Yuen Long District Summaries of Written Representations
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
M. Yuen Long - 108 - M. Yuen Long Appendix III - M Yuen Long District Summaries of Written Representations Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations 1 All DCCAs 2 The representations support The supporting views are noted. the demarcation proposals for all the DCCAs in Yuen Long District because the EAC has paid regard to the community integrity of the DCCAs and the populations thereof are within the permissible range. 2 M01 – 1 The representation objects to The representation is not Fung Nin transferring the area bounded accepted because: by Tai Shu Ha Road West and M07 – Kiu Hing Road including Ma (a) it is necessary to adjust the Shap Pat Tin Pok and Fraser Village boundary of the current M07 Heung North from M07 to M01 because: by transferring from this DCCA: (i) Ma Tin Pok and (i) the area bounded by Ma Fraser Village are Tong Road, Tai Tong located in rural area Road and Tai Shu Ha which is different Road East to the current from the Yuen Long M01; town area in M01 in (ii) the area bounded by Tai terms of traditional Shu Ha Road West and culture, rights and Kiu Hing Road community relations including Ma Tin Pok of residents; and Fraser Village to the current M01; and (ii) it will undermine the (iii)Kwan Lok San Tsuen to close connection the current M05 established between Ma Tin Pok and to alleviate the population Fraser Village and overflow (25,433, +47.16%) Shap Pat Heung Rural of the current M07. If the Committee and lead area mentioned at (a) (ii) to an overlap of above is retained in the consultative current M07, the resultant machinery which will population of the DCCA adversely affect the (22,296) would exceed the efficiency of public upper permissible limit administration; and (+29.01%). (iii)the population of M01 (b) there are supporting views (21,555) is already on the demarcation proposals M. Yuen Long - 109 - M. Yuen Long Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations close to the upper for M01 and M07. (See item permissible limit 1); and (+24.73%). It is likely that its boundary has (c) for this demarcation to be re-delineated exercise, the EAC must and moving Ma Tin adhere to the population Pok and Fraser projection as at 30 June Village to other 2011. Any developments DCCA may be beyond this cut-off date will required again in the not be considered. next demarcation exercise. This will cause confusion and unfairness to the residents of Ma Tin Pok and Fraser Village. 3 M01 – 1 The representation proposes Proposal (a) Fung Nin to: See item 2. M07 – (a) transfer the area bounded Proposal (b) Shap Pat by Tai Shu Ha Road West The proposal is not accepted as: Heung North and Kiu Hing Road including Ma Tin Pok and (i) it will affect the M28 – Fraser Village from M01 boundary of M28, the San Tin to M07 because: population of which falls within the (i) Ma Tin Pok and permissible range and it Fraser Village are is not necessary to located in rural area change its boundary; which is different and from the Yuen Long town area in M01 in (ii) there are supporting terms of traditional views on the culture, rights and demarcation proposals community relations for M01, M07 and of residents; and M28. (See item 1.) (ii) residents of Ma Tin Pok and Fraser Village are used to seek assistance from and express their views to the DC member of the current M07. (b) move Nam Sang Wai M. Yuen Long - 110 - M. Yuen Long Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations from M28 to M07 because: (i) Nam Sang Wai belongs to village area of Shap Pat Heung; and (ii) residents of Nam Sang Wai are used to seek assistance from and express their views to the DC member of the current M07. 4 M14 – 2 The representations propose The representations are not Shui Wah that the whole Tin Wah Estate accepted because: should form a DCCA because: M15 – (a) if a separate DCCA is Chung Wah (a) the community integrity delineated for Tin Wah and sense of belonging of Estate, the resultant the residents of Tin Wah population (12,006) would Estate can be enhanced; fall below the lower and permissible limit (-30.53%); and (b) splitting the estate into (b) there are supporting views two DCCAs would on the demarcation confuse the residents of proposals for M14 and the estate as they will be M15. (See item 1) served by two DC members. 5 M21 – 5 The representations support The supporting views are noted. Ching King the demarcation proposals for M25 and M26. The reasons M25 – given are: Kingswood South (a) the demarcation proposal for M25 has maintained M26 – the community integrity Chung Pak in the DCCA which comprises the three residential estates of Kingswood Villas South (ie Locwood Court, Sherwood Court and Chestwood Court) and Tin Lai Court. M. Yuen Long - 111 - M. Yuen Long Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations Community ties have been established amongst the aforesaid estates because: (i) they have been grouped in the same DCCA since 1994; and (ii) residents of the three residential estates of Kingswood Villas South share the use of common facilities, such as transport facilities and club house, and served by the same management company. They have common interests on issues relating to their daily lives; and (b) the formation of a new DCCA (i.e. M26) which comprises part of Tin Chung Court, Central Park Towers and Central Park Towers provides scope to cater for the future increase in population to be brought about by the residential development being built near Tin Wing MTR Station and Central Park Towers. This can minimise the adjustments to the boundaries of existing DCCAs in the southern part of Tin Shui Wai that may be required in the 2015 demarcation exercise. One representation also supports the demarcation proposal for M21 because M. Yuen Long - 112 - M. Yuen Long Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations the formation of a new DCCA (i.e. M21) which comprises Tin Ching Estates and Vianni Cove provides scope to cater for the future increase in population to be brought about by the residential development being built near Vianni Cove. This can minimise adjustments to the boundaries of the existing DCCAs in the northern part of Tin Shui Wai that may be required in the next demarcation exercise. 6 M25 – 4 The representations: The proposal is not accepted Kingswood because: South (a) object to grouping the Central Park Towers and (i) the resultant population of M26 – Central Park Towers II M25 (25,666) would exceed Chung Pak (private residential estates) the upper permissible limit and part of Tin Chung (+48.51%); and Court (an estate under Home Ownership Scheme) (ii) there are supporting views into one new DCCA as on the demarcation M26 because difference in proposals for M25 and M26. the nature of buildings (See items 1 and 5.) may cause divergence of views from the residents in the DCCA on issues relating to their interests and even leads to unfair situations and conflict of interests in future; and (b) propose to group the Central Park Towers and Central Park Towers II together with the Chestwood Court in M25 because they are built by the same developer and managed by the same property management company. M. Yuen Long - 113 - M. Yuen Long Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations 7 M29 – 1 The representation proposes The representation is accepted Kam Tin to: because the community integrity of the Tai Kong Po Tsuen and M30 – (a) transfer the part of Tai Wang Toi Shan Lo Uk Tsuen Pat Heung Kong Po Tsuen which can be preserved. North currently falls within M29 to M30 as the entire Tai The resultant populations of M31 – Kong Po Tsuen should be M29, M30 and M31 are as Pat Heung included in Pat Heung follows: South North i.e. M30; and M29: 10,324 (-40.26%) (b) to transfer the part of Wang M30: 12,072 (-30.15%) Toi Shan Lo Uk Tsuen M31: 16,151 (- 6.54%) which currently falls within M31 to M30 as the The EAC recommends that M29 entire Wang Toi Shan Lo and M30 be allowed to exceed Uk Tsuen should be the lower permissible limit included in Pat Heung because the justifications for North i.e. M30. their deviation in the last demarcation exercise (i.e. preservation of community integrity/identity) have remained valid. M. Yuen Long - 114 - M. Yuen Long Yuen Long District Oral Representations Received at the Public Forum on 14 December 2010 Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned Representations 8 M21 – 1 Same as item 5. See item 5. Ching King M25 – Kingswood South M26 – Chung Pak .