem was particularly serious. The residents had originally hoped that the traffic problem would be alleviated after the commissioning of the Express Rail Link (“XRL”) station; however, that was not the case. After the commissioning of the XRL and the opening of the Xiqu Centre in the West Kowloon, the traffic at the road sections concerned was very busy. The residents considered that the serious traffic congestion was caused by the illegal parking and the picking up/dropping off activities of cross-boundary coaches at Scout Path. The illegal parking at the double yellow lines on Scout Path would affect Austin Road and the pedestrian crossing, where no vehicle nor pedestrian could pass through. Local residents had pointed out that passengers waited at Scout Path for cross-boundary coaches, and the cross-boundary coach terminus sort of existed in name only. There were a number of schools in the vicinity of Scout Path, and students would walk past Scout Path during the periods before and after school, resulting in vehicle-pedestrian conflicts and dangerous situations. Besides, he had the following enquiries: (i) what traffic improvement measures the departments had; (ii) whether the duration of traffic signals would be adjusted according to the actual situations; (iii) during the past year, how many prosecutions had been initiated against the illegal parking and the traffic problems caused by picking up/dropping off activities of cross-boundary coaches at Scout Path; (iv) how many non-franchised buses were currently allowed to stop at Scout Path for picking up/dropping off passengers; (v) what actions the departments would take if they found cross-boundary coaches conducting illegal picking up/dropping off activities, and whether the licence renewal of the companies concerned would be affected; (vi) whether the departments had measures to follow up on the picking up/dropping off problem at Scout Path; and (vii) whether the addition of traffic facilities such as traffic lights and zebra crossings was necessary at the road sections concerned.

19. Mr Vincent CHOW responded that the TD was aware of the traffic situation in the vicinity of Scout Path and Austin Road. As the traffic at Scout Path was busy, a 24-hour prohibited zone had been set up there. If illegal parking was found, the department would refer the case to the Police for follow-ups. Besides, the department would keep communicating with the Police to combat illegal parking as far as possible. Regarding the problems related to cross-boundary coaches, the TD had contacted the coach companies, reminding them that their coaches should pick up/drop off passengers in the cross-boundary coach terminus and were not allowed to illegally stop and wait at, inter alia, locations with yellow lines.

20. Mr Eric TAM continued to respond that according to records, currently there were one short-haul cross-boundary coach route (the Yau Tsim Route) and 32 long-haul cross-boundary coach routes terminating at Austin Road Cross Border Coach Terminus. The TD were very concerned about the traffic congestion caused by cross-boundary coaches at Scout Path. The cross-boundary transport unit always paid attention to the operation of the location and would relay the information collected to the operators, urging them to stop and pick up/drop off passengers at suitable locations so as to avoid causing obstruction to members of the community and other road users. The operators understood that their operation affected the local traffic, saying that they would remind their drivers to observe regulations. They had apologised for any inconvenience caused to the members of the community. Regarding licence renewal, as the problem caused by picking up/dropping off

- 7 - activities concerned the conduct of individual drivers, the department would ask the companies concerned to urge their staff to improve their service and working behaviour. For serious cases, disciplinary actions would be taken by the companies.

21. Mr Craig JO said he did not see any solutions that could eradicate the problem from the department. He noticed that the location of the yellow box marking on Austin Road was always occupied by the passing vehicles, causing congestion in Shanghai Street that the vehicles there could hardly move, and then the congestion would extend to Jordan Road and cross-district congestion would be resulted. He asked how the situation of Austin Road would be dealt with. After the commissioning of the XRL, there had not been any improvement in the traffic congestion problem. If the situation was allowed to persist, traffic congestion would continue taking place in the whole Jordan district, which the residents would not be happy to see.

22. Mr Chris IP said he had inspected the site with Mr Alex POON and TD representatives earlier on, and at that time, he had suggested that the pedestrian crossing at Scout Path be moved forward, which he thought could produce concrete results and effectively prevent coaches from being parked illegally. He thanked the TD for its efforts in relocating the Airport Express shuttle bus stop to Austin Road, significantly alleviating the congestion problem. Given that traffic congestion was mainly caused by the illegal parking of some non-compliant coach drivers, he hoped that the department would take concrete measures to enhance the design of the roads concerned, so that pedestrian safety could be protected and motorists needed not feel alarmed. Currently, motorists’ sightlines were often blocked by the coaches, making them worried that they would hit pedestrians easily when cutting lanes and overtaking to drive into or out of Scout Path. He considered the situation absolutely unsatisfactory, and hoped that the TD would consider the suggestion.

(Ms Michelle TANG joined the meeting at 2:58 p.m.)

23. The Vice-chairman said the traffic congestion problem in the vicinity of Austin Road and Scout Path was well known to the public. She suggested that at the peak hours (from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.), traffic wardens be deployed there to divert traffic flows. As coaches was the main cause of the problem, if officers were deployed to divert traffic flows at the peak hours, or the issuance of summonses was stepped up, the situation might be improved. As there had not been any proposals on the best measures, line painting works or relocation of the traffic lights for the time being, she hoped that the traffic flows would first be diverted and monitored manually, and expected that the departments would implement the said measures at the initial stage.

24. Mr LAU Hoi-wa responded that the Police would consider deploying more police officers to the scene to divert traffic flows and take enforcement actions at the busiest hours, so as to improve the traffic condition at the peak hours.

25. The Chairman suggested that the Police notify the Councillor and the Member submitting the paper when taking enforcement actions. The Chairman thanked the government representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

26. The Chairman said the government representatives for Item 4 had not yet arrived and suggested discussing Item 5 first. There was no objection.

- 8 - Item 5: Concern over Excessive Advertisements Affecting Public Use of KMB’s Mobile Application (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 54/2019)

27. The Chairman said the written response from The Kowloon Motor Bus Company ----- (1933) Limited (“KMB”) (Annex 4) had been emailed to Members before the meeting for their perusal. He then welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD; (b) Miss Katherine PONG, Assistant District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) (1) of the Yau Tsim Mong District Office (“YTMDO”); and (c) Ms Betsy LEUNG, Assistant Manager, Public Affairs of the KMB.

28. Ms WONG Shu-ming provided supplementary information on the paper. She pointed out that the KMB was a public enterprise and thus had its social responsibilities. Even though it was said in the written response that the introduction of advertisements was to help maintaining the operation of the application, she considered that there were too many advertisements. The media had reported that the close icons of full-screen advertisements were not shown on a fixed location, causing inconvenience to users. The KMB hoped to help the public use its services with the application, but the excessive advertisements had first hindered the elderly from using the application. When the elderly found it difficult even just to close the advertisements, they would give up using the application. Although Councillors’ offices had held seminars for the elderly on the use of the bus company’s application, they had found the application different from what they had learnt, with many pop-up advertisements. She understood that the KMB needed to increase advertisement revenue, but she would like to ask the company whether full-screen advertisements could be reduced. If members of the public could search bus route information easily through the application, it was believed that they would use the services of the KMB more willingly. However, the current practice was doing the opposite.

29. Ms Betsy LEUNG responded that the application provided free information for passengers. As it was necessary to pay for the recurrent costs of the system, together with the continuous enhancement of services during the recent years, advertisements had been introduced. She understood the concerns of Members, and would relay Members’ views to the company, hoping that a balance could be achieved without affecting passengers’ search for bus schedule information.

30. Mr CHAN Siu-tong did not agree with the KMB. He said that if the application served the public purely, there would be no ground to blame the introduction of advertisements; however, being a bus company, the KMB earned revenue from bus fares and the advertising fees earned from the application were not the only income of the company. Moreover, the advertisements at bus stops also brought revenue to the company. While the application was aimed at providing help for passengers, advertisements were introduced without fare concessions being offered. As such, he did not quite agree with KMB’s saying that the introduction of advertisements was to help maintain the operation of the application. Besides, he criticised that the KMB still could not cooperate with the Citybus Limited/New World First Bus Services Limited (“Citybus/NWFB”) in the area of cross-harbour routes, causing “periods of non-KMB departures” in the application. Although the income from cross-harbour routes should have accounted for a high proportion of revenue of the KMB, it was often difficult for members of the public to obtain schedule information on cross-harbour routes from its application. He hoped that the KMB would cooperate with other companies

- 9 - to enhance the operation of cross-harbour routes by exchanging schedule information with them.

31. Ms WONG Shu-ming pointed out that the KMB should consider that the lack of smoothness in using the application would certainly affect the selection of its services by members of the public. If the introduction of advertisements was to help maintain the operation of the application, she hoped that the KMB would calculate the revenue changes when the income from advertisements caused the loss of passengers. She also suggested the KMB make reference to the applications used in the advanced cities in the Mainland which provided information on the catering shops in the vicinity at the same time when showing route information. This could not only attract shops to advertise in the application but also enable members of the public to obtain leisure information on the nearby areas. Moreover, full-screen advertisements could be avoided by such kind of advertisements. She hoped that the KMB would make improvement.

32. Ms Betsy LEUNG responded that cross-harbour routes involved jointly operated routes, with different stakeholders, so the KMB needed to discuss the relevant matters with other bus companies. She pointed out that the information on the timetables of KMB departures was provided on the website of the company. Concerning that members of the public had found the advertisements causing the lack of smoothness in using the application, and some had even stopped using the services of the KMB due to this reason, the company certainly did not want such things to happen. Hence, the company would study how to make improvement.

33. The Chairman thanked the representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

Item 6: Strong Advice to Improve Frequency of Minibus Route No. 79W (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 55/2019)

34. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD; and (b) Mr WAI Kam-choy, Director of the Honest Profit Corporation Limited.

