(Translation)
Minutes of the 21st Meeting of Transport Affairs Committee of Sham Shui Po District Council (5th Term)
Date: 4 June 2019 (Tuesday) Time: 9:30 a.m. Venue: Conference Room, Sham Shui Po District Council
Present
Chairman Mr CHENG Wing-shun, Vincent, MH
Members Mr CHAN Kwok-wai (Arrived at 9:45 a.m.; left at 1:30 p.m.) Mr CHAN Wai-ming, MH, JP (Arrived at 9:45 a.m.) Ms CHAN Wing-yan, Joephy (Arrived at 9:40 a.m.) Mr CHEUNG Wing-sum, Ambrose, BBS, MH, JP (Arrived at 9:55 a.m.) Ms CHOW Wing-heng, Zoé (Left at 3:15 p.m.) Mr CHUM Tak-shing (Arrived at 11 a.m.) Mr HO Kai-ming, Kalvin (Arrived at 10:30 a.m.) Mr KONG Kwai-sang (Arrived at 10:28 a.m.) Mr LAM Ka-fai, Aaron, BBS, JP (Arrived at 9:45 a.m.; left at 1:30 p.m.) Ms LAU Pui-yuk Mr LEE Tsz-king, Dominic (Left at 12:30 p.m.) Mr LEUNG Man-kwong Ms NG Mei, Carman Ms NG Yuet-lan Mr TAM Kwok-kiu, MH, JP Mr WAI Woon-nam Mr YAN Kai-wing (Arrived at 9:55 a.m.; left at 12:15 p.m.) Mr YEUNG Yuk (Arrived at 9:50 a.m.) Mr YUEN Hoi-man
Co-opted Members Mr LI Chun-hei, Joshua Mr MAK Wai-ming (Left at 12:15 p.m.)
- 2 - Action by
In Attendance Miss MAN Ka-wing, Kelly Assistant District Officer (Sham Shui Po) 1 Mr WONG Chi-tak, Keith Senior Transport Officer/Sham Shui Po, Transport Department Ms LAW Ming-chu, Cecilia Engineer/Planning 1, Transport Department Miss LO Ka-wai, Patsy Engineer/Sham Shui Po, Transport Department Mr CHANG Yiu-wa District Engineer/Lai Chi Kok, Highways Department Mr YU Chung-him District Engineer/Sham Shui Po, Highways Department Mr LAU Jo-pong, Jackie Assistant District Operations Officer, Sham Shui Po District, Hong Kong Police Force Mr NG Chi-sing Officer in-charge of District Traffic Team, Sham Shui Po District, Hong Kong Police Force Mr SO Ming-tak Assistant Officer-in-charge of Task Force Sub-unit, Cheung Sha Wan Division, Hong Kong Police Force Ms LEUNG Kar-yee, Carrie Senior Engineer/Walkability 1, Task Force/Walkability, Transport Department Mr WONG Siu-man, Simon Senior Engineer/Kowloon District West, Traffic Engineering (Kowloon) Division, Transport Department Ms NG Yu-yun, June Engineer 4/Walkability, Task Force/Walkability, Transport Department Mr Paul LENGTHORN Project Manager, Mott Macdonald Hong Kong Limited Mr Chris LEUNG Assistant Project Manager/Transport Planner, Mott Macdonald Hong Kong Limited Mr Edward TANG Principle Traffic Engineer, Mott Macdonald Hong Kong Limited Ms Winona IP Associated Director/Planner, Urbis Limited Mr YIU Yau-man, Wallace Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Regional West) 5, Environmental Protection Department Mr LAM Wai-man, John Environmental Protection Officer (Regional West) 51, Environmental Protection Department Mr LAU Kwok-ki, Woody Geotechnical Engineer/Consultant Management 21, Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr LIM Ying-lam Chief Health Inspector 3, Sham Shui Po District, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr WONG Ka-keung Senior Health Inspector (Cleansing and Pest Control)1, Sham Shui Po District Environmental Office, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr SIN Chun-ho, Leon Acting Engineer Project 1/Hardware 1, Transport Department - 3 - Action by
Mr LEE Ho-fung, Kevin Acting Senior Engineer/Project 1, Transport Department Mr CHEUNG Sau-cheong, Andrew Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Assessment and Noise) 1, Environmental Protection Department Mr KO Tin-lai, Anthony Assistant Public Relations Manager, External Affairs, MTR Corporation Limited Mr Utan WONG Manager, Operations, The Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Ltd.
Secretary Miss CHUNG Kit-nam, Mandy Executive Officer (District Council) 3, Sham Shui Po District Office
Absent
Members Mr LEE Wing-man Mr LEUNG Yau-fong Mr WONG Tat-tung, Dennis, MH, JP
Co-opted Members Mr HO Kwan-chau
- 4 - Action by
Opening Remarks
The Chairman welcomed members and representatives of government departments to the twenty-first meeting of the Transport Affairs Committee (“TAC”) of the fifth term Sham Shui Po District Council.
Agenda Item 1: Confirmation of the minutes of the 20th meeting held on 2 April 2019
2. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu said that “traffic signals” in paragraph 84 of the minutes of meeting should be amended as “speed enforcement cameras”.
3. The Committee agreed with the amendment concerned and confirmed the above minutes.
Agenda Item 2: Matters for discussion
(a) Developing Hong Kong into a Walkable City: Proposed Strategy and Conceptual Pedestrian Plan in Sham Shui Po Pilot Area (TAC Paper 47/19)
4. Ms Carrie LEUNG, Mr Chris LEUNG and Ms Winona IP introduced Paper 47/19 with the aid of PowerPoint.
5. The Chairman said that the consultation with the District Council (“DC”) was the second stage of consultation of the plan. Before the meeting, the Transport Department (“TD”) had already sent brochures with detailed information to the Members’ offices. Members were welcomed to discuss the content of the plan.
6. Ms LAU Pui-yuk raised the following views: (i) she welcomed the innovative plan put forward by TD. However, since many suggestions had been proposed in the plan, it was difficult to discuss all of them in this occasion; (ii) she requested the Department to fully consult various stakeholders in the district; (iii) the plan had not taken into account the current situation of illegal parking and article obstruction, etc. Besides, the current speed limits of the proposed locations of low speed limit zones were already very low; (iv) if the situation of illegal parking in the district was not handled or if no additional car park was built, it would be difficult to improve the walkability for pedestrians.
7. Ms Zoé CHOW raised the following views: (i) the walking time of the section from Hing Wah Street to Sham Mong Road had been lengthened due to the provision of traffic signals at the crossing. However, no suggestion was made in the plan to improve the road section concerned; (ii) the traffic load of the section of Hing Wah Street near - 5 - Action by
Sham Mong Road was reaching the full capacity, she suggested that improvement measures should be put forward in respect of the concerned situation; (iii) the lighting should be stepped up along the pavements in the neighbourhood of the waterfront to encourage public usage; (iv) it took time for road users to adapt to the alteration of traffic signs; (v) she suggested that the works in the new development area could be integrated with the existing works.
8. Mr Dominic LEE raised the following views: (i) he opined that the objective of the plan was to increase pedestrian space and reduce vehicular space; (ii) the implementation of the plan would not reduce the number of vehicles accessing Sham Shui Po (“SSP”); (iii) illegally parked vehicles frequently occupied a lane of the road section of the “Nam Cheong green corridor” suggested in the plan, thus the proposed effect could not be achieved. He opined that it was not necessary to wait until the implementation of the plan to step up enforcement actions against illegal parking; (iv) he hoped that TD would explain on how the plan could handle the current vehicular flow in the district.
9. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views and enquiries: (i) there was no shop along the road from Tonkin Street to the waterfront, there were 7 more schools outside the “school area” suggested in the plan. He suggested TD consider connecting the concerned road section by footbridges or elevated link roads; (ii) he suggested providing diagonal crossings at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road to improve walkability and reduce traffic accidents; (iii) he enquired how the Department handled the matter of the pedestrian subway from Yen Chow Street to the waterfront. He also pointed out that the complex of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“FEHD”), which was newly constructed there, was used for parking refuse collection vehicles; he opined that the public would not use the road section concerned.
10. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he agreed with TD’s direction of improving the old areas in SSP, yet it was necessary to listen to the views of different stakeholders for each suggestion; (ii) the medium and long-term measures of the plan would be implemented in the next DC term, he hoped that the Department would introduce specific arrangements at that time; (iii) the plan put forward concepts such as “market and street area”, “corridor” to facilitate pedestrians’ access to different places, while the benefits of vehicle-pedestrian segregation had not been taken into consideration; (iv) he suggested the Department consider constructing footbridges at Yen Chow Street and Tonkin Street to divert pedestrian flow effectively; (v) the designation of speed limit zones could serve the purpose of alerting drivers. He suggested designating speed limit zones at Tong Yam Street and Wai Chi Lane to ensure pedestrian safety; (vi) he hoped that the Department would promote the formation of the “south-north corridor” which was comprised of Tonkin Street, Nam Cheong Street and Yen Chow Street; (vii) he requested - 6 - Action by the Department to expedite the implementation of the short-term measures suggested in the plan within this DC term.
11. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views and enquiries: (i) TD had to consider how to handle the pedestrian flow in the walking area; (ii) he agreed that footbridges should be constructed to connect different areas in order to divert pedestrian flow; (iii) pedestrian links should be built in the neighbourhood of Pak Tin Estate and Chak On Estate so that it would be more convenient for residents to walk to the urban centre of SSP; (iv) he enquired whether the Department would expand the area of study to other locations in the district; (v) he hoped that the lighting at Tung Chau Street could be improved as soon as possible; (vi) he requested the Department and the Police to work together with FEHD to combat street obstruction by shops and hawker stalls in the district in order to ensure smooth traffic flow; (vii) it would be difficult for street traders of Pei Ho Street Market to load and unload goods after connecting Pei Ho Street and Kweilin Street.
12. Mr YUEN Hoi-man raised the following views: (i) he supported that TD had chosen SSP District as a pilot area; (ii) he hoped that the Department could collect the views of local residents; (iii) apart from implementing low speed limit zones, the Department should address the problem of illegal parking; (iv) he hoped that the Department would expand the area of study to locations which were less controversial such as Hing Wah Street West and the connecting road section from SSP to Mei Foo; (v) he suggested the Department incorporate the concept of “walkability” into infrastructure projects in planning stage; (vi) he hoped that the Department’s work would be carried out based on a pedestrian-led approach.
13. Mr MAK Wai-ming raised the following views: (i) he suggested including Castle Peak Road in the “south-north connecting corridor”; (ii) he supported the concept of “school area” and suggested increasing the number of “school areas”; (iii) the current speed limits of the proposed locations of low speed limit zones were already very low, TD had to handle the current situation first; (iv) he enquired how the Department could ensure that the vehicles would maintain at average speed.
14. Mr YAN Kai-wing raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he was concerned about the relationship between the installation of smart lampposts and the pedestrians; (ii) he enquired about the number of smart lampposts to be installed, the technology used and the use of the data collected from pedestrians.
15. Mr YEUNG Yuk raised the following views: (i) TD had not accepted members’ suggestions on improving the traffic in the district, including the provision of diagonal zebra crossings, adjustment of the countdown displays of traffic signals, at-grade pedestrian signals, etc.; (ii) since priority was given to the railway during planning, no - 7 - Action by walkable link was provided to enable members of the public to walk from the urban centre of SSP to the waterfront; (iii) he hoped that TD could modify the planning direction.
16. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she suggested TD designate the neighbourhood of Fortune Street as “school area” since there were many schools while the pavements were very narrow; (ii) she suggested the Department consider connecting SSP East and the urban centre and using the hillside escalator links system to connect the uphill and downhill of Nam Cheong Street; (iii) she suggested providing covers, sitting-out areas and cycle tracks for the roads connecting the waterfront.
17. Mr Joshua LI raised the following views: (i) he suggested TD adjust the traffic signal system of the district so that different traffic signals of the same road section could give crossing signals at the same time. This could minimise vehicle stoppage and alleviate traffic congestion; (ii) he suggested the Department install traffic signal countdown displays; (iii) the Department should build car parks at the same time for private cars and commercial vehicles in the district to reduce the number of vehicles parked at roadside.
18. Ms Joephy CHAN raised the following views: (i) after the traffic accident at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road in 2017, she had proposed suggestions for improvement at the concerned select committee. However, relevant measures was not covered in the plan; (ii) no railing was installed in Yen Chow Street as shown in the photomontage of the plan, this could not ensure pedestrian safety; (iii) while the Government was promoting the use of footbridges, TD was encouraging the public to walk on ground level. She enquired whether there was coordination between the Department and the Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”); (iv) she hoped that the plan could include barrier-free facilities such as covered walkways, smart lampposts and age-friendly traffic signals.
19. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views: (i) he welcomed TD’s plan; (ii) he hoped that the Department would pay attention to the recent development of SSP District and take into consideration the change of pedestrian flow in the district; (iii) he hoped that the Department would study how to connect West Rail Nam Cheong Station and MTR Sham Shui Po Station; (iv) he suggested TD maintain close communication internally and coordinate with district staff to prioritise different suggestions in the plan.
20. Mr Kalvin HO raised the following views and enquiries: (i) acts such as illegal parking, shop front extensions, placing construction waste at roadside, had caused traffic and pavement congestion. It was necessary for government departments to take enforcement actions; (ii) since there was no countdown display of traffic signals, vehicles weaved in and out of traffic in order to cross the junction as soon as possible; (iii) TD - 8 - Action by needed to collaborate with other departments to carry out joint operations. It would be impossible to implement the plan successfully if the above situation was not alleviated; (iv) he was concerned with the trees planted in “Nam Cheong green corridor” and enquired whether the plants were resistant to inclement weather, he was worried any tree collapse would paralyse the traffic at Nam Cheong Street.
21. The Chairman raised the following views: (i) he welcomed the introduction of the plan by TD; (ii) since there were too many details in the plan, all of them could not be discussed one by one at the meeting; (iii) he understood that the suggestion of the Department was put forward out of good intention, yet it would result in pressure on the district if there was a lack of effective management; (iv) parking spaces were insufficient in the district, the traffic would be more congested if pavements were widened without increasing the number of parking spaces; (v) he hoped that the Department would provide more data on low speed limit zones and explain how the road condition would be improved after the implementation of low speed limit zones.
22. Ms Carrie LEUNG responded as follows: (i) there were close communication and coordination within TD; (ii) the Department would strike a balance between traffic impacts and pedestrian needs, and gradually change the conventional vehicle-led transport planning with the hope of giving priority to pedestrians. Measures would be implemented as appropriate subject to the condition of different roads; (iii) the Department had launched a public consultation which lasted for three months and would organise a community workshop in SSP in August. The Department would also contact DC Members of the constituencies concerned and stakeholders to collect their views; (iv) the Department would coordinate with the Police, FEHD, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”), etc.
23. Mr Edward TANG responded as follows: (i) all streets being selected for implementing low speed limit zones were located at the market area, with high pedestrian flow and relatively low vehicular flow; (ii) a survey pointed out that the average vehicle speed of that area was lower than 30 km/h, the vehicle speed of individual road sections would be up to 50 km/h sometimes; (iii) since reducing vehicle speed could enhance pedestrian safety, it was suggested that low speed limit zones be designated at the market area.
