Minutes of the 13th Meeting of the Fourth-term Wong Tai Sin District Council of the HKSAR

Date: 5 November 2013 (Tuesday) Time: 2:30 p.m. Venue: Conference Room, Wong Tai Sin District Council 6/F Lung Cheung Office Block 138 Lung Cheung Road Wong Tai Sin, Kowloon

Present:

Chairman:

Mr. LI Tak-hong, MH, JP

Vice-chairman:

Dr. WONG Kam-chiu, MH

Wong Tai Sin District Council (WTSDC) Members:

Ms CHAN Man-ki, Maggie, MH Mr. CHAN On-tai Mr. CHAN Wai-kwan, Andie Mr. CHAN Yim-kwong, Joe Hon. CHAN Yuen-han, SBS, JP Mr. HO Yin-fai Mr. HUI Kam-shing Mr. KAN Chi-ho, BBS, MH, JP Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe Mr. LEE Tat-yan, MH Mr. MOK Chung-fai, Rex, MH Mr. MOK Kin-wing Mr. MOK Ying-fan Mr. SHUM Wan-wa Mr. SO Sik-kin Ms TAM Heung-man Ms TAM Mei-po Mr. TING Chi-wai, Roy Mr. WONG Kam-chi, BBS, MH, JP Mr. WONG Kit-hin Mr. WONG Kwok-tung Dr. WONG Kwok-yan Mr. WONG Yat-yuk Hon. WU Chi-wai, MH Mr. Yuen Kwok-keung, Stephen

Absent with Apologies:

Mr. HO Hon-man, MH Ms KWOK Sau-ying

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 1 In Attendance:

Mr. YAU Shing-mu, JP Under Secretary for Transport and Housing THB ) Re.: Miss WONG Tin-yu, Agnes, JP Deputy Secretary for Transport and Housing THB ) Item III(i) (Housing) )

Mrs. Sorais LEE, JP Head (Kai Tak Office) CEDD ) Re: Ms YING Fun-fong Chief Engineer / Kowloon 3 CEDD ) Item III (ii) & ) (iii)

Mr. MA Hon-ngai, Harry Senior Works Consolidation Manager EKEO ) Re: Mr. Igor HO Technical Director AECOM Asia ) Item III (ii) Company ) Limited )

Mr. C. K. MAN Assistant Technical Director ditto ) Re: ) Item III (iii)

Mr. SHIU Wai-chuen, William, JP District Officer (Wong Tai Sin) WTSDO Mr. CHOW Oi-wang, Toby District Commander (Wong Tai Sin) HKPF Ms Lily NG District Social Welfare Officer SWD (Wong Tai Sin/Sai Kung) Miss WU Long-yee Senior Housing Manager/ Wong Tai Sin HD Mr. CHUI Si-kay, Peter Senior Engineer/6 (Kowloon) CEDD Mr. CHOY Chik-sang, Mario Chief Transport Officer /Kowloon TD Miss TANG Man-wah, Sylvia Chief Leisure Manager (Kowloon) LCSD Mr. CHAN Yiu-keung, Edward Wong Tai Sin District Environmental Hygiene FEHD Superintendent Miss MA Wan-yin, Vivian Assistant District Officer (Wong Tai Sin) WTSDO Mr. HO Ming-leong, Trevor Acting Senior Executive Officer WTSDO (District Management) Mr. TING Tin-sang Senior Liaison Officer 1 WTSDO Ms PANG Suk-wah, Phyllis Senior Liaison Officer 2 WTSDO Ms TANG Wai-lan, Cecilia Executive Officer I (District Council) WTSDO

Secretary:

Miss LAM Wing-sze, Victoria Senior Executive Officer (District Council) WTSDO

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 2 Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed all to the 13th meeting of the Wong Tai Sin District Council (WTSDC), in particular Mr. YAU Shing-mu, Under Secretary for Transport and Housing (USTH), and Miss WONG Tin-yu, Agnes, Deputy Secretary for Transport and Housing (Housing) (DSTH) from the Transport and Housing Bureau (THB); and Mr. CHUI Si-kay, Peter, Senior Engineer from the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD), who stood in for Mr. LO Kam-yan, Anthony.

2. Knowing that Ms TAM Mei-po was going to give birth to her baby, Members wished her well on the delivery. Ms TAM Mei-po also informed the Secretariat that she would be absent from WTSDC and its committee meetings for about two months due to childbirth. The Chairman asked Members to take note of it and approve her absence in relevant meetings.

3. The Chairman also told the meeting that Mr. SHIU Wai-chuen, William, District Officer (Wong Tai Sin), was going to retire in late November 2013 and this was his last meeting before leaving the service. He appreciated Mr. SHIU’s dedication, enthusiasm and hard-work, his heart of putting people first and always did his utmost to promote the cooperation between WTSDC and various Government departments to facilitate the success of projects and programmes. Mr. SHIU had made valuable contributions to the well-being of residents in Wong Tai Sin district. On behalf of WTSDC, the Chairman wished Mr. SHIU a happy and healthy retirement life.

4. Mr. SHIU expressed gratitude towards WTSDC Members and said he felt very happy and enriched in serving WTS District over the past three and a half years. He said all Members had been sparing no effort in looking after district’s matters and served people out of goodness of their hearts. They were genuinely committed to safeguarding the best interests of residents and worked diligently for the betterment of the community. As a member of the Home Affairs Department (HAD), he held high regard for all Members, and expressed thanks for their encouragement and advice from the bottom of his heart. Mr. SHIU also thanked for the cooperation from various Government departments, whose assistance and inputs had contributed a lot to the smooth implementation of various district projects (including community activities and works projects). He thanked again all Members for their support and encouragement and wished them all the best at work and in family lives. Lastly, he wished WTS District would truly turn into a healthy and safe city.

(Messrs. CHAN Yim-kwong, Joe and YUEN Kwok-keung, Stephen, arrived at the meeting at 2:40 pm.)

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 3 5. The Chairman said the Secretariat issued the paper, namely, “Review of Allowance and Expense Reimbursement Arrangements for District Council Members” (WTSDC Paper No. 110/2013) on 1 November 2013, a photocopy of which was on table for Members’ reference. The Chairman said HAD’s suggestions were what Members had been asking for over the years. Members had no comment about the suggestions set out in the paper.

(Mr. MOK Ying-fan arrived at the meeting at 2:45 pm, while Hon. WU Chi-wai left the meeting at this juncture.)

6. Members also had no comment about the proposed discussion time for agenda items of the 13th meeting on table.

I. Confirmation of Minutes of the 12th Meeting of Wong Tai Sin District Council held on 10 September 2013

7. As there was no proposed amendment received before the meeting or raised by Members and representatives of Government departments present, minutes of the 12th meeting were hereby confirmed without amendment.

II. Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of Wong Tai Sin District Council held on 10 September 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 96/2013)

8. The Chairman called on Members to note that Director of Home Affairs issued a letter to all Members, following up on issues which had not yet been addressed at the previous meeting. The Secretariat had forwarded the letter to all Members. Members noted the progress report.

III(i) Long Term Housing Strategy Consultation (WTSDC Paper No. 97/2013)

9. The Chairman welcomed Mr. YAU Shing-mu, USTH and Miss WONG Tin-yu, Agnes, DSTH, to the meeting. They would give a briefing on the Long Term Housing Strategy (LTHS) Consultation Document. The Chairman said as more than 80% of residents in WTS District were living in public and subsidised housing and meeting housing needs was Hong Kong’s most pressing issue. Members were, therefore, looking forward to the presentation of USTH and DSTH.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 4 10. USTH said he was very delighted to present the LTHS Consultation Document to WTSDC. He said the LTHS Steering Committee (the Steering Committee) published the consultation document in early September 2013 and invited public views on the LTHS during the three-month consultation period, which would end on 2 December 2013. Although many people had expressed their views on LTHS on various occasions, he purposefully came to WTSDC and listened to Members’ views. The Transport and Housing Bureau (THB) had issued a briefing note to each Member, summarising the key points in the consultation document. He would not go into detail about the document and would like to spend more time in gathering Members’ opinions.

11. The Chairman said there were two submissions on table, one by nine WTSDC Members and two co-opted Members from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) Wong Tai Sin Branch (Annex 1); and the other one by two WTSDC Members from Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People’s Livelihood (ADPL) (Annex 2). The Chairman first invited Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe, from DAB, to introduce the first submission.

12. Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe, said Hong Kong was a small place with a large population, and housing was a matter of deep concern to everybody and crucial to social harmony and stability. With the incessant increase in property prices in recent years, people were more concerned about housing issues. According to the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA), there were about 118 700 applicants for public rental housing (PRH) on the general waiting list and about 115 600 non-elderly one-person applicants for PRH under the Quota and Points System (QPA) as at the end of June 2013. The figures were astounding. The “three-year pledge”, viz maintaining the waiting time of three years for PRH, had never been honoured. In addition, proliferation of subdivided units (SDUs) had become serious recently with many grass-roots inadequately housed in cubicle apartments and SDUs nowadays. To address the housing issues, the Steering Committee published a consultation document entitled “Building Consensus, Building Homes” in September 2013, explaining the prevailing housing problems and setting out the housing policy objectives and long term housing vision. They welcomed the move. Since housing policy had a far-reaching impact on different sectors in the community, they considered that a proper balance should be achieved. In this respect, they expressed the following eight major areas of concern and views on the consultation document:

(i) The LTHS should reaffirmed the guiding principle of housing policy, viz “assisting grassroots families in moving into public housing and the middle-income families in buying their own homes”;

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 5 (ii) They supported increasing housing supply as the guiding principle, but thought that the Government should also consider introducing demand-side management measures, in particular those to restrict non-local residents to buying properties, in order to accord priority to the home ownership needs of Hong Kong residents;

(iii) They agreed that public housing should account for the majority of the new housing production and supported increasing the supply of Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats. Nevertheless, the Government should pay attention to the distribution of public housing and try to avoid generating a labeling effect and other community problems due to over-concentration on public housing;

(iv) The projection of new housing units did not take into account the housing need generated by “investment”. If the Government did not introduce demand-side management measures, such as the “Hong Kong Property for Hong Kong People” policy, “Buyer’s Stamp Duty” or “Limiting Loan-to-value Ratio for Mortgages for Non-owner-occupied Properties”, people with genuine housing need would inevitably have to compete with investors for new housing units. In this regard, they advised the Government not to withdraw any effective measures;

(v) Families and the elderly should continue to be given top priority in PRH allocation while efforts should be made to shorten the waiting time of singleton applicants, in particular those aged 35 or above. They were also concerned about the suggestion of building dedicated PRH blocks for singletons within existing PRH estates and wished that the Government would gain support from residents before implementing such plans;

(vi) They agreed that the Government should eradicate SDUs in non-residential buildings, but considered that licensing and landlord registration system should not be introduced hastily without proper rehousing plans. It was because the move, though able to shrink SDU supply in a short period of time, might result in evictions or rental hikes. They wished the Government should think twice before action;

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 6

(vii) Besides producing more HOS flats, the Government should re-launch the “Sandwich Class Housing Scheme (SCHS)” in order to provide more choices and opportunities for first-time home buyers. There were also well-received policies in the past, such as Home Starter Loan Scheme and Tenants Purchase Scheme (TPS). Although re-launching such schemes might not be advantageous, or even detrimental, to the long term housing development given the general housing situations at present, they wished the Government would consider re-launching them again when the situations improved; and

(viii) They agreed that new towns in future should be developed as “self-sustained” communities. However, the Government should look into whether residents would be able to find jobs within districts and whether there were adequate community facilities to meet the needs of residents during detailed planning and study in order to avoid job mis-match and ensure timely provision of facilities. Despite “self-sustained” principle, good connectivity to other districts should be in place to take care of the needs of residents working across districts. The Government received many criticisms over new town developments (such as Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai). They criticised the Government for giving full play to free market operation and competition and failing to introduce new policies and concepts at initial stage of new town developments. They advised the Government to draw experiences from neighbouring countries or cities on such developments.

Lastly, Mr. LAI said LTHS, which was still under public consultation, had far-reaching implications. It was therefore necessary for the Government to continue listening to views from various sectors. The Government should then work out suitable policies and take them forward as quickly as possible to provide every family and citizen in Hong Kong with a “happy home” of their own.

13. The Chairman invited Mr. HUI Kam-shing to present the second paper on behalf of ADPL.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 7 14. Mr. HUI Kam-shing likened the Consultation Document to “loud thunder but small raindrops”. He was disappointed with the Consultation Document and said there seemed to be lacking in three aspects:

(i) A lack of general direction

No detailed account of the land supply was given in the document and the Government failed to secure enough lands for the provision of 400 000 more residential units in the future ten years to meet the projected housing supply target. In this regard, Mr. HUI suggested the Government make use of the following sites:

(a) Urban military sites

Although it might take considerable time to discuss the matter and the Central People’s Government might also be involved, he said similar policies were implemented in Singapore and Hong Kong might make reference to them for its long-term plans;

(b) Brown lands in the New Territories

He suggested the Government consider long-term plans on the use of these lands; and

(c) Small house sites

Small houses nowadays occupied many sites in old districts. He suggested a new mode be introduced, say multi-storey blocks, instead of the traditional three- to seven-storey structures be built for small houses to increase the supply.

(ii) A lack of correct assessment in housing demand

There were now 230 000 applicants for PRH on the waiting list and he expected it would be more than 270 000 over the next ten years, higher than the projected number. He asked the Government what it would do to meet the demand. On the

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 8 other hand, the Consultation Document did not take into account people’s pursuit of better living environment, say demand for “changing properties”. He said the Government was too optimistic to expect that buildings aged over 50 years and SDUs would be removed through urban renewal. According to the progress of the Urban Renewal Authority, there seemed to be a remote chance that all renewal projects could be completed in the next decade. There was also no assessment on the number of SDUs in industrial buildings. He considered the Government failed to do a good job in preparation; and

(iii) A lack of strength to deal with sub-standard homes, such as SDUs

He said the Government should not tackle SDU problems by way of licensing as a licensing regime could not stablise the housing supply chain. Instead, he advised the Government to redevelop old housing estates, a dozen of which were aged over 40 years. Re-developing these estates would enhance the plot ratio of the site, thereby increasing the housing supply. He also noted that vacant units would not be used for re-housing if the estate was going to be re-developed within three years. He therefore suggested these units be used as transitional housing to rehouse people living in SDUs. He thought it was not possible to get rid of all SDUs instantly and conditions of SDUs varied. Some of them were extremely bad and in peril. He suggested the Government deal with these in the first place. He also said the Consultation Document just talked about SDUs without giving solutions to the problem.

15. Overall speaking, he opined that although the LTHS touched on problems associated with older public housing estates, these problems had yet to be resolved completely. He hoped the Government would deal with them quickly to improve the housing environment in Hong Kong. As for the cases of “under-occupied households”, “over-crowded households” and “well-off tenants”, he considered that these problems required regular reviews and were not necessarily included in the LTHS. He said he proposed some improvement measures in the submission and hoped that the Government would recognise the concerns of Hong Kong people over housing issues and take effective measures to address the concerns as soon as possible.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 9 16. Dr. WONG Kam-chiu, Vice Chairman, appreciated the attempt made by the Steering Committee to address housing problems in Hong Kong by publishing the Consultation Document after 11 meetings. He had three comments concerning the document:

(i) The Government recently proposed to build “pencil towers” to accommodate non-elderly singletons. He regarded the proposal kind of a last resort. However, the proposal faced strong resistance at district level as people were concerned about the air ventilation, environment and ancillary facilities in relation to these buildings. As a DC Member, he needed to balance the need for more housing units in the society and the opinions of residents. If there were plans to build “pencil towers”, the Government should provide residents with incentives, such as enhancing social facilities, or otherwise would face strong opposition from residents;

(ii) The Government repeatedly stressed that it had no plan to use country park areas for housing developments. He opined that country parks were a treasure of Hong Kong with some areas having very high ecological value. Unless there was absolutely no alternative, the Government should not use country park land for housing purposes. He said, apart from development land and country parks, about 30% of Hong Kong land was classified as green belt. He suggested the Government consider developing certain land in green belt with low ecological value. For example, new towns in Tung Chung in Lantau Island and Hung Shui Kiu in Yuen Long were well developed with proper social facilities. Developing the green belt adjacent to these areas would be easier than turning “disposed sites” to “potential sites”; and

(iii) The consultation document did not talk much about assisting the youth in acquiring a home. He shared the view that the newly-graduated young people borne in the 1980s should not be too eager for home acquisition. However, given sky-high price of properties, including HOS flats and small apartments, at present, many young university graduates applied for PRH as soon as they left schools. He considered the situation unhealthy and there seemed to be an abuse of public resources. He wished the Government would do something to help them.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 10 17. Mr. MOK Kin-wing said it was mentioned in the LTHS that the housing supply should be 470 000 units in the next ten year with the ratio between public housing and private housing to be 60:40. He said the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) had all along advocated that PRH should be given priority in housing developments in Hong Kong, followed by HOS flats and supplemented with private housing units. He advised the Government to raise public housing supply to such a level that the ratio became 70:30. With 220 000 applicants on the waiting list and 80 000 more households living in SDUs, he said the Government should concentrate its efforts on housing these people first. Other issues, such as how to improve the living conditions and the demand for private housing arising from “changing properties” and investment needs, should be put aside for a moment. He also considered that the prices of medium-sized, large-sized and luxury units were so high that they were not affordable by general public and middle-class families. In this regard, he suggested introducing "Hong Kong Property for Hong Kong People" measures and restricting the supply of small- and medium-sized private housing units in the proposed 30% ratio. Lastly, he said the supply of the remaining 70 000 units had yet to be confirmed. He hoped the Government would secure the provision through various strategies. He said there were a number of PRH estates of 40 to 50 years old in WTS District. Their plot ratios were under-utilised. The Government might also consider raising the proportion of PRH in the developments at Tai Hom Village and Diamond Hill Service Reservoirs and housing residents of older estates to newly developed PRH units while constructing new buildings in-situ to increase the PRH supply.