35. Mr Andy YU provided supplementary information on the paper. He said that Minibus Route No. 79W had come into service since May, and he had had a trial ride on the minibus, finding that the route was operating at a headway of 10 to 15 minutes, the frequency of which was too low that there was insufficient service. He suggested that the route operate at a headway of 5 to 10 minutes, and that the frequency of service be increased at the peak hours. He pointed out that members of the public could walk from Hoi Fu Court to Mong Kok Station in 15 minutes, so they would rather go to Mong Kok on foot than wait for the minibus. He understood that the low frequency of Route No. 79W was due to the reason that it was waiting for the commissioning of West Kowloon Government Offices, and the frequency of the route would only be improved at that time. He hoped that the TD and the minibus company would consider improving the frequency of service earlier, so members of the public would be willing to take Route No. 79W.

(Mr TONG Yik-kan joined the meeting at 3:12 p.m.)

- 10 - 36. Mr WAI Kam-choy responded as follows:

(i) Minibus Route No. 79W had come into service since 1 May. At present, there were two 19-seaters and one 16-seater running the route. Normally, the route operated at a headway of 10 to 12 minutes. As there was no stop at Hoi Wang Road and Argyle Centre, members of the public might not notice the passing through of the minibuses of Route No. 79W. (ii) The TD had suggested providing a stop in front of the entrance of “Yaumatei Primary School”, but since that location were fully parked by private cars and taxis, the minibuses of Route No. 79W could not stop there. (iii) As the operator, he strived to deliver the best minibus service in the most sincere manner with the sense of social responsibilities. Nevertheless, he needed the support and cooperation of the TD and the public. Since its coming into service, there had been only 160 passengers taking the route each day, with a daily income of about 300-odd dollars only, not enough for the fuel charges, let alone other costs like vehicle rental fees. Under the current circumstances, without the assistance of the department and the public, it would be difficult for the company to have an extra vehicle to run the route or improve the frequency of service. (iv) Upon the operation of Route No. 79W, he had raised that many passengers had been taking Route No. 79K, and if the two routes co-existed, passengers might not choose Route No. 79W. Besides, he had requested that the route should reach Tai Kok Tsui Road quickly, and one or two additional stops should be provided in Mong Kok. If only one stop could be added at Argyle Centre, it would be hard for the route to attract more passengers. (v) After two months’ operation and observation, he hoped that all parties would study together whether the service of this route could be maintained. If sufficient support was obtained, the company could increase a vehicle or improve the frequency of service.

37. The Chairman said the Honest Profit Corporation Limited had raised its requests, and hoped that the TD would respond to the following two points: (i) whether more stops could be added to improve its operating environment; and (ii) whether the minibus route would be reviewed or other remedial measures would be studied.

38. Mr Eric TAM responded as follows:

(i) When the department conducted district consultation and collected views from the District Council for Minibus Route No. 79W, it had indeed been proposed in the original design that both the first pick-up/drop-off point and the terminus be set up in Park Avenue bus terminus. (ii) Currently, there was a taxi stand in Park Avenue bus terminus. With the general support from the District Council and members of the community, the taxi stand would be resumed for other uses. In the long run, Route No. 79W should terminate in the bus terminus to provide a satisfactory waiting environment for passengers. (iii) Regarding the additional pick-up/drop-off points and route diversion suggested by the operator, the department would give active consideration, and the major premise was to balance route diversion and the impact on existing passengers. If route diversion involved the exclusion of some areas or road sections

- 11 - covered by the service of the existing route, some passengers might be affected. Hence, careful consideration was necessary. (iv) If there were some balanced proposals, for example, encouraging passengers to take Route No. 79K to the market and Route No. 79W to Argyle Centre and Mong Kok Station dedicatedly, the department would make reference to the views of members of the community and conduct district consultation, and then make a decision on the proposals with the operator. (v) Route No. 79W was currently a circular route, facing restrictions at Argyle Centre as no terminus could be set up at Sai Yeung Choi Street for the stopping of minibuses. This would not only cause inconvenience to passengers but also result in difficulties in operation. The department hoped to explore ways to overcome the problem as far as possible together with the operator, such as operating the route with a fixed schedule and fixed stopping points so that passengers could have a better control of the waiting time according to the fixed schedule, in order to enhance the attractiveness of Route No. 79W.

39. The Chairman asked the TD: (i) whether there was prior planning for the introduction of a minibus route; and (ii) about the open tender procedures of a minibus route.

40. Mr Eric TAM responded that Route No. 79W was an auxiliary route of Route No. 79K. During the design stage of Route No. 79K, the Honest Profit Corporation Limited had won the bid for the operation of the route via open tender procedures. Under the existing operation model of minibuses, supplementary routes or secondary routes could be introduced under a main route. For the operation of a route supplementing the service of a main route, the operator concerned could negotiate with the department. If the proposed route was just a slightly diverted version of the main route, the operator could introduce the supplementary route after the completion of district consultation, and open tender procedures were not needed.

41. The Chairman said that he had asked the TD the questions because he hoped that Members could have a clear picture of the situation before making enquiries. The TD had clearly explained that Route No. 79W was an auxiliary route. He put a counter-question of what social responsibilities were, saying when Councillors and members of the community considered that the service of a route operated by an operator was insufficient, they would of course hope that the service frequency could be increased, instead of discontinuing its operation because of its difficulties in operation. Social responsibilities were that no matter whether the expected results could be achieved or not, one should be committed to maintain the provision of services. However, according to what the operator had just said, due to difficulties in operation, he hoped that the TD would cancel the route. This was another question.

42. Mr CHUI Kin-man said that he frequently took Minibus Route No. 79W. He considered the vehicles clean and neat, and the working attitude of the drivers good. However, he had noticed that when he boarded at Argyle Street, the minibuses were often empty of passengers. He agreed that it would be quite difficult for the operator to increase the frequency under the situation of insufficient passengers, and suggested that Route No. 79W change to stop at the junction of Sai Yeung Choi Street and Mong Kok Road, and then turn right to Sai Yee Street before turning right again to Argyle Street. As Route No. 79K was often already full at that location, and most passengers would alight only at Ming Kei College, Hoi Fu Court, Charming Garden, etc., if Route No. 79W was cancelled, the residents of Charming Garden, Hoi Fu Court and Park Avenue would have to wait for a long time for

- 12 - taking minibuses to Mong Kok.

43. Ms FUNG Lai-mei questioned whether the TD and the operator had got to understand the attractiveness of Route No. 79W to passengers, and whether they had carried out sufficient planning work. She was of the view that residents could go to Mong Kok via Olympian City 3 and Ming Kei College by about five minutes’ walk and needed not take Route No. 79W. She put a counter-question of how the number of passengers could be increased if there was no frequency improvement. The operator had said that it had a daily income of several hundred dollars only at present, hoping that the Government would cancel its operation of the route or offer assistance. She asked whether the income of the route could be increased if an additional stop was provided in front of the entrance of “Yaumatei Primary School”; however, as that location was narrow, how the nearby taxis could be handled when the minibuses stopped there. She considered that all parties had a responsibility, and said when some Councillors and members of the community expressing support for the cancellation of the taxi stand, she had already raised objection, disagreeing that that could suitably help the community.

44. Mr Andy YU raised the following enquiries: (i) after the route had come into service for about two months, whether the minibus operator and the TD had had enough communication; (ii) given the cancellation of the taxi stand, whether a stop for Route No. 79W could be provided in Park Avenue bus terminus; and (iii) whether the TD had measures to solve the picking up/dropping off problem at Mong Kok Station.

45. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said after Minibus Route No. 79W had come into service from May, he had received many complaints, which he had relayed to the TD and the operator. Actually, it was difficult for passengers to board on the minibuses of the route at Mong Kok Station, where the waiting time was long. He understood that the introduction of Route No. 79W was to complement the commissioning of the government offices, but its current passenger occupancy seemed to be below expectation and its patronage had been over-estimated. Moreover, members of the public usually had their own fixed travelling patterns to go to the market in Mong Kok and the MTR stations, and Route No. 79W seemed to be just “the icing on the cake” or a route complementing the commissioning of the government offices. He considered that increasing the frequency was a good idea, and hoped that consideration would be given to whether schedule adjustment was needed when the patronage rose. If the minibus frequency could meet the need, members of the public would have a greater incentive to take the route. He said that traffic congestion was particularly serious at two locations (Sai Yee Street and Reclamation Street) along the routing of Route No. 79K, while Route No. 79W would also pass through Reclamation Street. He raised the following suggestions: (i) to conduct a market research to find out the number of passengers alighting at Reclamation Street; if few passengers alighted there, consideration could be given to changing the routing to a faster one, such as travelling straight from Anchor Street, Tai Kok Tsui to Mong Kok Road and then back to Sai Yeung Choi Street; and (ii) to improve the environment of the waiting points, as the problem of dripping air-conditioners always occurred at the stop in Sai Yeung Choi Street near Fife Street, which he had made a complaint to the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department. He believed that after the commissioning of the government offices, the demand for the service of the minibus route would increase, so he hoped that the TD would study how to provide assistance for the operator and passengers.

46. The Chairman said Members had clearly raised their enquiries and suggestions, and asked the representative of the TD whether he would like to make responses.

- 13 - 47. Mr Eric TAM responded that Councillors’ views were all worth making reference to. He said that the operator was enthusiastic in serving the community and had expressed at an earlier meeting its willingness to strengthen its service to meet any demand for the route. Hence, currently it was necessary to collect views from community members so as to study how to enhance the operation of Route No. 79W. Regarding the proposals of re-routing and the provision of stops, the department would follow them up with the operator after the meeting. If the collection of views from more community members was needed, the department would seek YTMDO’s assistance in conducting district consultation.

