(Translation)
Minutes of the 1st Meeting of the Traffic and Transport Committee (2021) of Kwai Tsing District Council
Date and Time: 19 February 2021, 10:00 a.m. – 6:05 p.m. 24 February 2021, 10:00 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
Venue: K&T DO Conference Room
Attendee Time of Arrival Time of Departure Mr LAM Siu-fai (Chairman) Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr CHOI Nga-man (Vice-chairman) Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr CHAN Chi-wing Start of Meeting 19 February, 12:06 p.m. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr CHEUNG Man-lung 19 February, 10:03 a.m. End of Meeting Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman 19 February, 10:10 a.m. End of Meeting Mr HON Chun-yin Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr HUI Kei-cheung 19 February, 10:03 a.m. End of Meeting Miss KWOK Fu-yung 19 February, 10:10 a.m. 19 February, 1:20 p.m. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin 19 February, 10:45 a.m. End of Meeting Mr LAU Chi-kit Start of Meeting End of Meeting Ms LAU Kwai-mui Start of Meeting End of Meeting Miss LEUNG Ching-shan Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr LEUNG Kam-wai Start of Meeting End of Meeting Ms LEUNG Kar-ming Start of Meeting 24 February, 12:14 p.m. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen 19 February, 10:06 a.m. 19 February, 3:49 p.m. Miss LO Yuen-ting Start of Meeting 19 February, 5:18 p.m. Mr NG Kim-sing 19 February, 10:55 a.m. End of Meeting Mr SIN Chung-kai, SBS, JP Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr SIN Ho-fai Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr TONG Ho-man 19 February, 10:08 a.m. End of Meeting Mr TSUI Hiu-kit Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr WONG Bing-kuen 19 February, 3:41 p.m. End of Meeting Mr WONG Chun-tat 19 February, 10:08 a.m. End of Meeting Miss WONG Pit-man 19 February, 10:12 a.m. End of Meeting Mr WONG Tin-yan Start of Meeting 24 February, 1:05 p.m.
In Attendance Mr WONG Siu-fai Senior Engineer 3/ Universal Accessibility, Highways Department Mr PUI Sze-yuen Project Coordinator 2/ Universal Accessibility, Highways Department Ms NG Yim-ling, Elaine Public Relations Officer/ Universal Accessibility, Highways Department Mr WAN Cheuk-keung Senior Engineer 2/ Tsuen Wan Road, Highways Department Mr YU Chun-tat Engineer 4/ Tsuen Wan Road, Highways Department Ms CHOW Hoi-yi District Engineer/ Kwai Tsing (E), Highways Department Ms NG Wai-ki District Engineer/ Kwai Tsing (W), Highways Department Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny Senior Transport Officer/ Kwai Tsing 1, Transport Department Mr HO Ka-fai Senior Transport Officer/ Kwai Tsing 2, Transport Department Mr LI Hok-lai, Matthew Engineer/ District Facilities, Transport Department Mr NG Ho-leung, Jacky Engineer/ Tsing Yi, Transport Department Mr LO Chun-hin Engineer/ Kwai Chung, Transport Department Mr KWAN Yu-hang, Jason Engineer/ 24 (W), Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr TSANG Yiu-tim Officer-in-Charge, District Traffic Team, Kwai Tsing Police District, Hong Kong Police Force Mr CHEUNG Ka-wah Head of Traffic Prosecution Enforcement Unit, Kwai Tsing Police District, Hong Kong Police Force Mr LEUNG Wang-cheong Manager (Operations), The Kowloon Motor Bus Co. (1933) Ltd Ms WONG Peggy Assistant Manager (Planning & Development), The Kowloon Motor Bus Co. (1933) Ltd Miss LEUNG Betsy Manager (Public Affairs), The Kowloon Motor Bus Co. (1933) Ltd Mr CHAN Yiu-chung Assistant Public Relations Manager – External Affairs, MTR Corporation Limited Mr WONG Chi-kang, John Deputy Project Manager, WSP (Asia) Limited Mr KWOK Ka-wang, Gavin Project Engineer, WSP (Asia) Limited Mr LO Issac Project Director, AECOM Asia Company Limited Mr TAI Derek Project Manager, AECOM Asia Company Limited Dr HUNG Wing-tat Volunteer Consultant of “Research on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing” Ms LAM Cho-yan Senior Project Manager, Boys’ Brigade, Hong Kong
Ms JAN Choi-wan Public Relations and Fundraising Manager, Boys’ Brigade, Hong Kong Mr WONG Chung-chuen Executive Director, Ho Wang SPB Limited (Traffic &Transportation Consultants) Mr YUEN Wai-tik Senior Traffic Engineer, Ho Wang SPB Limited (Traffic &Transportation Consultants) Miss YIM Yik-huen, Bonnie Assistant District Officer (Kwai Tsing), Kwai Tsing District Office Miss SIU Wai-man, Eunice Executive Officer (District Council) 1, Kwai Tsing (Secretary) District Office
Responsible Department Opening Remarks
The Chairman welcomed Members and representatives of government departments and organisations to the 1st meeting of the Traffic and Transport Committee (“TTC”) (2021) of Kwai Tsing District Council (“K&T DC”).
Confirmation of Minutes of the 4th Meeting (2020) held on 15 October 2020
2. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan moved a motion to confirm the minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr HON Chun-yin. Members endorsed the minutes unanimously.
Follow-up on Circulation Paper
Response from Highways Department to Members’ Comments on “Third Phase” under the “Universal Accessibility” Programme – Lift Retrofitting Works for 7 Footbridges (Structure Nos. NF125, NF126, NF213, NF233, NF292, NF323 and N423) at Kwai Tsing District (TTC Circulation Paper No. 46/2020)
3. The Chairman indicated that the paper had been endorsed by circulation on 15 December 2020. However, as Members had commented on the paper, departmental representatives were invited to attend the meeting.
4. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries on the Structure No. NF126 project as follows:
(i) He considered Lift No. 2 not very useful as wheelchair users could use the existing ramp to travel.
(ii) He asked about the demand for Lift No. 2.
5. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries on the Structure No. NF323 project as follows:
(i) He expressed support for the project.
(ii) He asked whether the trees in the planters of the project would be transplanted in situ after removal.
6. Mr WONG Chi-kang, John, Deputy Project Manager of WSP (Asia) Limited,
4 Responsible Department responded on the Structure No. NF126 project as follows:
(i) Wheelchair users might be inconvenienced if they had to walk a little further to the footbridge via the ramp.
(ii) At present, the maximum hourly pedestrian flow at the road section was 352. It was tentatively estimated that the maximum hourly pedestrian flow would increase by 250 in the future, and it was considered necessary to retrofit a lift at that location.
7. Mr KWOK Ka-wang, Gavin, Project Engineer of WSP (Asia) Limited, responded that the lift for the Structure No. NF323 project was located at the planter, one tree might be affected in the preliminary study, and that tree would be replanted in another location.
8. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren asked if the relevant department had been contacted regarding the replanting of the tree.
9. Mr SIN Ho-fai said the residents were quite concerned about the need to remove trees for the works and hoped that the affected trees could be transplanted.
10. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions on the Structure No. NF126 project that if Lift No. 2 was retrofitted, residents would have to walk a little further to use the lift to reach the footbridge, which was more inconvenient than the existing ramp to reach the footbridge.
11. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked if any study had been conducted on the underground pipelines in the vicinity for the seven walkways and whether the works would affect the traffic in the vicinity.
(ii) He said there was a walkway project in his constituency approved in 2012, but now it had been cancelled due to problems with the pipeline.
(iii) He asked whether the Highways Department (“HyD”) had conducted a preliminary study on the feasibility of the seven walkways.
12. Mr WONG Siu-fai, Senior Engineer 3/ Universal Accessibility of HyD, responded as follows:
5 Responsible Department
(i) Regarding tree preservation, the Government would prefer to transplant trees as far as possible when taking forward the works in principle, but certain factors had to be considered, such as species, health condition and location of the trees. HyD would replant trees only when there was no other alternative.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF126 project, the Government would, as a matter of principle, retrofit a lift at the footbridge or pedestrian subway wherever technically feasible when implementing the project. In addition, there were opportunities for other developments in the vicinity of Lift No. 2, which might increase pedestrian flow. The Department would be pleased to listen to Members’ views on the project.
(iii) On the issue of pipelines, pipeline relocation was a significant problem for lift retrofitting. The Department had learnt from experience and would carry out early pipeline surveys from the second phase of the Universal Accessibility Programme onwards, before the detailed design of the project was carried out, to avoid cancellation of lift retrofitting projects due to pipeline problems in future.
(iv) On the issue of traffic, the consulting company would carry out a preliminary traffic impact assessment during the investigation and design stage to assess the future traffic impact of the project in the vicinity of the lifts.
13. Mr WONG Chi-kang, John responded that under the Universal Accessibility Programme, the Department would look into the possibility of retrofitting lifts to the footbridges. Lift No. 2 of Structure No. NF126 could accommodate the future development.
14. Mr LAU Chi-kit considered it unreasonable for residents of Cheung Hang Estate to travel via the ramp before taking the lift.
15. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai asked if the consulting company would have other design options to make the route smoother.
16. Mr WONG Siu-fai responded as follows:
(i) For the Structure No. NF126 project, there might be other future
6 Responsible Department developments in the vicinity of Lift No. 2, and the retrofitting of the lift would cater for the future development.
(ii) For the Universal Accessibility Programme, lifts would be retrofitted at all entrances to the footbridges where technically feasible in principle.
(iii) The Department would discuss the design options for Lift No. 2 with the consulting company to see if any improvements were needed.
17. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked if there were any current plans for future development in the vicinity of the walkway.
(ii) He considered that the paper should be discussed at the meetings before it was passed, instead of listening to Members’ views at the meetings after the paper was passed.
18. The Chairman advised that some Members wished to invite the Department to listen to Members’ views at the meeting and therefore representatives of the Department were invited to attend the meeting.
19. Mr WONG Siu-fai responded as follows:
(i) HyD was only estimating that there might be future developments in the vicinity of the walkway.
(ii) The paper on the subject was initially scheduled to be discussed at the meeting in December last year, but due to the epidemic, it was circulated as a circulation paper instead, which was supported by Members in the end.
20. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) For the Structure No. NF126 project, he pointed out that the project had been found to be in conflict with the underground pipeline and asked whether there would be an alternative design.
(ii) He pointed out that Lai King Building would be expanded and hoped that a lift would also be retrofitted to Lai King Building.
7 Responsible Department
21. Mr WONG Siu-fai responded that he had taken note of Members’ views and would review them again.
22. Mr CHAN Chi-wing welcomed the lift retrofitting works as it would be more convenient for the disabled and parents with strollers.
23. Mr LAU Chi-kit considered that the Structure No. NF126 project might not be cost-effective. He considered that the consulting company should consider whether the design was feasible and cost-effective.
24. The Chairman would like HyD to have further exchanges with the Members concerned after the meeting on the Structure No. NF126 project.
“Third Phase” under the “Universal Accessibility” Programme – Lift Retrofitting Works for 3 Footbridges (Structure Nos. NF215, NF275 and NF325) at Kwai Tsing District (Proposed by the Highways Department) (TTC Paper No. 1/D/2021)
25. Mr KWOK Ka-wang briefly introduced the paper.
26. Mr WONG Siu-fai said that if the preliminary proposal was supported by Members, detailed design, tendering, and works commencement would be carried out in the hope that the project would benefit the elderly and the needy.
27. Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen put forth opinions on the Structure No. NF275 project as follows:
(i) He welcomed the Structure No. NF275 project.
(ii) On the preliminary design mock-up, he was concerned that there was insufficient space for the lift door to allow wheelchairs to pass through, and the area of the top cover at the lift-waiting location could not cover one wheelchair, and he hoped that the design could be improved.
(iii) Residents of Shek Yam East Estate had to walk further to the lift entrance. He hoped that HyD could improve the design by providing access to the lift via the passageway near the school.
8 Responsible Department 28. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) For the Structure No. NF275 project, the mock-up showed that the lift was connected to the footbridge overhead. He inquired about the length and width of the road section. Moreover, the residents of Shek Yam East Estate would have to walk an extra distance to access the lift, which might cause inconvenience to the residents.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF325 project, HyD would demolish the existing staircase at Exit A2 for the retrofitting of a lift. He asked how and when the other side of the staircase would be handled.
29. Miss WONG Pit-man inquired as follows:
(i) For Structure No. NF215 project, exploration was conducted last year, and there was no foundation problem. She asked when the lift would be built. The resident said there was a construction site but no lift construction works.
(ii) In relation to the Structure No. NF325 project, she inquired when the exploration would be carried out.
30. Mr WONG Chun-tat put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He was pleased to see the retrofitting of lifts to help the elderly, the disabled and housewives get around.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF215 project, he said that there was more pedestrian flow along the road section and many people would commute between Chung Mei Road and Tsing Yi Garden, and suggested that the footbridge should be connected to Chung Mei Lo Uk Village.
31. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai inquired as follows:
(i) He asked how many people could be accommodated in the current design of the lift.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF215 project, he was concerned that one lift might not be sufficient for the residents due to the high pedestrian flow and inquired whether a lift accommodating a larger number of people
9 Responsible Department could be built.
32. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung inquired about the reason for removing the staircase instead of the ramp for the Structure No. NF325 project. He said that some residents might want to walk to the ground level. Removing the staircase would require them to walk further to the ground level via the ramp while removing the ramp might allow for some minor public facilities.
33. Mr TSUI Hiu-kit suggested the Transport Department (“TD”) and HyD discuss whether the footbridge could be connected to Cheung Hong Estate for the Structure No. NF123 project.
34. The Chairman put forth opinions and enquiries on the Structure No. NF275 project as follows:
(i) He considered that the lift would be beneficial to the secondary school students in the vicinity.
(ii) On the design plan, it was shown that there was a small distance between the upper deck of the lift and the footbridge. He inquired whether a cover would be added where the lift was connected to the flyover.
(iii) He asked if the design could be improved to make it more convenient for wheelchair users to travel.
(iv) He asked if it was possible to provide a few steps of stairs next to the lift to facilitate students to go up and down.
35. Mr WONG Siu-fai responded as follows:
(i) For the Structure No. NF275 project, although the retrofitting of a staircase was not within the scope of this project, the Department would discuss with colleagues of the relevant departments.
(ii) Regarding the Members’ questions on the width of the lift-waiting location and the cover, as it was only a preliminary proposal, HyD would pay more attention to the detailed design and further discuss with TD.
(iii) Regarding the size of the lift, as it was only at the preliminary stage, the consulting company did not have the size of the lift for the time being
10 Responsible Department and the Department would take into account the pedestrian flow and the views of Members in the detailed design.
(iv) For the Structure No. NF325 project, due to location constraints, the staircase had to be demolished to make way for the construction of an additional lift. In constructing the lift, the Department would first consider retaining the original ramp and staircase. However, if there was insufficient space, demolition of the staircase would be considered. If the ramp was demolished, it would affect the use of the walkway by the elderly and people in need during the construction of the lift. Moreover, as the lift would be maintained regularly, if only the staircase was available during maintenance, the elderly and the needy would also be affected.
(v) Starting from the second phase of the Universal Accessibility Programme, HyD would carry out preliminary exploration works to check the location of the pipelines. Based on the location of the pipelines, the consulting company would check with the electricity, gas and telecommunication companies on the possibility of relocating the pipelines and how long it would take to do so. Therefore, the construction site seen by the residents was for some of the pre-exploration works.
(vi) In respect of the timetable for the Structure Nos. NF215 and NF325 projects, subject to Members’ support, the detailed design would commence as soon as possible, followed by tendering. The preliminary timetable was to invite tenders and commence works this year. The lifts would normally take three to four years to complete.
(vii) For the Structure No. NF123 project, the initial proposal for the project had not yet been completed. HyD took note of Members’ comments and would liaise with other departments. HyD would report to TTC when the preliminary proposal was completed.
36. Mr KWOK Ka-wang responded as follows:
(i) For the Structure No. NF275 project, the ownership of the road next to the school belonged to the school and was not a public boundary. Therefore, the initial plan was not to connect the road adjacent to the school. However, they were discussing with the secondary school concerned and the Education Bureau (“EDB”) on the land lease and
11 Responsible Department would explore the possibility of providing an additional lift exit at ground level, but this would take time to resolve.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF325 project, HyD was arranging for the exploration of the pipeline and expected to carry out the underground pipeline exploration work in February to March.
(iii) The alignment of the Structure No. NF215 project to Chung Mei Lo Uk Village would be further studied.
37. Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen put forth opinions on the Structure No. NF275 project as follows:
(i) He considered that the current design was reasonable and did not request an additional exit next to the school.
(ii) He considered that it would be easier for the able-bodied to access the lift if a staircase was added next to the school.
(iii) He believed that HyD would build a cover where the lift was connected to the footbridge.
(iv) He considered that there should be enough space in the lift to allow for easy access by wheelchairs.
38. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren inquired about the preliminary design of the Structure No. K&T03 project and when HyD would have a site visit with him.