(Mr. SHUM Wan-wa, Dan, arrived at the meeting at 3:05 pm.)

18. Mr. WONG Yat-yuk asked the Government whether it was true that land supply for 100 000 more units among the projected 470 000 had yet to be confirmed. If so, he enquired whether there were other alternatives, such as carrying out reclamation to increase land supply or building housing units on less controversial plots. Regarding the waiting list, he said many grass-roots expected the Government to speed up the construction of PRH, increase the housing supply, and take measures to help young people in need to acquire home and the working-poor to move to the public housing quickly. He wished the Government would try every effort to shorten the PRH waiting time of the elderly and increase the PRH quotas for the working-poor.

(Ms TAM Mei-po left the meeting at 3:10 pm.)

19. USTH thanked Members for their valuable advice on LTHS and their support for the vision and plans to increase housing supply and the emphasis on public housing in the supply-led strategy advocated in the consultation document. His response to Members’ enquiries was summerised as follows:

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 11 (i) He admitted that, with tight supply of PRH units and moratorium on the sale of HOS flats, supply-demand imbalance for housing became apparent, resulting in a long waiting list for PRH. He opined that housing problems could not be resolved instantly and the purpose of LTHS was to project the housing demand for the next ten years, based on which the Government would work hard to accomplish the target in a systematic manner;

(ii) Following were some major principles of the LTHS:

(a) Providing rental housing for grass-roots families and helping them secure public housing;

(b) Helping people with purchasing power to buy their homes at an affordable price, with a view to re-establishing a complete progressive housing ladder;

(c) Maintaining the healthy and steady development of the private property market;

In brief, the Steering Committee recommended that the LTHS for the coming ten years should be built on the vision of providing adequate and affordable housing to the people of Hong Kong through re-establishing a housing ladder that facilitated upward mobility.

(iii) The Steering Committee accepted the housing demand projection, i.e. 470 000 units, in the next ten years made by experts and calculated by a computing model. He said the calculation had been explained in detail in the Consultation Document and “investment demand” had been taken into account. He explained that some units were not owner-occupied, but channelled to leasing market. These units, to a certain extent, met the demand for home-leasing. In this regard, the figures in the document had reflected the demand of investors. He said the document also covered flats purchased by non-local buyers without leasing out or re-selling. Figures of these units were projected in other sections under “Projection Methodology” in Chapter 4. The projection of 470 000 units, therefore, included demands from:

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 12 (a) new households arising from marriages, and splitting of existing households;

(b) households displaced by redevelopment of old buildings: the number of these households was calculated based on announced redevelopment plans from the HA, Urban Renewal Authority (URA) and Hong Kong Housing Society (HS). It was dynamic estimation and the number would be updated if new redevelopment projects arouse in the coming year;

(c) inadequately housed households: including those now living in SDUs, cubicles, cage homes, squatters and rooftop structures; and

(d) others: including unoccupied flats purchased by Hong Kong people who were working or living overseas or by non-local buyers who invested in Hong Kong;

USTH said the Government had prepared a document, explaining in detail the calculation of the 470 000 units as well as its relationship with the waiting list for PRH. He would provide the document to Members for reference if necessary and welcome views from Members on the document;

(iv) Regarding the issue of SDU, USTH said there was no statutory definition of SDU and different kinds of SDU of various standards existed in the market. A conservative estimation showed that about 40% of these units were regarded as inadequately housed due to shortage of individual toilets or cooking facilities. He viewed that the long-term solution to the issue was helping SDU tenants move to PRH units and he said relevant figures were mentioned in the Consultation Document. Although many SDU tenants were not eligible to move to PRH units for the time being, he believed that allocating PRH units to them was the solution in the long run. For measures in the transition period, he said two groups of opinions were ventured during discussions in the Steering Committee, reflecting that views on this issue were divided in the society. One group of views suggested tighter control over SDUs through licensing or landlord registration system to better regulate the hygiene conditions of SDUs. The

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 13 other group, however, considered that introducing a licensing or registration system was no different from setting standards for SDUs and it might push up the cost of the landlords. The increased cost would be passed on to SDU tenants, who might be forced to move out eventually. These opinions were by no means mainstream views formed by the Steering Committee. Instead, they were just suggestions of individual members as stated in the Consultation Document. The Steering Committee would like to listen to the views from all walks of life before making any decision and wished the society would discuss the issue thoroughly. He would like to invite Members to express their views vigorously in order to secure consensus for implementing any measures on this issue;

(v) As to whether temporary housing would be provided for SDU tenants, USTH said there was a Temporary Housing Area (THA) in WTS District before 1997, but he admitted that it was not easy to find a place for establishing a THA with the acceptance of local community now. Even if a suitable place was identified, it should be used for building permanent PRH units for allocation to eligible applicants to save tenants from moving again. He did not rule out the possibility of developing THA on urban lands which were not selected for any development plans in the short run. However, consideration should be given to the duration of stay of the tenants as it needed time to provide basic utilities, such as water, power and sewage, for the THA;

(vi) It was mentioned in the document that the society wished the Government would assist singletons in moving to public housing and increase PRH quotas for young applicants. Recognising that the priority of these people in the waiting list was far lower than family applicants, the Government was now devising means to assist them, for example identifying suitable sites in housing estates and conducting assessments on air ventilation, light capture, gas supply, and transport facilities etc., well in advance for future housing developments. He also said the document presented major considerations only. Whether they would be implemented depended on the outcomes of consultations with District Councils, views collected from the community and environmental considerations; and

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 14 (vii) He was aware that most Members supported the general principles and proposals set out in the LTHS but had doubts about the projection of 470 000 units. Concerning these 470 000 units, the proposed ratio between public housing and private housing was 60:40, and the Government had found suitable sites and would spare no effort in providing sufficient public housing in the next five years. As for the development after five years, the Government had identified some sites. However, the Government needed to apply for change of land use and garner support from local community. If everything went well, he was confident that the 60% ratio would be achieved. The 40% ratio of private housing relied on market supply. Developers would increase their supply when the economy was good and vice versa. That said, the Government would secure sufficient lands to produce public housing. He said the 470 000 units were a target, not a rigid indicator, for the next ten years. It would be updated yearly taking into account any changes in policy and social environment.

Lastly, USTH said land development was not an easy decision. Finding new sites and creating new sites by reclamation often aroused controversies. Nevertheless, there was a pressing need to address housing demand in the society. He wished Members would put forth more suggestions and work together with the Government to achieve the targets.

20. Mr. SO Sik-kin recalled that when he was working in the property sector more than a decade ago, the investors then liked to acquire tenement flats to reap big profits. For example, he said, a tenement flat could be sub-divided into 4 to 5 units. Leasing out these units to several families was much profitable than letting the entire flat out. Nevertheless, he expressed concerns over problems associated with SDUs, such as that of illegal structures, water pipes and power supply. Investors might overlook the safety problems faced by tenants as they did not live in these units. He believed the never-ending “chicken-and-egg” relationship could apply to SDU issues, saying that SDU tenants would never be vanished as long as SDUs existed. To resolve the problem, he said some adjustments could be made in LTHS to facilitate SDU tenants moving to public housing and kept the number of SDUs from growing through regulations. He also considered the waiting time of singleton applicants for PRH was too long. Many applicants submitted their applications when they were still in school. By the time they were given an offer, they were already employed and their wages

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 15 exceeded the threshold for allocation of singleton flats. He therefore suggested that some kinds of control be introduced, such as banning students with no income proof from applying for PRH. He understood that it was the duty of Government to take care of the needy and low-income group, but he reckoned that allowing students with no income to apply would generate a large number of applicants in the waiting list. Lastly, he supported the “spicy” measures introduced by the Government. He said, as a financial centre, Hong Kong was vulnerable to changes of external economy, such as forthcoming interest hikes and state’s macro-economic control. These would have implications on the profits and values of property investments, creating a large number of negative equities in the worst case scenario. He said the existing “spicy” measures should be retained or the public would engage in investments blindly. They would only blame the Government when the value of their properties dropped significantly. He also said although he supported green groups, he did approve of reclamation and land resumption if there were genuine needs and in the public interests.

21. Mr. HUI Kam-shing said he wished USTH would provide Members, via the Secretariat, the document detailing the projection of housing supply in the next ten years and its relationship with the number of applicants in the waiting list as he mentioned earlier. Besides, he asked USTH to explain further the methodology for “assessing the housing demand from the net increase in the number of households” as mentioned in page 30 of the Consultation Document. He also enquired about the re-development of older public estates, including whether there was any time table and specific plan for it and what would be done to engage HA in this matter.

