Minutes of the 1st Meeting in 2019 of the Traffic and Transport Committee of Tai Po District Council

Date: 11 January 2019 (Friday) Time: 2:33 p.m. – 7:37 p.m. Venue: Conference Room, Tai Po District Council (“TPDC”)

Present Time of Arrival Time of Withdrawal Chairman Dr. LAU Chee-sing Beginning of the meeting 6:55 p.m.

Vice-chairman Mr. WOO Kin-man, Clement Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting

Members Mr. AU Chun-wah Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. CHAN Cho-leung, MH 2:39 p.m. 5:51 p.m. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen, MH, JP Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. CHOW Yuen-wai Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. KWAN Wing-yip Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. LAU Yung-wai Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. LI Kwok-ying, BBS, MH, JP Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. LI Wah-kwong, Rex Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. LO Hiu-fung Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. TAM Wing-fun, Eric, MH Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. TANG Ming-tai, Patrick Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Ms. WONG Pik-kiu, BBS, MH, JP Beginning of the meeting 5:53 p.m. Mr. YAM Kai-bong, Francis Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. YAM Man-chuen Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. YU Chi-wing, Ken Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting

Co-opted Members Mr. AU Chun-ho Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Ms. CHAN Wai-ka, Olive Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. CHEUNG Kwok-wah Beginning of the meeting 5:09 p.m. Mr. CHEUNG Kwok-wai Beginning of the meeting 6:02 p.m. Mr. MAN Nim-chi Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. MUI Siu-fung Beginning of the meeting 6:46 p.m. - 2 -

Mr. TSANG Hon-man Beginning of the meeting 6:25 p.m. Mr. WAN Hing-choy Beginning of the meeting 5:09 p.m. Mr. WU Cheuk-him Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. WU Yiu-cheong, Max Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Mr. YIU Kwan-ho, Herman Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting

Secretary Mr. LEUNG Chung-wa, Alvin Beginning of the meeting End of the meeting Executive Officer (District Council) 1 / Tai Po District Office (“TPDO”) / Home Affairs Department (“HAD”)

In Attendance

Ms. LEE Kai-ying, Iris Assistant District Officer (Tai Po) / TPDO / HAD Ms. MA, Flora Senior Transport Officer / Tai Po / Transport Department (“TD”) Mr. LI Kin-yip, Charles Transport Officer / Tai Po / TD Ms. PUN Fun-yu, Winnie Engineer / Tai Po 1 / TD Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung Engineer / Tai Po 2 / TD Ms. MAK Pui-yan Engineer / 19 (North) / North Development Office / Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”) Mr. CHENG Wun-chee District Engineer / Tai Po 1 / Highways Department (“HyD”) Mr. LAU Tak-cheong Assistant Housing Manager / Tai Po, North and Shatin 7 / Housing Department (“HD”) Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak Station Sergeant (Acting) / District Traffic Team / Tai Po Police District / Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) Mr. TAM Tsun-hei, Jeff Manager / Public Affairs / Transport Planning and Public Affairs Department / Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited (“KMB”) Mr. TANG Ching-kit Assistant Manager / Transport Planning / Transport Planning and Public Affairs Department / KMB Mr. WONG Tsz-kin Assistant Manager / Operations / Shatin Depot / KMB Mr. LEE Yu-sau, Terence Senior Executive Officer (District Council) / TPDO / HAD Ms. WONG Yu-hang, Anita Senior Liaison Officer (2) / TPDO / HAD

Applicant for absence

Mr. LI Yiu-ban, BBS, MH, JP - 3 -

Absent

Mr. CHAN Tsz-wah

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed Members and departmental representatives to the Traffic and Transport Committee (“TTC”) meeting and announced the following:

(i) Mr. LAU Chung-hon had resigned from his position as a Co-opted Member of the TTC.

(ii) He welcomed Mr. YIU Kwan-ho, Herman, joining the TTC as a Co-opted Member. (iii) Mr. HUI Ka-kit of the HyD had been transferred out and Mr. CHENG Wun-chee attended this meeting on his behalf.

(iv) Mr. YEUNG Chiu-tim of the HD had been transferred out and Mr. LAU Tak-cheong attended this meeting on his behalf.

(v) Mr. TSUI Yik-fuk of the HKPF was unable to attend this meeting due to other commitments and Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak attended this meeting on his behalf.

(vi) Mr. LI Yiu-ban was unable to attend this meeting due to other commitments and had submitted his notice of absence to the Secretariat. Pursuant to Order 51(1) of the TPDC Standing Orders (“Standing Orders”), the TTC would only give consent to a Member’s application for absence from meeting filed on grounds of sickness (including sickness due to pregnancy), jury service, attendance at another meeting / activity on behalf of the District Council (“DC”), attendance at a Legislative Council or Executive Council meeting, confinement or paternity leave. Pursuant to the above requirements, his application was not approved.

I. Confirmation of the minutes of the 6th meeting in 2018 of the TTC on 9 November 2018 (TPDC Paper No. TT 1/2019)

2. The Chairman said that as the Secretariat did not receive any proposed amendments prior to the meeting and there were no amendments proposed by Members at the meeting, the above minutes were confirmed with no amendments necessary.

II. Demand for comprehensive improvement to the traffic in Pak Shek Kok (TPDC Paper No. TT 2/2019) - 4 -

3. Mr. WOO Kin-man, Clement, the Vice-chairman introduced the captioned paper.

4. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had earlier invited the representative of the Railway Development Office (“RDO”) of the HyD to the meeting for this agenda item. However, the RDO staff was unable to attend this meeting due to other commitments and had responded to Members’ questions in writing instead. The written reply concerned had been set out in Annex 1.

5. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee indicated that the RDO had responded in writing as regards the matters concerning the setting up of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok. If Members had any comments or questions, he would forward them to his RDO colleagues for follow-up actions. He suggested the TTC again invite the RDO staff to the next meeting if necessary.

6. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung responded as follows:

(i) At present, the traffic of Tolo Highway during peak hours was nearly saturated while that during non-peak hours was acceptable. In general, the TD opined that the current traffic condition of Tolo Highway was acceptable.

(ii) Vehicles on the northbound Tolo Highway mainly used the two roundabouts on Chak Cheung Street on their way to Pak Shek Kok, and the current traffic of Chak Cheung Street was nearly saturated during peak hours.

(iii) The CEDD would carry out road widening works on Tai Po Road (Sha Tin Section). It was expected that upon completion of the works, the traffic condition there would improve.

(iv) When constructing its Medical Centre, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (“CUHK”) would carry out road improvement works at the roundabout on Chak Cheung Street near the CUHK at the same time. It was believed that this works would help improve the traffic of Chak Cheung Street.

(v) Apart from Chak Cheung Street, drivers could also make their way to Pak Shek Kok via Tai Po Road, Yau King Lane and Pok Yin Road.

(vi) For the above reasons, the TD had no plans to study for a new carriageway connecting the northbound Tolo Highway and Pak Shek Kok for the time being. The department would continue to keep an eye on the traffic condition near the site and propose improvement measures where necessary.

7. Mr. TAM Wing-fun, Eric’s comments were as follows:

(i) Members submitted the paper as early as a month before the meeting. He expressed regret and dissatisfaction that the RDO of the HyD had still failed to send a - 5 -

representative to this meeting with so much time in hand.

(ii) The “Railway Development Strategy 2014” study report indicated that there was no sufficient transport demand to support the setting up of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok. He was not sure if the Government had taken into account the current development and changes in Pak Shek Kok when conducting the study back then, and did not know whether there was any difference between the Government’s expectation at that time and the actual situation today. However, he opined that there were indeed substantial changes in the development and planning of the Pak Shek Kok area in recent years.

(iii) When the Government constructed the West Rail Line years ago, the areas surrounding several stations were not fully developed yet. On the contrary, there were already many people living and working in Pak Shek Kok, and the population was expected to further increase substantially in the future. As such, it was difficult to see why the Government still did not consider setting up a railway station there.

(iv) He was not happy with the RDO’s written reply.

8. Ms. WONG Pik-kiu’s comments were as follows:

(i) As Members submitted the paper as early as a month in advance, she opined that the HyD should respect the TTC and attend the meeting. She asked the department to make a direct response regarding the setting up of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok later.

(ii) She disagreed with the HyD’s written reply. She indicated that lands had been reserved for the construction of Ma Liu Shui Station when planning for the East Rail Line (“ERL”) years ago, and the reason why the TPDC at that time agreed not to construct a station there was to shorten the ERL’s journey time. Meanwhile, the reasons for Members to ask for the setting up of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok or Hong Kong Science Park (“Science Park”) now was that the development in Area 39 of Tai Po was already in progress. Also, given the gradual completion of the Science Park and various residential projects, it was necessary to resolve the traffic problems there.

(iii) She shared that she once took Tai Po Road via Science Park on the way to Sha Tin as there was a traffic accident on Tolo Highway. However, as most of the drivers used the roundabout near the Marine Regional Headquarters to leave Science Park and thus created a traffic bottleneck, it took her nearly 45 minutes to get out of there. Therefore, she would take Route 3 if she had to travel to the area of Tsim Sha Tsui now.

(iv) She opined that the traffic issue of Pak Shek Kok was complicated and imminent. Therefore, she suggested the TTC call for a special meeting or use the Working - 6 -

Group under the TTC to continue discussing the measures to improve the traffic of Pak Shek Kok.

9. Mr. KWAN Wing-yip pointed out that given the considerable number of residential projects in the Pak Shek Kok area and the ever-increasing population there, he agreed that it was necessary to improve the traffic there. Apart from improving the traffic of Pak Shek Kok in the long run, he opined that the departments concerned had to pay attention to and improve the traffic safety issue as well. He saw a lot of passengers waiting outside the University MTR Station in the morning, including many people waiting for bus route 272K to go to work in the Pak Shek Kok area. It was very dangerous as some of them were even waiting for the buses on the carriageway. These were all clear signs that the facilities in this public transport interchange were insufficient. As such, he had contacted the HKPF and the bus companies for follow-up actions, and urged the departments concerned to study for improvement measures as soon as possible, so as to ensure the safety of passengers and traffic.

10. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen’s comments were as follows:

(i) He wrote to the Chief Executive, Chief Secretary for Administration and Secretary for Transport and Housing (“STH”) as early as two years ago to demand for the setting up of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok.

(ii) He agreed that there was room for improvement in the Kowloon-bound traffic of Pak Shek Kok.

(iii) He estimated that there would be a total population of 40 000 to 50 000 in Providence Bay, Mayfair by the Sea, Deerhill Bay, Villa Castell, Cheung Shue Tan Village, Tai Po Mei Village and the newly constructed residential projects, and up to 30 000 users in Phases 1 to 4 of Science Park. Added that the CUHK nearby was about to construct some dormitories, it was expected that the total pedestrian flow in this area would be as high as 90 000 in future. Nonetheless, the transport facilities and public transport services in the Pak Shek Kok area were saturated already now.

(iv) Tolo Highway was always congested during the morning peak hours. As such, he suggested setting up a railway station at Pak Shek Kok and constructing a covered pedestrian footbridge connecting it with the Science Park, the CUHK, Providence Bay, Mayfair by the Sea and all the newly constructed residential projects to make it easier for members of the public to travel in and out of the area via railway, and alleviate the traffic congestion caused by driving to Tai Po Market MTR Station or University MTR Station.

(v) He had suggested the MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) construct a railway station at Pak Shek Kok before, and the MTRCL responded that it would be willing to take follow-up actions if the Transport and Housing Bureau (“THB”) and the TD supported the suggestion concerned. He had also consulted the local residents as - 7 -

well and, at present, there were about 40 000 to 50 000 people supporting the Government construct a railway station at Pak Shek Kok. He understood that “Railway Development Strategy 2014” study report did not suggest constructing a railway station at Pak Shek Kok. Nonetheless, as the DC Member of the constituency concerned, he had to strive for the construction of a station for the public. He hoped that the TD would support the proposal of setting up a railway station at Pak Shek Kok.

(vi) As a short-term measure, he was studying with the TD regarding using a vacant land in the vicinity of Cheung Shue Tan as a bus interchange, and he would also inspect the site with the TD’s staff later. Besides, as nearly 7 000 residential units would be constructed in the Pak Shek Kok area, he asked the TD to enhance the bus services between Pak Shek Kok and East Tsim Sha Tsui, Central, Kwun Tong and Hong Kong International Airport in the Bus Route Planning Programme (“BRPP”) of Tai Po District in the coming year.

11. Mr. MUI Siu-fung was not happy that the HyD merely quoted the study report in 2014 as the reply to the TTC, and opined that the relevant result might not be applicable to the current situation at all. For instance, there was a smaller population in the Pak Shek Kok area four years ago compared with today. He hoped that the Administration would conduct a similar consultancy study again to review whether there was sufficient transport demand to support the construction of a railway station at Pak Shek Kok. Besides, he suggested having further discussion on this agenda item at the next meeting, and asked the RDO to send someone to attend the meeting. If the RDO failed to send anyone to attend the next meeting, he suggested the TTC consider censuring it.

12. Mr. YAM Kai-bong, Francis’s comments were as follows:

(i) Similarly, the TPDC had earlier invited the STH to attend the DC meetings to discuss the “Co-location Arrangement” on several occasions, but the THB refused to attend the meeting on the excuse of a busy schedule as well. He was not happy with the HyD’s written reply and found it unacceptable.

(ii) He believed that setting up a MTR station at Pak Shek Kok would help improve the traffic in the area. Therefore, he supported the suggestion concerned and opined that the TTC should proactively ask the Government to put in place the works.

(iii) As regards bus services, some of the regular routes had special departures travelling past Pak Shek Kok. As there were bus interchanges on Fanling Highway and Tuen Mun Road, he suggested the department consider setting up a bus interchange or a sizable transport interchange on Tolo Highway near Providence Bay, so that buses would not have to enter the area of Providence Bay while the local residents could travel to Hong Kong Island or Kowloon by bus. On the other hand, he indicated - 8 -

that there was room in the vicinity of the ERL to set up a bus interchange as well. However, the Administration had not responded to any of the above suggestions proactively.