24. Ms Carrie LEUNG added as follows: (i) low speed limit zone was one of the measures on improving walkability and enhancing pedestrian safety; (ii) the Department aimed at creating an environment which encouraged walking. The sign of speed limit zone could serve the purpose of alerting the drivers to enhance safety awareness; (iii) it was estimated that after the implementation of low speed limit zone at the market and street area, the average speed would be similar to that at present. Therefore, there would - 9 - Action by not be any actual impact on the travelling time of vehicles; (iv) many traffic accidents in the market and street area involved pedestrians. It was estimated that safety in low speed limit zones would be ensured through maintaining average vehicle speed, excluding the situation of vehicles travelling too fast occasionally and reducing the acceleration and deceleration of vehicles. When entering low speed limit zones, drivers would be more alert and sensitive to the surrounding environment such as pedestrians walking out from places where the sightlines of the drivers were obstructed. This could reduce accidents and enable pedestrians to walk on the streets more safely. Hence, it was considered that the selected location was a desirable trial spot; (v) it was also suggested in the plan that the pedestrian precinct at Kweilin Street and Pei Ho Street be extended to Lai Chi Kok Road at a certain time (12 noon to 9 p.m.) in order to enhance walkability through diversified measures; (vi) the Department planned to implement the improvement plan at the proposed “school area” on a trial basis and expand to the locations of other schools after smooth operation of the plan; (vii) some of the pavements would be widened and greening work would be carried out at “Nam Cheong green corridor”. Space for loading/unloading goods would be reserved if needed; (viii) tree experts would be arranged to handle tree problems if necessary; (ix) the Department would consider whether the lighting at “Tung Chau green corridor” was sufficient; (x) the Department would consider enhancing the linkage between Pei Ho Street and Kweilin Street, and the connection to the newly developed area in the neighbourhood of Tung Chau Street; (xi) the Department would study the adjustment of traffic signals; (xii) it was hoped that priority would be given to walking on ground level. If this was not possible due to the pavement condition, the Department would consider suggestions on footbridges and underground subways; (xiii) the Department aimed at using the integration of the old and new areas as the planning concept for the time being, and would explore the feasibility of expanding the plan to other suitable areas in the future; (xiv) the integration work of traffic signs, which would be conducted in phases, mainly concerned the removal of unnecessary road signs (e.g. 24-hour No Stopping sign). Approximately 50 signs would be removed at the first phase. The work would be conducted in 4 phases to allow drivers to gradually adapt to the changes; (xv) district consultation on all measures to be implemented would be conducted; (xvi) TD had commissioned another consultancy study to review and revise the assessment mechanism established in 2009 on projects of the hillside escalator links system. Based on the revised mechanism, TD would then carry out a preliminary vetting and detailed rating on 114 proposals on the hillside escalator links system received in the past few years (of which 5 proposals were in SSP District) and projects which met the requirements in order to accord priority and determine the first batch of projects to be implemented. The study was expected to be completed by the end of 2020; (xvii) the Government was implementing 249 projects concerning provision of ramps and lifts at footbridges and subways. In the first half of 2019, feasibility studies on over 120 proposals on installing lifts at pedestrian links had commenced; (xviii) the Government would examine the relaxation of requirements of the Transport Planning and Design Manual on the provision of covers for pedestrian links, and report the study result - 10 - Action by in a timely manner; (xix) the Department was considering the use of a smart traffic signal system. By making use of the images collected from traffic detectors, the Department could analyse the condition of pedestrian flows, vehicular flows and traffic queues to effectively coordinate the traffic lights and reduce the waiting time of pedestrians and vehicles. Field trials would be carried out only after conducting laboratory tests; (xx) the Department was exploring feasible locations of providing diagonal crossings.
25. The Chairman said that this was the first time that TD consulted DC on the plan, there would be more opportunities for members to put forward their views in the future. He asked members to ask brief follow-up questions only on the parts which the Department had not given a response.
26. Mr CHAN Wai-ming raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the vehicle speed might be more than 50 km/h occasionally in the low speed limit zones, he enquired how the Department would measure the vehicle speed concerned; (ii) one should not support the designation of low speed limit zones based on individual examples; (iii) he suggested designating low speed limit zones at different timeslots based on studies on vehicle speed; (iv) he hoped that TD could handle the situation of illegal parking since this was the main cause of reducing walkability.
27. Ms LAU Pui-yuk raised the following views: (i) designation of low speed limit zones could not improve the situation of the streets, the matter of illegally parking should be addressed first; (ii) the traffic near Pei Ho Street Market would be more congested if the pedestrian precinct was extended to Lai Chi Kok Road. She requested TD to conduct a detailed consultation on the suggestion.
28. Ms Joephy CHAN raised the following views: (i) she requested TD to provide more information about the barrier-free facilities to be provided as suggested in the plan; (ii) the original intention of the lifts of the footbridge across Tonkin Street and Lai Chi Kok Road (No. KF69) was to enable the public to use the footbridge to cross the roads conveniently. While the works had not yet been completed, the Department started encouraging the public to walk on ground level. This would cause confusion to the public; (iii) she hoped that the Department would accord priority to considering the provision of diagonal crossings at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road.
29. Ms Zoé CHOW said that the facilities of the footbridge across West Kowloon Highway connecting Lai Chi Kok and the waterfront were inadequate. She hoped that greening work could be conducted, and more age-friendly facilities could be provided to facilitate the use of the footbridge by the elderly. - 11 - Action by
30. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) the plan could not match with the actual situation of SSP District; (ii) it was difficult to implement the plan as the coordination between various departments was inadequate at present.
31. Mr Kalvin HO raised the following views: (i) the main cause of traffic accidents was the mental status of drivers, instead of vehicle speed; (ii) if the only objective was to reduce traffic accidents, it would be more effective to implement road levy so as to reduce vehicular access; (iii) he suggested that TD provide countdown displays when providing diagonal crossings at the junction of the crossroads; (iv) he requested the Department to seriously consider different factors of planting trees in urban areas.
32. Mr KONG Kwai-sang raised the following views: (i) he hoped that TD would carry out site inspection for low speed limit zones; (ii) speed restriction could not address road safety concerns, the current situation should be handled first; (iii) he enquired about the specific suggestion on the “south-north connecting corridor”.
33. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views: (i) the provision of diagonal crossings could greatly alleviate the situation of pedestrian congestion, he suggested providing diagonal crossings at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road; (ii) at present, many public housing estate projects at Tonkin Street were under construction. The way of connecting the pavements there should be planned in advance. He suggested using footbridges to connect different housing estates.
34. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) the 4 crossings at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road were rather narrow. After providing diagonal crossings, accidents might occur easily as it would be very crowded when pedestrians walked towards the same road junction; (ii) he suggested studying the provision of diagonal crossings at the junction of Nam Cheong Street and Woh Chai Street; (iii) the focus of low speed limit zones was to remind drivers that the area was different from the carriageways in general urban areas; (iv) apart from hardware, TD needed to consider how to manage the “market and street area”; (v) it was necessary to provide corresponding parking spaces and step up enforcement actions against illegal parking; (vi) he suggested conducting trials at smaller areas first. For instance, Tong Yam Street and Wai Chi Street could be designated as low speed limit zones in Tai Hang Tung area; (vii) he was concerned whether the Government had arranged additional manpower to implement the plan; (viii) he hoped that further discussion could be held at the district level next year.
35. Mr WAI Woon-nam raised the following views: (i) he always went to the Mainland before 8964 and shared the information about the transport measures of the Mainland at that time; (ii) he had reservation on the effectiveness of providing speed limit - 12 - Action by signs at low speed limit zones; (iii) he suggested constructing escalators to connect the urban centre of SSP and the uphill area to the north of Un Chau Street.
36. Mr YUEN Hoi-man raised the following views: (i) the coastal line of the existing waterfront in SSP was quite short, he hoped that the waterfront could be extended to Olympic Station after the relocation of the Wholesale Food Market Phase 1; (ii) he requested TD to report on how it would collaborate with various departments to implement the plan; (iii) he requested the Department to provide the implementation schedule for the plan, including the dates of consultation workshops, etc.
37. Mr YAN Kai-wing raised the following views: (i) he was concerned with the collection of data on walking environment and pedestrians by the use of technology, and enquired about the scope of data collection and privacy concerns; (ii) he requested the department to give a detailed explanation when reporting on the progress next time.
38. The Chairman said that the Government had implemented the scheme for smart lampposts for a long time and the scheme would be implemented in different districts.
39. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views: (i) he suggested TD divide SSP into the new area and the old area when carrying out the study; (ii) he hoped that the plan would include immediate, medium and long-term measures, the Department should start with measures which were easier to implement; (iii) at present, pedestrian flows mainly concentrated at the area to the north of Cheung Sha Wan such as Kweilin Street and Pei Ho Street. Since there was no connecting link at Lai Chi Kok Road, the situation could not be improved by simply handling the links at Nam Cheong Street and Yen Chow Street.
40. Mr Simon WONG responded as follows: (i) TD had been communicating with the Police to combat illegal parking and designate prohibited zones at suitable locations (i.e. road sections where loading/unloading activities would not be obstructed); (ii) the Department had also formulated short, medium and long-term measures to increase parking spaces in the district. For example, short-term measures included designation of undeveloped vacant lands as temporary car parks, conversion of the space underneath the flyovers to motorcycle parking spaces, etc. Medium and long-term measures included provision of more public parking spaces in suitable development projects under the principle of “single site, multiple use”; (iii) after the occurrence of the serious traffic accident at the junction of Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road at the end of 2017, the Department had already implemented a number of traffic improvement measures in 2018 which included widening of the pavement of Yen Chow Street near the road junction and adjustment of the prohibition zones near the road junction, etc.; (iv) the suggestion on providing diagonal pedestrian crossings had to be considered carefully, having regard that - 13 - Action by the traffic at Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road had already been very busy at present.