(Post-meeting note: the Secretariat had forwarded the related documents from HD to Members on 2 December 2013.)

22. Mr. CHAN Yim-kwong, Joe, said SDUs were products derived by demands. He viewed that the Government should not force tenants to move out from their SDUs without appropriate plans. Regarding a licensing regime for SDUs, he opined that no newly divided SDUs be allowed. He said, although the Buildings Department (BD) set out regulations for minor works of sub-dividing flat units, they did not have much effect because landlords might asked licensed persons to apply for sub-division works. Licensed persons in general did not undertake sub-division works for SDUs, existing SDUs were therefore made by unlicensed persons. He said, in case someone reported SDUs to the BD, the Department would only asked the landlord to hire a licensed person to make declarations. He had no idea as to whether the BD would take enforcement actions against these cases or not. He opined that sub-division of flat units to SDUs had to be stopped first, before finding ways to deal with existing ones.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 16 He said he knew about the operation and reasons behind the emergence of SDUs. He explained an 800 square-feet flat on the sixth floor of a tenement building without lifts was not attractive to the lease market. If it was sub-divided into four smaller units for $2,000 or $3,000 in rental each, they would be able to attract rent-conscious tenants. However, when the situation evolved to the state that sub-division also occurred in smaller flats on lower floors in tenement buildings, a lot of problems ensued. The Government should put an end to the emergence of such SDUs and he wished the BD would take enforcement actions without favouritism.

(Mr. WONG Kwok-tung arrived at the meeting at 3:35 pm.)

23. Mr. WONG Yat-yuk said USTH talked positively about the provision of 470 000 units, but did not give a definite reply to the request of Members for an upward adjustment of the ratio of PRH. He asked USTH to address the request.

24. USTH answered Mr. HUI Kam-shing’s question first. He said the net increase in household in the projection methodology denoted the actual increase in the number of households, arising from birth, marriages, and expatriates coming to Hong Kong for stay etc., in the next ten years. He added that although there were about 50 000 newly-weds each year, not all of them formed new household demands because some of them might still live with their families after marriage. Similarly, existing households might be dissolved due to deaths, emigration or household merging (living with their families again). The net growth in households mentioned in the document was a pivotal base for assessing housing demand. He said the ratio between private and public housing in existing household market was 53:47. In future, the Government would focus its efforts on building more public housing, including PRH units and HOS flats, while the ratio between these two had yet to decide. As to whether more HOS flats should be developed to meet the housing needs of the grass-roots, he said the Government would keep an open mind. Building of HOS flats was just resumed and the number of flats to be provided would not be large at the initial stage. If demands surged in the future, the Government would consider a more flexible supply. In addition, USTH said supply of HOS flats was subject to market conditions. If the property market was in a slump, the subscription rate of HOS would be very low. The HA would introduce due flexibility in the design of PRH units and HOS flats, so that the ratio between these housing could be adjusted by converting saleable flats to rental housing units (or the other way round) to tie in with the demand trend in the market. The Consultation Document, therefore, did not provide a definite ratio. USTH further talked about SDUs. He said the issue involved two parties, namely the tenants and landlords of SDUs. He opined that there was no legal definition of SDU and

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 17 conditions of some SDUs were extremely unsatisfactory. Helping SDU tenants move to public housing was the only solution. However, after the tenants moved to public housing, the SDUs would be leased out to others if they were sub-divided in compliance with the Building Ordinance and they met other regulations on load bearing, fire safety, air ventilation and fire escapes, etc.. The Government could not ban the landlords from leasing out these SDUs and he believed that they would exist as long as there was a need in the market. That said, if landlords were found breaching the law, for example, constructing SDUs in industrial buildings, the Government would act seriously against such malpractices.

(Ms TAM Heung-man, Mandy, arrived at the meeting at 3:40 pm.)

25. The Chairman thanked USTH for his detailed explanations and replies. He wished USTH and DSTH would take note and follow up Members’ opinions. He said the consultation period of LTHS would end on 2 December 2013. Members who had further views might send their written submissions, via the Secretariat or other means, to the Steering Committee.

III(ii) Connecting Kowloon East－Environmentally Friendly Linkage System Stage 2 Public Consultation (WTSDC Paper No.98/2013)

26. The Chairman welcomed Mrs. Sorais LEE, JP, Head (Kai Tak Office) and Ms YING Fun-fong, Chief Engineer/Kowloon 3, from the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD); Mr. MA Hon-ngai, Harry, Senior Works Consolidation Manager from the Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO) under the Development Bureau (DEVB); and Mr. Igor HO, Technical Director from AECOM Asia Company Limited to the meeting for this item.

27. Mrs. Sorais LEE said Connecting Kowloon East－Environmentally Friendly Linkage System (EFLS) Proposal had proceeded to Stage 2 public consultation. She would like to take this opportunity to sum up and respond to the views collected during Stage 1 public consultation, which was held between February and October 2012, and recommend the next move. She invited Ms YING Fun-fong to present the project.

28. Ms YING Fun-fong presented the paper with the aid of a Powerpoint file. Salient points were set out below:

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 18 (I) Purpose of the Stage 2 Public Consultation

Stage 2 Public Consultation of the EFLS was held from 28 October 2013 to 4 February 2014. It aimed to present the outcomes and respond to the views collected during the Stage 1 public consultation. It also suggested carrying out a feasibility study on the elevated rail-based EFLS to address the various concerns before committing to project implementation and seeking public views on the proposed detailed feasibility study.

(II) Outcomes of Stage 1 Public Consultation

Results of the Stage 1 public consultation revealed that the public generally welcomed the proposed development of EFLS to enhance the connectivity of Kowloon East (KE) and in turn promote the development of Central Business District (CBD) in the region. However, there were concerns about the proposal, which were largely categorised into three main issues:

(a) The Need for an EFLS

(i) People accepted that good accessibility was essential to the development of CBD in KE, but views were diverse on the way to achieve the target;

(ii) There were concerns about the high construction cost and low predicted operating returns of the EFLS and some members of the public even suggested using road-based green public transport as an alternative; and

(iii) Some also suggested putting the EFLS underground or at street level to minimise visual intrusion.

(b) Alignment and Coverage

(i) There was a suggestion to realign the EFLS via an existing Taxiway Bridge in order to avoid the need for the new Kwun Tong Transportation Link (KTTL);

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 19 (ii) Some suggested curtailing the KTTL section completely or postponing implementation of this section;

(iii) Many others wanted to see an extension of the EFLS to adjacent districts to improve connections with the surrounding areas;

(iv) There were suggestions to review the proposed locations of stations; and

(v) The Hoi Yuen Road and King Yip Street options for the final part of the route to MTR Kwun Tong Station both have their supporters.

(c) Implications for the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter

(i) Some stakeholders were worried that high-mast vessels would be forbidden from using the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter due to the proposed 21m height restriction of the KTTL right in front of the shelter; and

(ii) Some others were keen to see the water bodies be put to more beneficial use for the good of the wider community.

(III) CEDD ’s Reponses

(a) The Need for an EFLS

The Department took that an understanding of the transport accessibility demand in KE was fundamental to the assessment of the need for an EFLS. A high-quality transport infrastructure was necessary for the development of a world-class CBD in KE. Such infrastructure had to provide a high level of service in terms of reliability, safety, level of comfort and efficiency. There were now about 1.4 million square metres of office space in KE with additional 4 million square metres to be provided in the future. This

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 20 called into question whether the existing transport facilities would be able to cope with the future transport needs in the region and the modes of transport would be able to provide “reliable, safe, comfortable and efficient” services to meet the connectivity requirements for the CBD in future.

The KE region composed of two sections, namely Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay, developed districts; and Kai Tak Development (KTD), which was still under development. The road network in the densely developed districts was overloaded and congestions often occurred. Footpaths were no better. Pedestrian facilities were too crowded during peak hours (such as lunch time) that many people were forced to use the carriageways. As seen from the photos in the paper, the 500 m walk-in catchments of MTR stations (Kwun Tong (KT) Line as well as planned Shatin to Central Line (SCL)) covered only Kwun Tong, Kowloon Bay and the periphery of KTD. The entire former south apron and former runway in KTD and large parts of Kowloon Bay business area were not within the MTR station walk-in coverage. They were served by road-based transport or walking only. The existing CBDs in Hong Kong such as Central, Wanchai and Tsim Sha Tsui, however, were well served by the MTR, ground level transport (such as franchised buses and taxis) and grade-separated walking systems. These transport facilities formed a linkage system of high accessibility for residents and business activities in these districts.

