(Translation)

Minutes of the 3rd Meeting of the Transport Affairs Committee of District Council (5th Term)

Date: 12 May 2016 (Thursday) Time: 9:30 a.m. Venue: Conference Room, Council

Present

Chairman Mr CHENG Wing-shun, Vincent

Members Mr CHAN Kwok-wai Mr CHAN Wai-ming, MH Ms CHAN Wing-yan, Joephy Mr CHEUNG Wing-sum, Ambrose, MH, JP (Arrived at 11 a.m.) Ms CHOW Wing-heng, Zoé (Arrived at 11:30 a.m.) Mr CHUM Tak-shing (Arrived at 11 a.m.) Mr HO Kai-ming, Kalvin (Arrived at 10 a.m.; left at 12:55 p.m.) Mr KONG Kwai-sang (Arrived at 10 a.m.; left at 12:55 p.m.) Mr LAM Ka-fai, Aaron, JP (Arrived at 10:20 a.m.) Ms LAU Pui-yuk Mr LEE Tsz-king, Dominic Mr LEE Wing-man Mr LEUNG Man-kwong Mr LEUNG Yau-fong (Arrived at 10:06 a.m.) Ms NG Mei, Carman (Left at 1:30 p.m.) Ms NG Yuet-lan (Arrived at 11:18 a.m.) Mr TAM Kwok-kiu, MH, JP (Left at 1:15 p.m.) Mr WAI Woon-nam Mr WONG Tat-tung, Dennis, MH, JP (Arrived at 1 p.m.) Mr YAN Kai-wing (Arrived at 12:10 p.m.) Mr YEUNG Yuk Mr YUEN Hoi-man (Left at 1:20 p.m.)

Co-opted Members Mr LAU Kin-shing Mr LI Chun-hei, Joshua (Left at 1:25 p.m.) Ms TSE Hiu-hung

- 2 - Action by

In Attendance Miss CHAN Pui-ki, Kiki Assistant District Officer (Sham Shui Po) 1 Mr LAU Kin-hei, Louis Senior Transport Officer/Shum Shui Po, Transport Department Mr TAI Hoi-yau, Marco Engineer/Shum Shui Po, Transport Department Ms CHUNG Sau-mui District Engineer/Shum Shui Po, Highways Department Mr LAU Kin-hang, Kenneth Assistant District Operations Officer (Sham Shui Po), Police Force Mr KONG Wai-fung, Ryan Assistant District Operations Officer (Sham Shui Po), Hong Kong Police Force Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching Officer in-charge of District Traffic Team, Sham Shui Po District, Hong Kong Police Force Ms LEUNG Ka-wai Chief Health Inspector 1 (Shum Shui Po), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Ms LAM Yuk-sheung Acting Chief Health Inspector 2 (Shum Shui Po), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr WONG Yu-ting Senior Operations Officer, The Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited Mr YUEN Chi-wai Assistant Operations Manager, Citybus Limited & New World First Bus Services Limited

Secretary Mr CHAN Wing-ho, Patrick Executive Officer (District Council) 3, Shum Shui Po District Office

Co-opted Members

Mr CHAN Ming-kei Ms YUEN Ka-wai, Tiffany

- 3 - Action by

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed members and representatives of government departments to the third meeting of the Transport Affairs Committee (“TAC”) of fifth term Sham Shui Po District Council.

Agenda Item 1: Confirmation of the minutes of the 2nd meeting held on 10 March 2016

2. The Committee confirmed the above minutes without amendment.

Agenda Item 2: Matters for discussion

(a) Request for announcing the ancillary traffic arrangements for the intake of residents of Estate (TAC Paper 30/16)

3. Mr CHAN Wai-ming introduced Paper 30/16.

4. Ms TSE Hiu-hung raised the following views and enquiries: (i) she asked about the increase, if any, of bus routes currently at So Uk bus terminus; (ii) there was scope for improvement of the terminus design and she suggested adding advanced facilities and improve the traffic conditions nearby if the terminus was renovated; (iii) she asked whether the launch of route 6P in the fourth quarter of this year could match the timing of flat intake; (iv) she asked whether the service hours of route 6P could be extended to provide convenience to the residents; (v) she asked whether interchange incentives would be provided when minibus route 45B was reinstated.

5. Mr Louis LAU responded that: (i) the Transport Department (“TD”) had frequent contacts with the operator of route 45B in the past six months and would ask the operator to plan the route and make vehicles ready one month before the So Uk Estate flat intake; (ii) route 45B would continue to pass So Uk Estate after resumption of services and the Department would arrange for trial runs once the roads were opened. The operators could adjust frequency to ensure adequate service; (iii) the Department noted members’ views on transport services connecting So Uk, Castle Peak Road, Un Chau Street to Tsing Sha Highway and Shing Mun Tunnels Bus Exchange and would consider them when devising routes with the bus company in the future.

6. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded that: (i) as the timing for So Uk Estate flat intake could not be determined earlier, route 6P was tentatively scheduled to provide - 4 - Action by service in the fourth quarter of this year. The Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited (“KMB”) would arrange for route 6P to start service as soon as possible, depending on the actual intake date and the number of residents moving in So Uk Estate. Tentatively, KMB would schedule three trips from So Uk to Kwun Tong in the morning and three trips from Kwun Tong to So Uk in the afternoon. Bus frequency and service hours would be adjusted depending on the residents’ needs; (ii) extending routes 12A and 118 to So Uk Estate would affect frequency reliability. Hence, this option would not be considered for the time being; (iii) So Uk bus terminus usage was already saturated and it would not be possible to increase bus routes for the time being.

7. Mr YUEN Chi-wai responded that if stops were added for route 796C in Po Lam, travel time was estimated to be 12 to 15 minutes longer, affecting about 68% of the patrons (about 4 300 passengers). So New World First Bus Services Limited (“NWFB”) would not consider this proposal for the time being but would revisit it when discussing routeing with TD in the future.

8. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views: (i) after minibus route 40 had been cancelled, residents living along Castle Peak Road found it very inconvenient and they all looked forward to adding route 6P running after the flat intake of So Uk Estate. But the intake was repeatedly delayed and route 6P was still not launched; (ii) So Uk Estate began intake in the second quarter of this year but KMB said that route 6P would not be launched until the fourth quarter. Those already moved in So Uk Estate could not use the bus service; (iii) KMB should arrange for sufficient bus trips before the intake of So Uk Estate; (iv) So Uk bus terminus was very old and should be renovated as soon as possible to make bus movements smoother.

9. Ms TSE Hiu-hung raised the following views and enquiries: (i) she hoped KMB could make early preparations for route 6P service to avoid causing inconvenience to the residents; (ii) she asked KMB to indicate whether So Uk bus terminus would be renovated and give information on the specific arrangements such as adding chairs, frequency display panels, etc. and introducing new bus routes.