48. The Chairman suggested that the TD and the operator explore new proposals together with members of the community, and make a written report to the TTHC after the meeting. The Chairman thanked the representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

Item 4: Request for Installation of Noise Mitigation Facilities and Vehicle Speed Monitors at Flyover of Tai Kok Tsui Section of West Kowloon Corridor (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 53/2019)

49. The Chairman said the written responses from the TD, the HKPF and the ----- Environmental Protection Department (“EPD”) (Annexes 5 to 7) had been emailed to Members before the meeting for their perusal. He then welcomed:

(a) Mr WU Man-kit, Electronic Engineer/Project 1/1 of the TD; (b) Mr NG Chun-ling, District Engineer/Mong Kok of the HyD; and (c) Ms Vivian CHIK, Environmental Protection Officer (Assessment and Noise) of the EPD.

50. Mr LAU Pak-kei provided supplementary information on the paper. He pointed out that Councillors had submitted papers and put forward suggestions, such as the installation of noise barriers, the repaving of road surface and strengthened enforcement actions by the Police, on the problems of noise and speeding at the Tai Kok Tsui section of West Kowloon Corridor multiple times. He was pleased that the TD mentioned in its response that interval-based speed enforcement cameras would be installed, and raised the following enquiries: (i) the installation locations of the cameras; (ii) how the devices would be operated, as he was worried that residents would be affected by the flashes; and (iii) what the differences between fixed speed enforcement cameras and interval-based speed enforcement cameras were.

51. Mr Benjamin CHOI provided supplementary information on the paper. He considered that installation locations for speed detection devices were indeed available along the Tai Kok Tsui section of West Kowloon Corridor. With technology advancement, consideration could be given to the installation of infrared detectors, detection loops or laser speed sensors. He was also of the view that while speed detection devices could be installed, devices for collecting data of noise decibel level could also be installed, which would be helpful for monitoring the traffic condition. In addition, he hoped that the departments would explain the interval-based detection devices in detail, in particular how enforcement actions would be carried out in the future.

52. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai provided supplementary information on the paper. He said that the greatest concerns of Councillors were the noise from speeding vehicles as well as

- 14 - vehicle modification. The written responses pointed out that vehicle modification was within the purview of the Police. Given that speeding and noise problems mostly occurred at night time, he asked that apart from interval-based speed enforcement cameras, whether the Police had other measures to handle vehicle modification.

53. Mr WU Man-kit responded as follows:

(i) A fixed speed enforcement camera was operated at a fixed location with a detection range of about 20 to 50 metres. If a vehicle speeded up after driving out of the radar detection range, the device would fail to detect that. (ii) For an interval-based speed enforcement camera system, cameras would be installed at the ingress and egress of a road, recording vehicle registration marks at the ingress and egress respectively, and matching would then be conducted to calculate the average speeds of the vehicles in that road section, in order to find out if any of them exceeded the maximum speed limit for that road section. If the average speed of a vehicle exceeded the limit, the Police would consider instituting prosecution; otherwise, the system would destroy the relevant information immediately. (iii) The department had discussed with the Police early this year, studying the installation of a fixed speed enforcement camera on West Kowloon Corridor. However, after an site inspection with the contractor, the department had found that it was difficult to identify a suitable installation location. Moreover, if only one fixed speed enforcement camera was installed, its deterrent effect against speeding along the whole West Kowloon Corridor would be limited. Hence, it was finally decided that interval-based speed enforcement cameras would be put on trial for a greater deterrent effect. (iv) It was preliminarily planned that interval-based speed enforcement cameras would be installed at two ingresses (Cherry Street Park and Cherry Street near Florient Rise) and one egress (Lai Chi Kok Road near Banyan Garden). (v) No flash was needed in the operation of the cameras recording vehicle registration marks.

54. Mr Mike LAM responded that the Traffic, Kowloon West Region had not provided information on the relevant issue, and he would relay the views to it later.

55. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked about the maturity of the technology. He and Mr LAU Pak-kei had requested the TD and the Police to install interval-based speed enforcement cameras on West Kowloon Corridor in 2015, but at that time the departments had responded that the system was still under study; (ii) regarding what the department had said that no flash was needed in the operation of the devices, he understood the operation would be easy in daytime, but he was worried that the dim light at night would affect the detection result; and (iii) apart from the Tai Kok Tsui section, similar situations were also found in the Tong Mi Road section of West Kowloon Corridor. He asked the departments whether they would consider installing relevant devices on Tong Mi Road as well to tackle the problem.

56. Mr Benjamin CHOI raised the following enquiries: (i) whether the enforcement procedures with interval-based speed enforcement cameras were the same as those with the existing speed enforcement cameras, i.e. issuing tickets to the vehicle owners after recording the information; and (ii) whether there was a timetable for the installation of the devices.

- 15 -

57. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said the problems of speeding and illegal car racing on West Kowloon Corridor and the nearby link roads had persisted for years, especially in late night and before/after holidays. He and other District Councillors had, at different occasions, requested the departments to provide additional installations to effectively deter motorists from speeding. He welcomed very much that the departments were willing to install interval-based speed enforcement cameras. However, as mentioned by Mr CHUNG Chak-fai, Tong Mi Road and even Ferry Street were also seriously disturbed by the problems of speeding and illegal car racing, so he hoped that the departments would make a breakthrough, installing interval-based devices for the whole Tai Kok Tsui section of West Kowloon Corridor. He pointed out that currently there were video cameras, believed to be monitoring systems, installed on the top of the footbridges in Ferry Street and Dundas Street, so he considered that there should be room for installing the relevant devices. Hence, he hoped that interval-based speed enforcement cameras would also be installed in the Ferry Street section to control speeding and illegal car racing. In addition, the strengthened efforts of the Police in combating illegal car racing were also very important to prevent the nearby residents from being affected by prolonged noise nuisance at late night.

(Mr Paul LAW left the meeting at 3:45 p.m.)

58. Miss LI Sze-man said the noise problem of West Kowloon Corridor was not interval-based but occurred along the whole corridor. She hoped that the departments would consider taking overall improvement measures by installing interval-based speed enforcement cameras in all the road sections close to residential flats and enforcing the law strictly. She also hoped that the departments would be determined to solve the problems together with the public. Moreover, she suggested that if there were difficulties in installing devices on the flyover, the departments could discuss with the nearby buildings and install a monitoring system on the rooftops of the buildings.

59. Mr LAU Pak-kei raised the following enquiries: (i) how the TD would handle the case if a vehicle was found speeding midway; and (ii) how the Police instituted prosecutions against speeding vehicles. He said that speeding and illegal car racing mostly occurred at late night or in the early morning, and when residents were going to call the Police, the vehicles concerned had already left. Members of the public often asked at which locations prosecution actions would be taken against the offenders. Hence, he hoped that the Police would explain the enforcement procedures.

60. Ms WONG Shu-ming raised the following views and enquiries: (i) Councillors had repeatedly raised the problems and put forward proposals; however, the departments had said that the implementation feasibility would be reviewed only after the installation of the devices next year. She asked whether the installations were a temporary measure; and (ii) the departments had responded that there was a plan to install the devices, but a study was needed. She asked whether the study was on the type of devices to be procured, or on the funding issues. She hoped that at the remaining few meetings, the departments could make more undertakings and explain in detail whether the current problem was related to detailed issues or procedures.

61. The Chairman raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked whether there was a comprehensive planning for the installation of monitoring devices in the Yau Tsim Mong (“YTM”) District; and (ii) the Police often set road blocks beneath the flyover for law enforcement actions, but the spotlights used would disturb the sleep of residents.

- 16 - 62. Mr WU Man-kit responded as follows:

(i) Interval-based speed enforcement cameras had been used overseas for many years, while they had not been installed and applied in Hong Kong so far. Nevertheless, it was believed that the technology was mature. After discussing with the Police, the department would install the cameras on West Kowloon Corridor and Tsuen Wan Road on a trial basis. (ii) This was a trial scheme, and road tests would be carried out after the installation of interval-based speed enforcement cameras to study whether they were applicable to the road situation of Hong Kong in every aspect such as reliability and accuracy. Moreover, the department needed to discuss the enforcement procedures with the Police, the Department of Justice and other relevant departments. (iii) It was preliminarily estimated that the enforcement procedures would be similar to those with fixed speed enforcement cameras. The system would take photos of vehicles, and record the vehicle registration marks as well as their average speeds when passing through the road section. As the details had not been finalised, the department had to further discuss the enforcement procedures with the Police according to the information obtained after the installation of the system. (iv) Interval-based speed enforcement cameras also had limitations and were not suitable for all road sections. The ingress and egress of the road section that interval-based speed enforcement cameras were installed should be about 1 000 metres apart at the least. If the distance was too short, there would be difficulties in calculation. For a street which was several ten metres in length only, the installation of a fixed speed enforcement camera would be more effective. As such, the department and the Police would decide which type of cameras to be installed basing on the environment of different road sections. (v) As had been mentioned in the earlier responses, the installation project was planned to commence next year, and the department was currently preparing the advance work, including tendering. The locations selected by the department should be able to cover most area of the northbound carriageway of West Kowloon Corridor. As for whether Tong Mi Road and Ferry Street were suitable for the installation of interval-based or fixed speed enforcement cameras, the department had to make a further study.

63. The Chairman said the TD had clearly indicated that the tendering procedures were underway, and the prosecution procedures still needed to be further studied with the Police. The Chairman asked the Police whether they would like to make a response.