41. Ms Carrie LEUNG responded as follows: (i) the plan would include short, medium and long-term measures; (ii) short-term measures would be implemented as soon as possible. Further views of different stakeholders on medium and long-term measures would be collected; (iii) TD would contact DC Members of the constituencies concerned and conduct consultation on the improvement measures for the constituencies concerned; (iv) the Department would consult the professionals and stakeholders, and organise workshops as well; (v) the Department would report on the progress to the Council after integrating the views of different parties; (vi) the newly established Task Force/Walkability, which was a dedicated task force for projects concerning walkable city, would be responsible for the plan concerned; (vii) low speed limit zone was one of the measures on enhancing walkability. The objective of the plan was to create a safe walking environment; (viii) the Department would collaborate with staff of different departments and districts to improve district management; (ix) the road section of extending the pedestrian precinct at Kweilin Street and Pei Ho Street to Lai Chi Kok Road was rather short. Loading/unloading activities could be carried out at Ki Lung Street and Tai Nan Street, there was a time limit for the pedestrian precinct as well; (x) it was hoped that the design of the vehicular access would be improved so that the public could cross the vehicular access at the same level; (xi) regarding the “south-north connecting corridor”, the pavement of Tonkin Street was rather wide, greening work could be conducted and traffic signals could be adjusted. The pavement of Yen Chow Street was quite narrow, the Department would examine the local widening of the pavement without affecting the traffic; (xii) the Department would study how to improve the crossing arrangement at Cheung Sha Wan Road and Lai Chi Kok Road and the feasibility of providing diagonal crossings; (xiii) the Department would coordinate with other departments to improve the connection of the waterfront promenade; (xiv) the Government planned to implement a trial scheme for smart lampposts, the information about the arrangement for handling privacy data would be provided afterwards.
42. The Chairman raised the following views: (i) all members hoped that the walkability in SSP District could be improved; (ii) the scope of the plan was so wide that it was difficult to discuss the details all together at the meeting; (iii) he hoped that TD would incorporate suggestions put forward by members in the plan for consideration; (iv) he suggested the Department handle the suggestions one by one. After communicating with the stakeholders, the Department could submit the proposed measures to the Council for consultation; (v) he hoped that the Department would consider increasing the number of consultation activities.
43. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he requested TD to submit - 14 - Action by papers to explain specific details of the proposed measures to be implemented this year or early next year; (ii) he requested the Department to submit the works schedule and the details to the Council for consultation after collecting views from the local communities.
44. Ms LAU Pui-yuk added that: (i) she hoped that the Department would conduct more detailed studies and consultation on the extension of the pedestrian precinct; (ii) the public should be fully consulted on the suggestions; (iii) she did not agree with all of the suggestions.
45. Mr YAN Kai-wing said that he did not agree with the implementation of the scheme for smart lampposts to collect data from the public without the provision of further information.
46. The Chairman concluded that: (i) members had put forward many views, it was hoped that TD would implement the plan step by step; (ii) the Department was requested to submit the suggestions to the Council for consultation only after fully communicating with the stakeholders of the constituencies concerned; (iii) further discussion should be held on controversial suggestions.
(d) Illegal parking and machine noise at Yin Ping Road in Tai Wo Ping (TAC Paper 50/19)
47. The Chairman said that Ms Carman NG wished to advance the discussion on items (d) and (e) of matters for discussion.
48. The Committee agreed with the above arrangement.
49. Ms Carman NG introduced Paper 50/19.
50. Mr Wallace YIU introduced Response Paper 65/19, and reported that during a meeting with Ms Carman NG, the Chairman of The Owners’ Committee of Dynasty Heights and residents’ representatives on 3 June this year, he had listened to their views and discussed the follow-up work on noise nuisance caused by the nearby construction site. After the meeting, it was agreed that the following follow-up works would be conducted: (i) the Environmental Protection Department (“EPD”) would step up inspection at the above construction site; (ii) EPD would discuss with the contractor on the further reduction of the number of works hours of using powered mechanical machines which created much noise during the restricted hours; (iii) the relevant Member, The Owners’ Committee of Dynasty Heights and the residents concerned would maintain close communication with EPD and report any suspected irregularities of noise level at the above construction site by the contractor. - 15 - Action by
51. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) the Police had monitored the problem of illegal parking at Yin Ping Road near the construction site adjacent to Dynasty Heights; (ii) during the period from January to April 2019, SSP Police District had conducted traffic control in the neighbourhood of the above location, and issued 38 fixed penalty notices (“FPNs”) at Yin Ping Road, 105 FPNs at Chak On Road and 936 FPNs at Nam Cheong Street; (iii) the Police would continue to monitor the situation of illegal parking at the above location and conduct traffic control.
52. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) apart from enforcement actions by the Police, TD should also assist in improving the situation of illegal parking at the nearby construction site; (ii) residents did not wish that EPD would approve the further extension of the permit period of the construction site and construction works after 7 p.m.; (iii) the noise would cause nuisance to nearby residents if construction works was carried out during weekends and public holidays.
53. Ms NG Yuet-lan raised the following views: (i) she opined that there was inadequate consultation before EPD had granted the permit; (ii) she could not accept that construction works was carried out until 11 p.m. and on Sundays; (iii) the noise of the construction site, which included the noise created by piling and construction activities, seriously affected the quality of living of residents.
54. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired whether EPD could terminate the permit of the construction site, carry out the vetting and approval procedures anew, and shorten the time that noise could be created; (ii) he requested the Department to provide the enforcement figures and the details concerned.
55. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired whether EPD had taken into account the environmental factors of the location of the application concerned when vetting the permit application; (ii) he enquired about the vetting and approval criteria and the monitoring mechanism of the Department; (iii) he opined that the Department had to consider the impacts of the works on nearby residents.
56. Mr Wallace YIU responded as follows: (i) when issuing permits, EPD would conduct assessments in accordance with the Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Work other than Percussive Piling promulgated by the Noise Control Ordinance. Assessments would also be carried out having regard to the environment of the location of the application concerned, the distance between the construction site and the residential area, and the impacts on residents. The requirements varied among different regions; (ii) the Department would carry out inspection at construction sites and take enforcement actions against breaches of permit conditions. The permit could be cancelled if irregularities were found; (iii) after issuance of the permit, the Department - 16 - Action by would carry out inspection and enforcement actions according to the conditions stipulated in the permit, including the types and number of powered mechanical machines which were permitted to be used; (iv) in the past, the Department had arranged for unannounced inspection during the restricted hours including weekday evenings and Sundays or public holidays; (v) after residents lodged complaints, the Department would send staff to inspect the construction site. Enforcement actions would be taken if there was enough evidence to prove that the construction site did not comply with the conditions stipulated in the permit; (vi) no irregularity had been found during the inspection conducted in the past, the Department would continue to carry out inspection; (vii) members’ views on the issuance of permits were noted.
57. Ms NG Yuet-lan raised the following views: (i) EPD had issued a permit without consultation when vetting the application for the first time; (ii) even after nearby residents had lodged complaints, the Department had not conducted consultation when vetting the application again, and it had issued the permit to the concerned construction site; (iii) she enquired whether the Department had reduced the impacts on residents.
58. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) EPD had issued the permit in accordance with statutory requirements, yet the works had caused great nuisance to the residents. He opined that the legislation could not protect public interests; (ii) he opined that the Council needed to express its stance on the matter of the issuance of permit by EPD, and request for the revision or revocation of the permit.
59. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) using the number of machines as the enforcement standard could not effectively stop the nuisance caused by the construction site to the residents; (ii) when vetting the permit application again, EPD had not conducted consultation, nor had it provided any feasible option to protect the public; (iii) she hoped that a letter would be sent to the Director of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) to explain the situation.
60. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views: (i) he opined that the current approach of EPD could not provide assistance to the residents effectively; (ii) even if the construction site complied with the permit conditions, it still caused nuisance to the residents; (iii) he hoped that EPD would liaise with the developer to avoid carrying out noisy works procedures at night and during holidays.
61. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) he opined that proper arrangement of works procedures of the construction site could reduce the noise. EPD should require the contractor to use machines which created less noise; (ii) he requested the Department to provide the past enforcement figures and enquired whether the machines concerned complied with the requirements. - 17 - Action by
62. Mr Aaron LAM raised the following views: (i) he hoped that the Committee would write to DEP to request the Department to consider members’ views; (ii) he suggested solving the problem through liaison.