10. Mr CHAN Wai-ming raised the following views: (i) he asked KMB to indicate whether So Uk bus terminus would be renovated; (ii) before the redevelopment of So Uk Estate, minibus route 45 had a fleet of six minibuses, one of which served the So Uk Estate route and the remaining five served the route. As the demand for the So Uk Estate route would rise after the intake, he asked TD how to balance the needs of those two routes after the resumption of route 40.

11. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked - 5 - Action by whether TD had found out from the Housing Department (“HD”) the exact date of So Uk Estate flat intake; (ii) TD should provide information on the ancillary transport package for So Uk Estate so that the Committee could give comments; (iii) he enquired about TD arrangements in respect of ancillary traffic arrangements between So Uk Estate and Tsing Sha Highway and Shing Mun Tunnels Bus Exchange.

12. Mr Joshua LI pointed out that currently there was no direct bus from Sham Shui Po District (“SSP District”) to Kwun Tong and asked whether KMB would work in tandem with So Uk Estate flat intake to launch route 6P earlier to bring convenience to the public.

13. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) in 2008, routes 45B and 45M each had three minibuses. In face of the So Uk Estate redevelopment, route 45M now had four minibuses running and after the So Uk Estate intake, route 45B would have two to three minibuses and the operator might add more, subject to demand; (ii) it was learnt that HD expected to get occupation permit for So Uk Estate at the end of June this year. By then the residents would start moving in.

14. The Chairman asked TD whether it could guarantee to launch route 45B in early July this year.

15. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) the launch of route 45B depended on the flat intake date. It could be launched immediately after occupation permit was obtained; (ii) the Department had learnt that KMB planned to start the service of route 6P in June this year and the Department would approve the application as soon as possible. It was expected that route 6P would, as scheduled in last year’s bus routes development programme, kick off operations in June this year.

16. The Chairman recalled that as indicated earlier by KMB representatives, route 6P would launch service in the fourth quarter of this year. He demanded clarification from TD.

17. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) route 6P would provide two-way journeys in the fourth quarter but the three morning trips from So Uk to Kwun Tong were to be introduced first in June because the two-way trips were awaiting approval as it was in this year’s bus route development programme while the morning trips were approved last year; (ii) the Department had learnt from HD and the Highways Department that there was no plan to renovate So Uk bus terminus for the time being. But TD would still ask the bus company to consider adding chairs for waiting passengers and installing departure display panels etc. - 6 - Action by

18. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded as follows: (i) KMB was upgrading all bus stops including adding chairs for the waiting passengers and installing departure display panels, etc.; (ii) usage of So Uk bus terminus was expected to rise after So Uk Estate intake. KMB was positive about installing facilities in the terminus.

19. Mr Louis LAU reiterated that the Department and the bus company would take into consideration members’ views on transport services connecting So Uk, Castle Peak Road, Un Chau Street to Tsing Sha Highway and Shing Mun Tunnels Bus Exchange in route planning.

20. Mr LAU Kin-shing raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked when KMB would review the ridership of route 6P to determine whether to increase frequency; (ii) he strongly requested KMB to start two-way journeys of route 6P as soon as possible.

21. Ms TSE Hiu-hung asked TD and the bus company to confirm: (i) route 6P would start providing single journey service from June 2016; (ii) route 45B, operating with three minibuses now, would expand its fleet to five to six minibuses if ridership rose sharply; (iii) the relevant parties would not renovate So Uk bus terminus but would add chairs for waiting passengers and install departure display panels etc.

22. Ms LAU Pui-yuk said that there was a high demand for route 45B service and hoped TD would arrange the launch as soon as possible.

23. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) travel time for route 45B was expected to lengthen when its routeing was changed to pass So Uk Estate. He hoped the Department and the operator would make timely arrangements; (ii) considering the residents’ needs to travel to and from Kwun Tong, KMB launched route 6P going from So Uk to Kwun Tong in June but there was no return journeys arranged. He hoped KMB would also provide return journey service at the same time.

24. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) in last year’s KMB bus route development programme, three morning trips were proposed for route 6P going from So Uk to Kwun Tong. The Department approved this after consulting the stakeholders and would start the service in June this year. The three trips going from Kwun Tong to So Uk would be implemented after confirmation of this year’s programme; (ii) roads in So Uk Estate were not yet opened so the Department could not arrange for route 45B operator to start trial runs but the route did provide a certain level of service before the whole So Uk Estate was fenced off for redevelopment. Members’ worries were unnecessary; (iii) route 45B operator stirred to continue - 7 - Action by operating the route and the Department would accede to its request and allow the operator to add more minibuses to cater for the demand; (iv) the Department had learnt that the bus company intended to install more facilities in So Uk bus terminus to respond to the local needs.

25. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded as follows: (i) KMB would launch route 6P to match the time of So Uk Estate intake and review by closely monitoring residents’ needs. After TD completed the relevant consultation, KMB would start the return trips; (ii) KMB would add departure information display panels in So Uk bus terminus and consider putting more chairs there, depending on the physical conditions of the terminus.

26. Mr YUEN Chi-wai responded as follows: (i) NWFB was reviewing whether to add chairs at certain bus stops with bus shelters (including So Uk bus terminus) and would make application to TD once the outcomes were known; (ii) NWFB planned to start the real time arrival information system in 2018 and would look into the possibility of putting departure information display panels at So Uk bus terminus.

27. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he urged TD and KMB to start route 6P service within one week after So Uk Estate obtained the occupation permit; (ii) he believed other DCs would not object to the return journey service of route 6P from Kwun Tong to So Uk. He hoped TD would make it a priority to start consultation in a bid to start the return service as soon as possible.

28. Ms TSE Hiu-hung hoped TD would respond to the bus company’s request to renovate So Uk bus terminus as early as possible.

29. The Chairman concluded as follows: (i) he hoped TD would improve the transport arrangements before the So Uk Estate intake and submit details of the ancillary transport package before the next meeting; (ii) since the So Uk Estate intake would start at the end of June, he hoped route 45B would start running in early July; (iii) It was undesirable that route 6P would not provide two-way service until the fourth quarter of this year. He urged TD to arrange for two-way journeys for route 6P as soon as operations started; (iv) he hoped So Uk bus terminus would be renovated; (v) he urged TD to work with HD to provide the relevant transport information needed to the residents of So Uk Estate.

[Post-meeting note: The Secretariat passed the So Uk Estate ancillary transport arrangement information from TD to members on 4 July this year.]

(b) Review and improve the route of Green Minibus Route No.42 (TAC Paper 31/16) - 8 - Action by

30. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai introduced Paper 31/16.

31. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) since there was a route 30B running from Nam Cheong Street to MTR Station, the new route 42 would be arranged to run from Tai Po Road to Caritas Medical Centre and on its return via Nam Cheong Street to Chak On Estate to avoid route duplication; (ii) the operator of route 42 suggested TD change the route to Nam Cheong Street via to Caritas Medical Centre. Instead, the Department asked the operator to consider going from Tai Po Road en route Shek Kip Mei Estate before heading for Caritas Medical Centre. The Department would continue to discuss with the operator and consult the stakeholders; (iii) the Department would take into account the following factors when considering new bus routes or GMB routes: the current public transport service level, the passengers’ demands, district development, use of resources and the prospects of the new service and would try to avoid introducing long trips or routes passing heavily trafficked areas; (iv) there were many routes passing Caritas Medical Centre and areas around Castle Peak Road, including bus routes 2A, 2B, 2F, 6, 6C, 6D, 31B, 36A, 72, 86, 86A and 86C and minibus routes 42 and 45. Therefore the Department had no plan in the interim to introduce new routes passing Caritas Medical Centre.

32. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded that a number of KMB routes travelled between Nam Cheong Street and areas around Caritas Medical Centre. And so there was no plan for the time being to provide new routes to Caritas Medical Centre but members’ views would be noted and discussions with TD would start when necessary.

33. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai said at present route 42 would first go to Shek Kip Mei, then to Nam Cheong Street and Woh Chai Street before going round to Pak Tin. He suggested the minibus go direct from Nam Cheong Street and Woh Chai Street to Pak Tin.

34. Mr LAU Kin-shing raised the following views in respect of route 42: (i) he supported Mr CHAN Kwok-wai’s suggestion that the minibus should go direct from Nam Cheong Street and Woh Chai Street to Pak Tin; (ii) he hoped to add one bus stop in Woh Chai Street near Shek Kip Mei Estate Block 23; (iii) he hoped the route would pass Shek Kip Mei Estate to make it convenient for the residents going to Caritas Medical Centre.

35. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) route 42 had been running for a number of years and there was a need to fine-tune its routeing but the prerequisite was to have sufficient minibuses running; (ii) passengers currently going - 9 - Action by from SSP East to Caritas Medical Centre needed to walk a certain distance after alighting which was very inconvenient. He hoped TD would review the arrangement to consider adjusting the minibus routes and deploying more buses; (iii) in case the Department considered that routes should not be duplicated, it could consider allowing route 42 to pass Cornwall Street, Tai Hang Tung or Tai Hang Sai and then going to Caritas Medical Centre or consider interchange incentives to attract residents to ride routes 41A or 41M first before changing to route 42 to Caritas Medical Centre.

36. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) the public always complained about insufficient minibuses running route 42, long waiting time, old minibuses and frequent break-downs. The operator should try to improve the situation; (ii) demand for route 42 was high and TD should consider adding more minibuses and any route change should avoid affecting the residents; (iii) although TD pointed out that there were many routes going from to Caritas Medical Centre but those routes did not pass Chak On Estate. She urged the Department to make appropriate arrangements.

37. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) route 42 passed Pak Tin Street but not Nam Cheong Street to avoid overlapping route 30B. Given different fares, the impact of overlapping was not very obvious before the introduction of the $2 elderly concession fare. But after the concession scheme was implemented, the impact was obvious as almost half of those boarding in Chak On Estate were elderlies who only paid $2; (ii) the operator of route 30B had indicated to the Department that it objected to routeing change. The Department would consider its views; (iii) the Department would discuss with the operator the proposal of routeing route 42 to pass Cornwall Street; (iv) the Department had indicated to route 42 operator that there should always be two minibuses running which scheduled at 25-minute intervals as per the service timetable. The Department had issued a warning letter in respect of trips lost and the operator had promised to deploy reserve minibuses or those serving other routes to maintain service in case of break-downs; (v) route 42 did not have a high demand at present and the operator had applied for reduced frequency but was rejected by the Department; (iv) the Department would consider the proposed increase of minibus-stops for route 42.

38. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu said if route 42 maintained the status quo, it would encounter the problem of under utilisation. Once the route was cancelled, the residents would be affected. TD had the responsibility to get more people to ride the route, e.g. changing its service route and arranging sufficient minibuses running.

39. Mr LEE Wing-man raised the following views: (i) he did not agree that the $2 concession scheme would cause negative impact on the route duplication. On the contrary, the scheme would stimulate more elderlies to take the minibus, making the - 10 - Action by demand bigger than the supply. TD should increase trips for this route; (ii) route duplication could increase competition so that service would be improved; (iii) TD had the duty to ensure the operation of minibus would serve the public interests.

40. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai said that there were many elderlies in SSP East. Taking Mei Ying House and Mei Yue House as examples, the residents there found the transport inconvenient in case they wanted to travel to Caritas Medical Centre. He hoped TD would enhance transport service from SSP East to Caritas Medical Centre.

41. Ms Carman NG raised the following views and enquiries: (i) she asked about the travel time and the number of minibuses running the new route proposed by the operator; (ii) the operator of route 42 applied for a huge fare increase some years ago and undertook to deploy two minibuses to run the designated route in accordance with the timetable. She asked about the Department’s monitoring mechanism; (iii) the problem of lost trips was serious for route 42. To solve the problem there should be more minibuses running.

42. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) route 42 took about 23 minutes going from Chak On Estate to Caritas Medical Centre. A fleet of two minibuses was sufficient to maintain service at 25-minute intervals. The Department had no information about the travel time of the new route for the time being but estimated that travel time would be about five minutes longer; (ii) for the residents of Shek Kip Mei Estate travelling to Caritas Medical Centre, the Department would discuss with route 42 operator on the diversion option and try to cater for the residents’ demand without affecting operators of other routes; (iii) the Department would look into the service provided by route 42 and would urge the operator to make improvement in case minibuses were found not running on time; (iv) routes 42, 41A and 41M were in the same group. For a very long time, route 42 was operating in deficit and needed to be subsidised with income from route 41M. The operator had thought of giving up route 42 but the Department made it clear that giving up route 42 meant to give up routes 41A and 41M altogether; (v) route 30B had been subsidising routes 30A and 32M but the operator could not simply give up those routes in deficit.

43. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai asked if the Department would consider allowing route 42 to go direct from Nam Cheong Street to Caritas Medical Centre.

44. Mr Louis LAU responded that the routes proposed by members overlapped with that of route 30B and would bring about direct competition. TD would examine the views from the operators and members before reconsidering the case. - 11 - Action by

45. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) members asked to improve the transport service from SSP East to Caritas Medical Centre, not just that for Shek Kip Mei Estate; (ii) consideration should be given to route 42 passing Pak Tin, Nam Cheong Street or Shek Kip Mei.

46. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she hoped TD would provide the travel time of the new route proposed by the operator of route 42; (ii) if the travel time of route 42 was 23 minutes, it would be difficult to maintain a trip at 25-minute intervals with only two minibuses running in case of traffic jam and the Department should review the number of minibuses running that route.