(iv) The Government had reclaimed land and sold the lands in Pak Shek Kok for housing development, and more and more people had moved in. As such, it would not be desirable if the Administration procrastinated in improving the transport facilities in the area.

(v) If the TD could provide more bus services between the Science Park and other areas (such as Tai Po, Ma On Shan and Sha Tin, etc.), it would not be necessary for everyone visiting the Science Park to interchange at University MTR Station. He believed that it could prevent the afore-mentioned chaos mentioned by Mr. KWAN Wing-yip.

(vi) He and other fellow Members of the pro-democracy camp had suggested turning route 274P (between Tai Po and Ma On Shan) into a whole-day service route. He hoped that the TD would consider making the route concerned travel past Pak Shek Kok while planning for the new bus routes for Tai Po District.

(vii) He opined that it was crucial for the Government to respond to members of the public directly, and therefore hoped that the Member raising this agenda item would continue to raise the issue at the next meeting. Also, the RDO representative of the HyD should be invited again to attend the meeting to discuss the matters relating to the planning and transport policy.

13. As regards Member’s suggestion of calling for a special meeting to discuss the matter, the Chairman indicated that as the DC Member of the constituency concerned had been following up on the traffic issues of Pak Shek Kok, there was no urgency to call for a special meeting. However, he suggested inviting the RDO staff of the HyD to attend the next meeting to answer Members’ questions, such as explaining why there was no transport demand at present to support the setting up of railway station at Pak Shek Kok.

14. Mr. YAM Man-chuen’s comments were as follows:

(i) He supported the TTC calling for a special meeting to continue the discussion on this agenda item.

(ii) He stressed that improving the traffic of Pak Shek Kok was not only aimed at catering for the need of people who worked at the Science Park, but also making it easier for the Pak Shek Kok residents to travel to Tai Po and North District.

(iii) He was worried that setting up an MTR station at Pak Shek Kok would not be of much use at all. He indicated that as the ERL would switch to trains with only 9 cars in future, the crowdedness during peak hours would only get worse, and it - 9 -

would be difficult for people waiting for the trains in Pak Shek Kok to get on board. As such, he opined that the TD had to study for a solution.

(iv) He and other fellow Members and Community Officers of the pro-democracy camp asked for setting up a bus lane on Tolo Highway over a year ago, so as to prevent serious traffic accident from causing major impact on public bus services. He urged the TD to consider the suggestion concerned in a proactive manner.

15. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee indicated that he would forward Members’ comments to the RDO.

16. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung noted Members’ comments and would take appropriate follow-up actions.

17. Mr. Francis YAM said that while turning route 274P into a whole-day service route could not totally resolve the traffic problems in Pak Shek Kok, it could at least provide one more route to make it easier for the passengers in Pak Shek Kok to travel to Tai Po or Ma On Shan. He asked the department and KMB to respond to the suggestion concerned.

18. Ms. MA, Flora said that the TD had been following up on and planning the public transport services in the Pak Shek Kok area. In response to the increasing number of people working in the Science Park and living in Pak Shek Kok, the department set up route 263A and enhanced the frequencies of routes 272S and 272A, as well as enhanced the services of green minibus (“GMB”) routes 27A and 27B last year. The department would continue to maintain close contact with the DC Member of the constituency concerned to examine the traffic demand after people had moved into the residential projects in Pak Shek Kok, and would put in place various bus service proposals through this year’s BRPP.

19. Mr. TANG Ching-kit said that KMB had always been concerned about the traffic demand in the Pak Shek Kok area and kept an open mind about Members’ suggestion of turning route 274P into a whole-day service route in the hope of further enhancing its services. KMB noted Members’ comments and would submit suggested proposals to the TD after collating the comments, and would also consult the TTC where necessary.

20. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen indicated that he had been following up on the traffic issues of Pak Shek Kok with the TD in a proactive manner, and thanked the TTC for its concern over the traffic there. He said that Mr. Clement WOO, the Vice-chairman, and other Members had written to express their request for setting up a railway station at Pak Shek Kok and the relevant papers would be filed as well. As such, he found it unnecessary to continue to follow up on this agenda item in the TTC for the time being. As regards whether route 274P could be turned into a whole-day service route, he suggested the TD reply to the TTC after the meeting.

- 10 -

21. Mr. Clement WOO, the Vice-chairman, respected the views of the DC Member of the constituency concerned. He agreed to continue to follow up on the captioned matter at the local level for the time being and to discuss it at the TTC meeting where necessary.

III. Concerns about vehicles not giving way to the pedestrians at the zebra crossings in Tai Po District (TPDC Paper No. TT 3/2019)

22. Mr. LAU Yung-wai introduced the captioned paper.

23. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung responded as follows:

(i) There were established criteria as regards the set-up of zebra crossings. For instance, there were certain standards on the width of the zebra crossings, the use of equipment such as yellow beacon and “zigzag” markings next to the zebra crossings, etc.

(ii) Apart from the 4 locations set out in the captioned paper (i.e., the zebra crossings on Plover Cove Road off Plover Cove Road Market, Ting Kok Road off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic, Plover Cove Road off C.C.C. Fung Leung Kit Memorial Secondary School, and those on Po Nga Road in the Tai Wo Plaza area), the TD had inspected all the zebra crossings in Tai Po District and they were all up to standard.

(iii) Citing Section 31 of the Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulation (Cap. 374G), he indicated that pedestrians at zebra crossings had precedence over any vehicles. Therefore, it was the driving attitude to blame when it came to drivers not according precedence to pedestrians at zebra crossings.

(iv) The TD mainly used road markings and road-crossing facilities to control traffic condition. As for law enforcement work, the HKPF would provide additional comments.

24. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak responded as follows:

(i) As regards vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings, the HKPF had received relevant complaints as well (complaints involved the zebra crossings set out in the paper).

(ii) The HKPF had taken corresponding actions after receiving the complaints, including monitoring the situation and prosecuting drivers who had breached the law in the vicinity of the zebra crossings concerned. - 11 -

(iii) The HKPF would continue to closely monitor the situation until improvement could be seen, and would arrange for blitz action on an irregular basis, so as to make prosecution on vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings.

25. Ms. WONG Pik-kiu’s comments were as follows:

(i) There were a total of three zebra crossings on Plover Cove Road, and the management, construction and law enforcement were carried out by the TD, the HyD and the HKPF respectively.

(ii) The colour of the zebra crossings on Plover Cove Road was fading and the white lines on the road were unclear. She had informed the government departments of the problems on several occasions, but it often took them over a month to fix it. She indicated that as the colour at other zebra crossings was also fading, she asked the departments concerned to step up the inspection and repaint the zebra crossings on a regular basis, so that it would allow the road users to see the markings clearly and the HKPF to take law enforcement action easily.

(iii) The traffic cones that were usually placed in the middle of zebra crossings were knocked down frequently. Therefore, she reminded the departments concerned to put these traffic cones back in place properly.

(iv) As a frequent user of the zebra crossings on Plover Cove Road, she had noticed that the drivers there were more willing to give way in general. As vehicles had to stop in front of the zebra crossings to wait for the pedestrians to cross the road, the vehicular queue would sometime extend all the way back to the area of Golden Gate and Tai Po Wong Siu Ching Clinic. Since many pedestrians crossed the road via the zebra crossing off Plover Cove Road Market, it was impossible for the vehicles to keep waiting until no one was crossing the road. As such, she had suggested constructing a pedestrian footbridge to solve the road-crossing issue there on many occasions.

(v) She had requested the HKPF to take law enforcement action at the zebra crossing off C.C.C. Fung Leung Kit Memorial Secondary School. However, as the drivers were aware of the police vehicles parked nearby, they would comply with the traffic regulations. She opined that it was of not much use for the HKPF to take high-profile law enforcement action. The most important thing was to teach members of the public the correct driving attitude, such as stopping the vehicle to allow the pedestrians to cross the road first when they saw a zebra crossing.

26. Mr. TANG Ming-tai, Patrick indicated that there was a zebra crossing on Ting Kok Road off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic. There was a safety island separating the lanes, with a flashing yellow beacon in the middle of it. He indicated that as many wheelchair users and people pushing baby - 12 - prams would cross the road via this zebra crossing, he suggested moving the beacon in the middle of the safety island to a side, so as to make room for the pedestrians to cross the road. Besides, he indicated that many vehicles would cut the lane inside the “zigzag” area of the zebra crossings, and it could be dangerous. He hoped that the HKPF would pay attention to the situation.

27. Mr. Francis YAM’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) As there were always a lot of pedestrians at the zebra crossing off Plover Cove Road Market, traffic congestion would easily take place when vehicles stopped to wait for the pedestrians. Therefore, he enquired under what circumstances the TD would replace the zebra crossing with traffic lights.

(ii) He noticed that there were vehicles making U-turns at the zebra crossing on Po Nga Road near Tai Wo Plaza, posing a threat to both traffic and pedestrian safety. Although there was a “No Right Turn” road sign, he urged the HKPF to step up its law enforcement action there.

(iii) The zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic was of considerable length as it spanned several lanes. Citing a video he watched online earlier on, he indicated that when an elderly was crossing the road there, while a vehicle on one of the lanes had stopped to allow him to cross the road, a vehicle approaching on the other lane kept travelling as it did not notice that the elderly was crossing the road. Luckily, the elderly was walking rather slowly and no accident took place. He said it was such a dangerous situation that the HKPF had to step up its law enforcement action there.

28. Mr. MAN Nim-chi enquired whether members of the public could report the drivers not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings to the law enforcement departments with video footages, and whether such cases had retrospective effect. As regards the HKPF’s claims that it had taken action to prosecute the drivers who had breached the law, he asked whether the HKPF could provide the number of prosecution and its penalty, and explain the HKPF’s policy direction in prosecuting this type of violation in future. He explained that not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings would affect all road users. Also, as some drivers might not be familiar with the traffic regulations, he supported the HKPF’s initiatives to step up its prosecution efforts.

29. Mr. LAU Yung-wai’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He said that he had watched the video Mr. Francis YAM mentioned as well. He agreed that the situation was extremely dangerous, and it was also why he requested to discuss the captioned matter at the TTC.

(ii) He noticed that the HKPF had made blitz prosecutions on vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at the zebra crossing near Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic recently. He - 13 -

opined that the HKPF taking high-profile law enforcement action could serve as a warning to the drivers.

(iii) As many elderly people crossed the road at the zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic, he asked whether the TD had put up traffic signs such as “Slow” or “Pedestrians On Road Ahead”, etc., near the zebra crossing to remind the drivers to drive carefully.

(iv) He enquired about the penalty on vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings. As he was concerned that some drivers knew little about the traffic regulations, he hoped that the HKPF could step up its law enforcement action and deploy more manpower to inspect all the afore-mentioned traffic blackspots. Besides, through this discussion, he would like to raise the public awareness on vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings.

30. Mr. CHOW Yuen-wai indicated that there was high vehicular flow and pedestrian flow (especially during the morning and evening peak hours) at the zebra crossing on Po Nga Road near Tai Wo Plaza, and asked under what circumstances the TD could replace the zebra crossing with traffic lights. Besides, he pointed out that there were many illegally parked vehicles in the Po Nga Road area, and some were even parked on the zebra crossing. As such, pedestrians had to be extra careful when using the zebra crossing there. He hoped that the HKPF and the TD could help solve the problem.

31. Mr. AU Chun-ho indicated that there was a bus stop in front of the zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic. When a bus was leaving the bus stop, the views of other drivers could easily be obscured. Probably because of that, he had seen vehicles not stopping in front of the zebra crossing and nearly hitting the pedestrians crossing the road. Therefore, he hoped that the HKPF could step up its law enforcement action and prosecute the drivers who had breached the law.

32. Ms. WONG Pik-kiu clarified that she was not against the HKPF’s law enforcement action. She just found the HKPF’s high-profile law enforcement action ineffective. For instance, drivers would naturally comply with the traffic regulations when they saw a police vehicle there, and the HKPF would not be able to make any prosecution as a result. She suggested the HKPF consider deploying police officers in plain-clothes there for law enforcement action and reminding drivers to comply with the regulations.

33. Mr. AU Chun-wah enquired whether the zebra crossing off Plover Cove Road Market could be replaced by a light signal crossing, so as to resolve the traffic congestion there.

34. The Chairman said that as some of the zebra crossings (including the four zebra crossings set out in the paper) had a high pedestrian flow and vehicular flow, he asked whether the department could replace these zebra crossings with hand-pressed pedestrian crossings, so that most of the - 14 - pedestrians would cross the road when the green light was on. He opined that it was not only a safer practice, but could also prevent any misunderstanding between the pedestrians and drivers, and reduce the time wasted as they tried to give way to each other at the same time.

35. Mr. Clement WOO, the Vice-chairman, opined that the afore-mentioned problem could be addressed by a two-pronged approach, namely the HKPF stepping up its law enforcement effort, and the DC working together with the TD and the HKPF to see if there were any improvement measures at the zebra crossings throughout the district. For instance, many residents had complained that vehicles often drove past the zebra crossing on Plover Cove Road off Kwong Chi House at a high speed, and would not stop even if there were pedestrians waiting at the side of the zebra crossing. Therefore, he hoped that the HKPF would step up its law enforcement effort and inspect the site with the departments concerned to come up with the improvement measures.

36. Ms. CHAN Wai-ka, Olive indicated that the situation where the vehicles did not give way to pedestrians at zebra crossings was even worse in the evening, especially because they were travelling at a higher speed in the evening in general that it was more common for them to ignore the zebra crossings. Therefore, she hoped that the HKPF would also deploy officers to step up the law enforcement effort in the evening.

37. Mr. MAN Nim-chi enquired again whether members of the public could provide the law enforcement departments with video footage for reporting vehicles which had violated the traffic regulations, and whether this type of cases had retrospective effect. Besides, he asked whether the HKPF had encountered any difficulties when carrying out law enforcement action, and would like to know the prosecution figures concerned as well.

38. Mr. MUI Siu-fung opined that the solutions to the problem had always been law enforcement and education. He believed that the HKPF could not deploy manpower for round-the-clock law enforcement action, and therefore suggested the HKPF consider enhancing the road safety awareness of drivers by making promotional and educational video clips, so as to remind them to stop at zebra crossings to give way to pedestrians.