The above examples showed that the CBD should be served by an integrated multi-modal linkage system, which was able to serve the four different levels of connectivity objectives viz. strategic, inter-district, intra-district and local levels for the district. The EFLS played the role of backbone to serve inter-district and intra-district movements. At the intra-district level, the EFLS could achieve short-trip transportation purposes. Through convenient interchanges with MTR stations of the well-developed rail network (i.e. Kwun Tung Line and SCL), inter-district movements were also facilitated. Furthermore, this integrated multi-modal

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 21 system should take shape alongside the development of CBD. At this stage, efforts would be made to provide road-based green transport and improve walking environment progressively to meet the growing traffic demand. In the long term, at-grade traffic facilities alone could not meed the demand and maintain quality services. The Department, therefore, suggested using the EFLS as the core connectivity option in addition to the road-based green transport and pedestrian facilities to better serve the CDE.

On the other hand, some suggested replacement of EFLS by road-based green transport systems, such as modern tramway commonly used in Europe and US cities and Light Rail Transit now running in Yuen Long and Tuen Mun. All these system needed three traffic lanes for dedicated corridors and stations. With limited road space and high density of buildings in Kowloon Bay, Kwun Tong and Ngau Tau Kok, there was very little room for extension, rendering the construction of dedicated corridors for road-based green transport system impossible. Adding a ground-level tram, operating shared road space with other road users as seen in Hong Kong Island, was not applicable since its efficient operation relied heavily on the traffic condition, and thus failing to meet the demand of CBD for a high level of services, i.e. in terms of reliability, efficiency and safety. Furthermore, stations for road-based green transport system would add burden to pedestrian facilities and traffic lanes. According to the proposed alignment of EFLS, major parks and open spaces were en route of the journey. To align tramway at parks and open spaces and along promenade would have significant impacts on the safety of pedestrians.

The overall planning of KTD should be taken into account when considering building the EFLS underground as it might conflict with major underground facilities in the area, such as the existing Kai Tak Tunnel, the planned Central Kowloon Route and Trunk Road T2 tunnel (passing through Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter) as well as the District Cooling System. The EFLS also needed to link with the elevated MTR stations at Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay and the

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 22 interchange would be extremely inconvenient and inefficient if it was built underground. For these reasons, the EFLS in the form of an at-grade or underground system was not a desirable option.

(b) Alignment and Coverage

There were merits and demerits of both alignment options, namely KTTL alignment or Taxiway Bridge option, to connect the cruise terminal with Kwun Tong. The alignment via the Taxiway Bridge had the merits of no impact on the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter, better connectivity between Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay as well as between Kowloon Bay and the former runway tip. However, due to a shorter and more direct route between Kowloon Bay and the cruise terminal as compared with that between Kwun Tong and the former runway tip, it was expected that the MTR Kowloon Bay Station would become the primary interchange for inter-district connections. This would pose a very significant risk of overloading the station. Besides, this route would also result in an overlapping service catchment area with the MTR Ngau Tau Kok Station. Due to inadequate turning radius at Wai Yip Street/Hoi Yuen Road, it made the final part of the EFLS to MTR Kwun Tong Station via King Yip Street the only feasible option.

The KTTL alignment brought a number of potential benefits, including a more direct link between Kwun Tong and the former runway tip and synergy effect with various development projects under the Kai Tak Fantasy. The alignment had no impact on planned developments, including hospital sites at the former south apron, and enhanced connectivity between Kwun Tong and former runway tip also helped balance the interchange traffic in Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay MTR stations. Both the Hoi Yuen Road and King Yip Street alignment options remained viable, and a well-designed KTTL at the wide opening of Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter could become an iconic landmark in KE. However, if Taxiway Bridge option was adopted, the alignment of EFLS had to drop from Kwun Tong Bypass to

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 23 the ground-level station at former runway within a very short distance, causing serious visual impact. Given the above, the Department considered the route via the KTTL as the preferred option.

Members of the local communities were concerned about whether it was possible to extend the EFLS to serve the neigbouring areas, such as To Kwa Wan, Kowloon City and San Po Kong. As mentioned in Stage 1 consultation, given inadequate road space in these old districts and proximity of residential buildings, even if locations for construction of elevated rail were identified, there would still be noise and visual implications as well as privacy issue that could not be resolved at this stage. Apart from this, these districts were already served by other modes of transport, leaving very limited market segment for the EFLS. Besides, it would also drive up the cost considerably, undermining the financial viability further and generating more controversies as a result. The Department would not pursue the suggestion of enlarging coverage of EFLS. However, flexibility for future expansion of the EFLS would be considered in the detailed feasibility study. There was also local aspiration for extending the EFLS to cater for inter-district transport needs. Given that the EFLS was a light capacity rail system, it could not cope with inter-district transport demand. The Department considered that a single mode of transport or travel system should not be the only means to fulfill inter-district transport needs. It would look into ways to enhance the multi-modal connectivity of KE with neighbouring areas before and after the EFLS implementation in the detailed feasibility study.

Nevertheless, some locations of stations needed to be refined. The proposed station at the junction of Wang Kwong Road and Lam Wah Street was a little far from the hospital sites. It was suggested that the station be moved southward to the open space adjacent to MegaBox to enhance the service to Kowloon Bay business district and former south apron. Besides, since Kai Tak public rental estates were within walking distance of SCL Kai Tak Station as well as Richland

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 24 Gardens Station of the EFLS, it was suggested that the proposed station next to Kai Tak public rental estates be removed and the Richland Gardens Station be used to serve Richland Gardens, Kai Yip Estate and Kai Tak public rental estates together. The exact location of each station would be worked out in the detailed feasibility study at the following stage, which included a detailed study on the pedestrian linkage facilities between these stations and the surrounding areas in order to ensure efficiency use of these facilities. Both the Hoi Yuen Road and King Yip Street alignment options put forward in Stage 1 consultation had their supporters. The two options would be investigated further at the next stage before a decision was made.

(c) Implications for Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter

Due to the 21 m height restriction, high-mast vessels could no longer enter the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter after the construction of KTTL. The Department would explore ways to deal with the safety problems in marine trades in the detailed feasibility study at the following stage given the loss of sheltered spaces for high-mast vessels. On the other hand, with the closure of the Kwun Tong Public Cargo Working Area, vessels were scarcely seen in the typhoon shelter, except during the passage of typhoons. There were public aspirations for using the water body in the shelter for other activities, such as water sports centre, on ordinary days. The Department would explore the feasibility of the above suggestions at the next stage.

(Mr. WONG Kit-hin, Peter, arrived at the meeting at 4:10 pm while Mr. WONG Yat-yuk left the meeting at this juncture.)

29. All in all, an integrated multi-modal linkage system to serve the connection needs of the CBD in KE was necessary in the longer term and the EFLS would form the core element. The 9-kilometre 12-station elevated rail line was recommended as the preferred base option for the detailed feasibility study at the following stage.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 25 30. The Department then played a short video on the alignment of EFLS and invited Members to comment on the following issues to be covered in the detailed feasibility study following the Stage 2 public consultation:

(i) the technical design of stations and depot, the choice of operating system and operation and maintenance requirements;

(ii) a preliminary environmental impact assessment;

(iii) ways to improve the financial efficacy of the project, project implementation strategy as well as more detailed capital cost estimates and financial assessments;

(iv) flexibility for future expansion of the EFLS based on the proposed framework;

(v) enhancement of the multi-modal connectivity of KE with neighbouring areas before and after the EFLS implementation; and

(vi) more beneficial use of the water bodies at Kai Tak and concerns about the loss of sheltered space for tall vessels.

31. Mrs. Sorais LEE added that, after consolidating the views of WTSDC Members in the Stage 1 public consultation, she was aware of Members’ aspiration for extending the EFLS to cover the surrounding areas, such as Tsui Chuk Garden, Choi Wan and Tsz Wan Shan. She also recognised Members’ concerns over the inequity of service as the EFLS only served the business district, as well as their wishes for integrating the new and older districts by means of the EFLS. Members also considered that the provision of EFLS should be studied together with other modes of transport and the Government should try to link all the characteristics of each district together by the EFLS. She said it was difficult to extend the EFLS to hillside area. The Department passed the suggestions of District Councils to the Highways Department (HyD) soon after the conclusion of Stage 1 consultation. The HyD said these suggestions would be explored in related railway development studies by the Department and its consultants under the ongoing Railway Development Strategy 2000 having regard to the potential transport needs in hillside residential area in KE. Regarding the aforesaid request, she raised two issues which would be studied at the next stage:

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 26 (i) An in-depth study would be conducted to ascertain flexibility for future expansion of the EFLS network. However, since the surrounding areas, such as San Po Kong and To Kwa Wan, had been densely developed, extending the EFLS further to these areas would face enormous difficulties, such as absence of appropriate locations for building elevated track, visual intrusion and privacy issues. For these reasons, the suggestion was not very practicable at this stage. Nevertheless, the Department would allow flexibility in the design of EFLS for future expansion when there were plans to re-develop the surrounding areas and their commercial potential was heightened.