39. Mr WONG Chun-tat hoped that the Department would actively consider the possibility of access to Chung Mei Lo Uk Village for the Structure No. NF215 project.
40. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai followed up on the lift space issue, expecting sufficient space to speed up the flow of people. That was because there was more pedestrian flow in the Structure Nos. NF215 and NF275 projects, and there was more demand in the Structure No. NF325 project, which was close to the clinic.
41. Mr WONG Siu-fai responded as follows:
(i) The Department would consider in the detailed design for the proposed addition of a few steps of stairs to the Structure No. NF275 project, the
12 Responsible Department adequacy of the lift space, the demand in the vicinity of the clinic for the Structure No. NF325 project, and the feasibility of access to Chung Mei Lo Uk Village for the Structure No. NF215 project.
(ii) For the Structure No. NF275 project, the upper deck of the lift and the footbridge would be covered.
(iii) As the Structure No. K&T03 project involved the Housing Department (“HD”), the consulting company would conduct a preliminary study on the proposal before consulting Members.
42. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren asked if there was no preliminary study proposal for the Structure No. K&T03 project.
43. Mr KWOK Ka-wang replied that there was no preliminary proposal for the Structure No. K&T03 project for the time being.
44. Mr WONG Siu-fai said he would contact Members as soon as possible.
45. Members unanimously endorsed the captioned plan.
Improvement Works at Tsuen Tsing Interchange (Proposed by the Highways Department) (TTC Paper No. 2/D/2021)
46. Mr YU Chun-tat, Engineer 4/ Tsuen Wan Road of HyD, briefly introduced the paper.
47. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He supported the extension of the existing Texaco Road Flyover.
(ii) Whether the vehicles via Yeung Uk Road and Sha Tsui Road could cut into the Texaco Road Flyover earlier.
(iii) Whether the downstream lane of Texaco Road could be connected to the newly completed estate road and onwards to Tsing Yi.
(iv) He suggested widening the road outside Sandoz Centre.
13 Responsible Department 48. Mr HON Chun-yin put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He was pleased to see the plan being implemented, especially the additional loading and unloading bays near Sandoz Centre, which he believed would improve traffic congestion caused by illegal parking of goods vehicles.
(ii) He proposed widening part of the landscaped area outside Sandoz Centre to become a traffic lane to solve the traffic congestion problem.
49. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked if there was a need to cut the slope for the extension of the exclusive lane to Tsing Yi.
(ii) He asked about the length of the turnaround from Yeung Uk Road to Texaco Road Flyover and whether there was enough room for buses to cut into Texaco Road Flyover.
(iii) He considered that the plan would allow many bus routes to use Texaco Road Flyover instead of going through the roundabout.
(iv) He pointed out that the slip road linking Tsuen Wan Road (Kowloon bound) downhill to Texaco Road (Ma Tau Pa Road bound) was a sharp bend. He asked if there were any vehicle restrictions (e.g. heavy vehicles were restricted from passing) on that road section.
50. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth opinions on the project construction period as follows:
(i) She hoped that the noise impact on nearby residents could be reduced.
(ii) Traffic control to be put in place to avoid severe congestion.
51. Mr WAN Cheuk-keung responded as follows:
(i) After turning into the at-grade section of Texaco Road from the junction of Yeung Uk Road or Kwai Fuk Road, vehicles could use the new approach road to connect to the extension of Texaco Road Flyover. The approach road was over 100 metres long and was sufficient for vehicles
14 Responsible Department to cut through. In addition, vehicles turning right on Sha Tsui Road had already entered the at-grade section of Texaco Road at an earlier junction and therefore had sufficient distance to cut into the new approach road.
(ii) The Department planned to convert part of the landscaped area on Texaco Road near Sandoz Centre into a traffic lane to provide more road space to improve the traffic conditions in the vicinity.
(iii) Upon completion of the proposed improvement works, the traffic flow at the roundabout would be reduced, which would effectively alleviate the traffic conditions at Tsuen Tsing Interchange.
(iv) On the traffic problems in the district, the Department would continue to coordinate with TD to explore possible improvement measures.
(v) Slope cutting was required as part of the slope near the roundabout entrance obstructed the alignment of the proposed exclusive lane to Tsing Yi and the sightline of drivers. However, the works consultant had tried to make use of the existing roadside location to provide additional lanes to reduce the extent of slope cutting.
(vi) He understood Members’ concern about the curvature of the link road from the downward ramp of Tsuen Wan Road (Kowloon bound) to Texaco Road (Ma Tau Pa Road bound) and would pay attention to the relevant design requirements in the detailed design and would add signs at appropriate locations to alert drivers to reduce speed.
(vii) An environmental review of the works project had been carried out by the works consultant, and the findings indicated that the impact of the works on the nearby noise sensitive receivers met the requirements of the existing environmental legislation. Nevertheless, the Department would explore the provision of low noise road surfacing materials at suitable new road sections of the works during the detailed design stage.
(viii) During the construction period, the Department would require the contractor to implement appropriate temporary traffic measures and maintain the existing number of traffic lanes as far as possible. Temporary road closures might be required for some processes such as lifting of components, etc. and these would be carried out during non-peak hours as far as possible. A Traffic Management Liaison
15 Responsible Department Group (“TMLG”) would be set up during the works period to consider temporary traffic arrangements and the District Council (“DC”) would be consulted prior to the implementation of major temporary traffic arrangements.
52. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He supported the proposal as a whole.
(ii) Regarding the left-turn to Tsing Yi exclusive lane proposal, he hoped that the works control measures could be improved when the works were implemented to avoid traffic congestion.
(iii) For the non-operational Texaco Road Flyover, he was concerned that during the works, the site would obscure some traffic lanes and affect the sightlines of drivers turning out from Yeung Uk Road.
(iv) He asked if the brokrn bridge of Texaco Road Flyover had not been used for its original purpose before being used for the current works.
(v) The connection between the downward ramp of Tsuen Wan Road and the Texaco Road link road was a turning point, and the connections were relatively close together. He was concerned about confusion for drivers and accidents caused by fast lane cutting.
53. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) As the roundabout was very congested, he suggested that the works should be carried out during non-peak hours to minimise the impact on nearby residents.
(ii) It was stated in the 2019 consultation paper that the consultancy report for the entire Tsuen Tsing Interchange improvement works would be completed in 2022. He inquired whether the consultancy report had only been completed for those few works projects at this stage and the consultancy report for the remaining works projects would be completed in 2022.
(iii) He inquired whether an Environmental Impact Assessment (“EIA”) report had been completed for the left-turn to Tsing Yi exclusive lane
16 Responsible Department proposal.
(iv) The broken bridge location was originally intended to meet the traffic demand after the Tsuen Wan reclamation project. He asked if it would no longer be used for that purpose and could be used to extend the existing Texaco Road Flyover.
54. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He agreed to works as a whole and hoped that HyD could proceed with the works as soon as possible. He asked about the works schedule.
(ii) He inquired about the content of the survey report and the traffic impact report.
(iii) He was concerned that vehicles were still travelling at high speeds from the broken bridge location to North Bridge.
55. Miss WONG Pit-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She was concerned about the works schedule.
(ii) She asked whether the current five proposals would be adopted in a bundled manner in the future. She said that she did not wish to adopt a bundled approach as if the proposals were passed individually, they could be implemented as soon as possible.
56. Mr WAN Cheuk-keung responded as follows:
(i) The Department would refine the project management measures and require the contractor to implement appropriate temporary traffic measures to minimise the impact on traffic during the works.
(ii) The Department would pay attention to the design requirements (e.g. driver sightlines and road markings, etc.) of the link road from Tsuen Wan Road downward ramp to Texaco Road during the detailed design stage and would provide road signs at appropriate locations to alert drivers to the availability of the new link road to Texaco Road early on.
(iii) If the works project was supported by the Committee, it would be
17 Responsible Department scheduled for gazettal in the first half of this year as soon as possible. If public comments were received during the gazettal period, they would be dealt with in accordance with the statutory procedures. On the other hand, the works project would need to proceed to the next stage of detailed design and the design details would be adjusted depending on the geotechnical conditions as revealed by the geotechnical investigation works. The implementation schedule would therefore be subject to the completion of the statutory gazettal process and the finalisation of the design details.
(iv) The Department planned to take forward the five proposed improvement measures under the Tsuen Tsing Interchange improvement works project together. If some of the works items could be completed in phases, the relevant road sections would be opened for public use first so as to relieve the traffic at Tsuen Tsing Interchange as soon as possible.
(v) The investigation study for the widening of Tsuen Wan Road and associated junction improvement works was still being carried out by the works consultant. As the scope of the study was wider than that of the Tsuen Tsing Interchange improvement works and involved more complicated technical factors, it would take a longer time to carry out the relevant investigation study. As far as practicable, the Department would explore the phased implementation of some of the road improvement measures which involved relatively simple technologies.
(vi) The investigation study for the Tsuen Tsing Interchange improvement works was still in progress, and the relevant traffic impact assessment data had yet to be vetted by the relevant departments and was therefore for internal reference only.
57. Mr WONG Chun-tat put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He was concerned that the link between Tsuen Wan Road downward ramp and Texaco Road would be more dangerous.
(ii) He asked if there was room for two-lane traffic on Texaco Road. As Kwai Fuk Road and Yeung Uk Road had more traffic flow, two-lane traffic could improve the traffic congestion problem.
58. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
18 Responsible Department
(i) He asked HyD how many years it would take to complete the whole works as a preliminary estimate.
(ii) He inquired about the content of the temporary diversion measures during the works, particularly in relation to the part of broken bridge.
(iii) He hoped that the vetted traffic data would be available for Members’ reference.
(iv) He considered that the congestion problem at Yeung Uk Road turning into Wang Lung Street also needed to be addressed in the long run.
59. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin asked whether other options that had been consulted with the DC earlier (e.g. from Tsuen Wan Road to Ma Tau Pa Road) would be implemented.
60. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung inquired as follows:
(i) The reason why the roads from Tsing Yi to Kowloon were not shown in the paper.
(ii) Whether there would be a separate lane on Texaco Road towards Tsing Yi.
(iii) Whether there would be any change to the design of Texaco Road as it was relatively narrow towards Tsuen Wan.
61. Mr WAN Cheuk-keung responded as follows:
(i) Based on the traffic impact assessment, the extended Texaco Road Flyover and its approach road were single-lane carriageways and were adequate to cope with the anticipated traffic.
(ii) He took note of Members’ views on the traffic conditions along Texaco Road, Yeung Uk Road and Wang Lung Street. The Department would coordinate with TD on possible improvement measures in response to Members’ views on local traffic.
(iii) The five improvement measures mentioned in the paper were the first projects proposed to be taken forward at this stage. Other projects
19 Responsible Department relating to the widening of Tsuen Wan Road and related junction improvement works were still under investigation, and the Department would report the progress of the study to the DC in due course.
(iv) The Department would use the existing Texaco Road roadside and part of the open car park for the construction of the approach road to the at-grade approach road connecting Texaco Road to the flyover extension. Therefore, the number of lanes on the existing at-grade section of Texaco Road would remain unchanged.
(v) To minimise traffic disruption during construction, the Department would require the contractor to properly implement temporary traffic measures to maintain the number of existing traffic lanes as far as possible, and it would consult the DC before implementing major temporary traffic arrangements.
62. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He was pleased to see HyD’s wouldingness to address the congestion on Texaco Road.
(ii) He was concerned that there were objections from local stakeholders and that the current widening works might not be able to cope with the future development of Tung Chung and East Lantau.
(iii) He asked if HyD had considered bus route adjustments in the district.
63. Miss LO Yuen-ting put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She inquired about the impact on the route to Kowloon after connecting to the broken bridge.
(ii) The plan stated that there would be additional lanes near Sandoz Centre, but no change to the route towards Tsuen Wan, and the conversion of the planter location to a traffic lane may result in more traffic flow.
(iii) She considered that the project might relieve congestion in the Tsing Yi to Kowloon direction, but there was no mention of how it would be improved in the Tsing Yi to Tsuen Wan direction.
20 Responsible Department 64. Ms LEUNG Kar-ming put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She was concerned that there would be more serious environmental and traffic impacts during the works.
(ii) She asked whether various bus and minibus routes could use the approach road to the flyover to reach Tsing Yi directly.
(iii) She hoped that HyD would proceed with the left-turn to Tsing Yi exclusive lane and the extension of the existing Texaco Road Flyover first.
65. Mr TSUI Hiu-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He believed that the works would help to solve the traffic congestion problem.
(ii) He suggested the implementation of a new roundabout to avoid traffic accidents involving crashes.
(iii) He hoped that TD from the Tsuen Wan District could come to Kwai Tsing DC to introduce the works.
(iv) The traffic congestion problem was due to the prolonged parking of goods vehicles in the factory area to unload goods in traffic lanes. If the parking problem of goods vehicles was not solved, there would still be traffic congestion even after the improvement works.
(v) He hoped that HyD could present a firm schedule for the works at the next meeting.
(vi) He hoped that KMB could reorganise some of its bus routes to make it quicker for residents in southwest Tsing Yi to travel between Tsuen Wan and Tsing Yi.
66. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai asked HyD how many years it would take to complete the whole works as a preliminary estimate.
67. Mr WAN Cheuk-keung responded as follows:
21 Responsible Department (i) If the proposed works project was supported by the DC, it would be gazetted in the first half of this year as soon as possible. If public comments were received during the gazettal period, they would be dealt with in accordance with the statutory procedures.
(ii) The implementation schedule was subject to the completion of the statutory gazettal process and the finalisation of the design details. To provide early relief to the traffic conditions of Tsuen Tsing Interchange, the relevant road sections would be opened for public use first if some of the works items could be completed in phases.
(iii) The works consultant was currently conducting an investigation study on the widening of Tsuen Wan Road and the associated junction improvement works, which would take into account the traffic demand arising from the long-term development of the district and recommend road improvement plans. The Department would report the progress of the study to the DC in due course.
(iv) Issues relating to bus routes in the district would be referred to TD for consideration.
(v) At present, the left lane of Texaco Road near Sandoz Centre was occupied by vehicles from time to time for loading and unloading activities, affecting the traffic along that section of Texaco Road and the roundabout area. The current proposal was to convert part of the landscaped area into a traffic lane so that two lanes could be maintained towards Tsuen Wan even if the leftmost lane was occupied by vehicles.
(vi) He took note of Members’ views on traffic problems in the district, including traffic issues in the direction of Tsuen Wan from Tsing Yi, and would explore possible improvement measures with TD.
(vii) The proposal for the use of a new roundabout would be considered at the detailed design stage.
68. Mr CHOI Nga-man suggested that longer dashed lines could be drawn when widening Tsuen Wan Road so that vehicles could be prepared early to avoid traffic accidents.
69. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth opinions as follows:
22 Responsible Department (i) He suggested making use of more open car park space to widen the road for the approach road to Kwai Fuk Road in order to improve the congestion on Yeung Uk Road and Texaco Road.
(ii) He was concerned that the illegal parking at Sandoz Centre would get worse in the future and suggested setting up a prohibited zone to prevent illegal parking.
(iii) He was concerned that when the green belt was rebuilt as a carriageway, vehicles at the roundabout and Texaco Road (towards Ma Tau Pa Road) would be too close together and might become dangerous.
70. Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen was concerned that the illegal parking at Sandoz Centre might get worse in the future. He asked if HyD had discussed with the Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) the enforcement of future parking offences. In addition, he did not see any clear indication of the parking area for goods vehicles from the layout plan.
71. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) There were many learner drivers of medium goods vehicles and coaches on Kwai Fuk Road and the traffic flow would be slower. He asked if more space in the open car park would be used to widen the road.
(ii) In relation to the left-turn to Tsing Yi exclusive lane, he inquired whether more roundabouts would be used.
(iii) He suggested adding a speed bump to the downward ramp of Tsuen Wan Road. He inquired whether the traffic going via Texaco Road and via the roundabout would be diverted at the downward ramp as early as possible.
72. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai inquired about the approximate time required to complete the works.
73. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He referred to the 2010 consultation paper of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”), which mentioned that the Tsuen Tsing Interchange improvement proposal had been commenced in 2002.
23 Responsible Department (ii) He asked whether the proposals for Tsuen Wan Road towards Ma Tau Pa Road and Tsing Yi North Bridge towards the link road Tsuen Wan to could not be pursued due to technical problems.
74. Mr WAN Cheuk-keung responded as follows:
(i) To improve the design of the roundabout, the works consultant would look into adjusting the angle of access to the roundabout and would also make the best use of the space in the inner ring of the roundabout to improve the sight distance, thereby enhancing road safety.
(ii) Traffic lights would be provided at the junction of Kwai Fuk Road turning left and Yeung Uk Road turning right towards Texaco Road to guide vehicles to enter Texaco Road smoothly; the approach road to the extension of the flyover would make use of the existing Texaco Road roadside and part of the open car park, thus the number of existing at-grade traffic lanes of Texaco Road would not be affected.