63. The Chairman said that EPD should not follow the past practice when handling the issue concerned.
64. Mr Wallace YIU responded as follows: (i) the Department would step up inspection and enforcement at the above construction site, and discuss with the contractor the time of carrying out noisy works procedures; (ii) in accordance with the legislation and the requirements of the Technical Memorandum, the Department could cancel the permit concerned after taking into consideration the complaints received and other relevant factors including the proof of the contractor contravening the conditions stipulated in the permit.
65. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu hoped that the Police would assist in combating illegal parking.
66. The Chairman concluded as follows: (i) the Committee was dissatisfied with EPD’s response; (ii) EPD was requested to maintain close communication with the DC Member of the constituency concerned and report on the latest development; (iii) it was suggested that the Committee write to EPD to relay members’ views.
[Post-meeting note: EPD submitted the latest report on its work vide TAC Paper 75/19.]
[The Chairman left the Conference Room and the meeting was chaired by Mr Aaron LAM.]
(e) Issue concerning the staircase built on the pavement of Lung Ping Road for carrying out repair works (TAC Paper 51/19)
67. Ms Carman NG introduced Paper 51/19.
68. Mr Woody LAU introduced Response Paper 67/19.
69. Mr SO Ming-tak responded as follows: (i) during the period from January 2018 to May 2019, only one burglary case had occurred at the road section mentioned in the paper; (ii) the Police had already strengthened patrol at the location concerned.
70. The Chairman asked members to refer to Response Paper 68/19 of the Lands Department (“LandsD”). - 18 - Action by
71. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she requested CEDD to conduct local consultation before carrying out works in the future; (ii) she hoped that the paper would be referred to the next meeting which the representatives of LandsD would attend, and requested the Department to actively follow up on the installation of railings; (iii) she was concerned that the newly built staircase would allow thieves to see the situation inside the residential flats nearby and affect security. Wild boars could also run downhill through the staircase and cause disturbance.
72. Mr Woody LAU responded as follows: (i) CEDD would consult different departments including LandsD and the Sham Shui Po District Office (“SSPDO”) on slope stabilisation works. The Department would also submit progress report on the works and the Landslip Prevention and Mitigation Programme of the district to the Council regularly; (ii) the Department had explained the details of the works concerned to the DC Member of the constituency concerned and nearby residents in 2017; (iii) vegetation had been replanted at the works location, the staircase for carrying out repair works would be covered after the plants grew.
73. Mr Aaron LAM enquired about the Police’s measures on preventing robbery at the location concerned.
74. Mr SO Ming-tak responded as follows: (i) the Police would carry out patrol from time to time; (ii) publicity work on crime prevention would be strengthened.
75. Ms NG Yuet-lan raised the following views: (i) the department should propose improvement measures immediately after learning that the current situation would affect the residents; (ii) the department had not conducted consultation before carrying out the works; (iii) she suggested planting taller trees near the staircase and restoring the environment there.
76. Ms Carman NG raised the following views: (i) she hoped that the Police would step up patrol; (ii) it took time for the plants to grow, she opined that trees should be replanted.
77. Mr Woody LAU responded as follows: (i) the Department would soon remove one section of the maintenance access above the vacant land near Lung Ping Road and follow up on the matter of installing wire mesh with LandsD; (ii) the Department would study whether trees could be replanted.
78. Mr Aaron LAM concluded as follows: (i) it was hoped that CEDD and LandsD would study the improvement measures to address the problems which might arise from the works; (ii) it was hoped that the Police would follow up on the situation of law and - 19 - Action by order of the location concerned and step up publicity work on crime prevention.
(b) Request for installing CCTV cameras on lampposts and introducing smart lampposts to the district as soon as possible so as to combat illegal parking in the community effectively (TAC Paper 48/19)
79. Mr YUEN Hoi-man introduced Paper 48/19.
80. Mr Aaron LAM asked members to refer to Response Paper 63/19 of the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (“OGCIO”).
81. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) the Police continued to combat the situation of illegal parking at the locations concerned, the enforcement figures were shown in the table below; (ii) the SSP Police District was one of the pilot districts of the trial of Electronic Fixed Penalty Tickets, relevant training would be conducted starting from July this year. It was expected that the trial would be carried out in the third quarter of this year; (iii) due to limited resources, only the traffic team of the SSP Police District would participate in the trial at the preliminary stage; (iv) concerning the suggestion of installing CCTV cameras on smart lampposts to combat the problem of illegal parking in the community, the Police would give advice from the perspective of traffic enforcement action only.
Number of FPNs issued Date January to April 2018 January to April 2019 Location Sham Mong 590 542 Road Lai Chi Kok 2 100 2 491 Road Sham Shing 250 366 Road
82. Mr Aaron LAM raised the following views: (i) in the Mainland, there was already a system which used CCTV cameras for initiating prosecution, it was not necessary to deploy staff to carry out patrol and enforcement; (ii) the CCTV camera system could combat the situation of illegal parking effectively.
83. Mr YUEN Hoi-man raised the following views: (i) he opined that smart lampposts could facilitate the prosecution against illegal parked vehicles and reduce the traffic congestion caused by illegal parking; (ii) he suggested installing smart lampposts at the locations of major traffic bottlenecks; (iii) he wished to relay the request for installing - 20 - Action by
CCTV cameras to government departments.
84. Mr Aaron LAM concluded as follows: (i) the Committee hoped that SSP District would be included in the Multi-functional Smart Lampposts pilot scheme; (ii) it was suggested that the Committee write to OGCIO to request for selecting SSP District as the next pilot district.
[The Chairman returned to the Conference Room and resumed chairmanship of the meeting.]
(c) Request for installing a smart device at the traffic signal pole of the pedestrian crossing at Lai King Hill Road near Ching Lai Court (TAC Paper 49/19)
85. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG introduced Paper 49/19.
86. Ms Cecilia LAW introduced Response Paper 69/19.
87. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views: (i) the location mentioned in the paper provided access between West Rail Mei Foo Station and Princess Margaret Hospital, the pedestrian flow there was heavy during peak hours; (ii) he hoped that the duration of the green signal of the pedestrian traffic signal there could be extended to 25 seconds; (iii) he hoped that a countdown display of pedestrian traffic signal and a smart device could be installed so that the elderly could extend the duration of the green signal by using Octopus Card; (iv) since the traffic there was busy during several periods of time only, the installation of the smart device concerned was unlikely to affect the traffic.
88. Mr Joshua LI raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired how TD determined the duration of the traffic signals; (ii) the location concerned was not an area with busy traffic, the duration of crossing the road could be extended to provide convenience to the public; (iii) he hoped that the waiting time for pedestrians to cross the road could be shortened; (iv) the countdown display should not be linked to Elder Octopus; (v) he enquired about the planning for implementing the use of countdown display.
89. Ms Cecilia LAW responded that members’ enquiries about the traffic signals would be referred to the staff of relevant units for reply.
90. Mr Ambrose CHEUNG raised the following views: (i) the downhill vehicles there travelled at rather high speed, it was dangerous for pedestrians to stand on the safety island in the middle of the road; (ii) 22 seconds might not be sufficient for the elderly or other people in need to cross the road; (iii) he requested for further extension of the duration of crossing the road, installation of a countdown display and a smart device to extend the - 21 - Action by duration of crossing the road.
91. Mr Joshua LI said that since there was a bend at the location concerned and vehicles generally travelled at rather high speed, he suggested increasing the number of railings.
92. Ms Cecilia LAW responded as follows: (i) members’ views on the traffic signals would be relayed; (ii) the Department would study the feasibility of installing more railings.
93. The Chairman concluded that the department was requested to address members’ aspirations as soon as possible.
(f) Illegal parking problem can never be alleviated as the carriageways are occupied by goods (TAC Paper 52/19)
94. Mr CHUM Tak-shing introduced Paper 52/19.
95. Mr LIM Ying-lam responded as follows: (i) FEHD would cooperate with the Police in carrying out joint operations from time to time; (ii) FEHD was mainly responsible for the obstruction of pavements and would take actions if such situation occurred.
96. Mr SO Ming-tak responded as follows: (i) during the period from 1 January and 31 May this year, the Police had carried out 85 joint operations with FEHD at the location mentioned in the paper, issuing 593 FPNs at Shun Ning Road and 150 FPNs at Cheung Wah Street; (ii) the Police was concerned about road safety and would step up patrol and enforcement if necessary.