(ii) The Department wished to explore ways to enhance the multi-modal connectivity of KE with neighbouring areas before and after the EFLS implementation in the proposed detailed feasibility study at the following stage. Although 25 sets of pedestrian connections were planned in KTD, all of them involved crossing Prince Edward Road East only. The Department wished to identify characteristics of each district in collaboration with residents and DC Members and investigate the provision of an integrated multi-modal linkage system, comprising road-based transport, railways, EFLS and pedestrian connections to serve the public. The study would address the request for better linkage between new and older districts as well as the demand for various modes of transport to serve local residents.

32. Additionally, Mrs. Sorais LEE said the 3-month Stage 2 public consultation would end on 4 February 2014. The Secretariat had delivered the pamphlet to Members. The pamphlet consisted of three sections, highlighting the issues raised in Stage 1 public consultation and the way forward. She wished the EFLS proposal would proceed to the detailed feasibility study at the following stage with the support of Members. The Department would communicate closely with Members in the next few months, in order to collect as much their views as possible on elements to be included in the feasibility study. Members were also welcomed to discuss the matter with the Department during the consultation period. The Department wished to invite tenders for the detailed feasibility study in mid-2014 and the study would be commenced in early 2015 and completed in 18 months to 2 years. A decision on the proposed EFLS would be made upon completion of the study and after a thorough review of the information collected. It was expected that the EFLS would be commissioned in 2023.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 27 33. The Chairman said five WTSDC Members, two community organisers and three co-opted Members from the Joint Office of Members of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) in the Kowloon East District Councils jointly submitted a paper (Annex 3). He then invited Mr. MOK Kin-wing to present the submission.

34. Mr. MOK Kin-wing thanked the Kai Tak Office for the presentation and said DC Members of FTU in KE District considered that the "Connecting Kowloon East – Environmentally Friendly Linkage System" failed to provide genuine linkage at this stage. Salient points of the submission were as follows:

(i) The proposed EFSL segregated the CBD and older districts in KE from each other and inhibited residents in older districts from sharing the fruit of development, running counter to the original intention of “linking” KE District;

(ii) According to the blueprint, the Government intended to join the Kwun Tong Business Area, Kowloon Bay Business Area and KTD together to form a new alternative CBD outside Central and introduce an EFLS running through the entire district. FTU recognised the need for a monorail system in the CBD and supported the project. As a local organisaton with the aim of reflecting views of local residents, Members were especially concerned about the connection between the CBD and older districts as well as the importance of preserving local culture;

(iii) There was a need for extending the EFLS to older districts in KE and street culture had to be taken into account in the planning of the development area. All residents in KE should be entitled to share the fruit of development and enjoy the convenience brought about by the EFLS. The new development area should bring in the original culture of KE while maintaining local characteristics, realising the spirit of “Plan together, Build together, Share together”;

(iv) As a resident in KE, Members did not want to see that the EFSL turned out to be a “dedicated train” for linking international conglomerates and A-grade office buildings and serving the elites exclusively. Instead, the system should be a means of transport, carrying residents of KE to the new development area for leisure, greenery and cultural enjoyment; and

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 28 (v) FTU wished the suggestion of retaining the planned station in between Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate be accepted so as to allow residents in these two estates (and even Grand Waterfront) to travel conveniently to various places, including the hospital sites. The EFLS should be extended to older districts with interchanges designed and built to integrate effectively the road facilities and the stations with a view to enhancing the interaction between older districts and the new development area.

35. Dr. WONG Kam-chiu, Vice Chairman, believed that the proposed EFLS would play a pivotal role in facilitating the transformation of KE to a CBD. He said there were a lot of concerns over the alignment and coverage of the system while some people were worried about the impact on the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter. In this regard, he wished the Government would look into and discuss the above issues in Stage 2 public consultation. He had three comments on the proposed system. First, he wished the Government would consider actively extending the proposed EFLS to San Po Kong, which was transforming itself from an industrial area to a business centre. It was widely known that congestion often occurred and parking spaces were scarce in San Po Kong. Provision of transport facilities was crucial to the development of the district. If it was not until 2023 that the EFLS would come into operation, he wished San Po Kong would be included in the study on the development of the system in order to develop the KE district more extensively. Second, it was learnt that the EFLS cost about $12 billion, according to a preliminary estimate. To his understanding, the estimate was conducted two years ago. Given sharp hikes in construction cost and wages in recent years, he questioned whether the $12-billion estimate had taken price hikes into account. He opined that if a cost overrun was expected, the Government should provide an explanation as early as possible. Apart from the cost, the rate of return was only about 1%, much lower than that of other modes of transport. He understood that there would not be any above-station property development to fund the project, rendering a return hardly comparable with MTR projects. He asked the Government whether it would explore ways to increase the operation returns. Lastly, as for the final part of the alignment, he preferred King Yip Street option since traffic at Hoi Yuen Road was already extremely heavy. If the road was changed from three lanes to two lanes, serious congestion would ensue. Despite its remoteness, King Yip Street was a more spacious site with less impact on traffic and environment.

36. Mr. MOK Ying-fan said he was excited about the EFLS project when it was introduced in Stage 1 and 2 public consultations. However, he wished the project would not become another financial burden to Hong Kong people. As mentioned

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 29 earlier, with low operation returns, it was necessary for the Government to explore ways to enhance the cost effectiveness of the EFLS, such as expanding its coverage or using the station property to generate income. As for the financing of the project, care had to be taken to avoid incessant capital injection, like a “bottomless pond”. Otherwise, it would not be welcomed by the public. He said even though the EFLS could provide efficient service, the project would be a failure if it constantly required public money to fund its deficit.

37. Ms TAM Heung-man, Mandy, said unless built underground, the depot would create environmental problem in KE. She was also worried that the depot would use road resources, which could have been used for producing houses to meet housing demands. She wondered if the EFLS would really bring benefits to KE.

38. Mr. HO Yin-fai said, the title of the project, namely, “Connecting Kowloon East －Environmentally Friendly Linkage System”, indicated clearly that the system would service the entire KE district and KE was not confined to Kwun Tong. As mentioned by some Members earlier, San Po Kong and neighbouring areas (such as Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate) and even Kowloon City should be taken into account when deciding the service area of the system. As it was estimated that the rate of return was fairly low, the EFLS should not only operate in business district or surrounding areas with sparse population. Instead, it should serve inter-district movements and facilitate travelling across different destinations (such as housing estates, business areas and attractions) in order to achieve a higher rate of return. He wished the Government would consider these development directions in Stage 2 public consultation.

39. The Chairman thanked the Government for allowing flexibility in station and system design for future expansion of the EFLS. He thought that it was very important as changes to existing mass transit system would be necessary as time went by. He would not debate whether the project on the whole was aimed at developing KE or Kowloon Bay. He would like to point out that the system was linked with two MTR stations, providing interchanges for people to access the district via MTR. However, he thought that the Government did not take into account the fact that most of the users of these two MTR stations were not local residents and it also overlooked the need of local residents. The current proposal made no mention on how to tap into older districts, like Wong Tai Sin and San Po Kong in particular, to enhance its competitiveness and potential. Cost was another concern. He said he talked about movement facilitation with Prof. CHEUNG Bing-leung, Anthony, Secretary for Transport and Housing in 2013 Summit on District Administration held on 4 November 2013. He suggested that some convenient conveyance systems, such as subways and

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 30 escalators, be provided before the EFLS was ready for extension so as to reduce people’s time and hardship in traveling and help channeling people in adjoining districts (including Wong Tai Sin and Kowloon City) to the EFLS.

(Hon. CHAN Yuen-han arrived at the meeting at 4:40 pm, while Mr. CHAN Wai-kwan left the meeting at this juncture.)