(iii) Regarding the issue of illegal parking on Texaco Road near Sandoz Centre, the Department would liaise with HKPF and TD to discuss the traffic management measures.
(iv) For the link road from the downward ramp of Tsuen Wan Road to Texaco Road, road signs and speed bumps would be considered at suitable locations during the detailed design stage to alert drivers to reduce speed.
(v) As for the opinions on the link road from Tsing Yi North Bridge to Tsuen Wan Road, the Department would consider them in the investigation study for the widening of Tsuen Wan Road and associated junction improvement works.
(vi) He took note of Members’ enquiries on the implementation schedule of the works and would report to the Committee in due course when a concrete schedule was available.
75. Members unanimously endorsed the captioned project.
Report Items
Working Group Reports
24 Responsible Department (a) Traffic Development Affairs Working Group (“TDAWG”) (TTC Paper No. 3/R/2021)
76. Mr WONG Chung-chuen, Executive Director of Ho Wang SPB Limited (Traffic &Transportation Consultants), briefly introduced the report on the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District”.
77. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) On ferry services between Tsing Yi and Central, Tsim Sha Tsui or Kwun Tong, he pointed out that there was also a demand for ferry services from non-Tsing Yi residents. He asked whether government departments could examine the possibility of enhancing the inner harbour routes. That was because transport modes in other countries did not focus on land or railways only, e.g. inner harbour routes were also available in Sydney city centre. He suggested a circular route from Tsuen Wan, Tsing Yi to Central, Tsim Sha Tsui and Kwun Tong to relieve the pressure on land transport.
(ii) Regarding the location of Cheung On Bus Terminus as the hub of the Tsing Yi district, he hoped that different departments could discuss how to facilitate residents to take public transport. He suggested that KMB could introduce more interchange concessions.
78. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She asked how the government departments would follow up on the contents of the report on the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District”.
(ii) She suggested the bus companies introducing more interchange concessions.
(iii) She pointed out that there were not enough bus routes via High Prosperity Terrace and hoped that further studies could be conducted.
79. The Chairman pointed out that the report on the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District” report would be passed to TD after the endorsement in meeting.
25 Responsible Department 80. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve would like TD and KMB to comment on the study report. That was because the recommendations in the report needed to be implemented by TD and KMB, especially the two-way section fare concessions for buses in the area of Ha Kwai Chung, Lai King and Kau Wah Keng.
81. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He would like TD to comment on the feasibility of the Cheung On Bus Terminus interchange proposal. He pointed out that the biggest problem at this stage was that the ownership of the bus stop was HD.
(ii) He would like TD to express its views on the proposed bus route no. 37 modification.
82. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He pointed out that the extension of the tunnel at Hong Kong Station had been discussed for many years but had not yet been implemented and considered that it should not be assumed in the report that it would be implemented.
(ii) He mentioned the reclamation study at Siu Ho Wan. Tsing Yi Station was one of the top ten most popular MTR stations in Hong Kong with the most people entering the paid area. He opined that such data could be included in the report to let TD know the need for ferry development.
(iii) He suggested that a ferry route from Tsuen Wan to Tsing Yi and then to Central would be better. That was because relying on the patronage of Tsing Yi alone might not be sufficient for operation. He suggested that in addition to electric boats, Park Island Transport could also be considered. According to his observation, there were often no passengers on the ferries from Tsuen Wan to Park Island, but there might be licensing issues with ferries.
83. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He thanked the Volunteer Adviser in the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District”, Boys’ Brigade, Hong Kong and Ho Wang SPB Limited (Traffic &Transportation Consultants) for conducting the study.
26 Responsible Department
(ii) He expected TD to follow up on the recommendations of the report, including those on interchange and marine transport, in its work plan for 2021 to 2022.
(iii) He would like TD to comment on the recommendations of the report.
(iv) He hoped that the Committee would continue to have funding for such studies in the coming year.
84. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He hoped that the consulting company could provide some detailed data after the meeting, e.g. the number of questionnaires received in each district.
(ii) He asked how publicity would be conducted to let residents know that Octopus could be used for interchange concessions at interchange stations.
85. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He was concerned that the Government, bus companies and minibus operators might not view the study report positively.
(ii) He considered that the report was a general study on the transport development and supporting facilities in Kwai Tsing, but there was no detailed study on the internal demand for transport in the district. He looked forward to further funding for such research in the coming year.
86. Mr TSUI Hiu-kit put forth opinions as follows:
(i) The report did not mention the improvement plan of the Tsing Yi to Tuen Mun bus routes that had to pass through Tsuen Wan. He pointed out that Tuen Mun Road could be used directly to reach Tuen Mun from Tsing Yi.
(ii) There was excessive overlap of some bus routes in southwest Tsing Yi, such as route nos. 43B, 243M and 43. He did not think all routes should go through the Bus-Bus Interchange on Cheung On.
27 Responsible Department
87. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He thanked the Volunteer Adviser in the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District” for his input to the working group.
(ii) The study report was intended to be a preliminary study of traffic within and outside Kwai Tsing. Although the report did not go into too much depth, he hoped Members would read it carefully.
(iii) He hoped that government departments would respond to the recommendations of the report and the practice report.
88. Dr HUNG Wing-tat, Volunteer Adviser in the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District”, responded as follows:
(i) Regarding the bus-bus interchange and interchange concession scheme, the sectional bus fare scheme and the Tsing Yi waterborne transport scheme mentioned in the report, he hoped that the DC could follow up on them.
(ii) Concessions could be provided to passengers at interchanges to balance the need to delay arrival at their destinations. The interchange function would allow passengers to connect to places that would otherwise be inaccessible by bus, enhancing accessibility to residents by bus.
(iii) The report stated that one in four people travelled to work on Hong Kong Island and hoped that interchange options could be explored to address the needs.
(iv) He considered that a passenger-friendly fare mechanism should be adopted, whereby fares should be the same from one place to another, regardless of the number of interchanges to different public transport.
(v) Under the ferry proposal, he suggested that the Government could provide piers where ferry companies or water taxis could pick up passengers according to their demand.
89. Mr WONG Chung-chuen thanked the Volunteer Adviser in the “Study on
28 Responsible Department Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District” for his valuable comments on the study.
90. Mr LEUNG Wang-cheong, Manager (Operations) of the Kowloon Motor Bus Co. (1933) Ltd, responded that he supported the establishment of more interchange stations, but it needed the coordination of public works. It would also be easier to provide sectional fare concessions with interchange stations. He said that he could discuss with DC members the changes of bus routes in the district.
91. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny, Senior Transport Officer/ Kwai Tsing 1 of TD, responded that upon receipt of the report, he would review and study it in detail with the relevant departments and provide a reply to the DC afterwards.
92. Members unanimously endorsed the TDAWG’s report, including the final report on the “Study on Transport Infrastructure and Facilities in Kwai Tsing District”.
93. Mr HUI Kei-cheung hoped that the report and presentation could be emailed to all DC members.
(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat had sent the report by email on 11 February 2021 and the presentation by email on 22 February 2021 to all K&T DC members.)
94. Mr TSUI Hiu-kit would like the consulting company to respond to the issue of overlapping bus routes from southwest Tsing Yi to Tsuen Wan.
95. Mr HUI Kei-cheung indicated that the consulting company had carried out its research on the three main focal points identified by the Working Group. The relevant focal points had been consulted with DC members earlier. If DC members had other views, they could express them in the coming year or pursue them with TD.
(b) Road Safety Working Group (TTC Paper No. 4/R/2021)
96. The Committee unanimously endorsed the working group report.
(c) Public Transport Working Group (TTC Paper No. 5/R/2021)
97. The Committee unanimously endorsed the working group report.
29 Responsible Department Discussion Items
Discussion on Enhancement of the Ancillary Transport Facilities in Kwai Shing Circuit (Proposed by Miss LEUNG Ching-shan, Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman, Mr NG Kim-sing and Mr TONG Ho-man) (TTC Paper No. 6, 6a /D/2021)
98. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 6/D/2021 and added as follows:
(i) She was concerned that the opening of the lift tower would cut down the transport facilities in Kwai Shing Circuit.
(ii) The passenger capacity of Green Minibus (“GMB”) route nos. 89S and 89M might change with the opening of the lift tower.
99. Mr NG Kim-sing considered that the lift tower would not be able to meet the needs of the residents even after its commissioning. He hoped that TD would not cut down the transport facilities in Kwai Shing Circuit after the lift tower was opened.
100. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He pointed out that during peak hours, GMB route nos. 89S and 89M had a lot of passengers. He was concerned that TD would reduce the frequency of minibuses after the lift tower was opened.
(ii) He suggested that TD should send its staff to the site to examine the changes in passenger demand after the lift tower was opened.
101. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) HyD was currently working on the construction of a lift tower connecting Kwai Shing Circuit (near Luen Yat House) and Hing Shing Road (near Vocational Training Council (“VTC”) Youth College (Kwai Fong)). At present, public transport services to and from Kwai Fong in Kwai Shing Circuit were mainly GMB services, and the distance between Kwai Fong Station and Hing Shing Road was relatively long, the lift tower works would not have much impact on the passenger demand of the GMB routes to and from Kwai Fong Station upon completion. Therefore, the
30 Responsible Department service level of the GMB concerned would not be affected by the works.
(ii) Besides, as the terminus of GMB route no. 87 was located at Shing Fong Street near the lift tower, some passengers of the route might switch to use the lift tower to travel to and from Shing Fong Street and Kwai Shing Circuit (lower section). However, according to TD’s survey, the proportion of passengers travelling to and from Shing Fong Street and Kwai Shing Circuit was not high, and therefore it would not have much impact on the overall passenger demand of the GMB route.
(iii) TD would closely monitor changes in passenger demand with the operators concerned and make timely service adjustments accordingly.
102. Mr LAU Chi-kit asked about the passenger figures of GMB route nos. 87 and 87K to and from Kwai Fong and Kwai Shing Circuit. He observed that many passengers would also board the minibus at Kwai Fong to go to Luen Yuet House.
103. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman suggested TD conducting a study with the DC members on minibuses or buses in the district after the lift was opened, including changes in patronage and frequency, so as to make corresponding service adjustments, and even consider the restructuring of bus and GMB routes in the district.
104. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He agreed that TD had not considered reducing the frequency of GMB route nos. 87 and 87K for the time being.
(ii) There might be changes in pedestrian flow after the lift was commissioned, and he suggested that TD extend the survey period. That was because the lift might be heavily used at the initial stage of completion, but after a period of time, residents might revert to their old habit of taking a ride to Kwai Fong. He suggested that DC members of the concerned constituency could be consulted during the survey and that it might not be appropriate to have a change in frequency in the first year.
105. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) The terminus of GMB route no. 87 was located at Shing Fong Street near the lift tower, and some passengers of the route might switch to use the lift tower to travel between Shing Fong Street and Kwai Shing Circuit
31 Responsible Department (lower section). However, according to TD’s survey, the proportion of passengers travelling to and from Shing Fong Street and Kwai Shing Circuit was about 10% of the passengers of the route, and the passengers of the route mainly travelled between Kwai Fong and Tsuen Wan. Therefore, the completion of the lift tower works would not have much impact on the overall passenger demand of the GMB route.
(ii) In fact, the lift tower would provide an alternative means for residents to travel between Kwai Shing Circuit and Shing Fong Street. TD would also closely monitor changes in passenger demand for GMB upon the completion of the lift tower.
(iii) TD would conduct GMB service surveys from time to time and would review changes in passenger demand for GMB and make timely service adjustments with the relevant operators accordingly.
106. Mr NG Kim-sing suggested that TD could let DC members make reference to the relevant data on the change in patronage after the completion of the lift tower, if available.
Requests for Follow-up on the Chaotic Arrangement of the Temporary Relocation of the Minibus and Bus Termini in Kwai Shing Circuit (Proposed by Mr NG Kim-sing and Mr TONG Ho-man) (TTC Paper No. 7, 7a /D/2021)
107. Mr NG Kim-sing briefly introduced the paper.
108. Mr LO Chun-hin, Engineer/ Kwai Chung of TD, responded as follows:
(i) TD conducted a site visit with relevant Members and HyD on 4 February 2021.
(ii) In approving the temporary transport arrangements, TD had reminded the contractor to post temporary relocation notices at the original minibus stop locations in advance to remind residents of the arrangements. During the site visit on 4 February 2021, TD also pointed out to the relevant works consultants that they should closely monitor the daily work of the contractor, including the work before and after the implementation of the temporary traffic arrangements, so as to minimise the impact on the residents. Upon completion of the works, the
32 Responsible Department contractor would be responsible for the relocation of the affected minibus and bus stop signs to their original locations.
(iii) If the contractor failed to properly handle the temporary traffic arrangements, including the temporary relocation of minibuses or bus stops and received repeated feedback from the public on the temporary traffic arrangements, TD might request the works consulting company and the contractor to stop the works. The contractor would be required to review the temporary traffic arrangements and improve the site operation before the works could continue with TD’s consent.
109. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She pointed out that residents had reported that some stop signs of minibus operators were not clear. She added that clear signs would have pictures, an indication of stations passed through and the minibus operators’ telephone number.
(ii) She asked whether the stop signs were provided by TD or the minibus operator.
110. Mr NG Kim-sing hoped that the station signs would be returned to their original positions as soon as the works were completed.
111. The Chairman pointed out that many Public Light Bus (“PLB”) operators had relocated the stop signs privately to facilitate PLB operation. He said TD should inform the overall PLB operators to restore the locations of the stop signs.
112. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) Stop signs for GMB routes were provided by the operators concerned. TD might follow up with the operators concerned to request clear instructions and enquiry telephone numbers for the route service to be provided on the signs.
(ii) GMBs were required to pick up or set down passengers at appropriate locations in accordance with the traffic laws. If the GMB concerned needed to pick up or set down passengers in prohibited locations, they needed to obtain permission from TD first. TD would remind GMB operators to comply with the relevant traffic laws.
33 Responsible Department
(iii) Regarding the relocation of minibus and bus stop signs affected by the works, the relocation would be undertaken by the relevant works contractor, including the relocation of the stop signs to their original locations upon completion of the works. TD would discuss with the works contractor on the relocation issues.
(iv) If GMB operators requested to change the location of the original stop signs, they could submit their request to TD, which would examine the request.
113. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman said that TD and HyD did not communicate with DC members when they made the changes to the road facilities. He pointed out that the traffic lights at Tai Wo Hau Road and Hing Fong Road were changed from an automatic control system to a push-button system without consulting DC members before the change. After the change, DC members of the concerned constituency received many complaints from residents. He hoped that DC members would be consulted on any future changes to road facilities.
114. Mr LO Chun-hin responded that he would communicate with Members first when there were future changes to the lighting model.
The Incident of Minibus Route no. 409 Catching Fire and Exploding on 27 October (Proposed by Mr LAU Chi-kit and Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren) (TTC Paper No. 8, 8a/D/2021)
115. Mr LAU Chi-kit briefly introduced the paper and stated that he did not agree that the explosion was an isolated incident. He asked if the fire was caused by a short circuit in the electrical wiring.
116. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren asked if TD had communicated and followed up with the minibus operator about the explosion after the incident.
117. Mr HO Ka-fai, Senior Transport Officer/ Kwai Tsing 2 of TD, responded as follows:
(i) In consultation with the Fire Services Department (“FSD”), TD would inform the minibus operator of the measures to prevent accidents, e.g. before taking over the vehicle, the driver should check the condition of the vehicle carefully, pay particular attention to whether there were any
34 Responsible Department foreign objects or abnormal conditions underneath the vehicle and replace the consumables of the vehicle regularly, and to pay attention to the physical condition and rest arrangements of the driver.
(ii) The PLB Section of TD conducted regular meetings and safety seminars with the PLB sector, and TD also provided guidelines on rest time for PLB drivers to operators. Drivers were required to attend a traffic safety course before they could obtain a PLB driving licence.
(iii) After investigation, FSD concluded that the cause of the fire was unknown. No similar incident had occurred in the past with that model of vehicle, and the fire was believed to be an isolated incident.
(iv) He would follow up with the PLB Section on how to enhance security measures to prevent similar incidents from happening.
118. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked what was included in the safety course and whether drivers were taught the circumstances under which they needed to evacuate passengers. That was because, from his observation, PLB drivers might not have much safety knowledge.
(ii) He suggested TD posting some safety information in vehicle compartments.
(iii) He was surprised that the cause of the fire could not be found and asked whether insufficient care had been taken in the inspection.
119. Mr NG Kim-sing asked if the Department would investigate the minibus catching fire to see if it was related to its model, machinery or other equipment. He was concerned whether the accident might have occurred for some rare reason.
120. Mr HON Chun-yin put forth opinions as follows:
(i) TD’s policy on PLBs might focus on the operation and service of PLBs, thus neglecting the maintenance of vehicles. Minibus operators might not be aware of the need to inspect vehicles as some vehicles were not owned by the company and would be maintained by individual owners. He was concerned that there were uneven standards of repair.
