J. Kwun Tong - 89 - J. Kwun Tong

Appendix III - J Summaries of Written Representations

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

1 J07 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Shun Tin supports the demarcation proposal for J07.

2 J10 – 2 The representations The supporting views are noted. Po Tat support the demarcation proposal for J10.

3 J10 – 7 The seven representations The representations are accepted Po Tat object to delineating the although there are two Tat Cheung House and Tat representations supporting the J13 – Hei House of proposal (See item 2), because: Sau Mau into J13 because: Ping (i) Po Tat Estate is geographically South (a) community integrity isolated from of Po Tat Estate and separated by a major would be hampered; motorway; (although linked by a footbridge); (b) the operation of the Area Committee (ii) Tat Cheung House and Tat Hei would be affected; House are situated on the same elevated platform together with (c) residents’ sense of the other eleven residential belonging would be blocks of the Po Tat Estate and affected; sharing the same community facilities; and (d) the EAC permitted Laguna City to be (iii) There is a need to preserve the grouped under the community integrity of the same DCCA even Estate. though its population is over the upper However, the population of J10 will permissible limit; and hence exceed the upper permissible limit (24,763, +43.35%). (e) Tat Cheung House is mainly inhabited by elderly residents. They felt being separated from Po Tat Estate.

J. Kwun Tong - 90 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

4 J10 – 1 The representation (i) See items 3, 6, 11 and 13 for Po Tat representations of (a), (c), (d) (a) objects to delineating (e) and (f). J13 – the Tat Cheung House (ii) Representation of (b) is not Sau Mau and Tat Hei House of accepted because the Ping Po Tat Estate into J13 population of J11 is within the South because the permissible range (20,467, community integrity +18.48%). It is not necessary to J16 – of Po Tat Estate would change the existing boundaries. Kwong be hampered; Tak (b) suggests that Sau J19 – Ming House of Sau Mau Ping Estate East should be moved from J13 into J11 to J20 – preserve community Yau Tong integrity; Central (c) suggests that Ping J21 – Chun House of Ping Yau Tong Tin Estate should be West moved back from J16 into J17 to preserve the local ties and community integrity.

(d) suggests that J19 should include Lei Yue Mun Estate and four blocks of Ko Cheung Court (Ko Ching House, Ko Hong House, Ko Fung House and Ko Fei House);

(e) suggests that J20 should include five blocks of Ko Cheung Court (Ko On House, Ko Siu House, Ko Ki House, Ko Lun House and Ko Hang House), Yau Mei Court and Yau Lai Estate;

(f) suggests that J21 J. Kwun Tong - 91 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

should include Cha Kwo Ling, Lei Yue Mun, and Yau Tong Centre.

5 J12 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Hiu Lai suggests United Christian as the population of both DCCAs Hospital should be moved are within the permissible range: from J11 (Sau Mau Ping North) to J12 for better J11: 20,467 (+18.48%) communication with the J12: 18,896 (+9.38%) hospital and to maintain community integrity. It is not necessary to change the existing boundaries.

6 J14 – 2 (a) The representations The representations are partially Hing Tin object to dissolving accepted . Taking into account the the Lam Tin DCCA geographical factors and in order to J15 – (former J16) because it affect a smaller number of DCCA, Tak Tin is unfair to the the Lam Tin (former J16) can be residents of this kept intact by adopting the J16 – DCCA; following modified proposal: Kwong Tak (b) one representation (a) to merge the existing J15 (Tak opines that the Tin) and old J17 (Kwong Tak) population of Lam Tin into one DCCA (new J16 is increasing Kwong Tak); and continuously and thus the cancellation of one (b) to move Tak Lai House, Tak DCCA would cause King House and Tak Shui unfair community House from the existing J15 resources allocation; (Tak Tin) to J14 (Hing Tin). (c) one representation opines that dissolving Under the modified proposal, only 3 the said DCCA would existing DCCAs, one less than the cause confusion to the original proposal, would be affected. residents and hamper The resultant populations are also community within the upper permissible limit: development; J14: 20,040 (+16.01%) (d) one representation J16: 21,213 (+22.80%). opines that the combination of The merging of 3 DCCAs to 2 in DCCAs would cause Lam Tin is required so as to release inconvenience to the a seat to Yau Tong and to make the residents due to population of existing DCCA geographical Kwong Tak (former J17) within the differences; permissible limit.

J. Kwun Tong - 92 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

(e) one representation queries about the reason of cancellation of one DCCA as the population of Lam Tin DCCA is still within the permissible limit.

7 J14 – 1 (a) The representation Item (a) Hing Tin supports the The supporting view is noted. demarcation proposals J15 – for these 5 DCCAs. Item (b) Tak Tin The view is noted. (b) It proposes to relocate J16 – the polling station of Kwong J17, ie Sing Yin Tak Secondary School, to S.K.H Lee Shiu Keung J17 – Primary School for Ping Tin electors’ convenience.