40. Hon. CHAN Yuen-han said she approved the EFLS project. She reckoned that the elevated mode imposed contraints on the system. That said, the system could not operate in urban area if not in elevated mode. According to the presentation of tram company earlier, the biggest obstacle was that such mode of transport could only run within the district and hardly be extended to populated areas. For these reasons, she preferred the EFLS. Nevertheless, as mentioned by Messrs. MOK Kin-wing and HO Yin-fai, she was worried that the system, which looked so close to residents, was far away in reality. She wanted to know why Ngau Tau Kok district was not covered. She knew that there were a lot of public housing estates and private housing in the district and residents there yearned for a wider choice of transport modes, including the EFLS. She was also puzzled about the relocation of the proposed station from Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate, a home for about 30 000 residents, to a location near Megabox and even thought that the move might invite suspicion that the EFLS was merely aimed at connecting commercial buildings and giant property developments. An estimate done earlier showed that the project would cost more than $10 billion and the cost would be higher in the future. It was unacceptable to say that this costly project had nothing to do with local residents. So Mr. MOK Kin-wing suggested moving the station to elsewhere close to the two estates, rather than to a location near Megabox. She said Members of the Kowloon City District Council and her had a meeting with Ms CHENG Yu-wah, Eva, the then Secretary for Transport and Housing some time ago, relaying to the Secretary the request that an EFLS station be established at Thirteen Streets in To Kwa Wan. The suggestion was not accepted because Thirteen Streets were densely packed. However, there were many grassroots inhabiting in the vicinity of Grand Waterfront and the site was spacious, which could be used as a collecting point to the EFLS. A sizable patronage was required to sustain the operation of the system. The system should not only count on occupants of commercial buildings or sightseers from the outside as riders. Local residents had to be engaged. She wished the Government would connect the system with the aforesaid three districts inhabited by many grassroots. She was also concerned about the interface between the system and the ground level. She said the three districts had their own characteristics and suggested the Government make reference to the practice in Osaka and link together the history and culture of each district in such a way that riders made their way up and down unconsciously across ground-level facilities and the elevated system, far more

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 31 pleasurable than using footbridges. The FTU opined that every infrastructure in the district should benefit local residents and be able to boost the local economy as well. She recalled that when the Legislative Council discussed the development of former Kai Tak Airport many years ago, she suggested the Government set up a bargain-goods outlet in the district to attract more visitors, thus raising the flow of people at the former airport. Her idea was echoed by Mrs. CHOW LIANG Shuk-yee, Selina, the then Legislative Councilor. She praised the Planning Department and relevant departments for their keeness in listening to public opinions. She wished the Government would also take into consideration the requests of the grassroots when developing the former ariport, on top of the demand of the business sector, when designing the EFLS.

(Mr. CHAN On-tai arrived at the meeting at 4:45 pm.)

41. Mrs. Sorais LEE thanked Members for their views. She said detailed information about the three main issues set out in Stage 1 public consultation, in particular the contentious financial figures, would only be available after the detailed feasibility study at the following stage. Issues such as alignment and locations of stations were barely touched on at Stage 1, with no in-depth discussions on the type of monorail system to be used, detailed design of stations and pedestrian linkage between stations and the surrounding areas. In this regard, it was difficult to provide an accurate set of financial figures, including the estimated cost, at this stage. She expected that a more accurate estimate would be available after obtaining more information in the detailed feasibility study at the following stage.

42. The Department took the EFLS as an ordinary kind of transport infrastructure to project its passenger flow, taking into account the future resident and working populations in the district as a whole. The projection was rather conservative. After revitalisation, KE would encompass various attractions and activities. For example, Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO) would launch the Kai Tak Fantasy International Ideas Competition to solicit creative and innovative proposals to enhance the environment and vibrancy of KE, and the 11-km promenade and giant parks in Kai Tak (such as Metro Park and Runway Park) would serve as venues for various activities and exhibitions. In addition, the EKEO was now studying ways to further energise Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay areas with a view to attract a wider variety of activities. All these would attract visitors and in turn bring about potential increase in passengers of the system. However, this had not been taken in account in the projection. She wished the feasibility study at the next stage would explore in detail every opportunity and then make a more reasonable guess about the financial performance of the system.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 32 43. As for the concerns over street cultures and district characteristics, the Department wished to conduct in-depth studies on the link between new and older districts in the detailed feasibility study at the following stage, including how to integrate characteristics and street cultures of each district to the EFLS and connect the system with the future SCL and other public transport interchanges.

44. The Department said the EFLS would not only serve “financial personnel” in KE. In fact, there would be a lot of facilities in KE, not only for visitors from other districts but also residents in neighbouring areas. Regarding inter-district (including WTS District) transport service, she reiterated that an “integrated multi-modal linkage system” (encompassing MTR, EFLS, road-based mode of transport and pedestrian linkage system), instead of the EFLS alone, should be adopted to provide KE and the neighbouring districts a variety of transport services. She therefore wished the WTSDC would definitely support the Department in taking forward the detailed feasibility study at the next stage because the study would also investigate how to enhance the multi-modal connectivity of KE with neighbouring areas before and after the EFLS implementation.

45. On the other hand, views received at Stage 1 public consultation indicated that utlilisation of the water body of Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter was low except during the passage of typhoons and requested for a better use of the water body. The proposed detailed feasibility study would explore whether it was possible to accommodate other uses in the water body of the shelter. The Department would also look into the impact of 21-m height restriction of KTTL on high-mast vessels and how to minimise it.

46. As for Members’ suggestions on enhancing the rate of return of the EFLS, she said it was not the Department’s wish that the new infrastructure required long-term financing. All financing modes, including property development on stations as mentioned by Members, would be investigated further in the proposed detailed feasibility study with a view to enhancing the cost-effectiveness of the project.

47. She said both King Yip Street and Hoi Yuen Road alignment options were viable at this stage. The latter was more direct with convenient connection with the Kwun Tong MTR Station. However, one of the three lanes in Hoi Yuen Road had to be closed. King Yip Street option would not affect road-based transport, but the station was some distance away from the MTR Station, failing to serve as a convenient interchange. Some Members questioned if there was still room for the EFSL given heavy traffic at Hoi Yuen Road at present. The Department preliminary found that the proposal was feasible, subject to further confirmation in the detailed feasibility study at the next stage. She wished Members would support the Department in pursuing the proposed detailed feasibility study.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 33 48. Regarding the proposed relocation of an EFLS station at Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate, the Department explained that the two estates were within the walk-in catchment area of the SCL Kai Tak Station (i.e. 500-m walking distance from the station) and a public transport interchange, while they were not far away from a proposed EFLS station at Richland Gardens. For these reasons, the Department suggested refining the location of the EFLS station to avoid overlapping of service catchment areas of different modes of transport. Nevertheless, the Department was aware of the request for retaining the proposed station at Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate and pledged to study in detail the best location of the proposed Richland Gardens Station as well as pedestrian linkage facilities for connection with other estates in the vicinity on the chairman’s advice. The aim was to provide a convenient access to the EFSL for residents in Richland Gardens, Kai Ching Estate, Tak Long Estate and Kai Yip Estate. She stressed that linkage to neighbouring areas was more important than the location of a station because access to station could be made easy for people by linkage facilities.

49. As regards the depot, she said, to facilitate the operation, it was suggested that an EFLS station and the depot would be set up in the site of Action Area 1 under Energizing Kowloon East project. She recognised Members’ concerns over the compatibility between the depot/station with the development of neighbouring areas. For example, as the proposed depot/station was near the hospital sites in the former south apron, the Department would explore ways to provide convenient access for people to the sites. In addition, the Department would also communicate and work closely with the EKEO to study in detail the above-station developments and the linkage between EFSL stations and neighbouring areas in the ensuing feasibility study.

50. On the other hand, it was proposed that the EFSL would mainly serve the KTD, Kowloon Bay and Kwun Tong in KE at this stage. The study would also look into the link between the new and older districts, in particular how to connect residents in neighbouring areas to the facilities and attractions in the CBD and KTD.

51. Concerning the connection with MTR Ngau Tau Kok Station as suggested by some Members, the Department thought the suggestion not fairly practicable due to technical problems. For connection with MTR Ngau Tau Kok Station, the alignment would be high enough, i.e. about 25 metre above the ground, to run across the elevated section at Kwun Tong Road and the elevated railway of MTR Kwun Tong Line. It would cause visual impact and inconvenience in connecting with the ground-level station concourse. In addition, for building the EFLS station, some areas of Elegance Road Garden would be taken and the Kwun Tong Government Primary School be demolished. For these reasons, the suggestion of extending the EFSL to MTR Ngau Tau Kok Station was impracticable.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 34 52. To conclude, the Chairman said the WTSDC supported the proposed detailed feasibility study on the EFLS. He invited the CEDD, DEVB and consultant firm to take note and follow up Members’ advice. Members were welcomed to submit their further opinions to the CEDD before the close of Stage 2 public consultation period on 4 February 2014.

53. The Chairman invited Mr. MA Hon-ngai, Harry, Senior Works Consolidation Manager of EKEO; and Mr. Igor HO, Technical Director from AECOM Asia Company Ltd., to withdraw from the meeting.

(Ms TAM Heung-man, Mandy, left the meeting at 5:05 pm.)

III(iii) Kai Tak Development–Proposed Stage 5 Infrastructure Works at Former North Apron Area (WTSDC Paper No. 99/2013)

54. The Chairman welcomed Mr. C.K.MAN, Assistant Technical Director of AECOM Asia Company Ltd., and asked Mrs. Sorais LEE and Ms YING Fun-fong to continue presenting the paper.

55. Ms YING Fun-fong said, the “Kai Tak Development – Proposed Stage 5 Infrastructure Works at Former North Apron Area” was the extension of infrastructure works at former north apron area. With the aid of Powerpoint presentation, she introduced the paper. Highlights were as follows:

(i) Background

KTD Stage 1 Infrastructure Works was aimed to provide the infrastructure for Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate. All the works were completed. Stage 2 involved construction of infrastructure at sites south to the area covered by Stage 1. Stage 3A meant to provide the infrastructure in WTS District, while works in Stage 4 was aimed to provide the infrastructure for connecting with the Multi-purpose Sports Complex at Kai Tak and To Kwa Wan district. Works to improve Kai Tak River's drainage capacity was in progress.