64. Mr Mike LAM responded as follows:

(i) At present, the maximum speed limit for the road section concerned would be preset in fixed speed enforcement cameras. If a vehicle broke the speed limit, it would be photographed, and then the dedicated department would issue a letter to the registered address of the vehicle owner. After the owner had provided the personal particulars of the then driver, the department would issue a letter to fine the driver according to the information. If the driver objected to the penalty, the case would be referred to the court. (ii) He thanked the Councillors for providing information on other speeding cases

- 17 - (Tong Mi Road and Ferry Street). The Police would work with the TD to study whether these two road sections were suitable for using the new devices to strengthen prosecution. (iii) Except laser speed-detection guns, currently flashes were needed when detecting vehicle speeds with radar speed detectors at night. Before the availability of new devices, flashes would still be used to capture the clear images of vehicle registration marks at night. (iv) The Police were very concerned about road safety and traffic smoothness, and would step up enforcement actions in future.

(Miss LI Sze-man left the meeting at 3:55 p.m.)

65. Ms WONG Shu-ming considered that the responses of the departments had not shown much attention to the Mong Kok section. The installation of interval-based speed enforcement cameras was a trial scheme, and if they were only installed in the road section from Tai Kok Tsui to Liberte, there would be a question of fairness. She asked the departments whether fixed speed detection devices would be installed in the Mong Kok section meanwhile.

66. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai asked the TD about the procedures of installing interval-based speed enforcement cameras, e.g. whether the invitation of quotations was needed, and whether the installation would be monitored by the HyD.

67. Mr WU Man-kit reiterated that the detection method of interval-based speed enforcement cameras was to calculate the average speed of a vehicle within the whole West Kowloon Corridor. Regarding the procedures, the department would carry out the tendering exercise via the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department at the end of this year, and the installation works would take place early next year.

68. Mr Chris IP said that the interval-based speed detection method was common in the Mainland. He agreed that the system be installed for the whole West Kowloon Corridor so that motorists would comply with the speed limit requirement. Besides, he suggested that a reminder sign be set up at the start point of the detection zone and the maximum speed limit be shown all along the carriageway. In the Mainland, motorists would be clearly aware of the speed detection zones through navigation systems. The whole corridor was long, so more signs should be provided to ensure that the motorists were fully reminded.

69. Mr CHUI Kin-man suggested that the detection zone of interval-based speed enforcement cameras start from the sloping road behind Cherry Street. If the start point was set in Cherry Street, as vehicles would generally have reduced their speeds there, it was afraid that the devices would be wasted.

(Ms FUNG Lai-mei left the meeting at 4:03 p.m.)

70. The Chairman asked the TD to note the suggestions of Members, and thanked the government representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

Item 7: Open Space cum Underground Car Park at To Wah Road (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 56/2019)

- 18 -

71. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric CHEUNG, Senior Engineer/Major Projects 4, Ms Phoebe WU, Engineer/Major Projects 8, Mr Sam HUANG, Engineer/Mong Kok and Yaumatei, Mr Jimmy CHAN, Senior Engineer/Strategic Studies 5, and Mr Keith CHAN, Engineer/Strategic Studies 3, of the TD; and (b) Mr Harris FUNG, Deputy District Leisure Manager (Yau Tsim Mong) 1, Ms Sabrina SUEN, Senior Executive Officer (Planning) Special Duty, and Mr Mason HUNG, Executive Officer (Planning) Special Duty, of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”).

----- 72. The Chairman said that a letter from the Hong Kong Tennis Association (Annex 8) expressing its hope for a covered tennis court to be built at the site of To Wah Road, West Kowloon to promote tennis in Hong Kong had been received. He hoped that the departments concerned would pay attention to the aspirations of district organisations and consider their views when developing the site.

73. Mr Jimmy CHAN briefly introduced the paper.

74. The Chairman asked the LCSD whether it had anything to add to the paper, and the LCSD replied that it had nothing to add.

75. Mr CHUI Kin-man raised the following enquiries: (i) how many parking spaces would be cancelled in the vicinity of Man Wah Sun Chuen; and (ii) how many parking spaces would be provided at the carpark of To Wah Road.

76. Mr CHAN Siu-tong raised the following views: (i) the site was a zoned open space. It had been lent to the XRL for other uses earlier, to which residents had no objection. However, what he had received this time was a simple paper only, without any statistics, and even mentioning the simple consultation result of 2007. He questioned whether the consultation result at that time could still be used, without the need to collect the views of the current-term Members; (ii) he was worried about the proposal of using the site as a temporary carpark because similar cases had occurred in the YTM District, in which the temporary uses of some sites had lasted for several decades. He would like to know how to ensure that the department would return the site, and said the site for the construction of a youth hostel at Ferry Point had been lent out for a temporary use for 20 years. The paper said the temporary carpark would be relocated to To Wah Road, but in fact 130 parking spaces were insufficient to compensate for the loss of the original parking spaces; (iii) the paper did not provide any planning details, just simply mentioning that facilities such as football pitch, tennis court, pet garden and green garden would be provided. In the past, the papers submitted to the District Council seeking support had all been well prepared, but this paper did not provide any details or statistics but a concept only. Members did not know what should be supported at all, let alone when the site would be returned after being lent out; and (iv) the Hong Kong Tennis Association had suggested to him the provision of a covered tennis court by email, so he brought the letter to the Committee for Members’ information. The LCSD had preliminarily replied that consideration could be given to the provision of tennis courts, but a covered one might not be feasible. He hoped that the departments would clearly explain how the use of the site, which was 1.7 hectares (180 000 square metres) in area, could be optimised.

(Mr CHOW Chun-fai left the meeting at 4:09 p.m.)

- 19 - 77. Mr Derek HUNG raised the following views: (i) the TD had mentioned in March this year that an underground carpark and passive recreational facilities would be constructed at the site under the “single site, multiple use” model. During the past three months, he, together with department representatives, had met with the members of the owners’ committees of the housing estates at Kowloon Station. He had received letters from the nearby residents, including those from the “Kowloon Station Development Owners’ Committee” and the owners’ committees of individual housing estates, most of which raised objections as they were worried that the construction of an underground carpark would result in traffic congestion. Besides, they also suggested that the carpark should be equipped with chargers and its entrance/exit should be set at another location to avoid congestion. As regards the passive recreational facilities, there were many views that pet garden, community garden, environmental and greening facilities, kung-fu corner, tennis court, recreational and sports facilities for the elderly and children, etc. should be provided; (ii) the consultation paper of 2007 was attached in this paper; however, 12 years’ time had passed, and there had been significant changes in the topside developments of Austin Station at Jordan West and Kowloon Station. He understood that the demand for parking spaces was keen in the YTM District, but the consideration should be based on the actual situation of the area concerned. He shared the views of Mr CHAN Siu-tong that the proposals in relation to the planning of the site should not be made and discussed separately, but instead the issues concerning the permanent passive recreational facilities, underground carpark and temporary private car parking spaces should be discussed altogether; and (iii) the paper did not clearly respond to the proposals of setting the entrance/exit of the carpark at another location, providing more parking spaces and conducting a traffic assessment as raised by the residents. He considered that the department just dealt with trifles but evaded what were important.

78. Ms WONG Shu-ming raised the following views: (i) the To Wah Road site mentioned in the paper was large in area, so it was inappropriate to seek Councillors’ support by submitting a paper with a few pages only; (ii) it was unreasonable to seek the support of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council (“YTMDC”) of 2019 by using the consultation result of 2007; and (iii) she doubted the necessity of endorsing the paper immediately, and suggested the departments conduct consultation again in the next term of the Council by submitting a more detailed proposal and adopting more views of the residents and other stakeholders.

79. Ms Michelle TANG raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the paper was jointly submitted by the TD and the LCSD, while the Planning Department was not involved. As it was a major project which would have an impact on the urban centre, it seemed that the coordination of the planning work among departments was weak. She would like to know whether there was thorough planning preparation for the proposals; and (ii) she considered the suggestion of a covered tennis court quite good. Since the Government hoped to promote a sporting culture and tennis was a popular sports activity, in view of the insufficiency of tennis courts, the departments should give consideration to this suggestion.

80. Mr Andy YU raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked whether a traffic assessment had been conducted for the 130 parking spaces; if so, whether the assessment was based on the current traffic load or previous data; (ii) he hoped that the number of commercial parking spaces, including those for coaches, goods vehicles and large vehicles, could be increased, and that the carriageways could be widened for those types of vehicles; and (iii) he asked whether the project would complement the proposed underground space at Kowloon Park, and as the Government was currently considering the matters in relation to the underground space, whether the relevant public facilities would be dealt with together.

(Mr Benjamin CHOI left the meeting at 4:15 p.m.)

- 20 -

81. Mr WONG Kin-san raised the following views: (i) he considered that the paper was purely aimed at seeking Members’ endorsement of changing the use of the site from the proposed open space to a temporary carpark. As the Government had no immediate plan, there were not any details about the open space use in the paper. The paper still only stated that the Architectural Services Department (“ArchSD”) would start a feasibility study as soon as possible, and the YTMDC would be consulted in due course. Under such circumstances, he believed that Members would not give much support to the paper, let alone endorsing the proposal; (ii) similar temporary proposals had been raised in many works projects in the past, resulting in repeated delays in the works. Traffic diversions arranged by government departments had taken place many times in his constituency, but there had not been any progress in the works projects concerned even after several years; and (iii) he asked whether the departments could promise to set a time limit for the loan of the site, and that the construction of the passive recreational facilities would commence immediately after the end of the temporary use of the site.