35 Responsible Department
(ii) He hoped that TD could improve the management of PLB in Hong Kong to protect the safety of the public.
121. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He thought that TD should consult the minibus operator about the accident. That was because the driver pointed out that smoke was coming from the front of the vehicle, which might not necessarily involve engine problems.
(ii) He pointed out that on 28 October, a minibus on route no. 409 also emitted smoke at North Bridge. He asked if there was an accident notification mechanism.
(iii) He asked whether TD would encourage PLB operators to replace their vehicles. That was because the legislation did not restrict the replacement time for liquefied petroleum gas (“LPG”) minibuses but restricted the replacement of diesel minibuses to 15 years. He asked whether TD would establish a policy on the replacement time for LPG minibuses.
122. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked what course one had to attend before obtaining a PLB driving licence.
(ii) He thought that TD’s reply was not detailed enough and did not specify what had been checked and how to prevent similar incidents from happening.
123. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren asked if there were any follow-up arrangements after the fire accident, e.g. arranging for minibuses of the same type to be inspected.
124. The Chairman asked if TD had provided safety courses to drivers of public transport.
125. Mr NG Kim-sing inquired whether TD would investigate, request reports from PLB operators or issue guidelines to require certain vehicle models to stop running after an accident.
36 Responsible Department
126. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) The Department would follow up on the evacuation of passengers when a fire broke out and the posting of safety messages inside vehicle compartments, mentioned by Members.
(ii) He pointed out that his colleagues in the Vehicle Examination Unit were qualified as Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (“EMSD”) engineers and that the vehicle in question had passed its annual examination.
(iii) Although the cause of the fire was unknown after investigation, problems with maintenance or cleaning of the vehicle after annual examination mentioned by Members could be the cause of the accident. TD had informed the minibus operator of FSD’s findings and the recommended precautionary measures.
(iv) TD also asked the minibus operator about the accident. The minibus operator said that the driver found that fire was caught under the driver’s seat, and he immediately called the police. Afterwards, FSD replied that the cause of the fire was unknown.
(v) On the issue of vehicle age, there was no requirement for a vehicle to be retired after a certain number of years of service. However, the age of vehicles was one of the ratings given by TD in the mid-term review of minibus operators or in the renewal of passenger service licences (“PSL”).
(vi) To his knowledge, there was no similar incident involving the same model of the minibus. He took note of the suggestion to check other models of minibuses.
(vii) He would follow up on the incident of a minibus on route no. 409 discharging smoke at North Bridge on 28 October. Minibus operators were required to notify TD when similar incidents occurred.
127. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He expressed surprise that TD was unaware of an incident involving a
37 Responsible Department minibus on route no. 409 discharging smoking at North Bridge on 28 October. He opined that the minibus operators should not be the only ones to report incidents and that TD should step up its monitoring of minibuses.
(ii) He pointed out that TD had not responded to whether the minibus driver’s course had included some safety knowledge, such as when the driver should evacuate passengers in case of an accident.
128. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren inquired as follows:
(i) As there had been incidents of fire and explosion and smoke emission from minibuses on route no. 409, whether the relevant models of vehicles would be examined again.
(ii) How TD ensured the safety of passengers and whether there were risks associated with the relevant models of vehicles.
129. The Chairman inquired as follows:
(i) Whether HKPF would tow the vehicle to the examination centre for further inspection after the vehicle had caught fire, or whether the minibus operator could tow the vehicle itself when FSD considered that there was no problem.
(ii) Whether minibus or bus companies were required to report to TD for any traffic accident.
130. Mr LAU Chi-kit asked what the relevant minibus course was. He questioned whether TD had “brought [pause] to work”.
131. The Chairman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that Members no need to use wordings with extreme meaning.
(ii) He asked if minibus or bus drivers had driving courses.
132. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim, Officer-in-Charge, District Traffic Team, Kwai Tsing Police District of HKPF, responded that if the vehicle was involved in any casualties,
38 Responsible Department HKPF would treat it as a traffic accident.
133. Mr LEUNG Wang-cheong responded as follows:
(i) He said that if there was a fire on a bus, TD would write to the bus company asking for information, and the bus company would have an investigation report for TD.
(ii) New or serving captains were provided with relevant training so that they would know what to do when their vehicles were not running smoothly.
134. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) One of the safety measures for PLB operation was to make it mandatory for PLB drivers to complete a pre-service course before they would be issued with a PLB driving licence. It was his understanding that the course did not teach the subject of the evacuation of passengers in case of fire.
(ii) As similar incidents had not occurred on the same model of minibuses, no further inspection had been conducted on the same model of minibuses after the fire. However, he understood Members’ concern and would follow up again.
(iii) He pointed out that minibuses were required to report to TD if an incident occurred.
135. Miss YIM Yik-huen, Bonnie, Assistant District Officer (Kwai Tsing) of K&T DO, said that a Member had just made an improper and insulting remark to a TD representative and hoped that the Chairman would ask the Member to withdraw his remark.
136. Mr LAU Chi-kit pointed out that he would not withdraw the remark and disagreed with the views of the Assistant District Officer (Kwai Tsing).
137. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren added that the remark was “bring the brain to work”.
138. The Chairman instructed the Secretary to put the contents on record.
139. Mr WONG Tin-yan understood that Members were not satisfied with the
39 Responsible Department response from the government department. That was because after the discussion, Members were not clear about the outcome of the minibus and the relevant training information. He hoped that TD would take the incident seriously and protect the safety of the passengers.
140. Mr CHOI Nga-man would like TD to inform Members when the investigation report was available.
141. The Chairman put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He hoped that TD could provide safety training or driving training to GMB drivers.
(ii) He considered that TD should require minibus operators to carry out more examinations or repairs.
(iii) He hoped that TD would have the investigation report for Members as soon as possible.
142. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai suggested adding an agenda item to follow up on the subject at the next formal meeting.
143. Ms LEUNG Kar-ming suggested adding an agenda item for the April meeting to follow up on the subject.
Motion: Requests the Transport Department to Monitor the Situation of Inadequate Frequencies by Minibus Companies in the Morning (Proposed by Mr SIN Chung-kai, seconded by Mr CHOI Nga-man) (TTC Paper No. 9, 9a/D/2021)
144. The Chairman advised that the Secretariat had invited the relevant minibus operators to attend the meeting in February, but they all indicated that they were unable to attend the meeting.
145. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai asked if there was a written reply from the minibus operators and the reasons for their non-attendance.
146. The Secretary advised that she had called the relevant minibus operators in February to invite them to attend the meeting and had received no written reply from them. They had indicated that they would not attend this meeting due to other
40 Responsible Department commitments or illness.
147. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai suggested the Secretariat making a written invitation next time.
148. Miss YIM Yik-huen, Bonnie said that the Secretariat would make written invitations whenever possible. In addition, when an invitation was made by telephone, the Secretariat would also record it.
149. Mr SIN Chung-kai briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 9/D/2021 and asked whether minibus operators had reduced the frequency due to the outbreak.
150. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He expressed disappointment that the minibus operators did not attend the meeting.
(ii) He opined that TD should strengthen its monitoring of the services provided by minibus operators.
151. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He considered that the minibus operators should attend the meeting.
(ii) He pointed out that residents of Kau Wah Keng had difficulty taking minibus route no. 90M to Mei Foo, but TD’s reply did not reflect the situation. He hoped that TD would monitor the situation of minibus route no. 90M.
(iii) He asked how the chart in Paper No. 9/D/2021 was to be interpreted.
152. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) At present, GMB route nos. 47M, 90M and 91A would run via Lok Yiu House to Lai King Station, and TD was aware that those routes had more passengers at the terminus during the morning peak hours, resulting in longer waiting time for passengers at the intermediate stations. However, the operator had also arranged special trips from the intermediate stations so that more seats were available for minibuses arriving at the intermediate stations to take passengers to Lai King
41 Responsible Department Station, thus effectively diverting the passengers waiting at the intermediate station. TD would continue to liaise with the operator concerned to enhance its services as necessary, including special trips to Lai King Station, to reduce the waiting time of passengers at the intermediate stations.
(ii) TD would also conduct field surveys to monitor the frequency and occupancy rate of the GMB routes concerned, including during non-peak hours, when the epidemic had subsided, and the travel pattern of the public had resumed. TD would also follow up with the GMB operators on the provision of services according to the service schedule and adjust the services to meet passenger demand as and when necessary.
153. Mr SIN Chung-kai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He explained that the chart in Paper No. 9/D/2021 showed the waiting time of passengers for minibuses at different times of the day. The chart showed that at 7 a.m., the waiting time for passengers was longer.
(ii) He asked about the reasons for the sparse schedule during peak hours.
154. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He pointed out that a minibus was available about every 10 minutes as seen in the chart and considered that they could not cope with the demand of passengers during peak hours.
(ii) He hoped that TD would discuss with minibus operators to increase the frequency of service, especially to divert passengers at the terminus and Kau Wah Keng.
155. Mr WONG Bing-kuen put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He opined that TD should step up its efforts in monitoring the operation of minibus operators. TD would submit a Transport Plan for the coming year to the DC every year, and the plan would mainly focus on buses, with little mention of minibuses. He suggested that the Transport Plan should include minibuses, which could include basic information on minibuses, such as fares, frequency, the contract period of minibus operators and improvement plans for minibuses, etc.
42 Responsible Department
(ii) He inquired about the implementation of the Real-time Arrival Information System for minibuses, how it would be implemented and its timetable.
156. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He opined that after Members conveyed the situation of minibuses to TD, TD said it would follow up and investigate, but the situation of minibuses had not improved since then.
(ii) A motion passed by the TTC six months ago was for TD to have a clear mechanism of rewards and penalties for minibus operators. He received some comments from residents, some of which were positive, indicating that certain routes, such as route nos. 407 and 409, had improved. However, some routes had not improved, and the frequency and driving attitude of minibus drivers remained the same. He asked if TD would make the survey public.
157. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) The data provided by Members showed that during the peak hours between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m., people had to wait longer for minibuses, thus reflecting the higher patronage during the peak period. TD would continue to monitor the operation of special trips from intermediate stations with the operators.
(ii) TD would consider and discuss with operators the necessary adjustments to different GMB services based on actual passenger demand and would consult on such adjustments.
(iii) TD was working on the implementation of the Real-time Arrival Information System for GMB and would provide further information on the progress.
(iv) TD required GMB operators to comply with the operating conditions of the PSL. If operators failed to comply with the conditions, TD would require them to make improvements and would meet with the operators’ management to discuss improvement measures. TD would also continue to discuss with the operators on frequency and driver quality
43 Responsible Department issues.
158. The Chairman said that the Real-time Arrival Information System for minibuses was very useful in monitoring whether the minibuses were running on the designated routes.
159. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin asked if TD could make public the information of the route re-tendering or the mid-term review survey for operators.
160. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded that the results of the mid-term review of GMB routes would also be reflected in the expiry dates of the PSL of different GMBs.
161. Mr CHOI Nga-man inquired about the reward and penalty mechanism and asked if any minibus operators had been penalised and what they were.
162. Mr WONG Bing-kuen put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He suggested that the Secretariat could collect views from Members on the operation of minibuses.
(ii) Regarding the Real-time Arrival Information System, the TD website stated that it was introduced to three routes on Hong Kong Island in December 2020 for trial use. That would be further expanded to 70 routes from March 2011. All GMB routes would be covered in 2022. He asked if Kwai Tsing District was among the 70 routes and how all GMB routes would be covered in 2022.
163. The Chairman asked whether TD would not renew the contracts of poor performing minibus operators.
164. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) TD would monitor the services of GMB in accordance with the conditions of the GMB PSL, including the requirements on frequency, number of vehicles, etc., as set out in the Schedule of Services.
(ii) In assessing the performance of GMB, the frequency of service of a route was one of the major factors, while other factors included the quality of vehicles and facilities, fare concessions, etc. TD would examine the renewal of the PSL as a whole based on the performance of GMB
44 Responsible Department operators in different aspects. Under the current mechanism, TD might not renew the validity of the PSL if a GMB operator received a lower overall rating in the assessment.
(iii) The progress of work on the Real-time Arrival Information System for minibuses would be further supplemented.
165. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve thought that the problem of minibuses was that there were no competitors. He hoped that TD could look at what routes could be opened up for competition from bus operators.
166. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren asked if there was no way for TD to regulate minibuses and how serious the situation of minibuses had to be before their licence would be suspended.
167. Miss WONG Pit-man put forth opinions as follows:
(i) She pointed out that the problem of minibuses was very serious and requested TD to step up monitoring.
(ii) She suggested that red minibuses should be allowed to run in Tsing Yi.
168. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that there was a difference between TD’s field observation data and Members’ data, probably because TD’s field observations were too obvious, and drivers would adjust their schedules immediately when they knew TD was observing in the field. He asked whether TD could make public the reports on field observation of trips.
(ii) He requested TD to follow up on the comments made by Members at the meeting.
169. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that TD had cancelled GMB route no. 405A more than ten years ago because of the frequent non-running of the GMB route no. 405A.
(ii) Taking GMB route no. 88A in Tsing Yi as an example, its stop sign had
45 Responsible Department not been replaced for more than twenty years and had been rusting because of the lack of competition. He queried that the minibus operator had not replaced its facilities or improved its service standard but only used its minibus licence for speculation.
170. Mr NG Kim-sing inquired how TD would follow up on public complaints against minibuses and whether any penalty had been imposed on minibuses operators.
171. Mr CHOI Nga-man conveyed residents’ views that TD had penalised GMB route no. 88D, but he was not clear what the penalty was.
172. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
The Problem of Lost Trips of Minibus Route no. 401 in Tsing Yi (Proposed by Mr LAU Chi-kit and Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren) (TTC Paper No. 10, 10a/D/2021)
173. Mr LAU Chi-kit briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 10/D/2021 and asked for details of the number of shifts referred to in TD’s written reply which was 6 shifts less than that required by the Schedule of Services.
174. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked how TD would follow up with the minibus operator on the situation where the number of shifts was 6 less than that required by the Schedule of Services.
(ii) He pointed out that there were taxis blocking traffic at Cheung On Bus Terminus.
(iii) The Chairman asked whether GMB route no. 401 was not running on its original route, and hence the number of trips could not be counted at the intermediate stations temporarily.
175. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) TD conducted field surveys on the frequency of GMB route no. 401. The short-working service of GMB route no. 401 ran from Cheung On Bus Terminus to Shek Yam every 15 minutes from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. from Monday to Saturday (except public holidays). The Schedule of Services
46 Responsible Department stated that there should be 13 trips for the short-working service between 7 a.m. and 10 a.m. According to a survey conducted by TD on 27 November 2020, the frequency of the short-working service was 6 trips less than that required by the Schedule of Services. TD had written to the minibus operator requesting that they provide the service according to the Schedule of Services, i.e. every 15 minutes. The overall frequency of GMB route no. 401 on the day of the survey was two trips more than the Schedule of Services requirement, but the frequency of the short-working service was six trips less than the Schedule of Services requirement.
(ii) The purpose of the short-working service was to allow passengers at the intermediate station at Cheung On to board the minibus.
(iii) In the survey conducted in late January this year, the short-working service also did not run every 15 minutes from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. TD would follow up with the minibus operator again and issue a warning letter if the minibus operator failed to give a reasonable explanation. TD would monitor the minibus operator to provide the service in accordance with the Schedule of Services.
176. The Chairman asked whether the short-working service, which ran every 15 minutes from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m., was within the scope of the service as stated in the tender.
177. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) The short-working service was listed in the Schedule of Services. If the minibus operator was unable to provide the service according to the Schedule of Services, it would fail to meet the conditions of the PSL.
(ii) The warning letter would affect the successful renewal of the minibus operator’s licence or the length of the licence period. In very serious cases, TD would conduct a hearing and cancel the PSL.
178. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered the fact that the number of short-working services provided by GMB route no. 401 was 6 shifts less that the Schedule of Services requirement very serious.
47 Responsible Department
(ii) He asked whether the minibus operator of GMB route no. 401 would have plans to replace its minibuses with 19-seater minibuses. That was because maintaining 16-seater minibuses might not be sufficient to meet passenger demand when the frequency was not sufficient.
179. Mr HO Ka-fai responded that it had been TD’s policy to encourage operators to replace their minibuses with new ones, and where circumstances permitted, they could replace them with 19-seater minibuses. Whenever a mid-term review of the PSL was conducted, operators would be given extra points if they replaced their vehicles with new ones, and the higher the points, the longer the period of operation would be. He would follow up with the minibus operator on the situation of GMB route no. 401.
180. Mr LAU Chi-kit inquired as follows:
(i) Whether the direction of Shek Yam Road to Tsing Yi was not via Shek Yam Road.
(ii) Regarding the situation of GMB route no. 88E, whether TD had issued a warning letter.
181. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered that warning letters were not very useful.
(ii) He asked whether the points deduction system would affect the tender of the minibus operator or whether it would affect the tender of all the subsidiaries of the minibus operator.