The remaining works included projects covered in Stage 3B, which would be commenced in San Po Kong upon completion of Stage 3A, works projects at individual sites and Stage 5 works projects set out in this paper.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 35 (ii) Purpose

Works in Stage 5 was aimed to provide the infrastructure (such as roads, drainage and water supplies) for serving the proposed government, institution or community facilities; comprehensive development area; and residential, commercial and other specified uses at the north apron area of the former Kai Tak Airport, opposite to Prince Edward Road East.

Concerning the road infrastructure, vehicular crossings would be provided in the former north apron area, including roads linking to Kowloon City district via Olympic Avenue and the proposed Road D1. The existing two flyovers in front of the Regal Oriental Hotel would also be connected with Road D1. Vehicles could use the flyovers to access the north apron area. In addition, the infrastructure to be provided in Stage 5 would link to new roads constructed in Stage 3A.

(iii) Major Works

To facilitate the construction of new roads and infrastructure, Dakota Drive would be closed permanently. No vehicle was allowed to use the road as it was within the works area of SCL. The new Road D1 was a dual two-lane road, linking Olympic Avenue to a roundabout near San Po Kong. Footpaths of about 10-m wide would be provided along the road with greening. The existing two flyovers in front of the Regal Oriental Hotel would join the proposed Road D1 and both were a single-lane road.

Apart from the trunk road D1, the infrastructure works also included slip roads to connect with the former north apron area. The three slip roads, namely L7, L16 and L9, were single two-lane road and 7.3-m wide. Footpaths of about 10-m wide would also be provided along these roads with trees at the roadside.

To provide better walking experience, pedestrian streets of about 10-m wide would be constructed alongside the road network. The two subways linking to the Olympic Garden and another one near Sa Po Road would undergo renovation. To tie in with the works in Stage 1, the renovation works would include provision of

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 36 covers to the entrances of these subways and decoration of their internal walls with enamel cladding and graphic design. In addition, to align with the development of former north apron area, the southern entrance of the existing subway at Sa Po Road consisting of ramp and staircase would be demolished and replaced by new staircase and passenger lift. Since there was about 800 meters between the two subways at Sa Po Road and the Latitude respectively, it was proposed to build a new pedestrian subway in between. Other than for the convenience of people, the new subway was also aligned with the Lung Tsun Stone Bridge Preservation Corridor under planning. The Stage 5 works also provided ancillary works including watermains, drainage and greening, for the KTD.

(iv) Traffic Impact

Currently, Dakota Drive was temporarily closed as works area for the construction of SCL. It would be permanently closed upon completion of Stage 5. During construction, proper work process and temporary traffic arrangements would be implemented to maintain the existing traffic in Prince Edward Road East, Olympic Avenue and Sung Wong Toi Road.

(v) Environmental Impact

The proposed Road D1 was a designated project under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO). Environmental Permit had been issued by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) for construction and operation of the proposed Road D1. Whilst other parts of the proposed works were not designated projects under EIAO, the CEDD finished the Schedule 3 EIA report, which had been submitted and approved by the Director of Environmental Protection. The EIA report concluded that the proposed infrastructure works would not cause long-term adverse environmental impacts.

At construction stage, the CEDD would require the contractor to carry out appropriate dust control measures, such as the use of quiet powered mechanical equipment, proper material handling,

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 37 frequent water spraying, provision of wheel washing facilities, and use of tarpulin sheets to cover materials, etc., to minimise the impact on environment. Independent Environmental Checker would be responsible for the environmental monitoring and audit on site to minimise impact caused by the construction works on the surrounding environment.

(vi) Land Requirement

The Lung Tsun Stone Bridge Preservation Corridor under planning would run across Prince Edward Road East through to Kowloon Walled City Park. As the existing footpath at Prince Edward Road East was very narrow, there was no room for constructing the entrances of the proposed subway. In this regard, a small part of green area in Shek Ku Lung Road Playground had to be used for building two passenger lifts and one staircase to facilitate access to Lok Sin Road via the playground. The Department would only use a small green area (including a section of grassland) of about 265 square metres and six or seven trees would be affected. Depending on the tree conditions, the Department would consider relocating the trees to other places in the playground. Advice from the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) was sought and the respond was affirmative. The construction works would not affect other recreation facilities in the playground.

(vii) Next Step

After obtaining the support from the WTSDC, the proposed works would be gazetted under Road (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance (Cap 370) and Water Pollution Control (Sewerage) Regulation (Cap 358) in early 2014, and the public could provide their views within 60 days after the gazettal. Funding approval for the works would be sought upon completion of statutory procedures and detailed design. It was expected that the works would be commenced in early 2015 and targeted to complete by end 2018.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 38 56. Mr. LEE Tat-yan said residents of Kai Ching Estate and Tak Long Estate mostly used the existing footbridge and lifts outside Rhythm Garden, causing huge burden to the facilities, because the footbridge leading to these two estates was still under construction. He asked whether the road infrastructure in Stage 5 would be completed ahead of the development of former north apron area.

57. Mrs. Sorais LEE said the road system in Stage 5 would be completed ahead of the development of former north apron area.

(Ms CHAN Man-ki, Maggie, arrived at the meeting at 5:15 pm, while Mr. WONG Kit-hin left at this juncture.)

58. The Chairman said as Members did not oppose the proposal of using part of the Shek Ku Lung Road Playground for constructing the entrance of a subway by the CEDD, the WTSDC endorsed the support for the proposal. As regards the pedestrian streets in the former north apron area, he advised the Department to provide cover or rain shelters as appropriate so that DC Funds would not be required for minor improvement works in the future.

59. Mr. SO Sik-kin suggested that a thematic approach, rather than haphazard planting, should be adopted in greening the KTD.

60. Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe, supported the Stage 5 infrastructure works but had some opinions about the traffic at the Cruise Terminal. On behalf of the Traffic and Transport Committee under WTSDC, he held a meeting with the Traffic Kowloon East of Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) in October 2013. He noted that car accidents occasionally occurred at the right-angle turn of the road section leading to the runway at the Cruise Terminal. The HKPF advised that warnings at the road section be enhanced. However, approval from the CEDD had to be obtained for any change in traffic facilities in the new development area. He suggested communications among departments be strengthened in dealing with road safety issues.

61. In response, Mrs. Sorais LEE said works concerning the road section as mentioned by Mr. LAI Wing-ho, Joe, had been completed and was now managed by the HyD. She would pass on the suggestion to the Transport Department and HyD for follow-up actions.

62. The Chairman thanked representatives from the CEDD and AECOM Asia Company Ltd. and asked the Department to take note and follow up Members’ opinions.

(Representatives from the CEDD and AECOM Asia Company Ltd. left the meeting at this juncture.)

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 39 IV. Progress Reports

(i) Progress Reports of the 12th Meeting of the Community Building and Social Services Committee held on 17 September 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 100/2013)

63. Members noted the paper.

(ii) Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of the District Facilities Management Committee held on 24 September 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 101/2013)

64. Members noted the paper.

(iii) Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of the Traffic and Transport Committee held on 8 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 102/2013)

65. Members noted the paper.

(iv) Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of the Finance, General and Economic Affairs Committee held on 15 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 103/2013)

66. Members noted the paper.

(v) Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of the Housing Committee held on 22 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 104/2013)

67. Members noted the paper.

(vi) Progress Report of the 12th Meeting of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Committee held on 29 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 105/2013)

68. Members noted the paper.

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 40 (vii) Progress Report of the Wong Tai Sin District Management Committee Meeting held on 11 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 106/2013)

69. Members noted the paper.

(viii) Progress Report of the 3rd Meeting of“Energizing Wong Tai Sin” –Working Group on Signature Projects Scheme held on 18 September 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 107/2013)

70. Members noted the paper.

(ix) Progress Report of the 8th Meeting of the Working Group on Government and Public Utilities Works Projects held on 25 September 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 108/2013)

71. Members noted the paper.

(x) Progress Report of the 3rd Meeting of the Task Force on Medical Facilities in Wong Tai Sin held on 23 October 2013 (WTSDC Paper No. 109/2013)

72. Members noted the paper.

V. Date of the Next Meeting

73. The 14th meeting of WTSDC would be held at 2:30 pm on 7 January 2014 (Tuesday).

74. The meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm.

Wong Tai Sin District Council Secretariat Ref: HAD WTSDC 13-5/5/53 Pt. 33 December 2013

[14] 4_DC[M13](2013.11.5)-e 41 Annex I-III

Chinese version only: http://www.districtcouncils.gov.hk/wts/doc/common/dc_meetings_minutes/DC_M1 3_M.pdf