39. Mr. AU Chun-ho supported the suggestion of turning zebra crossings into light signal crossings, but was concerned that turning the zebra crossing on Plover Cove Road into a light signal crossing would escalate the traffic congestion there. He hoped that the departments concerned could come up with a corresponding solution.

40. Mr. CHEUNG Kwok-wai indicated that the problem of vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings had existed for years, and he was not happy that the departments concerned were still unable to put forward any improvement measures at this meeting. He believed that the HKPF’s law enforcement effort alone could not totally resolve the problem, and improving the facilities at the zebra crossings was equally important. As regards Members’ - 15 - suggestion of replacing zebra crossings with traffic lights, he opined that its feasibility could only be confirmed upon on-site inspection.

41. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung responded as follows:

(i) In general, the TD would take into account the pedestrian flow and vehicular flow to decide whether it was suitable to install traffic lights. The department would calculate the pedestrian flow and vehicular flow with a certain formula and would install traffic lights once a certain threshold had been reached. In short, when the vehicular flow was high and it was difficult for the pedestrians to cross the road, or when the pedestrian flow was so high that the vehicles could not go through, installing traffic lights would be deemed suitable. On the contrary, if the pedestrian flow was too low, installing traffic lights would actually obstruct vehicular access. As the traffic condition and facilities of each location varied, the department would have to study in detail whether it was suitable to replace the several zebra crossings mentioned in the paper with traffic lights.

(ii) As regards the zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic, he pointed out that there were traffic signs of “Slow” and “Zebra Crossing Ahead” near Bank of Communications. However, as there were many trees at the side, the department would visit the site later to see if the traffic signs concerned were clear, and improvement would be made where necessary. Besides, the department would also review the location of the beacon on the safety island to see if there was any room for improvement.

(iii) The department’s purpose of setting up zebra crossings was to make vehicles stop to give way to pedestrians. However, whether it would work depended on the willingness of drivers to co-operate. Therefore, what mattered the most was the drivers’ discipline.

42. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak responded as follows:

(i) The HKPF had been reviewing the traffic condition in the district. For locations with more traffic regulation violations, the HKPF would carry out prosecution on a targeted basis until the situation had improved.

(ii) The HKPF mainly dealt with improper driving via a three-pronged approach, namely education, law enforcement and improvement to road facilities. This was also the major direction of the HKPF’s efforts as regards road safety.

(iii) While there was only a road marking of “No Right Turn” but not “No U-turn” near the zebra crossing on Po Nga Road off Tai Wo Plaza, vehicles making a right turn there would have already violated the traffic regulations. The HKPF was aware of - 16 -

vehicles making a U-turn there and would continue to take law enforcement action.

(iv) If members of the public had any video footage of vehicles violating the traffic regulations, they could bring the video footage to any report room, or inform the HKPF via the HKPF website or calling 1823. The HKPF had a dedicated unit to handle this kind of traffic regulation violation cases which had a retrospective period of six months.

(v) If there were any vehicles not giving way to pedestrians at zebra crossings, the HKPF could issue a fixed penalty ticket to the offender for a fine of $450 and three driving-offence points. In addition, as the person concerned might have committed other traffic offences such as careless driving as well, the HKPF could charge the person concerned with other offences.

(vi) He could not provide the prosecution figure for the time being, but stressed that the HKPF would prosecute the offenders through a multi-pronged approach. For instance, the HKPF was trying to deploy officers from the mobile video team to make video recordings at certain blackspots for traffic accidents or illegal parking, and prosecute the offenders with reference to the video footage.

43. Mr. Patrick TANG understood that it might not be feasible to replace the zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic with a hand-pressed pedestrian crossing. However, he stressed that a lot of children, elderly people and people receiving methadone treatment would cross the road there. Also, as the zebra crossing spanned multiple lanes, accidents would easily happen if the drivers’ views were obscured. As such, he suggested the TD consider installing warning lights or providing more road markings there to further remind the drivers. He reiterated that it was a traffic accident blackspot and urged the TD to come up with proposals to enhance the safety of pedestrians when crossing the road.

44. Mr. YU Chi-wing, Ken indicated that he had provided the HKPF with a number of photos and video footage showing traffic regulation violations, but the HKPF had not responded to him. He enquired whether members of the public could indeed use the photos and video footage they had captured to report to the HKPF, and whether the HKPF had ever prosecuted the offenders concerned successfully.

45. Mr. LAU Yung-wai’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) The road marking “Slow” on Ting Kok Road off Bank of Communications was quite far away from the zebra crossing off Tai Po Jockey Club Clinic. As such, he hoped that the TD could study the feasibility of adding more road markings near the zebra crossings or at other suitable locations. As the DC Member of the constituency concerned, he welcomed the department staff to carry out site inspection and discuss improvement proposals with him. - 17 -

(ii) The HKPF website had limited the size of the file uploaded by members of the public when reporting a case to no more than 5MB. However, a 10-second video footage captured by a mobile phone might have already exceeded the limit. As such, he enquired how the HKPF would resolve the problem, and whether there were other ways for members of the public to forward video footages over 5MB in size to the HKPF.

46. Mr. MAN Nim-chi said that many drivers would park their vehicles at the metered parking spaces in Tung Mau Square, Tung Sau Square and Tung Fat Square (“the Squares”) during holidays. However, due to the shortage of parking spaces, vehicles often had to circle around the Squares repeatedly so as to look for a parking space. As vehicles leaving the Squares had to cut onto the eastbound Plover Cove Road before re-entering the Squares to look for parking spaces, the traffic of both eastbound and westbound Plover Cove Road would be directly affected. As such, he suggested the TD consider changing the driving direction of the Squares, i.e., from clockwise to anti-clockwise, so that vehicles leaving the Squares could re-enter directly from the westbound Plover Cove Road, which could minimise the impact on the traffic of Plover Cove Road and its vicinity.

47. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung indicated that the TD was happy to inspect the existing road markings in the district with Members to see if there was any room for improvement, and would take the initiative to contact the DC Members of the constituencies concerned for follow-up actions later on.

48. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak said that members of the public who wished to report to the HKPF on traffic regulation violations might send the video footage to the HKPF by email, upload it onto the HKPF website, or hand over a CD-ROM containing the video footage to the HKPF directly, so as to allow the traffic investigation division of the HKPF to take follow-up actions. Upon receiving the report, the HKPF would meet the member of the public who provided the information for a statement to learn more about the situation. As regards why Mr. Ken YU had not received any reply and why Mr. LAU Yung-wai could not upload the information successfully, he was unable to answer them as he had no relevant information for the time being.

49. Mr. Ken YU added that he reported to the HKPF via the 1823 hotline, but he had not received any reply from the HKPF yet.

50. Mr. LAU Yung-wai indicated that he was not saying that members of the public could not upload any information when reporting a case. He was saying that there was a size limit for the file to be uploaded and, therefore, members of the public could not upload any information over 5MB in size. He hoped that the HKPF representative at the meeting could inform the department of the problem.

- 18 -

51. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak indicated that if the information had exceeded the upload limit, he suggested members of the public saving it onto a CD-ROM and hand it over to the HKPF for follow-up actions.

52. Taking the zebra crossing off Plover Cove Garden as an example, Mr. WAN Hing-choy asked if there were pedestrians crossing the zebra crossing on the right lane, whether the vehicles on the left lane had to stop to give way.

53. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak responded that whether the vehicles had to stop depended on the set-up of the zebra crossing. He explained that if there was no safety island separating the two lanes, the zebra crossing concerned would be regarded as one zebra crossing even if it spanned two lanes. As such, if someone had set his foot on the zebra crossing, vehicles on both lanes would have to stop and wait. If there was a safety island separating the two zebra crossings, they would be regarded as two separate ones. When someone was using the other zebra crossing, vehicles could keep going without having to wait.

54. The Chairman said that if certain zebra crossings had a higher pedestrian flow or vehicular flow, he suggested the DC Members of the constituencies concerned ask the TD to calculate the flow at site for follow-up actions.

55. Ms. WONG Pik-kiu indicated that Tung Mau Square, Tung Sau Square and Tung Fat Square were steeped in history and managed by Luk Heung Village Office. She pointed out that should there be any changes or special arrangement to be made to the Squares, Luk Heung Village Office and the DC Member of the constituency concerned should be consulted first.

56. The Chairman agreed with Ms. WONG Pik-kiu’s comments and indicated that the DC Member of the constituency concerned should be informed of any changes and more communication was needed.

57. Mr. AU Chun-wah respected the views of the DC Member of the constituency concerned and the stakeholders. However, he opined that every Member should be informed of the progress of the afore-mentioned matters. As such, he asked the departments concerned to inform all Members via the Secretariat when arranging for inspections in future.

58. Mr. MAN Nim-chi agreed that the departments concerned should regard the DC Member of the constituency concerned as the channel of communication. However, he opined that apart from serving their own constituencies, TPDC Members should also care about the affairs of Tai Po District. Should there be any changes in the afore-mentioned matters, he would like the departments concerned to inform the DC Member of the constituency concerned as well as all the local stakeholders.

- 19 -

59. Mr. MUI Siu-fung said that he was willing to respect the views of the DC Member of the constituency concerned. However, citing the previous TTC discussion as regards the addition of bicycle parking spaces in the district, he wondered whether the views of a certain Member were inconsistent.

60. Mr. AU Chun-wah opined that Mr. MUI Siu-fung was referring to him and therefore had to make a response. He stressed that at that meeting, the TD made it clear that it would consult the DC Members of the constituencies concerned when proposing the addition of bicycle parking spaces in the district, and the department would respect the views of the DC Members of the constituencies concerned if they disagreed with the department adding bicycle parking spaces at their constituencies. The situation was different from this meeting’s. He indicated that while he highly respected the views of the DC Member of the constituency concerned as well as the stakeholders, it did not mean that other Members could not participate in the inspection and provide comments.

61. The Chairman indicated that he had allowed Members to fully express their views. If Members had other comments, they should continue their discussion after the meeting.

IV. Request for improvement of the public transport arrangement on Ting Kok Road during holidays (TPDC Paper No. TT 4/2019)

62. Mr. LAU Yung-wai introduced the captioned paper.

63. As the DC Member of Tai Mei Tuk and Ting Kok Road constituencies, the Chairman said that he had written to the Working Group on Provision of Public Bus and Minibus Services (“WGPB”) under the TTC on 24 November 2018 to request for enhancing the bus service in Tai Po Shuen Wan constituency, including enhancing the services of route 75K during weekdays and the service of routes 75K and 275R during holidays. The paper concerned was discussed at the WGPB meeting on 7 January 2019.

64. Ms. Flora MA responded as follows:

(i) The TD and the DC Member of the constituency concerned had been paying attention to the traffic demand of Shue Wan during weekdays and holidays.

(ii) On weekdays, most of the residents left home during the morning peak hours. As a result, route 75K would easily be full of passengers while some were unable to get on board. On the other hand, as the GMBs had fewer seats, they could hardly facilitate passenger flow. As such, the department suggested moving the terminus of route - 20 -

72C from Shue Wan to Tai Mei Tuk during the morning peak hours on weekdays, so as to help facilitate the passenger flow from Tai Mei Tuk to Tai Po Market MTR Station. In addition, the department had also asked the GMB operator to enhance the services of route 20C.

(iii) On weekends and holidays, as most people left Tai Mei Tuk in the early evening, it was difficult for the Tai Po Market-bound passengers to get on board at en route stops in Po Sam Pai or Shan Liu, etc. KMB would consider scheduling a special departure of route 75K headed for the Tai Po Industrial Estate area to pick up passengers there according to the situation. Besides, the department expected that KMB would begin deploying 12.8 metres (“m”) long buses for route 75K before the Chinese New Year so as to increase the number of passengers. The department would inform the DC Members of the constituencies concerned before the said proposal was put in place.

65. Mr. WONG Tsz-kin said that KMB noticed the seasonal demand of route 75K (especially during Autumn and Winter) and had therefore put forward a number of temporary measures, including sending inspectors to the terminus and en route stops to check the number of passengers and schedule special departures to facilitate passenger flow, etc. If it was found that passengers at the en route stops were unable to get on board, KMB would reserve seats at the terminus as appropriate. Besides, KMB also hoped to deploy 12.8 m long buses for route 75K as soon as possible so as to increase the number of passengers.

66. Mr. CHEUNG Kwok-wah’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He thanked other Members for their concerns over the traffic issue along the Ting Kok Road area.

(ii) Noting that he was the village head designate of Lung Mei, he said that many residents had earlier complained to him about the traffic issues in the area. As Lung Mei Beach would be commissioned in 2020, apart from the increase in pedestrian flow and traffic demand, he was also worried that the illegal parking problem would escalate.

(iii) If there was illegal parking, even if the TD had enhanced public transport services would not help facilitate passenger flow. Therefore, he hoped that the TD and the HKPF could come up with a solution in a proactive manner. He said that he had expressed his opinions to the afore-mentioned departments on several occasions, and criticised the Administration for not coming up with improvement proposals in a timely manner by considering thoroughly factors such as the substantial increase in pedestrian flow in future.

(iv) Recently, a number of organisations held events in the Tai Mei Tuk area, and he had - 21 -

no intention to prevent these events from taking place. However, he did not want to see people leaving the area after the end of these events would have any impact on the residents’ use of public transport services. As such, he would ask the hosting organisation to write to KMB and GMB operator to request for enhancing the services of routes 75K and 20C every single time. He asked whether KMB had increased the service frequency as requested to facilitate the flow of people participating in these events.

67. Mr. LAU Yung-wai indicated that the TD was often criticised for lacking awareness and overlooking the impact of pedestrian flow and vehicular flow all the time. As he had mentioned in the paper, the commissioning of Lung Mei Beach would definitely increase the pedestrian flow and transport demand in the area. Therefore, he opined that the TD should take one step further by planning for the future transport demand in advance and enhancing the services in a timely manner. Besides, he opined that the TD’s response just now focused on addressing the concerns of the DC Member of the constituency concerned. He hoped that the department would respect the Members who had submitted the paper and contact them as well when following up on the traffic arrangement of Ting Kok Road.