182. The Chairman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that if GMB route no. 401 had to pass through Shek Yam Road in the morning, he believed that the journey from Cheung On to Shek Yam would be longer.
(ii) He asked if GMB route no. 401 was full at Tsing Yi Pier, whether the minibus would pick up passengers at the intermediate stop or whether it would run on another route.
183. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
48 Responsible Department
(i) The previous two surveys were conducted at Cheung On Bus Terminus. The survey results could not show whether the driver would drive without passing through the intermediate stop. TD would conduct a further investigation into whether the operator had followed the scheduled route.
(ii) Warning letters were issued to PSL holders. At the time of the mid-term review, a warning letter would result in points being deducted from the PSL holder and affect the timing of the renewal of the PSL. If the PSL holder bid for another package of minibus routes, the warning letter would also have an impact on the tender, but details were not available at the time being. The tender scoring sheet would also take into account whether the PSL holder had other operating GMB routes and what their operating status was.
(iii) The Department would follow up on the situation of GMB route no. 88E.
184. The Chairman would like TD to follow up on whether GMB route no. 88E was still in operation and reply as soon as possible.
Motion: Requests the Transport Department to Enhance Monitoring of Minibus Companies Concerning the Situation of Skipping Stops (Proposed by Mr CHOI Nga-man, seconded by Mr SIN Chung-kai) (TTC Paper No. 11, 11a/D/2021)
185. Mr CHOI Nga-man briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 11/D/2021 and put forth enquiries as follows:
(i) Whether TD considered the 18 complaints about GMB route nos. 93 and 93A serious.
(ii) When TD would follow up with the operator and whether the minibus operator had made any improvement.
(iii) How TD would follow up if there were further cases of stop skipping by the operator.
186. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
49 Responsible Department (i) Complaints about GMB route nos. 93 and 93A involved mainly the minibus stop at Kwai Fuk Road (southbound) near Kwai Tsing Theatre, and TD had requested the operator concerned to investigate and take follow-up actions and instructed the drivers concerned to pay attention to the waiting passengers at the minibus stop. Some of the minibus trips did not stop at the minibus stop concerned because they were full or because the drivers thought there were no passengers waiting at the minibus stop and therefore ran in lanes far away from the roadside.
(ii) TD also observed illegal parking on Kwai Fuk Road (southbound) near Kwai Tsing Theatre, which might have obstructed the drivers’ views. TD had referred the case to HKPF for follow-up action, and HKPK had taken enforcement action accordingly.
187. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin pointed out that it was common for minibus drivers to skip stops and suggested TD applying technology to monitor the routes of minibuses, e.g. installing infra-red devices at stops, using systems such as QR codes to record movements.
188. Mr SIN Ho-fai pointed out that GMB route nos. 409, 409K and 409S would also ignore the intermediate stop at Broadview Garden and that package of minibus routes already had vehicles fitted with satellite positioning systems. He suggested TD enhancing the monitoring of minibuses’ stop skipping.
189. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He was concerned about the stop skipping of minibuses at Kwai Tsing Theatre. He pointed out that GMB route nos. 413 and 91 would also ignore the station at Kwai Tsing Theatre, but the minibus stop at Kwai Tsing Theatre was an important connection point.
(ii) He asked how TD would monitor the stop skipping situation of minibuses.
190. Mr HON Chun-yin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked whether a stop sign was required at GMB stops to pick up passengers. He pointed out that previous responses of TD had indicated that passengers could be picked up without stop signs as long as they were not on double yellow lines.
50 Responsible Department
(ii) He opined that minibus drivers might not pay attention to the operators’ instructions.
(iii) He inquired whether stop signs should be provided at some safe road sections.
191. Mr TSUI Hiu-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He suggested mandatory installation of closed-circuit television (“CCTV”) or black box on minibuses so that TD could check the footage when complaints were received, so that minibus drivers would be on the alert.
(ii) He opined that when a minibus operator had incurred demerit points or made some serious mistakes, the route should be re-tendered immediately.
(iii) He pointed out that minibus operators were facing a shortage of drivers and asked how the problem could be solved.
192. Mr SIN Chung-kai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He suggested that a complaint application should be designed, and a QR code should be posted at each minibus stop for the public to complain about minibus services.
(ii) He had previously heard that minibus operators had difficulties in hiring minibus drivers, but now that the unemployment rate had risen to about 7 percent, he did not quite agree that it was difficult to hire drivers and many drivers in the transport trade had switched to delivering takeaways or goods.
(iii) He suggested improving the facilities at minibus stops, such as installing waiting lights at the minibus stop at the Kwai Tsing Theatre to indicate that there were passengers waiting for minibuses.
193. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) The problem of stop skipping on GMB route no. 410 was also serious.
51 Responsible Department He suggested TD setting up an electronic monitor between stops to monitor whether minibuses were skipping stops.
(ii) He asked if minibus drivers were familiar with the circumstances under which they could pick up passengers at locations with no stop signs. That was because there were complaints from residents that GMB route no. 410 often did not stop at Yip Shing Street.
194. Mr NG Kim-sing pointed out that as far as he knew, passengers did not have to follow the stop signs when they needed to alight as long as they complied with the traffic regulations, but there were complaints from residents that they could not alight at certain locations.
195. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan inquired about the status of and information on the frequency of minibus trips in relation to GMB route no. 98. That was because residents complained that the minibuses in Kwai Shing West were often full and could not be boarded.
196. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) GMB might pick up or set down passengers in non-restricted areas where it was safe and did not contravene traffic laws. For some of the minibus stops located in restricted zones, TD might issue permits to the GMB concerned to pick up or set down passengers in restricted zones after examining the conditions of the road sections concerned. The stop signs of GMB routes could provide passengers with clearer information on the waiting positions of the minibuses.
(ii) Regarding the issue of minibus drivers skipping stops, TD requested minibus operators to strictly inform minibus drivers of the need to pick up waiting passengers at minibus stops, and TD would continue to follow up with the relevant operators.
(iii) TD took note of Members’ views on some of the monitoring measures or equipment to improve minibus services mentioned earlier.
197. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He inquired whether the 18 complaints received in 2020 regarding stop skipping on GMB route nos. 93 and 93A was high or low.
52 Responsible Department
(ii) Regarding the follow-up actions taken by the minibus operators, whether TD considered that there were any actual improvements.
(iii) Apart from asking the minibus operators to follow up, whether there were any other ways to improve the problem of stop skipping.
198. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) TD had not set a standard for the number of complaints to be considered serious, but TD would take public complaints seriously and follow up with minibus operators.
(ii) The main purpose of follow-up by the minibus operators was to remind drivers to be aware of the presence of passengers at the stops. TD has conducted a survey at the Kwai Tsing Theatre stop to find out if there was any stop skipping, and no such cases were found in the field survey. However, that did not prove that there was no stop skipping at other stops. If more complaints were received at a particular stop, TD would step up efforts to convey the need to pick up passengers at that stop to the minibus operator.
199. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
Discussion on the Service Quality of Minibus Route nos. 86 and 86M in Kwai Tsing District (Proposed by Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah) (TTC Paper No. 12, 12a/D/2021)
200. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 12/D/2021 and added as follows:
(i) He considered that there was a discrepancy between TD’s survey and the actual situation.
(ii) He inquired about the actual date and time of the TD survey.
201. The Chairman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered TD’s data incorrect as GMB route nos. 86 and 86M would
53 Responsible Department travel to Tsuen Wan via Shek Pai Street and Castle Peak Road when the Lei Pui Street terminus was full. Residents of Tai Pak Tin West and East could not take GMB route nos. 86 and 86M in the morning.
(ii) He pointed out that there was a driver of GMB route no. 86M who had a bad attitude and would like TD to take note of it.
202. Mr HON Chun-yin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked TD at what time of the day the survey was conducted and considered that it was unlikely that there would be a bus for 2 to 4 minutes.
(ii) He pointed out that minibuses would change shifts between 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. and that there would be a lot of people waiting at Lei Pui Street on Saturdays and Sundays and at Yeung Uk Road Market at 4 p.m.
203. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) TD would conduct surveys at different dates and times from time to time. The Department would not inform the operators concerned before conducting the surveys, and therefore the operators could not increase the frequency suddenly to cope with the surveys. TD would also continue to conduct field surveys on GMB routes.
(ii) On the issue of drivers’ attitude and stop skipping, TD would ask the operators to remind drivers to be polite to passengers, and would also ask the operators to communicate with drivers strictly and instruct them to follow the established routes.
204. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He hoped that TD would take a hard look at the issues of GMB route nos. 86 and 86M.
(ii) He suggested that TD could observe the arrival of minibuses at different times of the day. Three minibuses would pick up passengers from Lei Pui Street between 8:10 a.m. and 8:40 a.m., pointing out that TD might be right in its observation on the arrival of minibuses at Lei Pui Street in the morning. However, at 10 a.m. at Shek On House station, some
54 Responsible Department elderly people were unable to get on the bus. At 10 p.m. at Lei Pui Street, there were also no minibuses heading towards Tsuen Wan. There were also no minibuses at West Rail Station in the evening for Shek Lei.
205. Mr HON Chun-yin put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that the Shek Lei to Tsuen Wan direction had been a problem for many years.
(ii) He pointed out that GMB route nos. 86, 86M, 83A, 85 and 86A were a package of routes. He inquired about the deployment of vehicles on this package of minibus routes.
206. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny said that he would liaise with the operator concerned on the deployment of vehicles for this package of minibus routes.
Motion: The Traffic and Transport Committee of the Kwai Tsing District Council Strongly Requests the Transport Department to Urge the Operator of Green Minibus Route nos. 90P, 90M and 92M to Improve the Service Quality (Proposed by Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve, seconded by Mr CHOI Nga-man) (TTC Paper No. 13, 13a/D/2021)
207. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 13/D/2021 and added as follows:
(i) He hoped that TD could increase the frequency of route no. 90P after the outbreak.
(ii) The minibus compartments of all three minibus routes were very dirty.
(iii) The last minibus of GMB route no. 92M often left early.
208. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that GMB route no. 90M was mainly used to travel between Lai Kong Street and Lai Yiu Estate in the morning. GMB route no. 92M, which mainly passed through residential areas, would make it difficult for residents along residential areas to travel to and from MTR stations if it was during hospital visiting hours or when hospital staff were getting off duty.
55 Responsible Department
(ii) He asked when TD’s survey was conducted, what the service standards of GMB route nos. 90P, 90M and 92M were during off-peak hours, and how many complaints TD had received about these three minibus routes.
(iii) Whether TD had any knowledge of the commuting hours of hospital staff.
209. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) TD conducted a site survey on 29 January 2021 during the morning peak period, i.e. 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. GMB route no. 90P provided service between Mei Foo and Princess Margaret Hospital(“PMH”). The route had more passengers at the terminus, which might result in longer waiting time for passengers at the intermediate stops. TD would liaise with the relevant operator to balance the demand of passengers at the intermediate and final stops as far as possible.
(ii) TD would also consider appropriate service adjustments to meet passenger demand in a timely manner once the normal operation of PMH had resumed.
210. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that the minibus routes were related to the Lai King Building extension project.
(ii) He inquired why the number of Lai King residents was increased despite the inadequate level of minibus service.
211. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve considered that GMB route no. 90P was not positioned as a general residential minibus but a minibus route to connect to medical facilities, and all people going to PMH would use GMB route no. 90P.
212. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded that he understood that the waiting time for passengers at some intermediate stops might be longer, and TD would liaise with the operator concerned to try to balance the demand of passengers at intermediate stops and termini.
213. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
56 Responsible Department
Motion: Requests for Details of the Service Launch Schedule of Route no. 413’s Low-floor Public Light Bus (Proposed by Miss WONG Pit-man, seconded by Mr SIN Ho-fai and Mr WONG Chun-tat) (TTC Paper No. 14, 14a/D/2021)
214. Miss WONG Pit-man briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 14/D/2021 and asked when the low-floor public light bus on route no. 413 would come into service.
215. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) The operator received a low-floor public light bus on 18 February and was now installing the Octopus machine and would have trial runs on 20 and 21 February. The service was expected to commence in the last week of February.
(ii) The service schedule of the low-floor public light bus was currently planned to run from Monday to Friday and on Saturday mornings at 60-minute intervals. Reservations could be made by calling the operator during office hours. TD would inform Members of the details of the low-floor public light bus service on route no. 413 by circular when they were available.
216. The Chairman suggested that TD should contact Members as soon as the details were available.
217. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung inquired about the availability of the service on Saturday afternoons and Sundays.
218. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) As far as he knew, there were three minibuses on GMB route no. 413, and he inquired whether the operator would have four minibuses to provide service with the addition of the low-floor public light bus.
(ii) He opined that the service of the low-floor public light bus should not affect the existing service as the low-floor public light bus only had 17 seats and there were many people waiting for the minibus during the morning peak hours.
57 Responsible Department 219. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren inquired as follows:
(i) Whether the operator would have three or four minibuses to provide service after the addition of the low-floor public light bus.
(ii) Whether the booking of service would be handled on a first-come-first-served basis.
(iii) He would like TD to contact him when detailed information was available.
220. Miss WONG Pit-man pointed out that GMB route no. 413 had not reached the four minibuses mentioned in the tender within one year. It would be unsatisfactory if the operator only had three minibuses to provide service after the addition of the low-floor public light bus.
221. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that there was a problem of lost trips on GMB route no. 413 and hoped that low-floor public light bus could really run at 60-minute intervals.
(ii) He inquired whether the low-floor public light bus on GMB route no. 413 met the TD’s examination requirements. If other minibus routes to and from the hospital were available, whether the information on GMB route no. 413 could be taken as a reference for setting up low-floor public light buses in future.
222. Mr LAU Chi-kit inquired as follows:
(i) Regarding the booking service, whether it was necessary to pick up passengers at minibus stops.
(ii) Whether it was possible to use the low-floor public light bus if other passengers wished to do so.
(iii) Whether there was sufficient time for the low-floor public light bus to travel the whole route with a 60-minute service, especially during peak hours, and whether there was sufficient time for the low-floor public light bus to return to the terminus.
58 Responsible Department
223. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) Under normal circumstances, a low-floor public light bus could run the whole route within 30 minutes, but as there was only one low-floor public light bus, regular checks might be required.
(ii) The service schedule of the low-floor public light bus was adjusted according to the hospital service hours. Therefore, there was service at 60-minute intervals from Monday to Friday (except public holidays) and service at 60-minute intervals on Saturday mornings (except public holidays), and no service on Saturday afternoons and Sundays. The minibus operator would also adjust the overall GMB route no. 413 service to a 20-minute frequency.
(iii) According to the schedule of minibuses, the minibus operator should use four minibuses to provide service, so four minibuses would be available when the low-floor public light bus was added.
(iv) Reservations were made on a first-come-first-served basis. If there was a reservation, the minibus operator would post a notice on the vehicle that the service had been reserved.
224. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren inquired whether the operator would have three or four minibuses to provide service if there was service at 20-minute intervals.
225. Mr WONG Chun-tat asked if the operator had enough minibuses to provide the service.
226. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung asked if the low-floor public light bus could be put to service on Sundays if it was not in maintenance.
227. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) On the issue of specifications, different models of minibuses would have different specifications, and new models of minibuses would need to pass TD’s Vehicle Type Approval. Minibuses with the same design or model were not required to apply for the Vehicle Type Approval again.
(ii) It would be difficult to run four minibuses at the same time during all
59 Responsible Department hours of the day due to other needs, such as refuelling, driver meal breaks and maintenance.
228. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
(Post-meeting note: The Chairman requested the Secretariat to collect Members’ views on GMB routes and service frequencies after the meeting. The Secretariat issued a letter on 9 March 2021 to collect Members’ views and had forwarded them to the relevant departments. The suggestions would also be discussed at the second TTC meeting.)
Motion: Kwai Tsing District Council Requests MTR to Improve Its Service Quality (Proposed by Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve, Mr SIN Ho-fai and Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren, seconded by Mr CHOI Nga-man) (TTC Paper No. 21, 21a, 21b/D/2021)
229. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 21/D/2021.
230. Miss YIM Yik-huen, Bonnie pointed out that the use of the name Wuhan Pneumonia in the agenda text might be offensive to the public and that the K&T DO and K&T DC Secretariat had to point out that the official name of the disease should be “COVID-2019” according to the World Health Organization. The Secretariat had suggested to the Members concerned to correct the name of the disease before the meeting.
231. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered it unreasonable for the Government to urge the public to sit sparsely on buses during the epidemic while TD approved the bus companies and MTR to reduce the frequency, which in effect packed passengers into the same compartment.
(ii) He inquired about the penalties imposed on MTR in the several incidents.
(iii) He inquired about the reasons for EMSD not attending the meeting.
232. The Chairman pointed out that EMSD did not attend the meeting because the service standard of MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) was outside its scope of work.
60 Responsible Department 233. Mr LAU Chi-kit asked whether MTRCL would carry out improvement works for the additional tracks at Tsing Yi Station to increase the number of train trips from Hong Kong Station to Tsing Yi Station and to increase the frequency in the absence of an epidemic.
234. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren added that some trains would depart from Tsing Yi Station and whether there would be a third track to increase the frequency of the Tung Chung Line.
235. Mr CHAN Yiu-chung, Assistant Public Relations Manager – External Affairs of MTRCL, responded as follows:
(i) MTRCL closely monitored the impact of the outbreak on patronage. During the outbreak, train service during peak hours remained unchanged from the pre-epidemic period. The Tsuen Wan Line maintained a frequency of 2 minutes; the Tung Chung Line maintained a frequency of maximum 3.6 to 4 minutes between Tsing Yi Station and Hong Kong Station. During off-peak hours, the overall patronage of the railway decreased significantly due to the epidemic, and MTRCL adjusted some train services according to the actual situation after careful consideration. During the fourth wave of the epidemic, patronage in December fell by 28% compared to December last year and by 18% compared to November.
(ii) When the epidemic subsided, adjustments would be made to take into account the actual demand for rail services. For example, primary and secondary school students would resume schooling. MTRCL would flexibly deploy railway services according to the actual situation to facilitate the travelling public.
(iii) For the Tung Chung Line on Saturdays and holidays, MTRCL had enhanced the frequency of trains from 10 minutes to 7 minutes during weekdays, weekends and off-peak periods on public holidays since 19 October 2020. Station staff observed that the operation of Tsing Yi Station and Lai King Station during weekends and holidays was normal.
(iv) The capacity of the railway lines was sufficient to cope with the current passenger volume, and the conditions were generally normal. MTRCL would continue to closely monitor the development of the epidemic and train service situation, and adjust train service in a timely manner.
61 Responsible Department
(v) MTRCL apologised for the inconvenience caused to passengers. Regarding the cracks on the Tsuen Wan Line tracks, MTRCL would repair and maintain the tracks. The Tsuen Wan Line was regularly inspected by an ultrasonic track inspection vehicle, and track patrols were carried out regularly. The cracks on the tracks between Tai Wo Hau and Kwai Hing Stations on 3 November were found by the MTRCL during non-traffic hours. The cracks between Mong Kok Station and Prince Edward Station on 29 October was also found during a track inspection by engineering staff. The maintenance team regularly inspected and replaced the rails to ensure that they were in good condition. Cracks were repaired and followed up as soon as they were found.
(vi) MTRCL had conducted a detailed investigation into the Airport Express delay incident. On that day, a non-passenger Airport Express train was running in automatic mode, and the computer data was not properly updated, resulting in the train’s automatic operating system computer not functioning properly. As a result, the train did not stop at the light signal in time, but the automatic train protection system was operating normally. After investigation, it was found that the incident did not affect the safety of traffic on the main track, and MTRCL had taken corresponding measures to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents.
(vii) No information was available on the works of the Tsing Yi Station side-track at the time being. Therefore, the most frequent frequency of the Tung Chung Line was maintained at 3.6 to 4 minutes.
(viii) No information was available on the penalties for the time being. MTRCL would follow up on this.
236. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He opined that MTRCL should not compare the data with that of the same period last year, but with that during the third wave of the epidemic or earlier. Because during the fourth wave of the epidemic, there were fewer people working from home, and some students had started to go to school.
(ii) He considered that the 7-minute frequency of Tung Chung Line was also unacceptable.
62 Responsible Department
(iii) He considered that because of the epidemic, the frequency should be more frequent to keep passengers socially apart.
237. Mr SIN Ho-fai commented that the contingency arrangements during the incident at Tsing Yi Station were confusing, and the instructions for taking the feeder buses were not clear. He hoped that MTRCL would make improvements.
238. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai pointed out that during the second or third wave of the epidemic, the Government had appealed to the public to keep a distance from other passengers on board, but TD approved the bus companies and MTRCL to reduce the frequency, which was considered unreasonable. While MTRCL might have taken the step of cutting the frequency of trains from the perspective of cost-effectiveness, from the perspective of fighting the epidemic, the frequency should be increased so that passengers could keep a proper distance. He considered that MTRCL should fulfil its social responsibility.
239. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) The travel pattern of passengers might change at any time, and many residents reported that many people were already off work at 3 p.m. or 4 p.m.
(ii) He inquired about the actual changes in passenger flow at each time slot and how often a review would be conducted by MTRCL.
(iii) Regarding the arrangement of the incident at Tsing Yi Station, the staff mostly focused on instructing passengers inside the station, but passengers should also be instructed to board feeder buses or other means of transport outside the station, especially in the vicinity of Tsing King Road where it was more difficult for residents to know about the incident at Tsing Yi Station.
240. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve added that during the epidemic period, MTRCL’s schedule was confusing.
241. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren added that when an incident occurred at Tsing Yi Station, especially during the peak hours, there were feeder buses, staff buses and taxis parked outside the MTR station and the arrangement was very confusing.
63 Responsible Department 242. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He suggested that MTRCL should be invited to be a standing member of TTC.
(ii) He suggested that MTRCL should improve the interchange service, e.g. residents of Kwai Shing Circuit had to take minibuses to MTR stations for interchange, and he hoped that MTRCL could provide interchange concessions.
(iii) He asked whether the MTR Fare Savers services could be extended to Kwai Fong Station.
243. The Chairman said that any transport department or contractor was welcome to attend the meeting and the Secretariat would be asked to invite MTRCL to be a standing member.
(Post-meeting note: At the request of the Chairman, the Secretariat had invited MTRCL to send a standing member to attend the TTC meetings on 3 March 2021. MTRCL replied that it would attend the meetings of the DC and its committees to provide information, give reports and listen to Members’ views on matters relating to the operation or new railway projects as necessary.)
244. Mr CHAN Yiu-chung responded as follows:
(i) He took note of Members’ views on the incident arrangements at Tsing Yi Station and would convey them to the relevant colleagues.
(ii) On the issue of frequency, MTRCL would closely monitor the development of the epidemic and the service situation and would gradually adjust the frequency according to the actual needs when the patronage increased. During the fourth wave of the epidemic, there was no particular reduction in frequency, and the situation during non-peak hours was more or less the same as that after the third wave of the epidemic.
(iii) As for interchange concessions, GMB currently offered a minimum discount of $0.3 when interchanging to MTR. MTR Fare Savers was a commercially promoted scheme, and further discussion could be held with Members on the interchange concessions.
64 Responsible Department 245. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) On the issue of train frequency, TD did carry it out in the form of approval. However, colleagues of TD Railway Branch would, from time to time, request MTRCL to submit additional information, e.g. occupancy rate, to review the MTR service during the epidemic.
(ii) TD would work with MTRCL to monitor the service situation of each line to cater for the needs of passengers.
246. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat circulated EMSD’s written reply to the Committee on 5 March 2021 via TTC Circulation Paper No. 8/2021. A written reply from MTRCL was also circulated to the Committee on 18 March 2021 via TTC Circulation Paper No. 17/2021).
247. The Chairman announced that the meeting would continue at 10:00 a.m. on 24 February 2021.
Motion: Kwai Tsing District Council Requests the Transport Department to Review the Arrangement of Bus Stops for Employees’ Service in Tsing Yi District and Relocate Some of the Employees’ Bus Stops Originally at the Tsing Yi Station (Across Exit C) Public Transport Interchange to the Tsing King Road Ground Public Transport Interchange or Other Suitable Locations to Divert the Transport Services from Tsing Yi Station and Reduce the Traffic Flow at the Interchange. (Proposed by Mr SIN Ho-fai, seconded by Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren) (TTC Paper No. 15, 15a/D/2021)
248. Mr SIN Ho-fai briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 15/D/2021. He asked about the criteria for determining the pick-up and drop-off points of staff buses and whether TD had the authority to determine the pick-up and drop-off points of staff buses.
249. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked whether TD had the authority to determine the pick-up and drop-off points for staff buses as Tsing Yi Station Public Transport Interchange (“PTI”) was under private ownership.
(ii) He pointed out that due to illegal parking of vehicles, school buses, staff
65 Responsible Department buses and taxis were picking up passengers at Tsing Yi Station PTI, causing serious traffic congestion during the morning peak hours. Moreover, the drivers’ horns were also affecting the lives of nearby residents.
250. Mr LAU Chi-kit inquired about the criteria adopted by TD in arranging the parking places for coaches or staff buses.
251. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) The sites at the opposite of Tsing Yi Station Exit C and Maritime Square 2, Tsing King Road were both managed by MTRCL. Tsing Yi Station (opposite Exit C) was an MTR transport interchange. MTR staff were authorised to control and direct traffic at the transport interchange. The written reply from MTR pointed out that some vehicles were picking up passengers or parking at unsuitable locations. TD had therefore communicated with MTRCL and requested MTRCL to strengthen its management to reduce the problem of obstruction.
(ii) Maritime Square 2 on Tsing King Road was under a land grant that allowed MTRCL to manage the road. TD had communicated with MTRCL that if there was an application for staff bus service, the applicant would need to obtain written consent from MTRCL before TD would process the application.
(iii) There were some residents’ buses picking up and dropping off passengers at the entrance of Tsing Yi Station opposite Exit C, causing traffic congestion, and TD had reminded the operators to pick up and drop off passengers at suitable locations.
(iv) Residents’ buses or staff buses were required to follow the Schedule of Services. If the Schedule of Services did not indicate that passengers could be picked up and dropped off at the location opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station and at Maritime Square 2 on Tsing King Road, the operator was in breach of its PSL but not the Road Traffic Ordinance. Therefore, he understood that HKPF could not enforce the law in respect of such activities.
(v) TD would investigate whether residents’ or staff buses would pick up or drop off passengers at the location opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station
66 Responsible Department and at Maritime Square 2 on Tsing King Road. If their Schedules of Services were not specified, TD would issue a letter to remind the operator to operate according to the Schedules of Services.
(vi) According to TD’s survey, maybe due to the epidemic, there was no excessive congestion at Exit C of Tsing Yi Station for the time being, but TD would continue to communicate with MTRCL on whether staff buses would be accommodated at other locations.
(vii) The location opposite Tsing Yi Swimming Pool on Tsing King Road was designated as a busy road. If there were applications for residents’ or staff buses, TD would vet them again, but generally speaking, applications for residents’ or staff buses on busy roads would not be approved.
252. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim responded as follows:
(i) He had received complaints that the PTI opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station was a private site, but after HKPF had made enquiries with the Lands Department (“LandsD”), the latter replied that it was a government site. Therefore, HKPF would continue to enforce the law.
(ii) MTRCL had distributed leaflets instructing drivers not to park their vehicles, causing misunderstanding among drivers that HKPF might not be able to enforce the law at that road section. HKPF had communicated with MTRCL not to distribute leaflets. If a vehicle was parked and caused obstruction, HKPF would issue a citation.
253. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that there were taxis and private cars parked at the Maritime Square 2 location and asked if HKPF could arrange regular patrols and enforcement on a daily basis.
(ii) He pointed out that the location opposite Tsing Yi Swimming Pool on Tsing King Road was designated as a busy road, but TD had also approved two staff bus routes to pick up and drop off passengers at that location. He inquired about the reasons for TD’s approval in the first place.
67 Responsible Department 254. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered that the land grant should have specified that the location of the bus stop on the ground floor of Maritime Square 2 and the PTI at ground level belonged to the Government.
(ii) He pointed out that the number of staff bus routes at the PTI opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station in the written replies of TD and MTRCL were not match.
(iii) He pointed out that the traffic at the PTI opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station was very congested in the morning and during peak hours.
255. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that the number of staff bus routes at the PTI opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station in the written replies of TD and MTRCL were not match, and asked whether the staff bus routes not mentioned by MTRCL did not have the written approval of MTRCL.
(ii) TD’s reply was based on the Schedule of Services for residents’ buses or staff buses. He suggested that TD should conduct a site visit and that TD’s written reply did not specify the destination of the staff buses.
(iii) He inquired whether DC members of the concerned constituency would be consulted when approving the pick-up and drop-off of residents’ buses or staff buses at the above location.
(iv) The location opposite Tsing Yi Swimming Pool on Tsing King Road was already very busy, but staff buses were still picking up and dropping off passengers at that location, and he hoped TD would follow up.
256. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) The location opposite Tsing Yi Swimming Pool on Tsing King Road was defined as a busy section a few years ago. Some routes were approved for picking up and dropping off passengers maybe when they were not defined as busy roads. However, when new applications were received, TD would vet them again, and in general, applications for residents’ or staff buses on busy sections would not be approved. However, as the
68 Responsible Department location opposite Tsing Yi Swimming Pool on Tsing King Road was not a restricted area, general vehicles were allowed to pick up and drop off passengers.
(ii) For written consent from MTRCL, TD had informed MTRCL that if there was a new application and the location opposite Exit C of Tsing Yi Station and Maritime Square 2 on Tsing King Road were mentioned in the Schedule of Services, written consent from MTRCL was required. However, for routes approved long ago, he was not known if MTRCL had given any written consent.
(iii) For TD’s written reply, it was difficult to set details out in a table as staff buses departed from multiple origins and had multiple destinations. Therefore, the table was based on the Schedule of Services for residents’ buses or staff buses. TD also sent staff to conduct site inspections during peak hours, i.e. 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. TD would record the bus licence plates and check whether the PSLs were approved to pick up or drop off passengers at the above locations against the Schedule of Services. If not specified in the Schedule of Services, TD would issue a letter to remind the operator to operate in accordance with the Schedule of Services.
(iv) TD had communicated with LandsD that the ownership of Tsing King Road belonged to the Government, but the management and maintenance responsibility was with MTRCL.
(v) The franchised bus terminus on the first floor of Maritime Square 2 was under discussion to be handed back to the Government, but this could not be done in a short time as various government departments would have to review it again.
257. The Chairman asked if TD would review the pick-up and drop-off locations for routes that had been approved a long time ago.
258. Mr HO Ka-fai responded that reviewing the pick-up and drop-off locations of the routes would be one of the options to be considered for improvement.
259. Mr SIN Ho-fai requested TD to submit the Schedule of Services for the residents’ buses and staff buses at 3 locations.
69 Responsible Department 260. The Chairman asked TD to issue a clearer paper to Members after the meeting.
261. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim responded that additional staff would be deployed to prosecute and that HKPF had prosecuted vehicles parked illegally at taxi stands.
262. The Chairman asked if the taxi could be towed without a driver but parked illegally.
263. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim responded that more manpower would be required for towing, but HKPF would step up enforcement.
264. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
(Post-meeting note: A written reply from MTRCL was circulated to the Committee on 9 March 2021 via TTC Circulation Paper No. 9/2021. The Secretariat also circulated TD’s written reply to the Committee on 12 March 2021 via TTC Circulation Paper No. 12/2021.)
Requests the Transport Department to Reply Concerning the Follow-up Actions on the Traffic in the Expansion of Lai King Building in the Princess Margaret Hospital (Proposed by Mr CHOI Nga-man) (TTC Paper No. 16, 16a/D/2021)
265. Mr CHOI Nga-man briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 16/D/2021.
266. Mr LI Hok-lai, Matthew, Engineer/ District Facilities of TD, responded as follows:
(i) Regarding the widening of Lai Kong Street and Lai Chi Ling Road and the introduction of buses running pass Lai King Building after widening, both Lai Kong Street and Lai Chi Ling Road were currently two-lane two-way roads, and the slopes alongside the roads and existing developments had restricted the space for widening the roads concerned. Some of the road junctions, such as Lai Kong Street/Lai Chi Ling Road, Lai Chi Ling Road/Lim Cho Street and Lai Chi Ling Road/Wah Yiu Road, had a high gradient, and the vertical gradient of the road junctions would have to be raised if widening works were to be carried out, posing a safety hazard. Therefore, the roads could not be widened.
70 Responsible Department (ii) On the proposals for the hillside escalator and lift tower, TD commenced a consultancy study in December 2017 to review and improve the assessment mechanism for the hillside escalator system proposal. A total of 114 proposals covering hillside escalator systems in Hong Kong received in the past were first examined, screened and prioritised by the study consultants. The proposals for hillside escalator systems in Kwai Tsing were assessed under the revised assessment mechanism, and the proposals for hillside escalator systems from Castle Peak Road – Kwai Chung Section to Wah Sing Street (No. NTW10) and from Tai Pak Tin Street near Kam Shek Building to Shek Yam Road (No. NTW11) were considered more effective. According to the assessment of the consultancy study, the estimated daily patronage and the proportion of population aged 65 or above in the beneficiary areas of these two proposals were also higher than other proposals in the district.
(iii) In response to Members’ enquiries on the four hillside lift escalator proposals in the Lai King area, i.e. NTW04, NTW05, NTW06 and NTW09, the proposal No. NTW06 was one of the 18 hillside escalator system projects ranked under the original assessment mechanism established in 2009 and was being taken forward in accordance with the public works procedures. As for the other three proposals (i.e. NTW04, NTW05 and NTW09), they were not included in the first batch of projects after scoring and ranking based on the assessment of the proposals by the consultant. TD took note of Members’ views and would re-assess and follow up in due course together with other proposals not included in the first batch of projects and new proposals received.
267. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) At present, there were five GMB routes running from Lai Kong Street to Lai King Station, Mei Foo Station, Kwai Fong Station, Tsuen Wan and Sham Shui Po, and the service coverage was adequate.
(ii) In view of the PMH Lai King Building extension project, TD had discussed with the transport consultant of the Hospital Authority (“HA”) the additional passenger demand changes arising from the extension project and would consider adjusting the existing GMB service in due course. TD would liaise closely with HA to study the transport needs, patterns and arrangements of staff and visitors of the hospital concerned
71 Responsible Department with a view to coordinating with the operators to provide efficient public transport services.
268. Mr SIN Chung-kai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that of the views mentioned in TTC Paper No. 16/D/2021, only the hillside escalator system No. NTW06 was being taken forward, and the other proposals were not accepted. He asked whether TD considered that the existing traffic problems and those after the building expansion could be solved by using existing services.
(ii) He inquired about TD’s solution to the traffic problems after the building expansion.
269. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He inquired how the transport support would cope with the people visiting the patients after the expansion of Lai King Building in the future.
(ii) He pointed out that the ramp from Lim Cho Street to Lai Chi Ling Road and the interchange might be able to be two-lane and two-way, as there were other roads in Hong Kong that were steeper and could be two-lane and two-way. He inquired whether it could be opened for buses of shorter length and whether trial runs had been conducted.
(iii) He expressed disappointment that the proposals for lifts and pedestrian walkway systems had not been included. The traffic construction and infrastructure planning of Lai King indicated that there was not enough population support in Lai King. However, there were many elderly people and residents in Lai King who needed to use the transport infrastructure.
270. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that Lai King Building was planned to be expanded, and the transport support should be expedited. He suggested that TD should study the three lift and pedestrian walkway system proposals as soon as possible.
72 Responsible Department (ii) Regarding the minibus routes, he inquired whether the contractor would have resources to increase the number of minibuses after the Lai King Building expansion in the future. He opined that TD should plan ahead.
271. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) The consultancy report pointed out that buses no. 46X could be taken to Lai King Building, but buses no. 46X only reached Lai King Station, and there was no low-floor public light bus nearby, which was very inconvenient for wheelchair users. Besides, the minibus stop and taxi stand were located on a sloping road, which was problematic for wheelchair users to board.
(ii) The Town Planning Board (“TPB”) had endorsed a limited widening of the road, but HA replied that it was designed internally for the convenience of the public, and there was no change in the traffic condition outdoors.
(iii) He asked how the traffic congestion problem would be solved after the completion of the Lai King Building expansion when there would be an increase in the number of staff who had to work shifts and visitors.
272. Mr LI Hok-lai, Matthew responded as follows:
(i) Regarding the three non-included proposals for a hillside elevator system, i.e. hillside elevator systems No. NTW04, NTW05 and NTW09, TD would assess and follow up the non-included proposals and the new proposals in accordance with the revised assessment mechanism in due course after the first batch of projects had been rolled out, subject to the allocation of available resources, but there was no timetable at present.
(ii) Regarding whether the current road design allowed buses to run on the road, as there was a ten-metre length restriction in the Lai King Hill area, vehicles had to cross the existing double white lines or go onto the pavement when running on the road, posing a potential danger to other road users. The existing slopes and developments on both sides of the road made widening of Lai Kong Street and Lai Chi Ling Road technically infeasible.
(iii) On the issue of vertical gradient, the existing road design standards
73 Responsible Department restricted the gradient at which buses could be driven. Therefore, the new road section to be constructed would need to follow the new road design standards. After TD reviewed the relevant road section, widening works could not be carried out for the time being.
273. Mr SIN Chung-kai inquired as follows:
(i) What TD’s solutions to the traffic problems after the building expansion were.
(ii) Whether the hillside escalator system could tie in with the completion of the building, and he asked whether there was a specific timetable.
274. Mr LI Hok-lai, Matthew responded that the hillside escalator systems No. NTW04, NTW05 and NTW09 were not included in the first batch of projects, but it did not mean that they would not be included in the future. However, there was no timetable at the moment.
275. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that even with the ten-metre length restriction, TD could still approve buses to run. He cited the example that bus route no. 51 could also run on the very steep road of Route Twisk and asked why buses could not be allowed to run around Lai King.
(ii) He asked when the hillside escalator system No. NTW06 could be built and whether it could tie in with the expansion of Lai King Building. Moreover, the uphill escalator system No. NTW06 would not be of much help in diverting passengers to Lai King Building.
276. The Chairman asked whether TD would have corresponding transport facilities after the expansion of Lai King Building.
277. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman commented that TD, HyD and HA had not taken into account Members’ views. He suggested TD, HyD, HA and Members going on a site visit near Lai King Building to study the options for the Lai King Building expansion and the possibility of reserving space for taxi stands and minibus stops in the Lai King Building area.
278. Mr LI Hok-lai, Matthew responded as follows:
74 Responsible Department (i) The length of franchised buses currently permitted to run on some suitable roads in the vicinity of Lai King Hill was relatively short. TD would explore with the bus companies on the feasibility of opening up the local section of Lai King Hill to buses of shorter length.
(ii) He would further discuss with his TD colleagues on the site visit.
279. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) Regarding the minibus stop outside Lai King Building, TD had discussed with HA on the expansion plan and reserved a location at the entrance of the hospital for public transport, including GMB, to pick up and drop off passengers. Wheelchair users could also make use of the rehabus service to access Lai King Building.
(ii) Regarding the GMB service after the expansion of Lai King Building, during the morning peak hours, most of the Lai King residents travelled in the direction towards the MTR station, while most of the staff or visitors of Lai King Building travelled in the opposite direction, so it might not have much impact on the existing residents.
(iii) TD also conducted a survey on the demand for GMB services during off-peak hours. During the off-peak period on 23 February this year, the average occupancy rate of GMB route nos. 90M (Lai Kong Street to Mei Foo) and 91A (Lai Kong Street to Kwai Fong) was 30% to 40% when they reached the Lok Yiu House sub-station, and 50% to 60% after picking up and dropping off passengers at the intermediate station. Although passenger demand for GMB had been reduced due to the epidemic, recent field surveys indicated that there was still room for more passengers on GMB services. TD had met with the operator, and the latter indicated that it would adjust the minibus service accordingly if passenger demand increased in the future.
280. Mr SIN Chung-kai put forth opinions as follows:
(i) He pointed out that TD would need to take into account the shift situation of hospital staff.
(ii) He hoped that TD could arrange a trial run of 10.4-metre buses at Lai King with the participation of the Members concerned. He cited that
75 Responsible Department double-decker buses could also run in the mid-levels of Hong Kong Island.
(iii) He suggested that TD, HyD, HA and Members should conduct a site visit together to study how to solve the traffic problems after the Lai King Building expansion.
281. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai asked whether the contractors of the five minibus routes had promised to purchase more minibuses and increase the frequency in the future if passenger demand increased.
282. Mr WONG Tin-yan pointed out that even though the contractors had promised to increase the frequency, the minibus service was not regulated and the quality of service varied, and that the minibus service should not be relied on.
283. Mr CHOI Nga-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He considered that the rehabus service was not feasible as there were already many people at the stop.
(ii) He inquired whether the hillside escalator systems No. NTW04, NTW05 and NTW09 would be included in the timetable.
(iii) He would like to have a more detailed report on the occupancy rate of minibuses.
(iv) He would like to take a site visit together with other departments on the traffic situation near Lai King Building.
284. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) Members of the public could book the rehabus service. For details, he could contact Members after the meeting.
(ii) Regarding the situation of hospital staff working shifts, TD was discussing with HA on whether staff bus service would be provided by the hospital to avoid competition between hospital staff and residents for minibus service and to meet the demand of hospital staff efficiently.
(iii) Regarding the situation of GMB, TD conducted the surveys at different
76 Responsible Department times of the day. TD could also conduct a more comprehensive survey after the outbreak.
285. The Chairman said that a site visit to the design of Lai King Building and the traffic situation in the vicinity with Members and relevant departments could be arranged by the DO after the meeting.
Motion: The Kwai Tsing District Council Requests the Government to Increase Charging Stations for Electric Vehicles (EVs) in the District and to Require Sufficient Charging Stations to Be Provided in Newly Built Public and Private Housing, Government Car Parks and On-street Parking Spaces in Order to Tackle the Significant Increase in EVs (Proposed by Mr SIN Ho-fai, seconded by Mr WONG Chun-tat and Miss WONG Pit-man) (TTC Paper No. 17, 17a/D/2021)
286. Mr SIN Ho-fai briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 17/D/2021 and supplemented it with the following information:
(i) He decried the Environmental Protection Department (“EPD”) for not attending the meeting.
(ii) He inquired about TD’s role in increasing the number of charging stations for electric vehicles (“EVs”) in the district.
287. The Chairman asked whether TD would provide more charging stations in car parks and open parking spaces.
288. Mr NG Ho-leung, Jacky, Engineer/ Tsing Yi of TD, responded that TD would actively communicate and cooperate with EPD and had no information to add initially.
289. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He expressed disappointment that EPD did not attend the meeting.
(ii) He pointed out that Mainland China had planned to mainstream EVs by 2030. He pointed out that Hong Kong was lagging behind in the development of EVs, and the Government did not seem to have made much effort to promote the development of EVs.
77 Responsible Department 290. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that the charging speed of standard charging stations was very slow.
(ii) There were thirty-four fast-speed public EV charging spaces in Kwai Tsing District, but they were not evenly distributed, with Kwai Chung Shopping Centre and Gold Peak Building having ten spaces each, while other government car parks only provided a few medium-speed and fast-speed charging spaces. He pointed out that the lack of sufficient charging spaces would discourage the public from purchasing EVs.
(iii) The new public housing project near Lai King Hill Road had only 17 parking spaces and no standard charger for EVs, which would not attract the public to buy EVs.
291. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren pointed out that Hong Kong would not be able to achieve universal access to EVs without increasing the number of on-street charging facilities. The government authority had initially selected 10 on-street parking spaces for the installation of charging facilities, but only 6 met the requirements and were assessed for feasibility. He asked when the trial scheme for the installation of charging facilities would end and whether a detailed report could be provided upon completion of the scheme. He pointed out that the 6 sites were not located in Kwai Tsing District, and he was not sure how the development of EVs in Kwai Tsing District would be promoted.
292. Mr SIN Ho-fai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that at the end of last year, there were over 18,000 EVs in Hong Kong, but only about 3,000 charging spaces. He pointed out that it took longer to build an EV charging space than to purchase an EV and considered that the development of EVs in Hong Kong was lagging behind.
(ii) He asked if TD had a timetable for increasing the number of medium-speed chargers for public EVs in Kwai Fong Multistorey Garage.
(iii) He considered it unreasonable that only standard charging spaces were provided in new public housing projects. He suggested that charging
78 Responsible Department spaces at medium speed or above should be provided in new public housing projects.
293. Miss WONG Pit-man put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) She inquired about the timetable and implementation of charging spaces for EVs.
(ii) She pointed out that the Government’s environmental protection measures had always been lagging behind.
294. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai pointed out that there was a lack of charging spaces for EVs in the housing estates in Kwai Tsing and suggested increasing the number of charging spaces in housing estates and on-street car parks.
295. Mr NG Kim-sing pointed out that the Government had discussed waiving the First Registration Tax for EVs in the past, but not at present. He commented that the Government could enhance the development of EVs.
296. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung pointed out that the current EV charging spaces might not be sufficient for future development. He thought the Government should plan early, as the slow-speed charging spaces might not be able to meet the development of EVs in the future.
297. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) In the past, the Government had proposed to introduce electric taxis, but this could not be achieved due to the lack of charging spaces. In the early years, the Government said that it would promote the setting up of a charging system for EVs in government properties, but there were only 3 fast-speed charging spaces in Kwai Chung Estate in Kwai Tsing District.
(ii) If HD or the Housing Authority thought that people living in public housing estates were grassroots and should not have private cars, and did not seriously increase the number of charging spaces for EVs, this thinking was backward. That was because a large number of electric trucks would be launched in the coming year by domestic and foreign manufacturers. The Government should prepare for the development of EVs as early as possible. Government properties should have enough charging spaces for future use.
79 Responsible Department
298. Mr NG Ho-leung, Jacky responded that he took note of Members’ views and TD would actively communicate and work with EPD. He was informed that EPD was conducting pilot projects in other districts, and TD would actively cooperate with EPD and keep an open mind to negotiate with EPD.
299. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman asked when the results of the EPD study would be available. He hoped that the department would come to the DC to explain the findings of the study and what could be done to improve in Kwai Tsing District.
300. The Committee unanimously endorsed the motion.
(Post-meeting note: A written reply from EPD was circulated to the Committee on 9 March 2021 via TTC Circulation Paper No. 10/2021.)
Follow-up on the Works of the Lift Tower Connecting Hing Shing Road to Kwai Shing Circuit in Kwai Chung (Proposed by Mr NG Kim-sing and Mr TONG Ho-man) (TTC Paper No. 18, 18a /D/2021)
301. Mr NG Kim-sing briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 18/D/2021 and asked if the current works could be completed by April this year.
302. Mr TONG Ho-man said that residents often asked about the progress of the lift works. He inquired about the reasons for the delay.
303. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He had contacted the contractor and the consulting company in December last year, and the reply was that the lift installation was expected to be completed in February this year, and the next step was the bridge deck equipment installation. According to HyD’s current reply, the completion of the works would be delayed.
(ii) Last year, the contractor had problems with wage arrears and insufficient funds to purchase construction materials. He inquired whether the funding problem had been resolved.
304. The Chairman asked if EMSD had inspected and accepted the lift.
80 Responsible Department 305. Ms CHOW Hoi-yi, District Engineer/ Kwai Tsing (E) of HyD, responded as follows:
(i) HyD was now aiming to open the lift for public use by the end of April this year at the earliest.
(ii) The lift installation works were being carried out by the contractor, and EMSD had not inspected and accepted the lift yet.
306. The Chairman believed that the works could not be completed in April as scheduled, and would like HyD to report regularly on the progress of the works.
307. Mr NG Kim-sing pointed out that HyD’s reply was that the lift was expected to be open for public use by the end of April this year at the earliest. The remaining works outside the lift tower, including the retaining wall to the west of the lift tower, the associated drainage connections and cable laying, were expected to be completed by the end of April this year to coincide with the opening of the lift for public use. He would like HyD to inform him of the exact date of completion of the works.
308. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman hoped that HyD, the consulting company, the contractor and the Members concerned would conduct a site visit to keep track of the actual progress of the works.
309. Ms CHOW Hoi-yi responded that she would inform the relevant colleagues to meet the Members concerned for a site visit.
310. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan hoped that the works could be completed as soon as possible as the lift works had been postponed several times and the traffic situation at Kwai Shing Circuit had not improved.
311. The Chairman suggested HyD informing the consulting company and the contractor to follow up on the progress of the works by liaising closely with Members.
Follow-up on the New Pedestrian Crossing at the Junction of Hing Fong Road and Tai Wo Hau Road in Kwai Fong and the Serious Delay in the Current Construction Works (Proposed by Mr NG Kim-sing and Mr TONG Ho-man) (TTC Paper No. 19, 19a, 19b /D/2021)
312. Mr NG Kim-sing briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 19/D/2021 and pointed out
81 Responsible Department that the existing traffic light signal at the junction of Hing Fong Road and Tai Wo Hau Road required pedestrians to press the traffic light signal before the green pedestrian crossing could be activated. TD did not inform DC members of the traffic signal arrangement.
313. Mr LO Chun-hin responded as follows:
(i) TD, together with HyD, inspected the site on 26 January 2021 together with the relevant Member.
(ii) TD had switched the pedestrian signal to automatic mode during two periods during daytime (i.e. 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.) with effect from 27 January 2021, and the “green man” light would be automatically illuminated according to the pre-set traffic signal sequence to facilitate pedestrians to cross the road. TD would continue to monitor the operation of the traffic light at the above junction and adjust the signal timings according to the traffic conditions if necessary.
(iii) He said that he would communicate with Members in advance if there were changes to the traffic signals next time.
314. The Chairman asked why people had to press the button to cross the road before 10:30 a.m.
315. Mr LO Chun-hin said that the information was not available at the moment, and he would check with colleagues in the Traffic Lights Unit, but he believed it was designed to balance pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
316. Mr LAU Chi-kit pointed out that many people avoided touching objects due to the epidemic and asked if the pedestrian light could be switched to the automatic mode in the morning, and whether pedestrians were required to press the button to cross the road at busy road sections.
317. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He said that it was the first time he heard that pedestrians had to press the traffic light to cross the road, and he only knew that pressing the traffic light would make the green light turn on faster.
(ii) He asked TD which other pedestrian lights in Kwai Tsing District
82 Responsible Department required pedestrians to press the traffic light to cross the road.
318. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He pointed out that at the junction of Hing Fong Road and Tai Wo Hau Road, pedestrians often waited for others to press the traffic light controller button.