J18 – Pak Nga

8 J14 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Hing Tin suggests to dissolve the Po because it would affect two Lok DCCA (J26) and puts originally unaltered DCCAs (J25 J15 – up a proposal on and J26) causing substantial changes Tak Tin re-delineating J25, J26, J27 to the existing boundaries. and J28 as follows: J16 – Kwong (a) Move Tsui Mui Tak House, Tsui Nam House and Tsui Yue J17 – House of Tsui Ping Ping Tin North Estate from J26 into J25; J25 – Tsui Ping (b) Move Po Pui Court North from J26 into J28 and renamed J28 as “Po J26 – Cheung”; Po Lok (c) Move J27 – from J26 into J27. Yuet Wah Also move Hopewell House, Hip Wo House J28 – and Yen Fu Mansion J. Kwun Tong - 93 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Hip Hong from J28 into J27 and renamed J27 as “Yuet Wo”.

The reasons given are:

(i) the average population of the DCCAs concerned is relatively low;

(ii) the geographical features and community ties of the DCCAs will be better;

(iii) community integrity can be preserved;

(iv) the estimated population of the new proposal is within the permissible range; and

(v) the new proposal conforms to the continuous development principle.

Under this proposal, the existing number of DCCAs in Lam Tin can therefore be maintained.

9 J14 – 1 The representation (i) The supporting view of (a) and Hing Tin (b) are noted. (a) supports the J15 – demarcation proposals (ii) Representation (c) is not Tak Tin for dissolving the Lam accepted as the population of Tin DCCA (former J17 (17,347, +0.42%) is within J16 – J16); the permissible limit. Change to Kwong the existing boundary is not Tak (b) appreciates that the necessary. EAC accepted the J17 – proposal of renaming (iii) Representation (d) is not Ping Tin J18 as “Pak Nga”; accepted as the names currently adopted for the DCCAs J18 – (c) suggests that Ping concerned already reflected the J. Kwun Tong - 94 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Pak Nga Chun House of Ping major buildings therein (See Tin Estate, Lee Shiu also item 6). J19 – Keung Primary School (iv) See item 13 for representation Yau Tong and Lam Tin (e). East Methodist Primary School should be J20 – moved to J17; Yau Tong Central (d) as the Lam Tin DCCA (former J16) is J21 – dissolved, it suggests Yau Tong that J14 can be West renamed as “Wah Hing Yat”, J15 can be J23 – renamed as “Tak Kai”, King Tin J17 can be renamed as “Ping On” or “On Ping” and J23 can be renamed as “King Tin and Lei On”;

(e) suggests that J19 should include Ko Chun Court, , Lei Yue Mun Estate and four blocks of Ko Cheung Court (Ko Ching House, Ko Hong House, Ko Fung House and Ko Fei House), J20 should include Yau Mei Court, Yau Lai Estate and five blocks of Ko Cheung Court (Ko On House, Ko Siu House, Ko Ki House, Ko Lun House and Ko Hang House) and J21 should include Yau Tong Estate, Yau Tong Centre, Lei Yue Mun and Cha Kwo Ling.

The reasons given are:

(i) Lei Yue Mun Estate has close relation with Ko Yee Estate and Ko J. Kwun Tong - 95 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Chun Court; and

(ii) it is necessary to preserve the management integrity of Yau Mei Court and Yau Tong Estate.

10 J15 – 1 The representation See item 6. Tak Tin (a) opines that the Kai Tin Estate and are located far apart geographically;

(b) opines that as only one DC member’s office will remain, it causes inconvenience to the residents of these two estates in seeking assistance from the DC member; and

(c) opines that the cancellation of one DC member in Lam Tin district would cause confusion to residents in the future.

11 J16 – 4 (a) The four (i) The representations of (a) are Kwong representations object not accepted as the Tak to delineating Ping population of J17 (17,347, Chun House of Ping +0.42%) is within the Tin Estate into the permissible limit. Change to new J16 (Kwong Tak) the existing boundary is not because it would necessary. hamper the community integrity (ii) The supporting view of (b) is and further suggest noted. moving Ping Chun House to J17.

(b) two of the representations support the demarcation proposals J. Kwun Tong - 96 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

for dissolving the Lam Tin DCCA. 12 J19 – 1 The representation The supporting view is noted. Yau Tong supports the demarcation East proposals for J19 and J20.