68. Mr. AU Chun-wah pointed out that they were talking about widening Ting Kok Road a dozen years ago. Back then, he suggested the Government further widening the road surface of Ting Kok Road in view of its future development, but the departments concerned refused to do so at that time on the grounds that the vehicular flow had not reached the threshold. At present, the road facilities of Ting Kok Road were insufficient, and there was no more vacant land in the vicinity that could be used for widening. He criticised the department for not listening to his views back then. Besides, he indicated that congestion on Ting Kok Road had long become the norm and was particularly serious during public holidays and special occasions. He stressed that the current traffic in the area of Ting Kok Road was appalling and the flow of people waiting for vehicles in Tai Mei Tuk could not be facilitated even after a long period of time. He opined that the TD and KMB should try their best to resolve the problem, such as deploying buses at any time to facilitate passenger flow and assigning inspectors to find out the situation of the en route stops during holidays, etc. However, he could not see the department or KMB putting forward the relevant measures, and residents along the Ting Kok Road area were not happy with the traffic there either. He urged the department and the bus company to put forward feasible proposals to address the above issues.

69. Ms. Flora MA responded as follows:

(i) Every year, the TD would draw up the BRPP according to the development of the district in the coming year, and take into account the traffic demand of new development projects as well. - 22 -

(ii) The department had been closely monitoring the traffic demand in the Tai Mei Tuk area during public holidays and special occasions, and planned to fine-tune the timetable of route 75K before the Chinese New Year and relocate the terminus of route 72C to Tai Mei Tuk to facilitate passenger flow. The department would inform all Members before implementing the changes, and the bus company would also inform the passengers of the changes concerned.

(Post-meeting note: The afore-mentioned measures were put in place on 28 January 2019.)

70. Mr. WONG Tsz-kin said that if the event organisers could provide information, such as the starting and ending time of the event, the venue and number of participants, etc., for KMB in advance, KMB would be able to make the corresponding arrangement. For instance, when another organisation held a walkathon on Ting Kok Road not long ago, KMB and the hosting organisation had discussed about the special traffic arrangement to deal with the transport demand.

71. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung said that the TD was reviewing and studying the feasibility of widening Ting Kok Road, and therefore could not provide any further information at this stage. The department would report on the matters concerned to the TTC in a timely manner.

72. The Chairman indicated that he himself had strived for widening Ting Kok Road in the past as well, but the TD often refused taking forward the works on the grounds of insufficient vehicular flow. However, he knew that the department had reserved land for the road widening works on Ting Kok Road and that villagers were not allowed to build houses on the reserved land.

73. Mr. WAN Hing-choy pointed out that it was difficult for the residents to find their way home whenever there was a traffic accident on Ting Kok Road. Meanwhile, a lot of vehicles would be illegally parked there whenever an event was held, making it difficult for the residents to walk to the bus stop. Besides, there were always long queues of people waiting for vehicles in Tai Mei Tuk during holidays, making it difficult for the residents to go out using public transport. He asked how the TD and the HKPF could resolve the said issues.

74. The Chairman indicated that a chain collision involving three vehicles took place on Ting Kok Road near Green Cove on 4 January 2019, resulting in a traffic congestion of over 30 minutes. He had submitted a discussion paper to the TTC and would deal with it in Any Other Business.

75. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak said that the HKPF would specifically deploy officers to the Tai Mei Tuk area to carry out traffic control measures during holidays. In response to the number of traffic accidents on Ting Kok Road near Green Cove, the HKPF’s traffic wing would prosecute the speeding drivers.

- 23 -

V. Demand for setting up “transport fare subsidy collection points” at bus terminus and public transport interchange (TPDC Paper No. TT 5/2019)

76. Mr. Francis YAM introduced the captioned paper.

77. Ms. Flora MA went through the Public Transport Fare Subsidy Scheme. She indicated that the TD would review the effectiveness of the Scheme and was planning to set up subsidy collection points at the bus terminuses or public transport interchanges throughout the territory on a pilot basis. As regards Tai Po District, the department was proactively studying the provision of subsidy collection points at Tai Po Market Bus Terminus, and would have to take into account various factors such as the location and power supply arrangement, etc. It would inform the TPDC once further information became available.

78. Mr. Francis YAM was pleased to know that the TD was considering the provision of subsidy collection points at some of the bus terminuses or public transport interchanges. As members of the public could collect the transport fare subsidy for January 2019 at any subsidy collection point starting from 16 February 2019, he believed that there would be chaos at the early stages of the scheme and hoped that the department would confirm the provision of subsidy collection points at Tai Po Market Bus Terminus as well as other bus terminuses with higher pedestrian flow as soon as possible.

79. The Chairman asked whether the lack of Octopus Add Value Machines at the bus terminus was the reason why the department could not provide subsidy collection service for the time being.

80. Ms. Flora MA indicated that unlike Octopus Add Value Machines, subsidy collection points were specifically set up for collecting transport fare subsidy. As it took time for the bus company to identify suitable locations to set up subsidy collection points at the bus terminus, and there were problems such as power supply that had to be taken into account, not all bus terminuses were suitable for the provision of subsidy collection points. She reiterated that the department was studying the provision of subsidy collection points at Tai Po Market Bus Terminus.

VI. Request for new bus route plying between Tai Po and Prince of Wales Hospital in Sha Tin via Science Park (TPDC Paper No. TT 6/2019)

81. Mr. Francis YAM introduced the captioned paper.

82. Ms. Flora MA responded as follows: - 24 -

(i) The TD noted Member’s comments. (ii) The department had earlier consulted Members as regards the operation of a GMB service between Wan Tau Tong Estate, Tai Po and Wong Nai Tau, Sha Tin (see TPDC Paper No. TT 89/2018 for details), and the $19.8 set out in the consultation paper was actually the proposed maximum fare of this route (i.e., the highest amount calculated according to the route’s travel distance and fare scale). However, the fare level of the said route was mainly decided by the operator according to the operation condition, and could not be higher than the proposed maximum fare.

(iii) The department understood that Members might found the travel distance of the afore-mentioned route rather long. She indicated that the department had set out the proposed route of this GMB route in the consultation paper with the aim of briefing Members on the main areas the route would pass through and its scope of service. There was still room for splitting the areas covered into several shorter routes in future and the fare would be adjusted accordingly.

(iv) As regards the operation of the said GMB route, as it was still at the consultation stage, the department would continue to listen to the views of different parties (including those from the TPDC and Sha Tin District Council) so as to fine-tune the proposal as appropriate.

83. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) The GMB route proposed by the TD travelled past the Science Park and he believed that it would benefit the residents there. However, as the Science Park was only an en route stop, he was worried that it would be difficult for the passengers waiting there to get on board.

(ii) He understood that the $19.8 in the consultation paper was only the proposed maximum fare, but the fare for GMB route 28K (between Tai Po Market MTR Station and Sha Tin town centre) was only $9.5. As such, he opined that the operator of the new route had to provide passengers with sectional fare concession.

(iii) As over 20 000 people went to work at the Science Park every day, apart from route 272A and GMB routes 27A and 27B that he had requested in the past, he would also welcome the department operating more GMB routes to serve the passengers travelling to and from the Science Park.

(iv) Given the rapid increase in pedestrian flow in the Science Park and Pak Shek Kok area, he was worried that the GMBs might not be able to meet the passengers’ demand in future. As such, he asked the department whether this new GMB route, once in operation, could not be operated by buses instead. He hoped that the TD could pay close attention to the transport services in the area and assess whether the - 25 -

services could meet the passengers’ demand in a timely manner.

84. Mr. LAU Yung-wai’s comments were as follows:

(i) He asked whether the TD refused to consider using buses for the route between Wan Tau Tong and Wong Nai Tau at this stage.

(ii) A lot of passengers travelled from University MTR Station to the Science Park area every day. However, as GMBs could not carry a lot of passengers, it was difficult to facilitate passenger flow effectively no matter how many departures were added. As such, he suggested the department consider operating other routes that started from places like Tai Po or Sha Tin, so as to allow passengers from these places to travel to the Science Park directly, and help facilitate passenger flow at University MTR Station.

(iii) Not only could the bus route he and other Members proposed facilitate passenger flow, but also carry passengers to places such as Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital (“Nethersole Hospital”) in Tai Po, Prince of Wales Hospital in Sha Tin, Shek Mun Industrial Area and the Science Park, etc. Besides, he stressed that GMBs could not carry a lot of passengers that they could not facilitate passenger flow during the morning and evening peak hours. Therefore, he urged the TD to proactively consider their proposal.

(iv) The fare of the GMB route proposed by the TD was extremely high. In comparison, the bus fare of harbour-crossing route 307 was only $3 more than this GMB route, showing that its fare level was unreasonable. Even though $19.8 was only the proposed maximum fare of this route, he believed that the eventual fare would not be much lower than that level, and he expected that this route would not be welcomed by passengers.

(v) He supported the department operating GMB and bus services at the same time so as to introduce competition among them. In reality, however, the department would not operate any bus route with a similar route after operating a GMB route. Even if there was substantial transport demand in future, it could only increase the GMB service frequency to facilitate passenger flow. On the other hand, he found both the services and carrying capacity of GMBs less desirable than that of buses, and the attitude of some GMB drivers was poor as well. Therefore, he hoped that the department would carefully consider whether to operate this new route with GMBs.

85. Mr. YAM Man-chuen’s comments were as follows:

(i) He opined that it was not desirable for the TD to operate the route between Wan Tau - 26 -

Tong and Wong Nai Tau with GMBs.

(ii) For example, the number of passengers of GMB route 502 at present was way more than what was expected when the service was first operated. As a result, many passengers were unable to get on board at en route stops and often complained about it.

(iii) For instance, in the case of route 271B, which only provided service during the evening peak hours on weekdays, not many passengers got on board at en route stops in Fu Heng and Tai Po Centre. However, the buses would often become overloaded at the Science Park, showing the considerable transport demand at the Science Park during the morning and evening peak hours. He was worried that even the increase in the number of GMB seats to 19 would not be able to meet the transport demand, and passengers at the Science Park would not be able to travel to Tai Po or Sha Tin as a result.

(iv) He and other Members had proposed operating a bus route to replace the GMB route proposed by the TD and set out its bus stop locations as well. He asked the department to reply whether it would consider the proposal concerned, and asked KMB to make itself clear whether it was interested in operating the route as well as to explain the potential difficulties in operation.

86. Mr. WU Yiu-cheong, Max’s comments were as follows:

(i) He supported the TD’s operation of public transport services from Tai Po to the Science Park and Prince of Wales Hospital in principle. However, with a proposed maximum fare as high as $19.8, the GMB route was seriously uncompetitive.

(ii) The GMB stops proposed by the department included City One Shatin and Shek Mun, and it only cost Tai Po residents about $7 to go there by the MTR. Even if the eventual fare of the GMB was set at about $15, it would not be attractive to the public.

(iii) Taking a detour to Ma On Shan would lengthen the travel distance for the said GMB route and the proposed maximum fare was determined according to the travel distance. As such, the maximum fare of this route was as high as $19.8.

(iv) The proposed GMB route was circuitous. Not only would it raise the fare level, but also result in a waste of resources when there were no passengers taking it. He indicated that if the department was worried about the shortage of passengers of this GMB route, it should consider amending the route to make it travel past more area of Tai Po District (such as Tai Po Centre and Kwong Fuk Road, etc.) so as to attract more passengers, instead taking a detour to Ma On Shan.

87. Mr. Clement WOO, the Vice-chairman, indicated that the said GMB route proposed by the - 27 - department could provide one more option for the residents travelling to Prince of Wales Hospital. However, he agreed that the proposed maximum fare of $19.8 was rather high. He hoped that during the trial operation of the route, the department could make adjustment (including the fare and the route, etc.) according to the market response and consider thoroughly the ways to increase the number of passengers if the route was welcomed by the public.

88. Mr. LO Hiu-fung’s comments were as follows:

(i) There was no conflict between bus and GMB services. For instance, there were both GMB and bus services between Tai Po and Yuen Long, as well as Tai Po and Mong Kok to choose from. He opined that apart from this GMB route, the TD should also consider setting up the bus route proposed by Members.

(ii) He said that he had written to the TD on several occasions to request for the provision of public transport services between Tai Po and Prince of Wales Hospital. As the captioned paper suggested setting up a bus route from Nethersole Hospital to Prince of Wales Hospital via the Science Park, he asked the department to seriously consider the suggestion concerned.

(iii) The fare of the GMB route proposed by the TD was high. While the department explained that this fare level was the proposed maximum fare, this level had been approved by the department and was the highest fare chargeable by the operator. Therefore, he hoped that the department would note Members’ comments on the fare being too high and consider thoroughly the competitiveness of this fare level.

(iv) As the proposed GMB route would travel past many locations such as the Science Park, Ma On Shan, Shek Mun, City One Shatin, Wong Nai Tau, etc., and not all passengers would get off at the terminus, he suggested providing sectional fare concession for the passengers.

89. Mr. Ken YU supported the TD operating this GMB route, but agreed that fare of the route was too high and there would not be a lot of passengers. He suggested using buses for this route at the early stages of the trial, as he believed that the fare would be lower as well. In addition, he hoped that the department would consider adding a stop at Shatin Hospital so as to make it easier for the passengers to go there.

90. Mr. WU Cheuk-him supported providing bus services between Tai Po and Prince of Wales Hospital. He pointed out that as KMB had been granted the franchise by the Government, it had to fulfil its corporate social responsibility, such as operating hospital routes that had fewer passengers but could cater for the transport demand of members of the public. He continued that the existing travel route from Tai Po to Prince of Wales Hospital was rather circuitous. As such, he hoped that the TD and KMB would take full account of Members’ suggestions and set up this route. Besides, he opined that competition spurred progress and therefore did not find any - 28 - conflict between GMB and bus services. As regards the GMB route proposed by the TD, he opined that the fare was too high and was almost the same as the fare for other cross-harbour transport services. He opined that introducing buses for competition was the only way to benefit members of the public.