82. The Chairman raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked why the LCSD had not introduced the paper, which was jointly submitted by it and the TD, upon enquiry; (ii) Members would decide whether to support the paper basing on statistics and the planning details; however, such details were not clearly explained in the paper, in particular those related to recreational facilities, of which no quantities nor construction proposals were provided; (iii) the site at Soy Street had been being used as a temporary carpark for a decade, and there was still no sign of development. Members were worried that the same would occur at the To Wah Road site; and (iv) according to what Members had said, they all considered that there was insufficient consultation for the paper. Hence, he suggested that the departments conduct consultation at a full council meeting of the YTMDC, and clearly state in the paper that the consultation was conducted in 2019, so as to seek the endorsement of the YTMDC. It was because the discussions at full council meetings covered more district affairs and was more comprehensive. The Chairman said if the departments hoped to seek Members’ support for the proposal, he could invite Members to vote. Nevertheless, he would like to know whether the departments aimed at collecting views at this meeting to improve the inadequacies of the paper, and then seeking Councillors’ support for the proposal at a full council meeting.

83. Ms Sabrina SUEN responded as follows:

(i) The department was currently pressing ahead with the projects included in the “Five-Year Plan for Sports and Recreation Facilities” announced in the Policy Address in January 2017. The projects in the YTM District included the Open Space at Hoi Fai Road, Tai Kok Tsui, the Open Space at Hoi Fan Road, Tai Kok Tsui, the Open Space at Hung Hom Waterfront, as well as the Hoi Ting Road Joint User Complex under the $8 billion facility improvement projects in districts. Hence, the department had no plan to commence the open space project at To Wah Road at present. (ii) As the department had no plan to commence the To Wah Road open space project at present, when the development of an underground carpark had been proposed by the TD, the proponent of this public works project, the LCSD had submitted the proposal of the recreational and sports facilities for TD’s consideration, on the premise that members of the public could enjoy the open space as soon as possible. Because the implementation of the proposed open space and the public works for the underground carpark would take time, the TD hoped to optimise the use of the site by the way of a temporary carpark in

- 21 - the short term to alleviate the parking problem. (iii) In view that a long period of time had passed, the LCSD hoped that the recreational and sports facilities could keep abreast with the times and would be more diversified. As such, apart from the scope of development supported by the then Community Building Committee (“CBC”) in 2007 mentioned in the paper, the LCSD proposed some new facilities, such as football pitch, tennis court, pet garden, community garden and fitness corner. Other related facilities included toilets, nursery rooms, changing rooms, etc. As new facilities were proposed, the department had submitted the paper jointly with the TD, hoping to gain Members’ support so as to facilitate a feasibility study on the future long-term development. When a design plan had been drafted by the ArchSD, the department would consult the YTMDC again.

(Mr Benny YEUNG left the meeting at 4:21 p.m.)

84. The Chairman said Mr CHAN Siu-tong had just mentioned that among the then Councillors in 2007, only three were the current-term Councillors. The Chairman asked the departments whether they insisted on using the consultation result of that year in the place of conducting district consultation. If the departments hoped that a voting would be conducted, he could make the arrangement. The Chairman reiterated the following views and enquiries: (i) he queried whether the consultation result of 2007 could still be used after 12 years’ time; and (ii) he suggested that the departments collect views at this meeting, compile a report and then submit it to the YTMDC for a multi-aspect discussion. The Chairman explained that District Council consultation meant the consultation conducted in District Council meetings with written records. If a paper with a history of 12 years was used as the result of consultation, he, the Chairman, would definitely be the first one raising objection. The Chairman again asked the departments whether they preferred a voting, or Members to express views for opinion collection.

(Ms Michelle TANG left the meeting at 4:25 p.m.)

85. Ms Sabrina SUEN responded that some facilities such as football pitch and tennis court were proposed as the new scope of development in paragraph 5 of the paper. The department was deeply grateful for Members’ comments.

86. The Chairman said that as such, this discussion was deemed as an expression of views.

87. Mr Jimmy CHAN supplemented that from the long-term perspective, this submission of paper was not to request the immediate construction of the underground carpark and passive recreational facilities. According to Government’s existing procedures for general public works projects, the department hoped to complete the project definition statement and project registration by the end of this year, and then carry out a detailed study as well as designing the underground carpark and passive recreational facilities. Project registration must be completed by the department before the ArchSD could conduct the detailed design and study. After the completion of the relevant work, the department would further consult the YTMDC. This submission of paper aimed at setting out the approximate planning scope first, and the department would later carry out a detailed traffic impact assessment to study whether the location could cope with the traffic load as preliminarily assessed. Hence, the department hoped to gain the Committee’s support first so as to further take forward the project.

- 22 - 88. Mr Eric CHEUNG continued to supplement that from the short-term perspective, as the design and funding application procedures for the long-term development would take time, the department hoped to make use of the period before the commencement of the long-term development to provide a temporary carpark at the site by way of short term tenancy. Some conditions would be set out in the short term tenancy for the resumption of the site of the temporary carpark when appropriate for the construction of the underground carpark and passive recreational facilities. Due to the proposed construction of a youth hostel at the site of the temporary carpark at Man Wui Street, the department hoped to relocate the temporary carpark to To Wah Road to cope with the parking need.

89. The Chairman said he understood the departments hoped that Members would support the following two proposals: (i) the short-term proposal of a temporary carpark; and (ii) the long-term proposal of the overall planning; however, it seemed that the departments did not understand the concerns of Members. The Chairman pointed out that the Committee would support the departments in carrying out a further study, but the departments must provide more information. Moreover, to complement the work of the departments, the Committee could conduct a voting. The Chairman reiterated that if the voting result was against the proposals, it did not mean that Members did not support the proposals, but was only because there was a lack of detailed information.

90. Mr Jimmy CHAN further supplemented that there would be about 100-odd parking spaces in the temporary carpark. The department hoped to register the project according to the existing general public works mechanism, and then have the feasibility study and detailed design conducted by the ArchSD before further consulting the YTMDC. If everything went smooth, funds could be applied from the Legislative Council in respect of the project in three to four years. The department would also study how to enrich the contents of the paper, and consider further communicating with Councillors before submitting the paper to the YTMDC. He reiterated that in the stage of preliminary planning, it might not be possible to provide very detailed information. Nevertheless, the department still hoped to submit a paper with enriched information to the YTMDC for consultation within this year.

91. The Chairman suggested Members express their views so the departments could make a record and base on which to compile a paper. The departments would then submit the paper to the YTMDC for consultation and discussion.

92. Mr Chris IP asked the departments whether they meant they would further submit a paper to the YTMDC within this year. To his understanding, there was not any related items in the agenda of the full council meeting of the YTMDC to be held in July, and after that, there would only be one more full council meeting scheduled for 12 September in the current term of the YTMDC. Since the departments had planned to submit a paper to the YTMDC in September, he asked what kind of exchange the departments would like to conduct with Members at present.

93. Mr Jimmy CHAN responded that originally the department had had no plan to submit a paper to the full council meeting of the YTMDC to be held on 12 September but hoped to seek Councillors’ support at the TTHC meeting. He understood that the Chairman and Councillors had views on the paper at present, so he hoped to again seek Councillors’ support at the full council meeting in September after enriching the contents of the paper.

94. Mr Chris IP asked if the department had the relevant information at present, why it did not submit the information.

- 23 - 95. Mr Jimmy CHAN responded that the paper was planned to be further submitted for discussion at the full council meeting to be held on 12 September.

96. Mr Chris IP pressed on, asking whether the department had the relevant information currently, i.e. whether it in fact had no such information or just had not brought the information to the meeting.

97. Mr Jimmy CHAN responded that the department would enrich the contents of the paper, and in fact, the preliminary planning scope had generally been mentioned in the paper.

98. Mr Chris IP further pressed on, asking how the contents of the paper could be enriched.

99. Mr Jimmy CHAN responded that the department would enrich the contents of the paper and provide more information basing on the views raised by Councillors at this meeting.

100. The Chairman again suggested that the departments submit the paper to the YTMDC for discussion at a full council meeting. The Chairman explained what Mr Chris IP had meant: if the departments already had the relevant information, they should have submitted it to the TTHC at this meeting; if they had no information, then it would not be possible for them to provide such information on 12 September.

101. Ms Sabrina SUEN supplemented that apart from the scope of development supported by the then YTMDC in 2007, it was mentioned in paragraph 5 of the paper that because of the long time gap, the department had studied and considered what types of facilities were needed in the area as well as the prevailing policy so as to add some new items to the scope of development, and football pitch, tennis court, pet garden, etc. were the new facilities added. The open space in the long-term development plan would be under the management of the LCSD, and the department hoped to consult Councillors on the latest scope of development at the TTHC meeting as well. The department would listen to and consider Councillors’ views. If the latest scope of development could be endorsed by the TTHC, the department hoped that the relevant scope of development could be endorsed first.

102. The Chairman said that 12 years before, the XRL development project had been planned at the location concerned, and at that time he was one of the Councillors supporting the proposal. However, after 12 years, the need of the community had changed significantly, so it was unreasonable to endorse the proposal in the paper basing on the consultation result of 12 years before.