J20 – Yau Tong Central

13 J19 – 11 (a) These representations Representations of (a), (b), (c) and Yau Tong opposes the (d) are accepted and the proposal at East demarcation proposals (c) is adopted because: for J19, J20 or J21; J20 – (i) the integrity of Yau Mei Court Yau Tong (b) one representation and Yau Tong Estate can be Central objects to delineating preserved; and Lei Yu Mun Estate J21 – into J20 because Lei (ii) the resultant population of the Yau Tong Yue Mun Estate, Ko DCCAs concerned is within the West Chun Court and Ko permissible deviation limits: Yee Estate are connected J19: 21,442 (+24.12%) geographically; and J20: 19,844 (+14.87%) suggests moving Ko J21: 18,781 (+8.72%). Cheung Court, including, Ko On House, Ko Siu House, Ko Ki House, Ko Lun House and Ko Hang House to J20 because they are connected to Yau Mei Court by bridge;

(c) nine representations object to separating the Yau Mei Court and Yau Tong Estate into two parts because the community integrity would be adversely affected; and propose that J19 should include Ko Chun Court, Ko Yee Estate, Lei Yue Mun Estate and four blocks of Ko Cheung J. Kwun Tong - 97 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Court (Ko Ching House, Ko Hong House, Ko Fung House and Ko Fei House), J20 should include Yau Mei Court, Yau Lai Estate and five blocks of Ko Cheung Court (Ko On House, Ko Siu House, Ko Ki House, Ko Lun House and Ko Hang House) and J21 should include Yau Tong Estate, Yau Tong Centre, Lei Yue Mun and Cha Kwo Ling;

(d) seven of the nine representations in (c) above, suggests that alternatively EAC’s original proposal on J19 can be retained, but J20 should include Cha Kwo Ling, Yau Lai Estate, Yau Mei Court and Yau Tong Centre and J21 should include Yau Tong Estate, Lei Yue Mun Estate and Lei Yue Mun.

The reasons given are:

(i) it is necessary to preserve the management integrity of Yau Mei Court and Yau Tong Estate; and

(ii) there are needs to maintain geographical connection between different estates.

J. Kwun Tong - 98 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

14 J22 – 1 The representation (i) Representation (a) is accepted . Lai Kong (a) suggests that J22 (ii) Representation (b) would should be renamed as involve the addition of one seat “Laguna City”; and for the Kwun Tong DC which is outside EAC’s jurisdiction. (b) opines that one seat should be added in this DCCA due to the continuous increase in population.

15 J29 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Hong Lok proposes to move Yee On as the population of both DCCAs Street Market from J29 to are within the permissible range: J30 – J30 for residences’ Ting On convenience in J30. J29: 15,408 (-10.81%) J30: 18,139 (+5.00%)

It is not necessary to change the existing boundaries.

16 J31 – 1 The representation The representation is not accepted Ngau Tau suggests to move Tak Bo as the population of both DCCAs Kok Garden from J31 (Ngau are within the permissible range: Tau Kok) to J32 (To Tai) because it is a private J31: 19,610 (+13.52%) residential development, J32: 16,552 (-4.19%) which is different from the estates in It is not necessary to change the the rest of the existing boundaries. constituency.

17 J34 – 2 (a) The representations (i) The representations are not Lok Wah object to delineating accepted . As the population of South the Hipway Towers J34 would be 11,249, which and Wah Fung exceeds the lower permissible Gardens into J34 in limit (-34.88%), there is a need terms of location, to move Disciplined Services living habits and Quarters, Hipway Towers and community integrity; Wah Fung Gardens from J28 to and J34 so as to contain the population of J34 within the (b) one representation permissible limit. further suggests moving Fai Wah (ii) The proposal in (b) would House or/and Chin involve changing the boundary Wah House of Lok of J33, the population (15,281, J. Kwun Tong - 99 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

Wah South Estate -11.54%) of which is within the from J33 into J34 for permissible range. It is not alleviating the necessary to change the existing population shortfall of boundaries. J34 and enhancing community integrity.

J. Kwun Tong - 100 - J. Kwun Tong

Kwun Tong District Oral Representations Received at the Public Forum on 15 August 2006

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

18 J10 – 2 Same as item 3. See item 3. Po Tat

19 J13 – 1 The representation See item 4. Sau Mau Ping (a) opines that Sau Ming South House of is located far apart geographically from the rest of other building in J13; and

(b) suggests that EAC should consult public before demarcation.

20 J14 – 3 (a) Same as item 6. (i) See item 6. Hing Tin (b) One representation (ii) The proposal at (b) is not J15 – opines that one seat accepted because it would Tak Tin should be added in the involve the addition of one seat Kwun Tong DC. for the Kwun Tong DC which is J16 – outside EAC’s jurisdiction. Kwong (c) One representation Tak further suggests movering Tak Lung House and Tak Shing House to J15.

21 J14 – 1 The representation See items 6 and 13. Hing Tin (a) opines that the J15 – existing boundaries of Tak Tin Lam Tin District and Yau Tong District J16 – should be kept intact; Kwong and Tak (b) objects to delineating J19 – the Hong Yat Court Yau Tong into J14 due to East geographical factor. J. Kwun Tong - 101 - J. Kwun Tong

Item DCCAs No. of Representations EAC’s views no. concerned representations

J20 – Yau Tong Central

J21 – Yau Tong West

22 J19 – 4 (a) Same as item 13. (i) See item 13. Yau Tong East (b) One representation (ii) The supporting view of (b) is supports the addition noted. J20 – of one seat for the Yau Yau Tong Tong District. Central (c) Two representations J21 – further object to Yau Tong separating the Yau West Tong Estate into two parts because the community integrity would be adversely affected.