91. Mr. MAN Nim-chi said that apart from taking the MTR and changing for other transportation, Tai Po residents could also travel to Prince of Wales Hospital by taking routes 74X or 75X to Tate’s Cairn Tunnel Interchange, walking to the opposite lanes via the pedestrian footbridge and changing for routes 84M or 89X. However, he found such routes circuitous and particularly inconvenient for people with physical disabilities or those who had to seek treatment there. As such, he supported setting up bus services that travelled directly between Tai Po and Prince of Wales Hospital and hoped that the TD and KMB would proactively consider the proposal.

92. Mr. Francis YAM’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He did not see any problem providing bus and GMB services at the same time, and regretted that the department thought otherwise. It was like what happened earlier when Members asked for route 73B to take a detour to North District Hospital, but the department turned down the proposal as it indicated that the proposed route would overlap the route of GMB route 502 and led to competition.

(ii) In view of the situation in point (i), he opined that the bus company should have the priority in operating the route if it was willing to do so, and GMB services should only be arranged if passenger demand was not met or passenger demand was lower in certain areas.

(iii) Bus companies were big companies and had representatives attending the meeting to listen to Members’ views, making it easier for Members to monitor their services. On the contrary, it was rather difficult for the TTC to monitor GMB services.

(iv) If there was a sectional fare concession in the GMB services, short-distance passengers might be driving out the long-distance ones. Taking GMB route 26 (travelled between Tai Po and Ma On Shan) as an example, he said that as passengers at Hong Kong Education University could enjoy sectional fare concession for their ride to Kwong Fuk Road, some passengers would not get off until Kwong Fuk Road. As a result, passengers at the en route stops (such as Tai Po Centre and Sun Hing Garden) were unable to get on board to Ma On Shan, and thus the GMBs had failed to do the job to send passengers to Ma On Shan effectively. Taking the GMB route proposed by the TD as an example, the GMBs departing from Tai Po would be full of passengers getting off at the Science Park, which meant that passengers in the Providence Bay area would not be able to travel by minibus to places such as Sha Tin and Shek Mun either. - 29 -

(v) The GMB route currently proposed by the department was 20 kilometres long and its journey time 50 minutes. In view of the situation in point (iv), were GMBs suitable for such a lengthy route? Were GMBs more suitable for feeder routes for small areas only?

(vi) He stressed that he was not denying the value of GMBs. However, if GMBs were used to operate the new route, it would definitely make the same mistakes as routes 502 or 26 and affect the likelihood of operating bus services in future. Therefore, he opined that it would be more desirable to use franchise buses for the afore-mentioned services.

93. Ms. Flora MA responded as follows:

(i) She understood Members’ views that the proposed GMB route was rather long. On the other hand, passengers for Shatin Hospital might also take this GMB route as it would travel past A Kung Kok Street.

(ii) As a number of Members considered that buses were more desirable for the route concerned, she would forward the comments to the Bus and Railway Branch of the department so that it would take into account in its bus route planning.

(iii) The TD was currently open-minded as regards the type of transportation to be used for this route. As the route concerned was still at the consultation stage, the department would listen to and take into account Members’ views, and would inform the TPDC for any updates.

94. Mr. TAM Tsun-hei, Jeff responded as follows:

(i) KMB noted Members’ comments and kept an open mind on the proposal concerned. (ii) As the TD currently suggested that this route should be operated by GMBs, KMB had not studied in detail about the route and fare, etc., of the services concerned. For reference, the fare for KMB bus services between Tai Po and Kowloon was between $10 and $14.

(iii) KMB would be happy to study ways to improve the bus services between Sha Tin and the Science Park as well as those between the Science Park and Tai Po.

VII. Proposed adjustment to KMB route 73B (TPDC Paper No. TT 7/2019)

95. Ms. Flora MA introduced the captioned paper.

- 30 -

96. The Chairman said that the WGPB endorsed the proposal of route 73B taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West at the meeting on 7 January 2019. He asked Members to note the WGPB’s comments.

97. Pointing out that both the WGPB and local villagers supported route 73B taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West, Mr. Patrick TANG asked why the TD was consulting the TTC again. If the TTC had endorsed the proposal at this meeting, would the department implement it?

98. The Secretary said that as the TD submitted the captioned paper mainly in the hope of consulting the TTC, the TTC Chairman agreed to incorporate the matters relating to the service adjustment of route 73B into the agenda of this meeting. On the other hand, as the WGPB had been following up on the matters relating to route 73B, the agenda item of route 73B was a Matter Arising at the WGPB meeting. He continued that the decision made by the WGPB had to be endorsed by the DC or the committee it belonged to before being regarded as a decision made by the DC. As such, the Chairman just now reported on the WGPB’s decision on the adjustment to route 73B for Members’ consideration.

99. The TTC endorsed supporting the adjustment to route 73B proposed by the TD.

100. Mr. Patrick TANG pointed out that the TD’s proposal had been endorsed by the TPDC. He asked whether the department still had to consult other DCs about the adjustment proposal and when the adjustment proposal could be put in place.

101. Ms. Flora MA pointed out that as route 73B travelled past Tai Po District and North District, the TD had to consult the two DCs as regards this adjustment proposal. She indicated that the department had already consulted the two DCs, but had to consolidate the views and fine-tune the proposal, so as to come up with a proposal acceptable to both DCs. The department hoped to put in place the adjustment proposal in two to three weeks, and would inform both DCs before implementing the proposal concerned.

102. Mr. CHAN Cho-leung indicated that the TTC had clearly stated its support to the TD’s adjustment proposal. However, as he knew that the North District Council (“NDC”) was against this proposal, Mr. Patrick TANG enquired the department about its follow-up procedures just now and whether the adjustment proposal would be shelved. He stressed that taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West would only increase the journey time of route 73B by a couple of minutes and would not affect the bus services. He asked the department to reply whether this adjustment proposal could be put in place by the end of January 2019 as scheduled.

103. Ms. Flora MA pointed out that the matters relating to route 73B had been discussed for a long time and she clearly understood Mr. CHAN’s concerns. After collecting the views from Tai Po District, she would further discuss with KMB and her colleagues in charge of the traffic matters - 31 - in North District to study ways to adjust the proposal to make it acceptable to both DCs. She expected that there would be proposed amendments by late January and early February 2019, and she would inform the two DCs in due course.

104. Ms. WONG Pik-kiu indicated that the reason why the NDC was against the adjustment proposal for route 73B was that the service frequency would be reduced from once every 20 minutes to once every 30 minutes after changes had been made for the buses to take a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West instead. The NDC found the change unacceptable and asked KMB to deploy one more bus for route 73B so as to maintain a service frequency of once every 20 minutes. She indicated that the TPDC was fine with the service frequency of once every 30 minutes. However, taking into account the opposing views of the NDC, she suggested the department consider changing the service frequency to once every 25 minutes. Besides, she said that traffic condition would affect the journey time of buses, especially when there was works being carried out on Tai Wo Service Road West. As she believed that the journey time would be reduced after the works had been completed, the department could set out in a general manner the service frequency in the paper, such as once every 23 to 28 minutes, so as to prevent creating conflicts between the two DCs as well as among their DC Members. She hoped that the department would co-ordinate the route and service frequency of route 73B, and put in place the adjustment proposal as soon as possible.

105. As residents would take route 73B to seek treatment at Nethersole Hospital, Mr. MAN Nim-chi hoped that the department would extend the service hours of route 73B to benefit more residents. Besides, he opined that Mr. CHAN Cho-leung had put in a lot of effort in securing this route for the residents. Therefore, he criticised the department for not heeding the TPDC’s advice when setting up route 73B by refusing to let the buses take a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West. As a result, it had to adjust the route now due to the shortage of passengers and it was such a waste of time and resources. He hoped that the department would learn a lesson from it and listen to the stakeholders more when planning for routes.

106. Mr. CHAN Cho-leung said that since the cancellation of route 70, residents in the area of Tai Wo Service Road West could only rely on GMB route 502 to travel to Sheung Shui. He stressed that the route from Nethersole Hospital to North District was not set up for those going to work, and taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West would only increase the journey time by a couple of minutes. As such, he did not see any problem with the change concerned.

107. Mr. CHOW Yuen-wai pointed out that long before route 73B had commenced services, many Members and residents had said that its service hours (i.e., 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.) was undesirable as it could not benefit the residents or even students. As such, he could foresee that there would not be a lot of passengers for this route. He opined that what the TD was suggesting right now were just minor adjustments that apart from services hours (i.e., services would commence earlier at 9:30 a.m.), there were no significant changes whatsoever. Also, the department only suggested - 32 - route 73B taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West during its journey from Tai Po to North District, but had not set up any stop at North District Hospital as requested by Members. He indicated that many residents had to seek treatment at North District Hospital and taking a detour there would substantially increase the number of passengers. If there was still a shortage of passengers, he suggested route 73B taking a detour to Tai Wo to avoid wasting bus resources.

108. Mr. Patrick TANG’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He asked whether the service frequency of route 73B being changed from once every 20 minutes to once every 30 minutes meant that bus services would be less frequent or the journey time would be extended by 10 minutes.

(ii) He said that Mr. CHAN Cho-leung, Route 73B Concern Group (“Concern Group”) and he had been asking for route 73B to take a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West. However, as buses from North District to Tai Po would travel past Fanling Highway Bus Interchange and the route from this interchange to Tai Wo Service Road West was rather circuitous, the Concern Group was willing to give in and accept the proposal of taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West in one way only.

(iii) If the NDC opposed this adjustment proposal because of the 10-minute increase in the journey time of route 73B, it would not help even if KMB deployed one more bus for this route as the journey time would not be reduced.

(iv) In view of the claims that route 73B was a bus route for North District, he opined that public bus services should not be separated by districts whatsoever. If it was, as the route after Fanling Highway Bus Interchange was inside Tai Po District, did it mean that Tai Po District had full control over the route in this section?

(v) He stressed that Mr. CHAN Cho-leung and he were only helping the residents fight for their rights and interests, and had discussed the matters relating to route 73B with the department on many occasions in the past. He opined that the department should decide how to adjust the route after striking a balance between the views of different stakeholders, as well as respond to and clearly state the department’s standpoint at this meeting, so that they could inform the residents.

109. Mr. CHAN Cho-leung indicated that he was willing to visit the NDC to follow up on the matters relating to route 73B.

110. The Chairman said that the TPDC asked for route 73B to take a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West in August 2018. However, the TD used its authority to decide its route without the TPDC’s consent, and wrote to inform the TPDC and NDC of its decision. At present, as the department had put forward service adjustment proposal as regards the actual operation of route 73B, it should also use its authority to put in place the proposal and write to inform the two DCs of - 33 - its decision.

111. Ms Flora MA responded as follows:

(i) She reiterated that the reason why the TD submitted the captioned paper at this meeting was to find out whether the TTC had any comments on the adjustment proposal put forward by the department.

(ii) The department first consulted the TTC about the provision of route 73B in January 2018, and had adjusted the route to take a detour to Fanling Health Centre as suggested by some Members.

(iii) She stressed that the department remained neutral among the different views, and would follow the principle of making good use of resources as well as avoiding overlapping and circuitous routes when planning for public transport services such as buses and minibuses.

(iv) Route 73B did not have a lot of passengers since commencing services in September 2018. As taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West would not increase journey time by much while adjusting the route could benefit more members of the public and make good use of bus resources, the department had put forward the adjustment proposal for route 73B.

(v) The department noted all Members’ comments, and would follow the principle mentioned in point (iii) above to study the adjustment proposal for route 73B with KMB. It was expected that the proposed amendments would be put forward in late January or early February 2019.

(vi) Before putting in place the amendments, the department would inform the TPDC and NDC in a timely manner.

112. Mr. Francis YAM said that rather than wasting time to deal with the problems of route 73B, he suggested that it would be more practical for Members to ask the TD to move the terminus of route 73 back to Choi Yuen Estate in Sheung Shui (at present, the terminus of route 73 was at Wah Ming Estate in Fanling), and the reasons were as follows:

(i) The original route of route 73 was from Tai Po Industrial Estate to Choi Yuen Estate via Sheung Shui.

(ii) As Tai Po residents hoped that the Administration could provide bus services from Tai Po to North District Hospital, the afore-mentioned change could meet the residents’ demand.

(iii) Route 73 was a whole-day service route which had more desirable service hours than route 73B. - 34 -

He opined that the route 73B proposal put forward by the department had created conflicts between the TPDC and NDC, which was undesirable and had wasted a lot of discussion time. On the contrary, it would be more important to move the terminus of route 73 back to Sheung Shui. He suggested forwarding this agenda item to the WGPB for follow-up actions.

113. Mr. Patrick TANG reiterated that the route of route 73B had been discussed for a long time. He opined that the department had to clearly state its standpoints and reply whether the proposal of taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West could be put in place so that he could explain it to the residents. Besides, he indicated that all DC Members fought for the rights of the residents in their constituencies, and thus disagreed sending a TPDC Member to the NDC to discuss the matters relating to route 73B. He opined that the TD should take up the responsibility in making a decision.

114. Ms. Flora MA noted the comments on routes 70 and 73, as well as the residents’ demand for bus services between Tai Po and North District Hospital. She said that as every year the TTC would discuss the BRPP for the coming year, she suggested Members put forward these bus service suggestions when discussing the BRPP concerned. She reiterated that the department would continue to follow up on the matters relating to route 73B, and would inform the TPDC and the NDC of any changes to the proposal.

115. The Chairman said that the TTC had endorsed the TD’s adjustment proposal to route 73B and the TD had also made a response. He asked Members to give the TD time to follow up on the matters.

VIII. Proposed conversion of some of the planters on Tat Wan Road near Tai Po Market MTR Station into an alighting / boarding bay for non-franchised buses (TPDC Paper No. TT 8/2019)

116. Ms. PUN Fun-yu, Winnie introduced the captioned paper.

117. Mr. Max WU’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He was surprised to see the TD brief the captioned works with a paper that had only one page. He indicated that he had no idea how the parties concerned came up with the location, and did not know the pros and cons for expanding the non-franchised bus stop there.