103. Mr CHAN Siu-tong said the discussion just now was about the procedural issues only. He pointed out that the owners’ corporations and different stakeholders in his constituency knew that a youth hostel would be built at the site opposite Man Wah Building, but they did not know when the works would commence. He raised the following enquiries and views: (i) he asked whether there was a works schedule; (ii) he asked what the exact number of the parking spaces in the carpark would be; (iii) he asked where the entrance/exit of the carpark would be; (iv) there was a demand for kung fu corners and dragon/lion dance training venues, and a covered tennis court could also meet the needs of Hong Kong; (v) he asked that under the new concept of “single site, multiple uses”, whether the departments would optimise the use of underground space by setting up table tennis rooms, conference rooms, etc. therein; and (vi) there were enough motorcycle parking spaces in the area, so the motorcycle parking spaces proposed in the paper might not be necessary and could be

- 24 - cancelled. The relevant location could be used as a recreation room.

104. The Chairman said each Member had two minutes to present their views .

105. Mr Derek HUNG raised the following views: (i) with the provision of recreational facilities leading the provision of carparking facilities, the TD was putting the cart before the horse; (ii) he had reservations about the grass football pitch proposed by the LCSD, considering that there were already many facilities in the vicinity and thus might not have sufficient space for the football pitch. Moreover, the nearby residents had never raised such a suggestion to him, so he doubted the demand for the football pitch; (iii) the question of traffic was the main reason for his reservations about the proposed carpark. The TD had said that it had collected views, while he, together with the department, had all along had discussions with different owners’ committees of Kowloon Station; however, the residents’ views on the entrance/exit of the carpark was not mentioned in the paper, which he considered irresponsible; and (iv) while the previous paper had mentioned that the underground carpark would have two to three levels, no information on the number of levels of the underground carpark was provided in the current paper, which he thought was a backward move. He hoped that the department would provide detailed information and accurate public opinions for TTHC’s reference before the formal discussion and consultation. He agreed with the Chairman that it was not meaningful to discuss the relevant matters in the TTHC meeting, and that the department had not responded to the two key questions raised by the residents of Kowloon Station. Therefore, if a voting would be conducted, he would cast a negative vote.

106. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said it was shown in the paper that the then CBC had been consulted of the development scope of the open space at a meeting held in August 2007, at which the development scope had been supported and endorsed. He asked the LCSD through what channels it grasped the relevant information in respect of the proposed new facilities, or if it was just the thinking of the department that such facilities would benefit the public.

107. Mr Chris IP raised the following views: (i) regarding recreational and sports facilities, he had assisted the Mong Kok District Cultural, Recreational and Sports Association in organising football classes, in particular classes for children, and he had noticed that there were insufficient artificial football pitches in the YTM District. Such pitches could only be found in Boundary Street and Cherry Street Park, and they were always fully booked. Even if priority was given to organisations, usually they could not book the pitches successfully. He said there might not be a need to build an 11-a-side football pitch because the area of which was large and the utilisation rate would be low accordingly. Instead, the provision of a 7-a-side football pitch could be considered as it would occupy less area but have a higher utilisation rate. He was of the view that if recreational and sports facilities were to be added, consideration could be given to the provision of an additional indoor games hall. It was because when helping organisations organise other activities, he had also found that it was difficult for him to book the indoor games halls in the district, let alone the general public. He hoped that the department would consider increasing the relevant facilities to meet public needs; and (ii) he criticised that the information provided by the TD was not in full details. As for how the entrance/exit of the carpark should be arranged, he asked the department to make further consideration.

108. Mr CHUI Kin-man said he supported the Chairman’s remark that the TTHC should discuss the affairs of traffic, transport and housing only but not the leisure and recreational issues. Given that Yau Ma Tei Carpark would soon be demolished, and the parking spaces in the open space off Man Wah Sun Chuen had been closed, he asked whether more parking

- 25 - spaces would be provided in the reconstruction of a carpark at the site in the future so as to compensate for the closed carpark.

109. The Chairman reiterated that each Member would have two minutes to present their views, which were not limited to transport and housing issues.

110. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai raised the following views: (i) he agreed that a covered tennis court should be constructed. In the tennis competition of the 7th Hong Kong Games held earlier, some events had to be cut short and rescheduled due to rain. As the LCSD had not any covered tennis courts at present, some events of major competitions might not be successfully carried out due to rain or other weather problems. Weather factors would also affect training; and (ii) due to the reason that there was a lack of formal athletic grounds in the YTM District, the recreational and sports associations in the district had to use the venues in Sham Shui Po or Kowloon City when holding competitions, which would hinder the sports development of the district. Given the current availability of a large-scale site, he asked whether the use of the site could be considered and handled in this direction.

(Mr Andy YU left the meeting at 4:52 p.m.)

111. The Vice-chairman raised the following views: (i) members of the public, in particular young people, often told her that booking a badminton court was very difficult, so she hoped for additional badminton facilities to increase the venues available for public hiring; (ii) in the light of the weekly one-day intensive training of some sports like fencing, she hoped that an indoor games hall would be provided; and (iii) since owners’ corporations and owners’ committees lacked meeting venues, she hoped that a small community hall would be provided by the departments for public convenience.

112. Ms WONG Shu-ming raised the following views: (i) most of the sports facilities mentioned in the paper were popular among the public, while facilities for various sports activities were also available in the Kai Tak Sports City, so she would like to know as for the arrangements for sports facilities, whether the department would consider according priority to the provision of facilities for those sports that were not benefitted from the Sports City but popular among the public. She believed that according priority to those sports would be a fairer arrangement; and (ii) the consultation was conducted in a haste, so she was worried that even if a paper would be submitted to the YTMDC in September, the contents therein might not have any changes. According to the current situation of the Legislative Council, she also doubted whether funding could be granted to the project at this moment. If the approval of funding from the Legislative Council was necessary, she wondered why the departments had to be so hasty.

113. Mr Jimmy CHAN responded as follows:

(i) As the permanent carpark would be on a site where the Airport Express Line and Tung Chung Line of the MTR passed through, and there would also be a culvert at its north, it was preliminarily estimated that only a two-level carpark could be built, providing about 130 parking spaces. (ii) The department would set back the gate of the carpark as far as possible, so that even if vehicles stopped and waited there, no obstruction would be caused to the junction of To Wah Road and Jordan Road. (iii) Regarding the views of Mr Derek HUNG, the staff of the department had met the members of the Kowloon Station Development Owners’ Committee and noted their views on transport issues in June, and had given a reply to them.

- 26 - As for their hope for the provision of charging equipment in the carpark, the department would study and consider the suggestion in detail later.

114. Ms Sabrina SUEN responded as follows:

(i) The new facility “sports and fitness corner” (literal translation) mentioned in paragraph 5 of the paper covered the function of a kung fu corner. Its name was decided after the consultation with the bureau. (ii) The construction of a covered tennis court was subject to technical feasibility as well as venue design and arrangements. The LCSD was open-minded on the proposal. As the LCSD was mainly responsible for recreational and sports facilities, it hoped to explain the updated development scope at the meeting. (iii) Regarding the various kinds of recreational and sports facilities suggested by Members, when the LCSD studied and planned the new open space and relevant facilities, apart from making reference to the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, it would also consider other factors, including the relevant facilities provided at the territory and district levels, the relevant policy objectives, the utilisation rates of the existing facilities, demographic changes, the views of the District Council, the land available for use, cost effectiveness and technical feasibility, in order to decide what facilities would be provided in the site.

115. The Chairman thanked the government representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

Item 8: Request for Prompt Implementation of Re-routing of Airport Bus Route No. A20 via Hoi Wang Road (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 57/2019)

----- 116. The Chairman said the written response from the Citybus/NWFB (Annex 9) had been emailed to Members before the meeting for their perusal. He then welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric TAM, Senior Transport Officer/Yau Tsim Mong of the TD; and (b) Miss Joyce WAN, Chief Public Affairs Officer of the Citybus/NWFB.

117. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo provided supplementary information on the paper, and raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he had fought for an airport bus route operating via Hoi Wang Road for many years, and was pleased that the TD had put forward the proposal with the Citybus in March this year; (ii) it had been said that the proposal would be implemented in the second quarter; however, the third quarter was now approaching while the proposal was still yet to be implemented. He hoped that the department would reply when the re-routing of Route No. A20 would be implemented; (iii) he asked whether the frequency would be increased; (vi) he asked whether more concessions could be provided in terms of the sectional fare for the departures from Mong Kok to Hung Hom; and (v) he asked whether a stop would be provided at the Hong Kong Port of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge.

(Mr TONG Yik-kan left the meeting at 5:07 p.m.)

- 27 - (Mr LAM Kin-man left the meeting at 5:08 p.m.)

118. Miss Joyce WAN responded as follows:

(i) The proposal was included in the Bus Route Planning Programme 2019, and the relevant District Councils had been consulted and had shown their support. The company was currently carrying out the work mentioned in the paper, and would arrange route training for bus captains. If everything went smooth, the proposal could be implemented in September. (ii) Regarding frequency improvement, the company would pay attention to the passenger occupancy of the route after re-routing and then conduct assessment. (iii) The company would carefully review the current financial situation so as to consider whether more concessions could be provided in terms of the sectional fare. (iv) At present, there were already several Cityflyer routes operating via the Hong Kong Port of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge. The company would conduct further study after re-routing basing on the total actual journey time of the route.

119. The Chairman pointed out that the Citybus had only replied that it would study the suggestions. He asked whether the suggestions were feasible, and hoped that the Citybus would give a response to the Councillor after the meeting.

120. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo added that he understood the bus company needed to review the operation situation before considering the suggestion of providing more sectional fare concessions. Concerning the route, however, as there was only one departure every hour, providing concessions might not reduce much of the company’s income. In the contrary, as the route travelling past Mei Foo, Sham Shui Po, Argyle Street, Hoi Wang Road and Ho Man Tin, the provision of concessions might attract new passengers. Under the existing sectional fare arrangement, even if members of the public would like to take the route, they might give up taking it as the fare was too expensive. Fare reduction could provide an incentive for new passengers to take the route. He hoped that the bus company would conduct a review after re-routing and consider his suggestion.