97. The Chairman enquired how the Police handled the situation of placing articles at roadside which obstructed parking of vehicles.
98. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he hoped that the Police would adopt measures in the morning to improve the situation; (ii) he enquired how the department handled the situation of road obstruction caused by liquefied petroleum gas cylinders.
99. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following enquiries: (i) whether SSPDO could assist in handling the situation concerned; (ii) whether the legislation allowed departments to handle the articles being placed on pavements or roads immediately. - 22 - Action by
100. The Chairman raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired how the departments take enforcement actions if the shops placed articles on roads; (ii) at present, the frequent occurrence of similar situation resulted in a situation that nearly all on-street parking spaces were privatised by the shops, the traffic was thus seriously affected.
101. Mr LIM Ying-lam responded as follows: (i) FEHD was responsible for handling the situation of pavement obstruction caused by miscellaneous articles; (ii) the Department would first advise the shops placing the articles to remove the articles. If the identity of the owner of the articles was unknown, a “Notice to Remove Obstruction” which was commonly known as “yellow paper” would be posted and the owner was required to remove the articles within 4 hours; (iii) the Department would remove unclaimed articles; owners might be prosecuted if they claimed those articles.
102. Mr SO Ming-tak responded that the Police mainly took enforcement actions against vehicles obstructing traffic flow.
103. The Chairman said that the situation was worsening as there was no obvious consequence.
104. Mr SO Ming-tak responded as follows: (i) it was necessary to coordinate the work of the Police and FEHD; (ii) during the period from 1 January and 31 May this year, the Police had issued 23 summonses for street obstruction at the above location; (iii) if articles being placed on roads were found, a warning would be given to the owner first. If the articles were not removed after a reasonable period of time, a summons would be issued against the owner.
105. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views and enquiries: (i) the Police might not accord priority to handling the situation of articles obstructing roads; (ii) it was necessary for FEHD, the Police and SSPDO to coordinate the work concerned; (iii) he enquired whether SSPDO could combat the situation of placing articles on roads after it had combated shop front extensions.
106. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) the division of work between FEHD and the Police was unclear, the shops might easily misunderstand that no department would take enforcement actions and thus continue such acts; (ii) the shops would take away the articles temporarily after the warning, this could not help solving the problem; (iii) it was necessary to take rigorous enforcement actions such as multiple issuance of summonses in one day.
107. The Chairman raised the following views: (i) traffic congestion and the situation of illegal parking were serious in SSP District, one of the causes was the prolonged - 23 - Action by occupation of on-street parking spaces by some vehicles; (ii) he hoped that FEHD and the Police could coordinate with each other.
108. Assistant District Officer 1 responded that SSPDO would enquire the two departments of the situation and assist in coordination if necessary.
109. The Chairman said that he hoped that the departments would strengthen enforcement and report the enforcement situation at the next meeting.
110. Mr WAI Woon-nam hoped that SSPDO would take up the coordination role.
111. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) deployment and coordination were necessary for carrying out territory-wide enforcement work, he hoped that SSPDO would coordinate the operation; (ii) he hoped that the Police would step up enforcement.
112. The Chairman concluded that it was hoped that the departments would handle the situation concerned as soon as possible.
(g) Strongly request the MTR Corporation Limited to install Fare Saver machine in Hoi Ying Estate (TAC Paper 53/19)
113. Ms Zoé CHOW introduced Paper 53/19.
114. The Chairman asked members to refer to Response Paper 64/19 of the Housing Department (“HD”).
115. Mr Anthony KO responded as follows: (i) Fare Saver machine was a business promotion programme which aimed at attracting the public to walk to the nearest MTR Station and take MTR. This could provide concession to passengers and expand the source of clientele at the same time, achieving a win-win situation; (ii) to install a Fare Saver machine, it was necessary to meet various requirements such as electricity supply, sufficient space, security system, the walking distance between the location of the machine and the nearest MTR Station, etc.; (iii) MTR noted that the intake of many new housing estates in the neighbourhood of Hoi Ying Estate had commenced, it would pay attention to the district development and conduct further study; (iv) members were welcomed to put forward their views for reference.
116. Mr Keith WONG responded as follows: (i) TD had been encouraging public transport operators to provide concessionary measures if possible, having regard to the social and economic environment, market situation, operating condition, passenger demand, etc.; (ii) owing to the spirit of free enterprise, it is up to the operator to decide - 24 - Action by whether to provide concession; (iii) the Department would continue to encourage MTR to provide more Fare Saver machines and other concessionary measures.
117. Ms Zoé CHOW raised the following views: (i) many residents of Hoi Ying Estate had to travel to and from the New Territories or Hong Kong Island, the intake of Hoi Lok Court was about to commence as well; the area was very suitable for installing a Fare Saver machine; (ii) site inspection could be carried out to identify suitable locations if necessary.
118. Mr YUEN Hoi-man said that apart from Hoi Ying Estate and Hoi Lok Court, there were also many housing estates nearby. It was worthwhile to provide Fare Saver machines from a commercial point of view as well.
119. Mr KO Tin-lai responded as follows: (i) members’ views would be relayed to relevant departments for further study; (ii) MTR had been reviewing various promotion programmes from time to time having regard to market changes, passenger demand and market environment.
120. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired about the specific requirements of MTR on installing Fare Saver machines; (ii) he suggested a Fare Saver machine be installed in Mei Yick House of Shek Kip Mei Estate.
121. Mr CHUM Tak-shing enquired about MTR’s mechanism on reviewing the suggestions on installing Fare Saver machines.
122. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views: (i) residents of the new reclamation area in the neighbourhood of Hoi Ying Estate were accustomed to taking Tsuen Wan Line, the provision of a Fare Saver machine might attract the public to take different lines; (ii) he suggested the Fare Saver machine programme be extended to Lai Chi Kok Station and Cheung Sha Wan Station.
123. Ms LAU Pui-yuk raised the following views: (i) she suggested installing a Fare Saver machine in Pei Ho Street Market and encourage the public to go to Nam Cheong Station in order to divert the pedestrian flow of MTR SSP Station; (ii) she hoped that MTR could benefit the public.
124. Mr KONG Kwai-sang raised the following views: (i) he suggested installing a Fare Saver machine in Lei Cheng Uk Estate; (ii) MTR should consider providing other forms of concession as well.
125. Mr WAI Woon-nam suggested MTR provide the concessionary fare of $2 directly. - 25 - Action by
126. Mr Anthony KO responded as follows: (i) MTR reviewed various promotion programmes from time to time and would make reference to members’ views; (ii) members were welcomed to provide more details of the proposed locations including the walking distance, the condition of the location, electricity supply and sufficient space, etc. so that relevant departments could study the feasibility; (iii) regarding the locations of installing Fare Saver machines, the effectiveness of the locations concerned in encouraging more members of the public to take MTR would be taken into consideration.
127. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu said that accidents had occurred frequently in MTR in recent years, he suggested using provision of Fare Saver machines as one of the compensatory measures.
128. Ms Zoé CHOW hoped that when establishing criteria for installing Fare Saver machines, MTR would consider making adjustment having regard to the distance.
(h) Request for providing an additional bus stop at Sham Mong Road near Hing Wah Street West for KMB Route No. 296C (TAC Paper 54/19)
129. Ms Zoé CHOW introduced Paper 54/19.
130. Mr Keith WONG responded as follows: (i) according to the bus route development plan implemented in 2018-19, the Kowloon Motor Bus (“KMB”) had extended the terminus of bus route number 296C from Sham Mong Road to Lai Ying Street on 24 March this year to complement the development of the neighbourhood of the new reclamation area; (ii) due to route alteration, the first mid-way stop of the bus route concerned travelling to Tseung Kwan O had to be moved forward for approximately 200 metres, causing inconvenience to some passengers; (iii) TD agreed that it was necessary to consider providing a bus stop at Sham Mong Road near Tack Ching Girls’ Secondary School. However, it was found after site inspection that there were structures such as planters at the location concerned.
131. Ms Cecilia LAW responded as follows: (i) at present, the said road section of Sham Mong Road eastbound was a two-lane carriageway. Since the construction of large-scale residential estates and private development projects in the vicinity would soon be completed, in order to avoid causing serious traffic impacts on Sham Mong Road, the Department suggested providing a new bus lay-by if an additional bus stop was to be provided at the location concerned; (ii) the whole bus lay-by would be approximately 45 metres long and 3.5 metres wide and would affect the existing planters and the pavement; (iii) trees in the existing planters needed to be relocated. There might be underground pipelines underneath the planters and the pavement nearby, it was necessary to obtain information from public utility companies and carry out investigation if - 26 - Action by necessary. If there were underground pipelines, the depth of pipelines had to be increased as the location concerned would be converted from a pavement to a road; (iv) during the works period, it was inevitable that the traffic of Sham Mong Road eastbound would be affected.