(ii) He had collected public views in the Tat Wan Road area near Tai Po Market MTR Station. He found that the residents did not know there was such a works project in - 35 -

the department and they were also worried that the works would substantially increase the traffic burden of Tat Wan Road. However, such information was not mentioned by the captioned paper. He opined that the department should provide the information concerned.

(iii) As Elegance Garden was split into two by Tat Wan Road, many elderly people and students would cross the road at the pedestrian crossing near the selected site. If the traffic of Tat Wan Road got busier because of the captioned works and the additional resident bus licenses, he was worried that it would be more dangerous for the elderly people and students to cross the road.

(iv) According to the TD’s preliminary design, about 11 trees and two-thirds of the planters had to be removed for the captioned works. Therefore, he wondered if the works was worth launching. He believed that Members would agree that the alighting / boarding area for resident buses outside Tai Po Market MTR Station was poorly managed and was seriously congested during the peak hours. However, he hoped that the department could provide more information regarding the selected site of the works concerned, so that Members could think it through and make the right choice.

(v) He opposed the department turning some of the existing planters on Tat Wan Road near Tai Po Market MTR Station into an alighting / boarding bay for non-franchised buses. He enquired whether the department had considered constructing the lay-by somewhere else, and whether the current site was suggested only due to technical difficulties.

(vi) After the captioned works had been completed, how many resident buses would the department expect to use this lay-by? As such information was not mentioned in the paper, it was difficult for Members to speculate how the captioned works would affect the traffic flow in the Tat Wan Road area.

(vii) There were a lot of management issues at the existing non-franchised bus stop outside Tai Po Market MTR Station. For instance, it was not regulated by the smoking ban-related ordinances, and there were also problems relating to illegal parking, promotional booths as well as panhandling. He understood that the department had no authority to manage these non-franchised bus stops. However, he opined that the department would only spread the social problems from the MTR station to somewhere even closer to people’s homes by expanding the area of these non-franchised bus stops. He found such a move irresponsible and demanded an explanation.

(viii) He had written to the TD as regards the captioned works proposal asking for staff to inspect the site with him, so as to study whether there were other suitable locations to construct this lay-by to avoid removing the trees and planters.

- 36 -

118. Mr. AU Chun-wah enquired that after the TTC had endorsed the captioned works, whether the TD would issue more resident bus licenses and allow the newly joined ones to pick up and drop off passengers at this lay-by, or it would not issue new resident bus licenses and this lay-by would only serve to alleviate the traffic there. If the former was the case, he opined that the provision of the additional lay-by might not help alleviate the traffic in the vicinity, but only make the Tat Wan Road area even more congested. If the latter was the case, he said that all the resident buses would then be able to pick up and drop off passengers at this lay-by, and other vehicles could continue to use the existing lay-by outside the MTR station. He opined that it was necessary for the department to explain this to allow Members to consider thoroughly.

119. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen’s comments were as follows:

(i) As Members might not know the works design clearly, he suggested discussing with the TD after the meeting instead.

(ii) As the flow of GMBs, resident buses and private vehicles off Tai Po Market MTR Station and University MTR Station had been saturated, he and some former DC Members had suggested removing some of the planters outside Tai Po Market MTR Station to make room for GMBs and resident buses, so as to facilitate the queuing of commuters and residents.

(iii) He, the TD staff and police officers had inspected the site many times, and opined that while the planters had to be kept, it was not necessary to keep too many of them, and the currently selected site was not that close to Elegance Garden either. On the contrary, congestion on Tat Wan Road in the morning due to the excessive amount of vehicles was more annoying to the residents.

(iv) As there were more than 1 600 housing units behind Lai Chi Shan and residents of the residential estates nearby also relied on the MTR for their travel, the site suggested by the department was the only location available for expanding the non-franchised bus lay-by in the short run.

(v) As for the long run, he had requested the MTRCL and the TD to build a podium next to the lay-by to divert the additional population of Tai Po Market.

(vi) As Members often criticised the Government for insufficient road facilities and parking spaces, the captioned works could properly address the shortcomings in this regard. He pointed out that it was normal for Members to have different views. He agreed to inspect the site to facilitate Members raising comments.

120. Mr. Francis YAM’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) Were there any other exclusive lay-bys for non-franchised buses in Hong Kong? If there were other vehicles parked or picking up / dropping off passengers at the - 37 -

exclusive lay-by for non-franchised buses, were the HKPF or TD authorised to take law enforcement action?

(ii) There was a hatched area in front of the selected site of the captioned works near Tai Po Market MTR Station, and it should not be illegal for vehicles to pick up / drop off passengers there. However, owing to the difficulty in adducing evidence, it was difficult for the HKPF to prosecute the illegally parked vehicles. As a result, a lot of vehicles were parked there causing obstruction.

(iii) He was worried that the exclusive lay-by constructed for non-franchised buses on Tat Wan Road would eventually turn into a place for other vehicles to park illegally. He enquired how to make sure that no other vehicles could use this exclusive lay-by for non-franchised buses, and whether there were similar lay-bys somewhere else for reference.

(iv) The current passenger alighting / boarding area for resident buses was closer to the MTR station with a cover nearby. As such, residents were worried that after the provision of the additional exclusive lay-by for non-franchised buses, their resident bus stops would be relocated there so that they would be tormented by the elements or had to put up with a longer congestion time as well. He asked whether the department had consulted the non-franchised bus operators concerned and the relevant residential estates about the captioned works.

121. Mr. LO Hiu-fung’s comments and questions were as follows:

(i) He thanked the TD for putting forward the improvement proposals at this meeting, and welcomed all Members to inspect the site and share their views.

(ii) He had been highlighting the traffic congestion problems outside Tai Po Market MTR Station in the past. In particular, the sale of a new housing estate on Shan Tong Road recently had further escalated the congestion problem in the area, with the vehicular queue extending all the way back to the Wan Tau Tong Estate area.

(iii) The afore-mentioned traffic congestion had also led to other problems, such as noise pollution created by vehicles sounding their horns, vehicles picking up / dropping off passengers anytime and anywhere they saw fit, air pollution created by the idling vehicles, goods vehicles loading / unloading goods anytime on the roadside of housing estates, etc.

(iv) For Tai Po District, 19 of the 36 existing resident bus routes travelled past Tai Po Market MTR Station. He agreed that residents had certain demand for resident buses, while the TD kept issuing resident bus licenses to the eligible operators. However, as there was only so much room outside Tai Po Market MTR Station for parking, he opined that it was not an ideal practice to satisfy the demand of unlimited licences with the supply of limited parking spaces. - 38 -

(v) As there were vehicles illegally parked at the pick-up / drop-off area, and the HKPF was unable to deploy officers to be stationed at the site for law enforcement action due to manpower shortage, he opined that the shortage of parking spaces outside Tai Po Market MTR Station could not be resolved simply by expanding the passenger alighting / boarding area of resident buses. Due to the shortage of the HKPF’s manpower, he would only ask the HKPF to take law enforcement action at the site during the peak hours, and asked whether the HKPF had followed up on his suggestion.

(vi) Many insurance company’s promotional vehicles would be parked at the said site during weekday afternoon and on holidays. He asked whether the HKPF had checked if they had obtained the relevant licenses for on-street promotion.

(vii) The afore-mentioned situation would affect the operation of the passenger alighting / boarding area. If the department concerned was unable to manage the existing passenger alighting / boarding area properly, it would be difficult for members of the public and DC Members to be confident with the expansion of passenger alighting / boarding area of resident buses.

(viii) Many members of the public would cross the road to change for other buses at the Uptown Plaza bus stop immediately after getting off at the said site. It was extremely dangerous and would affect the traffic too. He opined that the HKPF had to pay attention to such jaywalking. As such, it was necessary to deploy staff for law enforcement action at the site. In addition, he suggested the TD enhance the instructions at the site to remind members of the public to make good use of the pedestrian subway on their way to the bus stop.

(ix) The location of the passenger alighting / boarding lay-by proposed to be expanded was not ideal, and he asked whether it had to be so close to people’s homes. Besides, as the existing passenger alighting / boarding area and the proposed one were situated at the opposite ends of the road, he found it difficult to manage.

122. Ms. Winnie PUN said that the TD proposed the captioned works with the purpose of dealing with the passenger alighting / boarding issue outside Tai Po Market MTR Station and diverting the vehicles, so as to improve the situation of vehicles using the passenger alighting / boarding area. As regards the concerns on whether more resident buses would be added after the construction of the afore-mentioned lay-by had been confirmed, the department did not have the relevant information for the time being. However, if the department received any applications for operating resident buses, it would examine them on a case by case basis.

123. From the design plan attached in the paper, Mr. Max WU noticed three “P” patterns at Uptown Plaza near the car park exit. He said that the three “P”s should refer to three plastic bollards that prevented vehicles from making a right turn after leaving the car park. However, as - 39 - there was no plastic bollard at the site, he asked if the TD would put up some again.

124. Ms. Winnie PUN pointed out that the three “P”s referred to the traffic signs indicating that there was a car park. The TD would deploy staff to examine the traffic signs concerned at the site after the meeting, and would ask the relevant units to follow up on any damages found.

125. Mr. LO Hiu-fung asked whether the HKPF had deployed any officers to take law enforcement action outside Tai Po Market MTR Station. If yes, what were the prosecution figures concerned?

126. The Chairman said that as Members would discuss illegal parking issues in Matter Arising, he suggested following up on the questions as regards illegal parking then.

127. Mr. AU Chun-wah was not against on-site inspection. However, if the TD failed to promise not to issue additional resident bus licenses after expanding the alighting / boarding area, there would not be enough incentives for Members to support the captioned works. He added that if the department promised not to issue new resident bus licenses, he would consider the captioned works proposal carefully. But if the department once again examined and issued resident bus licenses because the passenger alighting / boarding area had been expanded, he would rather maintain status quo.

128. The Chairman opined that it was necessary to expand the passenger alighting / boarding area to facilitate the use by resident buses and private vehicles. While he agreed that some vehicles might use the passenger alighting / boarding area improperly, the management issue should be taken care of separately. He continued that the housing development projects in the district would be completed gradually in the coming years, and the TD had to take care of the residents’ traffic needs. As such, it would have to deal with the problem of issuing more resident bus licenses eventually. He opined that if there was room for expanding the passenger alighting / boarding area, the parties concerned should give it a try.

129. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen indicated that he had earlier advocated the captioned works to the TD. He agreed that the TD had to resolve the transport connection problems for the residents, and DC Members also had the responsibility to resolve problems for the community, just like the way he fought for the provision of a cover for the GMB terminus outside Tai Po Market MTR Station. He said that some Members had just criticised the Government for not planning ahead by widening Ting Kok Road in a timely manner. As such, he did not understand why Members were against the expansion of the passenger alighting / boarding area outside Tai Po Market MTR Station. Compared to vehicles sounding horns due to traffic congestion, he opined that it would be better to expand the passenger alighting / boarding area to facilitate the vehicles picking up or dropping off passengers. The captioned works would help improve the traffic. Although it might create minor nuisance to the residents nearby, it would greatly benefit the neighbouring residential - 40 -

estates. Therefore, he supported the works concerned and welcomed the TTC and the TD to carry out on-site inspection.

130. As there was only one lane on Tat Wan Road, Mr. Francis YAM opined that adding a passenger alighting / boarding area at the said site could only alleviate the issue involving vehicles picking up and dropping off passengers, but not the general vehicular flow and congestion on Tat Wan Road. As such, he suggested the department consider using the bus stop on Nam Wan Road off Uptown Plaza Block 2 as the passenger pick-up / drop-off lay-by. He opined that vehicles would then be diverted to somewhere other than Tat Wan Road that could truly alleviate the traffic congestion on Tat Wan Road. He explained that only three bus routes were using this bus stop at present, including route 272P which had only one trip per day, route N271 which was only in service during the early hours, and route 74A which had only one trip every hour. It was clear that the usage rate of this bus stop was low. Meanwhile, as the bus stop was rather long and the existing planters would not have to be rebuilt, he suggested the department study the feasibility of the proposal.

131. Ms. Winnie PUN noted Members’ comments and the TD would take follow-up action after the meeting.

132. As regards Mr. Francis YAM’s suggestion, the Chairman indicated that it was necessary to consider whether the bus stop concerned was too far away from Tai Po Market MTR Station, and it might not be convenient to the passengers if the route was too circuitous. He suggested carrying out on-site inspection to examine the feasibility of every proposal.

133. The TTC agreed to ask the Secretariat to help arrange for the site inspection.

(Post-meeting notes: The afore-mentioned site inspection was scheduled on 4 March 2019.)

IX. The Transport Department’s Annual Work Plan 2019/20 (TPDC Paper No. TT 9/2019)

134. Ms. Flora MA introduced the captioned paper.

135. Mr. YAM Man-chuen asked when the TD would submit the BRPP of Tai Po District 2019-2020 to the TTC.

136. Ms. Flora MA said that the TD submitted the BRPP for the next year to all DCs in January or February every year, and would notify all Members via the Secretariat before issuing the papers.

- 41 -

X. Matters arising from the minutes of the 6th meeting in 2018 of the TTC on 9 November 2018 (TPDC Paper No. TT 10/2019)

(1) Demand for the prompt setting up of a bus stop on Lam Tsuen Heung Kung Sho Road

137. Ms. Flora MA indicated that the TD could not follow up on the captioned works as land right issue was involved. She explained that some of the lands in the captioned works were located in the green area, and it was rather time-consuming to change the land use and construct a bus stop for frequent use. As such, the TD would speed up the provision of a bus interchange at Lam Kam Road Transport Interchange so as to provide Lam Tsuen residents with more bus services as soon as possible.

(2) Request for more parking spaces in Tai Po

138. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung reported on the progress of providing more parking spaces in the district as follows:

(i) As regards the proposal of providing an additional five to six night-time parking spaces at the metered car park on Dai Shing Street in Tai Po Industrial Estate, the department had not received any objection and would arrange for the works.

(ii) The department had received objections against the proposal of turning the metered parking spaces for private vehicles on Dai King Street and Dai Hei Street in Tai Po Industrial Estate into night-time parking spaces for goods vehicles. The department was reviewing the objections and trying to modify the design so as to reduce the impact on the vehicular entrance nearby. Consultation would be conducted again in due course.