121. The Chairman asked the Citybus to note the suggestions of the Councillor and seriously consider them. He thanked the representatives concerned for joining the discussion on this item. There being no further comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

Item 9: Progress Report on Handling of Dangerous and Abandoned Signboards in Yau Tsim Mong District by Buildings Department (“BD”) (YTMDC TTHC Paper No. 58/2019)

122. The Chairman welcomed Ms Bon KO, Senior Professional Officer/Signboard Control 1 of the BD.

123. Ms Bon KO briefly introduced the paper.

124. There being no comments, the Chairman ended the discussion on this item.

- 28 - Item 10: Any Other Business

(1) District Traffic Improvement Projects under Construction or pending Construction in Near Future by TD/HyD and Their Implementation Schedules (as at 17 June 2019)

125. The Chairman said the report was on the table for Councillors’ reference.

126. Mr CHAN Siu-tong raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he was satisfied with the two projects concerned; (ii) he asked whether the trial scheme would be extended to other areas where illegal parking was serious; and (iii) as the current location could not be used for parking and was not convenient for pedestrians, some shops heaped up miscellaneous articles there. The situation was unsatisfactory.

127. Mr LAU Tak-yin responded that the project at the relevant section of Man Wui Street had been completed in May promptly. The project had received a good response, but complaints had also been received about it. As regards whether the trial scheme would be extended to other areas, it had to be decided by the TD. If receiving works requests from the TD, the HyD would provide cooperation as soon as possible.

128. Mr Eric TAM responded that his colleague responsible for this issue had left the meeting, and the department would consider giving a response to Councillors in writing or in form of a report after the meeting.

129. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai asked whether the progress of the works for the traffic lights at the junction of Anchor Street and Beech Street was satisfactory, and whether the works could be completed by September.

130. Mr NG Chun-ling responded that the works for the widening of the carriageway at Beech Street outside Drainage Services Department’s sewage pumping station, the laying of underground conduits for the traffic signal system and the erection of traffic signal poles had been completed. Works were currently taking place at the carriageway off Fu Tor Loy Sun Chuen, and the laying of underground conduits for the crossing and the installation of the traffic signal control cabinet would be carried out later. The whole project was still expected to be completed by September.

(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat received a written response to the enquiries raised by Mr CHAN Siu-tong regarding the subject issue from the TD on 13 ----- August 2019 (Annex 10), which was forwarded to Members on the same day.)

(2) Other Views

132. Mr Derek HUNG said newspapers had reported that an organisation had applied for holding a procession from Salisbury Garden to the XRL station via Canton Road on that Sunday. He had enquired the Police of the situation and discussed with the relevant parties, and hoped to relay his concerns to the TD and the YTMDO. He considered that the event to be held by the organisation would certainly affect traffic, especially at locations like Star Ferry Bus Terminus, branded shops, Xiqu Centre, China Ferry Terminal and the XRL station, and therefore hoped that the TD and the YTMDO would coordinate with other relevant

- 29 - government departments to keep an eye on the situation. Although most processions were peaceful, some unexpected incidents might take place, so he hoped that the departments would pay extra attention. If necessary, the departments should provide relevant information for the nearby shops and residents. Besides, he had earlier raised the issues of the police presence in the XRL station and the operation of the police post therein, hoping that the YTMDO and the Police would maintain close liaison and take contingency measures as appropriate.

132. There being no other business, the Chairman closed the meeting at 5:20 p.m. The next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on Thursday, 29 August 2019.

Yau Tsim Mong District Council Secretariat July 2019

- 30 - Only Chinese version is available Annex 1

2016 至 2019 年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第二十一次會議

回應 第 41/2019 號文件

對於題述文件中的關注，本署有以下回應：

感謝議員對旺角道行人天橋延伸段工程項目進度的關注。

旺角道行人天橋延伸工程項目是由私人發展商 (新鴻基地産慈善基金 有限公司) 負責出資、設計及建造，並由其委聘的獨立工程顧問公司負責監 督工程的施工進度和 質量。當工程完成後，該天橋的擁有權將會移交給政府， 並由本署負責保養及維修。

天橋延伸部分的建造及道路改善工程，繼前期工程完成後，於 2016 年初展開。天橋的地基工程現已全部完成，承建商現正進行橋身連接樓梯工 程及橋面結構工程。 據工程顧問公司表示，有關吊運彌敦道天橋的封路措施 已經初步獲得相關部門的同意。就天橋的吊運方法及安裝方式的研究亦已完 成，相關深化細節如天橋預製件的運送路線、時間及安排等將提交至交通管 理聯絡小組會議中確定。

此 外，彌敦道天橋的預製件正在工場進行組裝，預計於 2019 年第三季 完成，經檢驗及相關測試合格後，會隨即安排運送到工地。有關工程進度詳 情可參考隨附的進度報告。工程顧問公司預計主要工程可望於 2020 年第一季 完成。

自推展旺角道行人天橋延伸工程項目以來，本署一直與有關發展商及 其工程顧問公司保持聯繫，並就天橋的設計及施工安排提供意見。本署會繼 續 與有關單位保持聯繫和協調，以期在安全的大前提下盡早完成有關工程。

路政署/市區 2019 年 6 月 議項二

2016 至 2019 年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第二十一次會議 回應 第 41/2019 號文件

旺角道與洗衣街的行人天橋系統 - 彌敦道伸延工程 (截至2019年6月17日的進度報告)

工程項目 地點 動工日期 預期完工日期 工程進度 詳細備註

旺角道與洗衣街的 旺角道西延至橫過彌敦道 地下設施遷移工程： 主要工程 於旺角道行車路及行人路進行之地下公用設施遷移工 行人天橋系統伸延 2011年7月 預計將於 程經已完成。 工程 2020年第一季 天橋建造工程： 完成 天橋的建造工程已於2016年1月開展。 2016年1月 相關配套工程 有關吊運彌敦道天橋的封路措施 (見附圖) 已經初步獲 預計將於 得相關部門的同意。封路措施及改道安排已經獲得巴 2020年第三季 士公司的同意，現正與小巴公司協調封路、改道安排 完成 的細節。此外，就天橋的吊運方法及安裝方式的研究 亦已完成，相關深化細節如天橋預製件的運送路線、 時間及安排等將提交至交通管理聯絡小組 (TMLG) 會議 中確定，會議暫定將於7月尾、8月初舉行。

樓梯地基建設已經部份完成。橋身連接樓梯工程及橋 面結構工程正在進行，預計於2019年第三季完成。為配 合吊運及安裝預製件，需要搭建橫跨在旺角道的臨時 工作台，有關設計已經完成，而搭建臨時工作台涉及 的封路措施亦已獲得相關部門同意，搭建工程會於前 置工作完成後展開。此外，彌敦道天橋預製件正在工 場組製過程當中，預計於2019年第三季完成組裝，經檢 驗及相關測試工序完成後，隨後安排運送。 旺角道與洗衣街的行人天橋系統 - 彌敦道伸延工程 橫跨彌敦道天橋預製件的運送路線 – 自昂船洲公眾貨物裝卸區至彌敦道與旺角道交界

彌敦道與旺角道交界

昂船洲公眾貨物裝卸區 旺角道與洗衣街的行人天橋系統 - 彌敦道伸延工程 吊運彌敦道天橋預製件的臨時封路措施及改道安排

彌敦道南行改道路線

彌敦道北行改道路線 28/05/2019 18:15 +852-28270487 SHKP(42/F PM DEPT 旬 〉 PAGE 01/02

Only Chinese version is available Annex 2

S盯了有 H盯ᬉG 瓦AI PROPERτIESC盟ARIτABL軍軍盯翯DLil\啞τEl》 Facsimile T.ransn直ission

Date: 28/6/2019 Yau Tsim Mong District To Council From Leslie Yeung

Attn Ms. Cherry Leung Dept. 主坐旦扭扭ag翩翩t Fax 2722 7696 Our Tel No. 3766 3050

No. of Pa窮的（including thispag 睡）： l+I Our Fax No. 2827 0485 If you do not receive all pages indicated above, pleasecontact us immediately.

盤盤盟星星

Dear Cherry,

Invi臨的on宜。A仕en晶the 21關閉eetin!! of Traffic‘Transuor藍 and盟ousin宮 Co臨臨i甜甜甜 Yiu且 T戚朋Ӫ。明寶路蛤trict Council (2016-2019)

Refon扭g to your fax dated 21 June 2019 regarding the captioned, we are sorry甘1atwe are “ 也nable to 翩翩d the said meeting this time. Our response to the paper 旺角行人天構（5蘭教纜 伸延工程部份，完工日拖得就拖間 is enclosed herewith foryour information.