(ii) He pointed out that TD’s traffic light controller had three modes, including: pushing the button to cross the road, automatic mode, and extending the traffic light signal with an elder Octopus. He inquired about the criteria for using the different traffic light controller modes.
(iii) As many people were avoiding contact with objects due to the current epidemic, he suggested that the Government could consider using non-contact buttons.
319. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin pointed out that he did not understand why TD did not send the relevant staff to respond to Members directly on the issue and considered the approach unsatisfactory.
320. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He asked why TD had to change the mode of the traffic light controller.
(ii) The notice on the change from automatic mode to requiring pedestrians to press the traffic light controller to activate the green pedestrian crossing lights was not posted until requested by Members, and the public was required to press the traffic light controller during the epidemic. He considered these measures unreasonable.
(iii) He asked whether TD had changed the mode of the traffic light controller at the road junction because of the Pilot Adaptive Traffic Signal System. He observed that the road section was not very busy.
321. Mr NG Kim-sing put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He understood that there were some road sections where people could not cross the road unless they pressed the traffic light controller, but basically very few people would cross the road on those sections. However, the
83 Responsible Department junction of Tai Wo Hau Road and Hing Fong Road was used by many people, and he inquired about the reasons for changing the mode to that of the traffic light controller and also wanted to know the criteria for using the different light controllers.
(ii) For the works concerned, HyD had arranged a trial run, but it was unsuccessful. He inquired when the trial run could be conducted again, or the works could commence.
322. Ms NG Wai-ki, District Engineer/ Kwai Tsing (W) of HyD, responded on the progress of the works that the temporary traffic arrangement had been revised in February this year and a trial run would be arranged again after the approval was granted. HyD would start the works as soon as the trial run was successful and the temporary traffic arrangement and road opening application were approved.
323. Mr LO Chun-hin responded that he took note of Members’ views and would communicate with his colleagues in the Traffic Lights Unit and provide additional information after the meeting.
324. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman said that TD had not responded to the reasons for changing the mode of traffic light controller.
325. The Chairman would like TD to provide the information as soon as possible after the meeting.
(Post-meeting note: TD added that there were about 60 junctions in Kwai Tsing District where pedestrians were required to push the button to activate the “green man” light signal. Generally speaking, at junctions with high traffic flow and low pedestrian flow, the lights were designed in push-button mode, and the “green man” light would only come on after pedestrians pushed the button so as to allow more traffic to pass through the junction; otherwise, the automatic mode was more appropriate. As for the extension of the green flashing pedestrian light for the elderly and persons with disabilities, it would generally be installed closer to locations where the elderly or persons with disabilities travelled more frequently and where there was no heavy traffic so as to avoid traffic congestion.
The new signalised pedestrian crossing at the junction of Hing Fong Road and Tai Wo Hau Road was the longest pedestrian crossing at the junction. To allow sufficient time for pedestrians to cross Hing Fong Road safely, it was necessary to extend the duration of the “green man” light. However, as the junction had a relatively high volume of
84 Responsible Department traffic and a relatively low volume of pedestrians, in order not to disrupt the traffic flow and cause traffic congestion by extending the green pedestrian signal, the signal control had been changed to button-pushing to activate the “green man” signal so as to allow more traffic to pass through the junction.
The junction had now been switched to the automatic mode during the two daytime periods (i.e. 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.) with effect from 27 January 2021, whereby the “green man” signal was automatically activated according to the pre-set traffic light sequence to further facilitate pedestrians. TD had inspected the operation of the traffic lights at the intersection in early March 2021 and the intersection was operating well according to the observation. TD would continue to monitor the operation of the traffic signals at the junction and, if necessary, adjust the timing of the automatic mode to suit the actual traffic conditions and the needs of pedestrians crossing the road.)
Requests to Add Regular Bus Service Travelling Directly from Kwai Fong to Yuen Long (Proposed by Mr NG Kim-sing and Mr TONG Ho-man) (TTC Paper No. 20, 20a /D/2021)
326. Mr NG Kim-sing briefly introduced TTC Paper No. 20/D/2021.
327. Mr TONG Ho-man asked why the terminus of bus route no. 68M could not be extended from Tsuen Wan Station to Kwai Fong Bus Terminus. He pointed out that the proposal had also been raised by the Yuen Long District Council (“YLDC”).
328. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He agreed that a new regular bus service between Kwai Fong and Yuen Long should be added.
(ii) He suggested that bus route nos. 69M, 265M or 269M could be routed via Yuen Long before running to Tin Shui Wai, depending on their capacity.
(iii) He had reservations about the proposed extension of bus route no. 68M to the Kwai Fong area. As the capacity of bus route no. 68M was very high during peak hours, the bus company might need to increase the frequency if it was to be extended to Kwai Fong.
85 Responsible Department 329. Mr WONG Ka-chun, Danny responded as follows:
(i) In considering the addition of bus routes or modification of existing routes, relevant factors such as the existing public transport network, level of public transport services, passenger demand, patronage of new routes, possible traffic load and use of resources should be taken into account. If existing routes were to be extended, the impact on existing passengers should be taken into account. Some routes were already carrying a very high level of passengers, and extension of existing routes would lengthen the travel time of existing passengers and result in a reduction in service levels.
(ii) Given the limited road and transport resources in Hong Kong, the public could make use of the interchange arrangements for public transport to optimise the use of resources, thereby enhancing the operational efficiency of public transport services.
(iii) He took note of Members’ suggestion of route rationalisation for certain routes with low patronage, and TD would further study with the bus companies.
330. Ms WONG Peggy, Assistant Manager (Planning & Development) of The Kowloon Motor Bus Co. (1933) Ltd (“KMB”), responded that KMB noted Members’ wish to introduce new regular bus services between Kwai Fong and Yuen Long. This included extending the service of bus route no. 68M to Kwai Fong and adjusting the routes of bus route nos. 69M, 265M or 269M. However, the change of routes would involve additional resources and would result in congestion as the buses passed through Yuen Long town centre. KMB would need to carefully assess the resource requirement, journey time and impact on frequency stability of the proposals. KMB would continue to liaise with TD and relevant stakeholders.
331. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung pointed out that the only bus route from Kwai Tsing and Tsuen Wan areas to Yuen Long was bus route no. 68M. Although interchanges could be made at Tai Lam Tunnel, the choices between the two directions were unbalanced. That was because passengers from Kwai Tsing and Tsuen Wan areas could interchange to many Kowloon routes when they went to Yuen Long. However, only bus route no. 68M was available to Tsuen Wan in the area of Castle Peak Road (Yuen Long). He considered that if the bus company had the resources, it should balance the demand of passengers from both directions and divert passengers from Yuen Long to Tsuen Wan.
86 Responsible Department
332. Mr NG Kim-sing asked KMB and TD whether they had any data on passengers taking bus route no. 68M and interchanging to bus route nos. 69M, 265M or 269M to travel between Yuen Long and Kwai Chung during peak hours.
333. Ms WONG Peggy said that she would prepare the relevant data after the meeting.
(Post-meeting note: After the meeting, KMB added that according to the statistics in mid-February this year, the average daily patronage of route no. 68M (Yuen Long West to Tsuen Wan), interchanging to route nos. 69M, 265M or 269M to Kwai Fong was about 600.)
Information Papers Kwai Tsing District Traffic Accident Report (October-November 2020) (TTC Circulation Paper No. 2/2021)
334. Members took note of the paper.
Projects and Timetables of Major Traffic Improvement Works Completed in the Past Two Months, In Progress or to be Commenced in Six Months by the Highways Department (TTC Circulation Paper No. 3/2021)
335. Mr HUI Kei-cheung followed up on Project No. TW/18/02176, which showed an expected completion date of November 2019. He pointed out that it was now 2021 and asked about the progress of the works.
336. Ms NG Wai-ki responded as follows:
(i) The trenching works for Project No. TW/18/02176 had been completed, but when the inspection of the underground traffic signal ducts for the proposed improvement works was subsequently carried out, it was found that most of the underground ducts were blocked. A temporary traffic arrangement was submitted to clean the ducts, but that caused traffic congestion during implementation, and the duct cleaning could not be carried out. HyD and TD subsequently discussed the proposed design of the improvement works to take into account the condition of the underground traffic signal pipes and the traffic constraints on site. The original design was eventually revised by TD to reduce the area of the
87 Responsible Department altered crossing. HyD also discussed the changes with the Members concerned prior to TD’s revised design.
(ii) HyD conducted a traffic assessment of the proposed improvement works last year and recently submitted the latest temporary traffic arrangements for the main works and received positive comments from TD and HKPF on the traffic arrangements. However, HyD was exploring the possibility of modifying the area to be enclosed by the works as there were comments that the works would reduce the width of the road. If the changes were accepted by the authorities concerned, the works could be implemented as soon as possible.
337. Mr HUI Kei-cheung pointed out that blockage of underground ducts was a common problem in works. He asked why there was no timetable for the works, and the process had not been reported to the DC.
338. Ms NG Wai-ki responded that temporary traffic arrangements needed to be approved before the works could commence and that positive feedback had been received on the temporary traffic arrangements for the main works, and she hoped that the works could commence within this year.
339. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim responded that the road works were undertaken by the New Territories South Traffic and Road Works Unit. Generally speaking, HKPF would grant a permit as soon as possible after the contractor had submitted an application and the plans were approved to comply with the temporary traffic regulations. He pointed out that HKPF would reply to the contractor’s application as soon as possible.
340. The Chairman inquired as follows:
(i) Whether HyD needed a works permit to carry out the works.
(ii) Some Members were of the view that the works had been running for two years but had not been completed, which was too long, and would like the Department to give an explanation.
341. Ms NG Wai-ki responded as follows:
(i) The trenching works for Project No. TW/18/02176 were completed, but when the underground traffic signal ducts were subsequently inspected for the proposed improvement works, it was found that most of the
88 Responsible Department underground ducts were blocked. A temporary traffic arrangement was submitted to clean the underground pipes using high-pressure water tankers. However, this caused traffic congestion during implementation, and therefore the ducts could not be cleaned at that time.
(ii) HyD revised its original plan to change the cleaning works from daytime to night-time. It also discussed with TD the feasibility of revising the design of the proposed improvement works, i.e. if the crossing at Wang Wah Building did not need to be altered, the cleaning of the underground ducts would not be arranged.
(iii) Following TD’s revision of the original design last year, HyD submitted a temporary traffic arrangement and met with the relevant authorities to discuss the temporary traffic arrangement, during which HyD was requested to conduct a traffic assessment for the project. HyD completed the traffic assessment at the end of last year and revised the temporary traffic arrangements according to the results of the traffic assessment, with a view to commencing the works as soon as possible.
342. Mr HUI Kei-cheung hoped that the three departments would approve and commence the works under Project No. TW/18/02176 as soon as possible.
343. Mr WONG Bing-kuen put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) In 2016, TD and HyD carried out improvement works to the crossing system at the junction of Tai Wo Hau Road and Texaco Road, but there was a part of the pavement where the pedestrian crossing light would not turn green when all the vehicles were stopped, so the residents could not cross the road. He had asked TD to make improvements and TD had agreed.
(ii) He pointed out that HyD should give definite answers regarding the works. He suggested inviting Mr CHOW Kai-hang, Daniel of TD Tsuen Wan to attend the TTC meetings.
344. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai expressed concern about the works under Project No. TW/18/02176. He asked if HyD could submit the revised proposal to the DC and what the specific timeframe would be. He would like to have a written reply from HyD.
345. The Chairman asked whether the works could not commence during
89 Responsible Department construction due to traffic obstruction. He suggested Members submitting an agenda on the relevant item and discuss it at the next meeting.
346. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai suggested that if HyD had a design plan before the next meeting, it could submit it in advance.
347. Mr WONG Bing-kuen put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) For Serial No. 111 on the improvement to the bus stop at Tai Wo Hau Road near Tai Wo Hau Estate Playground No. 7, he inquired about the content of the project.
(ii) For Serial No. 127 on the works for the trial run of the widening of the pavement on Tai Ha Street, he pointed out that TD might have reduced the traffic flow there due to the epidemic, and therefore the details of the project were to be decided. However, now that the epidemic had subsided and traffic flow had started to resume, he asked when the project would commence.
348. Mr LO Chun-hin responded that for the works for the trial run of the widening of the pavement on Tai Ha Street, the Department hoped that the project would be tested first to simulate the traffic conditions after the road was widened in future. Now that the fourth wave of the epidemic had started to subside, TD would discuss with HyD to arrange the road trial as soon as the traffic was almost back to normal. He would also communicate with Members when a date had been set.
349. Ms NG Wai-ki responded that TD would provide an estimated schedule of works after discussion with HyD.
350. Ms CHOW Hoi-yi responded that the project under Serial No. 111 was to include road traffic markings at the bus stop at Sheung Kok Street.
351. Mr LAU Chi-kit asked about the works of Project No. NW/20/02618 that when the works on adding yellow grids would commence.
352. Mr NG Ho-leung, Jacky responded that TD was liaising with HyD and expected to start construction in the fourth quarter.
353. Mr LAU Chi-kit asked whether it would be postponed to the fourth quarter as the third quarter was shown in the paper.
90 Responsible Department
354. Ms CHOW Hoi-yi responded that the works of Project No. NW/20/02618 queried by the Member was a shadow line modification and not works to add yellow grids.
355. The Chairman asked TD and HyD to contact the relevant Member after the meeting regarding the works of Project No. NW/20/02618.
356. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) It was regarding Serial No. 54 on the improvement of road markings, traffic signs and installation of roadside bollards at Lai King Hill Road near Lai Chi Kok Bay Garden. The works involved a greengrocer’s shop. When the shop knew that yellow grids and yellow lines would be added to that location, he expressed dissatisfaction that this would affect his unloading of goods. He hoped that HKPF would pay more attention to the location and pointed out that the shop had been occupying the location for a long time.
(ii) Regarding Serial No. 116 on the improvement of road markings at Lai King Hill Road near Lai Chi Kok Bay Garden, he hoped that the works would be taken forward as soon as possible as the illegal parking situation at Lai King was very serious and the addition of yellow lines would improve the problem of illegal parking.
357. Mr TSANG Yiu-tim responded that he would refer the suggestion to the Cheung Sha Wan Division.
358. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He inquired about the content and plans of the relevant works of the projects under Serial No. 89, 111 and 115 and wished to clarify the locations.
(ii) He hoped that HyD could communicate with the DC members of the concerned constituency for future works involving the district.
359. Mr CHEUNG Kwan-kiu, Steve suggested that the works projects in the paper could be more detailed or that the content of the works could be communicated with Members beforehand.
91 Responsible Department
360. The Chairman suggested that the information on road traffic markings could be improved by adding what kind of markings, e.g. disabled markings, bus stop markings, pedestrian crossing markings, etc. He suggested that TD or HyD could contact Members with future improvement works.
361. Mr WONG Bing-kuen gave the example of Serial No. 111 and pointed out that the location marked by HyD in the paper was not clear.
362. The Chairman would like the Department to contact the relevant Members after the meeting. If there were future works, he would like the Department to inform Members by email.
Any Other Business
363. The Chairman received an extempore motion as follows:
Extempore Motion: To Oppose the Reduction in Service and Fare Increase of Minibus Route nos. 405 and 407 and to Request TD to Review and Restructure the Minibus Services (Proposed by Mr HON Chun-yin and Mr KWOK Tsz-kin, seconded by Miss LEUNG Ching-shan)
364. The Chairman announced to decide whether to accept the extempore motion by voting and the Committee unanimously accepted the extempore motion.
365. Mr HON Chun-yin, Mr KWOK Tsz-kin and Miss LEUNG Ching-shan briefly introduced the extempore motion.
366. Mr HO Ka-fai responded that as it was an extempore motion, no information was available at the time being, but Members’ views were noted.
367. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) The financial statements of PLB’s application for a fare increase in 2020 might not be accurate as there was assistance from the Employment Support Scheme Fund.
(ii) He asked if the financial statements of the minibus operators when they requested for fare increase could be made public.
92 Responsible Department 368. Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:
(i) He supported the extempore motion and objected to the fare increase of PLBs.
(ii) He said that TD had conducted a consultation on the issue of PLB fare increase in the past, and many local stakeholders had expressed objection, but TD had finally approved the PLB fare increase. He asked if TD could disclose information on the number of people who opposed PLB fare increase during the consultation.
(iii) He pointed out that the service standard of PLBs still varied after the fare increase. He asked whether TD would consider re-tendering the routes concerned.
369. Mr HO Ka-fai responded as follows:
(i) In handling the fare increase, TD would examine the operating conditions of PLB operators before and during the epidemic.
(ii) TD would also take into account the views of local organisations and Members on the fare increase of PLBs.
370. The Committee unanimously endorsed the extempore motion.
Date of Next Meeting
371. The first special meeting of the TTC would be held on 25 March 2021.
372. The second meeting of the TTC would be held on 15 April 2021.
Kwai Tsing District Council Secretariat March 2021
93