47. Mr LEE Wing-man raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he hoped TD could respond to why routes could not overlap; (ii) route 42 was facing serious problem of lost-trips and the waiting time could be as long as 45 minutes in some cases. Passengers would give up waiting and so the route was operating in the red. So the Department should step up monitoring.

48. The Chairman concluded that at present the residents of Shek Kip Mei Estate found it very inconvenient to travel to Caritas Medical Centre. Yet changing the routeing of route 42 might lengthen the travel time and the waiting time to a large extent. In this regard, the Committee urged TD to suitably arrange the transport routes to making it convenient for residents of Shek Kip Mei Estate to travel to Caritas Medical Centre without impacting on residents of Chak On Estate.

(c) Request for GMB Route No. 30A to stop by Shek Kip Mei (TAC Paper 32/16)

49. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai introduced Paper 32/16.

50. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) minibus route 30A already had section fares in place for the trip from Shek Kip Mei Estate to Mong Kok; (ii) passengers could get on/off the minibuses in Nam Cheong Street or Woh Chai Street. There might be some misunderstanding to suggest that passengers were not able to stop and board the minibuses. The Department had asked the operator to erect more minibus stop signs at suitable locations so that the residents could identify the pick-up/drop-off points; (iii) route 30A was operating in deficit for a long time and needed to be subsidised by route 30B. Since the operator had applied to the Department earlier to reduce the frequency to 25-minute intervals, the frequency would not be increased for the time being.

51. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she suggested route 30A erect more minibus stop signs to remind the drivers to stop at the suitable places; (ii) - 12 - Action by residents relied on route 30A to return from Shek Kip Mei Estate to Chak On Estate. So she hoped the service time could be extended to beyond 11:30 p.m.

52. Mr CHAN Kwok-wai raised the following views: (i) he believed adding more minibus stop signs in Nam Cheong Street and Woh Chai Street would help improve the situation; (ii) many residents of Chak On Estate relied on the night service of route 30A so he hoped the service time could be lengthened.

53. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he hoped TD would discuss with Members of constituencies passed by route 30A to set up minibus stop signs at suitable locations; (ii) adding pickup/drop-off points in Woh Chai Street would make the route more indirect. Instead, adding stops in Nam Cheong Street was more desirable; (iii) some residents reflected that they could not stop and board route 30A in Tai Po Road. So there might be a need to add minibus stop signs there.

54. Mr Louis LAU responded that the Department would find out the passengers’ needs and discuss with route 30A operator to erect more minibus stop signs and lengthen the service time.

55. The Chairman concluded that the Committee urged TD to add enough minibus stop signs and consider lengthening the service time for route 30A.

(d) Concern over the fatal traffic accident at Kwong Lee Road (TAC Paper 33/16)

56. Mr KONG Kwai-sang introduced Paper 33/16.

57. Mr Marco TAI responded that the road surface design of Kwong Lee Road complied with the required standards but since many students walked past there during peak periods, TD was collecting data to explore how to improve road safety there.

58. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded as follows: (i) Special Investigation Team 2 of Traffic Kowloon West Region was investigating the Kwong Lee Road fatal traffic accident and arrested a driver for suspected “dangerous driving causing death”; (ii) Kwong Lee Road was not a traffic accident black spot. In the past 12 months there were only three traffic accidents causing damage to property and two causing injuries; (iii) after the accident, the Police had started road safety promotion and education work and would continue to monitor the traffic conditions in Kwong Lee Road.

59. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded as follows: (i) KMB would cooperate with the - 13 - Action by

Police in their investigations and had sent condolences to the deceased’s family and followed up on the compensation; (ii) bus captains were reminded to take note of the blind spots of their sightline and road conditions, etc. They were also advised to drive with care and give way to pedestrians at zebra crossings when driving past Kwong Lee Road; (iii) bus captains were not allowed to drive past Fat Tseung Street at any time of the day.

60. Mr KONG Kwai-sang raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he asked how TD would improve the road surface design of Kwong Lee Road; (ii) So Uk bus terminus was so small that it would not be convenient for the new long buses to enter. That was the indirect cause of the accident. He asked when the bus terminus would be rebuilt.

61. Mr Joshua LI raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the vehicle flow of Kwong Lee Road was not heavy and drivers could easily pay insufficient attention to the road conditions. However, drivers should drive with care because there were altogether five secondary schools, primary schools and kindergartens and community facilities like clinics could be found in the vicinity; (ii) Kwong Lee Road and Fat Tseung Street always had buses parked there and blocked the sightline of waiting passengers. He enquired whether the cause was due to insufficient space in the So Uk bus terminus; (iii) he asked about the number of buses parked in So Uk bus terminus as approved by TD; (iv) he asked whether NWFB would follow the steps of KMB to prohibit buses passing Fat Tseung Street; (v) he asked whether the design of So Uk bus terminus could accommodate the new 12.8 m long buses.

62. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he understood that buses would be parked near the terminus after service stopped at night. But on the day of the accident, the bus involved parked in Kwong Lee Road in broad daylight. He asked KMB for its guidelines in respect of the parking locations for empty buses; (ii) if the parking spaces of So Uk bus terminus could be widened, the accident might have been prevented. The bus terminus was so small that it would be difficult for buses to go in and out. Also, there were always children walking past there. Therefore, the bus terminus should be rebuilt as soon as possible.

63. Ms TSE Hiu-hung raised the following views: (i) Dump trucks waiting to go into a construction site were often found in the area around Kwong Lee Road, causing danger to the pedestrians and other vehicles; (ii) driving with care could ensure road safety; (iii) the design of So Uk bus terminus had to be improved and she hoped that TD could give serious consideration to this case.

64. Mr LEUNG Yau-fong raised the following views and enquiries: (i) rebuilding - 14 - Action by

So Uk bus terminus was a pressing need because that could ensure road safety in the long run; (ii) he asked about KMB parking guidelines for bus captains; (iii) the cause of the accident was negligence of the bus captain. Given that vehicles passed Kwong Lee Road at a relatively high speed, which easily caused danger, he urged KMB to give instructions to its bus captains; (iv) the problem of illegal parking was serious in Kwong Lee Road. He urged the Police to address the problem.

65. Ms Carman NG raised the following views and enquiries: (i) So Uk bus terminus had reached 100% utilisaton rate and would be difficult to cope with the demand after the intake of So Uk Estate. The authorities should improve the terminus design as soon as possible; (ii) if the new type of long buses could not get into So Uk bus terminus, the problem of buses parking outside the terminus would persist.

66. Mr CHAN Wai-ming raised the following views: (i) KMB should spare no efforts to improve the driving attitudes of the bus captains; (ii) the design of So Uk bus terminus should keep abreast of the times and following the So Uk Estate intake, TD should push the bus company to improve the terminus design as soon as possible.

67. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) there should have been a comprehensive plan before the redevelopment of So Uk Estate, including the rebuilding of So Uk bus terminus and optimisation of the space inside; (ii) he hoped TD would rebuild So Uk bus terminus as soon as possible to improve road safety; (iii) the bus involved was parked at a pickup/drop-off point, which was not proper. As a general rule, other vehicles parking there would be regarded as illegally parked. He queried the Police for giving preferential treatment to the buses and remarked that the Police should treat all vehicles equally.

68. Mr YEUNG Yuk raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the usage of So Uk bus terminus was already saturated and the lack of parking spaces inside had resulted in many buses parking outside the terminus; (ii) he asked if the Police would step up enforcement action if buses parking outside the terminus were breaking the law; (iii) he urged KMB to disclose why the bus in question parked outside the terminus. If there were not enough parking spaces inside, TD should try to make improvements; (iv) bus captains tended to lower their guard when driving empty buses. He hoped KMB would improve the driving attitudes of the bus captains.

69. Mr Marco TAI responded that the Department was collecting data to improve the design of Kwong Lee Road but no concrete options could be provided for the time being. The Department would complete its study as soon as possible and then consult Members and the general public. - 15 - Action by

70. Mr Louis LAU responded as follows: (i) Since Uk bus terminus was outside So Uk Estate, it was not included in the Estate redevelopment. The Department was working with the Highways Department to find out ways to improve the design of the terminus; (ii) So Uk bus terminus could currently accommodate 20 to over 30 buses.

71. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that the Police would continue to monitor the traffic conditions in Kwong Lee Road and law enforcement action would be taken against any vehicles illegally parked, buses included.

72. The Chairman asked the Police to provide the number of prosecutions against illegal parking in Kwong Lee Road.

73. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that in 2015, the Police issued 561 fixed penalty tickets to cars illegally parked in Kwong Lee Road and between January and April 2016, 118 tickets were issued.

74. The Chairman asked the Police whether illegally parked buses would be prosecuted.

75. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that the Police would prosecute illegally parked buses.

76. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded as follows: (i) 12.8m long buses were unable to enter So Uk bus terminus so the routes there did not use that type of buses; (ii) KMB had issued internal reminders to bus captains passing the area around Kwong Lee Road to take note of relevant matters. Also, staff would be sent there regularly to monitor the bus speed and the driving attitudes of the bus captains. Those bus captains who illegally parked the buses would be handled by KMB’s discipline department and those involved in speeding would be severely punished; (iii) KMB agreed that buses should not be parked at en route stops and had repeatedly warned field staff that they should not allow buses to park at en route stops during deployment and any rule-breaking bus captain would be severely punished.

77. The Chairman commented that So Uk bus terminus was saturated and asked where buses would park if they could not park inside the terminus.

78. Mr WONG Yu-ting responded as follows: (i) KMB would as far as possible arrange for buses arriving at So Uk bus terminus to leave orderly to avoid parking inside for a long time. Those buses whose service was not required would be parked outside the terminus at designated places; (ii) KMB would pass members’ concerns to its staff and strictly prohibit them to park buses at en route stops. - 16 - Action by

79. Mr YUEN Chi-wai responded as follows: (i) NWFB would instruct its bus captains to avoid driving empty buses to Fat Tseung Street as far as possible; (ii) NWFB never arranged buses to park at en route stops. It would give such instruction to its bus captains, arranged surprise checks as well as severely punish any rule-breaking bus captains; (iii) NWFB found out that 12.8m long buses could not enter So Uk bus terminus during testing and so it had no plans to use that type of buses in routes serving this terminus; (iv) So Uk bus terminus parking spaces were small in size and less flexibility was expected in bus deployment and so deployment would be made outside the bus terminus; (v) if TD intended to rebuild or improve So Uk bus terminus, NWFB would be happy to cooperate.

80. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he was glad to know that the Police did not have different treatment for buses; (ii) the design of So Uk bus terminus was accident-prone and he urged TD to arrange for the rebuilding of the terminus.

81. Mr YEUNG Yuk remarked that bus captains were forced to park buses outside the terminus because there was not enough parking space. TD should try to make improvements so that the problem would be solved.

82. Mr Joshua LI pointed out that he had seen NWFB buses parked in Fat Tseung Street restricted zone and hoped NWFB would make improvements.

83. Mr LEUNG Yau-fong hoped the Police would provide the prosecution statistics in area around Kwong Lee Road so that members would know the extent of Police follow-up actions.

84. The Chairman said that the Police had already reported the relevant figures earlier in the meeting but invited the Police to report again.

85. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that in 2015, the Police issued 561 fixed penalty tickets to cars illegally parked in Kwong Lee Road and between January and April 2016, 118 tickets were issued.

86. The Chairman concluded as follows: (i) it was hoped that TD would report to the Committee the progress of improvement work on Kwong Lee Road road surface design so that members could give their views; (ii) it was requested that So Uk bus terminus would be rebuilt as soon as possible to improve safety and to match the flat intake of So Uk Estate; (iii) it was hoped that the Police would not have a selective law enforcement policy in respect of illegally parked vehicles; (iv) the bus companies were requested to improve the driving attitudes of their bus captains. - 17 - Action by

(e) Concern over the recurrence of serious traffic accident at the road section of Tai Po Road near Caldecott Hill and request for the setting up of an inter-departmental working group for improving the design of the road section concerned (TAC Paper 34/16)

87. Ms Carman NG introduced Paper 34/16.

88. Mr Marco TAI had the following response: (i) Tai Po Road already had anti-skid surfacing and crash barriers. After the accident, the Department would consider extending the coverage of the anti-skid surfacing and would add crash barriers and “reduce speed signs”; (ii) the Department would continue to discuss with the Police on other improvement measures.

89. Mr Ryan KONG had the following response: (i) in the past 12 months, Tai Po Road near Caldecott Road had 23 traffic accidents involving property damage only and 42 causing injuries, one of which was fatal; (ii) the Police had been discussing with TD on how to improve the design of the road section in question. TD put anti-skid surfacing in that particular road section in April 2016; (iii) the Police had suggested TD add bollards, “reduce speed signs” and speed enforcement cameras to enhance safety there.

90. The Chairman enquired whether damage-causing only accidents and injuries accidents were counted separately.

91. Mr Ryan KONG responded that the two figures were calculated seperately and so the total number of accidents adding up would be 65.

92. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) the current road design might make it not possible for the drivers to brake timely, thus causing accidents; (ii) many hikers and cyclists passed Tai Po Road near Caldecott Road. Also, the road section was frequented by monkeys and thus was prone to accident. She suggested the relevant departments call a joint meeting with Sham Shui Po District Council (“SSPDC”) and Sha Tin District Council (“STDC”) to discuss ways to tackle the problem; (iii) the vehicle involved was a big one and she suggested large vehicles use other roads with a safer design.

93. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views: (i) the accident had caused Tai Po Road to close for most part of the day and he suggested TD consider straightening and widening Tai Po Road to avoid accidents caused by vehicles passing sharp bends; (ii) he suggested the relevant departments consolidate views of SSPDC and STDC to improve design of the relevant road section. - 18 - Action by

94. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu said some bends in Tai Po Road were relatively narrow and accidents happened easily. He suggested that road humps might be considered in addition to the anti-skid surfacing so that the motorists would reduce speed when passing the sharp bends.

95. The Chairman concluded that: (i) the accident had caused the closure of Tai Po Road and affected traffic flow; (ii) Tai Po Road had high incidence of traffic accidents which might not be prevented simply by adding anti-skid surfacing and crash barriers. It was suggested that TD hold meetings with SSPDC and STDC to discuss ways to tackle the problem; (iii) previously, there were proposals to add road humps in Tai Po Road and near but they were not accepted by the relevant departments. It was suggested that consideration might be given to adding road humps or speed enforcement cameras in Tai Po Road near Caldecott Road so that drivers would reduce speed when going downhill; (iv) many hikers passed Tai Po Road near Caldecott Road which did not have crash barriers and accidents might happen easily.

96. Mr Marco TAI responded as follows: (i) TD was happy to have joint meetings with the Police, SSPDC and STDC to discuss the road surface design of Tai Po Road; (ii) the Department would take into account all suggestions from members.

97. The Chairman remarked that he hoped TD would arrange a joint meeting.

(f) Request for stepping up enforcement action against illegal parking in Shum Shui Po District (TAC Paper 35/16) (g) Concern over the traffic problems along Fuk Wing Street, Fuk Wa Street and Un Chau Street (TAC Paper 36/16) (i) Request for improving the illegal parking problem at Pak Wan Street and Pak Tin Street (TAC Paper 38/16)

98. The Chairman proposed to discuss agenda items (f), (g) and (i) together. Members did not raise objection.

99. Mr CHAN Wai-ming introduced Paper 35/16.

100. The Chairman introduced Paper 36/16.

101. Ms Carman NG introduced Paper 38/16.

102. Mr Marco TAI responded that: (i) TD had visited the sites mentioned in the discussion papers; (ii) Fuk Wa Street always had vehicles parked illegally causing - 19 - Action by road congestion and he hoped the Police would step up enforcement to improve the situation; (iii) the Department could arrange for a site inspection with members; (iv) he hoped the Police could step up enforcement to contain illegal parking in Un Chau Street; (v) in view of frequent illegal parking in Castle Peak Road, the Department was considering extending the restricted zone there; (vi) as the bus terminus was being rebuilt, many vehicles parked in Pak Wan Street and Pak Tin Street. The Department would consider extending the restricted zone; (vii) Un Chau Street and Castle Peak Road already had restricted zones and the Department would not consider adding extra ones for the time being as there should be spaces left for picking-up and dropping-off passengers, but it hoped that the Police could step up enforcement there; (viii) the crossing place in Tung Chau Street always had vehicles parked there illegally. The Department would consider a 24-hour restricted zone there.

103. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that prosecution statistics for the locations mentioned in the discussion paper were as follows:

Year 2016 2015 (Jan - Apr) (number of cases) Place (number of cases) Fuk Wing Street 3 024 639

Fuk Wa Street 1 234 412

Un Chau Street 4 163 1 297

Castle Peak Road 1 108 399

Tung Chau Street 319 157

Pak Wan Street 794 158

Pak Tin Street 1 035 284

He added that (i) Fuk Wing Street, Fuk Wa Street, Un Chau Street and Castle Peak Road were illegal parking black spots in the district and the Police had been taking prosecution action. If the conditions were serious, the illegal parked vehicles would be towed away; (ii) Police had stepped up enforcement action in Pak Wan Street and Pak Tin Street and the situation was improved; (iii) the Police would continue to step up enforcement action in all illegal parking black spots mentioned in the discussion papers.

104. Ms LAM Yuk-sheung had the following response: (i) Food and Environmental - 20 - Action by

Hygiene Department (“FEHD”) had noticed that some stalls in Fuk Wing Street often placed their goods outside the bounds of their stalls and FEHD had been making inspections and prosecution; (ii) three counts of prosecution were made against goods placed illegally in Fuk Wing Street between January and April 2016; (iii) the Department would step up enforcement action and educate the stall licencees.

105. Mr YUEN Hoi-man said that: (i) Sham Shing Road, Tung Chau Street near Fat Tseung Street and Tsing Sha Highway near Hoi Lai Estate entrance in Lai Po Road often had vehicles parked illegally; (ii) Road near Liberte and Banyan Garden often had estate agency vehicles taking up road spaces; (iii) Sham Mong Road near Hoi Lai Estate and Aqua Marine often had refuse collection vehicles parked illegally; (iv) he hoped the Police would step up enforcement and TD would start with the road surface design to resolve the problem of illegal parking at the above locations.

106. Mr CHAN Wai-ming raised the following views and enquiries: (i) residents complained that illegal parking in Un Chau Street and Castle Peak Road had not been improved. He hoped the Police would take enforcement action during peak periods at the specified areas; (ii) he asked the Police to provide, after the meeting, a statistics table showing prosecutions at the above locations; (iii) he asked if the 1 108 cases of prosecutions were the total for Un Chau Street and Castle Peak Road; (iv) he asked whether the Police had information of the repeated offenders and suggested that the Police should step up enforcement action against those people.

107. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she hoped TD would integrate in its planning more parking spaces to reduce illegal parking; (ii) Pak Wan Street and Pak Tin Street often had large vehicles parked there illegally. This affected pedestrians’ sightline and brought about law and order problems at night. She hoped TD would make improvements with road surface design.

108. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views: (i) Tung Chau Street near often had a number of refuse collection vehicles parking, blocking the traffic and the pedestrians’ sightline. He hoped TD would designate a restricted zone there as soon as possible; (ii) he urged FEHD to designate vehicles parking locations for refuse collecting contractors’ to prevent affecting the traffic flow.

109. Mr YAN Kai-wing asked TD to respond to illegal parking in Pak Tin Street.

110. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views: (i) FEHD could help TD and the Police alleviate illegal parking. Taking the section of Fuk Wing Street near Pei Ho Street and Nam Cheong Street as an example, stalls there often occupied the road - 21 - Action by and caused congestion. If FEHD could improve the situation, traffic congestion could be eased as a result; (ii) coach parking spaces in Fuk Wing Street near Nam Cheong Street were often taken up by other vehicles. He hoped the Police would step up action to advise the vehicles to leave as soon as possible.

111. Ms Joephy CHAN raised the following views: (i) Fuk Wing Street near often had students passing by. The illegally parked vehicles obstructed their sightline and easily caused danger; (ii) she hoped the authorities would review the number of parking spaces in SSP District and solve the problem from the planning perspective.