Thank you foryour invitation 司

Best Reg釘ds,

卜

L但tie Yeung

29-JUN-2019 18:05 +852 28270487 97χ P.001

Only Chinese version is available Annex 3

罩�� ？由 陋 旺區議會 闕，a.._ YAU TSIM MONG DISTRICT COUNCIL 匁冒充 : ( ) in HAD YTMDC/ 電話： 2399 256 7 傳真： 27 22 7696

傳真函件 2523 9187

運輸及房屋局局長 陳帆先生，JP

陳局長：

關注旺角行人天橋 （彌敦道伸延工程部份）完工日長期拖延

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會（還房會）在 2019 年 7 月4日舉行第二十一次會議，會上續議由李思敏議員、 陳少棠議員 、 黃舒明議員和黃建新議員提呈的文件 ，題為〈旺角 行人天橋（彌敦道伸延工程部份）完工日拖得就拖？〉（附件一）。 路政署和承辦商新鴻基地產慈善基金有限公司（新鴻基）的書面回 應載於附件二及三 。 路政署及運輸署均有派代表出席會議 ，惟 新鴻基未有派員出席 。

路政署代表於會上表示 ， 行人天橋的地基工程已完成 。現 正進行橋身連接樓梯工程及橋面結構工程 ，並籌備吊運橋身預 製件的安排 。 由於相關事宜經過多次討論依然未見成果 ，而運 房會多番致函邀請仍未見新鴻基派員出席會議 ， 會上不少議員 對此表達不滿 ， 並質疑為何容許相關工程拖延至今及沒有對承 辦商作出任何懲處 。議員提出以下訴求：（i）切實交代工程完工 日期﹔（ ii）就改道安排與使用者或附近持份者作充分溝通﹔以及 (i ii）敦促新鴻基履行其社會責任 。

當日會議過程錄音己上載到油尖旺區議會網頁（網址 ： h役。s://www.districtcouncils.Q:ov.hk/vtm/tc chi/meetinQ:s/committees/dc committees mee tings audio.oho?meeting id=16713）， 以供查聽 。相關會議記錄節錄（草擬 本）亦載於血企且， 以供參考 。

九龍聯運街三十號旺角政府令者四接 電話 2399 2596 間文傳真 2722 7696 4/F’，Mong Kok Government Offices, 30 Luen Wan Street, Kowloon. Tel: 2399 2596 Fax: 2722 7696

HADLH48

Only Chinese version is available Annex 4

油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 二零一九年七月四日 第二十一次會議 九龍巴士（一九三三）有限公司書面回覆

議程：關注九巴手機應用程式廣告過多 影響市民使用

就上述議程，本公司謹覆如下：

九巴及龍運智能手機應用程式App1933，免費向乘客提供全面的巴士路線資訊及 預計到站時間，我們近年提升硬件設施，並不斷優化程式，以方便乘客，包括於 部分線路進行即時乘客計數測試，讓乘客得悉抵達巴士的客量等。為了應付有關 系統的恆常開支，並繼續提升服務，程式引入廣告務求達至收支平衡，期望用家 諒解。

九龍巴士(一九三三)有限公司

二零一九年六月 Only Chinese version is available Annex 5

油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第二十一次會議

建議西九龍走廊行走在適當位置安裝 車速監察系統 (第 53 /2019 號文件)

運輸署書面回覆

劉柏祺議員， 對於文件内的第四點建議安裝車速監察系統， 運輸署回應 如下:

運輸署和警方在今年一月商討後，決定在西九龍走廊大角咀段天橋安裝偵察 車速攝影機，以遏止西九龍走廊大角咀段天橋的超速情況。由於固定偵察車 速攝影機並未能全面改善西九龍走廊天橋的大範圍超速情況，本署現正研究 在西九龍走廊天橋安裝區間偵速快相機。本署已經聯絡不同的供應商以了解 有關器材和技術，並正研究在西九龍走廊天橋安裝區間偵速快相機的細節包 括安裝位置和電源供應等問題。本署正在蒐集有關資料，並期望能在明年內 在西九龍走廊天橋安裝有關設施，以測試有關技術在香港實施的可行性。本 署會繼續向委員會匯報有關工作的進展。

2019 年 7 月 2 日 Only Chinese version is available Annex 6 Only Chinese version is available Annex 7

2016至 2019年度油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 第二十一次會議 2019年 7月 4日會議

要求西九龍走廊大角咀段天橋 裝設隔音設施和車速監測儀

就上述討論文件，環境保護署回覆如下﹕

按討論文件所述，議員主要關注的是疑似改裝汽車及電單車在西九 龍走廊高速行駛所造成的噪音滋擾；有關車輛改裝及超速事宜是由警 方按《道路交通條例》處理。

至於在西九龍走廊安裝隔音設施事宜，路政署及環境保護署已曾於 2017年 7月 27日的交通運輸及房屋事務委員會，2018年 11月 29日的區議 會大會及2019年 6月 20日的社區建設委員會向油尖旺區議員詳細解釋 在西九龍走廊安裝隔音設施所面對的技術性問題及現時可行的措施， 現簡述如下：

為了緩減西九龍走廊交通噪音對附近居民的影響，路政署已研究在 西九龍走廊加建隔音屏障的可行性。由於西九龍走廊天橋已建成約三 十年，其結構不能承受加建隔音屏障或隔音罩所帶來的額外負荷，而 天橋沿線的地面亦無足夠空間容納獨立構築物來支撐隔音屏障，因此 在西九龍走廊天橋加建隔音屏障在技術上並不可行。

雖然未能加建隔音屏障，路政署已在西九龍走廊有關路段鋪設了低 噪音路面物料以緩減交通噪音對鄰近居民的影響，並會留意路面情況， 在有需要時為路面進行維修。

環境保護署 2019年 7月 2日

副本送：環境保護署評估及噪音組 Only Chinese version is available Annex 8

．．．．．． 香港網球總會 ”。my Mono Te””is Association 國 苦追飼 Ii �HJ I宮別六 I� f

我司香港網球總會己札很香港逾百年之久，本會作為香港的官方認可艘育總會，以推廣、 「 「 培訓及提高本港網球水平為己任。本會一直秉持「普及﹛七」 、 精英化」及 盛事他」三 大理念，與政府支持體育藝術發展大方針方向一致。除了積極推廣網球運動，更舉辦多項 本地及國際網球賽事，致力培訓本地有潛質的青少年網球手，目標提高整體網球運動水平， 與圓際水平接軌。以期遲至網球運動普及化，亦能讓本地網球運動員踏上國際舞台，為香 港爭光，進一步鞏固香港作為亞洲體育盛事之都的地位。

要全面配合政府積極推廣體育藝術發展藍圖，場地設施配套及天氣因素至為重要，惜本港 的公共網球設施緊拙，近年來亦未見有任何改善及升級計剖，有葦的公共網球設施更一直 未聞樓梯聲。加上香港天氣潮濕多雨，於賽事頻繁的夏季，影響甚深。不但窒礙賽事的進 行，連帶所有訓練活動均要取消改期，延誤訓練進度，引申對教練的生計亦有影響，由此 可見有葦的公共網球設施需求甚殷。

香港在粵港澳大灣區的發展斑圖上飾演領導地位的角色，但在體育設施上，卻遠遠落後大 灣區內的周邊城市。鄰近的廣州、珠海 、 深圳等城市均已配備室內網球場等，公共設施（見 附圖1-4），連同周邊練習場地等均一應俱全，近年亦相繼落實舉行多項大型國際網球盛事 包括今年首次舉辦的 WTA 女子年終蟹。長遠恐怕威脅香港國際體育盛事之都的地位，更 窒礙本地網球運動發展，以致未能全面配合政府全民運動的方針。

本會對增設有蓋網球設施的事甚為關注，從報章得悉在西九龍渡華路有18萬呎的地皮規 劃作休憩用地，其中可興建網球場，故此特意致函陳議員，希望陳議員向政府反映興建有 黨網球場的需要，把j度華路計翻中興建的網球場加上上蓋。除了讓廣大市民可以在不受天 兩影響的環境下享受網球運動的樂趣外，亦有助於各中外網球賽事更順利地舉行。靜候佳 音，不勝戚激！

祝台安！ 才r百字

黎百年 行政總裁 香港網球總會 二零一九年四月一日

Main Line:(852) 2504-8266 Fax:(852) 2894-8704 Website:www.tennishk.org 頁1/3頁

Only Chinese version is available Annex 9

檔案編號：CC/L2/195/19/JW

敬啟者：

有關︰要求儘快落實機場巴士 A20 號改經海泓道方案

多謝 貴會於 6 月 21 日就上述事宜來函本公司轉達議員意見，經現謹覆如下：

城巴於《2019 至 2020 年度巴士路線計劃》中建議增設機場巴士 A20 號線的行車路線改經何 文田及大角咀，取代行走現時與 A21 號線重疊的尖沙咀及油麻地一帶路段，以善用巴士資源 及為居民提供更直接的機場巴士服務。建議早前已在各相關區議會諮詢，公司將會與運輸署 商討 A20 號線服務改動的相關細節並提出申請，預計於本年度第三季實施。

再次多謝 貴會對本公司服務的關注。

此致 油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房屋事務委員會 許德亮主席

城巴有限公司 公眾事務部 謹啟

2019 年 6 月 28 日

副本抄送︰運輸署 Only Chinese version is available Annex 10

傳真函件及電子郵件

本薯擋號： (KBYUQ) in TD KR146/193/M-16 來的檔號： 電 話： 2399 2506

傳真： 2397肋插

九龍旺角聯運街 30 號 旺角政府合署4樓 油尖旺區議會 交通運輸及房犀事務委員會秘書處

執事先生／女士：

泌的至 2019 年度油尖旺區鐵會 交通運輸及房處事務委員會第二十…次會議 其他事項

在 2019 年 7 月 4 日的油尖旺區議會交通運輸及房屋事務委員會上，就 陳少黨議員就題述事宜表達的查詢，本署現自覆如下：

位於文蔚街的交通改善工程已於 2019 年 5 月完工，我們現正檢視新措 施落成後的成效，以及聆聽於文蔚街一帶的地區持份者、駕駛者及相關政府部 門的意見。現階段我們將會於 2020 年完成檢討後再決定是否會於未來在其他地 方推展類似的交通改善工程。

運輸署署長

二零一九年八月十三日