(iii) The works to provide 24 metered parking spaces for private vehicles on the newly constructed slip road of She Shan Road were still in progress. The department would report on the works progress in a timely manner.

(iv) The TD was carrying out consultation as regards the proposal of providing additional bicycle parking spaces at Kwong Fuk Park and on Yuen Shin Road near Fu Shin Estate, and would report on the results to the TTC in due course. The department had received objections against the proposal of providing additional bicycle parking spaces on Sai Sha Road near Symphony Bay and was dealing with the matters concerned.

139. Ms. Winnie PUN indicated that as mentioned by the Chief Executive in 2018 Policy Address, the Government would follow the principle of “single site, multiple uses” to provide - 42 - public parking spaces in suitable “Government, Institution or Community” facilities and public open spaces projects. Hence, the TD and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) were proactively studying the feasibility of providing an underground car park at the sport centre in Area 6 of Tai Po.

140. Mr. Man Nim-chi said that as the result of the quantitative risk assessment would affect the feasibility of building an underground car park, he hoped that the TD would explain the situation of Area 6 of Tai Po in detail.

141. As regards the TD saying just now that it would study the provision of parking spaces at the sport centre in Area 6 of Tai Po, Mr. Max WU asked whether the department planned to construct an underground car park or simply draw up parking spaces outside the sport centre. If parking spaces were to be drawn up outside the sport centre, how many parking spaces did the department expect to provide? He added that the Administration had resumed about 300 parking spaces so as to launch the works project of the sport centre at Area 6 of Tai Po. As a result, chaos ensued as some drivers were forced to look for other parking spaces in a hurry, while some car parks took advantage of the situation by increasing the parking fee. Apart from the residents of Classical Gardens and the Ma Wo area, residents of Tai Po Market would also use the parking spaces in Area 6 of Tai Po. As such, he would like to know the future parking space supply in Area 6 of Tai Po. Besides, as no works schedule for the sport centre project at Area 6 of Tai Po was available yet, he asked whether the construction of an underground car park would slow down the works progress. If works progress had been slowed down, the demand for parking spaces might have increased upon the completion of works that the 300 parking spaces lost could hardly be made up by the construction of the underground car park. Therefore, he would like to know more about the works’ progress and details.

142. Mr. LAU Yung-wai enquired the TD about the progress of providing additional motorcycle parking spaces in Tai Po Old Market area.

143. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung responded as follows:

(i) As there were town gas tanks near the football-cum-rugby pitch in Area 33 of Tai Po, the TD had to carry out a quantitative risk assessment as regards the construction of an underground car park there to assess the feasibility of the proposal concerned. The situation of Area 6 of Tai Po was different from that of Area 33 of Tai Po as it was situated at the south of Lam Tsuen River.

(ii) The department was studying the proposal of providing additional motorcycle parking spaces in the Tai Po Old Market area, and would contact Mr. LAU Yung-wai for follow-up action for any updates.

- 43 -

144. As regards the provision of parking spaces at the sport centre in Area 6 of Tai Po, Ms. Winnie PUN indicated that the TD was exchanging information with the LCSD and the Architectural Services Department (“ArchSD”), and the LCSD and the ArchSD were also studying the feasibility of providing parking spaces for the project. As for the design details such as whether to construct an underground car park or to provide parking spaces on the ground level, no decision had been made yet.

145. Mr. Max WU enquired again whether the provision of an underground car park would slow down the main works progress of the sport centre in Area 6 of Tai Po.

146. Ms. Winnie PUN said that she would forward Mr. Max WU’s enquiry to the ArchSD and reply him later.

147. Mr. LO Hiu-fung said that at the previous meeting, a Member suggested the TD extend the time limit of metered parking spaces (e.g., from two hours to four) in the rural areas (e.g., Kam Shek New Village). He asked the department to respond to this suggestion.

148. Ms. Winnie PUN said that the TD would keep the metered parking facilities at the metered car park in Kam Shek New Village, and would examine the usage rate of this car park to decide whether to extend the parking time limit.

149. Mr. Patrick TANG indicated that the usage rate of the metered car park in Kam Shek New Village was low, and he had suggested the department extend the time limit of the metered parking spaces there on many occasions. He opined that the department should stop acting in a perfunctory manner and procrastinating, and urged the department to follow up on the matter proactively.

150. The Chairman enquired whether there was any metered parking space with a time limit of over two hours in Hong Kong.

151. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung said that he had no such information for the time being and would follow up on the afore-mentioned enquiry after the meeting.

152. Mr. MAN Nim-chi said that the parking fee for the metered parking spaces off Green Leaves Garden in Sheung Shui was only $2 every 30 minutes. If the time limit for metered parking spaces could not exceed two hours, he suggested the department consider lowering the fee for the metered parking spaces in Kam Shek New Village to enhance its usage rate.

153. Mr. LO Hiu-fung said that it was the TD’s responsibility to resolve the parking space problems. Therefore, he was not happy that the department kept procrastinating with the excuse of “carrying out studies”. Besides, as he had earlier suggested the TD make good use of the - 44 -

Government land under the flyover near Lai Chi Shan by turning it into a temporary car park, he asked whether the department had negotiated with the HyD and the Drainage Services Department as regards his suggestion. He said that as the resident representatives of places such as Lai Chi Shan and Sheung Wun Yiu all supported the proposal, he urged the department to follow up on the matters in a proactive manner.

154. Mr. Patrick TANG opined that the main reason why Members were not happy was that the TD did not follow up on the matters after the previous meeting. He indicated that extending the time limit of parking meters in the rural area would help resolve the shortage of parking spaces in car parks in the urban area, and therefore urged the department to follow up on this proposal in a proactive manner.

155. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung responded as follows:

(i) The TD would study the proposal of extending the time limit for metered parking spaces. If the proposal was deemed not feasible, the department would find out if it was because of technical or administrative issues.

(ii) The department would set up metered car parks at suitable locations and set an appropriate time limit for parking, so as to control the mobility of vehicles inside the car parks. As regards the feasibility of extending the time limit of metered parking spaces, the department would carry out a study and report on the result to the TTC.

(3) Request for the addition of a covered taxi stand next to the petrol filling station on Kwong Chun Street

156. Ms. Winnie PUN said that the LCSD had submitted a land rights transfer application to the District Lands Office, Tai Po (“TPDLO”) for the captioned works, and the TD had also submitted the information required to the TPDLO through the LCSD. Although the land required by the works was currently managed by the LCSD, the TD and the LCSD had carried out the procedure for transferring the land rights in advance so as to launch the works as soon as possible.

157. Mr. MAN Nim-chi said that at the previous meeting, a Member suggested the TD consider resuming some of the pedestrian walkway next to Kwong Fuk Roundabout so as to widen the road. He asked the department to report on its follow-up action.

158. Ms. Winnie PUN said that there were three lanes available to vehicles at Kwong Fuk Roundabout and the traffic condition was acceptable. Therefore, the TD would not consider resuming the pedestrian walkway next to the roundabout.

- 45 -

(4) Concerns over illegal parking in Tai Po District

159. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee reported that the HyD had received from the TD the traffic improvement proposals for Po Heung Street. It would arrange for the works concerned later on and would maintain close liaison with the HD.

160. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak reported as follows:

(i) Tai Po Police District had issued a total of 154 890 fixed penalty illegal parking tickets between January and December 2018.

(ii) Tai Po Police District continued to enforce traffic laws under the Selected Traffic Enforcement Priorities policy, and would prioritise its enforcement efforts on double parking, as well as on the vehicles parked at the exit and entrance of housing estates, pedestrian walkways and pedestrian crossings.

(iii) Tai Po Police District set up a special squad dedicated to illegal parking issues in late 2018 and the local stakeholders concerned had been informed of the contact information of the special squad. He believed that such measures would help alleviate the illegal parking problems in the district.

161. Mr. AU Chun-wah’s comments were as follows:

(i) Recounting a traffic accident which took place on Wan Tau Street recently, he said that the site was an illegal parking blackspot and vehicles were illegally parked on the roadside or even at the pedestrian crossings all the time. Even if a police vehicle was there or travelled past, no law enforcement action would be taken. As the pedestrian crossings were blocked by vehicles, pedestrians could only cross the road through the gaps between vehicles, which often resulted in accidents. Also, if one of the lanes on Wan Tau Street was fully parked with vehicles, it would be difficult for vehicles turning onto Wan Tau Street from Kwong Fuk Road to go through, and the resulting congestion would extend all the way back to Kwong Fuk Road. If there were buses / minibus picking up or dropping off passengers or goods, the traffic there would be even more congested. As such, he urged the TD and the HKPF to study ways to improve the traffic of Wan Tau Street (the section between Chiu Wo Hing and Lok Sin Tong Chu Ting Cheong Home for the Aged). He asked the HKPF to strictly enforce the law there and prosecute the illegally parked vehicles immediately before the improvement measures were put in place.

(ii) It was very often to see vehicles illegally parked on On Cheung Road near the taxi stand of Jade Plaza, leading to constant congestion on the southbound On Cheung Road towards Po Heung Bridge. Also, as there were double white lines separating - 46 -

the left turn lane and the right turn lane at the taxi stand near the signal junction, vehicles going straight or turning left would have to get onto the left turn lane when they reached Tai Yuen Market. However, due to the illegally parked vehicles, vehicles were unable to change lanes before reaching the double white lines, and were often forced to cross the double white lines for the left turn lane right before the signal junction. In view of the situation above, he asked the HKPF to prosecute the vehicles illegally parked there in a stringent manner. Otherwise, it would be impossible to resolve the traffic problems there.

(iii) Despite the presences of yellow hatched road markings on the lay-by on On Chee Road near Fortune Plaza, he noticed that the HKPF rarely prosecuted the illegally parked vehicles there right away. Besides, many vehicles were illegally parked on the hatched markings on On Chee Road near Hang Seng Bank, and there were even double parking that had obstructed the buses, resulting in congestion extending all the way back to the Tai Po Centre area. As such, he urged the HKPF to step up its law enforcement efforts.

(iv) He had called the special squad dedicated to illegal parking and commended its officers for their willingness to take up responsibilities. However, they were unable to deal with the cases within a short period of time due to the substantial amount of complaints received. He was concerned whether the special squad had enough manpower and hoped that the HKPF would allocate more resources to it.

162. The Chairman said that he had to leave the meeting due to other commitments and asked Mr. Clement WOO, the Vice-chairman (hereafter referred to as “the Acting Chairman”), to chair the rest of the meeting on his behalf.

163. Mr. LAU Yung-wai’s comments were as follows:

(i) The special squad was set up to deal with illegal parking on an exclusive basis. However, due to the shortage of manpower, it often failed to deal with complaints about illegal parking right away. If illegal parking cases had to be dealt with immediately, the special squad would suggest Members call 999, which had rendered the special squad useless. He agreed that the special squad did not have enough manpower and therefore urged the HKPF to increase it.

(ii) He opined that the HKPF should not deal with the illegally parked vehicles by asking the drivers to drive them away, especially for vehicles illegally parked on double yellow lines or zebra crossings. He opined that the HKPF should prosecute them immediately.

(iii) Double yellow lines had been painted at the corner of Kau Hui Chik Street towards the elderly home, as well as at the corner between Chui Yi Street and Chui Lok - 47 -

Street. If vehicles were illegally parked there, it would be difficult for members of the public (especially wheelchair users) to cross the road. Therefore, he opined that illegal parking at places with double yellow lines should not be tolerated.

(iv) There were often vehicles parked at the pedestrian crossing on Tai Po Tau Road near the bus terminus of route E41, and there were also a lot of vehicles illegally parked in the Tai Po Tau Drive area. He urged the HKPF to step up the law enforcement efforts.

(v) Vehicles had been parked at the box junction between Chui Lok Street and Mei Sun Lane and he found it unacceptable.

(vi) Many residents had been complaining about the illegal parking problems above and asked for his assistance. However, he rarely saw the HKPF take law enforcement action there. Even if members of the public had reported the cases of vehicles blocking the passage to the HKPF, it often took the HKPF over half an hour to arrive at the scene to deal with it. As a result, the problem could not be resolved immediately and members of the public were frustrated by it.

(vii) He understood that the HKPF had limited manpower. However, as residents’ access would be seriously affected when there were illegally parked vehicles in some of the areas in the district, he hoped that the HKPF would step up its law enforcement efforts for the sake of pedestrian safety.

164. Mr. Ken YU’s comments were as follows:

(i) When the special squad of Tai Po Police District was first set up, he was able to call the direct line to inform the HKPF to take law enforcement action as regards traffic issues, and the HKPF had deployed traffic wardens to patrol the Wan Tau Tong area as well. However, the special squad had no spare capacity to deal with all the complaints cases recently, and he criticised the special squad for being less useful than it was.

(ii) As the law enforcement efforts of the HKPF were insufficient, the fine for illegal parking might cost the drivers less than the monthly parking fee in a car park did. As such, some drivers would take the risk to continue to park their vehicles on the streets illegally.

(iii) The illegally parked vehicles obstructing the pedestrians’ views were serious threats to pedestrian safety as pedestrians crossing the road would be easily knocked down by vehicles. It was also the cause of the fatal traffic accident on Wan Tau Street not long ago.

(iv) He opined that the HKPF should have the greatest share of responsibility for the illegal parking issue and should allocate resources on recruiting more manpower to - 48 -

deal with traffic matters. He believed that all Members would support the HKPF in securing more resources to improve the traffic in the district, and the HKPF should inform the TTC on any difficulty it faced so that the TTC would be able to provide assistance.

165. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak responded as follows:

(i) He thanked Members for providing the locations of traffic blackspots in the district, and he would forward Members’ comments to his supervisors and take follow-up actions after the meeting.

(ii) The HKPF had proactively deployed manpower to deal with the illegal parking issue and would do so in a stringent manner.

(iii) Owing to limited manpower, the HKPF would accord priority to the complaints. The HKPF would also review the effectiveness of the traffic complaint direct line, and adjustment would be made where necessary.

166. Mr. AU Chun-wah opined that all the patrol officers of Tai Po Police District had to deal with traffic issue. However, only the representative of Tai Po Police District Traffic Team was attending this meeting. He enquired whether they should invite the HKPF representatives of the operation team or relevant teams to attend the TTC meeting from now on, so as to discuss the illegal parking problems together.