132. Mr CHANG Yiu-wa responded as follows: (i) the information about the actual construction cost and schedule was not available for the time being; (ii) the arrangements for the trees had to be further discussed with LCSD; (iii) it would take approximately 3 months to complete the road works without taking into account the time for handling the tree matter.
133. Mr Utan WONG responded that it was suggested that bus route number 296C could be diverted to travel via Aqua Marine.
134. Mr YEUNG Yuk raised the following views: (i) bus route number 702B would commence operation and could use the new bus stop; (ii) he hoped that the Department would conduct a feasibility study as soon as possible.
135. Ms Zoé CHOW raised the following views: (i) she agreed that a bus stop should be provided at Aqua Marine so that pedestrian flow could be diverted effectively; (ii) if bus route number 702B could stop at the new bus stop in the future, the burden on bus route number 702 could be alleviated.
136. Mr Keith WONG responded as follows: (i) he would study in detail the suggestion on route alteration with the staff of the Bus Development Division and Sai Kung District; (ii) the current journey of bus route number 296C was already very long, further extension of the route might cause inconvenience to passengers, particularly passengers boarding at the terminus at Lai Ying Street; (iii) the provision of an additional bus lay-by at Sham Mong Road was beneficial to the long-term development of the bus network of SSP.
137. Mr YUEN Hoi-man said that he did not oppose the provision of a bus stop at Aqua Marine, yet he was concerned that there might be technical difficulties.
138. Mr Utan WONG responded as follows: (i) if a bus stop was provided at Aqua Marine, the vehicle mileage would be increased by approximately 1 kilometre and the travelling time would be increased by around 5 minutes; (ii) KMB had the responsibility to strike a balance between the needs of new and current passengers; (iii) KMB would continue to discuss with TD the provision of new bus stops, yet the faster way was to travel via Aqua Marine; (iv) KMB would not increase the bus fare due to route extension.
139. The Chairman concluded that the department and KMB were requested to - 27 - Action by continue to follow up on the matter concerned.
(i) Request for installing speed detectors and noise meters at West Kowloon Corridor (from The Pacifica to One West Kowloon) and West Kowloon Highway (from Cullinan West to Hoi Ying Estate) (TAC Paper 55/19)
140. Mr YUEN Hoi-man introduced Paper 55/19.
141. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) the Police would rigorously combat speeding by using tools such as road speed enforcement cameras, speed enforcement laser guns, digital radars, military patrol vehicles and unmarked police vehicles; (ii) military patrol vehicles and unmarked police vehicles were equipped with speed enforcement system and vehicle identification system; (iii) during the period from January to April this year, the Police had carried out 61 enforcement operations at West Kowloon Corridor and West Kowloon Highway and prosecuted 358 drivers who had broken speed limit. Military patrol vehicles and unmarked police vehicles had prosecuted 23 drivers who had broken speed limit. In order to combat illegal racing activities, the Police had also set up vehicle inspection roadblocks and intercepted 33 vehicles which were not roadworthy to carry out inspection.
142. Mr Kevin LEE responded as follows: (i) West Kowloon Corridor was one of the suitable sites for installing new speed enforcement cameras this year; (ii) after site inspection, it was found that it would be technically difficult to install the cameras at the location concerned. The Department was studying the use of new speed enforcement technology; (iii) the Department would commission the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department to carry out the Average Speed Camera System Trial Scheme in the fourth quarter of this year to study the feasibility of using the system in the territory and the Court’s advice on using the system for collecting evidence; (iv) the Department planned to install cameras at the access and exit points of the road section under monitoring, record the time of vehicles entering and leaving the road section, identify vehicles by car plates and calculate their average speed; (v) the system concerned could apply on road sections with few access points only. To minimise errors, each road section must be at least one kilometre long. West Kowloon Corridor met the requirement of the trial scheme concerned; (vi) it was estimated that it would take 1 year to collect data and handle possible situations.
143. Mr Andrew CHEUNG responded as follows: (i) in accordance with the Road Traffic Ordinance, vehicles which were first registered in Hong Kong were required to meet the noise emission standards stipulated in the Noise Control (Motor Vehicles) Regulation; (ii) the Road Traffic (Construction and Maintenance of Vehicles) Regulations required vehicles to be installed with silencers. The silencers should be maintained in - 28 - Action by good and efficient condition, they should not be altered or replaced in such a way that more exhaust gases were emitted, and louder noise was created; (iii) if necessary, EPD would provide professional advice to the enforcement departments concerned to facilitate enforcement.
144. Mr YUEN Hoi-man enquired whether the two road sections mentioned in the paper were included in the trial scheme of TD and he also enquired about the scope of the scheme.
145. Mr Kevin LEE responded as follows: (i) since the road network of West Kowloon Highway was rather complex, the scheme would include West Kowloon Corridor only; (ii) the scope covered the road section starting from the two access points at the south of West Kowloon Corridor, which were near Cherry Street Park and at Olympian City 2 near Cherry Street, to the exit point near Banyan Garden, The Pacifica, Aqua Marine and Liberte (“Four Little Dragons”), the whole road section was approximately 2 kilometres long.
146. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views and enquiries: (i) he enquired whether speed enforcement cameras could be installed at the road section of West Kowloon Corridor near Wing Cheong Estate; (ii) he hoped that the department could liaise with DC Members of the constituencies concerned before implementing new measures.
147. Ms Zoé CHOW raised the following views: (i) the housing estates near West Kowloon Highway had been affected by traffic noise; (ii) she hoped that the department could study the use of the Average Speed Camera System on West Kowloon Highway; (iii) she had reservation on the effectiveness of EPD’s approach in reducing vehicle noise at source.
148. Mr NG Chi-sing responded that the responses to members’ enquiries could not be given for the time being, supplementary information would be provided afterwards.
149. Mr Kevin LEE responded as follows: (i) the locations of installing new speed enforcement cameras were determined by different experts such as the Police, the Traffic Engineering Divisions of different districts and the Road Safety and Standards Division; (ii) West Kowloon Highway was one of the sites under consideration but it was not included in the finalised ones.
150. Mr Andrew CHEUNG responded as follows: (i) when the vehicles were first registered, EPD was responsible for vetting the information about noise emission of the vehicles concerned which was submitted by the applicants for TD’s consideration; (ii) enforcement actions against vehicles emitting excessive noise due to modification - 29 - Action by would be carried out by the Police and TD.
151. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong enquired whether the trial scheme would be carried out at the road section from Olympian City to “Four Little Dragons”.
152. Mr Kevin LEE responded that the trial scheme would cover the road section from the 2 access points of West Kowloon Corridor which were mentioned earlier to “Four Little Dragons”.
153. The Chairman concluded that the departments were requested to study members’ suggestions.
(j) Request for providing additional motorcycle parking spaces in the district (TAC Paper 56/19)
154. Mr WAI Woon-nam introduced Paper 56/19.
155. Miss Patsy LO responded as follows: (i) at present, there was only one lay-by at Cheong San Lane for vehicles to carry out loading/unloading activities. It was learnt that some organisations would use the lay-by concerned for mobile van activities. If additional motorcycle parking spaces were provided, there would be less space for loading/unloading activities. Therefore, the Department would not consider providing additional motorcycle parking spaces there for the time being; (ii) the Highways Department (“HyD”) would soon commence the works for provision of additional motorcycle parking spaces at the location outside Trinity Towers at Kweilin Street.
156. Mr YU Chung-him responded that the works at Trinity Towers at Kweilin Street was expected to commence and complete within next month.
157. Mr WAI Woon-nam enquired whether there were other suitable locations in the district for providing additional motorcycle parking spaces.
158. Miss Patsy LO responded as follows: (i) TD was always concerned about the community’s demand for parking spaces, including motorcycle parking spaces; (ii) the Department would identify suitable locations in the district for providing additional parking spaces without affecting road safety and other road users; (iii) members were welcomed to propose feasible sites.
159. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu suggested that TD could study whether a road could be provided in the neighbourhood of Sai Chuen Road near Cheong San Lane to make good use of the space there as motorcycle parking spaces. - 30 - Action by
(k) Request for clamping down on prolonged parking at on-street metered parking spaces in Cheung Sha Wan District Request for changing the parking time of some busiest metered parking spaces from 1 hour to 30 minutes (TAC Paper 57/19)
160. Mr CHUM Tak-shing introduced Paper 57/19.
161. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) the Police was always concerned about the situation of prolonged parking, the enforcement figures during the period between January and April this year were shown in the table below; (ii) for 2018 as a whole, SSP Police District had issued 113 594 FPNs for illegal parking, with an increase of approximately 10% as compared to 2017. The efforts in combating illegal parking had not been reduced; (iii) the Police would continue to combat the situation of illegal parking to ensure road safety and pedestrian safety in the community.
Location Number of FPNs issued for prolonged parking
Cheung Wah Street 150
Un Chau Street 2 376
Shun Ning Road 593
162. Ms Cecilia LAW responded as follows: (i) the upper limit for parking time of private car parking spaces at the three streets mentioned in the paper was shown in the table below; (ii) the upper limit for parking time of most of the on-street private car parking spaces in the district was 2 hours, the upper limit for parking time of only a small number of locations was 30 minutes; (iii) TD believed that on-street private car parking spaces were mainly used for leisure purpose and met the demand of the general public; (iv) in the vicinity of special facilities such as markets and community halls, the Department would shorten the upper limit for parking time to one hour by taking into account the temporary parking needs and the utilisation rate of parking spaces; (v) suitable sites could be selected for implementing the measure on a trial basis after carrying out site inspection.
Location Upper limit for parking time of private car parking spaces Cheung Wah Street from Cheung Sha Wan Road to 2 Hours Po On Road
The whole section of Un Chau Street (no on-street parking spaces) - 31 - Action by
Shun Ning Road (except for the section from 2 Hours Tonkin Street to Pratas Street)
Shun Ning Road (the section from Tonkin Street to 0.5 Hour Pratas Street)
163. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) he hoped that TD would implement the measure at busy locations first; (ii) he requested the Police to consider creating the post of night-shift Traffic Wardens.
164. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) since Traffic Wardens belonged to civilian grades, a change of duty time had to be studied and decided by the Headquarters; (ii) members’ views would be relayed.
165. Mr CHUM Tak-shing hoped that the request concerned would be relayed to the Civil Service Bureau.
166. The Chairman concluded that it was hoped that the Police would step up efforts in handling the situation of prolonged parking.
(l) Request for improving the junction of Fuk Wing Street and Cheung Wah Street immediately (TAC Paper 58/19)
167. Mr CHUM Tak-shing introduced Paper 58/19.
168. Ms Cecilia LAW responded as follows: (i) after the occurrence of a traffic accident on 21 April this year, TD and HyD had carried out site inspection and formulated short, medium and long-term measures; (ii) short-term measures included the provision of a pair of “Pedestrian crossing ahead” traffic signs at the junction of Cheung Wah Street towards Fuk Wing Street to remind the public of the pedestrian crossing ahead, and the provision of a “Slow” road marking on the road surface to alert drivers of the side without give-way lines at Fuk Wing Street. The two works projects had been completed on 17 May this year; (iii) for medium-term measures, it was suggested that the pedestrian crossing at Cheung Wah Street near Fuk Wing Street would be cancelled, the local consultation was underway. If there was no objection, it was expected that HyD would carry out the works at the end of this year or early next year; (iv) before the commencement of the works, HyD would close the pavement temporarily by placing water-filled barriers at roadside; (v) for long-term measures, it was suggested that a new pedestrian crossing would be provided at the location which was 20 metres at the south of Cheung Wah Street and outside Kim Shin Lane. However, it might take longer time to carry out studies as the works involved dredging and cancellation of parking spaces; - 32 - Action by
(vi) medium and long-term measures would be implemented one after another as far as possible.
169. Mr CHUM Tak-shing raised the following views: (i) he agreed that emergency measures should be implemented first; (ii) it was difficult for pedestrians to become aware of vehicles turning right from Fuk Wing Street eastbound to Cheung Wah Street due to a number of large logistics vehicles parking there. The sightlines of pedestrians would be obstructed by those vehicles when they crossed the road; (iii) he urged TD to consider painting double yellow lines there and requested the Police to step up efforts in combating illegal parking at the location concerned.
170. Mr LEUNG Man-kwong raised the following views: (i) it was common that the sightlines of pedestrians were obstructed by goods vehicles at the crossing concerned; (ii) relocation of the crossing might cause inconvenience to the public; (iii) he suggested strengthening street management.
171. Mr CHUM Tak-shing suggested TD consider providing traffic signals at the road junction concerned.
172. Ms Cecilia LAW responded that members’ suggestions would be considered.
(m) Request for addressing the safety issue of pedestrians crossing Tai Hang Sai Street (TAC Paper 59/19)
173. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu introduced Paper 59/19.
174. Miss Patsy LO responded as follows: (i) the vehicular flow was not heavy at the location mentioned in the paper, only 1 minor traffic accident had occurred over the past 3 years; (ii) at present, a signal-controlled crossing had already been provided at Tai Hang Sai Street near the junction of Tai Hang Tung Road for the public to cross Tai Hang Sai Street. Hence, the existing traffic facilities at the above location were appropriate; (iii) it was noted that members of the public would cross the road from Tai Hang Sai Street near the access point of the carriageway of Tai Hang Sai Estate and Nam Shan Shopping Centre. TD was initially studying the feasibility of providing a pedestrian crossing there; (iv) the Department had to examine the works in details and consult other departments since the works involved tree relocation, relocation and shortening of the taxi stand lay-by, relocation of underground facilities and lampposts, restriction on the directions of vehicles making turns, etc.
175. Mr NG Chi-sing responded as follows: (i) the figures on the enforcement actions taken by the Police at the above location were shown in the table below; (ii) the Police - 33 - Action by would continue to step up efforts in conducting traffic control at the above location.
Time period Number of FPNs issued for prolonged parking
2016 186
2017 210
2018 205
January to April 2019 108
176. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) despite a small number of accidents, it was necessary to pay attention to road safety there as the public crossed the road frequently at the above location; (ii) the situation of illegal parking continued although double yellow lines had already been painted at the location concerned; (iii) he hoped that the Police would take enforcement actions against parking on double yellow lines in particular; (iv) he suggested TD cancel some single yellow lines in the vicinity; (v) he was discussing with HD the request for making the car park available for use by restaurants during night time.
177. The Chairman asked members to vote on the motion in Paper 59/19 which was moved by Mr TAM Kwok-kiu and seconded by Mr WAI Woon-nam. It read as follows:
“The Committee strongly requests TD and the Police to face up to the safety problem of pedestrians crossing the road section of Tai Hang Sai Street (Nam Shan Shopping Centre and the entrance of Tai Hang Sai Estate), requests the Police to step up enforcement work at double yellow lines of the above road section, and requests TD to formulate and implement effective management measures for the above road section as soon as possible.”
178. The Committee unanimously passed the motion.
Agenda Item 3: Follow-up matters
(a) List of follow-up actions for matters of discussion at TAC meeting (TAC Paper 60/19)
179. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) he requested TD to implement the traffic management measure of no right turn from the exit of Mei Leong House car park and Woh Chai Street to the car park; (ii) accidents might easily occur as the car park exit was close to Shek Kip Mei Street, he requested TD to follow up on the matter - 34 - Action by properly.
180. Miss Patsy LO responded as follows: (i) objection had been received during local consultation, yet the reply from HD was still pending; (ii) since the objectors were the car park users, the objection concerned had been referred to HD for follow up.
181. Mr TAM Kwok-kiu raised the following views: (i) the car park users had raised objection as the suggestion concerned would make the car park less convenient to them; (ii) TD should consider whether new measures should be implemented from a professional perspective.
(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 (TAC Paper 61/19)
182. The Committee noted and endorsed the above report.
Agenda Item 4: Report from Working Groups under the Committee
(a) Report from the Non-Standing Working Group on Barrier Free Transport-related Facilities (TAC Paper 62/19)
183. The Committee noted and endorsed the above report.
Agenda Item 5: Any other business
184. Members did not raise any other business.
Agenda Item 6: Date of next meeting
185. The next meeting would be held at 9:30 a.m. on 23 July 2019 (Tuesday).
186. The meeting ended at 3:25 p.m.
District Council Secretariat Sham Shui Po District Office July 2019