112. Ms Zoé CHOW said: (i) Castle Peak Road, Un Chau Street and Sham Shing Road near Aqua Marine often had vehicles illegally parked; (ii) Tung Chau Street had large vehicles parked there illegally in the evening; (iii) the location opposite to the Sparkle often had vehicles illegally parked, posing a potential danger to schoolchildren boarding/alighting school buses; (iv) she hoped that the authorities would step up enforcement, improve road surface design and increase parking spaces in the area to tackle the illegal parking problem.

113. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views and enquiries: (i) staff buses of construction company often parked in Mei Lai Road with running engine at around 6:30 a.m. The vehicles not only made noises but also took up road spaces. He hoped TD and the Police would improve the situation; (ii) private vehicles often illegally parked in Nassau Street turning left to Lai Wan Road at around 6 a.m. to 7 a.m., obstructing the school buses. He hoped the Police would institute more prosecutions; (iii) he asked TD the progress of designating a 24 hour restricted zone in Nassau Street; (iv) after the widening of pavement, the number of parking spaces in Lai Wan Road near Mount Sterling Mall had been reduced and often there were many vehicles illegally parked or even sales or promotional activities on vehicles. He hoped the Police and FEHD would follow up this case.

114. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu said that: (i) Tong Yam Street often had vehicles illegally parked, clogging up traffic; (ii) Tai Hang Tung Road often had vehicles illegally parked at night; (iii) Road near Shek Kip Mei Park exit often had vehicles illegally parked at night until early morning, blocking the sightline of morning walkers crossing there and causing accidents easily; (iv) roads near restaurants, e.g. Tai Hang Sai Street often had diners illegally parked their cars; (v) he hoped TD would follow up illegal parking at the above locations.

115. Mr LEUNG Yau-fong said illegal parking was serious in SSP District, blocking pedestrians’ sightline and easily caused danger. The Police should step up - 22 - Action by prosecution and in the long run, TD should try to solve the problem through planning process e.g. increase the parking spaces in the district.

116. The Chairman said that the total number of prosecutions against illegal parking in Hong Kong last year was 1.3 million cases and the charges of SSP parking spaces ranked second in Hong Kong, reflecting the fact that there were not enough parking spaces in the district.

117. Mr Dominic LEE said that: (i) over the weekend illegal parking was often found in the lay-by outside the glass doors of ; (ii) illegal parking was serious in Tseuk Kiu Street near Wellcome Supermarket. Since the road section was going to be repaved with eco-blocks, the residents worried that cars illegally parked there would cause road subsidence. He had repeatedly urged TD to erect fencing there but the Department said objection was received during consultation and would not accept his proposal. He pointed out that as a member of the Owners’ Corporation of a nearby housing estate and a Member of that constituency, he had never received any consultation paper. He urged TD to consider adding fencing at the above location; (iii) Tat Chee Avenue near Blocks 16 to 18 often had many learner driver vehicles parked illegally; (iv) he urged the Police to step up enforcement at the above locations and he remarked that TD should try to solve the problem starting from the planning process.

118. Ms NG Yuet-lan said Po On Road near Tonkin Street and Pratas Street had serious illegal parking, blocking the sightline. The pedestrians were forced out onto the carriageway which was very dangerous. She hoped the Police would step up enforcement.

119. Ms LAU Pui-yuk said that the junction of Nam Cheong Street and Apliu Street often had vehicles illegally parked, making it difficult for the pedestrians to cross the road there. Although TD had painted double yellow lines and erected bollards there, vehicles could still navigate round the bollards and intruded the double yellow lines zone to park illegally. She hoped TD would add more bollards there.

120. The Chairman said the road sections mentioned by members were not reported in the discussion paper and the relevant departments might not have information at hand. He hoped the relevant departments would follow up on illegal parking in the road sections pinpointed by members.

121. Mr Marco TAI responded as follows: (i) TD would follow up on illegal parking in Sham Shing Road, Tung Chau Street, Tsing Sha Highway, , Sham Mong Road, Castle Peak Road, Un Chau Street, the road section near the - 23 - Action by

Sparkle, Mei Lai Road, Tong Yam Street and Tai Hang Tung Road; (ii) the Department had been working hard to find suitable locations within the district to add more parking spaces; (iii) on designating a 24-hour restricted zone in Tung Chau Street near Sham Shui Po Park, the Department would conduct public consultation as soon as possible; (iv) the Department would study the proposed restricted zone in Pak Tin Street; (v) enquiries on consultation on Tseuk Kiu Street fencing could be directed to the District Office.

122. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded as follows: (i) the Police would, after the meeting, pass prosecution statistics to the Secretary for circulation to members; (ii) the Police would take focused enforcement action in the locations pinpointed by members in Pak Wan Street, Pak Tin Street, Fuk Wing Street, Fuk Wa Street, Un Chau Street, Castle Peak Road and Tung Chau Street; (iii) the Police had opened files in respect of illegal parking in the following places: Sham Shing Road, Lai Chi Kok Road, Lai Po Road, Sham Mong Road, Fat Tseung Street, Mei Lai Road, Nassau Street, Lai Wan Road, Tong Yam Street, Tai Hang Tung Road, Nam Shan Estate Road, Tat Chee Avenue, Tseuk Kiu Street, Po On Road and junction of Nam Cheong Street and Ap Liu Street; (iv) with limited resources, the Police found it difficult to work round the clock at the above locations to take immediate action but the priority areas would be the illegal parking black spots.

[Post-meeting note: The Secretariat passed the statistics on illegal parking prosecution in SSP District from the Police to members on 30 June this year.]

123. Ms LEUNG Ka-wai gave a consolidated response as follows: (i) the Department’s cleansing services contract required the service providers to abide by Hong Kong laws, including the traffic regulations. The Department would send its staff to conduct inspections and once the contractors’ vehicles were found to break the law, follow up action would be initiated in accordance with the contract terms; (ii) the Department had taken regular enforcement action against the promotional activities conducted on vehicles in Lai Wan Road near Mount Sterling Mall.

124. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong remarked that FEHD should send its staff to check the illegal parking problem of refuse collection vehicles.

125. Ms LEUNG Ka-wai responded that the Department would follow up on this case.

126. The Chairman concluded as follows: (i) illegal parking was serious in various locations throughout SSP District and urged the relevant departments to follow up on the issue; (ii) illegal parking was serious in SSP District because parking spaces were - 24 - Action by not enough. It is hoped that TD would add parking spaces as far as possible; (iii) it was proposed that the relevant departments should explore the use of advanced technology to solve the illegal parking problem.

(h) Concern over the problem of parking spaces along the section of Apliu Street between Kweilin Street and Yen Chow Street being obstructed by large amount of debris (TAC Paper 37/16)

127. Ms LAU Pui-yuk introduced Paper 37/16.

128. Mr Marco TAI responded as follows: (i) the section of Apliu Street between Kweilin Street and Yen Chow Street was loading/unloading zone and drivers could only load/unload passengers/goods at the specified area; (ii) many hawkers placed their goods at the loading/unloading zone so that the vehicles could not load/unload passengers/goods there. He hoped the Police and FEHD would give further information on their enforcement action.

129. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded as follows: (i) the Police inspected the above road section on 3 May and 6 May this year and found that the problem of goods blocking the loading/unloading area was not serious. The Police would continue to monitor traffic conditions at the above road section; (ii) the Police issued 310 fixed penalty tickets for illegal parking at the above road section in 2015 and 93 tickets between January and April 2016.

130. Ms LEUNG Ka-wai responded as follows: (i) FEHD cleaned up the pavement of the road section in question between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. every day. In case cleansing work was obstructed by any unclaimed object left on the pavement, a “Notice to Remove Obstruction” would be posted to require the owner to remove it within four hours, otherwise the object would be seized and impounded by the Department; (ii) for unlicensed hawkers found, the Department would, depending on the circumstances, take appropriate action e.g. warning, expulsion, prosecution or arrest; (iii) between January and April this year, the Department removed 12 objects before noon and 46 objects in the afternoon and arrested four hawkers; (iv) the Department would continue to act according to established practices and would step up enforcement action in the aforementioned road section.

131. Ms LAU Pui-yuk raised the following views and enquiries: (i) based on FEHD’s statistics, obstruction was serious at the above road section; (ii) she asked why the Department did not provide street cleaning service between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.; (iii) she hoped the relevant departments would enforce the law to the full so as to prevent obstruction on the streets. - 25 - Action by

132. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that the Police would continue to spare no efforts against illegal parking in the above road section.

133. Ms LEUNG Ka-wai responded that the Department did not provide street cleaning service between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. at the particular road section and therefore obstruction could not be removed immediately. However, more staff would be deployed there to step up enforcement during the service hours.

134. The Chairman concluded that obstruction was serious at the above road section and urged the Police and FEHD to step up enforcement.

135. Ms LAU Pui-yuk asked which department would be responsible to follow up in case obstruction disrupted the traffic.

136. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that obstruction on the carriageway would be followed up by the Police whereas obstruction on the pavement was the responsibility of FEHD.

137. Ms LAU Pui-yuk asked whether the Police would handle articles left on the carriageway.

138. Mr AU YEUNG Chung-ching responded that different departments would deal with articles on the carriageway, depending on whether they were goods, rubbish or other things.

(j) Request for expanding the pavement at Cheung Wah Street/Castle Peak Road and providing a traffic light at its crossing place (TAC Paper 39/16)

139. Mr WAI Woon-nam introduced Paper 39/16.

140. Mr Marco TAI responded as follows: (i) TD had planned to set up a traffic light controlled pedestrian crossing at the junction of Cheung Wah Street and Castle Peak Road and would start public consultation as soon as possible.

141. Mr WAI Woon-nam hoped the pavement in Castle Peak Road turning left to Cheung Wah Street would be partly expanded.

142. Mr CHAN Wai-ming raised the following views: (i) the partly widened pavement would serve as a warning to the motorists to drive safely; (ii) past experience showed that it took longer to widen a whole section of the pavement and therefore he hoped that part of the pavement would be widened first to reduce the - 26 - Action by likelihood of accidents.

143. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) there was only one set of traffic lights at the junction of Cheung Wah Street and Castle Peak Road and it would be dangerous for pedestrians to cross at a place without traffic lights; (ii) he hoped the Department would widen the pavement at the road junction.

144. Ms Zoé CHOW raised the following views: (i) the pavement at the road junction of Cheung Wah Street and Castle Peak Road was narrow and pedestrians crossing road there were accident prone; (ii) intake of Heya Delight would start soon and more pedestrians would be using the road section there. So it was necessary to add pedestrian crossing lights to ensure safety.

145. Mr Marco TAI responded that the Department would consider widening the pavement together with the addition of light controlled pedestrian crossing.

146. The Chairman concluded that the Committee noted that TD would study the proposals to widen the pavement at the junction of Cheung Wah Street and Castle Peak Road and to add light controlled pedestrian crossing there.

Agenda Item 3: Follow-up matters

(a) List of follow-up actions for matters of discussion at TAC meetings (TAC Paper 40/16)

147. Mr YUEN Chi-wai said NWFB had applied to TD to increase frequency of route 702 from every12 minutes to every 9 to10 minutes between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m.

148. Mr YEUNG Yuk raised the following enquiries: (i) it was learnt that all buses deployed to enhance frequency of route 702 came from route 701. He asked how the frequency of route 701 would be affected; (ii) route 702 was in reality running at 20 to 25 minute intervals between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. He asked how NWFB would ensure that the route could run at 9 to 10 minute intervals.

149. Mr YUEN Chi-wai responded as follows: (i) NWFB did not have additional buses available so buses had to be deployed from routes serving the same area; (ii) according to the new arrangement, route 701 would have its frequency reduced from every 10 minutes to every 12 minutes during 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.; (iii) route 701 had an occupancy rate of about 25% to 30% and was expected to rise to 27% to 30% with the new arrangement; (iv) peak hours for route 701 started after 5 p.m. whilst that for route 702 was between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. There was no overlapping and the - 27 - Action by frequency for route 701 during the peak period would not be reduced after the new arrangement was introduced; (v) NWFB would closely monitor the situation after the new arrangement was introduced and would continue the new measures if necessary.

150. Mr YEUNG Yuk asked about the launch date of the new arrangement and hoped NWFB would report on the implementation in the next meeting.

151. Mr Louis LAU said TD was processing the relevant application. Once approved would mean the new arrangement could be implemented on 23 May this year.

152. Mr LEUNG Yau-fong asked about the noise barrier works at Villa Carlton and Monte Carlton and asked the Highways Department and the Environmental Protection Department to provide information on the identification of low noise materials to be used and progress of the work.

153. Ms CHUNG Sau-mui responded that the relevant information was not yet available and would give a reply to members after the meeting.

154. Mr WAI Woon-nam enquired about the progress of improving the traffic conditions of pavement and carriageway in Cheung Sha Wan Road.

155. Mr Marco TAI responded that TD was studying various options to improve the traffic conditions in Cheung Sha Wan Road.

156. The Chairman requested TD to report the progress in the next meeting.

(b) Project items and schedules of district traffic improvement works completed, under construction or under planning within the past two months by Transport Department/Highways Department (as at 25 April 2016) (TAC Paper 41/16)

157. Ms TSE Hiu-hung asked the reasons for not starting the works in Shun Ning Road near Tonkin Street which was supposed to start last year.

158. Ms CHUNG Sau-mui responded that the relevant information was not yet available and would give a reply to members after the meeting.

Agenda Item 4: Any other business

159. Members did not raise any other business. - 28 - Action by

Agenda Item 5: Date of next meeting

160. The next meeting would be held at 9:30 a.m. on 14 July 2016 (Thursday).

161. There being no other business, the meeting ended at 1:45 p.m.

District Council Secretariat Sham Shui Po District Office July 2016