167. Mr. LO Hiu-fung asked whether the HKPF had deployed officers to take law enforcement action or divert the traffic outside Tai Po Market MTR Station.

168. Mr. Eric TAM opined that hiring traffic wardens would not waste the HKPF’s resources but would increase the Government’s revenue with the fine collected. As traffic wardens could focus on dealing with the traffic matters, he hoped that the HKPF would deploy more traffic wardens to the district for the illegal parking problems. Besides, as regards the illegal parking situation, he enquired whether people could film it and send the video footage to the HKPF, so that the HKPF could take law enforcement action and issue fixed penalty tickets to the persons concerned afterwards.

169. The Acting Chairman asked whether the HKPF could introduce new technology to help deal with the illegal parking problems and take law enforcement actions, and whether it could use more stringent methods, such as using tow trucks, to deal with the illegally parked vehicles.

170. Mr. LEUNG Chi-tak responded as follows:

(i) The HKPF deployed police officers or traffic wardens to Tai Po Market MTR - 49 -

Station to divert the traffic during the peak hours every morning. As many school buses, resident buses, factory feeder buses, etc., picked up and dropped off passengers there at the same time during the morning peak hours while the yellow hatched area was rather small (it could only accommodate two coaches), the HKPF usually diverted the traffic in a tolerant manner to avoid serious traffic congestion from taking place. However, the HKPF would also prosecute the illegally parked vehicles. Between January and October 2018, the HKPF had issued a total of 478 fixed penalty illegal parking tickets on Tat Wan Road.

(ii) The HKPF noticed that due to the sale of new residential developments, many property agents and estate salespersons had parked their vehicles outside Tai Po Market MTR Station to promote the flats and look for buyers. As such, the HKPF had also deployed police officers there to find out the situation and to carry out law enforcement action. The HKPF would make blitz prosecution if these vehicles were found parked at the passenger alighting / boarding lay-by there.

(iii) Members of the public could hand over the video footage and photos of illegally parked vehicles to the HKPF, which had designated officers responsible for following up on the law enforcement action.

(5) Improving the facilities of Tolo Highway

171. As regards the proposal of painting double white lines at the exit of the southbound Tolo Highway towards Ma On Shan or East Kowloon, Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung reported as follows:

(i) As vehicles usually travelled at a higher speed on highways, it was necessary to reserve an appropriate distance when putting up traffic signs. For instance, the department would put up “Exit” signs as far away from the exit as possible to remind the drivers to choose their lane in advance.

(ii) As regards the afore-mentioned road section, the existing direction signs complied with the set-up requirements and were at a sufficient distance away to remind the drivers to choose their lane. If double white lines were to be painted at the exit, there would be less time and less travel distance available for drivers to consider changing lanes. Also, it would be more difficult to change lanes in time of heavy traffic, thus increasing the likelihood of changing lanes in a forceful manner. As such, painting double white lines would compromise the safety of changing lanes.

(iii) If double white lines were to be painted there, the department would have to move the direction signs forward. However, these direction signs were usually set up on large structural frames and moving these frames was a major project.

(iv) As painting double white lines at the said site would not help improve the traffic - 50 -

congestion there a lot, having taken into account various factors, the TD would not recommend painting double white lines at the exit of the southbound Tolo Highway towards Ma On Shan or East Kowloon.

(6) Setting up a bus stop at Lam Kam Road Roundabout

172. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee reported that the HyD had received the design drawings submitted by the TD and was carrying out valuation work. The HyD would inform the TD for follow-up actions upon the completion of valuation work.

173. Mr. LI Wah-kwong, Rex indicated that what the HyD reported at this meeting was identical to that at the previous meeting. Therefore, he urged the HyD to finish the valuation work as soon as possible and take follow-up action in a proactive manner.

174. Mr. Patrick TANG relayed Mr. CHAN Cho-leung’s comments and ask the departments concerned to provide the timetable of the captioned works.

175. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung said that the TD had come up with the design concept for the captioned works that the bus stop facilities would include two bus stops of 27 m long, two GMB lanes and one taxi lane. The TD was making final adjustment to the design drawings and would carry out public consultation in due course.

176. Mr. Patrick TANG asked the TD to provide the design drawings of the bus stop for the TTC as soon as possible.

XI. Situation report on traffic improvement works completed in the past two months and to be carried out in the next three months in Tai Po District by the Highways Department (TPDC Paper No. TT 11/2019)

177. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee asked Members to note the captioned paper.

178. As regards the works to remove the bollards on the pedestrian walkway of Kau Hui Chik Street, Mr. LAU Yung-wai said that the works concerned had succeeded in making the vehicles no longer gather at the vehicular entrance at the back entrance of Tai Po Jockey Club General Out-patient Clinic, and that the vehicles would no longer obstruct the pedestrians walking by as well. As such, he would like to take this opportunity to commend the HyD for its work.

- 51 -

XII. List of items and schedule concerning the additional provision of barrier-free access facilities in Tai Po District (TPDC Paper No. TT 12/2019)

179. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee asked Members to note the captioned paper.

180. Mr. AU Chun-wah said that the TTC had earlier approved selecting the pedestrian footbridge connecting Plover Cove Garden and Tai Po Mega Mall as one of the sites for lift construction at the next stage of the Universal Accessibility Programme. At the briefing of the project, the HyD indicated that Plover Cove Garden had ownership of the pedestrian footbridge. As such, the department had communicated with the owners’ corporation of Plover Cove Garden and confirmed that there was no objection before carrying on with the works concerned. However, when he met with the Owners’ Corporation of Tai Po Centre (“OCTPC”) not long ago, the OCTPC indicated that Tai Po Centre had ownership of the afore-mentioned pedestrian footbridge instead. As such, he asked the HyD to figure out who had ownership of the afore-mentioned pedestrian footbridge. To his knowledge, the OCTPC had reservations as regards the provision of lift at the pedestrian footbridge. Therefore, if the ownership of the pedestrian footbridge belonged to Tai Po Centre, he would ask the department to contact the OCTPC for follow-up action as soon as possible.

181. Mr. CHENG Wun-chee said that he would forward Mr. AU Chun-wah’s comments to the Major Works Project Management Office.

182. As regards the barrier-free access facilities works projects across Ting Kok Road connecting Tai Yuen Estate and Fu Heng Estate (Project No. NF191), Mr. MAN Nim-chi enquired about the works progress of Lift No. 1.

183. As regards the works mentioned by Mr. MAN Nim-chi, Mr. WU Cheuk-him said that Lift No. 2 was earlier damaged by the rainwater brought about by Typhoon “Mangkhut”. Therefore, he hoped that the department would carry out flood control work on Lift No. 1 properly, so as to prevent similar incidents. Besides, as the HyD had mentioned that the works for Lift No. 1 could be completed in the first quarter of 2019, he enquired whether the works could be completed as scheduled.

184. The Acting Chairman said that for lifts that had been completed and opened for public use, if repair and maintenance work had to be carried out, the HyD should put up more notices to remind members of the public. Besides, as it often took a while for the lifts damaged by typhoon to resume service, he hoped that the HyD could step up its efforts in dealing with them.

185. Ms. MAK Pui-yan said that the CEDD was responsible for the construction of works project No. NF191. She would contact the Members concerned to report on the completion date of this works project after the meeting. - 52 -

(Post-meeting note: Lift No. 1 of works project No. NF191 was expected to be opened to the public in late March 2019.)

XIII. Vetting of district minor works proposals to be recommended to the District Facilities Management Committee (TPDC Paper No. TT 13/2019)

186. The Acting Chairman said that district works proposals had to secure the support of the committee concerned before being submitted to the District Facilities Management Committee (“DFMC”) for consideration. The Secretariat had received one works proposal from Members and the TTC had to consider whether to recommend the proposal or not. The proposal concerned had been set out in TPDC Paper No. TT 13/2019.

187. Members did not have any comments or questions.

188. The TTC agreed to recommend the works proposal concerned to the DFMC.

XIV. Reports of working groups

(1) Working Group on Provision of Public Bus and Minibus Services

189. On behalf of Ms. WONG Pik-kiu, Chairman of the Working Group, the Secretary reported as follows:

(i) The Working Group convened its first meeting in 2019 on 7 January 2019 to continue the discussion on matters relating to the public bus and minibus services in Tai Po District.

(ii) Regarding public bus services, the Working Group followed up on the service improvement proposals for routes 64K, 65K, 73B, 75K, 275R, 94, 271, 271X and 72X with the TD and bus companies. Besides, the Working Group also endorsed supporting the proposal of route 73B taking a detour to Tai Wo Service Road West.

(iii) The consultancy reported on the preliminary findings of the study on the improvement to public transport services in Tai Po District at the meeting, and would continue to collect and collate Members’ comments. The study findings would be officially reported at the next TTC meeting.

- 53 -

(2) Working Group on Improvements to Major Roads in Rural Areas

190. Mr. Patrick TANG, Chairman of the Working Group, reported that the Working Group on Improvements to Major Roads in Rural Areas had not held any meeting recently. The Secretariat would inform Members to attend the next meeting once the date had been confirmed.

(3) Working Group on Road Safety Campaign and Cycling Network Development

191. The Acting Chairman reported as the Chairman of the Working Group that the Working Group convened its third meeting in 2018 on 21 December 2018. He continued that the two activities organised this year, namely “Tai Po District Schools Road and Traffic Safety Competition cum Publicity Campaign 2018/19” and “Tai Po Road and Traffic Safety Campaign Carnival 2018/19”, had been held successfully with active participation, and had effectively promoted the road traffic safety message. Besides, the TD continued to report on the implementation progress of the Code of Practice for Automated Dockless Bicycle Rental Services at this Working Group meeting, and would continue to keep an eye on the development of the automated bicycle rental service as well as to enhance the regulation policies.

(4) Working Group on Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge

192. Mr. LI Kwok-ying, Chairman of the Working Group, reported that the Working Group on Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge had not held any meeting recently. The Secretariat would inform Members to attend the next meeting once the date had been confirmed. On the other hand, the HyD indicated that it had more or less finished the technical feasibility study on the proposed Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge, and would prepare for the launch of advance preparation work for construction at the next stage. The HyD would report to the Working Group on the findings of the technical feasibility study later.

193. The Acting Chairman indicated that the Working Group on Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge was a non-standing working group and its term would expire on 12 March 2019. As the discussion relating to Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge had not been completed before the end of the term, he suggested the TTC consider setting up this Working Group again on 1 April 2019, so as to continue to follow up on the matters relating to the construction of Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge.

194. The TTC agreed with the Acting Chairman’s suggestion, and endorsed that the next term of the Working Group would be from 1 April 2019 to 30 November 2019 (8 months in total), while the title and terms of reference would remain unchanged.

195. The Acting Chairman invited Members to nominate the Chairman of the Working Group for - 54 -

the next term.

196. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen nominated Mr. LI Kwok-ying as the Chairman of the Working Group for another term, and was seconded by Mr. Eric TAM and Mr. Ken YU. Mr. LI Kwok-ying accepted the nomination.

197. The Acting Chairman announced that as Mr. LI Kwok-ying was the only one nominated, he was elected as the Chairman of the Working Group on Kwong Fuk Bridge for another term.

198. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen hoped that the Working Group could convene a meeting as soon as possible, so as to focus the discussion and follow up on the matters relating to the construction of Kwong Fuk Vehicular Bridge.

199. Mr. LI Kwok-ying believed that the HyD had prepared the relevant information, and he expected that the Working Group could convene the next meeting in late February 2019.

XV. Any other business

(1) Updating District Council Member’s personal interests registration form and curriculum vitae

200. The Acting Chairman said that according to the Standing Orders, DC Members had to register their personal interests every year. He asked Members to return the completed form for registration of personal interests to the DC Secretariat on or before 18 January 2019 for filing and public reference. In addition, if Members had made changes to their curriculum vitae, they were also required to return the revised curriculum vitae to the Secretariat before the above deadline

(2) Speeding on Tai Po Road

201. Mr. CHAN Siu-kuen said that in recent years, there were often vehicles travelling at a high speed on Tai Po Road between Tai Po Mei and Wong Yi Au in the early hours on holidays. As such, he had written to the TD and the HKPF in 2015 and 2017 respectively asking for the installation of speed cameras at the road section concerned. He said that in recent years, the HKPF had been cracking down on illegal road racing in a proactive manner, and the situation there had improved a lot. As such, he would like to take this opportunity to commend the efforts of the Task Force and Intelligence Unit of the Traffic Team (New Territories North) of the HKPF.

(3) Following up on the meeting arrangement of the Working Group on Provision of Public - 55 -

Bus and Minibus Services

202. Mr. YAM Man-chuen suggested setting the dates for the remaining WGPB meetings in 2019, so as to facilitate Members making the corresponding arrangement. He asked the Chairman of the WGPB to note his comments.

(Post-meeting notes: The WGPB followed up on the afore-mentioned suggestion at the meeting on 22 February 2019 and had set the dates for the remaining meetings.)

(4) Setting up temporary toilets near the bus stop at Uptown Plaza

203. Mr. LO Hiu-fung thanked Ms. Flora MA of the TD for her assistance in setting up temporary toilets near the bus stop at Uptown Plaza for the bus drivers.

(5) Request for improving the road traffic safety measures on Ting Kok Road in Tai Po from Lai Pek Shan Tsuen to Green Cove

204. The Acting Chairman said that the Chairman submitted a paper relating to the captioned matter before the meeting (see Annex 2 for details), and asked the departments concerned to take follow-up action.

205. Mr. CHEUNG Wai-fung indicated that after going through the information, it was found that the captioned site had not been listed as a traffic blackspot between the third quarter of 2013 and the second quarter of 2018. Nevertheless, the TD would review the existing measures to see if there was any room for improvement.

206. The Acting Chairman asked the TD to continue following up on the matter with the Chairman.

XVI. Date of next meeting

207. The Acting Chairman announced that the next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 15 March 2019 (Friday).

208. There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m.

- 56 -

Tai Po District Council Secretariat February 2019